Everyone Kickstart Yo!

[DaFool]

Experience 3:
Jason puts his own money into developing a game. Jason 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 for free. The game is subject to criticism, though most of the criticism ends up being personal attacks on the creator. Jason has never intended on recovering his costs, and the personal satisfaction being received is minimal at best.

Experience 4:
Maria after working long hours at her full-time job, goes home and makes art for her game. She ends up sleeping only 2 hours every night. Her art is good enough for people to commission/pay money for, but for personal reasons she prefers to work for free with a few teammates because she believes in the project. And she wants everything in the game to be all original resources. The game gets released for free, and despite the high original production values, the game doesn't create the intended impact and slowly falls into obscurity. After a while it fades along with other games which were using off-the-shelf stock assets.

Experiences 3 and 4 are more likely than you think.

Anyways, KS doesn't apply to me since I don't live in the US anymore and I'm an anti-social person who would rather minimize interaction. KS has done a lot of great things, I'll give you that. The time will eventually come when the only things that get funded are from the established entities.

[Blue Lemma]

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

Exactly, which is why I think your project is a good example of category 1 (innovative/companies not doing it)

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

Very true... but taking a look around Kickstarter (not just the top funded projects), I'm pretty comfortable guessing most people would find most of them not very unique.

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.

Also true People can spend money on whatever they want (well, for the most part ) That's the great thing about money

However, there are so many games and projects and... EVERYTHING (lol) out there these days on the internet, that if you look hard enough, you'll probably find more than you thought there was. Kickstarter brings all the potential and hype to one place.

@DaFool: Yes, I thought of those experiences, too... but they were way too depressing to bring up In fact, that's probably going to happen with some of the stuff I'm working on now. And it's very discouraging.
It's simple: Finished product? People will find flaws to criticize. Just an idea with fluffy marketing? No flaws, just happy dreams and encouragement.

[Obscura]

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.

Oh come on Blue, how about the person with experience 1 consider they can pursue experience 2, especially now that they've got the some skills under their belt? You know what you've just learned from the person 2? How to market successfully. They guinea pigged for you, go take what you learned and apply it.

You speak like 2 is closed to 1 forever. It's not a zero-sum game. Frankly, the more people there are making successful VNs, the more eyeballs the entire VN community gets. The most helpful thing for all VN devs is to make sure their games are as great as possible. You hit one new player with a good VN, they'll look for more. Not just your stuff, other devs too. You make one awful one, you'll send a potential new player running.

edit:

Kickstarter brings all the potential and hype to one place.

Yes, it's certainly one of the most powerful marketing tools I've ever seen. Whether you love it or hate it, it's incredibly well thought out and put together. If you've been on the other side, there are so many weird, interesting little things about it you can't know until you've run one. Even if my project had failed, I'd say the experience was worth doing in and of itself, just for my education.

And as I was saying elsewhere, you've basically got two very niche games that got considerable funding on KS, mine and Tao's. People with more games under their belt and/or appealing to a broader audience should do phenomenally.

[Blue Lemma]

Oh come on Blue, how about the person with experience 1 consider they can pursue experience 2, especially now that they've got the some skills under their belt? You know what you've just learned from the person 2? How to market successfully. They guinea pigged for you, go take what you learned and apply it.

If you've been through experience 1, you know it is incredibly draining. It can drain your energy, your spirit, and your wallet. It's not so easy to go straight into another project.

But yes, we all have different options Again, I really do want to encourage more people to try Kickstarting. No sarcasm at all. A point of my initial post is that if you have confidence in your abilities, you don't have much to lose and a bunch to gain.

[Ionait]

I'm sorry but... The video for the project you linked to... Why can't he stop saying "RPG games?" Wai?! And how -- nevermind.

Kickstarter is really interesting to me, to be back on topic a bit. I have seen posts on gaming forums bashing established creators for using Kickstarter when they have published games before, insanely successful games, and they should be able to do that again with traditional sources of funding and leave the Kickstarter dollars out there to the people who need them, i.e. unknowns. So the established developers are considered "greedy."

Yet, total unknowns also take Kickstarter for granted, abuse the system on the site, and very much abuse and mislead the people who invest in them. So...

When you're taking people's money, you're kind of always the bad guy?

[TrickWithAKnife]

If you want to use kickstarter, have iron skin and certainty that you can complete your game to the quality implied by your campaign.

Actually, if you want to be a Dev in general, iron skin doesn't hurt.

The majority of the time people are supportive. A few wont be, but that's life

[fioricca]

I don't follow crowdfunding much, but now I wonder if a VN/project has to reach a certain scale/quality for it to be, well, 'worthy' of being put up on KS or other crowdfunding platforms...? For instance, what about short/freeware projects with just one - two hours gameplay length?

[Blue Lemma]

@fioricca: I'm pretty sure you can put up whatever you want

The more you promise, though, the higher you can reasonably (that word is kind of ironic here) set your goal.

I'd like to see a mini-kickstarter - and you're a pretty darn awesome artist so go for it!

[Obscura]

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.

If you know how to tell a story, that's at least 50% of what you'll need to know in terms of marketing on Kickstarter.

If you're going to use Western style art, you have a much better chance of attracting people who don't normally play VNs, and also possibly more attention from LGBT gaymers, if that's what you want. But yes, you'll also probably lose a few traditional VN players (but not too many, if you're able to publicize this enough.)

If you need someone to look at your Kickstarter page/marketing plan, I'd be happy to provide what little wisdom I have. But given the genre, the fact that you're an established dev, as well as a woman (a man doing a GG is going to have a different set of obstacles), you're likely to wind up with an EXTREMELY well-funded campaign even with less than stellar Kickstarter-fu. I'd even venture you probably won't even need a demo, just a video with some graphics and sample art.

[Blue Lemma]

Yep, I'd kick papillon some bucks

[jack_norton]

It's simple: Finished product? People will find flaws to criticize. Just an idea with fluffy marketing? No flaws, just happy dreams and encouragement.

Yes, that's is absolutely true

But even outside kickstarter there are still examples of people having success with games because they know people, journalists, can do marketing, while others with maybe same product quality (or better) don't have the same success. Check Steam Greenlight for example and which kind of games gets greenlit

In the end no matter how you do it, like in all things in life, some people will be lucky and others not (or less). But you can make it even if you're unlucky, you need to be persistent and you'll make it.

[Fairy Godfeather]

I love the idea of Kickstarting being a way to combat piracy. Actually I think this whole discussion is brilliant and it's actually make me rethink my own stance on running a kickstarter.

The whole idea of writing and coding up my game and then kickstarting to fund the artwork is so extremely appealing to me. There's no other way that I could afford the sort of artwork I want. In that sense I see kickstarter as opening doors that I wouldn't otherwise see. However I'm still a long way off from that.

It would be absolutely crazy if I were to go on Kickstarter now and say "Wheee I have this amazing idea for a game please give me money!" Or even "I HAVE THIS PLAN!!!"

I love the idea of putting some of the risk up front. Where rather than spend a year on a project that's going to fail, do a large chunk of the marketting near the start and see if there's people actually interested in the game. If no one's interested, or if your marketting just isn't good enough, better to find out before you've invested a lot of money, time and resources on it.

I read another article recently about how failed kickstarters aren't actually failures. The real failure is if you don't kickstart the project, finish it and then discover that no one wants it. I like the idea of partially negating the risk that way.

I have so much admiration for what Obscura did with her game. I am kicking myself that I forgot to fund it. I'd been planning to, but I'm a huge flake, no excuses, I'll be one of the first actually buying the game. I've had so many kickstarter projects I've wanted to fund and then flaked out on.

I like that kickstarter is opening new doors and offering new opportunities. That in some regards it's cutting out the middle man completely, putting the creator and the audience directly in touch.

[TrickWithAKnife]

Indeed, that's a very positive aspect. It forces us to take a look at our projects, and think about how appealing it is to others. It encourages us to do research. It's motivates us to learn more about marketing and promotion. It helps us to improve various skills, all of which are extremely useful for indie developers. I look forward to the day when Lemmasoft needs to open up a marketing/promotion section, to go along with writing, art, music, and coding.

[Blue Lemma]

While I think more people should consider KS, it's not all fun and roses as this article states:

Some donors are growing disillusioned as entrepreneurs miss deadlines or fail to produce. Among technology and design-related projects, 75 percent didn’t finish on time, according to a study published last month by Ethan Mollick, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School.
....
“It didn’t really seem on the surface like it was going to be that challenging, but it has been extremely challenging,” he said. “A lot, lot slower than I expected. A lot, lot more money than I expected to spend.”

Kickstarter backers aren’t silent partners. Giddings’s page on the site is full of people demanding progress reports. Video- game studio Harebrained Schemes LLC, which raised $1.84 million in April, ended up hiring someone to handle its requests from backers.

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-0 ... e-stumbles

(Still, it's not like people won't complain about stuff after it's out if devs spent their own money, either, soooooo...)

I look forward to the day when Lemmasoft needs to open up a marketing/promotion section, to go along with writing, art, music, and coding.

It might be interesting to have a Cost Recovery Monetary Encouragement section where people can say how much they spent on their projects and collect donations. If people liked a game, might as well put their money where their mouth is. It seems fair. Help reward people for jobs well-done, and not just jobs not yet done.

[vividXP]

I sort of roll my eyes at the kickstarter debate. A lot of it stems from people sipping the soup grape flavored haterade. And as it's been said several times, people are going to do what they want with their money. If people fund a random campaign that looks good with no guarantee on whether or not the devs are going to deliver, well the risk is on them. This has been true for a long time, even before kickstarter. It's like those stories of people coming into money (and quickly becoming broke again) being hit up by their friends looking for capital to start a business and promising a cut of the profits that never appear. I think compared to that kickstarter is better because there is more accountability for donors.

The only time I've ever really had an objection to a kickstarter campaign is with the Veronica Mars movie kickstarter. To me, I didn't understand why a project with access to the traditional method of funding and distribution by a production studio needed to have fans pony up 5 million and change. But in the end, no one really cared what I thought.

I'm less skeptical of professional game devs starting kickstarters. With the way the industry is right now with studios closing left and right, I understand why people are loathe to trust in the traditional game publisher. Crowdsourcing funding may actually give you more freedom to execute your idea than the traditional publisher.

As for unique games vs. generic games being funded. I think this is overblown. I've donated to a couple of unique games, this musical claymation point and click game for example. No way a game like that gets made without the kickstarters or indiegogos. I think the problem lies in having devs of these so-called unique games give Kickstarter a try.

I understand why some people won't risk it. Even if it's not a mainstream publisher/production company, Kickstarter donors still feel a sense of ownership and entitlement and have certain expectations. That may be too much pressure and constraint to work with.