Support NeoGAF

[Pie and Beans]

I think they could well decide to revise rules sooner rather than later. They already did a revision of rules for physical products a short while ago, but that didn't include videogames, presumably because they didn't want to cut off a huge growing revenue stream immediately. I guess we'll see what happens. Hopefully there are some changes before a funded project actually falls apart and makes everyone look bad.

The Penny Arcade one has left an almighty bad reflection on the team that okays dubious Kickstarters though. Their own rules are often rendered meaningless if the potential cut is big enough, which isn't really the "indie crowdsourcing spirit" thats gonna keep them in the good books. Penny Arcade also initially pledged to do the same exact thing every year to keep ads off the site, that may have changed because they came nowhere near the 1 mill true goal, but one can only assume Kickstarter HQ was totally fine with that concept then and probably now.

Kickstarters to fund Kickstarters should definitely be a no-no.

 

[plagiarize]

If the kickstarter is clear about what the money being asked for is going to do, then there is nothing shady about it. They wanted money for a tech demo. They got it because people felt it worth supporting that tech demo. They want money to speed up development... if people want to donate for that purpose, then they can.

I'd argue it's a risky proposition even if the company is completely above board. Game delays are often unavoidable realities... even if the money speeds up development, it could still be four years or more before it comes out.

But, no, this is no abuse. As far as I can tell it is within the rules of Kickstarter, and the company is being very straightforwards about where they are, and what they want the money for.

I'm not going to support it, but people that do either understand and support that end goal, or are morons who part with their money too easily.

 

[Data West]

I find it odd this group of people who are just waiting for any negative article about kickstarter to show up(especially games journalists) so they can say, 'I told you so.'

It's not as if you're giving free money to Activision or EA here. In all KS projects you are still funding a smaller group. Obsidian's probably the biggest one, and the amount of money they make off KS isn't near enough to be a caper for them when you run a company of that size. Not only that, but you have to realize that patience of someone who's pledging to a KS especially when it comes to games. I've pledged to Maia and Sui Generis because they're the kind of games I'm interested in that don't get made anymore or have something neat. Most people have accepted that these games are not going to be out for a loooong time.

It's a little different than something like Star Citizen that actually could come out in a decent time. And part of what I like about KS is that there's no publisher rushing. We'll see how it works out with their budgetted time, but I like to assume they get to take their time on putting out the product.

 

[Tash]

If you are rewarding someone with money with no track record, you are not using kickstarter right.

Give money to Obsidian, not some no name team

Wow, wait, what?

I hope you are joking...
So as long as it's an already known name you would support them no matter what lies they tell you?

And a startup team who might have a super awesome concept, made a prototype and shows actual models and gameplay would not get your money over the first option? Smart..that surely will drive change and innovation in the industry.

 

[Shaheed79]

Not even the Molyneux one? Or the recent Braben one?

I'm glad that we're starting to see some pushback on Kickstarters. Not because I don't like Kickstarter -- I very much do -- but because it's important to remain vigilant.

By propping up kickstarter, game players have retaken tremendous power from publishers, but in the process we'll also need to start guarding ourselves from charlatans, fools, and scam artists -- people who had (mostly) been kept out by publishers previously.

But now the responsibility falls on us, so I'm glad to see some signs that we're actually doing it.

Well said. My feelings in a nutshell.

We need something like KS because of what the industry is evolving into, but at the same time we have to be responsible for the quality of KS and its output. Abusers are to be tarred and feathered by the community.

 

[Jac_Solar]

http://massively.joystiq.com/2012/11/27/pathfinder-online-begins-second-kickstarter-project/





first kickstarter:
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1675907842/pathfinder-online-technology-demo







what we can get from their KS is that they already talked to investors and publisher who probably just wanted to see a demo before giving them any money.


second kickstarter:
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1675907842/pathfinder-online-a-fantasy-sandbox-mmo





WAT?



well... yeah... so you really want us to believe that whatever your backers think comes before the needs of the investors you already have?

i don't know about you guys, but i think the whole thing really is disappointing

An MMO on Kickstarter? What happens if the servers crash, and they need to buy more hardware, or if they promised subscription based, or free with item shop based and need to go with something else to maintain the world? (Poll, maybe?) How will they maintain constant updates and fixes with 1 million dollars? What if they need to hire more people for the maintenance of the server infrastructure? Do they launch another Kickstarter?

 

[nubbe]

I view my pledges as a pre-order for games i really want.

But as with everything in life... it is up to the individual to make.... "rational decisions"

I wouldn't back this or the Barben game, even though I loved the old Elite games.

I would back Molyneux, even with his hyperbole... I really enjoy his games.

 

[Aiii]

Not even the Molyneux one? Or the recent Braben one?

I'm glad that we're starting to see some pushback on Kickstarters. Not because I don't like Kickstarter -- I very much do -- but because it's important to remain vigilant.

By propping up kickstarter, game players have retaken tremendous power from publishers, but in the process we'll also need to start guarding ourselves from charlatans, fools, and scam artists -- people who had (mostly) been kept out by publishers previously.

But now the responsibility falls on us, so I'm glad to see some signs that we're actually doing it.

Seems to me it's pretty much self-regulating.

Of course, there could always be imposters, but disregarding those (Kickstarter surely has regulations and safeguards in place for those) the idea of Kickstarter is simple, you either bring a good idea that people find worthy of investment, or you don't. The way I see it, any game that actually makes it goals has a target audience. Sure, it might just be those few people, but that's the entire idea of Kickstarter. Get stuff made for the people that want to consume it, instead of making stuff and then hoping there's consumers that want it enough or, if you will, not making something because you don't believe the consumers will want it. Even though some of them might.

Don't think Kickstarter will ever replace publishers or be an alternative to it really. I really do see it as more of a way to get some niche-games to it's target audience and make sure everyone walks away happy (creater gets some cash, invester gets the game)

 

[duckroll]

An MMO on Kickstarter? What happens if the servers crash, and they need to buy more hardware, or if they promised subscription based, or free with item shop based and need to go with something else to maintain the world? (Poll, maybe?) How will they maintain constant updates and fixes with 1 million dollars? What if they need to hire more people for the maintenance of the server infrastructure? Do they launch another Kickstarter?

Well it's not hard to figure all that out. The Kickstarter here is looking for partial funding to hasten the development period of a MMO game. It is not the full development budget. It also does not promise a service which will last forever, with no crashes, and no problems whatsoever. I think any reasonable normal person would know this. If you don't feel confident they can deliver even a competent MMO which can make generate enough revenue to keep running, then the solution would simply be not to support it. It isn't that different from not wanting to buy a retail MMO in the first place because you think it's going to die fast, or there won't be a userbase, or if you think it will be going f2p at some point. Nothing wrong with that though. It's healthy to scrutinize products before buying them.

 

[Perkel]

At first i thought scam but looking closely it is valid.

1st kickstarter was only technology demo that would help them get investors and prove people that they have skill to do full scale MMORPG.

Second one is for actual game they have some investors but this also means royalty to them. Pledging money to them will mean that studio will earn a lot more from game.

I don't have any interest in this game but it is hardly fishy.

 

[Ingueferroque]

wow, the combat in the tech demo is exactly what's wrong with MMO's.. well, aside from the ridiculous scale of everything. The characters look like ants even when running on fields.

Doesn't really seem like a scam to me though, since the original KS was for a tech demo.

 

[Jac_Solar]

Well it's not hard to figure all that out. The Kickstarter here is looking for partial funding to hasten the development period of a MMO game. It is not the full development budget. It also does not promise a service which will last forever, with no crashes, and no problems whatsoever. I think any reasonable normal person would know this. If you don't feel confident they can deliver even a competent MMO which can make generate enough revenue to keep running, then the solution would simply be not to support it. It isn't that different from not wanting to buy a retail MMO in the first place because you think it's going to die fast, or there won't be a userbase, or if you think it will be going f2p at some point. Nothing wrong with that though. It's healthy to scrutinize products before buying them.

Exactly. Why would anyone want to support something like this when they could have used that money to buy an existing MMO? I know of atleast 1 game that sounds a lot like this one, and haven't been following MMO's for awhile. http://www.darkfallonline.com/ seems to support a lot of the things they mention in the Kickstarter.

 

[Jinko]

Having watched the tech demo, I don't think this is a scam, but I am pretty underwhelmed by what I saw.

 

[duckroll]

Yeah it's certainly not a scam. It just seems like... a not so great product.

 

[RPGCrazied]

I still haven't backed any. I really don't like giving out $$$$ with no product. Even the Tim Schafer project. I'll buy any that I'm interested in when I see it released.

 

[Midou]

I'm sure this has happened with projects even before gaming.

I follow the general rule of, only pay $10-15 towards something that gets me a full game without a known developer behind them, and if they have footage of the game. Otherwise stuff like Double Fine I trust 100%. Kickstarter seems to be the only way I can get new entries in several of my favorite adventure game series, otherwise there would be nothing. Sure there have been lots of great adventure games in the recent past, but none I felt were Lucas Arts, Longest Journey, etc tier.

 

[flyinpiranha]

Kickstarter is just like the stock market or buying a used car or anything where you are investing money into something really. Look at what you're backing, dig into it.

People screaming "scam, KS will be shut down by 20XX" are completely missing the point. KS is a new way to gain VC, it's like what ebay and Craigslist sort of is to resellers. Are there going to be shady scams? Of course. But scammers have figured out a way to scam in EVERY possible medium out there ...

I like KS personally, I haven't funded any game related KS myself because my needs are catered to, but I've donated some money on projects like the personal 3D printer one and the Pebble Watch to name a few.

It's a great idea, many of the inventing houses take HUGE cuts from these things once they take your invention and patent it themselves.

 

[RionaaM]

WTF? People actually backed a tech demo? And now they're been asked to back the final game?

Yeah, these devs can go screw themselves, for all I care. Actually not, they shouldn't be to blame if people is stupid enough to still support them. But to me it seems as shady as it could be.

 

[Shao Kahn Brewing a Stew]

WTF? People actually backed a tech demo? And now they're been asked to back the final game?

Yeah, these devs can go screw themselves, for all I care. Actually not, they souldn't be to blame if people is stupid enough to still support them. But to me it seems as shady as it could be.

Hey guys, I'm thinking of creating a company. Can you give me $10,000 so I can pay for licenses? Another $100,000 for hiring employees and $1 million for state of the art facility?

Maybe we'll release something...

 

[RionaaM]

Hey guys, I'm thinking of creating a company. Can you give me $10,000 so I can pay for licenses? Another $100,000 for hiring employees and $1 million for state of the art facility?

Maybe we'll release something...

This is actually the problem with Kickstarter, as I understand it. The backers are the ones actually taking all the risk, without getting any of the economic rewards of the projects. It's easy to invest when you're playing with someone else's money, and when they are the ones doing all the work of acquiring the necessary funds for you.

 

[Perkel]

This is actually the problem with Kickstarter, as I understand it. The backers are the ones actually taking all the risk, without getting any of the economic rewards of the projects. It's easy to invest when you're playing with someone else's money, and when they are the ones doing all the work of acquiring the necessary funds for you.

One thing: Karma

If someone will try to run with money or they will fail to deliver they will never have a chance to do kickstarter again because people will remember.

Kickstarter is like funding art in earlier centuries. Name is only one and if you fail to deliver it will be you last project.

 

[Midou]

This is actually the problem with Kickstarter, as I understand it. The backers are the ones actually taking all the risk, without getting any of the economic rewards of the projects. It's easy to invest when you're playing with someone else's money, and when they are the ones doing all the work of acquiring the necessary funds for you.

Yes, the backers take the role of publisher. This is also the good thing about KS. It gives people like Tim Schafer the freedom and time to make an adventure game without having his hand forced by someone else.

Few KS projects have finished, I think it's too early to jump the gun and judge it one way or another. When stuff like Double Fine, Broken Sword, Star Citizen, Project Eternity are finished, then we will know how much these guys benefit from this sort of funding and publisher freedom. I'm pretty confident at least the big name ones will go well.

 

[jcm]

Kickstarter is just like the stock market or buying a used car or anything where you are investing money into something really. Look at what you're backing, dig into it.

People screaming "scam, KS will be shut down by 20XX" are completely missing the point. KS is a new way to gain VC, it's like what ebay and Craigslist sort of is to resellers. Are there going to be shady scams? Of course. But scammers have figured out a way to scam in EVERY possible medium out there ...

I like KS personally, I haven't funded any game related KS myself because my needs are catered to, but I've donated some money on projects like the personal 3D printer one and the Pebble Watch to name a few.

It's a great idea, many of the inventing houses take HUGE cuts from these things once they take your invention and patent it themselves.

Kickstarter is nothing at all like the stock market or VC. You are not getting any equity at all. You are donating.

There's nothing wrong with donating. I kickstarted my neighborhood community garden, and I feel great about it. But don't confuse it with equity investment. They are entirely different things.

 

[Barack Lesnar]

They can ask whatever they want, it's up to the people if they fall again for it or not. IMHO it's an abuse. The best part?

4 years away. I don't think they have bad intentions, they just don't have a fuking idea of how to use kickstarter and release an iterative game.

Just lol at this. 4 years away? 90% chance this becomes vaporware

 

[Diddy Kong]

Not cool.

 

[RionaaM]

One thing: Karma

If someone will try to run with money or they will fail to deliver they will never have a chance to do kickstarter again because people will remember.

Kickstarter is like funding art in earlier centuries. Name is only one and if you fail to deliver it will be you last project.

But if they made enough money, why should they care if they'll never get to make another Kickstarter? They'll probably be laughing at all the poor people who trusted them with their hard-earned cash.

Yes, the backers take the role of publisher. This is also the good thing about KS. It gives people like Tim Schafer the freedom and time to make an adventure game without having his hand forced by someone else.

Few KS projects have finished, I think it's too early to jump the gun and judge it one way or another. When stuff like Double Fine, Broken Sword, Star Citizen, Project Eternity are finished, then we will know how much these guys benefit from this sort of funding and publisher freedom. I'm pretty confident at least the big name ones will go well.

There's a difference, Tim Schafer is already known for his talent and previous games. I'm sure he won't disappoint, and in this case I'd say it's not much of a risk.

But when it comes to these cmopletely unknown guys, who are now doing a Kickstarter out of another Kickstarter, that's something I can't accept. They already got the money for the proof of concept, which supposedly would put them in the spotlight for publishers and investors to take an interest in them. Now they are scrapping that, and asking the previous backers to support them again? That's asking a little too much of them, as far as I can see.

 

[Returners]

Wow, I can't believe people can actually pull this off.

I can't see myself backing the first Kickstarter when all I get under 100 is a video and a book.

Then again, they were pretty clear on the Kickstarter to begin with, any sense of being cheated is purely personal feelings.

At least this time you get to play the game now.

 

[Yasae]

Not even the Molyneux one? Or the recent Braben one?

I'm glad that we're starting to see some pushback on Kickstarters. Not because I don't like Kickstarter -- I very much do -- but because it's important to remain vigilant.

By propping up kickstarter, game players have retaken tremendous power from publishers, but in the process we'll also need to start guarding ourselves from charlatans, fools, and scam artists -- people who had (mostly) been kept out by publishers previously.

But now the responsibility falls on us, so I'm glad to see some signs that we're actually doing it.

No, we haven't done that. We've given up our power AS publishers.

Big difference.

 

[v1oz]

I can't wait until the 419 scammers discover Kickstarter.

 

[Yasae]

Wow, I can't believe people can actually pull this off.

I can't see myself backing the first Kickstarter when all I get under 100 is a video and a book.

Then again, they were pretty clear on the Kickstarter to begin with, any sense of being cheated is purely personal feelings.

At least this time you get to play the game now.

What's that you say? Capitalism works? You can screw people over and make money doing it? Novel idea, except oh right, when profiteers are allowed free reign and abuse it.

But hey, Laissez-Faire... The market will sort it out. Or most likely, it'll implode.

 

[flyinpiranha]

Kickstarter is nothing at all like the stock market or VC. You are not getting any equity at all. You are donating.

There's nothing wrong with donating. I kickstarted my neighborhood community garden, and I feel great about it. But don't confuse it with equity investment. They are entirely different things.

I used those loosely as a relation to people getting a return (usually a finished product) based on their investment. I didn't mean that they would be investing in the company expecting profit share. While they are different the model of investment and return (without ownership in the company) is similar with a broad brush stroke.

As for the VC comment, I should have clarified, it's just another way to raise capital in general and is free from investor pressure.

Again, probably not the best examples but I feel there are similarities, whether that ROI is the finished product or a share of the profits of the company is somewhat moot in my usage. But yeah, looking back it's a poorly worded example.

 

[hiryu]

How is this abuse? They apparently have been very upfront about what each kickstarter is, it's up to you if you want to support that or not.

 

[sangreal]

The only abuse I can see is if the creator fails to deliver the rewards you bought. I couldn't care less what else they do with the money.

It would be abuse if getting the rewards for the first kickstarter was contingent on the success of the second.

disclaimer: I've backed 8 or so (mostly non-game) projects

 

[Munin]

Some of the backlash is hilarious. "Kickstarter won't exist in 2014", ahahaha. It's just a platform. A mechanism. It's just a way of donating. Star Citizen, that racing sim and Prison Architect have proven that you don't even necessarily need Kickstarter to pull it off.

So, guys, watch out, the millennia-old concept of donating will soon cease to exist!!!!!!!!!

 

[Patryn]

Even if this launches, I doubt it would last very long. Have they considered how much it costs to simply run an MMO? That market is contracting, not expanding. I have serious doubts they'll be able to get the userbase necessary to keep it running.

 

[LuchaShaq]

Kickstarting a project that promises to deliver nothing more than a tech demo to show to potential investors doesn't strike me as particularly frugal. More to the point, however, trying to mask the fact that this demo failed to attract the necessary attention by launching a second, $1m Kickstarter and attempting to assuage concern by saying you have "secured the financing we need to put the game into production" is monumentally stupid.

This not to mention that the game looks like some hot trash.

 

[Orayn]

This not to mention that the game looks like some hot trash.

Tech demo, not game. We're a long ways from it being a game.

Even if this launches, I doubt it would last very long. Have they considered how much it costs to simply run an MMO? That market is contracting, not expanding. I have serious doubts they'll be able to get the userbase necessary to keep it running.

Running an MMO costs a lot less than Blizzard would have you believe.

 

[jcm]

I used those loosely as a relation to people getting a return (usually a finished product) based on their investment. I didn't mean that they would be investing in the company expecting profit share. While they are different the model of investment and return (without ownership in the company) is similar with a broad brush stroke.

As for the VC comment, I should have clarified, it's just another way to raise capital in general and is free from investor pressure.

Again, probably not the best examples but I feel there are similarities, whether that ROI is the finished product or a share of the profits of the company is somewhat moot in my usage. But yeah, looking back it's a poorly worded example.

The reason I harp on it is because the difference between kickstarter and equity investment is really important. Kickstarter has no real rules, and no real recourse for unhappy kickstarters. I think it's important people understand this. You are not buying a product. You are not getting any equity. You are donating to someone, and he is promising to give you a gift at some point in the future. If he doesn't come through with that gift, you have no recourse.

I think a lot of people believe its no different than preordering a game or investing in a startup, but it is in fact fundamentally different than those activities, and not different in a way that is to your advantage.

 

[ChosenPredator]

ever since that cheetah game got funded I realized no matter the amount of shade emits from whatever developer people will fund it no matter what

 

[Ithil]

Time for this one kickstarter to be used as "proof" that ALL kickstarters are evil and shouldn't exist.

 

[Takuan]

This is exploitation, absolutely. Kickstarter needs to be stricter about this sort of stuff.

 

[staticneuron]

The short answer to your implicit question is this, Ziz: some people have tastes which are not being catered to. Particularly in the "hardcore AAA" or console markets, where production design has continuously narrowed in scope. Space sims are one example of a recently kickstarted genre which have literally no representation on the PS3/360, and have had essentially no support on PC for the past 5 years as a consequence of this. Isometric RPGs are nearly as barren. Point and Click adventure games have been on the out for quite some time, although they've had at least some representation.

So if your personal preferences are those types of games, then there are not "tons of games to play." I sold both my PS3 and 360 because they both have nothing to play and are barren of interesting releases. If you disagree, that's fine: I "get" your position.

I am still waiting on a real sequel to StarLancer. Freelancer continues the story but had different gameplay. I am wondering if we will see a return of those games.

 

[The M.O.B]

People put their money up for this, then it's on them and not the company. Know what your putting your money towards for doing it. It's common sense.

Apparently a bunch of people like to fund crappy tech demos. If these people donating don't realize they are being exploited or don't think they are then that's fine too.

 

[Copenap]

There are plenty of examples already.

Hm, I had the impression the overall opinion on ks was still pretty fluffy and provably even naive. So that could be just due to the desperation for some niche genre games of hardcore fans.

 

[jrDev]

Makes sense. It IS an MMO!

 

[V_Arnold]

This is actually the problem with Kickstarter, as I understand it. The backers are the ones actually taking all the risk, without getting any of the economic rewards of the projects. It's easy to invest when you're playing with someone else's money, and when they are the ones doing all the work of acquiring the necessary funds for you.

Today's materialistic, "gimme more of that, AND some extra profits on top of it" ideals might struggle with Kickstarter's concept, but at the end of the day, there are plenty of people who enjoy the idea that in exchange for their money, they will be rewarded with an experience that they backed in the first place. Not everything has to be about the profits.

...I mean, there might be somewhere someone thinking about starting a hardcore KickstarterPLUS, where you are not allowed to sell and/or share your product to anyone else BUT to those that pledged, if you cannot sleep well knowing that someone made a product in exchange for your money AND profited from it at the same time. But I do no think that that we, as a society, should head into that direction.

 

[Karak]

At first i thought scam but looking closely it is valid.

1st kickstarter was only technology demo that would help them get investors and prove people that they have skill to do full scale MMORPG.

Second one is for actual game they have some investors but this also means royalty to them. Pledging money to them will mean that studio will earn a lot more from game.

I don't have any interest in this game but it is hardly fishy.

Looking really closely at it, I have to agree. I am not backing it either but it seems like, there is some description there of why they are doing it that bears out to me at least.

 

[jcm]

Today's materialistic, "gimme more of that, AND some extra profits on top of it" ideals might struggle with Kickstarter's concept, but at the end of the day, there are plenty of people who enjoy the idea that in exchange for their money, they will be rewarded with an experience that they backed in the first place. Not everything has to be about the profits.

...I mean, there might be somewhere someone thinking about starting a hardcore KickstarterPLUS, where you are not allowed to sell and/or share your product to anyone else BUT to those that pledged, if you cannot sleep well knowing that someone made a product in exchange for your money AND profited from it at the same time. But I do no think that that we, as a society, should head into that direction.

Whatever, commie. Just kidding. I'm with you, as long as people are aware it's a donation, not a preorder or an equity investment.

 

[Nairume]

Not going to lie, I'm not surprised that such a scummy project is tied to something like Pathfinder.

 

[EndcatOmega]

Not going to lie, I'm not surprised that such a scummy project is tied to something like Pathfinder.

Oh? Do Paizo have a record with sketchy things or something?