American McGee on Publishers: "News Flash: Things Cost Money"

[Imperioratorex Caprae]

You can make any game with 100k or less. Much much less. If people want more game start a fundraising drive after its finished to upgrade the game cosmetically.

By Kickstarter rules don't these companies forfeit all of their funds if they don't deliver something? I mean you better have a Plan B.

Really? so the dev team salary is cut to mere pennies then? what about office space rental, or electricity? How about Q/A teams?
I don't think you understand what it takes to just run a business, let alone a development team.
This type of ignorance is why there are so many reactionary gamers out there. People who think that development is easy and cheap, but fail to realize things cost money. People who work need a salary, the lights need to stay on for things to get done, development teams need testers to find bugs while the programmers continue to write the game code, voice acting (if applicable) needs to pay its voice actors...
In short, shit adds up.

 

[Ipsen]

Got to side with American here, I can't see the call to arms against Double Fine in this issue. I see the issue, but it's quite small. This put it well:

Spoiler: snip

Makes sense. Besides, Double Fine isn't even asking people for more money. They're using their money to finish it and just putting the game on Steam's early access to try and recoup some of it. Basically, they're putting the game up for pre-order. Which they could have just said, and nobody would have been angry.

Besides, Schafer said at the beginning of this whole thing that he had no idea what he wanted to do, that he just wanted people to give him $400,000 to make an adventure game and see what happens, saying succeed or fail, it would be an adventure and would be documented. Kickstarter isn't a pre-order shop, every single project there has a chance that it could burn in flames and never come out, and you'll never get back what you invested. That's part of the risk.

What are backers worried about, in a proper perspective? With the way kickstarter works 90% of the time, you back a game (starting at maybe 2nd or 3rd tier), you get it for free. ALL of it. Anything else you can ask for? Developers usually STILL throw in more stuff, and that's now standard practice for kickstarter. I don't want to forget too, that the extras that kickstarter tiers provide come from that extra funding.

I think people, as in the consumers of this medium, are caught up in the '3.3 million' figure that they raised for this. Since Kickstarter is a crowd-sourced funding effort, and has no cap, this figure is more indicative of the amount of people interested in Double Fine; the size of the 'crowd' rather than some large sum that a few people brought together (which sounds more like a publisher's budget figure). I won't make assumptions, but I'll bet most backers only share the relation of liking Double Fine's stuff (and groups do give to kickstarters, and tend to buy up the highest tiers, or so I hear). I would actually like to see how many donations a popular kickstarter makes, but I'm not sure where to look, even if it was publicly available.

Against Double Fine, however, knowledge about what extra ideas are brought to the table, and of course, how much those ideas might cost to implement would have gone a long way in terms of transparency (aware that they try to be during the development, not sure if they did that here).

 

[Genocidicles]

Asking for more money is one thing, but asking for more money from a publisher is exactly why consumers are supporting Kickstarter in the first place!

So the publisher will just give you some money then? What's in it for them? I doubt they're after Kickstarter rewards. They're going to want a cut of the profit, and for that they're going to ask the devs to alter their artistic vision (if only slightly) so that the game will bring in more money.

 

[BrotherRool]

What are backers worried about, in a proper perspective? With the way kickstarter works 90% of the time, you back a game (starting at maybe 2nd or 3rd tier), you get it for free. ALL of it. Anything else you can ask for? Developers usually STILL throw in more stuff, and that's now standard practice for kickstarter. I don't want to forget too, that the extras that kickstarter tiers provide come from that extra funding.

So the big thing people are worried about is, what if Double Fine don't get their money? They aren't going to a publisher, they're putting it on steam pre-fund. Essentially they're asking customers to supply them money again. But it's fair to say that most of the people interested in the game have already put their money into it. What happens if there aren't enough people interested in putting money in (or more money in) that Double Fine can't finish the game? According to them they've only got enough money for 25% of the game (despite getting triple their asking price, and the asking price of kickstarter is meant to guarantee a finished product to the best of the producers ability).

Thats basically the extent of people's worry. If Double Fine had said they'd magically produced money from the air and were investing it into the game everyone would love them, but Double Fine didn't say that. What they said is they'd decided to make a game which was way bigger than their budget and now they were going to have to ask consumers for more money to be able to finish the game

 

[Amaror]

I think it's rather the developers that missunderstand not the funders.
Kickstarter isn't there to pay for your fancy studio and pay dozens of top - salaries, that's just stupid to think.
It's there to support small groups. When we look at games it's there to support a small group of people who want to make a specific game because they love to make it. It's there to give them a living, pay their rent and food, so they don't have to work to make a living during the development of the game. But it's not there to fund AAA - titles, where you just don't want a publisher behind you nagging about stuff.

Edit:
Now i seem to have been missunderstood here a little.
I don't have anything against bis projects on kickstarter. I backed Star citizen, Planetary annihilation, Project Eternity and a good amount of larger titles myself.
What i rather meant is, while kickstarter should be used to make big projects to, it's main purpose is to make the development of something possible. It's not meant to be like a publisher.
Developers can't fund their projects on kickstarter and still expect to pay a luxurius office with that money, plus top salaries for everyone involved. If they want that, they have to go through a publisher. Now it is of course possible to make really big projects through crowdfunding, like star citizen, but in such a case, you have to make payment possible over a huge amount of time, not for one or two months. And you have to give people the feeling that the game gets better, because they back it. You can see it on the website of star citizen itself that the funding increased significantly, once they started giving stretch goals again. Massive Chalice, for example gave no stretch goals and shortly after it's goal was reached, the amound of pledges dropped significantly. They "only" made around 150 % (169 to be precise), which is a really low amount, considering they reached their goal only a few days after launch.

 

[subabuser]

Well,
opinions.
If one guy made Gunslinger for 30 $, then 5 guys can make decent point'n'click adventure (look Deponia).
Problem is, no one asked for this, we asked for small indie old school point'n'click adventure and we supported it.
Now, all the extra money they got could be used for extra polishing or adding content they could t before.
To me it looks like Tim Grim and McFee are addicted to publishers whip and are unable to do game without some form of pressure.
Well, I think we should raise intarweb shitstorm, so they start a little crunching.
Crunching is unneeded if all the milestones are done smart, they were not smart with their money/time so it's time to induce crunch.
Backers are not some magical bag of endless money, they shouldnt play with only invent that provided developers sort of income with almost no strings attached, content -wise, and couple of bad boys full of themselves could ruin the whole Kickstarter scene and were back at Calls of Dutys #..

They should be sent to 4A studios in Ukraine(guys who made Metro:Last Light) for a little revelation.
I tell you now, 3 mill. is a lot of money and some teams in Eastern Europe would do wonders with that amount(IDK how much Witcher 1 cost'd but I dont think it costed more that 1 or 2 mills..)
Why Double Fine and McFee should have all the benefits of doing a AAA game for some big publisher, they are selling them-self as indie(indie=eating junk food, working all day and night, its passion)and should start to act as one..

 

[MeChaNiZ3D]

There's a difference between something being more expensive than you'd expect and something being more expensive than quoted.

But I'm not even particularly annoyed about that, publishers are a different issue. If game development is so complex, why the fuck are people with no concept of the game or its audience butting in with their focus groups and statistics? I've hardly ever heard of a publisher suggesting a focus or mechanic that ultimately makes the game better. It's always the same story: "We want a male on the cover, and have him hold a gun" "You can't have that in a game, the target audience don't like that" "Put some multiplayer in there and make sure no freeloaders play it without paying first". The best publishers leave devs the hell alone.

 

[LordMonty]

We're over thinking this 'Shit is hard' thats a metaphor for life. Kickstarter is a gamble and if the games there need more help to get 'out there' from a publisher I see no problem...

Ok here goes some funny logic train: it gets the game seen/sold too more people and makes more money for the next cool game by those people you just paid money for a game that you must have really wanted but might have never been made weather kickstarter failed or suceeded? how does it matter that a publisher is involved?

Meh internet 101 this is getting dumb

 

[Ipsen]

Spoiler: snip

What are backers worried about, in a proper perspective? With the way kickstarter works 90% of the time, you back a game (starting at maybe 2nd or 3rd tier), you get it for free. ALL of it. Anything else you can ask for? Developers usually STILL throw in more stuff, and that's now standard practice for kickstarter. I don't want to forget too, that the extras that kickstarter tiers provide come from that extra funding.

So the big thing people are worried about is, what if Double Fine don't get their money? They aren't going to a publisher, they're putting it on steam pre-fund. Essentially they're asking customers to supply them money again. But it's fair to say that most of the people interested in the game have already put their money into it. What happens if there aren't enough people interested in putting money in (or more money in) that Double Fine can't finish the game? According to them they've only got enough money for 25% of the game (despite getting triple their asking price, and the asking price of kickstarter is meant to guarantee a finished product to the best of the producers ability).

Thats basically the extent of people's worry. If Double Fine had said they'd magically produced money from the air and were investing it into the game everyone would love them, but Double Fine didn't say that. What they said is they'd decided to make a game which was way bigger than their budget and now they were going to have to ask consumers for more money to be able to finish the game

If that's the case, it sucks, but the alternative provided isn't bad either, if one is concerned for the project as a whole. Irridium put it quite well; DF is reigniting some interest by the game by...well, getting part of the game out there. It has been more than a year since the kickstarter ended; I'm sure there are some (like myself) who missed out on the effort, yet are interested in the game. Backers get first AND second part, so they need not apply, but others can actually experience what the game is currently, and to some extent what will come. I see it as an 'expand the audience' move (done better than most publishers). Correct me if I'm wrong, however; I'm making assumptions that this is how Steam early access works.

 

[BrotherRool]

Spoiler: snip

What are backers worried about, in a proper perspective? With the way kickstarter works 90% of the time, you back a game (starting at maybe 2nd or 3rd tier), you get it for free. ALL of it. Anything else you can ask for? Developers usually STILL throw in more stuff, and that's now standard practice for kickstarter. I don't want to forget too, that the extras that kickstarter tiers provide come from that extra funding.

So the big thing people are worried about is, what if Double Fine don't get their money? They aren't going to a publisher, they're putting it on steam pre-fund. Essentially they're asking customers to supply them money again. But it's fair to say that most of the people interested in the game have already put their money into it. What happens if there aren't enough people interested in putting money in (or more money in) that Double Fine can't finish the game? According to them they've only got enough money for 25% of the game (despite getting triple their asking price, and the asking price of kickstarter is meant to guarantee a finished product to the best of the producers ability).

Thats basically the extent of people's worry. If Double Fine had said they'd magically produced money from the air and were investing it into the game everyone would love them, but Double Fine didn't say that. What they said is they'd decided to make a game which was way bigger than their budget and now they were going to have to ask consumers for more money to be able to finish the game

If that's the case, it sucks, but the alternative provided isn't bad either, if one is concerned for the project as a whole. Irridium put it quite well; DF is reigniting some interest by the game by...well, getting part of the game out there. It has been more than a year since the kickstarter ended; I'm sure there are some (like myself) who missed out on the effort, yet are interested in the game. Backers get first AND second part, so they need not apply, but others can actually experience what the game is currently, and to some extent what will come. I see it as an 'expand the audience' move (done better than most publishers). Correct me if I'm wrong, however; I'm making assumptions that this is how Steam early access works.

I agree that what they're doing is the best alternative having screwed up and made a game far too big for the budget you were given. And hopefully enough people will buy into the game on Steam to fund the project. But they were talking about it costing so much more money that Double Fine didn't have enough private money stored up to pay for it, nor was it a size that they could go back to the kickstarter people for. It sounds like it's an awful lot of cash and so there must be a risk that not enough people will want to buy in on Steam for them to be able to complete the game. And it's awful of them to get themselves in a situation where that possibility even exists.

 

[lacktheknack]

Yes, things. Cost money. But don't be supriced if you ask more money from your backers and they give you grief. That happens in any business. You make a film that goes over budget and the studio will ask a lot of questions and be up your arse coz it's their money your using. That's business. I am getting annoyed at devs thinking they're rock stars.

Thank heavens that no one has asked for more money from their backers, then.

Still, if you're going to take a publisher post-KickStarter, make sure you've clarified that on the KickStarter page.

 

[lacktheknack]

I think it's rather the developers that missunderstand not the funders.
Kickstarter isn't there to pay for your fancy studio and pay dozens of top - salaries, that's just stupid to think.
It's there to support small groups. When we look at games it's there to support a small group of people who want to make a specific game because they love to make it. It's there to give them a living, pay their rent and food, so they don't have to work to make a living during the development of the game. But it's not there to fund AAA - titles, where you just don't want a publisher behind you nagging about stuff.

It's there to fund whoever damn well asks for money.

Speak for yourself and your own funded projects. If someone was Kickstarting a AAA game I really wanted while under a publisher, I'd fund it.

 

[ZZoMBiE13]

You know, I backed "Double Fine Adventure" because I wanted to see inside their process through the documentary. In the pitch video Schaffer says "It may be great, or it may crash and burn. But either way, you'll get to see it all".

Double Fine isn't asking for any more, and they've put considerable funds of their own into the mix already. They're doing this because they want to stay independent and I don't really mind that. Even if the game were to crash and burn, I'd still feel like I had gotten what I came for.

All things being equal, this doesn't really bother me in the least. It's not like they're asking anything else from backers, the game is still going to be made and will likely be a love letter to this style of game once it's done. The only thing at fault that I see is Tim was honest in a venue that loves to persecute. A venue that loves to see heroes fall. In short, he took his message to the internet.

 

[Bluestorm83]

Three Million dollars is a LOT of money - STOP - if you are one person. Double Fine has 65 employees. That reduces the per-person number down to less than 75 thousand dollars per person. Broken Age is projected for release in January of 2014, and the project started in earnest after the end of the Kickstarter in March 2012. So nearly two years of development time paying for 65 people means that if that money went only to their salaries and nothing else every person would earn less than 37.5 thousand dollars a year. That's not bad money, but it's not making anyone rich overnight. But it's not just 37.5 thousand dollars a year salary.

They have to pay for office space, water, electricity, and whatever they use for heating. They have to license technology to make the game, the engines and all. Kickstarter takes their fee, which averages out to be around 9%. So right off the bat Double Fine had a 330,000 dollar expense. They need to buy the actual physical technology to program the game on. There are untold other costs that I have no knowledge of because I admit that I am not a game maker and I have no right to bark about what a company will do with THEIR MONEY that people GAVE them as a DONATION and not a payment.

Everyone needs to calm their collective Omni-Tits. At no point does Kickstarter promise anything at all, other than to use the money it brings in for the purpose advertised, after Kickstarter gets their fee. Tim Schafer isn't rolling around in a Scrooge McDuck style vault, drinking diamonds while he jerks off onto money that he stole. Tim Schafer is probably as you read this sitting at a desk or a table, working on a game that he wants to make, wondering how he's going to secure added funding that he needs to get it done and good so people will have another quirky and fun game that the Major Studios and their Publishers would have wiped their asses with as they either make another call of duty or try to find a way to turn "Thoughtful Introspective RPG: The Tale of Great Storytelling" into "BroPG: Tits and Guns, Muthafucka!"

 

[Scars Unseen]

I think it's rather the developers that missunderstand not the funders.
Kickstarter isn't there to pay for your fancy studio and pay dozens of top - salaries, that's just stupid to think.
It's there to support small groups. When we look at games it's there to support a small group of people who want to make a specific game because they love to make it. It's there to give them a living, pay their rent and food, so they don't have to work to make a living during the development of the game. But it's not there to fund AAA - titles, where you just don't want a publisher behind you nagging about stuff.

I think that it you who misunderstands Kickstarter. Go to its website and read up on what it is for. The words "small group" won't be found. Paying rent isn't there either. Kickstarter is to help fund projects, large or small. Artists cost money, as do competent programmers. There are some indie developers that make games on a shoestring budget, but that is not the only type of project that you'll find on the site. There is no requirement for developers to live in penury to minimize budget requirements.

Project Eternity: AAA Developer making an old school game. Continuing to take donations on their site after a successful Kickstarter.

Star Citizen: Space Sim Golden Age developer coming back to make AAA space sim on modified CryEngine 3/4. Got $6M from Kickstarter, and has gotten another $6M so far on their own site. Continues to run promotions to increase funding.

Now that second one is particularly relevant to the discussion, because there is no fucking way that Chris Roberts could have gotten the money he needed purely through a Kickstarter. Because he took the path that he did, he has raised enough money to make a true next gen experience without having to give up control of the project to a publisher or pay the administrative overhead and overblown marketing costs that AAA games usually incur(which is why they cost so damn much to make).

Kickstarter goals should never be mistaken for a budget. Chances are that anything much more involved than FTL will cost more than what you can realistically ask for on Kickstarter. If you're lucky, you get more than you expected(note: not the same thing as your starting goal), and you can finish the game with just what you pulled through crowdfunding. If not, then you have to find another way. Like Obsidian. Like Chris Roberts. Like Double Fine.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

"Things cost money?" No shit. Next you'll be telling me that there's sand at the beach. That doesn't however justify the bullshit business practices of AAA publishers esp. when they're already making enough money to feed and cloth several 3rd world nations for a year.

 

[Woodsey]

It's not a matter of things costing money, it's a matter of developers looking like they can't manage money. If they tell people X Amount is what they need to make their game, then turning around later and saying they've run out doesn't look good. I doubt anyone seriously believes Double Fine are using the money to snort coke off of a bunch of strippers, but it's perfectly reasonable to be wary of them asking for more. People forget that in spite of all the Kickstarters we've seen, most of them are yet to come to fruition.

 

[Scars Unseen]

If big names keep abusing Kickstarter like this, people will start to lose faith in the idea of crowdfunding, which would be a great shame.

Nobody is abusing anything(well maybe Paizo with their MMO "tech demo" that you can't even see without pledging $10,000). As the man said, things cost money, and sometimes that's more money than you can get from Kickstarter alone. The site is not called "CompleteProjectFunder."

If you aren't talking about a couple of guys making a game in their bedrooms, you have to hire professionals. One good programmer can cost $90K-$100K per year. That's just for one guy(and you're unlikely to only have a single programmer for a project of any size). Artists aren't cheap either. You'll need some of those. And let's not forget at least one writer, a UI designer(Being a good programmer doesn't make you good at designing user interfaces), and more. Then there's facility costs, utilities, equipment, software licensing costs... it goes on. In any case, it's often more than what you can realistically ask for on Kickstarter.

These developers are putting themselves out there on the tightrope without a safety net because it's the only way these game are getting made. Do you think a AAA publisher would green light Project Eternity? Torment? Star Citizen(without watering it down considerably)? Going with a publisher is safer than developing on your own, but then, the resulting game is safer too. The alternative is full control and full responsibility for funding. So far, the major devs trying their hand are doing a good job of finding money where and how they can to get the job done.

 

[Dr.Awkward]

The problem with Kickstarter projects is that it's been put into the mindset that in order to encourage people to fund past the minimum goal, you have to offer rewards and extra content for the game... In other words, they're literally introducing scope creep and external costs into their game development. That is the sort of thing that leeches on that funding, and as a result you get kickstarted games that run out of money because apparently in order to be a success you have to be generous to a fault.

If you really want to help out someone's Kickstarter project, go ahead and donate, but ask them to not give you the reward items or do the extra content yet. Make them understand that they need to focus on getting the core game done first, and if it's a success and makes a profit, then add the extra content and make those reward items. In fact, we should encourage Kickstarter projects to not have reward tiers and unlock goals.