Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Businesses The Almighty Buck Games

Will Kickstarter Launch a Gaming Renaissance? 170

Posted by timothy
from the pair-a-dimes-shift dept.
jfruh writes "Most gamers probably know that legendary game designer Tim Schafer turned to Kickstarter to help raise money a new adventure game; aiming for $400,000, he managed to raise more than $3 million. But you might not know that a host of other game projects are doing well on the crowdfunding site, with creators ranging from industry famous to unknown. By bypassing corporate funding and appealing directly to their audience, these developers are sparking a renaissance in quirky, personal games that probably wouldn't be backed by a big label looking for a sure-fire hit."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Will Kickstarter Launch a Gaming Renaissance?

Comments Filter:
  • Wasteland 2 (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Jaysyn (203771) <jaysyn+slashdot@NoSPAm.gmail.com> on Sunday April 08, 2012 @12:56PM (#39613269) Homepage Journal

    I personally am really looking forward to see what comes out of the Wasteland 2 Kickstarter.

    • You and me both. It's going to be a long year of waiting.
      • Hey we've been waiting over 20 already. The only thing we have to worry about in one year is if the crazy politicians decide to start world war 3. And if that is the case, I just have to find some like minded individuals who know first aid and pugilism.
    • Re:Wasteland 2 (Score:4, Informative)

      by Niedi (1335165) on Sunday April 08, 2012 @03:08PM (#39613871)
      +1 here!

      However my personal favorite is Al Lowe's new/remade Leisure Suit Larry, although I'm not quite sure if it'll make its goal... I have quite fond memories for that series.
      But anyway, let's just see how many more old gems will get revived and how long it will take until the crappy ones start to creep in...
      • by Hatta (162192)

        I would love to see a new Al Lowe made LSL game. Why doesn't Al just start there? Everyone who wants to play a new LSL has played the old ones a dozen times, what's the point in doing remakes?

        • by Niedi (1335165)
          Appearantly, so far they only got a license for the remakes. Plus a new game in the quality of, say, lsl7 is a wee bit too expensive for them right now (some 2-3 million if I remember rightly)...

          So I doubt this would be possible via kickstarter
          • by Hatta (162192)

            I don't care if Al writes it in AGI. A new LSL game is worth more than any remake.

    • Re:Wasteland 2 (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Gadget_Guy (627405) * on Sunday April 08, 2012 @04:54PM (#39614355)

      Really? Well then I guess that the answer is no, this will not launch a gaming Renaissance. So far in my scans of these posts, I have seen a sequel, a remake, people fixated on return on investment, and the established developers getting priority over new, unproven programmers.

      That sounds just like our existing games industry to me! The established industry still has an avenue for potentially unprofitable ideas. It's called indie developers.

      Also, the idea of giving money to games you want to see made is not new, as people do the same with pre-orders. Some people had Duke Nukem Forever on pre-order for a decade!

      • Re:Wasteland 2 (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 08, 2012 @07:35PM (#39615187)

        The pattern seems to be of remakes of and sequels to classic-style games from the 1990s, of a type which the mainstream games industry claims no longer has a market. The people with experience making such games have found a way around the traditional middlemen. I think there's room for this pattern to continue for five years or so, tapping the veins of creativity that were cut short by the consolidation of the gaming industry, before I'd start demanding completely-new titles (which may or may not be supportable through the Kickstarter model).

        • by ildon (413912)

          This really just proves that there is not in fact a market for these mid 90s style games. These developers have simply found an alternate avenue for funding the development of games for this extremely niche market. Maybe.

      • by Thing 1 (178996)

        Some people had Duke Nukem Forever on pre-order for a decade!

        Fortunately, bought that trash in the bargain bin for $5, and wasn't even worth that. "Here's an etch-a-sketch interface, sign your name!" What total crap.

    • Me too as a game player way back to the original "Colossal Cave" text adventure back on a PDP-11 mini computer c.a. 1978, *but*

      I do have a sad feeling that if only distinguished "ancients" like Brian Fargo can automagically hit their targets, get all their old friends from Black Isle/Interplay/Obsidian etc..

      then Kickstarter is a lying cake! ("it's who you know, not what you know"....)

      Disclaimer: was a programmer since the 80's do some teaching, want to scratch that indie game itch .... (watching Kickstar

  • by Anonymous Coward

    But going straight down as soon as somes start to use it for shitty projects and still get the money.

    Just like present day.

  • by mseeger (40923) on Sunday April 08, 2012 @12:59PM (#39613281)

    I surely hope so..... at least i backed 4 projects in two weeks :-)

    P.S. I recommend a look here: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/mercenary-games/vigrior-maneuver-warfare [kickstarter.com]

    • by tfigment (2425764) on Sunday April 08, 2012 @01:12PM (#39613333)

      Pretty much same here different games probably. I've funded 6 games in past 3 weeks or so. 5 of those have already hit their targets. Shadowrun Returns, Wasteland 2 and the DFA game are run away successes I think in this phase. I don't think the 6th one will make its targets.

      I think it will be successful for well known but niche titles. I have very few problems giving my money to the original authors of the games as that is probably a safe bet. I have slightly more reservations with new content from unknowns or people who have only good mods in their pocket. But I have invested in both just to see if this spurs on new kinds of development but I'm not giving $15 or $1000 to just anybody as there are few guarantees here that the money will be well spent and I will see anything in return in 1-2 years.

      I don't care for the latest action game or multiplayer whatever. I'm far more interested in games with content and choices and a little back story not ones that accurately model the reloading behavior of the latest military firearms. Unfortunately we seem to be getting better graphics and animation and worse content as years go by. These kickstarters are showing that there is a market for older style games from decades past that are being updated for today's computers without having to sell your soul to the publisher in exchange for money.

      • by mseeger (40923)

        Vigrior is having a hard time too. But i press my thumbs and try to do a bit of PR for them :-).

      • 1. Release a free version on iPhone or Android or Steam.

        2. Get name recognition.

        3. Go to Kickstarter and pitch your new game (or improved version of your original game).

        4. "Upgrade" your free game with quick ads pointing to your Kickstarter project.

    • Also you can see an old school BOARD GAME. Check out. http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/49100723/expedite-a-fast-paced-route-building-game-of-world [kickstarter.com]
  • Let's wait (Score:4, Insightful)

    by kamapuaa (555446) on Sunday April 08, 2012 @01:02PM (#39613291) Homepage

    As somebody who put in money for Wasteland 2, I'm negative about Kickstarter. I'll even join the official backlash team.

    Let's wait until a single good game has been released under this model. Or really, a single good game has been released from somebody who doesn't already have a large fanbase and nostalgia helping him get attention.

    Furthermore, there's really no accountability under this whole scheme. What if the game released is totally amateurish? What if the developers just pocket half the money? What if the money ends up not being enough and the game is only half completed? What recourse do the "donators" have?

    System seems ripe for being abused...Leisure Suit Larry's kickstarter suggests the money is needed to make the game, glossing over that the game has already been under production for at least half a year. Presumably they already had the money, it doesn't mention where the donation's going.

    • by aussersterne (212916) on Sunday April 08, 2012 @01:07PM (#39613305) Homepage

      buy a consumer product. If you want to make an investment, make an investment.

      Kickstarter is not a store, nor is it a brokerage. It is a place to donate and support things you'd like to see happen. Don't send any money their way if you're hoping for some sort of guaranteed return. It's a kind of participation, activism, or expression, not a kind of transaction.

      • Wouldn't it be a good idea to, as a Kickstarter supporter, be paid back more if the specific project made lots of money?

        • by forand (530402) on Sunday April 08, 2012 @01:35PM (#39613435) Homepage

          What you are suggesting is called investing, not donation, it legally requires far more hurdles for a fledgling business to jump through to obtain. Furthermore, until the recent signing of the JOBS Act it was illegal for average people to make such investments within the US.

          While I would love to be able to invest directly with local businesses there is a real concern about fraud when dealing with hundreds of thousands of small investment options. The SEC, or anything like it, is incapable of ensuring a limited risk to fraud for investors. We are in the infancy of crowd funding and while I yearn for a well regulated and open marketplace to invest in local business I think it reasonable that we take it one step at a time and not rush into things.

          • I agree with most of what you said but there is already a solution to handling high risk investments. Demand a high return. If the company can provide some evidence that the investment is lower risk (such as having a track record of success, submitting to regular external audits/reviews, etc.) then they don't have to offer as much compensation. I'm sure you will even see firms with the experience and the time to do some due diligence and suggest/handle crowd funding investments for a fee/%. People are f
          • by wmbetts (1306001)

            It would be illegal for them to call it an investment, but what would happen if they just decided to give them money? For example, thanks for helping me when I needed it so here's some cash to say thank you. If I made a bunch of money from something that started on kickstarter I'd feel it was appropriate to do something for them. I'd feel pretty shitty about myself if I didn't.

          • Kickstarter is not about donation OR investing.

            It's about funding. You get something in return for your pledge. Most games on kickstarter offer the game at one of the funding levels, and swag or recognition at other levels. Many, things on kickstarter, I think, have poorly thought returns for lower funding levels (a complete game for $1? But it's supposedly going to be "worth" $40 when you finish it???)

            Some of the returns are similar to donation prizes, but really, it's a place where you can say, by sen

      • No, it's not. They have levels that you can buy into for each of the different products. For example Diaspora [kickstarter.com] promised everyone that donated $5 "Once the software is released as open source, we will send you a CD with diaspora all set up and ready to go, with a note from our team!". I don't think anyone has gotten that.

        It's even worse on the hardware side of things. So far I've backed 4 things in the last year and physically have 1 of them. Anywhere from "Sorry guys my supplier changed all my quotes" to "I

        • As a fellow HexBright sponsor, I'd like to point out that they never claimed that it was already made. On the FAQs:

          When will you ship?

          Short answer- as soon as we can. Long answer- HexBright is not a product already on the shelf ready to be shipped. You are funding development of a top quality product where almost all your money is going into the parts and materials with almost no overhead, marketing or middlemen costs (we are projecting future retail prices to be over $100). As the saying goes, "CHEAP, FA

          • I didn't claim it was already made. They claimed that you were funding development of the Flex and he would be selling the Prime which is a replication of his prototype. As I read that all the Prime needed was produced.

            • I thought that the Flex and the Prime were just different versions, with the Prime being his first design and the Flex being his upgraded design (after making the prototype). It makes sense that they're manufacturing them both together and they're also tweaking the designs as they progress. It's a shame you've been disappointed by the project as I still think it's a really interesting one.
        • I should mention the Dream-Quest of Unknown Kadath http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/22092473/the-dream-quest-of-unknown-kadath-and-other-storie?ref=live [kickstarter.com] as being an unexpectedly well produced book. I'm a big HPL fan, so I wanted to sponsor it, but I was surprised at just how well made/written/drawn it is.
        • I don't know if MBAs are needed, but some common business sense may be applicable.

          As it is, nearly every project I have backed has run late - anywhere from 2 weeks to 7 months and counting.
          But projects running late is pretty much par for the course everywhere (and if not running late, then almost certainly over budget or underperforming).

          I think backers need to have a bit of common sense as well, though.
          The HexBright project is a good example. It's running late and yes the guy continued the engineering pro

      • When you pay for something before your receive the goods, you take a risk. You may never get them, they may not be what you want, etc. If you aren't ok with that risk that's totally fine, don't do it. However don't cry about it. Some people are fine with the risk.

        Same shit with stocks vs CDs or the like in investing. If you have no risk tolerance, you place your money in savings accounts, CDs, and other instruments that have guarantees of value. They are as safe as you can get. However if you have more risk

      • by jeffmeden (135043)

        buy a consumer product. If you want to make an investment, make an investment.

        Kickstarter is not a store, nor is it a brokerage. It is a place to donate and support things you'd like to see happen. Don't send any money their way if you're hoping for some sort of guaranteed return. It's a kind of participation, activism, or expression, not a kind of transaction.

        Seeing as how (at least based on the evidence at hand) none of these outfits are operating as a true not-for-profit (some may operate without profit but that is something else entirely) then the word "donation" is NOT appropriate here. The word you are looking for is "snakeoil". They are selling (that is what you need to call it unless you are explicitly not operating with the intent to make a profit) a specific good (the promise of something magical and wonderful at some point in the future) and their cu

    • Re:Let's wait (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Beelzebud (1361137) on Sunday April 08, 2012 @01:11PM (#39613329)
      Well right now we're seeing many popular projects from people who are industry veterans going back 20-25 years. These are people with established reputations as being able to manage teams, and million dollar budgets. The only thing developers have to lose in this deal is their names and reputations, which if any of them wishes to remain in the industry, that will be a huge incentive not to rip people off. I think that's why you see people putting their trust in these bigger projects. It's also why it is harder for less known people to have a successful kickstarter campaign. The community backlash from someone abusing kickstarter would be career suicide.
    • 100% agreement. I kicked the bucket for wasteland 2 based on nothing but the title. No concept art, no details, no script treatment, nothing but a title and a hope for the game I wanted.

      Remember Barack Obama in 2008? He had the hope and change, but no details. He was an empty canvas of sorts on which you could imagine he'd do all the things you supported. There was something for everybody. Then he got elected, started making decisions instead of speeches, and the thrill was gone.

      Every wasteland sta

    • by Creepy (93888)

      Many things on Kickstarter are already in production but need some extra funding to see final light. The Leisure Suit Larry people, as I understand it, are working on the "original" game with updated graphics after acquiring the license and original developer, but it obviously isn't done yet since some of the rewards are to add supporters in as in-game graphics. I use quotes around original because the original game was Softporn Adventure [destructoid.com] by Charles Benton, which was nearly identical but all text based (an

    • by matunos (1587263)

      What if the developers just pocket half the money?

      I'd be more curious about where the other half is going. Don't you *expect* most of the money to go toward the developers?

    • by bfandreas (603438)
      There will be a backlash when people first relise that giving money to kickstarter is an investment without ROI. And that they don't have too much say(hopefully) in the project. Indeed, it's not even certain the projects will yield anything.
      You don't buy shares of the project.Your money may be gone. If you value your money and common sense then stay away from kickstarter. There's going to be a backlash, yes. And the charge will be lead by the usual Blue Meanies and other assorted grey and featureless men
      • I've sponsored a few different projects on Kickstarter and I don't think of it as any kind of investment. I'm basically paying for the reward level offered. There's a certain amount of trust involved that they will actually deliver the rewards, but I haven't been disappointed yet.
        • by bfandreas (603438)
          I'm sure I will fund an effort sooner or later, but I'm not yet interested in anything that's been offered. But when I do, I will follow the whole thing from start to finish and rather enjoy the soap opera since I basically payed the admission fee.
          I THINK the makers of Legend of Grimrock found the right balance between maintaining their vision and taking in fan suggestions. Which is irrelevant here since they weren't funded by kickstarter. Now imagine what would have happened if Bastion had been funded by
        • by 0111 1110 (518466)

          I will be helping to fund Wasteland 2 and I do see it as an investment. Not every reward has to be monetary. A donation would imply that I am not expecting any reward for myself. It would just be to help others. That is clearly not the case here. My motivation is most definitely *not* altruistic. Far from it. It is 100% purely selfish.

          There is most definitely risk involved. Brian Fargo could put his 2 1/2 million in a suitcase, and disappear with enough money to live comfortably for the rest of his life. Th

    • by grumbel (592662)

      System seems ripe for being abused...Leisure Suit Larry's kickstarter suggests the money is needed to make the game, glossing over that the game has already been under production for at least half a year.

      All they have is a single background and a bit of animation that they used to pitch the game to publishers, they don't have a game. The publishers didn't want it, so they are now pitching it to kickstarter.

      • by bfandreas (603438)
        LL1 has already been remade as VGA/256 colours if memory serves me right. I do distinctly remember that Space Quest 1 got remade in the Space Quest IV engine.
        The thing is, I don't think LL1 needs to be remade. The EGA original had its very own charme and high-definition propably won't be able to add anything to it. Besides, a 1:1 remake will propably be lost on the current generation of gamers. It's a tale of an idiot clinging to late 70ies stereotypes which will be lost on anybody born past 1960.

        I playe
    • by Sir_Sri (199544)

      Well that's why you're hedging your bets risk wise. Donate 25 bucks or 30 bucks or whatever, if it's terrible it's not a huge loss.

      The reason big studios aren't behind these things is because if it takes 10-20 million to make a game and another 20-30 to market it they can't afford to risk that kind of money on a game that's going to make 5 million in sales. The movie studios do this sort of thing with fancy accounting, much larger distributions (worldwide) double monetization (movie+ dvd) and they're big

    • by flowwolf (1824892)

      Okay then "Big Publisher Damage Control Consultant", doing his job auspiciously as possible. The accountability is there. The reputation of those who asked for funding is already there. If studios don't follow through on their development promises, you'll be damned sure that people won't forget about it. They won't be seeing any more of that sweet KickStarter nectar if they try that monkey business. You screw your investors/customers over and they'll take their money elsewhere. That's how reputation w

    • I posted to an earlier post re Wastlands 2, but here goes...

      You left out a magic word ---> "new" I'm trying to be optimistic but i suspect i'm dead wrong - what we'll get is semi riskless stuff from well known almost immortal

      zombie like devs from the 90's ( ---> :-| Something inside me thinks the existing dead bipedal mammals think they can look young again by borrowing newer models... (maybe i'm just a cynic)

      Andy

    • by DavidTC (10147)

      Or really, a single good game has been released from somebody who doesn't already have a large fanbase and nostalgia helping him get attention.

      Anyone who thinks Kickstart is a reasonable development model is crazy.

      I donate money to Kickstart adventure games, to show that adventure games actually do sell and have a large audience. (You'd think that the dozens of Europeans adventure games that have sold well in the US over the last decade would prove this, but apparently no.) I consider this a donation, i

  • by RyanFenton (230700) on Sunday April 08, 2012 @01:08PM (#39613311)

    In other discussions I've seen, the assumption seems to be that the first game that betrays expectations will doom the whole system.

    I don't think that's true - this isn't an investment cycle, but more a method of pre-purchasing that cuts the last link that was tying small game makers to publishers - seen money for projects.

    Collapse isn't inevitable - but I do see some interesting circumstances occurring as Kickstarter is forced to pull funding from some projects, or resulting in empty demo games with no plans for completion.

    The idea is still critical though - a mechanism for the potential audience of an entertainment product to freely contribute to the seed money for that product. It will certainly be some rocky challenges ahead - but the core idea will survive, and I think will result in a lot of positive alternatives to insular corporate planning.

    It's also a great alternative to the centralized planned culture of nations like France, so intent on protecting an elusive cultural ideal, they approach stagnation at times.

    It's a great third way - a way with its own problems, but much to add compared to the extremes of strict corporate planning and liberal cultural protectionism.

    Ryan Fenton

    • In other discussions I've seen, the assumption seems to be that the first game that betrays expectations will doom the whole system.

      Kind of an odd comment for some people to make, considering how often the publisher model ends up betraying expectations and it's still around (unfortunately).

  • No (Score:5, Interesting)

    by nedlohs (1335013) on Sunday April 08, 2012 @01:46PM (#39613483)

    Kikstarter lets people who already have a name get funding for their pet project.

    • Re:No (Score:5, Informative)

      by am 2k (217885) on Sunday April 08, 2012 @02:29PM (#39613673) Homepage

      Kikstarter lets people who already have a name get funding for their pet project.

      Tell that to the oh-so-well-known game developers Justin Ma and Matthew Davis (not the actor), who run the Faster Than Light [kickstarter.com] Kickstarter project.

    • Kikstarter lets people who already have a name get funding for their pet project.

      How does that contradict the premise of the original question? Yeah, you need to have a name to get top-dollar funding. Unknowns will get some, but not as much as people who have a proven track record. This is a good thing, as maintaining that record is the only incentive that keeps people from doing a run with the money, or producing crap. (Personally, I think Kickstarter funds over a certain amount should be held in escrow, and released as specified milestones are achieved).

      That doesn't mean that Kickstar

      • by DavidTC (10147)

        It doesn't mean that it won't provide a way for niche genres to get funding.

        What I am hoping Kickstart does, at least for adventure gaming, is to 'unkill it'.

        The death and subsequent fear of the US gaming industry to touch adventure games with a 10-foot pole was due entirely to chance, as one studio collapsed while the other changing direction, added on top of absurd over-expectations, largely thanks to Myst, which is still the most popular game in terms of 'copies sold per installed computer'. Which me

    • The word "pet project" has the negative connotation of illegitimacy. One could rephrase what you said as, "Kickstarter lets game developers who have a proven track-record get funding for projects without needing to go to an outside publisher."

      We'll see how these projects turn out, but I've read developer complaints about publishers encouraging them to make safe, cookie-cutter, mediocre games; pushing the games out too early; and having a bad influence on creative decisions. Maybe the developers are just

  • by painandgreed (692585) on Sunday April 08, 2012 @02:05PM (#39613579)

    Depends on what one means by "renaissance". Will Kickstarter see a large boost for unknowns making new games for the first time? Maybe, it will help get some ideas done that otherwise never would have seen the day, (see Diaspora), but I doubt it will cause a huge increase in such. What I think we will be, and are, seeing is a large influx of established games and designers creating new work that otherwise wouldn't have ever seen the light of day. With the one and a quarter of a million that The Order of the Stick Reprint Drive [kickstarter.com] made, I think we are already seeing this in the table top gaming community. Now other games companies [kickstarter.com] are pulling out old favorites and using Kickstarter to judge interest and essentially get pre-sales for a product. We are seeing the same thing with the Shadowrun Returns [kickstarter.com] game by the original designers. I'm hearing the same sort of things from friends who are comic book fans about new and old comic book projects. For what are essentially cottage industries with fans, I think it will help a great deal as one can essentially take a lot of risk out of guessing if something will sale enough to make the money back.

    Personally, I'm beginning to really get into Kickstarter. New creative projects that I can not only look at getting, but if I really like it could even pay more for extras or even for things like getting myself added as a character in the video game. Some of the projects are small endevors that I want, but the larger demand just isn't there for. If I had to rely on brick and mortar stores or even the internet for such products to get produced, I'd probably never get them. With Kickstarter, a project can get the funding for it to fill what demand there is even if it's not enough to be sustainable for wide distribution.

  • by Xian97 (714198) on Sunday April 08, 2012 @02:48PM (#39613739)
    I see these recent wave of kickstarts as the ultimate pre-order. As a backer, I get a lower price and maybe some extras for my investment, and the knowledge that I am helping with the creation of a game that I want to play but wouldn't have got backing otherwise. As a developer, you get your funding in advance, and anything sold after the release is profit since your expenses have already been covered.

    I backed Wasteland 2. I would love to see another post apocalyptic turn based RPG, since Fallout 3 went in a completely different direction in regards to game play as it's predecessors.

    Eventually one of these projects will fail, or not live up to expectations, but I hope that is the rare exception.
    • by bfandreas (603438)
      I think of it as a lot less than a pre-order.

      If your pre-ordered thing doesn't get delivered then you won't be charged.

      For sanity's sake consider it a risk and write off that money spent. If something comes out of it, rejoice. If not, find another worthwhile project. But for heavens sake don't feel entitled but to the anonymous glory of being one of the thousands who backed a thing when the big publishers would not.
  • by blahplusplus (757119) on Sunday April 08, 2012 @03:24PM (#39613943)

    ... of the modern videogame industry while I'm also pessimistic about kickstarter I'd rather throw money at people who love and care about games then just watch every game become an MMO and chained to online DRM (Starcraft 2, diablo 3).

    Kickstarter is really tapping into a lot of negative gamer sentiment, especially if you grew up in the 80's and 90's and watched PC game quality dive off cliff after the early 2000's. The last decade has been probably one of the worst decades for gamers and gamers rights on the whole. Map editors, tools to mod games? Sorry we'd rather sell you bonus weapons and extra maps as DLC at inflated prices.

    Most newer generation gamers didn't grow up playing Doom, Duke3D, Quake and many other early PC games so they have no f'n clue how bad games have become.

  • Kickstarter is a huge gamble for everyone - in traditional publishing the publisher takes the risk and if a project falls flat they write it off. Big deal, they know that half of their investments are not going to fly, quarter will get their money back, 12,5% will make a decent profit and rest will be a success. But with kickstarter you have thousands of contributors for a project, and if, and eventually some project will, turn out to be a pancake on the floor there will be thousands complaining.

    I wish all

    • by bfandreas (603438)
      Well, if everybody doesn't see the difference betwen a donation and an investment, then no. People won't praticipate in crowdfunding anymore.

      But it is just a matter of time before torrents of QQ wash us all into the sea so it might be wise not to spend money on kickstarter but build an arc instead.

      I'm mulling over what it'd take to make me send disposable cash to a project. There are some things but as of now, I'm not seeing it.
      But what I do see is the level of expectation that rides on the two-digit d
    • by SQL Error (16383)

      I wish all the best for the model, but it is risky as hell - it only needs one colossal failure and people will not donate again.

      Except that you can't have a colossal failure with this model. Say a project fails completely and all we get is some art sketches and an unplayable demo. Oh no, I'm out $15. I still have a dozen other projects in the pipeline to keep me entertained.

      I fully expect that I won't end up playing half the games I'm backing - either they'll never deliver, or they'll deliver but I won't like the result. And I'm perfectly fine with that. Look, people bought Dragon Age 2, and Bioware's offices are still standing

  • by N0Man74 (1620447) on Sunday April 08, 2012 @03:49PM (#39614041)

    I just want to mention that Kickstarter is also getting board games off the ground as well. I actually only first heard about Kickstarter after playing Alien Frontiers a couple months ago. It is an enjoyable and well received board game that is the result of a Kickstarter project. There are many board games in development because of Kickstarter as well.

  • All they do is suck the fun of the games and add crap DRM and DLC.

  • Don't wait, it won't be that long until this method of funding is abused, people quit helping and it's ruined for everyone.
  • With video games, I don't see it kicking off a renaissance. Huge AAA games still take millions of dollars and that model likely won't change. What may change is the development of Indie games or games that have a history to them.

    With board games I do think there is and will be a change. A lot of board games coming out are by indie designers. Before they had to pitch their ideas to a publisher to get published. Now they can pitch their idea to a small group of consumers, get the first run printed and

  • I have just one question, will we see Toys for Bob (i.e., Ford and Reiche) start a kickstarter effort for a true Star Control sequel? Star Control 2 was one of my favorite games of all time. Heck, I even enjoyed (although nowhere near as much) the non-Ford/Reiche produced Star Control 3 (I know, heresy...). If there is any game that screams out as good candidate, surely this is it. I'd be willing to put my money where my mouth is and help fund it through kick-starter. Anyone else with me?

"There is nothing new under the sun, but there are lots of old things we don't know yet." -Ambrose Bierce

Working...