• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Kickstarter and Linux: Are devs misusing crowdsourced funding for a vocal minority?

I

Ignis Fatuus

Banned
This debate started up in the Shadowrun thread in response to the recent announcement that at $1,000,000 in funding, the developers intend to use the additional money to contract an external company to create a Linux port. Since then some posters have argued that this is a misuse of crowdsourced funding. The argument is that Linux users are a small but vocal minority who are unlikely to have no other way to play the game, and that every dollar spent appeasing them is money that could have gone into improving the game that everyone plays.

I'm personally undecided on the matter because I'd like to see actual developers weigh in on this, but here are the sentiments expressed thus far:

XTERC said:
I don't really get the Linux thing. I've used Linux in the past, I like it sure, but all of the graphics card drivers etc. are primarily built for Windows, Linux seems more of an afterthought. Linux is more of a hobby / server OS I don't see the point in developing a game for Linux when the money could be better spent improving the game. Surely if you are into gaming you have a Windows machine.

Valve has mentioned that they are having problems developing for Linux, it seems like a distraction more than anything. Surely if you use Linux as your primary OS and you are into gaming, you at least have a dual boot option. Please let me know if I'm off base, I just don't get it.
Click to expand...
Mikey Jr. said:
This Linux thing sounds like a massive waste of money that could instead have been put into the game.

No offense to Linux people.
Click to expand...
Xater said:
I don't even use Linux and I am totally fine with it. Multiplatform for these games is why I am also supporting it.
Click to expand...
DiscoJer said:
I actually dropped my pledge from $60 to $15 because of them using money to hire a company to do the Linux port. That money could have been used to make the game I play better.

Though to be fair, some of it was also because I have some qualms about the finished product. It's probably going to end up looking more like a Mobile title than a PC game, since they are using the Moai development thing (which as near as I can tell, only runs on the PC as a plugin for Chrone?).

At least Wasteland is being designed as a PC game first and foremost. The nature of this is that it's going to be a mobile product first, then PC game after.
Click to expand...
Victrix said:
Would you rather they spend time and money on porting the game to a platform that 0.1% of the audience will use? 1%? 5%? 10%?

How many Linux only users are there that don't also have access to a windows or mac box?
Click to expand...

Edit: Food for thought. The Linux version of Shadowrun was announced on 4/11. Since that time, there has been absolutely no spike in funding at all, suggesting that the inclusion of Linux made little to no difference. Yet money will be allocated for a Linux version regardless.

last8daysdiff.png


Edit2: Massa argues that Linux users represent a large potential donor base, despite this not being reflected in the Shadowrun numbers. Here's a pie chart from Humble Bundle.

Massa said:
vb8u1.jpg


Doesn't look like a minority to me. Mac and Linux versions are usually almost identical so there's that also.
Click to expand...

Edit3: Just so that we keep things intellectually honest, a lot of Linux supporters are repeating ad nauseum a truly horrendous argument that donors have no right to complain about what Kickstarter devs choose to do with the money. Let's just make it clear that the Shadowrun devs had originally ruled out a Linux version because they said it would detract from the main game, and only promised to hire an external contractor after Linux users complained. If donors had no right to complain, then a Linux version would not exist in the first place. This argument kills puppies and kittens, seriously.
 
Putting in on Linux is more like a PR announcement than something really worthwhile. I wish they would concentrate their money on the actual product. At the same time, if the actual porting process is painless and inexpensive, I guess its not that bad.
 
I would feel better if they said "this is excess money that we don't really need for the base game".

Which is most likely what it is, but who knows.
 
I'm pretty much neutral on the argument there. Both sides have a point.

This is really revealing of the problems with Kickstarting these sorts of projects though. They really need to get more of a specification before accepting donations, otherwise the whole process will probably be riddled with "I'm paying for this, that's not how I want it done!" from people that paid.
 
These sort of announcements are definitely to generate goodwill from a very vocal, oftentimes very wealthy minority.

That said, in Shadowrun's case, they didn't commit to a Linux version until well after superseding their funding goal. This port isn't taking anything away; they plan to outsource it, and they even said it wouldn't be there at launch.
 
If indie boundle sale number is any indication, Linux gamers are about 1/5 of the total user base, and the most generous by a pretty big margin.
 
It seems to be a good mid tier boost our take goalpost. Linux and mac users pay larger amounts per person with humble bundles.

I do think outsourcing to another company is pushing it though. Make the game "right" to start with and do the QA/installer needed but don't spend a hundred grand or whatever on the port. Personally I would like to see more mutliplatform games just for the option.
 
If they want to port to linux they should do it after the fact with the profits from the game. I certainly didn't kick in money to make a port that 30 people are going to play.
 
Not actually a Linux person, nor do I reckon a uniform hive mind is in place, but I can sort of see where this stands.

In general, people want software for their platform of choice---whether that is a physical thing like a console or something a bit more nebulous like an OS. There's something of a chicken and egg dynamic alongside the long and winding history of the lot, so if one can't get exclusive goodies then at the least there's a desire to get some parity going in terms of the "other".

"No Games on Linux > "Look we've got some games with lots of buzz" etc. Many won't use Windows and such for various reasons, crazy and otherwise, so it is what it is.

Were they more organized and things a bit more settled out in terms of the latest and greatest, I'd frankly expect the AmigaOS crowd to partake in kickstarting various things (Of the recent crop of prominent things, only Brashspriter has any folk involved in this respect) for much the same to satisfy and even bigger niche than Linux...and the same perhaps in another year or so for Haiku.

People have money, throw it about with intent to support, and it goes as it does. A catalyst is needed for things to improve and dynamics to shift, and money bearing folks looking to support something are a potentially good fit for a developer looking for a paying audience that can appreciate their work.

Also, IIRC, for Shadowrun this came down to the actual team behind the Moai engine they are using rethinking the situation in their own right as opposed to anybody truly twisting their arm?
 
Getting overfunded on Kickstarter is somewhat of a luxury, and I've seen some things happening with what I'd call on the spot decision making.

The Shadowrun project seems to have a very good roadmap planned out for hitting milestones above their initial goal (which was 400k), so I wouldn't be too worried about feature creep or rash decisions.

Just like a developer has to decide what to put in a game and where to port it, a Kickstarter pitcher has to decide what's necessary to secure additional funding and provide incentives for people to back. If that vocal minority of Linux people adds a chunk to the Kickstarter funding, I see no problem with seeing them rewarded with a version playable on their favourite OS.

Ultimately, it's the decision of the ones doing the pitch if such a move benefits them (which I personally think it will). I mean, the Humble Bundle distributions have shown that the Linux portion of contributors are giving a lot more on average.
 
HP_Wuvcraft said:
I would feel better if they said "this is excess money that we don't really need for the base game".

Which is most likely what it is, but who knows.
Click to expand...

well it is, since they exceeded their funding.

they have put up stretch goals so to speak.

Question is of course, if you want to pledge for the game, when it is already funded and the stretch goal is of no interest to you. But heck, no one has to pledge.
 
Until figures are disclosed as to who donated what and why then people whining about platform choices sound pretty stupid.
 
Grayman said:
I do think outsourcing to another company is pushing it though. Make the game "right" to start with and do the QA/installer needed but don't spend a hundred grand or whatever on the port. Personally I would like to see more mutliplatform games just for the option.
Click to expand...

yeah, the real reason why they suggested outsourcing, is because they don't want to deal with the headaches of maintaining another version of the game. They have to deal with troubleshooting and customer service. These can all be a drain on resources and manpower. As they said, they don't really have the team members necessary to handle a Linux version, even though they have people experienced with Mac.

But even if they (The Shadowrun team) never release a Linux version, most Linux users will just dual-boot, run the game under wine, or use virtualization anyway.

But if they did make a Linux executable, I wonder how they would manage with distribution? There really aren't any good online game distribution services for Linux yet.
 
vb8u1.jpg


Doesn't look like a minority to me. Mac and Linux versions are usually almost identical so there's that also.
 
emb said:
This is really revealing of the problems with Kickstarting these sorts of projects though. They really need to get more of a specification before accepting donations, otherwise the whole process will probably be riddled with "I'm paying for this, that's not how I want it done!" from people that paid.
Click to expand...

Not really, that's a known factor you accept as a risk when you fund anything

Linux ports are a very specific case, because linux proponents are extremely vocal about wanting ports of indie games to their platform (every game?)

What I don't know is how large of a group they are, or how much money they're funding

My gripe is purely with the allocation of time and money that could go elsewhere, there's _never_ enough time or money to do everything you want when making a game (or anything, really), so it's a pretty simple question: Is Linux worth supporting?

We need more hard numbers from devs though, or this is simple speculation and argument, without knowing how many actual linux users there are out there.
 
emb said:
otherwise the whole process will probably be riddled with "I'm paying for this, that's not how I want it done!" from people that paid.
Click to expand...
I've funded quite a few games but very early on I realised the threads wouldn't be worth visiting because I knew there'd be a loud, vocal bunch of entitled people demanding this or that. I donate to give the developer freedom to express not to wall them up in a garden of my making. If that means Linux, iOS or Mac versions then so be it.
 
What is the return on investment when you contribute to a kick starter?
 
All of these threads have the same answer: Kickstarter pledges are essentially donations. When you give them money, they can't "misuse" the funds because you've given it to them to do with as they see best. Kickstarter does not obligate devs to appropriate their project to backer interests, which really is and should be part of the appeal of the platform.
 
Massa said:
More specifically it's the final stats for the latest Humble Bundle.
Click to expand...

In pretty much every bundle, Linux total revenue was at roughly a quarter overall, and the per person donation dwarfed the other two.

I think the last one (in the picture) was the first where it clearly overtook Mac as the #2 platform in terms of revenue.
 
I don't mind Linux ports, even though I've never used a Linux computer in my life. I like the fact a lot of the Kickstarter games seem to be promising Windows, Mac and Linux versions. That's pretty rare for a normal mainstream game. I think it meshes well with the whole idea of kickstarter, too. These are, after all, considered niche games with vocal minority fans, right? Old school graphic adventures and hardcore turn based PC RPGs. Kickstarter is allowing these to happen, even though the market/publishers consider the fanbase too small to risk it.
 
Random aside, it'd be cool if they could do backer only 'dollar votes', that tallied up the votes from backers and displayed a pie graph/vote tally with the cash amount donated by that user going towards whatever they voted for

Fastest and easiest way to get both a user number and $ view of what your userbase wants from you
 
thcsquad said:
In pretty much every bundle, Linux total revenue was at roughly a quarter overall, and the per person donation dwarfed the other two.

I think the last one (in the picture) was the first where it clearly overtook Mac as the #2 platform in terms of revenue.
Click to expand...

Linux users are basically starved for games. You can handwave and say they can use Wine or dual boot but Linux users are people, too, and they deserve games just as much as Mac or Windows users.
 
Massa said:
Unfortunately Kickstarter doesn't publish platform breakdowns like that.
Click to expand...

I can understand that being a useless statistic for them. Especially given the nature of the site. Crowd funding for gaming didn't really take off on Kickstarter until the beginning of the year. But it would be nice if they could give out these statistics to the project leaders who asked for them. It would certainly help developers gauge where they should put there funding into.
 
Probably outside the scope of this thread, but it's going to be really interesting to see what happens if one of these heavily funded kickstarters fails to get a project out the door.
 
MrCunningham said:
yeah, the real reason why they suggested outsourcing, is because they don't want to deal with the headaches of maintaining another version of the game. They have to deal with troubleshooting and customer service. These can all be a drain on resources and manpower. As they said, they don't really have the team members necessary to handle a Linux version, even though they have people experienced with Mac.

But even if they (The Shadowrun team) never release a Linux version, most Linux users will just dual-boot, run the game under wine, or use virtualization anyway.

But if they did make a Linux executable, I wonder how they would manage with distribution? There really aren't any good online game distribution services for Linux yet.
Click to expand...
I am not using linux currently but I would imagine distribution has a few options. The wasteland site itself is one, the drm free services that allow sending a .zip (gog, others?) that also has the linux binary or package, or even use a common repository and an account based login as the sale proof.

I hadn't thought of the headaches of maintaining the other version at first. What came to my mind was using techniques and software that was multiplatform from the start if they had the people who work that way.
 
Andrex said:
Linux users are basically starved for games. You can handwave and say they can use Wine or dual boot but Linux users are people, too, and they deserve games just as much as Mac or Windows users.
Click to expand...

So they can buy windows and get games like everyone else.
 
The Banner saga people said that almost as many people visited their website using Linux as iOS.

As someone else points out, Indiebundles typically get a pretty sizable chunk of their support from the Linux community.

There is also a certain amount of logic behind it. Linux users consist largely of tech people. I'm pretty sure that if you did a survey of Linux users, a much larger percentage than the general population grew up playing games, often on Amiga or PC in the 80s and 90s, which is where many of these Kickstarter projects draw their base from.

Many of them might not be playing many newish games these days, and thus not use Windows, partly because they are disillusioned with modern gaming (which is a motivation for them to support kickstarter in the first place).

While the percentage of people using Linux might globally be around 1%, I'm pretty sure that it's a much larger percentage who are supporting these games, perhaps as large as 10% who at least use Linux along side Windows, and probably a good chunk who use it exclusively as well.

There is the fact that the infrastructure for creating graphical application is not as good on Linux as in Windows, but that is also largely a Chicken and Egg thing, where there has to be games developed for the platform first to make it attractive. To be honest, my support for some of the kickstarter projects have been at least partly with that as a motivation. And I did decide not to support Shadowrun when they first announced that there would be not Linux port. A decision I of course will reconsider.

Lastly I feel it's incredible arrogant and selfish of the Windows community. They basically go: I got the game for my platform, screw everybody else.

The game has more than made its target, and is likely going to be awesome. Why not take allow as many people as possible to enjoy it?
 
MrCunningham said:
But if they did make a Linux executable, I wonder how they would manage with distribution? There really aren't any good online game distribution services for Linux yet.
Click to expand...

The Ubuntu Software Center is pretty much the premiere .deb "app store," and actually predates the Mac App Store and the upcoming Windows 8 App Store by years. In fact I believe it was the first desktop OS app store, and features all the developer tools and controls you'd expect.

Valnen said:
So they can buy windows and get games like everyone else.
Click to expand...

Would you use that line on Mac users? There are legitimate reasons for not buying or installing Windows, you know.
 
Grayman said:
I am not using linux currently but I would imagine distribution has a few options. The wasteland site itself is one, the drm free services that allow sending a .zip (gog, others?) that also has the linux binary or package, or even use a common repository and an account based login as the sale proof.
Click to expand...

Oh right GOG, that is a pretty good option. There are a few Linux clients for GOG already (non are official though), I use JGoGDownloader for downloading games from there.

Also, Ubuntu's own Ubuntu Software Center does sell a few retail games, but that is distro specific (though Ubuntu Software Center can be installed on most Debian based systems). I guess they could also include a linux executable in with the windows version on Steam... most Linux users run steam under wine anyway.

Andrex said:
The Ubuntu Software Center is pretty much the premiere .deb "app store," and actually predates the Mac App Store and the upcoming Windows 8 App Store by years. In fact I believe it was the first desktop OS app store, and features all the developer tools and controls you'd expect.
Click to expand...

Ah, you beat me to it. Yeah I thought about this a few times.... but unfortunately not all Linux users are using Ubuntu. I do have the Ubuntu Software Center installed in Mint 12 though, and it works fine. But it could be a bit of a pain to install for non Debian users.
 
Andrex said:
Linux users are basically starved for games. You can handwave and say they can use Wine or dual boot but Linux users are people, too, and they deserve games just as much as Mac or Windows users.
Click to expand...

They don't deserve software any more than HD-DVD adopters deserve new releases. People using Linux pretty much pick it for political reasons (DRM-free, open-source, anti-large corporations), not for software. People typically pick Windows for software quantity and diversity as well as more robust hardware support, drivers, and APIs. If you don't like the software selection you shouldn't pick Linux, simple as that.

Now if people want more devs to support Linux then more power to them. But I also think that it is kinda a waste and a misappropriation when it's advertised as a Mac/Windows project and most users donated to that cause. What makes more sense is to either make Linux a first-class platform and fund all 3 equally or start another kickstarter or use the profits after the game releases for people interested in a Linux port.
 
Andrex said:
Would you use that line on Mac users? There are legitimate reasons for not buying or installing Windows, you know.
Click to expand...

What reasons would those be? Especially if you're a PC gamer? Price certainly can't be a factor if a Mac is involved.
 
If a kickstarter wants to use their funds on a Linux version who is anybody to demand otherwise? I don't see the issue. You either support them in their efforts or you don't.
 
NullPointer said:
If a kickstarter wants to use their funds on a Linux version who is anybody to demand otherwise?
Click to expand...

A financial backer? All Kickstarters listen attentively to feedback and for good reason. The Shadowrun devs originally ruled out a Linux version because they said it would detract from the main game, they reversed course in the first place because people complained.

Massa said:
vb8u1.jpg


Doesn't look like a minority to me. Mac and Linux versions are usually almost identical so there's that also.
Click to expand...

While interesting, that is still actually a minority. Regardless, if that data were applicable in every case, wouldn't you have expected a boost in funding for Shadowrun following the announcement?
 
Valnen said:
What reasons would those be? Especially if you're a PC gamer?
Click to expand...

Who says you have to define yourself as a "PC gamer" to enjoy certain indie games?

As for reasons for not installing Windows, they range from the philosophical to the realistic; speaking for myself, web development is a pain on Windows and command line tools in particular are just kludgy. Besides that, Linux distributions like Ubuntu and Fedora are very mature and already do support my most-used applications (Chrome, Sublime Text, Gimp, Audacity) without Wine. Why should I have to run an entire different OS to play the games I have an interest in? It's not worth it for me and many others like me, as that Humble Bundle graph shows. Pass on Linux and you're potentially passing on 1/4 of your audience.
 
Somnid said:
People using Linux pretty much pick it for political reasons (DRM-free, open-source, anti-large corporations), not for software.
Click to expand...

Not me, I use Linux for my own personal preferences. Not because of some political rebellion. My first introductory to Linux was with Ubuntu 7.04 (2007), I really liked the environment and made it my default OS for many years. I can find pretty good replacements for windows software on Linux, and the ones I can't I will just run with wine and such. I do have Windows 7 installed as well (I'm not some anti-Windows zealot), but I haven't really touched it in 2 - 3 months.
 
Andrex said:
Who says you have to define yourself as a "PC gamer" to enjoy certain indie games?

As for reasons for not installing Windows, they range from the philosophical to the realistic; speaking for myself, web development is a pain on Windows and command line tools in particular are just kludgy. Besides that, Linux distributions like Ubuntu and Fedora are very mature and already do support my most-used applications (Chrome, Sublime Text, Gimp, Audacity) without Wine. Why should I have to run an entire different OS to play the games I have an interest in? It's not worth it for me and many others like me, as that Humble Bundle graph shows. Pass on Linux and you're potentially passing on 1/4 of your audience.
Click to expand...
To be fair, you could also apply this to consoles as in "Why should I have to buy a PS3 to play PS3 games I'm interested in?". Starts to sound weird doesn't it?
 
GuitarAtomik said:
To be fair, you could also apply this to consoles as in "Why should I have to buy a PS3 to play PS3 games I'm interested in?". Starts to sound weird doesn't it?
Click to expand...

Well, it's true. If you had a 360 why would you? Assuming you could technically do without the PS3 exclusive games, but would still play them given the opportunity?
 
Andrex said:
Well, it's true. If you had a 360 why would you? Assuming you could technically do without the PS3 exclusive games, but would still play them given the opportunity?
Click to expand...

But why should other donors have to pay for an external contractor just so that you don't have to run Wine?
 
This is like PS3 fanboys complaining about a game being ported to the 360. Or vice versa.

Disclaimer: I've exclusively run Linux for the past 4 years, and will for the rest of my life (unless something better comes along).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

What will Xbox gain by appealing to a small vocal minority of Xbox gamers instead of looking at the big picture??
2
83
1K
reinking replied
[NEWS] Over 105000 games are available to play on Linux.
News Game Dev 
17
490
Durin replied
GOG confirm they are working on releasing GOG Galaxy on Linux
42
69
Goalus replied
Security PSA for CEMU Linux users.
News 
0
213
Holammer replied
Linux kernel maintainer says AI has suddenly become useful for devs: 'We can't ignore this stuff. It's coming up, and it's getting better'
Opinion Platform  2
72
1K
Loomy replied
Top Bottom