Everyone Kickstart Yo!

[TrickWithAKnife]

You can only have either monetary gain or personal satisfaction... that's the way the world works... you cannot "fully" have both.

It depends. I'm making the game I want because there's a demand for it, but most people have too much common sense to try because of the insane amount of work involved.
The personal satisfaction comes from the process. Extra satisfaction if people buy it. Of course personal satisfaction comes first though, or my motivation wouldn't have stayed so high after all this time.

[Lishy]

Is this thread sarcasm? I've already invested $1000 into my VN preparing a demo before even beginning kickstarter.

I'm asking that seriously. Is it sarcasm?

[Obscura]

Geez, reading all these comments makes me feel like I've got some weird DNA that make me perversely predisposed to enjoying the entire Kickstarting process, beginning to end. I had fun throughout the Kickstarter, and I'm having fun now. It was a crapload of work, but it connected me to hundreds of very interesting people from all over the world who are potential players.

If you enjoy talking to people, you'll most likely love the process. I mean heck, one of my rewards is a closed forum--I interact with a number of my backers on a near-daily basis. I adore my backers; incidentally, this might be an unprofessional thing that makes me think I'm more suited to running Kickstarters than running, say, a traditional game development studio.

In terms of post-Kickstarter stress that's been discussed here, I guess it hasn't been an issue for me? My goal has always been to to deliver an unforgettable product. That 1800 people are waiting for a game is a very, very faint echo in the back of my head. What I'm motivated by is the conviction that I'm going to make something different, awesome and that my intended audience will love it. I wouldn't have Kickstarted if I didn't have this belief in the first place.

I'm already expecting a lot of myself--it's not enough for me that people will like the final product or feel the game has acceptably fulfilled all the conditions promised under my Kickstarter. No, I want them to LOVE it. As in, remember my silly little dating sim for the rest of their goddamn lives. Any post-Kickstarter stress is infinitely much lower than this goal I've already placed on myself.

As for accountability, specifically in terms of VNs...all I can say is, VNs aren't that complicated to make, though they are a heck of a lot of work. I'm rather stunned that there were VNs that got funded but never finished. I've mostly only seen VNs that didn't achieve funding.

Personally, the only thing that would keep me from finishing my VN is death or disability, and it's the one reason I'm doing the main character art and all the writing myself; since my greatest fear is losing an artist (which seems like it's the one thing that's brought most VN projects to a standstill.) It's the one variable I can't control.

Re: investing, here are Mark Cuban's comments on how KS changes the relationship between investor and entrepreneur in comparison to traditional investment models.

Will you buy a game featuring me UNCLE MUGEN as the protagonist of a harem VN with no bad endings?

Ahahaha, you should consider it a great personal achievement that you're going to end up in a Kickstarter VN anyway, from the looks of it.

Kickstarter sounds like a good idea now, but I got the feeling it's going to collapse within a few years, at least for games. If I give $50, get promised a free game, and then the devs quit, does this mean I can sue the game creators for breach of contract? Does this mean that potentially all 500 people who paid $50 and get promised a free game can sue? Imagine if 50 000 people donated to your game. Does this mean potentially 50 000 lawsuits against the devs?

I believe somewhere in the terms you're supposed to return the money to backers, if you don't have a product.

@Lishy
Yes, the original post was sarcasm.
Which should be a reminder to all of us that a lot of cultures do not use sarcasm and it confuses a lot of people who aren't used to it.

[SundownKid]

If you do a Kickstarter and don't deliver, people can sue you to get their money back, but not Kickstarter themselves. That said, it's a legitimate means of fundraising but only as good as your marketing skills.

[Greeny]

It's rather unfortunate though, that it's limited to US and UK citizens.
I wonder if someone would be willing to run the kickstarter on my behalf; or perhaps for some kind of compensation.

[PyTom]

Other than being in a central place, I don't see much difference in Kickstarter and funding games via preorders, something that has happened for a while now. I think people realize that there's a little bit of risk in pre-ordering, and they factor that in. I go into KS with the idea that it's something like an investment - one that will either return a game, or will return nothing.

I also think that there are ways to be careful about kickstarting. For example, I look for a demo to exist before I'd consider funding - I'm considering making it a rule that a demo must exist for people to link to a Kickstarter from these forums. I also look for a plan that looks realistic to me - one thing people do is to offer too much effort for too little money. But so far, I've had luck with Kickstarters - out of 14 kickstarters I've gone in on, 8 have delivered, and all the others are still progressing.

I do think that there's a bit of a kickstarter bubble going on, and that some people will be hurt when projects they pre-ordered fail. But at the same time, I think people have done a fairly good job of picking out the projects that are overly ambitious, and not funding them.

It's rather unfortunate though, that it's limited to US and UK citizens.

Aren't US/UK corporations okay? I think you'd want a corporation if you're doing a KS.


Random question: In KS, do you promise to deliver the completed project, or just the rewards? It strikes me that you could be 100% sure that the rewards will be delivered, even if there's risk to the project as a whole. (For example, promising a postcard set you can make using art you've already created.)

[Samu-kun]

Well, I'm sure Kickstarter has some anti-indemnity clause in their boiler plate contract. But it's still a big risk, since the chances of people being able to pay back all donated funds if a project goes under is pretty low. You're going to expend funds as you make the project, so you're not going to have all the money necessary. So yeah, Kickstarter does seem like an needless risk to me. I mean, if your project goes under, you're going to have breach of contract claims, at least. But chances are, people will also likely attach fraud and embezzlement claims too, which I don't want attached to my name. I've seen too many projects go under to take that risk.

On the other hand, the problem with Lemma's first comment is that it was motivated by competition. The devs here have become competitive. Devs get mad just to see another dev make off with a lot of money. Which is probably petty.

I am with Mugen Oji-san on this one... but his games still suck!

[Endorphin]

I'm considering making it a rule that a demo must exist for people to link to a Kickstarter from these forums.

Hmmm... How about a trailer, maybe with some game scenes?
When making games, I'm not particularly fond of making demos as in some cases it just seems "senseless" (if the game isn't that long, it branches way to differently [which would mean that people could only try out this one path and get a "nah, don't choose that"-message in other cases], etc.).
Also, sometimes it's more work to make a demo than just finishing it (e.g, I don't work chronically--I code the system while drawing, and until I finish this I have a lot of random scenes down, plus the general plot. It's easier for me to just work on it "randomly" from then on [normally one, two paths at a time, working rather on scenes than on the actual order of things] and connecting it afterwards. This also helps me to make the flow better than starting at the beginning without really knowing what to do next.)
For example, >this sneak peak from BCM< is enough to form an opinion about the quality and personal enjoyment without providing a demo.

- En.

[Obscura]

Random question: In KS, do you promise to deliver the completed project, or just the rewards? It strikes me that you could be 100% sure that the rewards will be delivered, even if there's risk to the project as a whole. (For example, promising a postcard set you can make using art you've already created.)

IANAL but I believe you're legally obligated to provide everything you've listed as a reward. Sometimes that includes the product itself, sometimes not.

Some stuff off the Kickstarter page to answer some of the questions above:

Is Kickstarter going to be available in other countries at some point?
We’re working hard to open up to more countries! If you’ve been waiting, we really appreciate your patience.


From the page on accountability: http://www.kickstarter.com/help/faq/kic ... asics#Acco

How do backers know if a project will follow through?
Launching a Kickstarter is a very public act, and creators put their reputations at risk when they do.

Backers should look for creators who share a clear plan for how their project will be completed and who have a history of doing so. Creators are encouraged to share links and as much background information as possible so backers can make informed decisions about the projects they support.

If a creator has no demonstrable experience in doing something like their project or doesn't share key information, backers should take that into consideration. Does the creator include links to any websites that show work related to the project, or past projects? Does the creator appear in the video? Have they connected via Facebook?

Don't hesitate to request information from a creator. You can always reach out before pledging via the "Contact me" button on the project page.

Is a creator legally obligated to fulfill the promises of their project?
Yes. Kickstarter's Terms of Use require creators to fulfill all rewards of their project or refund any backer whose reward they do not or cannot fulfill. (This is what creators see before they launch.) We crafted these terms to create a legal requirement for creators to follow through on their projects, and to give backers a recourse if they don't. We hope that backers will consider using this provision only in cases where they feel that a creator has not made a good faith effort to complete the project and fulfill.

[Blue Lemma]

If you do a Kickstarter and don't deliver, people can sue you to get their money back, but not Kickstarter themselves.

That's true, but if you pledge $1 or even $50 to a project that doesn't deliver, are you REALLY going to go through the trouble and expense to file a lawsuit? Probably not.

Also, "delivering" something and delivering it well for the money are two completely different things. I could technically make a date-sim with 10 different characters and 20 endings in a single day, but I don't think it would be very good.

On the other hand, the problem with Lemma's first comment is that it was motivated by competition. The devs here have become competitive. Devs get mad just to see another dev make off with a lot of money. Which is probably petty.

I like you, Samu-kun, but please don't assert what my motivation was unless you're a psychic. Especially if you're going to accuse me of something cynical and completely negative.

Game-making is not my full-time job, not even close. In fact, I've had to scale way back the last several months due to personal circumstances. Right now I'm working on free games, just like I did when I started this site. So please don't give me the "Lemma is boo-hooing that someone's making more money."

I see a lot of people putting in tons of time to make games. Papillon, jack_norton, and sake-bento, just to name a few (there are many others!) and I really do wish them continued success. It's living the dream, you know? It's not the most lucrative dream ever, but as a dev myself, I know you do it because you have a passion for it. And to cover your expenses and make money on it, even part time, is no small feat.

My actual motivations for the post were:
1) point out ways the Kickstarter model is backwards from a consumer standpoint
2) given #1, encourage people to think more carefully about what projects they want to fund
3) encourage devs to consider Kickstarting their projects (seriously - it's backwards in many ways from a consumer standpoint, but a GREAT deal from a developer standpoint)
4) get the whole thing off my chest (obviously) because it is madness

Did anyone follow that link in the original post? That project is the leader's FIRST GAME PROJECT (he said so in the original post, it's been updated since so I don't see it anymore.) It is, IMO, riddled with cliches and doesn't offer anything that isn't already out there. And people give him over $40,000 and loads of encouragement. It's insanity.

But hey, he had a nice feel-good fluffy pitch with cool art, right?

Don't get me wrong: more power to him. If you can get $40,000 for your first game project because you're great at taking advantage of the power of marketing hype, why wouldn't you?

My issue is really more with the people who fund such a project and throw tons of money at it when there are alternatives already available from other indie developers. Developers who have risked their own money and not asked you to take all the risk yourself.

This is also a horrible way to allocate money for game development. If someone is going to get $40,000 to work on a game, doesn't it make sense to give it to someone who has some experience with it? I really don't care who. If you want to bring a cool game into the world and had $40,000 to help do that, would you give it to someone who's made games before and has experience with it? Or would you give it to someone who's never done one? The choice should be obvious. In this way, Kickstarter rewards hubris: those bold enough to ask for a bunch of money, yet may not really know what they're getting into (or even DOING), are the ones who get a bunch of money.

The only way to restore sanity to all this and have an allocation of funds conducive to having the most innovative and best-team projects get funded is for everyone to get on there and let the market (the Kickstarter community) decide. People want to be personally invested in a project with their money, so give them more options!

If the project isn't innovative, or it's not led by reputable people, it makes no sense to give money to it in my book. On the other hand, if it's one or the other or both, I think Kickstarter can be great. I'd fund something that caught my eye if it met at least one of those criteria.

Yes, the original post was sarcasm.
Which should be a reminder to all of us that a lot of cultures do not use sarcasm and it confuses a lot of people who aren't used to it.

The beauty of the post is that despite the sarcasm, the literal message is still true: I really do think more people should get on Kickstarter.

----
Edit: Some examples of projects I think are great Kickstarter projects:
Category 1: innovative/haven't seen companies do it:
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/and ... nes-and-ta
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/obs ... video-game

Category 2: led by people with experience who are going indie:
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/lei ... come-again
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/inx ... f-numenera

[Samu-kun]

Well, as an aside, I think a potential Kickstarter lawsuit for a failed big project would be very attractive. I don't mean a small visual novel. Maybe if a large project with about $500 000 in backing with about 100 000 backers went under, a lawsuit would be a practicable way for people to get their money back. One lawyer would handle 100 000 clients with the same claim. If each client gives the lawyer $1, I think everyone will be able to recoup the majority of their contribution, and the lawyer would still walk away rather rich. (Of course, the dev would be screwed under.)

Why do Kickstarters make you mad though? It's not like it harms you as a dev. It's a risky venture, and something I wouldn't do. And some contributors are foolish, yes. But it doesn't really harm you as a dev.

[TrickWithAKnife]

If you use Kickstarter to fund development of your VN and then disappear with the money, you are digging your own grave. VNs are a very niche product, which means there are small pockets of communities who are the main player base. We will remember you, and you will have a very difficult time receiving any support or sales in the future.

If you are going to apply for sponsorship, you should be damn sure you can deliver if successful.

[Omnificent]

If I ever *did* try to make that fullscale yuri eroge I would almost certainly have to kickstart it... however, the skillset for running a successful kickstarter is not quite the same as that for actually selling games I've made, so it might simply result in disappointment and disaster. Meh.

I think you should do it, you have enough of an existing portfolio and customer base that it should be pretty easy. Plus there are basically no OELVN yuri eroge, let alone good yuri eroge period, so you'd be filling a nice niche.

If I did a Kickstarter it would be for something beyond my power otherwise. Like high-quality voice acting for FA:NG. To me people who have Kickstarters for VNs that don't even have a demo or something smack of laziness.

[Blue Lemma]

@Samu and Trick: Yes, it's really less likely that the project will completely fail to materialize (although that has happened in the past.) It's more likely that it's just not going to be all that great given the resources, and it will be a grossly inefficient use of money.

Why do Kickstarters make you mad though? It's not like it harms you as a dev. It's a risky venture, and something I wouldn't do. And some contributors are foolish, yes. But it doesn't really harm you as a dev.

Kickstarters as a whole don't make me mad. I've added some examples of Kickstarters to my previous post that I think make a lot of sense.

What irritates me is that you have these two different experiences.

Experience 1:
Bob puts his own money into developing a game. Bob works hard on it. He spends thousands of dollars and countless hours, and eventually TA-DA! It's done!
The game is released to the public. It sells some copies, has many copies pirated (because, you know, games are just way too expensive), and is the subject of both positive and negative criticism. Bob has no guarantee of recovering his costs, and there is a fair chance he will not.

Experience 2:
Alice gets her marketing mojo going and puts her game project on Kickstarter. She gets thousands of dollars of other people's money despite her project not being very unique and not having ever made a game before. She receives pretty much all positive encouragement. She uses these thousands of dollars of other people's money (because, you know, games are just way too expensive, but ideas for games deserve mega-cash!), puts in the countless hours Bob did, and eventually TA-DA! It's (hopefully!) done!
The game is released to the public. Whether it's good, bad, or mediocre, she's already covered her costs.

As someone who's had experience 1, the fact that experience 2 even exists is pretty discouraging. Put yourself in Bob's shoes. Think about the personal cost and time devoted, only to be brushed aside for cliched games that do not even exist, by people who have never made one. It makes you feel like the biggest sucker ever and that you are living in bizarro-world.

I KNOW I am not the only one to think this, but I'm one of the few people who will say it.

[Obscura]

If someone is going to get $40,000 to work on a game, doesn't it make sense to give it to someone who has some experience with it? I really don't care who. If you want to bring a cool game into the world and had $40,000 to help do that, would you give it to someone who's made games before and has experience with it?

I'm pretty sure this doesn't apply to me, because the chances of one of our commercial devs here making an adult game about gay men is less than zero, but I'd like to extrapolate my case and say that practically nearly all game developers on Kickstarter feel they're making a game they couldn't find commercially. Sometimes others will agree with them and back them, sometimes they won't.

It's such a highly subjective thing about whether or not you feel a product is generic.

Particularly in the case of VNs, where the creator's personality is stamped on it in in the same way works of fiction feel very personal.

Also, I believe you're assuming that existing devs throughout the gaming industry are also making games that satisfy public tastes and demand. Maybe they're making great games, but you've played them all. Or they're making mediocre ones, and you're looking for something else.