Seeing lots of games on kickstarter

[Craig234]

One I'm not sure about, called 'Wild Mage'. It looks like a bit of a pet project that has some maybe interesting combinations of spells, and a doesn't-look-good slicing of enemies.

Because at the $20/40/60/100 levels you get extra keys and extra in-game bonuses, it's almost tempting to see if people want to join in on it, but a hassle to deal with money.

You must ask for permission before you can endorse any form of kickstarter.
I have removed the kickstater link.

Moderator Aigo.

 

[cmdrdredd]

One thing I don't get, why not place the Playstation platform at a lower monetary level on the stretch goals? Is it really that expensive to deliver a game on PSN? It has the highest player base of any console so it's got more audience to advertise to. I'd figure a developer would want their game marketed to the maximum number of players and I'm not sure Mac/Linux is a more desirable platform, nor is multiplayer. I don't think multiplayer should be a stretch goal anyway. I feel that if you want to do MP in your game then you build that into your vision for the game. You don't add it on like it's a checkbox to tick off. That cheapens the MP experience and it certainly doesn't entice me to fund the game. I'm not anxious to pledge more because I want that MP goal to be reached.

 

[Craig234]

I did back 'Forest of Liars', but it's only 30% with about 15 days to go.

https://www.kickstarter.com/project...-liars-a-narrative-adventure-game/description

This one is allowed as you are making a reference..

Moderator Aigo

 

[ImpulsE69]

Over kickstarter. Over it.

 

[Craig234]

Myst did a kickstarter of the 7 myst games digital downloads ($50) or with some collectibles (up to $1,000 for a drawing from riven), and it funded in 8 hours and raised 1.8 million so far...

 

[Aikouka]

My biggest issue with most game-related Kickstarter projects is that it seems like they ask for too little, and are almost destined to failure. ...or the creators know the money is too low, and they're hoping for either outside investment or presales such as Steam Early Access. That isn't too bad, but at times, they aren't entirely clear on it in their risks section.

Fortunately, I've had pretty good luck on Kickstarter... even outside of games. I think the only straight-out failure that I had was LinguaLift's Fluent Panda app, which was meant to teach foreign languages to the end user, and then it transitioned to a tool to teach English to developing nations. They ended up giving out a free year of service to LinguaLift, so it wasn't too bad. In some cases, there are games that are presented one way, and end up not even looking like the concept art. An example of that would be Mighty Number 9, which had a nice, cartoonish, flat design that I found rather appealing. What we ended up with in the end looked a bit more like the PSP's Mega Man Powered Up!. (Amusingly enough, the new Mega Man 11 has the same style as Might Number 9's concept art, and based upon Capcom's videos, it's actually being created that way.)

Probably the most accurate Kickstarter that I backed was Battlechasers: Night War, and that came out looking like the concept art and playing fairly well. The only complaint I had about that one is that I assumed the game would be more like a JRPG since that concept was referenced a bit, but even as Joe Madureira says in the Gameumentary documentary, it was meant to be more like an ARPG (Diablo) meets a JRPG. It's not bad, but I remember playing the beta demo, and being confused that I was just sort of dumped into a story.

I've also backed board games and such, which usually turn out just fine. There is an ARPG (Last Epoch) that I'm considering backing. I'm somewhat interested in playing it, and a part of me also like supporting eager developers. The game does have a demo, which is a huge boon over most Kickstarter projects, but their asking price is kind of low.

 

[Craig234]

I suspect they have low goals because if they aren't met, there's no funding, and they figure they can always get more if people pledge more.

'Wild mage' had a goal of just $10,000 and when I posted it was already at $47,000, probably for that reason.

 

[Aikouka]

I suspect they have low goals because if they aren't met, there's no funding, and they figure they can always get more if people pledge more.

'Wild mage' had a goal of just $10,000 and when I posted it was already at $47,000, probably for that reason.

I've heard that some campaigns have been suspected of lowballing their requirements, and the problem is that they're doing it because they hope to secure external funding. However, that doesn't always happen, and they end up screwing over their backers with an intentionally false campaign.

 

[Midwayman]

My rules for kickstarter on games
1) It has to be a studio that has actually published something.New studios often have no clue on the business side and fail.
2) It has to be a genre that is under served. I've back a lot of old school RPGs since those basically weren't being made anymore.
3) Its going to take at least a year longer than they say.
4) The cost savings to get in has to be at least 20% off retail (typical sale price) unless I really think it might fail without it. (Like battletech I might have backed at full price if the kickstater had been doing poorly)

I kinda of like it so long as you're careful and go in understand how long it might take. All the projects I back take longer than they say, but I've had a 100% success rate on them too. It allows game devs to make the games that they want to and serve niche markets. Something that's hard to do with a publisher breathing down your neck. I used to work in game dev so have a fairly good feel for what is going to make it though.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

I’ve got similar rules as above poster. I like Kickstarter and early access, I like small designers with different ideas, I’m tolerant of risks and not pissed if something doesn’t work out.
I do expect a discount, I generally don’t like the idea of pay extra now for early access.

 

[Aikouka]

My rules for kickstarter on games
1) It has to be a studio that has actually published something.New studios often have no clue on the business side and fail.
2) It has to be a genre that is under served. I've back a lot of old school RPGs since those basically weren't being made anymore.
3) Its going to take at least a year longer than they say.
4) The cost savings to get in has to be at least 20% off retail (typical sale price) unless I really think it might fail without it. (Like battletech I might have backed at full price if the kickstater had been doing poorly)

I kinda of like it so long as you're careful and go in understand how long it might take. All the projects I back take longer than they say, but I've had a 100% success rate on them too. It allows game devs to make the games that they want to and serve niche markets. Something that's hard to do with a publisher breathing down your neck. I used to work in game dev so have a fairly good feel for what is going to make it though.

The only thing is... it looks like Mighty No. 9 passes your four rules, and we know how that turned out.

I do agree on some of the points, but to a degree, I don't think you can always boil it down to a simple snippet for a rule. For example, Inti Creates worked on Mighty No. 9 and they also did Mega Man Zero (among other similar games), which means that there was certainly experience behind the project. When it comes to your first point, the big thing for me is that if this studio has successfully published or had their game published, why aren't they able to do it this time? If we look at two good Kickstarter examples for this, Mighty No. 9 and Broken Age, both were from established studios that are trying to make games that aren't made often (your rule 2). However, it's arguable that both Kickstarter results fell short of their ambitions in various ways. (The documentary on Broken Age is actually a rather good watch.)

I'll admit... I've grown a bit fond of helping to fund "the little guy"; however, I try to be cautious of whether I'm backing someone's ambition or their actual capability. I certainly don't have first-hand or insider information on what truly makes or breaks a game, but I can compare a project to similar existing projects (released games) to get an idea of whether their ambition might be a bit too high... especially depending on their asking price. As I mentioned in an earlier post, I'm not terribly fond of developers that purposefully undervalue their Kickstarter to ensure they get the funds with the hope of getting some sort of outside funding.

I mentioned Last Epoch in an earlier post, and the thing that gives me a bit more hope is that they already have a demo. I do prefer seeing at least something more than just concept art. So, I'm fine even if it's just a video of an internal demo, but being able to put out any sort of demo for a user to actually try out is certainly nice. The only worry is that you have to be incredibly clear that it's in a rough state (it's listed as pre-alpha) and there may be quality control issues. Sometimes, people get turned off by that sort of thing, so it can be a bit of a double-edged sword.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

^^^you need to accept that all projects will not work, again I have a good tolerance for risk. I do not find it odd if someone has less tolerance for risk.

 

[DaveSimmons]

Yep, I've funded games knowing they might fail -- Jagged Alliance Flashback shipped, but in a 5/10 state. Not surprising since JA sequels have all been cursed.

On the other hand, The Long Dark, Shadowrun, Grim Dawn, Divinity Original Sin, Wasteland 2, Pillars of Eternity, Torment all shipped. The first 4 of those would probably have been considered "too risky" for many to back without the 20/20 hindsight of their success.

 

[Aikouka]

^^^you need to accept that all projects will not work, again I have a good tolerance for risk. I do not find it odd if someone has less tolerance for risk.

I'm a little confused. I'm not saying that @Midwayman should be less risk averse or anything like that. I'm just saying that his criteria for defining a worthwhile crowdfunding project may not always work, and then talked about things that I try to look for in relation to his list.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

I'm a little confused. I'm not saying that @Midwayman should be less risk averse or anything like that. I'm just saying that his criteria for defining a worthwhile crowdfunding project may not always work, and then talked about things that I try to look for in relation to his list.

Yes, simply put when it’s Kickstarter or EA either contribute and don’t expect results or wait until it’s released.
I don’t like to hear people complain about EA.

 

[SMOGZINN]

On the other hand, The Long Dark, Shadowrun, Grim Dawn, Divinity Original Sin, Wasteland 2, Pillars of Eternity, Torment all shipped. The first 4 of those would probably have been considered "too risky" for many to back without the 20/20 hindsight of their success.

Divinity was never a risk. Larian Studios was an established developer that had already made several great games that were well regarded. The only risk was that the game would not be something you liked.

 

[Midwayman]

I'm a little confused. I'm not saying that @Midwayman should be less risk averse or anything like that. I'm just saying that his criteria for defining a worthwhile crowdfunding project may not always work, and then talked about things that I try to look for in relation to his list.

Well to be fair, that's hardly a comprehensive list and I'll willing to break rules.However its a set of general guidelines. I also read the project and make a seat of the pants assessment if the team is over-reaching. Just trying to limit the number of bad projects that I support.

I look at kick starter as a way to free devs from the shackles of mainstream funding. Getting anything funded that isn't a sequel and catering to the lowest common denominator is incredibly hard. From a publisher's perspective new IP is incredibly risky. Making a niche game is very risky. Like Kingdom Come deliverance- That game made some risky design choices and I applaud them for it. I wonder how it got funding?

Anyhow you have to look at it just like an interview. Look at their past work. Look at their proposal. Decide how much risk you're willing to take vs how desirable the game is to you. I guess you could say I'm risk adverse, but I look at it as just doing due diligence.

 

[Midwayman]

Divinity was never a risk. Larian Studios was an established developer that had already made several great games that were well regarded. The only risk was that the game would not be something you liked.

That's not exactly true. Larian nearly went bankrupt doing it.
https://www.pcgamer.com/how-larian-studios-skirted-bankruptcy-before-making-divinity-original-sin/

 

[JSt0rm]

dont buy any games on kickstarter that arent from a proven company. And then dont give them anymore then the base price to get the digital game. No more star citizens.

 

[aigomorla]

Just to remind people so no one crosses the line.
Kickstarters is a sensitive topic on the forum

Anandtech does not support or endorse any kickstarter of any kind.
We will not be held liable or responsible for it PERIOD.
It is up to you to decide if you want to participate in one, and its risk is solely on you.

That being said, i will not allow any threads endorsing any form of kickstarters, and they will be removed.
You can mention them as reference, but i will NOT allow you to endorse them without permission.

If you wish to post a thread about one, you must ask for permission in Moderators Discussion, before you do so.

Moderator Aigo.

 

[Craig234]

I did back 'Forest of Liars', but it's only 30% with about 15 days to go.

https://www.kickstarter.com/project...-liars-a-narrative-adventure-game/description

This one is allowed as you are making a reference..

Moderator Aigo

OK... it's still at $38K of $105K with 10 days left, so the odds look quite bad.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Just to remind people so no one crosses the line.
Kickstarters is a sensitive topic on the forum

Anandtech does not support or endorse any kickstarter of any kind.
We will not be held liable or responsible for it PERIOD.
It is up to you to decide if you want to participate in one, and its risk is solely on you.

That being said, i will not allow any threads endorsing any form of kickstarters, and they will be removed.
You can mention them as reference, but i will NOT allow you to endorse them without permission.

If you wish to post a thread about one, you must ask for permission in Moderators Discussion, before you do so.

Moderator Aigo.

Please forgive me for being dumb, if we post something EA or Kickstarter that could be interesting is against the rules?

 

[JSt0rm]

Please forgive me for being dumb, if we post something EA or Kickstarter that could be interesting is against the rules?

They dont want people shilling kickstarters.

 

[Craig234]

They dont want people shilling kickstarters.

I can see not having sellers advertise, but for players to talk about games, some chat about games is needed. They seem to be trying to have a balance.

I'd think sometimes a 'hey, I saw this neat looking game on Kickstarter others might want to back' post can be useful.

But, it's up to them how to strike the balance.

I'd hope they have room for 'raising awareness' posts that are from gamers, not sellers. They did say just to ask permission so that's an option.

 

[JSt0rm]

craig you are a long time member im sure if you want to talk about a kickstarter you can. We all work in bureaucracy. get to it.