Jump to content
Albert

Gubble 3D Kickstart Project by Former Atari Designers

Recommended Posts

Several former Atari employees comprising Actual Entertainment are developing an all-new game titled Gubble 3D based around the long-lost art of arcade maze games. The designer of the classic Crystal Castles arcade game, Franz Lanzinger, is among those involved, and anyone familiar with Crystal Castles will feel right at home in Gubble 3D. Other designers participating include Eric Ginner, Mark Robichek, Steve Woita, Susan Woita, Karl Anderson, Dave Ralston, Paul Barton and Seppo "Zep" Hurme. Gubble 3D is itself based on an earlier game called Gubble. Gubble 3D will use a 3D engine and will introduce new tools, weapons, and entirely new gameplay mechanics.

 

You can learn more about the project on Kickstarter, where the team hope to raise enough money to fund development. Included on the Kickstarter page is a video narrated by Franz Lanzinger, along with a detailed description of the game and what the team hopes to accomplish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These Kickstarter fundraisers just fascinate the heck out of me. It shows that people are willing to pay for games that "push the envelope," typically exactly the kind of games that big-time publishers don't want to do in lieu of chasing down the almighty dollar.

 

I'm glad there is now something out there for developers with a passion for game design and development to put out pet projects that aren't under the purview of developers, tied to the graces of marketing-minded folks who hold a Sword of Damocles over a project like this one, with the threat of letting it drop most any minute.

 

The game itself sounds very interesting, and I've always loved Crystal Castles in both arcade and 2600 form. Definitely bookmarking and keeping an eyeball on this one, and wouldn't mind pitching a little money at the project. Thanks for posting about it and getting the word out. I'll spread the work at my workplace as well. :-D

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whoa! I had no idea that Gubble was from these guys. I have the PS1 game all these years and always thought it was rather fun (Crystal Castles fun). I picked it up just randomly because it looked old school.

 

220px-Gubble_-_PlayStation_US_cover_art_-_Zenimax.jpg

 

 

 

Thanks for the link I will definitely support them and get Gubble 3D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These Kickstarter fundraisers just fascinate the heck out of me. It shows that people are willing to pay for games that "push the envelope," typically exactly the kind of games that big-time publishers don't want to do in lieu of chasing down the almighty dollar.

 

I'm glad there is now something out there for developers with a passion for game design and development to put out pet projects that aren't under the purview of developers, tied to the graces of marketing-minded folks who hold a Sword of Damocles over a project like this one, with the threat of letting it drop most any minute.

 

The game itself sounds very interesting, and I've always loved Crystal Castles in both arcade and 2600 form. Definitely bookmarking and keeping an eyeball on this one, and wouldn't mind pitching a little money at the project. Thanks for posting about it and getting the word out. I'll spread the work at my workplace as well. :-D

 

First off, thanks Albert for bringing this to everyone's attention. I'm definitley going to go take a look...and perhaps make a contribution (phew....this will make my 3rd in the last month and a half! :) ).

 

Second, @rockman, I couldn't agree with you more. At the same time, I wonder if some of these types of games are not in fact even more sucessful than they would be if they were even released through a more traditional publishing deal/route. I've been thinking about this for the past few weeks, and (surprise surprise!) gamers are a pretty fickle bunch of people. Many of whom know that a game will go down in price, typically at least, the longer you wait to make the purchase. Doesn't matter if the game starts at $60 or $20, chances are you'll be able to get it cheaper down the road. Once a game is released, at least a little bit of the drama and worry of it ever coming out is now gone. So the consumer can really bide their time and wait to make the purchase. Even if it's not a calculated move on their part to get the price down as much as simply trying to get through their backlog of games, they may not make that purchase right away, and then it slips by. Contrast that with the stark decision: 'hey guys, we've got this game that we really want to make, but it simply will not happen without you, your faith and your money'. For those people wanting that game, there's no waiting now, it's just a simple decision between helping out or potentially never seeing your game.

 

Personally, I like it. Aside from the obvious benefit of getting games into the wild that publishers have simply become jaded to, it kind of (in my mind at least) places a bit of responsibility, if you can call it that, back on gamers. For all the complaining we do as a community (myself included) I think that's a good thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of the kickstarters are getting a bit obnoxious and trying to cash in on the hype.

 

But others (like this one) are simply the game makers way of telling big-timers "neener neener, told you so"

 

It's great. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly, the project has been shut down, and the funding has been canceled. From an e-mail I received today (I was a backer):

 

Hello Gubble Backers and Fans

 

This project is shutting down. The public response to the project has been disappointing. A big Thank You to the few of you who pledged. We really appreciate your support. We will continue to support the existing Gubble products and plan to develop one or more Gubble sequels in the coming years.

 

best regards,

 

Franz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my mind the graphics and ideas presented don't look good enough to attract the $80k needed. With those big names behind it they should have spent a few hundred dollars getting a pixel artist on board to really make what they had shine. Even if paying an artist wasn't an option upfront, you'd think those names could call in some favours given their industrial track records.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've donated to several kickstarter programs from old gamers..

Love the concepts..

I saw this one, but I have to admit, when I saw the phrase "3D engine," I figured it wasn't for me..

Nothing against those type of games, just not my favorite and there's a lot to choose from...

 

Too bad there wasn't enough interest from the people who like those type of games tho..

 

desiv

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's too bad. Last night I started a draft article for review over at gamesbeat.com too that I was hoping would get published and might draw some attention to that Kickstarter. That's the thing....if the word doesn't start getting out, then a project has a real slim shot of getting successfully funded.

 

@GroovyBee - I agree about their presentation. Unfortunately, it was simply not of the caliber needed to draw in the amount of money they were requesting. Look at The Banner Saga video and art assets presented as part of their recenty completed Kickstarter campaign. They were requesting $100K, so really in the same ball park as the Gubble project goal (and they ended up with ~$724K!). But their pitch was impecable.

 

In the end, if you don't pay attention to the tips provided by the master himself, and in fact do a really good job of proving those items out to potential backers, then your project isn't going to succeed, no matter how deserving.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There were 11 days or so left but it only attracted ~39 backers (I was one of them). I think they got around $1000 of the $80K goal. They ended it early since it didn't seem like it would have a chance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was the time frame used required? I think if it had time to catch on then maybe. It was a very short period.

 

As far as whether it needed to use a 30 day time frame....I'm not sure. It seems to me at least as though most projects are ~30 days, but I thought I'd seen some longer ones as well. I'm not sure if the project manager can enter any length of time they want, but it may let them choose a pre-designated campaign length from a dropdown (i.e. 30 days; 60 days, etc.)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...