Poll: Will Kickstarter do great things for gaming?

[Verzin]

I'm curious to know what the escapist thinks of Kickstarter. With the ridiculous success of Wasteland 2, which is really only one of the major successes there, I'm starting to think that kickstarter will be a magical place where amazing games can get funded without putting themselves under the thumb of villainous corporate dogs who manipulate their project and leech the creativity.

EDIT: fixed up the spelling on Wasteland 2. I had wastland 2. The shame...the shaaaame!
EDIT: edited the title of the thread for clarity. I think I was planning to write an entirely different post when I began.
captcha: 'Win Free Rent'. I want free rent .

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

Well if God is perfect, and God created the world, then the world is perfect, and we live in the best of all possible worlds. Therefore, if Kickstarter is the future of gaming, it is the best of all possible futures for gaming.

Oh wait, were we not talking 17th century philosophy? The title confused me.

OT: I think Kickstarter has the potential to be a great thing, since it means that certain genres like turn based RPGS and space combat flight sims, which have been all but completely dropped by the industry in recent years, have a possibility of being made again. It remains to be seen if it'll really play out, but I'm optimistic.

 

[9thRequiem]

It'll be part of it, certainly. For indie titles with a niche market, totally.
But for big widespread games? No way.

On top of that, the big rush of kickstarted games are still in development. If even one of them fails to live up to expectations, it'll cause a huge breakaway from that kind of funding, as people will be much less likely to take the risk to drop money on a game that's only at the planning stage.

 

[Qitz]

Same thing I said in This thread [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.371240-Poll-Is-Kickstarter-The-Future-Of-The-Game-Industry-As-We-Know-It]

Yes.

Sure, not every game will be getting the Double Fine $3mill+ treatment but it offers a lot more than just funding new projects. It also offers companies who had a game already in development but either lost funding or failed to get any publishers to still get that game out there.

Nekro [http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/343838885/nekro] for example. It's a game that's has a majority of its content completed and just needs some extra funding for marketing and publishing.

It's a great way to take some of the power away from publishers who have had too much say in what a development company does or doesn't do. That and getting the idea out there that no, that genre isn't dead and yes it is still fairly profitable.

 

[Verzin]

Well if God is perfect, and God created the world, then the world is perfect, and we live in the best of all possible worlds. Therefore, if Kickstarter is the future of gaming, it is the best of all possible futures for gaming.

Oh wait, were we not talking 17th century philosophy? The title confused me.

OT: I think Kickstarter has the potential to be a great thing, since it means that certain genres like turn based RPGS and space combat flight sims, which have been all but completely dropped by the industry in recent years, have a possibility of being made again. It remains to be seen if it'll really play out, but I'm optimistic.

yeah. sorry about the confusion with the title and all. When I write threads I usually start in one place and end somewhere else, lol.

I agree with you. Kickstarter has soo much potential right now. I hope that it gets some truly astounding titles out into the world.
I'll certainly donate when I can.

 

[WoW Killer]

Kickstarters are consumers supplying capital for worker owned businesses. And they said Marxism was impossible. This is a good thing.

 

[Kahunaburger]

I think we'll be able to answer that one in a couple of years. So far, I'm cautiously optimistic, particularly about Wasteland 2.

 

[Verzin]

I think we'll be able to answer that one in a couple of years. So far, I'm cautiously optimistic, particularly about Wasteland 2.

Wise attitude. I need to learn how to simply sit back and watch things unfold instead of getting caught up in the moment. I get caught practically every single time something interesting is on the horizon.

On another note...every time I see your avatar I want to buy a cheeseburger and watch pulp-fiction for the 3-hundredth time. It's not fair.

 

[Limecake]

the whole kickstarter 'kick' (sorry I couldn't help myself) doesn't make a lot of sense to me. I understand if you really truly care about an IP and would do anything to play a new version of that game.

But why are we paying for games to be made? I understand it's a great tool for indie developers or developers who don't have the kind of capital to make games themselves But it just seems so silly to me.

We live in a world where Day-1 DLC justifies a boycott, Being forced to buy our games new is an outrage, Micro-transactions/online-passes are looked down on and monthly subscriptions are going the way of the dreamcast.

Yet we're still willing to pay out of our own pocket just for them to make a game so they can charge us again? so as long as the company is upfront with just wanting your money gamers have no problem with it?

I don't have anything against anyone who donates but it just seems that our gamer ideals don't always match up.

 

[Verzin]

the whole kickstarter 'kick' (sorry I couldn't help myself) doesn't make a lot of sense to me. I understand if you really truly care about an IP and would do anything to play a new version of that game.

But why are we paying for games to be made? I understand it's a great tool for indie developers or developers who don't have the kind of capital to make games themselves But it just seems so silly to me.

We live in a world where Day-1 DLC justifies a boycott, Being forced to buy our games new is an outrage, Micro-transactions/online-passes are looked down on and monthly subscriptions are going the way of the dreamcast.

Yet we're still willing to pay out of our own pocket just for them to make a game so they can charge us again? so as long as the company is upfront with just wanting your money gamers have no problem with it?

I don't have anything against anyone who donates but it just seems that our gamer ideals don't always match up.

The idea is that large publishers enforce ideas they think are popular on the developers they are funding. This prevents the industry from ever moving forward.

Kickstarter lets gamers who are passionate about certain IPs or forgotten genres restart them.
The titles that large groups put out are O.K, but they lack the love that was put into games like planescape torment, Monkey Island, or wasteland.

Personally, I feel that games just aren't what they once were because of the way AAA titles are handled now. Indie games are the answer to this, but most Indie games lack the funding to really shine. Kickstarter is the solution.

If you don't really want more than COD remakes into infinity, or very bland RPGs such as kingdoms of amulur, then kickstarter won't do much for you. But personally, I want more isometric text based RPGS. I want story over graphics, I want more immersing experiences like baldur's gate.

Large studios just aren't doing that kind of thing anymore.

EDIT: fyi: donate 15ish dollars and most of the kickstarter projects give you the game for free.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

the whole kickstarter 'kick' (sorry I couldn't help myself) doesn't make a lot of sense to me. I understand if you really truly care about an IP and would do anything to play a new version of that game.

But why are we paying for games to be made? I understand it's a great tool for indie developers or developers who don't have the kind of capital to make games themselves But it just seems so silly to me.

We live in a world where Day-1 DLC justifies a boycott, Being forced to buy our games new is an outrage, Micro-transactions/online-passes are looked down on and monthly subscriptions are going the way of the dreamcast.

Yet we're still willing to pay out of our own pocket just for them to make a game so they can charge us again? so as long as the company is upfront with just wanting your money gamers have no problem with it?

I don't have anything against anyone who donates but it just seems that our gamer ideals don't always match up.

15 dollars for the game for free when it comes out, and DRM free (or steam) most of the time?

that doesn't sound too bad to me, especially for a few of the higher budget ones.

15 dollars is much easier to say "ah, oh well" than 60-70 when paying for publisher games, especially when the developer then has full control and can really give it their best, unlike when they have to jump through 1000 hoops for publishers.

 

[Limecake]

Kickstarter lets gamers who are passionate about certain IPs or forgotten genres restart them.
The titles that large groups put out are O.K, but they lack the love that was put into games like planescape torment, Monkey Island, or wasteland.

Large studios just aren't doing that kind of thing anymore.

fair enough, but that doesn't mean that every AAA title is a rehashing of COD. And passion for an IP is a great reason to donate (Heck I would have chipped in for Psychonauts 2 if I had wanted to) and I can completely understand that the fans of these IP's are the demographic and will probably be willing to dish out $15 or more to see the game get made.

15 dollars for the game for free when it comes out, and DRM free (or steam) most of the time?

that doesn't sound too bad to me, especially for a few of the higher budget ones.

15 dollars is much easier to say "ah, oh well" than 60-70 when paying for publisher games, especially when the developer then has full control and can really give it their best, unlike when they have to jump through 1000 hoops for publishers.

But this model is far from practical, let's take Wasteland 2 as an example. I've never played the original and in fact before kickstarter I had never even heard of it. The fans would be all over it though! Donating $15 for a copy and to help development costs is cheap, really cheap.

But the fans who are donating to get the game made are the same people that would have bought the game if it was developed anyway. This means that when the game comes out and all the 'free' copies are given out there really isn't a large audience to buy the game unless it turns out to be really good.

This is why most Publishers tend to shy away from the 'riskier' IP's because a CoD clone and DLC will sell enough to at least make your money back insuring you can continue to make games.

No game that was funded through kickstarter has even been made yet, it might be a little early to call it the next big thing in gaming.

 

[tendaji]

My problem with the kickstarter idea is that only the games that have a name behind them, whether they are a big name sequel such as Wasteland 2, or have big name developers behind them, will they get any serious contributions for making games. So in my opinion it can condemn those new develops just coming onto the scene with great new ideas, because they aren't known and people don't want to invest in something they don't know about.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

15 dollars for the game for free when it comes out, and DRM free (or steam) most of the time?

that doesn't sound too bad to me, especially for a few of the higher budget ones.

15 dollars is much easier to say "ah, oh well" than 60-70 when paying for publisher games, especially when the developer then has full control and can really give it their best, unlike when they have to jump through 1000 hoops for publishers.

But this model is far from practical, let's take Wasteland 2 as an example. I've never played the original and in fact before kickstarter I had never even heard of it. The fans would be all over it though! Donating $15 for a copy and to help development costs is cheap, really cheap.

But the fans who are donating to get the game made are the same people that would have bought the game if it was developed anyway. This means that when the game comes out and all the 'free' copies are given out there really isn't a large audience to buy the game unless it turns out to be really good.

This is why most Publishers tend to shy away from the 'riskier' IP's because a CoD clone and DLC will sell enough to at least make your money back insuring you can continue to make games.

No game that was funded through kickstarter has even been made yet, it might be a little early to call it the next big thing in gaming.

by all means i'm not saying it's the next big thing, just a viable options for developers who have had it with publishers as much as alot of consumers have, and small indies. I've never played the original either, but after checking in to see who's making the game, what it was about, and what the aim to do, i don't think i could've NOT supported them in some way, compared to half the bland crap sitting on the shelves at stores right now. alot of the money is going to software/hardware/licensing and whatnot, agreed, but it also is paying for the workers themselves, for the work they are going to be doing, so by the time they are done they've already broke even in alot of spots, as publishers usually take up all the profits and pay the developers a flat fee. so any games they sell on top of that (which, to be frank, if you make a game on pc, and it's half way decent, with little to no DRM, it's gonna sell, especially on sites such as GOG and steam.) is pure profit for the team and is gonna help fund future projects and make it so they actually WANT to make games, and not just cookie cutter COD #10 with 20 dollar DLC map pack #4.

 

[veloper]

I have high hopes for Wasteland, Banner Saga and Shadowrun and I've got stakes in those projects.

Kickstarter funding is the best thing that happened to gaming in years. The games may still fail ofcourse, but we'll never get a better chance than this.

 

[Schadrach]

the whole kickstarter 'kick' (sorry I couldn't help myself) doesn't make a lot of sense to me. I understand if you really truly care about an IP and would do anything to play a new version of that game.

But why are we paying for games to be made? I understand it's a great tool for indie developers or developers who don't have the kind of capital to make games themselves But it just seems so silly to me.

We live in a world where Day-1 DLC justifies a boycott, Being forced to buy our games new is an outrage, Micro-transactions/online-passes are looked down on and monthly subscriptions are going the way of the dreamcast.

Day 1 DLC, online passes, and trying to screw people out of the right of first sale are all shit moves done by publishers to ensure maximum profitability. Microtransactions are actually all right when their done right (Turbine is basically the god of microtransaction models that don't make you feel like you're being cheated while dumping money on them). I actually think it's interesting that a lot of free to play games are pulling in *more* money after moving from a subscription model, even ones where the model they use isn't based on screwing you into being "forced" to pay to play.

Yet we're still willing to pay out of our own pocket just for them to make a game so they can charge us again? so as long as the company is upfront with just wanting your money gamers have no problem with it?

Nearly all of the Kickstarter game projects have "a copy of the game when completed" in some form (usually a DRM-free download, a Steam key, a Desura key, or an iTunes promo code) as one of the cheapest two donation levels, and generally priced in the range of cheap indie game to expensive for an indie game indie game. For most of them, it's effectively a preorder to ensure the game gets built -- I fully expect there to be a rise of a handful of "major" kickstarter indie teams who will use kickstarter to keep themselves fed, clothed, and housed while they make games no publisher would ever consider.

Actually back on the Day 1 DLC thing for a sec: The "best" case for Day 1 DLC is that it gives the dev team something to do during certification and physical publishing of the game, and accordingly it should be paid for. The "worst" case is locking content that should be a fundamental part of the game out and demanding additional payment for a game you've already paid for. The "kickstarter" case is what they call "stretch goals", where if they get enough more funding than originally requested, they go ahead and build that stuff in, typically for "free", because they've already *been* paid to develop it.

I don't have anything against anyone who donates but it just seems that our gamer ideals don't always match up.

Hmm, "most publishers at best don't hurt game development" and "shit publishers do primarily to squeeze extra money out of gamers is shitty" vs "pay developers directly, get unique or niche games that almost no developer would consider touching because it's not a guaranteed moneymaker, while the people who actually MADE the game still get to own the rights to it"? No, I can't see how those might be generally consistent or anything...

 

[Schadrach]

My problem with the kickstarter idea is that only the games that have a name behind them, whether they are a big name sequel such as Wasteland 2, or have big name developers behind them, will they get any serious contributions for making games. So in my opinion it can condemn those new develops just coming onto the scene with great new ideas, because they aren't known and people don't want to invest in something they don't know about.

The interesting thing is that a *lot* of the projects are indie games, and comparatively small budgets. To fire off a few examples of projects that are either already funded or will be as soon as the clock runs out:

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1465600975/echoes-of-eternia-a-modern-take-on-a-classic-desig
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/winterkewlgames/yogventures
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/sandswept/the-dead-linger
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/stoic/the-banner-saga
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1756321461/anonymous-agony
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/460275866/valdis-story-abyssal-city
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/zombieapocalypse/arg-zombies-a-mobile-alternate-reality-zombie-game
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/chaos680/core-of-innocence-an-epic-platform-adventure-game
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1075607244/college-ruled-universe
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/64409699/ftl-faster-than-light
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/534715294/bacillus
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/mightyjosh/saturday-morning-rpg
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/primerist/code-hero-a-game-that-teaches-you-to-make-games-he
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/564944684/pixel-sand

Most of those are not strongly tied to big industry names (and Yogventures isn't tied to a well known dev team, but rather a well known minecraft community) -- I intentionally left several big ones with big names off. Anonymous Agony is centered around a topic no publisher would touch with a ten foot pole, for example.

Code Hero and Pixel Sand have betas available for backers. Saturday Morning RPG is actually out for iOS, with Android and PC ports coming. FTL is...unique. The Dead Linger is essentially L4D in an infinite procedurally generated modern world.

Unique ideas, niche gameplay, controversial story hooks, stuff publishers won't touch because it's unlikely to have the same ROI as another CoD or Madden.

 

[Bad Jim]

Kickstarter means not having to put up with DRM, on disc DLC, EA style server shutdowns and other bullshit. Minecraft was funded by its' users and has none of that. It's the first stuff to go when developers want gamers to fund their development.

You could even have a game released straight into the public domain, source code and all. The developers would be paid. The investors would get an extremely moddable, DRM free, bullshit free game. Other developers could re-use the assets in their own projects instead of wastefully reinventing the wheel every time. It would be win-win, really.

 

[Trololo Punk]

It will surely inspire innovative/unique IP's in the industry. Whether it will be all and all successful, as someone else said. We will have to wait and see. Either way, it seems to be doing good things for gaming as a whole.

 

[malestrithe]

It will have an impact in helping indie titles, fledging companies, and the completion of dream projects. Right now, the biggest titles have a name attached to them.

Remember Tim Schaffer? Well the creator of games you, your older sibling, your dad, or your uncle played is looking for money to fund a dream project of sorts.

Remember Wasteland? Well back in the Dos era, it was a big deal. Touted, by the cleverly worded advertising, as the first Post apocalyptic game, it is something you need to know about. The creator of that setting, and the rest of the time are donating their time and energy to get their dream project back on the ground.

You know that 2007 Shadowrun FPS? Well forget that ever existed because the creator of the original D&D infused Cyberpunk setting wants to reintroduce the game back to the gaming community.

Those of you that were old enough to play: Remember when Leisure Suit Larry was good? Well, we want to do a graphical update of the very first one.

These dream projects are not looking to make a profit. They are more about making that one final game the way they want it done. Wasteland 2's developer settled on kickstarter because they wanted to make the game the way they wanted and not some crappy Fallout 3 knockoff. Tim Schaffer lost most of his clout when Brutal Legend bombed and had to make his adventure game that way.

Beyond these little dream projects, most kickstarter campaigns are about getting a workable demo completed to shop it around to major gaming studios. Sorry, but that is how it works.

Until we see a couple of crowd funded games make substantial profits, something like a 25,000 dollar game making 3 million, it is not going to be a viable avenue for these things.