Wee Gamers interview Caffeinated Chaos Studios

By Polar_Bear
In Interviews
Jan 19th, 2013
3 Comments
474 Views

Wee Gamers has been doing a lot of talking lately. Here’s another of their interviews. This one’s with Caffeinated Chaos Studios.

From the interview:

Wee Gamers have a chat with Caffeinated Chaos Studios about how they came about and their post-apocalypse rpg Kickstarter project

About "" Has 25424 Posts

I was born at a very young age. I plan on living forever. So far, so good.
  • Soulfinger

    I found the answer to why this KS is unlikely to fund a little grasping. First, he blames the proliferation of larger, more professional outfits elbowing out the little guy. This is patently false, considering that Kingdom Death is the top funded board game. The larger companies are present, but they certainly aren’t the only ones succeeding on KS. The most successful demonstrate business sense and competence. That this KS has as high of a pledge as it does demonstrates the supreme willingness of backers to support unproven and unfinished products that would be stillborn in any other venue.

    Secondly, he cites gamers being critical and that we, as a group, will only fund products with illustrations of big-breasted women, hot studs, and far-out concepts. I agree with being critical, but I find that latter part more than a little insulting.

    I would not consider funding this KS for these reasons (none of which have to do with artwork or concept):

    1) The creator has not demonstrated a basic understanding of English grammar. The product description, cut-and-paste interview answers — anything that reflects the product and company should have good sentence structure, proper comma use, etc. If the author(s) does not or is unable to write a clean description of his product then the product is guaranteed to be flawed. Learn how to write.

    2) The description tells me absolutely nothing useful about the game. The author fails to adequately demonstrate his credentials, there is no mention of game mechanics, and the selling points are not adequately detailed. Clearly, a complete draft has not been written. That it is based not on a novel, not on an unfinished draft, but on an idea for a novel further demonstrates that the author has underestimated the work that goes into finalizing a book. Most successful KS are further along in the development phase, and I question the ability of this author to follow through with a completed product that is not rushed in the end and riddled with errors.

    3) It is based on an idea for a novel. Reading that first paragraph was an instant turn-off for me. I used to work for a print-on-demand publisher, briefly as a small press magazine editor, headed a writer’s workshop, and so-on. I have seen that 99% of ideas are bad or far more derived and unoriginal than the author believes. Out of that one-percent, 99% are incoherent or poorly implemented when put into writing. Not that a poorly written book won’t sell. Stephanie Meyer has cashed in on a novel that barely qualifies as being written in English, but an idea itself is fairly worthless. I will invest in a person or a product, but never an idea (quadruply so if it’s a “good” idea for a novel).

  • SloaneHucker

    Dear S. Finger,

    I see that this happens to be your bridge. By all means, feel free to live under it.

    • Soulfinger

      Oh snap! Nice rebuttal there with the clever one-liner, because obviously anyone who takes the time to read the interview and write out a six paragraph response is just trolling for attention. No valid criticisms there at all, right?