Hi. With all due respect, please understand that many people have made huge claims. Many of them have proven unfounded. We aren't accusing you of any dishonesty or wrongdoing, but many innovative approaches have proven unfeasible on current hardware or to have severe limitations. That's why for big claims people want to see some evidence. You don't need fancy artwork or for the demo to even relate to your game at all. nVidia did a real-time voxel rendering demo, and all it contained was a square room with a square pedestal in it, albeit with cracks and imperfections at a great level of detail. If the drawcard of the engine is physics (which can't be done by current engines), show off something. For example drop some simple objects on some simulated sand. Move them around. Show the physics in action. Or maybe a fire. I'm not sure what the particular drawcard of your engine is. Give people a wow factor to be excited about.

I agree that we shouldn't just jump in and support something so fantastic without thoroughly investigating the claim ourselves and that even a simple proof of concept demonstration of my physics engine would go a long way to building confidence with my supporters. It is obvious that I am not ready for that demo yet, so apart from the physics engine, what else is there about the abbreviated GDD that stands out to you?

I'm not an expert on GDDs myself, so I won't comment on that. If I were a contributor, I would want to see that you have programmers on board (even if it's contingent on money arriving by a certain date), and that there is a plan. Progress milestones, e.g. if this is funded people will get an alpha build and a t-shirt by xx/yy/zz.

Remember that the majority of potential contributors have never heard of you (unlike if a leading figure in the industry starts a kickstarter campaign), so projecting credibility is very important. The GDD is part of it. The above is part of it. And also statements about your company are part of it. Your list of core goals sound fine, but they also may give the impression that you aim unreasonably high. Items 1 and 2... sure, people will buy that. Items 3 and 4 address major world problems. It is reasonable to say you want to work towards solving these problems, but saying that you will solve them in this lifetime sounds unrealistic. If they are genuinely in your mission statement you will likely be too busy to make computer games in any case. Items 5 and 6 sound more like personal statements. Personal statements can be dangerous because they are divisive. People who have different opinions may be put off funding the project because of these.

That's my honest assessment, and I wish you well as I do anybody who posts on these forums. Creating something from your own hard work and perserverance is something that I respect both for the goal and because the challenges are always greater than we anticipate at the start.

Thank you Jeffery. I appreciate your thorough study of the page and I appreciate the honesty. I am in total agreement with you about needing a programmer and I am working through a list of potential candidates. As soon as select someone to complete this work I will make the necessary updates. I understand that the claims I am making seem unrealistic but I firmly believe that it is possible. The key is as you said, building off items 1 and 2. The technology exists and when I get the money to show you how to do it, I will. The video game industry is worth over 80 billion annually and all I need is .01% of that to break into it big. This is by no means impossible with what I am proposing.

I suppose you feel it impossible to give feedback on the GDD for any complete game then?[/quote]

You haven't even given a design document, or anything closely resembling one. All your Kickstarter page has is a plot summary and a few game elements (which by the way are NOT mechanics). A design document needs to stipulate how these will be accomplished as well.If Skyrim was described so briefly, I wouldn't comment on it either. But I can assure you that before any money was put aside for the project by Bethseda, Skyrim's design document would have been extremely lengthy.

It is obvious that I am not ready for that demo yet, so apart from the physics engine, what else is there about the abbreviated GDD that stands out to you?[/quote]

Not really, it comes across as pretty standard fantasy fare.

Oh cool, I have attracted the attention of a [color=#ff0000]moderator, this should be interesting . I can definitely agree that at first glance most people will look at us and dismiss the project as highly unlikely to succeed. I totally agree that if I am unable to gain the confidence of supporters, the Kickstarter campaign will be dead before it starts. I do have to point out that I am only using the Kickstarter format as a method of sharing the project. I do appreciate the honest assessment for its likely hood of success, but as I said earlier, I am not worried about that. I also appreciate the limited assessment of my company and its structure. I see the formal titles have caught your eye, even if for the wrong reasons. Its not quite fair to say we have zero experience, but I suppose its just a matter of perception. It is entirely possible to produce an epic open world RPG in 2 years time, as long as project management is handled properly. Again whether you or anyone else will believe that we can do it is contingent on our being able to provide "evidence of capability", as you put it. Our GDD happens to be an evolving document based around our modified agile development method, so while I won't be able to say that it is 100% complete until the game is actually done, I can say that we are well into the technical design for each facet of The Dragon King. My timeline and budget figures are pretty standard "time and material" calculations based on our projected workloads. The current iteration of the Kickstarter page doesn't show the full extent of my network of developers, opting for a brief rundown of the key developers for this project and a short description of the network structure that creates the rest of the team. I have been getting mixed reviews about where to place this info on the page and you seem to agree that it should be moved closer to the top. I am going to be adding the intro video which will cover a lot of who we are and our progress in other areas, so I think I might leave the team info near the bottom. In any case, we will see.