toymachine
Member
SAVE US BUTTER_STICK
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Was the Code Hero Kickstarter a scam? They claim it's not! But Tactical Corsets!!!
- Thread starter onlyindreams
- Start date
SAVE US BUTTER_STICK
Present a working alpha, and don't ask for too much. Going by past results, you'd have a more than average chance of success. Like in any business, make sure you have a good pitch lined up. Run it by a variety of people before posting it. People you know will respond honestly, and help you tweak it for better shot at success.
These comments might shed some light:
It kinda seems like they not only didn't know how much effort the project would take, but that they also changed the scope/focus of the project than what the backers were expecting.
Also:
Every time I gave money, it was done realizing that something like this might happen. I havent given to a lot of projects (Republique, Pinkerton Road, Starlight Inception) but so far, so good.
How do the backers in the OP know for sure that the project is scrapped? The complete lack of updates and the way the project was handled is pretty telling but what if this guy suddenly re-appears and says "Hey dudes, its still being worked on" and then leaves again. What can they do?
How do the backers in the OP know for sure that the project is scrapped? The complete lack of updates and the way the project was handled is pretty telling but what if this guy suddenly re-appears and says "Hey dudes, its still being worked on" and then leaves again. What can they do?
GalacticGravy
Member
I go out to dinner often, and I know they sometimes you hit a good place that you'll come back to, and other times a place just sucks. It's a risk. Every time you open your wallet you are making a risky decision.
Kickstarter is, yes, a more risky decision than others. But the payoff is greater. Here we are, getting games funded that are tailored to US. Not to frat guys. Not to sports enthusiasts with an Xbox. To us. That's worth a risk as far as I'm concerned.
Kickstarter is, yes, a more risky decision than others. But the payoff is greater. Here we are, getting games funded that are tailored to US. Not to frat guys. Not to sports enthusiasts with an Xbox. To us. That's worth a risk as far as I'm concerned.
can they actually go after him? considering they made a donation.
AtomskEater
Member
Kickstarter is most certainly not an investment, you get a return on investments. Its arguably like patronage though really its more akin to risky preordering
Aquamarine
Member
When you go a restaurant and order food, you receive your food BEFORE you pay.
Even if the food is horrible, at least you get fed. The inherent risk is nothing compared to a Kickstarter.
People who backed this project have to face the very real possibility that they will receive absolutely nothing for their money. Not a mediocre game...not even communication from the developers.
It's a much more frustrating experience for the consumer, and it damages the Kickstarter brand, especially for new startups.
A single person thinks that, and it is the main guy posting on there about this stuff and is the only guy who has mentioned a lawsuit indirectly via his email address.
He's also almost the only person posting to say that he and a "modest" number of other backers who haven't posted publicly believe that the guy has wasted the money.
Anything could be going on here, it's all speculation.
This kickstarter stuff is all shit anyway. I don't believe that people should get their money back from failed projects, you are basically investing in the hope that the project succeeds. If it doesn't you should bite the bullet of that "investment" you made.
Dynamite Shikoku
Congratulations, you really deserve it!
lol, that 'game' looked so dodgy
The way I understand it, the project leads can be held responsible if nothing is delivered but the chances of getting any money out of the situation are slim. Not only that, Kickstarter will not assist with any LEGAL ACTION.
I for one do not expect to be reimbursed if any of my backed projects fail.
Ghost Dad the Whip
Member
even if he has failed he has a responsibility to his own brand to get out there ahead of the story and explain what's going on... otherwise "Alex Peake" will forever be associated with the KS scam guy and will have that stain on his resume.
Ghost Dad the Whip
Member
gotta love all the games journos twittering this story and quoting the OP's choice of thread title as fact
#D'oh #Ritos
#D'oh #Ritos
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
I'll mention that I called Code Hero being an amateur hour pile of shit that was asking for vastly more money than its concept and pedigree deserved back when it was still kickstarting. I'm not surprised it didn't amount to anything. Hope the backers are able to successfully exercise their legal remedies.
In the mean time I haven't been scammed and I'll keep backing stuff, using basic discretion
In the mean time I haven't been scammed and I'll keep backing stuff, using basic discretion
I absolutely agree except when there is intent to scam (either before the KS is created or after the mountain of cash comes in). However, I'm not sure there's any intent to scam here, though that may indeed be case... To me, these guys sound like extremely irresponsible people who simply shouldn't have been supported. Nothing about the pitch video explained how programming knowledge is transferred to the user, and I'm not convinced they are sure how to do it either (though I haven't played the beta). The game itself looked extremely dodgy -- they should have focused a single introductory "lesson" and fleshed it out if they were serious about delivering what they were talking about. But, like I said, it seems to me that they weren't sure what they were doing in the first place.
Zero-Crescent
Member
They might actually have a strong case here, though I am not a lawyer, and I'd like to see responses from Lawyer-GAF (lawblob, chac, etc.). I don't know why people keep bringing up "donation/investment," because last I checked, there are fraud and theft laws that apply to those terms too. He promised to work on a project using that money, and allegedly he blew it all on unrelated expenditures. Potentially creating fake accounts to chip-in large amounts and falsely raise the profile of the project is also sketchy in many ways, which would strengthen the fraud complaint. From that point, it would be up to the developer to show (using detailed accounting records) that he made a good faith attempt to use the money to complete the project and didn't just blow it all on himself.
If not from that angle, they could pursue it from a rewards perspective. As pointed out before, Kickstarter requires creators to promise that they will refund backers if they cannot deliver the rewards. That could constitute a contract between the backers and the creator. That's what makes the "You'll get the game!" tier such a dangerous level if the creator cannot finish the game, because by not being able to finish the game, they can no longer fulfill that reward tier, which is probably where most of the backers are concentrated. Once again, he might need to show that he made a good-faith attempt to refund backers.
Unfortunately, if he already blew through the money, then even if they win the case, their chances of getting any cash back are slim-to-none unless he's secretly wealthy. Still, it's worth pursuing for the principle to put his "head on a pike," so to speak, to discourage other potential scammers.
If not from that angle, they could pursue it from a rewards perspective. As pointed out before, Kickstarter requires creators to promise that they will refund backers if they cannot deliver the rewards. That could constitute a contract between the backers and the creator. That's what makes the "You'll get the game!" tier such a dangerous level if the creator cannot finish the game, because by not being able to finish the game, they can no longer fulfill that reward tier, which is probably where most of the backers are concentrated. Once again, he might need to show that he made a good-faith attempt to refund backers.
Unfortunately, if he already blew through the money, then even if they win the case, their chances of getting any cash back are slim-to-none unless he's secretly wealthy. Still, it's worth pursuing for the principle to put his "head on a pike," so to speak, to discourage other potential scammers.
This is why you don't back random people making projects out of their apartment unless they have something really substantial to show. The unfortunate reality is Kickstarter is trying to fund entire projects upfront, so you can't partially fund a project based on milestone progression. If Kickstarter investments were smaller and in chunks it would be less of a problem when a project stumbles or is dropped entirely.
This is why developers have to hit deliverables and milestones all the time, to prove to their investors that they're actually working and making progress and to keep being funded. Publishers usually don't throw the entire game's budget at the developer up front and let them go nuts.
This is why developers have to hit deliverables and milestones all the time, to prove to their investors that they're actually working and making progress and to keep being funded. Publishers usually don't throw the entire game's budget at the developer up front and let them go nuts.
djplaeskool
Member
Not always.
Investment often times implies risk of loss, depending on what it is you are investing in.
Fare Godmace
Member
Damn, I remember being the first to post about Code Hero in the Kickstarter thread... I hope no one here backed because it discovered it thanks to my post 
I loved the concept and was very happy to see it funded... Thankfully, I didn't back it.
I loved the concept and was very happy to see it funded... Thankfully, I didn't back it.
I agree with this very much. Very good points.
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
One of the basic principles of Kickstarter is that it's not a milestone approach, because the milestone approach is tough to interpret, leads to stakeholder-developer disputes, and ultimately offers no security the product will be released. It's also the reason why KS won't do partial payouts. The downside of the full-funding approach is that the element of faith is held in the developer's assessment of their fiscal needs--that the money is enough to finish the game or that the developer can secure the rest.
Enormous budget relative to the apparent pedigree and size of the team, unclear and muddy concept with no obvious released products to compare it to, stretch goal of "turning the game into an MMO" with no elaboration betrays an obvious fantasyland attitude by devs, and it looked like a disaster.
djplaeskool
Member
I think the Ouya will be fine, as far as providing the hardware.
They have a good plan, a sensible target, and a number of high-profile heads putting themselves on the line for it.
I just don't think it will be the alternative gaming utopia some have propped it up to potentially be.
A good, hackable console-styled device for $100? Sure.
Lots of speculation being bandied about. Just because a project missed deadlines doesn't mean the project owner "ran away with the money". I know we don't have a lot else to go on, but a lot of people are kind of just assuming the worst and spreading that as fact. Don't do that. It's super weak.
Aquamarine
Member
Milestone approaches work better with a linear top-down management system where the developer answers to a singular entity, like publishing executives.
Answering to "the fans" for project milestones is completely nebulous and would result in chaos because of so many dissenting opinions.
It might have some legs.
http://www.kickstarter.com/help/faq/kickstarter basics#Accokickstarter FAQ said:
I see it as an "investment" spread across a population group, but it's obviously not an investment in the same sense as a normal one.
Where a wealthy businessman might invest a lump sum into a business or supply a loan to get it started, here the cost is spread across a large population.
The wealthy businessman gets either a % share of profits or a return on the loan as the products are shipped out to or provide service to customers. The population on the other hand directly receives the product + extras, usually below the expected market cost, which wouldn't exist without their funding of the project.
Allegedly, according to a single commenter. He states:
You should know, right off the bat, that based on what we've found (and been told) - Alex Peake seems to have run out of money after spending it recklessly, and doesn't plan on continuing with this project.
There is nothing contained within the comments to support these claims yet or even detail why he believes that to be so, and it all seems to be based on this "modest" number of other supposed backers who have contacted him. Without any information in regards to this, it is just speculation based on what this person believes Alex Peake has done based on his past history, lack of communication, and missed deadlines.
djplaeskool
Member
I dunno.
When the progress and updates were slow before, you promise a rigorous ramping up of pace after PAX, then are completely silent for 3 months, that's a big time problem.
That is not allowed. If he has somehow managed to do so, then he has broken the rules of Kickstarter.
Yup, it's probably going to do well for its XBMC capabilities alone.
Castor Krieg
Banned
The creator of Kickstarter project has an obligation to deliver, however it isn't exactly mentioned what "deliver" means.
Alexios
Cores, shaders and BIOS oh my!
Pretty sure most "Kickstarter defenders" weren't saying this, just that it's a bad part of the system but that it doesn't nullify its good parts, some people will be scammed, others will get the return they expect, others a better one, others a lesser one, the risk is part of the system so you should pledge as wisely as possible, or steer clear altogether, it's up to the individual.
Hopefully something can be sorted out for these guys. If true.
Ding ding. Seriously. You get what you (didn't) pay for, I guess?
I'm pretty sure that the Ouya WILL deliver the consoles.
Now talking about people satisfied with the insane promisses ?
That is another story completly
It's stated pretty clearly that they have to deliver everything they have promised to the backers. If they promise a game & varying degrees of bonuses for different tiers of pledgers, then they have to deliver a game and all those extra things. There's no room for interpretation.
MagicWithEarvin
Member
That's just sad.
i thought the same thing back when i first looked at the kickstarter, but i don't feel sorry for anyone who donated. it's their own fault for putting money into such a silly idea
TouchMyBox
Member
Pretty much.
I've only been backing stuff from people with proven track records, people who have obviously sunk a lot of resources into the project before going to kickstarter and already have something promising, or stuff that looks interesting and is so low-risk that I wouldn't miss my money if I got nothing in return.
onlyindreams
Banned
Most of those $1000 pledges were teachers/parents etc donating copies of the game to schools. Makes it even worse.