Is kickstarter good for gaming?

P

Parmenides

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 25, 2006
Messages
6,578
I don't want to start a troll thread and I don't think I'm stirring the pot, since a number of actual game threads have been interrupted with kickstarter debates. I'm merely taking the heat and diverting it to this thread. The can of worms was already opened. Let's keep the can here? (if mods think this is unhelpful, of course they can delete this thread)
 
I'm likely going to be getting several games that I wouldn't have before. I find that aspect good. I'm also getting games that are likely more in line with what I enjoy than what's currently on the market. It's also helpful that some game studios I like are having success, and able to make games without influence by publishers.

There are some negatives, though. It makes a small percentage of people on forums extremely angry. There is the possibility of a major project going bust. There is potential for scamming.
 
Hard to say because none of the bigger projects have got anywhere yet. There's been one or two smaller releases, but none of them have been outstanding.

Seems to be mostly a bunch of games that would be released anyway, but companies use it for advertizing, like a big preorder deal. :D
 
I like it because even though I can "vote with my dollars" in the current system of Indie developers and publishers, I am still limited by the choices they give me to vote for (since I can only vote for completed products that are available for sale) ... KS gives me the ability to cast that vote before development begins and, as LeninGHOLA mentioned, get games that might not necessarily be on the market otherwise.

I won't have as much risk for scammers since I am unlikely to give KS funds to a totally unknown developer ... both of the projects I have supported so far were from developers I am familiar with (Grim Dawn - part of the team that developed Titan Quest; Project Eternity from Oblivion) ... I am still evaluating Shaker (the old time RPG) ... I don't have doubts about it being a valid project since they are experienced developers but I am still trying to decide if their poor KS proposal is just inexperience or lack of planning

The risk of failure for KS in my mind is no worse than the risk of a crappy game from a publisher ... I think if people just throw money at every project possible we will definitely get some failures ... but if they are on a budget like me and they pick and choose their projects ... and we reward the people with really decent proposals and plans ... we should minimize that risk

I don't think KS is the be all/end all for gaming funding (as I am sure a few zealots do) nor do I think it is the gaming apocalypse (as some of the opposing zealots do) ... I think once the exuberance wears off it will provide a nice alternative for games that are too big for reasonable Indie development without help and too small for serious publisher interest ... in my book that is good ... we can get the small, the medium, and the large ... where right now we tend to get only the two extremes

:D
 
Most released games in the past years have all been in the same cookie cutter mold.
Publishers say that games that don't fit the mold are unprofitable, 100million+ $ budget and 1 million sales.

Some of the kickstarters that got my attention asked from 500k to 3 million.
Eternity , doublefine will make money and they won't have had a publisher mingle in their creative process and in the end that is good.
 
i have only invested in one. and they only had a game concept video. i contributed 40$ which i think is generous without any information at all.. so when it is complete i will let you know how i feel about kickstarter :)


im sure it opens possibilities to creating more fun and specific games less commercialized.
 
Incidentally ... it looks like the new Chris Roberts game is now on KS ... we'll see how his project does since he already pulled in a million from the donations on his own website ... I wonder if we'll see any of the other developers do some boutique projects now ... they all have to have a few pet projects that they have been nursing around and never had the resources to tackle ... I'd like to see one of the RTS developers like Brian Reynolds tackle a project ... or an awesome HoMM style project attempted (maybe even in a new setting like a post apocalypse TBS) :D
 
There's two sides to the coin. I'm sure some really good things are going to come out of these projects, but there will inevitably also be some great failures. How those failures are handled is going to set the tone for the future of game crowdsourcing initiatives.
 
kbrickley said:
Incidentally ... it looks like the new Chris Roberts game is now on KS ... we'll see how his project does since he already pulled in a million from the donations on his own website ... I wonder if we'll see any of the other developers do some boutique projects now ... they all have to have a few pet projects that they have been nursing around and never had the resources to tackle ... I'd like to see one of the RTS developers like Brian Reynolds tackle a project ... or an awesome HoMM style project attempted (maybe even in a new setting like a post apocalypse TBS) :D
Click to expand...

Path of Exile also got a ton of money through their own website.
 
LeninGHOLA said:
Path of Exile also got a ton of money through their own website.
Click to expand...

I was more curious how the amounts would compare between the off KS funding and KS funding ... I saw on the announcement some people making the usual predictions of a new record KS from Chris Roberts ... which is certainly possible ... but with a million on the table already I would be surprised if he picked up another 4 million from KS ... but stranger things have happened ... I won't be giving to his project since I am not a hard core space sim guy ... although it is a very nice looking project (if his reach doesn't exceed his grasp on this one ;) )
 
Parja said:
There's two sides to the coin. I'm sure some really good things are going to come out of these projects, but there will inevitably also be some great failures. How those failures are handled is going to set the tone for the future of game crowdsourcing initiatives.
Click to expand...

there were plenty of failures released by publishers as well.. C&C 4, ET:QW, supcom 2, MoA reboot are just to name a few recent ones.

i think what kickstarter allows is developers to cater to the niche markets they are specifically developing games toward instead of having to deal with publishers forcing them to modify games to fit in a market they don't belong in. it also allows developers to use more creativity then having to stick with the same basic cookie cutter games styles in each genre because a game before it did really good.. like COD in the FPS market, WoW in the MMORPG market, starcraft in the RTS market to name a few.

so as far as the question goes, is kickstarter good for gaming, hell yes. of course there will be some bad games but just the fact that developers are allowed to release the games they want to release and not the games publishers want them to release is worth it even if the game flops.
 
I haven't funded anything and am not exactly a fan of giving basically "free" up front funding, but I think overall KS will be a good thing. We'll see, however, what happens to the market when the inevitable failures turn up. It's one thing if the game is sub-par, it's another if the team falls apart and nothing is actually released.

Does each game have fine print? If I were to fund one, I'd want there to be a clause that if something arises and the team is unable to complete the project, the code would be released to another dev for free or minimal charge, with each dev wanting to take it over submitting a proposal and the KS backers voting on them.
 
It will increase quantity of released games. Will it increase quality? Remains to be seen.
 
At the end of the day, competition is good. Being able to get around the middleman (publishing houses) and going direct to the consumer should hopefully shake things up. Not only directly with the games released by KS, but hopefully the big publishers notice the attention and demand for some of these supposedly "niche" genres and throw some big money behind them as well.
 
TwistedAegis said:
At the end of the day, competition is good. Being able to get around the middleman (publishing houses) and going direct to the consumer should hopefully shake things up. Not only directly with the games released by KS, but hopefully the big publishers notice the attention and demand for some of these supposedly "niche" genres and throw some big money behind them as well.
Click to expand...

agreed.. some of these projects have big $$ supporting them. its awesome to see.
 
Monkey God said:
It will increase quantity of released games. Will it increase quality? Remains to be seen.
Click to expand...

I think this will totally depend on how responsible the KS donators are ... if they have money to burn and they throw funds at every single project then we will definitely get some crappy games ... if they carefully evaluate the proposals and reward those that have reasonable products and goals then we might see better quality ... so it will all come down to how carefully we vote :cool:
 
I think kickstarter is a great place for gaming IF youre not in a hurry. I actually funded only one project , wich is Castle story , but saurapod studio . I pledged 25$ for the game and a prototype in october. Yesterday i received an email with a link to the prototype and was very impressed with the quality.

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/902505202/castle-story
 
Is it good for gaming? Pretty much a universal "duuuuuuh" because it highlights games publishers aren't confident in funding. If the game gets funded great, If not a publisher might get the word of mouth on its popularity and take a dive.

1. The folks who want to whine about how you're not making a profit are from what I can see the same sheeple who pre-order call of Duty and Halo. You're not seeing any money from that now are you?

2. Kickstarter is a scaaaaaaam. Actually they are right, but not for the reason they're crying about. The problem is that Kickstarter could though it hasn't been proven yet be used as free advertising. Drum up support for a new title by using Kickstarter to make gamers think they are supporting something that wouldn't otherwise be made.

Project Eternity rubs me the wrong way just little. It's really not that unique a title. Sure it uses an old engine but no one is waxing poetic for a return to the infinity engine. Additionally games like this are already being made, one just came out called Inquisition or some such. Nothing in the game info that I've seen shows it as something publishers would avoid. It's also being done but a fairly professional company.

I after I gave it some thought I canceled my Project Eternity funding I honestly felt like I was just putting in a pre-order.
 
piscian18 said:
Is it good for gaming? Pretty much a universal "duuuuuuh" because it highlights games publishers aren't confident in funding. If the game gets funded great, If not a publisher might get the word of mouth on its popularity and take a dive.

1. The folks who want to whine about how you're not making a profit are from what I can see the same sheeple who pre-order call of Duty and Halo. You're not seeing any money from that now are you?

2. Kickstarter is a scaaaaaaam. Actually they are right, but not for the reason they're crying about. The problem is that Kickstarter could though it hasn't been proven yet be used as free advertising. Drum up support for a new title by using Kickstarter to make gamers think they are supporting something that wouldn't otherwise be made.

Project Eternity rubs me the wrong way just little. It's really not that unique a title. Sure it uses an old engine but no one is waxing poetic for a return to the infinity engine. Additionally games like this are already being made, one just came out called Inquisition or some such. Nothing in the game info that I've seen shows it as something publishers would avoid. It's also being done but a fairly professional company.

I after I gave it some thought I canceled my Project Eternity funding I honestly felt like I was just putting in a pre-order.
Click to expand...

It's not being done on the Infinity engine, and plenty of people are waxing poetic about a return to PS:T/IWD style games. Inquisitor is kind of a turd of a game, so I don't know why it keeps being used as an example. Misinformation!
 
2. Kickstarter is a scaaaaaaam. Actually they are right, but not for the reason they're crying about. The problem is that Kickstarter could though it hasn't been proven yet be used as free advertising. Drum up support for a new title by using Kickstarter to make gamers think they are supporting something that wouldn't otherwise be made.
Click to expand...

I think there are degrees, one of the titles I supported (Grim Dawn) probably would have been made without the 500K they got from their KS ... but it would take longer and probably be a smaller game ... the KS money allowed the guys that were working on it and begging favors from their friends to help them to hire some full time help. The Shaker project, which I am still on the fence about supporting (since I think it is going to fail in its KS goal) has not been handled well, but I think they have the resources to do it on their own, even without the KS money, if they really want to.

Project Eternity rubs me the wrong way just little. It's really not that unique a title. Sure it uses an old engine but no one is waxing poetic for a return to the infinity engine. Additionally games like this are already being made, one just came out called Inquisition or some such. Nothing in the game info that I've seen shows it as something publishers would avoid. It's also being done but a fairly professional company.
Click to expand...

I don't know any game with the scope of Balder's Gate 2 (and the quality of that title) that is currently out or in development, other than PE. Everyone wants the big 3D games (Skyrim, Witcher, etc) which are all great games in their own style but they don't have the feel of the artistry and craftsmanship that went into BG2. I am hopeful (perhaps naively so) that PE will be that title. I guess we'll find out in 18 months.

The next game I would like to see on KS (and I would support it if it was there) would be either a RTS in the vein of Warcraft 2/3 and Age of Mythology or a TBS in the style of HoMM :D
 
kbrickley said:
I think there are degrees, one of the titles I supported (Grim Dawn) probably would have been made without the 500K they got from their KS ... but it would take longer and probably be a smaller game ... the KS money allowed the guys that were working on it and begging favors from their friends to help them to hire some full time help. The Shaker project, which I am still on the fence about supporting (since I think it is going to fail in its KS goal) has not been handled well, but I think they have the resources to do it on their own, even without the KS money, if they really want to.
Click to expand...

But, you could say that about any game. If BF3 was only bought by 1m people, BF4 would likely be made, but just not with as much stuff and effort placed in it. Therefore to maximize the amount of stuff in BF5, we all should preorder BF4 $199 collectors editions and buy all the DLC. :D
 
LeninGHOLA said:
It's not being done on the Infinity engine, and plenty of people are waxing poetic about a return to PS:T/IWD style games. Inquisitor is kind of a turd of a game, so I don't know why it keeps being used as an example. Misinformation!
Click to expand...

MEH Fine, Avadon!(great game btw) whatever I mean Isometric pseudo view games generally. What I mean to say is that Project Eternity did not hit the same buttons with me that Wasteland 2 does. Obsidian didn't wake up and go "shit we need kickstarter" like Tim schaffer, Brian Fargo, Grim dawn etc. For a game of this production value they were perfectly capable of getting funding for it and nothing so far in the themes has backed up this claim that publishers would shy away from their content. they went to kickstarter for funzies and gamers ate it up because Obisidian is a company known for making well received games.

This is all personal opinion stuff but for me it's not enough to just go "Hey were making Return to poop castle 3 No ones made that in a while you should donate to us." They've gotta convince me that I'm actually helping and not pre-ordering otherwise I'd rather throw my $20 at the humane society or something worth while.
 
kbrickley said:
Dare to dream ... then my faith in the modern gamer would be restored :p
Click to expand...

Buut all the people that buy games buy the stuff they think they want. The people that buy BF3 do so the same way people who like special interest groups who like isometric 90s styled RPGs pay for kickstarters. If everyone loved those kind of games, and weren't really into 64 player FPS, then the picture would be very different, and there would be kickstarters for BF style games instead. :D
 
piscian18 said:
MEH Fine, Avadon!(great game btw) whatever I mean Isometric pseudo view games generally. What I mean to say is that Project Eternity did not hit the same buttons with me that Wasteland 2 does. Obsidian didn't wake up and go "shit we need kickstarter" like Tim schaffer, Brian Fargo, Grim dawn etc. For a game of this production value they were perfectly capable of getting funding for it and nothing so far in the themes has backed up this claim that publishers would shy away from their content. they went to kickstarter for funzies and gamers ate it up because Obisidian is a company known for making well received games.

This is all personal opinion stuff but for me it's not enough to just go "Hey were making Return to poop castle 3 No ones made that in a while you should donate to us." They've gotta convince me that I'm actually helping and not pre-ordering otherwise I'd rather throw my $20 at the humane society or something worth while.
Click to expand...

Likely after publishers cancelled 2 of their last 4 projects, they may have felt differently. No publisher would ever fund a PS:T again, I'd wager. That game, despite being probably one of the best RPG's ever (my #1), flopped hard.

You were excited about the Brenda/Tom Wizardry like, and there was maybe 10% of the information Eternity had. Though, not a ton of Wizardry style games being made outside of Japan, most of which are complete fucking garbage.

Either way, looking forward to Return to Poop Castle 3 myself.

P.S. The most recent Avernum: Escape from the Pit was quite a bit better than Avadon. Give it a shot, same guy made both.
 
piscian18 said:
MEH Fine, Avadon!(great game btw) whatever I mean Isometric pseudo view games generally. What I mean to say is that Project Eternity did not hit the same buttons with me that Wasteland 2 does. Obsidian didn't wake up and go "shit we need kickstarter" like Tim schaffer, Brian Fargo, Grim dawn etc. For a game of this production value they were perfectly capable of getting funding for it and nothing so far in the themes has backed up this claim that publishers would shy away from their content. they went to kickstarter for funzies and gamers ate it up because Obisidian is a company known for making well received games.
Click to expand...

It's impossible for me to say whether you are right or wrong but Obsidian has been burned on their last few projects ... their publisher has withheld bonus payouts because of their metacritic scores and not all their recent titles have been resounding successes ... they also recently laid off some portion of their staff (a fairly common thing across many game developers right now) ... they might have been a little gun shy ... whether that justifies them going to KS for funding who can say (that is a subjective judgement call each person must make) ... I didn't see anything wrong with it and I gave them a big chunk of change ... I can see where some might choose to do differently ...

I don't think every KS project deserves to be supported ... in fact, that would actually be bad for gaming ... but if the KS participants use their money wisely we do become kind of an Angel venture capitalist where we hand out money to deserving companies in exchange for a game and possibly some digital or physical trifles :cool:
 
piscian18 said:
1. The folks who want to whine about how you're not making a profit are from what I can see the same sheeple who pre-order call of Duty and Halo. You're not seeing any money from that now are you?
Click to expand...

I have to take issue with this. What these companies in many cases are looking for is startup funding, for a period of 1-2 years. Usually when risking capital, the reward is a return on your investment. In this case many people are content with the game, however that isn't much of a return. In fact, it is a losing investment right off the bat - today's dollars will be worth more than tomorrow's dollars, and that isn't even taking into consideration the opportunity cost of handing them the money today for a product tomorrow.

Is it really being a "sheeple" to feel that in some ways, KS projects take advantage of the emotions and unsophisticated economic understanding of users? As I always say, value is subjective, if you feel the game is worth it, more power to you. But there absolutely are legitimate reasons to "whine".
 
DeathPrincess said:
Buut all the people that buy games buy the stuff they think they want. The people that buy BF3 do so the same way people who like special interest groups who like isometric 90s styled RPGs pay for kickstarters. If everyone loved those kind of games, and weren't really into 64 player FPS, then the picture would be very different, and there would be kickstarters for BF style games instead. :D
Click to expand...

Yes, and I would be able to go trolling in their KS threads like Daggah does in the PE ones between my glorious sessions of RPG bliss :D
 
I don't see how Kickstarter could be bad for gaming. The big publishers will still be around to release games even if Kickstarter flops; they wouldn't even care since Kickstarter is just a very tiny ripple in the status quo.
 
Parja said:
There's two sides to the coin. I'm sure some really good things are going to come out of these projects, but there will inevitably also be some great failures. How those failures are handled is going to set the tone for the future of game crowdsourcing initiatives.
Click to expand...

There will no doubt be huge failures along with games that never get finished even if the developers collect a ton of cash.
 
ROI isn't good when considered an investment, but I'm pretty sure nobody cares. You may buy the game on a Steam sale a year later for $5 and think "Hahah, thank those idiots for funding the game!" and we will say "Don't care! Fun game, eh?".
 
LeninGHOLA said:
ROI isn't good when considered an investment, but I'm pretty sure nobody cares. You may buy the game on a Steam sale a year later for $5 and think "Hahah, thank those idiots for funding the game!" and we will say "Don't care! Fun game, eh?".
Click to expand...

That's because KS isn't a financial investment, and in fact it is specifically set up not to be that. You can't offer financial rewards. It is a creative investment. You are saying "Yes, I want to see this made and I'm willing to risk my money to see it happen." The return you hope for is creative, a product you want, not financial.

That is one of the things that makes it cool. If I want to invest in games financially, I can do that. Most publishers are publicly traded companies, I can buy their stock. KS is for when I want to invest in a creative return, I want to see a project made, I don't care if it makes money.

As such it can allow for more niche things to be made. If I'm investing for financial return, I want shit like CoD. I don't care how bad it is, I care about most return on my investment. However with KS I'm not after financial gain, so I back things I want to see made. I don't care if they never make a dollar of profit, because I'm not in it for money.
 
My gut tells me yes. Reality tells me that we won't know for a good 2 years once we see some of these projects reach fruition. It's all speculation at this point, none of us really know.
 
TwistedAegis said:
I have to take issue with this. What these companies in many cases are looking for is startup funding, for a period of 1-2 years. Usually when risking capital, the reward is a return on your investment. In this case many people are content with the game, however that isn't much of a return. In fact, it is a losing investment right off the bat - today's dollars will be worth more than tomorrow's dollars, and that isn't even taking into consideration the opportunity cost of handing them the money today for a product tomorrow.

Is it really being a "sheeple" to feel that in some ways, KS projects take advantage of the emotions and unsophisticated economic understanding of users? As I always say, value is subjective, if you feel the game is worth it, more power to you. But there absolutely are legitimate reasons to "whine".
Click to expand...

And if someone viewed KS as an investment you'd be correct ... however, if you view it as an entertainment expense it is a different calculation ... everyone decides what their entertainment needs are and must match those to their budget ... for some that entails a monthly internet and cable charge ... for others a monthly netflix or audible bill ... for others a WOW subscription or something else

for many of us it includes some sort of gaming budget ... if viewed in that context, as a long term preorder, then the only measure of your financial risk is based on whether this is a game you want ... and whether they are offering it at a price point you find acceptable ... as long as you purchase into only those titles you really want and only at the price points that meet your entertainment needs then there is nothing wrong

Also, as many of us that are long term gamers can attest to, for some titles the expectation can often exceed the joy of the actual product (for products that fail to measure up) ... so, if you limit your KS choices to titles that you REALLY want you get a year or more of expectation and planning and watching the updates which will provide some entertainment there also ... if the game sucks then you are no worse off then if you had preordered a AAA title ... if the game meets your expectations (or occasionally even exceeds them) then you get the additional enjoyment of the game ... so unless you put an ROI on every hour of entertainment you pursue the measure of success becomes did you enjoy being a part of the game process and playing or did you not ;)
 
SockMan! said:
I don't see how Kickstarter could be bad for gaming. The big publishers will still be around to release games even if Kickstarter flops; they wouldn't even care since Kickstarter is just a very tiny ripple in the status quo.
Click to expand...

Kickstarter is bad for gaming because all of a sudden, Kickstarter is necessary for anything that's not the next Battlefield or Call of Duty game. Before Kickstarter, if you (general you directed at developers) wanted to make a niche title, you found a fucking way. Now, it's somehow necessary for the gaming community to subsidize your risk to guarantee you get something out of it? Bullshit. Fuck off.
 
huxley said:
My gut tells me yes. Reality tells me that we won't know for a good 2 years once we see some of these projects reach fruition. It's all speculation at this point, none of us really know.
Click to expand...

Sort of.

FTL completed and is doing well.

Paper Sorcerer is nearing completion. I'm playing the beta/alpha right now should be done in a month or two. It's very good.

A few others are complete or nearing completion.
 
Am I the only one here who remembers the episode of South Park where a beggar comes to town and they give him money? Then the entire town becomes slowly infested with beggars? That's kickstarter in a nut shell. When it first started being used for gaming, I was immediately against it. Even when it was just a small or solo developer doing the panhandling, I opposed it. I predicted that, if it was successful, bigger developers and companies would start using it. I was right. I was ignored, laughed at, and accused of being a troll. What's next? What does it take for the "shut up and take my money" morons to get it? What happens when EA or Activision pop up with a game in Kickstarter saying "oh, this is a niche title we couldn't fund by ourselves. Please help us fund it!" and it happens to be a game you want? Where will you Kickstarter zealots draw the line before you realize you've been had?
 
It's all about trust. You fund those you trust. There's certainly those who you can trust who will give it their best shot and those who you know you can't trust being lame beggars. Reputation and quality presentation of a doable project will have to be important with kickstarter.

If there are some mistakes with funding, people will wisen up and be more savvy. The whole process will naturally mature. Backers will become more wiser, and people who aren't cut for the job will be identified much better. If not then the only other scenario is that the whole KS gaming scene will die a cold death. I think you should be happy either way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top