Yantelope V2

yes and no, It's slightly more complicated than that. http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-20063310-1/how-3d-content-works-blu-ray-vs-broadcast/

That's quite a loaded juxtaposition there.

Well, again, we're arguing semantics here but it's not a charitable donation or gift. Maybe a gift is a better word but again, only if you have no expectation of any kind of return, even a videogame you might want to buy.

Alien 1&2 are classic. 3 is meh, 4 is not so good.

Again, poor one BY YOUR STANDARDS. Your standards are not fact. Well, yes, by my standards it's poor. Fact is it's an investment, not a charitable donation.

What's the difference exactly? One company makes better games than another company or spends their money more wisely? I already support good games. It's called buying games. So whatever your justification is for giving money to your kickstarter is changes a lot. Some people are saying it's "for games that wouldn't get made otherwise" or "art" or "supporting what you believe in" or whatever. I'm hearing a hundred different excuses as to why it's not an investment (because everyone seems to agree that as an investment it'd be silly) but then apparently I'm the one giving you the runaround when I try to say that all your arguments of justification for a donation to a company still don't matter because you're only giving your money away to someone who's only using it to make money for themselves. That's not charity. You're determined it's not an investment, and it's clearly not charity. What am I supposed to argue with. You've created some untenable nebulous stance basing it on some high ground that doesn't exist. I don't care if you don't agree with my opinions but your statements are simply contradictory. The fact is this: Kickstarter is an investment, and it's a poor one. It's that simple.

http://www.thinkgeek.com/interests/looflirpa/ee05/

I still need to go pull my virtual boy out and play it. I have a ton of games for it. Wario Land on the virtual boy was actually really good.

I have not seen either AvP movie. I kept meaning to but I heard that the first one was horrible.

Yeah, there's a definite shift between Riddley Scott and the survival horror of Alien to the action movie James Cameron Aliens. Two great films but both very different. Alien 3 and Resurrection didn't really work for me though.

No, it'd be lies and slander if I said Sonic > Mario. I think we all agree on that though. I seriously voted for Zelda though because for some reason I go back and play through my old Zelda games a lot, especially Link's Awakening and I just don't really do that with Mario as much. Even games I loved like Mario 64 are hard for me to go back and finish. Also, a confession, I couldn't bring myself to finish Mario Galaxy.

Virtual Boy was the only way to play Mario Tennis. (I'm kidding, don't hurt me)

Aliens is James Cameron at his finest. That and T2 are still his best movies.

Zelda > Mario.

Mario Golf on N64 was greatness. The Gamecube version was not so much.

No I don't, in fact, two pages ago I said No musician needs a small business loan to start a band or record a CD. Anyone can do that with the money they could make during a day job. I know a lot of people who do. Music is also an industry that is really oversaturated and not very profitable right now. Small games development on the other hand is a full time job requiring funding (unless it's a really small indie game) and so it should be possible to find an investor to start up a small company if you've got a good idea and you could convince someone it can be reasonably profitable. Relaunching dead genres isn't usually a palatable idea for a serious investor. Okay, now here's where you begin to argue that there's some sort of "good cause" that you're donating to. That's where I argue that I don't think it's a good cause. I've already admitted that this is simply opinion. I'll state it again here though so you can read it again. I don't donate to random charity. I donate to productive charities making them productive. You're not donating to any charity by giving to a kickstarter. You're donating to a business. Give some money to EA while you're at it. There's no moral difference. What does it matter if it's a small company or Activision. Since Activision wasted money and another business didn't it makes it better to give them money? It'd be okay to donate money to Honda instead of Chevrolet because they didn't take government money? Who gives a crap? You're still giving your hard earned money to a business which is not charity. So back to my original questions that you people can't seem to answer. Why couldn't wasteland 2 be developed like many other indie games? Are there any good examples of (kickstarted games) to go off of? What makes a kickstarter game different from a traditional indie game other than you giving your money away to them?

Yeah, and I never said that was wrong. If you want to do that fine. Go for it. It'd be cool to have that kind of money. I don't have that kind of money so I prefer not to spend my money in such a way. It's not what I'd define as charity though. I wouldn't consider it a charitable contribution to society. Maybe if they were going to give the game away for free to people upon completion you could consider it charitable. If you were giving millions to someone to make the game and then sell it for a profit and keep the money themselves, I think that'd be a bit silly of you. You could do it, but I think it'd be silly.

Charcoal is more of a pain but the flavor is so worth it. Mostly I grill fajitas or steaks> I do burgers some but as charcoal is more work I'm often to lazy to fire up the grill for a couple of burgers. I am definitely way too lazy to smoke a brisket no matter how delicious. I usually just swing over to spring creek barbecue for that. Man that's some good stuff.

I love watching golf, especially on a Sunday afternoon, open the shades and let a littlle light in, curl up on the couch and pass out quickly. It's the perfect sport for napping. Pleasant sounds of birds and fountains. Even the announcers speak in hushed tones because they know you're sleeping and the fans all do that gentle clap. It's great.

I'm not really arguing with what the last 3 of you guys have said. If you're going to invest your money in that way in hopes of getting a great game (or ska CD) out of it then that is certainly your business. What I said is if I'm going to buy something I prefer to buy a real product that already exists. The only place where I get confused is after it's something that has been a commercial failure. I haven't gotten any response on this point beyond Dean pointing out that not everyone's idea of a commercial success is the same, which is valid. In this ska band for example, how did you already know about them but they didn't have money for a new CD? Most established bands should be able to produce a new CD unless they're unsuccessful in which case they would need their fan base to throw them extra money to try to float them. Perhaps that's the only point of kickstarter is to float unsuccessful business ventures that have a niche demand. I suppose that's a void it could fill. Again, are there any examples of games that have actually been completed from kickstarters and why they're different than traditional indie games which secure other forms of funding? Why can't these people take out small business loans?

At least I'm actually posting real responses.

Golfing is so much harder than it looks. It's kind of strange like that. The angle of the club when it strikes the ball can make the ball go all over the place if you don't have a very consistent swing. I've only tried hitting some balls at the driving range a few times and it's surprisingly difficult.

What do you mean it's either? Who are you to decide that it's this black and white? Kickstarter itself has shades of grey represented by the pledge levels. On many levels you just donate money. Straight up. No gifts. No anything. You're ignoring the fact that Kickstarter is very much in the middle ground. It's a new concept. Something your mind seems to have trouble with. Pledge levels don't make it grey. It's just different levels of investment. The difference between investment and donation is strictly in your mind and whether or not you expect to get anything in return which Dean just pointed out. It's all about expectation. If you can't tell the difference then the grey area is simply in your mind. That's why I said you made it up. Edit: just because you only "hope" to get something doesn't make it grey either. It's just a very very low expectation.