Double Fine (Tim Schafer ) - Crowd Source/Kickstarter adventure game project.

Trust. Website. Infrastructure. Branding.

All important, all non-trivial to implement. The most important of them, branding, you've appeared to completely neglect.

 

Don't see that branding has anything important, other than its link to trust, which again kickstarter gives absolutely nothing towards, it certainly not worth 5%. Plus as far as I'm aware trust is actually provided by Amazon payments, they are the ones that deal with 'offset' payment system? I mean Kickstarter to my knowledge is not keeping one's credit card information for X number of days are they? I'm pretty sure when I pledged it all went through Amazon as I would certainly not trust kickstarter or most online companies with my credit card information.

 

dude are you serious he has made 2, million? For what exactly...

I should give Kickstarter site a try

 

When you say "for what", are you asking what the money will be used for or asking why people gave it to him? I'll answer both.

1) He's going to use it to fund a documentary and a game. The game is a point-and-click adventure and the money will pay the wages of the people working on it.

2) They gave it to him because he's spent the past twenty years making fantastic, creative games that millions of people love playing. He's built up a huge amount of love, respect and trust in the gaming community and this is why people were happy to contribute to the first true point-and-click adventure he's made in quite some time.


So sure, if you've spent the past 20 years making amazing games loved by millions, maybe you should give Kickstarter a try.

 

I ment why hasn't production started? He promised alot. I would wanna see concept before backing the project

Not accurate

 

Because they don't have the money yet. But don't fret. They've made almost six times their target already, so I think they'll scrape by without your backing.

Care to elaborate? My crystal ball is in the shop being mended.

 

Because you can't draw up your budget plans before you know exactly how much you have going in. He obviously expected $400K, now he has almost 6x that amount. That's a huge change in plans -- and he will use it. He's done million dollar projects before, but your budget plan for something that large isn't something you just come up with overnight. I wouldn't be surprised if he doesn't start working on it until a month after the final budget is in.

Slightly misleading -- KickStarter is great for any game developer with something semi-serious to bring to the table (and a reasonable budget). 20 years of experience gets you $2M, but that doesn't mean you need to be famous to use kickstarter.

There's plenty of non-"famous creator" games that have got full funding.
Ex: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/564944684/pixel-sand?ref=category

 

If that's the way you read it, then apparently it was misleading, because I certainly wasn't meaning to suggest that you have to have Tim Schafer's background to have a successful Kickstarter project. The point I was making is that since Tim Schafer has had this successful appeal, everyone with no track record, no discernible ability and a desire to fill their pockets with cash seems to think that Kickstarter must be the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. If you go there with a "gimme gimme gimme" attitude, no track record, and no real plan, you will leave empty handed.

To pre-empt any misunderstandings about my clarifications and how they relate to KingCharizard, I have no idea what his track record is or what his abilities are, and I did not perceive that he was seriously contemplating making his own appeal. My comments were only addressed to him because his attitude seems to be that TIm Schafer has made over $2M without actually doing anything. I disagree. I think twenty years making games people love has bought him a lot of capital and people who think that it's possible to achieve the same without paying their dues will be disappointed.

I hope that clarifies what I meant.

 

They say it's already sufficient if your last name starts with a M, like for instance Meretsky, Moriarty, Meier, Mabuse, Marihuana, ...

 

It wasn't your post, it was the sentence clip of your post that was misleading. I agree 100% with you and it seems people are completely misunderstanding the point of kickstarter now that there are some big names making big dollars there -- it's an investment plan, just like going to your boss and asking for funding for a project, just your boss is actually your future customers. In fact it's more stressful as a developer because now you have expectations to live up to, because these people paid in advance to fund your product (and often much more than your product is actually worth).

 

No The way I understand Kickstarter is anyone can use it to hope to start a project with a reasonable budget lets say $1000, but I also don't think someone like me who has not had years of experience and no one knows who I am can hope to reach that $1000 unless they show some kind of proof of concept or a project that has development already started.

 

So, is someone lucky with the reddit gig?

I do get heavy load messages here.

 

Really?

Such and such has a kick-starter project.

From that alone I know the following:

• It's on kickstarter.com.
• It's a good/fun/exciting creative project.
• It wants money - generally a little with options for more.
• I will be rewarded.
• If it doesn't work out [raise funds] I lose nothing.
• etc.

Now saying the same without mentioning KickStarter.

That 5% is defiantly worth it - and the proof is in the pudding - people use it!

 

Such and such has a indiegogo project.

From that alone I know the following:

• It's on http://www.indiegogo.com.
• It's a good/fun/exciting creative project.
• It wants money - generally a little with options for more.
• I will be rewarded.
• If it doesn't work out [raise funds] I lose nothing.
• etc.

I believe I just have and ...

http://www.rockethub.com/
http://www.fondomat.com/
http://www.peerbackers.com/

plus others though some specialise in various areas such as music or fashion or even advertising.


However i've yet to dig too deeply into these so I suspect they have the same problems which I take issue with on kickstarter, too high/flat fee percentage for doing nothing other than providing a typical front and back-end website.

Look don't get me wrong, I have no problem with kickstarter being financially rewarded, however currently I don't see that they are really earning 5%, especially with them not participating in the marketing of your project beyond adding it to the home page, they don't even market themselves, they leech off the marketing of peoples projects on their sites.

Crowd sourcing is a great concept, but it will have to change soon due to increased awareness and usage by 'creators'. it simply wont be enough to provide the front/back-end website and nothing else.

 

>2.4m

 

Your proof of branding being unimportant is to show me lots of other brands.

/facepalm.

 

and your replies completely fail to bring anything relevant.

Everything is a brand, being a brand in itself has no value, its the value attached to a brand that is important and as far as I can see none of the companies I listed or kickstarter has any greater value currently than any other.

That's my point, that's why I don't like kickstarter, other than the front/back-end it offers nothing more than a brand name, it has NO VALUE. Sure it has some visitor numbers, those few that already know about it and maybe visit its home page every so often, but its acquired these visitors ONLY through the hard work of creators who started a project and marketed it themselves, directing people to kickstarter, NOT because of any marketing that kickstarter does, as it doesn't do any!

Again this is my point, kickstarter does NOTHING other than support the front/back end of the website. It may be a brand, but its one that does not even promote itself! Its value is dervived off the back of other poeples hard work with projects, such as Double fine introducing 60k new backers to the site, but again thats my point, kickstarter itself has done ZERO work or effort to acquire those backers.

 

I think at the point this project started Kickstarter was the right thing but generally i agree with Noisecrime.

I mean, just in case someone cares.

 

There is nothing forcing you to choose Kickstarter over any of the other options. If you have a personal distaste for it, that is your prerogative. I can understand the position your taking, however I think it, along with the others you mentioned, all offer a great service.

There is nothing forcing a person to use one service over another, they have the freedom of choice. There are no lock in contracts, no control over IP, nothing of what makes publishers such a pain.

I don't know why DF chose Kickstarter over the other options. They must be doing something right.

 

DF is as much in a learning process with this as we all are, so i wouldn't expect this to be the very best option just because they did it this way.

 

Don't get me wrong I like what kickstarter and all the others are doing in terms of crowd sourcing, just don't like their and others flat fee approach of 5% for simply having the website. I just feel for 5%, especially of projects in $100k is a bit of a cheek since they are pretty much doing nothing but living off other peoples hard work.

Its not particularity aimed at kickstarter either, although others have lower fees, none to my knowledge do anything more than provide a website and that's my real issue. At least it became my issue, when I started to look into it in greater depth and what one would need to do in order to be successful. Its only then that you realise unless you get on the home page of kickstarter, its still all done to you and your efforts. So much so that i wondered if you could feasibly cut them out as they are simply acting as middle men, which of course one of the whole points of crowd sourcing was to remove the middle men

@taumel: thx, I care, sort of I mean I'm making a fuss about the issues, but only to draw attention to them. I still think using kickstarter (if you are US based) is probably the best and most cost effective method of raising funds.

 

The app store and steam take 30%, all they do is provide a distribution platform.

Anyway, Petroz point still stands: if you don't like it, don't use it. It's not like they're duping people, they're pretty clear about the 5% when you create a project. If it bothers you and you really want to use kickstarter, just set your goal to be 105% of what your original goal was.

 

@Noisecrime
The more this goes on, the more i get the impression that some don't understand what you initially wanted to say or maybe just have to much time. Who knows...

Anyway, less than a week left and still 50k to go, so more pledging and less typing please. :O)

 

This is the problem - a completely disagreeable personality refusing to be civil with other concepts and POV.

Kickstarter exists. Kickstarter works. That in itself is vastly more proof than your rantings otherwise. If you cannot see the value the site provides, then that's likely a failing on your part - not theirs.

 

Yep, I give up.

 

While there was some valid reasoning the point was overstated. As far as I have seen nobody is disagreeing with the facts you provided; nor has it been said that your personal dislike of Kickstarter is wrong. You're entitled to your opinion.

 

You want to see how Tim uses all the money? Then watch from 3:26 on.

http://www.gamespot.com/events/gdc-2012/video.html?sid=6365134

 

LOL

BTW for me the 'next video' is a 8 minute talk by Jonathan Blow that is quite interesting
http://uk.gamespot.com/events/gdc-2012/video.html?sid=6365133



Well we're coming up on the last few days of the project, looks like it will break $2.5 million in the next day or so. Pledges have naturally dropped off, though off-hand I still have a feeling they are around $5k a day? Was pretty sure there would be a last minute rush, but doesn't seem to have kicked in yet? Not even sure if there is a last minute rush that it will add much more than $50-$100k?

... and of course i'm still debating whether to up my pledge a tier or two

 

This one won't come again. ;O)

As for the Blow interview. I agree with the discovery factor, therefore i also skip tutorials or mainly read the manuals after playing a game or when i get completely stuck, it's often more fun this way.

 

2.5 millions passed and an update on the kickstarter site.

@Noisecrime
You now get a T-Shirt for the $100/$110 tier and a wonderful old skool box. The hardcovers are finally signed at $500. So, i hope this makes your decision easier. ;O)

 

$2.6m now - so either last minute rush or those new rewards made a bit of a difference then.

Wish Kickstarter had some stats and graphs to view per project.

 

It's both but a lot of people are upping to the $100 tier.

If you, generally spoken, hesitate about his work i suggest getting Psychonauts on Steam, they sell it for a discounted price of $5/€5 till 13th and it's both Win/OS X.

 

2.7 million and 54 hours to go.

 

2.8 millions and 36 hours to go.

Come on, give all you can and let it finally break the 3 milions. :O)

 

2.9 millions and about 20 hours to go, oh and an update on the kickstarter site.

 

It just hit the $3 million mark and was ticking over at about $8,000 an hour.

 

Yeah, we did it! I haven't slept the whole night but i feel 10/10. :O)

 

3 hrs to go, just shy of $3.2 million, which i'm sure it will hit.

Quite surprised it made it to $3m in the end, as it had seemed to slow down alot in the last few weeks (understandably). I think those extra reward tiers helped.

 

Ended up being more in a 3.4-3.5 million range including the high backers. Just Wow! :O)

 

So they nearly made $3 million more than their initial goal in the end

From all accounts there are quite a number of people who wanted to pledge but for various reasons (payment options, countries of residence etc) were unable too. So I guess it may have been feasible that they could have hit $4 million.

.. just realised they made almost $1 million in the last 4/5 days !

 

From the experience made so far i say 5 million would have been possible if they had PayPal on board and optimised the tiers. But also 3.44 millions are a lot of money for this type of game.

Now on the same day this on ended, Brian Fargo's Wasteland 2 started, they are asking for $900k and already got more than 524k, with more than 33 days to go it's safe to assume that this one will end as another DRM free, crossrelease old skooler. I would love to see them starting a new Bard's Tale afterwards as well and i'm wondering when plans for the funding of Psychonauts 2 will begin, will Notch still be involved or will they dare it on their own, as well as which other from publishers turned down but great games will make their way this way.

Due to a wider audience and more success, when will the funding sites enhance things on their sides. At the moment it seems the funding games this way seems to be great for smaller to mid sized teams. I wonder how easy it would be funding a $80 million project this way as masses also involve a maas mentality. I think it can go this direction but i also think that it won't happen without some migration time for a learning process being needed.

Anyway we're at least getting some great games again but as nice as it is it also drains energy&time from you, at least if you're involved and care about. I can't imagine myself funding 47 projects this way so you have to learn to blend things out until they are done as well or you're ending up as some kind of backer zombie.

 

And Wasteland 2 is funded as well.

I'm looking forward to when they'll do a new The Bard's Tale this way.

 

To me this seems like a double edged sword, sure you make a ton of money up front, but all those people who put 3 million in the pot to get the game funded have already paid for the full version of the game. So while you have the capital to start the game the profits from sales will be smaller as most people who want the game have actually already paid for it.

 

If you have some magical powers to create a game out of the void without any resources then this might be a downside.

If you on the other side can't then these are just sales upfront to cover the costs (producing the game, paying your employees, the rent, ...). If you produce a game on your own, you don't get this for free. The cool thing is that you get all this upfront and can plan a lot better, so it takes out the risk. Now counting in how sceptical even some so called adventure fans/experts on certain forums have been, you can be assured that there will be enough sales afterwards as well which will result into pure profit for DF. Same goes for players who might be new to the genre, couldn't contribute due to credit card issues, people who want to play the game on a platform which isn't covered by the rewards (iOS), merchandising, sale actions, increased sales on other products from their store due to the marketing factor from this one and so on.

Needless to say that without attractive rewards the sum only would have been a fraction which again contradicts your goal of increasing your profit afterwards due to a game's lower quality. Last but not least, DF got lots of money for free because afterwards almost no one would pay such high prices anymore. And i'm completely leaving out aspects like publishers and artistic freedom.

So, what was your point again? You value getting resources to some degree but you don't want to give those people who believe in you something for their money?

 

Don't know if you guys saw this, it's pretty awesome : http://kotaku.com/5893454/genius-turns-job-application-into-lucasarts-adventure-game

 

FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF, that guy stole my hidden idea ive had for years

 

Your idea? I had the idea to get paid millions for a game I didnt made over 25 years ago!!!

Unless you talking about the game application thingy, then... I did think about doing a Mega Man game as a resume to Capcom when I was a kid too... never did it though...

 

@titanty
wasted_chances++

I liked the colors and it's nicely done. As for Majus, i don't like his type of humour this much, he also worked at TTG and just wasn't funny, in this respect he was perfectly right there, but as long as he doesn't ruin the game. This game should be awesome and not just nice.

 

It might seem like that, but as Taumel says its not.

Firstly you are assuming profits are the goal. Whilst they are nice, with this form of upfront payment they don't have to be, since you are getting funding that does NOT have to be repaid. Obviously it would be nice to make a profit in order to fund future games without the need to crowd source and that is still easily possible as less than 100k people pledged for this and there must be several times that amount in the world who will want to play the game (especially a new adventure game as in this case).

Secondly the alternative is to get funded by a publisher or venture capitalists, both of whom will take far more than the 10% total Kickstarter/Amazon are going to take and will require the money paid back before you begin to even make a profit. However more to the point that's assuming they would see you as a worthwhile investment, which they wont, so really crowd sourcing becomes almost the only method open to you.

Then of course there are additional avenue streams which are a must these days, such as merchandising for the game, additional downloaded content etc. Some of this was included as rewards, but again there should still be enough of a market left to make some profit

 

What will their next move be?