It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussion (archive)Skeptical about Kickstarter(78 posts)(78 posts)
(78 posts)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
This is my favourite topic
Posted February 10, 2013
avatar
Zolgar: snip
And then whinge about the price of the game (or whatever) after its released and wonder why you didnt take the risk early like other ppl :P
Posted February 10, 2013
One important property of KS is that the pledged money is not just a charity gift. The project owner is legally bound to deliver the promised product (whatever it is) or pay back the money. I feel that this is a very important difference enhancing the confidence that backers can have greatly.

However the matter is not so clear. The time frame is only loosely known - the estimated dates of delivery are almost never realistic. Also it is unknown how much own money the project creator has available. If you would know how much own capital there is, a high amount of it could inspire additional confidence in backers.
avatar
overread: ...I don't think less profitability = less desire or benefit, its only one criteria profit...
In economic terms I think profitability is regarded universally as the most important criteria with charity being the most notable exception. Now how you reach that goal... by traditional investors or KS ... is not really important. You just choose what works best. I think too that the world needs KS but I am not sure how much KS it needs.
Post edited February 10, 2013 by Trilarion
Posted February 10, 2013
avatar
Trilarion: One important property of KS is that the pledged money is not just a charity gift. The project owner is legally bound to deliver the promised product (whatever it is) or pay back the money. I feel that this is a very important difference enhancing the confidence that backers can have greatly.
I actually do believe that the 'pay back the money' bit is just a bad, bad idea. Every new project is a risk, that's just a fact, and when someone is donating to a KS projecz, he should not, under any circumstances, expect to get his money back. The fact that the dev has to either deliver or give back the money puts him in a really bad situation where if the project fails for whatever reason, he is screwed as he has invested the money already.

That is why I do believe that small / unexperienced devs should only ask for very small ammounts of money and only when they actually have something to show, and people should give out bigger ammounts based on reputation. If the said person / studio doesn't have money before the KS, they sure as heck won't have them in case it fails, and since they need to give the money back, they're suddenly in a fairly ... life-ruining situation.
Posted February 10, 2013
avatar
Perscienter: Is that your legal opinion about it? Did you study contract law in a university?

Believe me or not, there will be a lot of disappointed people and fights.
I did (study contract law) and nijuu is correct. People may be disappointed but that doesn't alter their rights.
Posted February 10, 2013
I've seen many projects delayed, and the responses are invariably "take your time, we just want the product". When it looks like the project might need more money, a lot of people ask "where can we donate more?"

Most people who pledge on Kickstarter invest emotionally in the project, and often in its creator. They want that project to succeed and they want that person or company to succeed. They want to be part of the process and see the end result. As long as they don't feel cheated by the creator they will continue to support the project.

I think that one of the major indications that Kickstarter isn't a pre-order platform is that most of the money projects get comes from people who pledge a lot more than the game (or other project result) will cost.
Posted February 10, 2013
avatar
Fenixp: ...
I actually do believe that the 'pay back the money' bit is just a bad, bad idea. Every new project is a risk, that's just a fact, and when someone is donating to a KS projecz, he should not, under any circumstances, expect to get his money back. The fact that the dev has to either deliver or give back the money puts him in a really bad situation where if the project fails for whatever reason, he is screwed as he has invested the money already.

That is why I do believe that small / unexperienced devs should only ask for very small ammounts of money and only when they actually have something to show, and people should give out bigger ammounts based on reputation. If the said person / studio doesn't have money before the KS, they sure as heck won't have them in case it fails, and since they need to give the money back, they're suddenly in a fairly ... life-ruining situation.
I think backers should expect to get something back, because otherwise all the risk of the projects would be on the backers side and none on the creators side which is unfair. However personal hardships can surely be avoided, maybe via an insurace. In the end the best description of a pledge in KS is maybe something like a loan given by the backers. Taking a loan is always risky. One should be as careful as with all other loans.

One idea could be: Project owner guarantees that in case of failure all remaining money is paid back to the backers and all assets (code, artwork) are either sold before or transferred to the backers or upon their wish made open source (so somebody else might finish). On the other side to also let backers participate in the success, if the game is finished and sells more than X units they get a percentage of their pledge back. I would like this model very much.
Posted February 10, 2013
avatar
nijuu: ...If people are made aware of the pro's and con's of a kickstarter before they donate, i wouldn't have thought (nor by a reasonable persons standards) they would be able to complain or have any recourse or action available.
My impression is that most backers do not really think for a long time about pro's and con's. Nor is there sufficient information on the project pages. Even after watching some videos you don't really know the creators well enough to judge them. And for the project: in the games section it is often formulated quite unclear, maybe to not give too much information to potential competitors or they don't know yet themselves. Often most you get is buzz-phrases. If the idea isn't immedtialy evident you don't know really if it will work or not. Seldom backers are given sufficient information to be aware of the risk. We are only amateurs, not professionels.

Exceptions are projects like the 3D printer where the technology is existent and prototypes exist and all you need is to aggregate demand and scale the thing up. If presented properly, people should be able to judge them.
Post edited February 10, 2013 by Trilarion
Posted February 10, 2013
avatar
ET3D: I've seen many projects delayed, and the responses are invariably "take your time, we just want the product". When it looks like the project might need more money, a lot of people ask "where can we donate more?"

Most people who pledge on Kickstarter invest emotionally in the project, and often in its creator. They want that project to succeed and they want that person or company to succeed. They want to be part of the process and see the end result. As long as they don't feel cheated by the creator they will continue to support the project.

I think that one of the major indications that Kickstarter isn't a pre-order platform is that most of the money projects get comes from people who pledge a lot more than the game (or other project result) will cost.
So much this, the entire arc of the comic series I backed has just been completed. I'll receive the last couple physical books soon (already have the digital copies). Shit I funded is sitting on comic book store shelves. How bad ass is that? I could never in a million years do what this pair of comic book guys did and yet I was able to take part in a small way in its creation. Fuck yes I'm emotionally invested! And it is awesome!
Posted February 10, 2013
avatar
nijuu: ...If people are made aware of the pro's and con's of a kickstarter before they donate, i wouldn't have thought (nor by a reasonable persons standards) they would be able to complain or have any recourse or action available.
avatar
Trilarion: My impression is that most backers do not really think for a long time about pro's and con's. Nor is there sufficient information on the project pages. Even after watching some videos you don't really know the creators well enough to judge them. And for the project: in the games section it is often formulated quite unclear, maybe to not give too much information to potential competitors or they don't know yet themselves. Often most you get is buzz-phrases. If the idea isn't immedtialy evident you don't know really if it will work or not. Seldom backers are given sufficient information to be aware of the risk. We are only amateurs, not professionels.

Exceptions are projects like the 3D printer where the technology is existent and prototypes exist and all you need is to aggregate demand and scale the thing up. If presented properly, people should be able to judge them.
Not sure if you need to be a professional to work out whether a project is viable or not.
Doesn't the average person at least check to see if something is worth donating to?. And your right, i could easily see people also see the rewards as what they want rather than having a careful think about it first (i tend to overthink...but thats me LOL). I suppose it does go back to the devs to make sure they have outlined clearly what they offer, how they plan and organize, communicate and how or when final product is shipped/delivered.
Donator beware?
Maybe KS needs to bold a small section that needs to be read before people donate into any projects..something more obvious than it is now
Post edited February 10, 2013 by nijuu
Posted February 11, 2013
avatar
nijuu: ... Doesn't the average person at least check to see if something is worth donating to? ...
At least with video games it seems that backers strongly react on buzz phrases, like "new", "innovative", "next level", "fun", or "rpg with strategy and action elements" ... Also I doubt that project creators want to give more specific information, since there is no difference between backers and the public at this stage. I can show you many examples of highly backed KS video game projects (particularly games without demos in early stages) where you know almost nothing about what will make this game unique.

I think people use mostly gut feeling because with limited facts you cannot really check.
Post edited February 11, 2013 by Trilarion
Posted February 11, 2013
To have an actual example about how well funded the decision of the backers is: "Dreamfall Chapters: The Longest Journey" a new KS video game project that collected 600k US-$ by 10000 people within three days.

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/redthread/dreamfall-chapters-the-longest-journey

The video on the project page is a trailer with phrases like "location both familiar and new", "real dialogs and emotions", "fun puzzles", "freedom of exploration", "the game you are waiting for", "passionate about adventure games".

Passionate is my favorite. I like it a lot as a word because it sounds like what it is. Unfortunately it's used so often.

And from the text: "deep and complex storyline", "explore a rich, detailed, interactive and living world" (a living world?), "engaging puzzle gameplay designed for fans of adventure games"

These phrases are just advertisment speak, nothing more. You surely cannot estimate the outcome realistically. It's impossible. But still people throw money at it. They go for the name.

I would say this project is almost exclusively like a pre-order and here it would be fully justified to demand your money back in case they fail to deliver.
Posted February 11, 2013
avatar
Trilarion: To have an actual example about how well funded the decision of the backers is: "Dreamfall Chapters: The Longest Journey" a new KS video game project that collected 600k US-$ by 10000 people within three days.

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/redthread/dreamfall-chapters-the-longest-journey

The video on the project page is a trailer with phrases like "location both familiar and new", "real dialogs and emotions", "fun puzzles", "freedom of exploration", "the game you are waiting for", "passionate about adventure games".

Passionate is my favorite. I like it a lot as a word because it sounds like what it is. Unfortunately it's used so often.

And from the text: "deep and complex storyline", "explore a rich, detailed, interactive and living world" (a living world?), "engaging puzzle gameplay designed for fans of adventure games"

These phrases are just advertisment speak, nothing more. You surely cannot estimate the outcome realistically. It's impossible. But still people throw money at it. They go for the name.

I would say this project is almost exclusively like a pre-order and here it would be fully justified to demand your money back in case they fail to deliver.
On thing with Dreamfall is though, that there's a lot of people who have been waiting for some time for the story to be concluded. Over the years there's been a lot of deamand for the final chapter of the trilogy, so now that it's finally promised people want it. It's the same thing with all nostalgia driven projects really, though with Dreamfall there's not necessarily that much nostalgia involved but desire to finally know how the story ends.

There are some projects I've funded I doubt will never evolve into much bigger venues. Some of the games I've backed I suspect will be one offs and the real sales numbers won't warrant for the designers to really continue, but at least it will be interesting to see what some of those old players can do with modern tech.
Posted February 11, 2013
avatar
Trilarion: And the best thing: start a KS project yourself and profit from the fruits of crowdfunding. Everybody can be on the other side.
Actually, this isn't a true statement. A Kickstarter project can be created only by people with address in selected countries.

Citation from the official website:
US creators must be permanent US residents at least 18 years of age with a social security number (or EIN), a US bank account, US address, US state-issued ID (driver’s license), and major US credit or debit card.
UK creators must be permanent UK residents at least 18 years of age either creating a project in their own name or on behalf of a legal entity with a Companies House Number. You’ll need a UK address, UK bank account, government-issued ID (driver’s license or passport), and a major UK credit or debit card.
Post edited February 11, 2013 by Mivas
Posted February 11, 2013
avatar
tomimt: ...desire to finally know how the story ends. ...
And the desire can only be satisfied with the working product. So in case they fail to deliver it would be reasonable to expect as much money back as possible. This case is really more like a pre-order than a donation. You buy a sequel by throwing money at some well-known people and hope they do something good with it. It's even probably not very innovative or different from other adventures - at least the advertisment speak is the same as everywhere.
Post edited February 11, 2013 by Trilarion
Posted February 11, 2013
avatar
Trilarion: At least with video games it seems that backers strongly react on buzz phrases, like "new", "innovative", "next level", "fun", or "rpg with strategy and action elements"
Can you give examples? The most backed projects are those based on old franchises or promising to capture the essence of those. That's pretty clear. The most successful indicator of small indie success is probably "pixel art".

The specific keywords you mention seem to go against the core of what's getting funded.

I think that most backers pledge based on the project concept and the track record of the project creator. For smaller projects (unknown creators) it's based on project concept and art. Mixed concepts (such as "rpg with strategy and action elements") are probably the most likely to fail.
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussion (archive)Skeptical about Kickstarter(78 posts)(78 posts)
(78 posts)