Kickstarter: call me paranoid

[Lucky Day]

second post - previous was long; and this is a separate idea so...

one of the big benefits these kickstarters are giving away for pledges are copies of the game for a pledge. In the terms of a business standpoint doesn't this take away from a future sale? In other words, what you gain at the end of production you are moving to the beginning.

Herein lies my original argument, of course, but moving beyond ( and assume the product is finished, complete and delivered - without asking for more funds at the last minute for a final "push") what a company gets out of the kickstarter beyond the game is word of mouth from those early pledgers. What this is effectively is a futures market. Any company would want revenue after the fact - their funding now was guaranteed and in the bank - after production you want new revenue and you hurt that.

What this seems to me is that effectively a pre-order system (and I've seen people talk around this idea in the two threads): the company generates funding before the product is shipped. I'll admit that this is a better idea than releasing a buggy game to get cash now with the hope that there'll be enough to keep production going and fix those problems.

 

[Pladio]

Gaming hours can not be swapped.

If so, you should also include the hours you will spend reading press in case the game is not released.

None of the hours spent on an excellent game is equivalent to one hour spent on a poor game.

In the end, you'll have spent money to get excellent time or awful time. You'll have funded an endeavour to have an entertaining experience or an awful experience.

I don't understand what you mean by swapped ?
Also, if it doesn't get released, I would lose 1 hour. And all you have to do is give it a negative value if it's that important to you. The calculation is still valid. You just have to do it for yourself.

 

[wolfing]

one of the big benefits these kickstarters are giving away for pledges are copies of the game for a pledge. In the terms of a business standpoint doesn't this take away from a future sale? In other words, what you gain at the end of production you are moving to the beginning.

That's exactly what I'm taking it, as a cheap way to get the game. I've backed 4 games I think now, 2 for $15 and 2 for $10. And that's what I'll pay for the game, so yes, you can see it as a trade-off… Either wait and pay $40/$50 but have the chance to not pay anything (i.e. not buy) if reviews are not so hot, or take a risk now and pay a lot less but maybe the game sucks when you get it. I'm totally ok with this.

 

[Lucky Day]

That's exactly what I'm taking it, as a cheap way to get the game. I've backed 4 games I think now, 2 for $15 and 2 for $10. And that's what I'll pay for the game, so yes, you can see it as a trade-off… Either wait and pay $40/$50 but have the chance to not pay anything (i.e. not buy) if reviews are not so hot, or take a risk now and pay a lot less but maybe the game sucks when you get it. I'm totally ok with this.

from the buyers perspective yes: but what about the business? The deep discounts you give come out of the high price early adopters pay at the other end - say, for collectors editions.

 

[GhanBuriGhan]

That's exactly what I'm taking it, as a cheap way to get the game. I've backed 4 games I think now, 2 for $15 and 2 for $10. And that's what I'll pay for the game, so yes, you can see it as a trade-off… Either wait and pay $40/$50 but have the chance to not pay anything (i.e. not buy) if reviews are not so hot, or take a risk now and pay a lot less but maybe the game sucks when you get it. I'm totally ok with this.

Or wait even longer and get it for $5 or less on a sale. Well I really rather see it as backing a project I like, if I really like it I can give them more money than they would get for the game. That's what's really nice about this tier system.

 

[ChienAboyeur]

I don't understand what you mean by swapped ?
Also, if it doesn't get released, I would lose 1 hour. And all you have to do is give it a negative value if it's that important to you. The calculation is still valid. You just have to do it for yourself.

An hour spent on a satisfying game is not equivalent to one hour spent on a disappointing game.

If the game appears to be disappointing, you'll have funded a game that would have taken 2 hours of your life ,wasted on bad gaming experience.

Two hours of a good game leaves you happy. Two hours of a bad game leaves you unhappy, angry, frustrated etc...

 

[Pladio]

An hour spent on a satisfying game is not equivalent to one hour spent on a disappointing game.

If the game appears to be disappointing, you'll have funded a game that would have taken 2 hours of your life ,wasted on bad gaming experience.

Two hours of a good game leaves you happy. Two hours of a bad game leaves you unhappy, angry, frustrated etc…

Ok, I understand now. So like I said, all you do for that is quantify the bad time as negative $.

 

[skavenhorde]

I've been seeing more and more articles about Kickstarter and how people should "beware". All I have to say about that is, DUHH!!!

I'm backing a project I would like to see made. If it fails, well I wasn't an investor, I was a backer. Big difference between those two words.

Bottom line is that I want to help fund games I would like to see made. If it fails, then it fails. It's better than the alternative of keeping the reigns of PC gaming with the publishers.

 

[zahratustra]

Besides, people donate (or should donate) what they can afford. I doubt if anybody will loose their life savings or go hungry because some of Kickstarter ventures might fail or not live up to expectations.

 

[MasterKromm]

From the lyrics of Kurt Cobain, "just because you’re paranoid, don’t mean they’re not after you"…

Anyhoo, here is a link to an, oddly enough, related article I just stumbled across on Moddb:

Tim Schafer’s Top 5 Pitch Tips for Kickstarter Success

What’s In A Pitch?
“Like they always say, a good pitch is a good story,” explains Tim. In the end, the success of getting your game funded, either through a publisher or through crowdfunding, boils down to telling a great story to inspire support. As I listened to Tim talk it became clear that there are 5 key tips, or “forces” as he referred to them, to crafting the perfect pitch. “All of these forces come together and this game just has to be made,” he states. “Do you want to be the people that benefit it and pay for it? A pitch is like that,” Tim concludes.

1. Prove why the game has to be made.
No matter what your project idea is, you need to make sure it’s clear to potential backers why your project fills a void and is significant enough for them to fund it.

2. Prove why the game has to be made in a certain way.
How are you going to make the game and what makes your approach unique?

3. Prove why your team is the one-and-only team to make it.
What do you bring to the table? Why are you the unique team to bring your vision to life in a way that no one else can?

4. Prove why it’s critical the game is made now.
Is there a sense of urgency in why your project needs to get funded right now? You need to determine that angle and play it up in your pitch. In other words, develop a strong call-to-action.

5. Prove that it’s more than game, it’s a significant event and fans need to be a part of it.
What can you offer to fans in return for their time and monetary support? It needs to be something of significant value, either tangible or abstract.

There is more at the source article…

While I want to believe that crowdsourcing/funding can and will work, it is my opinion that these early KS projects(Double Fine, WL2, Banner Saga, Shadowrun, ect) need to deliver or faith/goodwill in this system will invariably be lost. On the flip side, perhaps outright success across the board for most of the big name projects will mean a trickle down effect for the lesser knowns or outright unknowns.

 

[blatantninja]

The ugly side of Kickstarter: the risks in backing game dev campaigns are greater than you think

Interesting article right on point with this thread.