Is It Time For Gaming To Give Up Its Love Affair With Kickstarter?

ScreenGurus explores if Kickstarter is worth the letdown for gamers, looking back at titles such as 'Godus', 'Mighty No. 9' and 'The Stomping Land' to explore what went wrong.

[Rookie_Monster]

After the Shenmue fiasco in which we won't be seeing it for a long, long time after it was announced at the Sony E3 conference last year, a heck YES.

Either have a real publisher put up the money to fully fund it or don't con the fans of their hard earned money with long development time.

[Christopher]

Grim Dawn and Pillars of Eternity say the opposite to me. Just spend your money wisely and not just on hopes and dreams.

Trying to shoe-horn in Shenmue because it will take years to develop really is poor logic on your part. Unless the game is already half developed, two plus years to deliver is normal. Time to develop when it is Kickstarted has zero bearing on the quality.

[ScreenGurus]

Plus the likes of Shovel Knight and such emerged on the platform. When it works, it works beautifully (and with Yooka-Laylee, I'm fully expecting another hit).

There's certainly an argument for the platform, but it's hard to not be put off by the horror stories.

[Gaming_Cousin]

Shovel Knight was addictively amazing. I just loved upgrade system and randomly generated maps

[KentBenMei]

Agreed.

[rainslacker]

It's the failures which seem to make the news, while the successes mostly go unnoticed, and a lot of people that end up buying a particular game are oblivious to the fact that it started on KickStarter. There are more horror stories in angel funding type plans than there are on KS, but angel funding can also deliver some exceptional results. Saturday Morning RPG for instance started at Joystick Labs, and went on to become a major hit. While several other projects at the same angel funding source failed to ever see the light of day. KS is really no different, except you actually hear about the failures, because they're publicized instead of just becoming a game that nobody has heard about. The failures see a slew of articles about how bad KS is, while the successes just see an article or two that the game released and is good, and no one pays attention to it.

But yes, Rookie really shouldn't be trying to ruin the chances of many quality games that could get released through proper KickStarters just to serve some console war agenda and take a jab at Sony. It really is sad that he's more interested in his attack on Sony than the betterment of gaming as a whole, and I for one would hate to see a positive source be taken away from developers who can use it properly.

I can usually tolerate his form of trolling, but I find this kind of comment absolutely distasteful, as he actively seeks to remove chances for game developers to fund their creations FOR US TO PLAY. All with no remorse about the consequences of what we'd lose out on should KS and similar venues disappear. He acts like every game developer can get a publisher by just making a phone call, but neglects the fact that one of the most respected game developers in history, up there with Miyamoto in terms of influential games, couldn't get a publisher to commit for almost 2 decades. Imagine how hard it is for the developers you've never heard of.

It's up to the contributor to research thoroughly and decide if a project is worth funding. There are usually plenty of signs a game won't make it or live up to the hype before the first dollar is ever donated, and Shenmue 3 didn't have those signs. It had the signs of some serious backing if it got the support it needed from KS, which essentially means it's going to release, and given the creator, will likely be what fans are hoping for. Would be a shame if fans lose out just so Rookie can have a go at Sony.

[ziggurcat]

what "Shenmue fiasco", Rookie? Shenmue 3 was *just* announced last year, and even then, the E3 presentation was more about announcing the kickstarter campaign to raise the funds to start the game's development - the game hadn't even started its development cycle at that point.

it takes an average of 3-5 years for a video game to be developed, so the fact that it's not coming out this year (and probably not even next year) is nothing out of the ordinary.

[ScreenGurus]

I think the upset over Shenmue is more down to the way that it was presented. It was a very unusual way to unveil a game.

[Aenea]

@Screen

That and the fact that Xbox fans like Rookie can't play it...

[rainslacker]

There's no fiasco. He just wants to use the idea that KS is somehow filled with more failures than successes(which isn't true) to take a jab at Sony.

It's completely embarrassing that he feels it's perfectly OK to take away something positive for so many game developers just to take a stab at Sony, despite there being no indication that Shenmue is off track.

There used to be a flag for trolling, and how his comment couldn't be considered trolling is beyond me. His rhetoric is actually harmful to the game industry and the gamers themselves, as it actively takes away funding sources from developers.

I'd love for him to just spend one day trying to find funding for a game, and then see just how oppressive it can be to be turned down hundreds of times, despite having people clamoring over wanting to play your game. The biggest reason given by a "real publisher"? "There's not enough ways built into the game play to monetize the game for profit". In other words, we can't throw in tons of micro transactions. That's what you get with real publishers. More candy crushes and homogenized games which are not doing anything new except finding clever ways to get you to purchase something extra. I've been there trying to find real publishers for my projects. It rarely happens where a developer can just fund a game...whether you're fairly new, someone established, or even one of the most respected developers in the industry(as witnessed with S3).

Good job Rookie. Hope you enjoy your little console war.

[Aenea]

And another anti-Sony comment from our very own massive PlaySta, ehhh, Xbox fan!

[KentBenMei]

Nope, there are some games we couldn't get without Kickstarter. Publishers don't like taking risks, so they come to us. Stop ruining this for everyone.

[Timesplitter14]

Holy crap people are so over-dramatizing this. Kickstarter is something that allows the money to fund a game to come from people instead of a publisher. That's it. The risks are the exact same. Take all the games that ever came out, take the portion of these games that weren't good, and that's representative of the portion of kickstarter games that won't be good.

Now we got one or two failures and people can't take it? Ridiculous. Failures happen all the time, and the fact that it's our money instead of a company's money doesn't change anything

[rezzah]

What about the Bloodstain fiasco?

[Cy]

Nope, Kickstarter is a great way for games that would never get picked up by a publisher to have a chance to be made. What people need to do is remember that A) a Kickstarter is *not* a pre-order, it's a bet, you're betting that the game you fund will get made, B) not everyone who makes a Kickstarter knows how much money their game is going to cost, sometimes they gravely underestimate because they're first time game devs, it doesn't necessarily mean they're trying to "scam" you when they take two years to realize they can't finish their game, C) the "estimated delivery date" under each reward tier is just that, an ESTIMATED delivery date, not a guarantee, and finally D) KICKSTARTER IS A RISK, there is *always* the risk that a game might never come out, there are *always* things that can happen that cause a game to get delayed or canceled, especially when most games are Kickstarted before development even really starts.

If you go into Kickstarter with your eyes open it can be totally worth the risk. I've backed games that were great. I've backed games that were okay. I've backed games that ran out of money and had to try a second Kickstarter (which I didn't back). I don't regret a single pledge I've made, because I helped bring games into the world that I want to play and that never would have been made otherwise. Hell, even with the Kickstarters that failed or the one that needed a second Kickstarter I don't regret, because maybe by being one of a few hundred people that backed it I've shown someone that there's interest in those kinds of games. Maybe some other, better dev team will see that and decide to try something similar that will have more success.

[s45gr32]

Very well said 😀

[rainslacker]

There are two things people should research when deciding on if they should back a KS.

1. Competency of the dev. This should be readily available for established devs. New devs should be able to prove they're capable, and have a game with a scope that is appropriate for someone new to the field.

2. If the KS goals are reasonable to the scope of the game. This can be a bit trickier, because most people who contribute have no idea how much it costs to make certain games at different levels of design. However, one can go look for similar games, see how much they were made for, and see if they were able to deliver the game with the amount set forth. Overall, financial information should be robust for where the money goes, so the contributor can decide if it seems reasonable. If the person seeking the funding just gives broad, general numbers, and seems to be guessing or estimating, then it's probably best to stay away. If they can give a detailed analysis of what it will cost, then it's probably a safer bet. Any real publisher or investor will require a very detailed analysis of where the money is going to determine if it's reasonable, and so should the KS contributor. If something is off in the numbers, someone will point it out for the others to see.

After that, there are things to consider beyond the research.

1. Does the campaign seem on the up and up? Usually, for hack job KS, or ones that are underestimating, there are plentiful signs that something isn't right. For the most part, outside of a dev with excellent PR skills, it will just come from the uncomfortable feeling that something doesn't seem right. But again, if something doesn't seem right, someone is going to point it out somewhere...so worth doing a google search.

2. Is the game's scope within the limits of what the dev can achieve? If you have say a mid-tier game being made by 4 people on a KS, then it's likely it's way too much for them to handle. While not completely true 100% of the time, one has to look at the amount of funding needed to determine if this will hold up. For instance, a 4 man team can achieve a lot if they're talented, and outsourcing is available to make up the difference. OTOH, if they aren't asking for much, and offering a mid-tier indie game, then it's probably going to fail.

3. Are the stretch goals reasonable? Personally, I don't care for most stretch goals. They seem over valued for what is delivered. Things like new skins for 10K more seem excessive. Some are better though, and if those stretch goals are within reason, then it's probably more legitimate.

There's probably more I could go into, but overall, those things should cover 99% of all KS projects, and if someone should consider contributing to them. Even with all that stuff, there are going to be anomalies which buck the trend, but as with most things, if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.

[Bismarn]

It's an abusive relationship. He's not worth the tears.

[Geekman]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe games like Grim Dawns, Shovel Knight, Undertale, and Pillars of Eternity were all funded on Kickstarter. And everyone seems to love those games. (Aside from those of you who will inevitably reply with "well I HATE one or all of those games" as if to suggest that you have better taste than everyone else.) I don't think one flop should compel people to stop using an entire program.

[Aenea]

We should be wary of any and all Kickstarter project, not just videogames. So many disasters it's not funny.

[KentBenMei]

God, the Internet ruins EVERYTHING. These articles are going to strangle Kickstarter games, fucking knock it OFF. Take your risks or don't, quit crying. Most games turn out fine and I've been satisfied. Some of the great games in their respective genres ave come from Kickstarter, like Shovel Knight.

*sigh*

[brewin]

Hell no! A couple of failures and we are having this convo? There's a risk factor for sure but the platform is showing its worth with the several great titles that have come out of it and there are several titles that look like winners coming in the next year or so. If Yooka Laylee and Bloodstained are both failures then we can start talking again.

[Summons75]

A couple? The amount of failures and scams waaaaay outweighs the amount of successes.

[lunatic0001]

I only backed two games so far...yooka laylee and shenmue...yooka laylee has been great with all the updates and how it has been handled...shenmue 3 from the start...I knew it would take a long time and I dont plan to see it or play it any time soon...people need to realize that this is me giving my money to these people knowing the consequences of what might happen...it's up to us to back projects that we feel will see the light of day knowing full well of the consequences...simple as that

[stalepie]

I feel they overdo it with the rewards system, which take efforts on their part that might be better spent on making the game, but I think mostly good comes out of Kickstarter projects. There's been so many of them. I'm surprised by the negativity just because of Mighty No 9.

[wonderfulmonkeyman]

I want to say yes, but then I look at games like Bloodstained: Ritual of the Night, Cryamore, and Yooka-Laylee, and I feel that neither yes nor no are the correct answer.

The best answer, I feel, is "it depends on the project and the team behind it".

Though, I have noticed a small trend; the devs with the most arrogance or the least openness with their backers, or very little clarity in their goals/how they go about their goals, are the ones you gotta be wary with.

Start with small donations, if they don't have avoid the problems above and you decide to donate anyways, but don't donate at all if there isn't a truly strong proof of concept right from the get-go.
There's obviously exceptions to everything, but in general I feel that's a safe guide-line to follow.

[MagicBeanz]

Its time for people to stop giving their money for BS projects that either never come out or never turn out to be whats promised. Its confounding to me that people are willing to just give money to anything on Kickstarter, might as well just wipe your stink cannon with your money and burn it in a fire. If a project cant get funding from a reputable source there's probably a reason.

[s45gr32]

No, despite all of its flaws kickstarter is needed now more than ever. Today's mainstream publishers will only publish profitable games, not niche or unique ideas.