[Kusagari]

Absolutely 100% agreed. Consumers should not have to pay for a product before it's even fucking created. The system is shit, you cannot convince me otherwise.

Pretty sure nobody is forcing people to pay for the product before it's created. The product won't exist if some people don't though, so pick your poison.

[cr_blah_blah]

Absolutely 100% agreed. Consumers should not have to pay for a product before it's even fucking created. The system is shit, you cannot convince me otherwise.

So we're better off only having the opportunity to have games created that publishers deem there's a market for? Even when getting a game funded by Kickstarter proves that they don't have a clue?

It's insane people want to keep the status-quo of being force fed whatever the big publishers want. People are genuinely upset that there's now a new avenue for genres we've been told don't matter anymore to exist.

[DTKT]

Can I be pissed on Brink if I preordered it based on positive previews, there was no demo and reviews were embargoed?

How many people constantly complain about reviews that either underrate or - in particular - overrate a game? It's fairly interesting that reviews are bandied about as some trusted source when the Kickstarter topic comes up, and viewed with hatred anytime else. Look at the reaction to Mass Effect 3 we just had, and the number of people who felt burned. You don't truly know how well you'll enjoy something until you actually play it.

Right, but that issue is part of why game reviews are broken. It's either 10's or 5's. Even then, you should not look at the score. You need to find a site you trust, with a reviewer that has the same interests as you. That's really all you do to not get disappointed into a game. I honestly don't remember the last time I bought a game and was disappointed by it. I believe that there are enough sources of information to make a informed decision on buying a game.

I just read Rock Paper Shotgun and read Neogaf, solves all my problems. :)

[Acosta]

I have another question: why do you care?

No, seriously, I read these thread and I see some people are actually bothered about this or have some kind of security there will be a backlash.

So what? It's not your problem.

This is not forced on anyone, don't want to put your money? awesome, you will still have the chance to buy a good game in some months/years, and if it´s not a good game or you are no interested, you can pass on it, just live every game. How the finances of the studio affect to you? since when do you care about how a game is funded?

Really, I fail to understand why anyone could be bothered about it.

[speedpop]

Absolutely 100% agreed. Consumers should not have to pay for a product before it's even fucking created. The system is shit, you cannot convince me otherwise.

How is this any different from taking your idea for a product, perhaps even a physical prototype, and shopping around for investors? The only difference is the investors then take that product they have bankrolled and get rich off it. Kickstarter is similar in premise but cuts out the middle man and rather than a true investment it's nothing more than a donation with differing levels of rewards depending upon how much money you throw at it. Even then it has a chance of never being funded.

Honestly we've had at least several threads where people are repeating the same arguments and opinions and nothing seems to change. The ignorance remains. I can understand if you are not interested in the system, but don't slag it off without knowing the facts or realizing the potentials.

[dr3upmushroom]

Looking at Kickstarter rewards can be depressing. Seeing people throw away a grand to be a character in an iPhone game really puts how poor I am into perspective. I guess that comes along with being a student, but still.

I'm surprised that not a lot of people seem to be worried about projects going over budget. There's some cases like Double Fine's game that are just ridiculously over-funded that hopefully have basically zero chance of running into trouble, but I worry about games like Republique that are just barely over the amount they were asking for.

There's a very well-known effect that often gets talked about in regards to public projects like constructing public buildings or bridges or whatever else where even very experienced project managers have an extremely hard time judging how much time a project will take and how expensive it will be. In fact there are tons of documented cases where even when project managers accounted for the fact that they have a tendency to under-budget, they still ended up predicting far lower budgets than they eventually used.

Anyway, hopefully it won't happen, but I wonder how a team would handle it if they work on a game that was Kickstarter funded for a few months and all of a sudden realize "Oh shit, this is going to cost a little more than we thought."

[toythatkills]

My favourite thing about NeoGAF is how someone starts this thread basically every single day at the moment.

[funkystudent]

Yeah it's a bit shifty.


At least DF are making a documentary. I bet most of these kickstarters won't be as open with there development. Heck a bunch already seem all to happy to bend the truth to make a better sales pitch for there game.

Can't wait for the reaction after one of these games is cancelled or finised but horrible.

[shagg_187]

Kickstarter that provide everything or reasonable price is awesome. Anything over $100 tier is not reasonable and it's just a fanboy's dream to be part of a game. Anything under that has to be reasonable i.e. should include multiple copies of the game for you and your friend, should include a tshirt, a poster, a soundtrack, behind the scene footage or images, PDF concept art, beta and more. These are a MUST and no one should chare you loads for that since you are blindly supporting a concept and you deserve it all. It's not that hard to do these, really.

[DTKT]

Yeah it's a bit shifty. At least DF are making a documentary. I bet most of these kickstarters won't be as open with there development. Heck a bunch already seem all to happy to bend the truth to make a better sales pitch for there game. Can't wait for the reaction after one of these games is cancelled or finised but horrible.

There's going to be a shitstorm. But that fault lies within the developer itself, not the Kickstarter model.

[Khezu]

I like KS, not sure how much I like it for games though. There is just so much that can go wrong with game development, so many ways they can fuck up and waste all there money with little to show for it.

One of these KS darlings is eventually going to either not come out, or come out and be complete shit, and the backlash will be crazy. Double fine adventure probably won't be that game, those dudes seemed to have put a lot of effort and thought into this before hand, especially with the documentary, but not everyone is as awesome as Tim.

I do agree though, the republououadf thing was a little gross, the way some people were pimping the shit out of it all over the place, and desperation to get it funded towards the last week of its funding.

[shagg_187]

Some of them, I only paid for the base game and dont think it merits paying anything more than $20. I paid $20 for Republique but I don't even think I'll play it on iPhone. I didn't know it ended today or I would've reduced my pledge to just the PC game.

[Corto]

Absolutely 100% agreed. Consumers should not have to pay for a product before it's even fucking created. The system is shit, you cannot convince me otherwise.

Consumers can still buy the final product post release. You don't need to pledge money to buy the game. The system is great as instead of pitching their games to a publisher they go directly to their customer base avoiding marketing noise and publisher meddling in their creation. There are some obvious risks of course. Design by commitee for example, trying to please everyone. But that's a risk that I'm confortable with.

[Mr_Zombie]

But do we really want a new developer begging us for money every week?

If that means a game that I will probably enjoy (Tim Schafer's or Jane Jensen's new adventure game) and that wouldn't be developed otherwise ("No one plays p&c adventure games nowadays. Let's make a big budget modern shooter #124564 instead!") is going to be developed thanks to the money I can donate, they sure, I want that.

And yes, no one forces you to pay. You see what the developer can offer you, you see his/her vision (or lack of it), early materials etc. and it's up to you to whether you want to donate or not and how much you want to donate.

[whalenapp81]

I have another question: why do you care?

Thank you!!

[IceMarker]

I still haven't gotten my $30 worth on the Minecraft documentary movie from 2 Player Productions.

[DidntKnowJack]

I don't think Kickstarter is inherently shady, but it's possible to become so in certain situations. But really the only time I have a problem with it, is when they are being shilled by supposedly objective people in the enthusiast press.

As far as a company not delivering on a kickstarter promise, that's a very real possibility and outside video games I'm sure it has happened many times. But you're free to give or not give money. As with all things, buyer beware. Doesn't make it shady, but it does involve a certain amount of risk.

[Kintaro]

So become a publisher if you're only interested in ROI. Maybe people will change their minds if one of these games ends up hitting the jackpot, but their primary interest in investing is as consumers.

That may be their interest, but they basically are publishers already. Except the devs only owe them whatever it promised when they donated. Money from the game are basically "free." Giving people what amounts of review copies and some beta compared to the potential of good profit? What dev wouldn't take that bet? Especially if they don't even spend all of the money donated to them. What if they pocket it? The gamers who invested wouldn't know and aren't under any right to know. Asking for 500k? What if the game was actually 250k to make? You have no idea.

I just don't dig it. As a consumer, you give up too much for essentially a review copy of the game.

[dyergram]

I liked the look of rebubliq I didn't donate because I couldn't afford to and because I can't justify pre paying for something that comes out next year. I think kick starter has come along at the perfect time when it can feel like the industry is churning out a lot of un original products. If we have to gamble to get some fresh experiences so be it and if there's people willing to finance said gamble then more power to them.

[Nightshade1765]

I'm a strong person, I can't be influenced by the words of these people, but I'm sure a lot of people are going to regret being convinced by people that should be impartial that they should give money to somebody with only scraps of detail available. My friend told me Republique is guaranteed to be Game of the Year 2013. There's indoctrination going on here.

Thankfully we've got strong people like you around to take care of us weak minded individuals who can't do it for ourselves. Clearly, donating to Kickstarter (emphasis on the word donating) is mostly done by the people who are simply just corralled with pretty words and motion pictures into buying snake-oils and cure-alls.

Look, people can spend their own money however they'd like. You don't have to feel obligated as some voice of reasoning for the people you consider "indoctrinated."

That said. I think Kickstarter has had a profound impact on gaming as a whole. And I'm glad that people like Tim Schafer get an opportunity to make the game they want, and invite a level of community involvement. If your idea is good enough, and if you're creative enough; Kickstarter is a great medium to get your project off the ground. And make those who support you feel like they have some level of importance in its development.

[Mr_Zombie]

Absolutely 100% agreed. Consumers should not have to pay for a product before it's even fucking created. The system is shit, you cannot convince me otherwise.

I'd rather pay for the product before it's created than never be able to pay for it because it would be never created otherwise.

[shagg_187]

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/...sega-dreamcast

This, in my opinion, is the shadiest Kickstarter yet. This better not become a trend in any way possible cause it just plain stupid.

Surprised it already made that much money, with almost everyone paying $65 or above.

Not even a thank you to the ones that pledge.

[Zeliard]

Right, but that issue is part of why game reviews are broken. It's either 10's or 5's. Even then, you should not look at the score. You need to find a site you trust, with a reviewer that has the same interests as you. That's really all you do to not get disappointed into a game. I honestly don't remember the last time I bought a game and was disappointed by it. I believe that there are enough sources of information to make a informed decision on buying a game. I just read Rock Paper Shotgun and read Neogaf, solves all my problems. :)

There is still the inherent talent of the studio which one should take into account. Just because Brian Fargo knows how to make a good isometric rpg doesn't mean the rest of his team does. You hope he can guide the rest of them to make something good, but that is still a hope.

Sure, but it's no different in that sense than hoping that the next Dragon Age game won't be a turd. You can rely on reviews or comments from others but it's no guarantee of anything. Some people thought Dragon Age 2 was a great game. Others thought it was shit on a stick. Ultimately your own experience will be the judge of that. You're putting forth $15 before the fact with Wasteland 2, but if you want to truly know how well you'll like Dragon Age 3, you have to put money towards that game too.

Look at Alpha Protocol. Somewhere in the 60s on Metacritic and generally reviled by critics, and even by a lot of GAF (some of whom have even admitted they haven't played it and go by word-of-mouth). Yet a lot of others who play it are pleased with it, and are often surprised at how good they found it due to its reception. The key there is they played it and ultimately came to a conclusion based on their own experience with the product. Others who hated it after they played it took a risk with their money and ended up disappointed.

You ultimately never know. You're taking a risk with every purchase you make, and nobody is forcing anyone to fund anything. When it comes to the games, some people will only fund the larger ones like Double Fine Adventure and Wasteland 2, even if due simply to things like bigger budgets and bigger studios, feeling there is less risk involved there. Others will ignore those and view the smaller, newer guys as places they'd rather put money towards, weighing the risks there and making their decision accordingly. Others still will fund what they interests them in general, regardless of the size or track record of the studio involved, because they appreciate the vision being put forth and would like to help it come to pass.

I really don't see why it bothers so many people. If you dislike the Kickstarter proposition as a whole, then simply ignore it. You're seeing it everywhere? I couldn't care less for games like CoD and Halo but I don't pitch a fit because those games get insane amounts of coverage whenever a new one comes out. Ignore the things you aren't interested in and focus on what you like.

[Famassu]

Eh, I just can't get into this idea as I'm basically help funding the game by an investment and will see no return on it. No, a copy of the game is not a return on my investment. That's a pre-order. When a game has been funded and I'm reserving a copy of the game. This is investing on an idea which does not exist yet. I'm not against Kickstarter, but I don't like what it is currently handled ("Pre-order a copy of the game or invest more money for other shit before the game exists yet!").

You're not an investor. You're helping to fund game development and the devs can choose to give you a copy of the game (and they always do, usually cheaper than it would be day 1) as a thanks for the support.

With these kickstarters, I'd be a lot more impressed if these developers actually put out some kind of 'tech demo' and thorough design documents before they start asking for money.

Some of them have done that, but it's simply not possible for every game. Making a tech demo takes time & money in itself, time & money these people/devs don't necessarily have. Still, if Jane Jensen says they have a clear concept for their game done, what reason do I have to doubt them? Plus she's one of the most talented writers in the game industry, so I trust her to bring out an enjoyable game. And I don't need to see all the planning Brian Fargo & Co had already put to Wasteland 2 before pledging money for it, they said they HAD done lots of planning and that's good enough for me. There have been plenty of KS projects where it's obvious the developers haven't done too much planning and those kinds of projects (probably) shouldn't be supported. But these projects like Wasteland 2, DFA, Moebius etc. have clearly been planned out fairly well before they initiated their KS projects.

I'm also tired of the 'bribe system,' aka hey, if you want this feature, give us this amount of money. Oh, you want decent musicians? We need $200,000.

Why? The initial amount of money they are asking is usually just to get the game done. Why do you see it as a bad thing that they are telling what the extra money is used for? Isn't them being open a GOOD thing? They aren't just ignoring that they are getting 2-5+ times the money they were asking for, but TELLING us what they'll use the extra money. Isn't that what you wanted, for them to share their plans with the game? And isn't it good that they are trying to make the game better with the extra money?

[Acosta]

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/...sega-dreamcast This, in my opinion, is the shadiest Kickstarter yet. This better not become a trend in any way possible cause it just plain stupid. Surprised it already made that much money, with almost everyone paying $65 or above.

Why? they are a proven developer, that its their fourth game for Neo Geo / Dreamcast.

They made this, which I find pretty awesome, so they have a public already:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=HohDEQpIRMw

(BTW, I think their Kickstarter is bad, I don't like lower tears not getting the product in any form, but that's beyond the point).

[Instro]

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/...sega-dreamcast This, in my opinion, is the shadiest Kickstarter yet. This better not become a trend in any way possible cause it just plain stupid. Surprised it already made that much money, with almost everyone paying $65 or above. Not even a thank you to the ones that pledge.

Well that's because the $60+ dollar tiers is what gets you the Dreamcast game.

[Reuenthal]

Kickstarter is a good idea when it comes to supporting people who there are evidence that they can deliver, and it is something it would not have been done otherwise.

It can be a bad idea as well in certain cases. And no, the fact that it is your money does not mean that it is not a problem. Same way that I don't own Skyrim on PS3 but I still find it a shitty thing for PS3 owners and their Skyrim that it has the problems it has (or had, if it was fixed). I like people making good use of their money, and donating for games to be made is actually not necessarily a bad use but it can be a bad use based on to whom you are donating. If Kickstarter was a wholly bad use of one's money, the reaction to Kickstarter would be more negative, because people don't like other people being scummed from their money. The reason it isn't, is not because people don't care at all what you do with your money.

Example of potential problems:

They could have made the game regardless.
They are not trustworthy enough to dedicate the budget fully to the game.
They don't have sufficiently good record to prove that they are worthy of that trust or investment and so on.
They are perhaps going to fail making the game successfully.
The game is in an oversatured genre or does not appear to be anything special in comparison to so many available games, deserving of your donation

Also, I agree that there should not be many "Go out there and donate!" messages for all kickstarters. People should not feel pressured to donate, especially by gaming journalists. If a project is worthy of such donation, just show it to the public, there is no reason for journalists to ask people to donate to it. No game is entitled to donations, the ones who want those donations because they are making the games can ask for them, but I don't think journalists should do so.

The concept is not all bad or even mostly bad, in fact it will bring something good and games that wouldn't be made without it but I think people should not over do it, and mostly support few projects that deserve the support.

[Mr_Zombie]

As a consumer, you give up too much for essentially a review copy of the game.

Again, it's up to you if and how much you pay. I donated $15 for Double Fine's game and $16 for Jane Jensen's game. Is it really "too much" for a full game and (in case of DF's game) access to the beta? Both those games will probably cost more when they are eventually released.

There are games that I paid more for (damn you Steam sales!) and that I hadn't even started yet.

[IamMikeside]

This just in!
If you don't like Kickstarter, I have a new option for you - it's called not putting any money on Kickstarter projects!

Already I'm seeing amazing results from people who don't like Kickstarter or the projects on it! Almost 100% of people who didn't put any money into anything on Kickstarter said they didn't feel like they'd been ripped off! You too can join this new revolution, but beware - you may have to actually shut up and put up when other people want to risk a bit of money to see games they want made actually getting made!

[butter_stick]

I have another question: why do you care? No, seriously, I read these thread and I see some people are actually bothered about this or have some kind of security there will be a backlash. So what? It's not your problem. This is not forced on anyone, don't want to put your money? awesome, you will still have the chance to buy a good game in some months/years, and if it´s not a good game or you are no interested, you can pass on it, just live every game. How the finances of the studio affect to you? since when do you care about how a game is funded? Really, I fail to understand why anyone could be bothered about it.

I care about it because it spammed up my twitter feed and people kept telling me to donate because it has a totally wicked story and cool chick character. And it's happening frequently. I don't really care what people do with their money. But it feels like I'm walking down a street and some guy without a job is trying to improve his CV by hassling people for money for this "totally worthwhile cause".

[Haly]

What's the point of twitter if you want to be selective about the kind of stuff people are tweeting?

[outunderthestars]

I care about it because it spammed up my twitter feed and people kept telling me to donate because it has a totally wicked story and cool chick character. And it's happening frequently. I don't really care what people do with their money. But it feels like I'm walking down a street and some guy without a job is trying to improve his CV by hassling people for money for this "totally worthwhile cause".

That sounds more like the problem is your crappy twitter friends, and not Kickstarter itself.

[cr_blah_blah]

I care about it because it spammed up my twitter feed and people kept telling me to donate because it has a totally wicked story and cool chick character. And it's happening frequently. I don't really care what people do with their money. But it feels like I'm walking down a street and some guy without a job is trying to improve his CV by hassling people for money for this "totally worthwhile cause".

So you made another thread bitching about Kickstarter because you can't filter your shitty twitter account despite every single criticism already being countered previously? Glad you got it off your chest.

[boingball]

Do you agree? Do you think Kickstarters are awesome? Have you put down $125 for the special edition of Republique with an iPhone case? Am I being unreasonable and just trying to crush someone's vision?

I do not agree,

I think Kickstarters are awesome.

I have not put down $125 for Republique. Since I want to see the game first. But I have put down than $100 bucks on Shadowrun since I like the swag and also the game concept.

Yes, you are unreasonable. Of course there will be Kickstarters which will fail and Kickstarters which underdeliver. I doubt we see many Kickstarters exceeding expectations since that will be a difficult thing to pull off with hyperbole in the sales pitch of most Kickstarters.

There will be even shady Kickstarters, since kickstarter.com is not really screening the projects. But I think most of those will be uncovered by someone before they are funded. (I believe in the power of the Internet, lol).

Finally, Activision is making record profits. Their game plan is basically WoW subscriptions and yearly CoD subscriptions. They are trying to establish a similar franchise after successfully killing of Tony Hawk and Guitar Hero, but both Blur and Prototype seem to be unsuccessful. Most publishers will follow this blueprint (EA is trying to push BF, but it seems that SW Galaxies is not becoming their WoW) or go belly-up. Some smaller ones might survive as niche publishers (e.g. Atlus). This means unfortunately that a lot of great games will not be published (go watch the Wasteland pitch video to see how this works). You can make an Indie game, but those will be quite small, since self-funding can go only so far.

For ppl pledging Kickstarter is basically a pre-order system for their games (or the SE of the game with swag). Instead of pre-ordering at gamestop.

P.S.
Look at the reaction to ME3 on how a published AAA game with excellent reviews also did not fulfill most (some?) ppls expectations. So there is no difference between Kickstarter and a Publisher after all...

[IamMikeside]

I care about it because it spammed up my twitter feed and people kept telling me to donate because it has a totally wicked story and cool chick character. And it's happening frequently. I don't really care what people do with their money. But it feels like I'm walking down a street and some guy without a job is trying to improve his CV by hassling people for money for this "totally worthwhile cause".

Not your precious twitter feed!

[whalleywhat]

That may be their interest, but they basically are publishers already. Except the devs only owe them whatever it promised when they donated. Money from the game are basically "free." Giving people what amounts of review copies and some beta compared to the potential of good profit? What dev wouldn't take that bet? Especially if they don't even spend all of the money donated to them. What if they pocket it? The gamers who invested wouldn't know and aren't under any right to know. Asking for 500k? What if the game was actually 250k to make? You have no idea. I just don't dig it. As a consumer, you give up too much for essentially a review copy of the game.

Because devs basically have the same relation to money as I do. They make things so they can get money so they can continue living. Yes, the money they're receiving doesn't have the same strings attached as money they get from a publisher. It's money from people who are interested in them making the best product rather than the most profitable product. So it's not really a publisher/dev relationship at all. As for all the "what ifs", I'm not too concerned about Tim Schafer pocketing my cash, and if he does I'm out $15 and got to watch some funny videos.

But it feels like I'm walking down a street and some guy without a job is trying to improve his CV by hassling people for money for this "totally worthwhile cause".

Homeless people's scarves don't look like that.

[Acosta]

I care about it because it spammed up my twitter feed and people kept telling me to donate because it has a totally wicked story and cool chick character. And it's happening frequently. I don't really care what people do with their money. But it feels like I'm walking down a street and some guy without a job is trying to improve his CV by hassling people for money for this "totally worthwhile cause".

Really?

No, really? that´s the big deal? Twitter posts?

Come on.

[HadesGigas]

I care about it because it spammed up my twitter feed and people kept telling me to donate because it has a totally wicked story and cool chick character. And it's happening frequently. I don't really care what people do with their money. But it feels like I'm walking down a street and some guy without a job is trying to improve his CV by hassling people for money for this "totally worthwhile cause".

Twitter being used to spam commercial products??? Well I never...

Stop following game companies and game journalist sites if you don't want spam about shit you mostly don't care about.

If it is your actual friends spamming you, get less annoying friends.

[Ashes1396]

Do investors get their money back?

[IamMikeside]

Because devs basically have the same relation to money as I do. They make things so they can get money so they can continue living. Yes, the money they're receiving doesn't have the same strings attached as money they get from a publisher. It's money from people who are interested in them making the best product rather than the most profitable product. So it's not really a publisher/dev relationship at all. As for all the "what ifs", I'm not too concerned about Tim Schafer pocketing my cash, and if he does I'm out $15 and got to watch some funny videos.

This is exactly it - you can't view it as a pre-order or an investment, you have to look at it as funding the studio in the belief that they'll reward you by making something cool.

I've backed 10 games now, varying from $15 - $100 pledges because I like what those studios have shown and I'm willing to put some money down to see how it progresses and hopefully have an awesome product at the end of it - if any of these projects go belly up then I've accepted that the money I spent was purely for the ride, the end result is just a bonus.

Do investors get their money back?

You're not an investor, it's not an investment.

[Corky]

Scenario 1 : $15 kickstarter project that you might not enjoy in the end
Scenario 2 : $60 AAA title with 98+ metacritic that you might not enjoy in the end


One of those sting more than the other and as of yet only one of those has happened to me thus far...

[butter_stick]

So you made another thread bitching about Kickstarter because you can't filter your shitty twitter account despite every single criticism already being countered previously? Glad you got it off your chest.

I'm not here to justify my opinion to you. Just like people are free to ignore Kickstarters they don't like, people are free to ignore Internet message board threads they don't like. If you feel my opinion on Kickstarters is worthless, you must also agree your opinion on my thread is worthless.

[DTKT]

I care about it because it spammed up my twitter feed and people kept telling me to donate because it has a totally wicked story and cool chick character. And it's happening frequently. I don't really care what people do with their money. But it feels like I'm walking down a street and some guy without a job is trying to improve his CV by hassling people for money for this "totally worthwhile cause".

Because it spammed your twitter feed? Common.

Comparing an article on the internet to someone shoving something in your face?

[Reuenthal]

Scenario 1 : $15 kickstarter project that you might not enjoy in the end Scenario 2 : $60 AAA title with 98+ metacritic that you might not enjoy in the end One of those sting more than the other and as of yet only one of those has happened to me thus far...

How many kickstarter projects have you supported? And how many have you played? How many 90+% metacritic games have you bought and how many have you played?

[HiroProtagonist]

if you dont want to look at kickstarters dont go to the website

Or the front page of gaming.

[Corky]

How many kickstarter projects have you supported? And how many have you played? How many 90+% metacritic games have you bought and how many have you played?

In case it wasn't already painfully obvious, I was talking about the prospect of which one would theoretically be worse.

[FieryBalrog]

I'm also tired of the 'bribe system,' aka hey, if you want this feature, give us this amount of money. Oh, you want decent musicians? We need $200,000. Kickstart is a nice concept, but I have a feeling some people will get burned What's wrong with that kind of transparency in the costs?

There is no transparency in costs. The guy says he needs $200,000 for musicians. Does he really? Does he need $180,000 and the other $20,000 is to remodel his home? Who knows where the money actually goes? That's part of what is disturbing about it. It's not like they're preparing accounting reports for us. The money is basically in their hands to do anything they want to do.

[EmSeta]

The idea is great, but I'm worried there's gonna be major backlash once the first real dud hits the market. And it will.

That said, I'm totally going to sink money into Tex Murphy. Can't wait!

[cr_blah_blah]

I'm not here to justify my opinion to you. Just like people are free to ignore Kickstarters they don't like, people are free to ignore Internet message board threads they don't like. If you feel my opinion on Kickstarters is worthless, you must also agree your opinion on my thread is worthless.

It's worthless because you're not going to change your mind despite being wrong and this discussion being had every day and the naysayers continually being uninformed and proven so. You made this thread because you have annoying friends and follow IGN and the like on Twitter, not to figure anything out with your list of bullshit questions you put at the end of every thread start.

[IamMikeside]

There is no transparency in costs. The guy says he needs $200,000 for musicians. Does he really? Does he need $180,000 and the other $20,000 is to remodel his home? Who knows where the money actually goes? That's part of what is disturbing about it. It's not like they're preparing accounting reports for us. The money is basically in their hands to do anything they want to do.

That's why you only back projects that you;
a. Trust the people involved
b. Are willing to risk your cash to see come to light