Mildly disappointed by the Kickstarter phenomenon.

[Albino Boo]

Part of the problem is that people forgot that the name developers are successful businessmen too. The way that they see Kickstarter is make a BBB game with the public taking the risk and they don't have to give a return on the money that was put up front. The net result is that they get richer. Most of the guys doing the big kickstarters are not some starving artist living in a garret but multimillionaires in their own right and they want to make a profit with the minimum amount of risk.

The same is also true of Tim Schafer, Peter Molyneux, Brian Fargo, American McGee, Al Lowe and David Braben. In fact most of the high value game kickstarters have come from established developers, who are rich in their own right. If they don't believe in the their games enough to put their own money up why should I?

 

[Something Amyss]

You're looking for creativity in a field that's always lacked it by and large. Breakthroughs are less common than you think, and copying has been big since day 1. That's the problem with Kickstarter: it can't change the nature of the business. In fact, now larger groups are coming in with their hands out promising what almost certainly could have been made freely as AAA games.

The same is also true of Tim Schafer, Peter Molyneux, Brian Fargo, American McGee, Al Lowe and David Braben. In fact most of the high value game kickstarters have come from established developers, who are rich in their own right. If they don't believe in the their games enough to put their own money up why should I?

Ponies.

I don't think that they have no faith in their work. But if you can get someone else to front the money, why use your own?

 

[Legion]

They are making games that had a large fanbase, but not a large enough one for the biggest companies to cater to. RPG's are now very diluted in the games industry thanks to the success of "action adventure" which apparently everybody wants, so on Kickstarter they can make games to those who felt that their favoured game types were being ignored.

I never saw Kickstarter as a way of being unshackled from creativity, so much as being unshackled in the sense that nobody can tell you not to make X game because it won't sell as well as Y game. The triple A industry seems to be practically run based upon focus groups and statistics whereas people funding games via Kickstarter can appeal directly to actual people and hear what they want.

That is not to say I disagree that it's a shame so many seem to be going the same route, but put that down to the people, not a problem with Kickstarter models themselves.

 

[Albino Boo]

You're looking for creativity in a field that's always lacked it by and large. Breakthroughs are less common than you think, and copying has been big since day 1. That's the problem with Kickstarter: it can't change the nature of the business. In fact, now larger groups are coming in with their hands out promising what almost certainly could have been made freely as AAA games.

The same is also true of Tim Schafer, Peter Molyneux, Brian Fargo, American McGee, Al Lowe and David Braben. In fact most of the high value game kickstarters have come from established developers, who are rich in their own right. If they don't believe in the their games enough to put their own money up why should I?

Ponies.

I don't think that they have no faith in their work. But if you can get someone else to front the money, why use your own?

Thats my point. The Devs who have supposedly been stifled creativity make the same decisions as the publishers for the same business reasons. When a publishers puts money into a developer the expect a return on their investment, why is the contributors to a kickstarter money not worth a return? The big name kickstarters are get richer schemes for established developers and thats it. You are just giving your capital to a multi millionaire who is going to get richer off the back of your capital.

 

[DanDanikov]

Kickstarter may have brought us the Oculus Rift. As someone who's tried it, I can assure you that's going to be a big deal.

Problem with Kickstarter is your interest is always going to be proportional to your reputation and what you can show, so either you have to be Tim Shafer going 'trust me, give me money and I'll make awesome things happen' or you have to put in the effort and have something to show (and even you may be relegated to obscurity).

Fundamentally, Kickstarter does CROWD-funding. Crowds go for obvious things that look good and like they might work, not a crazy idea that makes no sense to anyone and hasn't been fleshed out. Publishers, on the other hand, tend to be especially conservative, so Kickstarter does occupy a nice niche between totally avante guarde and ultra-conservative sequels and remakes.

 

[Gennadios]

No, people criticize the mainstream AAA industry for recycling Modern Warfare, or cramming Modern Warfare elements into existing IPs that didn't have them.

The players that backed the games listed are backing game systems they enjoyed and that the AAA industry is not interested in making again. This is other people's personal spending money, it doesn't come cheap, forgive them for not putting it towards something they're not at all familiar with.

Also, the Dungeon Keeper clone is not shit. Not yet, anyway. The look and feel is actually really close, it's just that it's *really* early alpha and updates are coming in uncomfortably slowly.

 

[Something Amyss]

Thats my point. The Devs who have supposedly been stifled creativity make the same decisions as the publishers for the same business reasons. When a publishers puts money into a developer the expect a return on their investment, why is the contributors to a kickstarter money not worth a return? The big name kickstarters are get richer schemes for established developers and thats it. You are just giving your capital to a multi millionaire who is going to get richer off the back of your capital.

Especially when you consider they're mostly not making games they couldn't make otherwise. Even DoubleFine, which tends to have quirky titles, is big enough that I have trouble buying them failing to find a publisher.

But you're definitely correct. We're investing in a product but being treated like it's simply a pre-order, meaning they reap all the benefits. It's insane.

 

[kingthrall]

Remember back when the video game kickstarter craze took off?

Finally, they'd found a way to bypass those mean, money-grubbing, creativity-hating, Scrooge McDuck publishers. Rather than go begging to the fat cat money counters, developers would secure their precious lucre directly from the blessed consumer. Thus they would be free to pursue their dreams and bring forth their ideas without constraint or oversight. A golden renaissance of unbridled creativity would come to the medium as bright eyed developers danced across green fields, arm-in-arm with generous crowdfunding gamers.

Now, I'll admit, I was a bit skeptical. I immediately began picturing the reaction when one of these projects dies in the arse for whatever reason and a whole bunch of people realise that they've thrown their money down the gurgler. However, overall I thought the whole idea had a lot of promise and I looked forward to seeing what came out of it.

Then I started seeing the actual games being proposed.

Hey, like the old Fallout games? Well, they can't do that because of IP rights, but have a sequel to the game that they made before issues over IP rights forced them to make Fallout.

Like the old XCOM games? Here, have Xenonauts, a blatant XCOM rip off.

Like Dungeon Keeper? Here, have a clone. (Which is shit, from what I hear.)

Remember Planescape Torment? Have a sequel!

Oh hey, Project Eternity. A new IP that... oh, it's a fantasy RPG. Way to blow my mind there Obsidian. What's next? A modern shooter? Perhaps a zombie apocalypse ga...?

Oh look, three zombie apocalypse games. Joy.

...

This is not quite what I was hoping for. It seems that most developers, rather than using this as an opportunity to take some risks and try new things, have elected to just remake that one old game that they liked or, failing that, make a sequel.

Isn't this what people criticize about the big budget, mainstream AAA industry? Constant recycling of IP and pumping out sequels to everything in sight, regardless of whether or not the original called for it.

Oh, and I'm part of the problem of course. The only Kickstarter I've chucked money at is Dreamfall: Chapters, a sequel. (Although it's a sequel to a series with an incomplete story, so that makes it totally okay!)

...

Tell ya what, let's try to end this on a positive note. Tell me about the promising, interesting and generally amazing projects you're looking forward to that aren't just some old game getting the dust blown off. Perhaps I'll find something to restore my faith in the Church of Kickstarter.

1. Kick-starter is crowd funded, so even if its not your cup of tea it wouldn't be successful if they were not doing something right in the first place. People want these kind of games like the obsidian rpg, I know I do so why the hell not?

2. Speaking of remakes, check Amikrog the new never-hood game out. I doubt any AAA game would of funded this game or even take a risk until they had sufficient funds.

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1949537745/armikrog


I dont spend money on beta's or half finished games anyway, which is why kick-starters work. If people want to have it that bad good for them but there's plenty of other thing to choose from and it keeps the so called AAA games heads turning to see what they should of been doing years ago.

 

[Anthony Corrigan]

The novel ideas are definitely in the small games. Investing a lot of money in fresh ideas is a)Ridiculously risky and b) Bad for the game.

Think of how many developers have talked about trying add X mechanic in a game and found it didn't really work and overtime the project morphed into something completely different. Kickstarter stops that process in it's tracks, because you need to commit to a mechanic before you've built and tested it.


As far as big games go, we'll see innovation if a normal Kickstarter project comes off and provides enough money in sales for the company to create their own game next time round. Obsidian for example are hoping Project Eternity will be self-sustaining once they've sold the first game. If that happens a company can start messing around and trying new things free of publishers and fans. And whats more, they have a safety net. If things go wrong they can kickstarter a safer game and try again.

So we're only going to see these things start to appear maybe 4 years down the road. The excitement isn't the Double Fine get to make Broken Age and Massive Chalice, the real end goal is BA and MC selling so well that Double Fine are completely free to make their own games.

But if you want innovation then the smaller projects involve much less risk and are a way for the one to five indie dev teams to get their dreams made whilst still having food to eat. And their are tons of games like that on Kickstarter. Look at Unrest [http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/698883673/unrest-an-unconventional-rpg-set-in-ancient-india] for example, an RPG set in India with little combat focus and characters who can die and the story will continue. This is where the creativity is, where we only need to provide a handful of people with the tools they need to make games that weren't possible before. It can't come with providing funding to big 20 man teams

tl;dr, there's a lot of good reasons publishers behave the way they do. Kickstarters success will be in giving developers completely independent income sources, not directly from the games funded.

I disagree, listen to Richard Garriot and Chris Spears talking about SotA, RG specifically said in one interview that he WANTS to be beholden to the fans of the game because its us who buy them, if they are putting up ideas but the players hate the idea then its better to know early in development so that can be changed than after the game is released and no one buys it. I am loving being involved, not just in "preordering" the game but actually having input into how its made

 

[Genocidicles]

Especially when you consider they're mostly not making games they couldn't make otherwise. Even DoubleFine, which tends to have quirky titles, is big enough that I have trouble buying them failing to find a publisher.

They'd likely be able to get their games published, but probably at the cost of compromising their original artistic vision to make the game more profitable, or maybe other things such as the publisher forcing them to add DRM, or to only sell the game on a DRM platform such as Steam or Origin.

 

[idarkphoenixi]

There's still a few kickstarter games yet to come out that I'm really excited to be able to play.

The problem now is it's become so mainstream. We're seeing kickstarters by people who don't even need it.
DoubleFine, I'm looking at you. You might technically be "indy" but there's no fucking way you can't come up with the scratch to make a few games, you're just too scared to take a risk.

 

[Saltyk]

I was hoping for kickstarter to attract more indie developers that needed a larger budget for new idea's for games. Well, there are plenty of those games too on kickstarter. But the most 'vocal' kind are the sequels, copies and larger companies wanting your money in advance to make a game, even though they already have enough money to work with. (It's like pre-ordering.)

Oh well, I never kickstarted because I'd rather wait for a game to actually come out before throwing my money at it.

You know this is a good point. I didn't even think about it. While I have preordered my fair share of games, you see a lot of people state how stupid an idea it is. But this is even worse. At least when you preorder a game, you have a chance to see what it is and what it will be. I've literally preordered a game the day before release after reading a review.

But with Kickstarter, you'd be lucky to get anything more than a vague idea. Maybe some early art work. Beyond that, you're effectively preordering the game. Good point.

Personally, I'm not going to give away money without good reason. And I certainly don't look around on Kickstarter just looking to give it away.

 

[Something Amyss]

They'd likely be able to get their games published, but probably at the cost of compromising their original artistic vision to make the game more profitable, or maybe other things such as the publisher forcing them to add DRM, or to only sell the game on a DRM platform such as Steam or Origin.

And I still have to call bullshit on this, because it looks incredibly unlikely. Also, funny as hell that you talk about DRM, and then list Steam as an alternative.

Consoles, Origin and Steam are all DRM. Deal with it.

But more to the point, not looking for crowdfunding hasn't hurt their distro model yet and there's no evidence it will. As far as "artistic vision" goes, lol.

 

[Abomination]

I'm still in the "wait and see" camp. I'm a backer of Wasteland II and Massive Chalice as well as some other stuff I've got via early access on Steam (which is essentially the same thing).

If Wasteland II manages to pull off an 85+ Metacritic (for argument's sake), be a game that I enjoy, and turn a massive profit I'd have said the Kickstarter fad was worth it. It has battened down a lot of the barriers to entry into the AAA market for some developers which increases both competition in the marketplace (always good for consumers) and the number of genres being catered to.

 

[Something Amyss]

But with Kickstarter, you'd be lucky to get anything more than a vague idea. Maybe some early art work. Beyond that, you're effectively preordering the game. Good point.

You also have no assurance the game will come out. With a pre-order, the game is slated for release and you will get a refund if it doesn't come out. Kickstarter? Long as they made the effort, they don't need to refund you. And this isn't about scamming. There are numerous reasons such a game might not come out.

 

[Genocidicles]

Also, funny as hell that you talk about DRM, and then list Steam as an alternative.

I called it a DRM platform. As in it offers services that regular DRM doesn't, but it's still DRM.

But more to the point, not looking for crowdfunding hasn't hurt their distro model yet and there's no evidence it will.

Perhaps, but what they could normally fund was nothing like what they'd accomplish with crowd-funding. Most of their newer games such as Stacking and Iron Brigade could be completed in about four hours. With all the money Broken Age got (and still needs) they're planning on making a game of similar length to older adventure titles.

As far as "artistic vision" goes, lol.

What else would you call it then, when publishers force devs to add in an unnecessary multiplayer mode, or to make the game so easy a four year old could play it, in the name of generating greater revenue?

 

[Anthony Corrigan]

But with Kickstarter, you'd be lucky to get anything more than a vague idea. Maybe some early art work. Beyond that, you're effectively preordering the game. Good point.

You also have no assurance the game will come out. With a pre-order, the game is slated for release and you will get a refund if it doesn't come out. Kickstarter? Long as they made the effort, they don't need to refund you. And this isn't about scamming. There are numerous reasons such a game might not come out.

err no that's not how it works, they are legally required to provide the gifts that they promised and in everyone I have seen that includes a copy of the game. If they don't provide that they have breeched the contract and you can take them to court if they refuse to provide a refund

 

[Something Amyss]

err no that's not how it works, they are legally required to provide the gifts that they promised and in everyone I have seen that includes a copy of the game. If they don't provide that they have breeched the contract and you can take them to court if they refuse to provide a refund

Kickstarter disagrees. That's why they have accountability warnings.

Incidentally, I'm not sure you understand breach of contract from a backer's perspective.

 

[Something Amyss]

Most of their newer games such as Stacking and Iron Brigade could be completed in about four hours.

You mean inexpensive XBLA titles are short? Wow. Never saw that coming.