Kickstarter, the new Pre-Order

Jojin

 

It seems it didn't take long for individuals to take advantage of the ability to sell the desire for a dream; which is the essence of kickstarter.  Plus, with this method of funding there is no obligation should the dream not be made.

Now it seems many new games are heading to kickstarter before release.  If you look at the pledge lineup, it mimics what we used to have a pre-orders bonuses.  The only difference is, with these pledges money can be gathered prior to development and should things go bad, the final product doesn't have to be delivered.

Maybe I am cynical, but this just seems ripe for abuse.  So much so, as we are starting to see with a couple of mismanaged and multiple rounds of kickstarter drives, the concept of crowd funding will be ruined.

Perhaps it should be modified to give some sort of liability to the developer.  Something to maintain a balance so those who are truly gifted enough to produce and devoted enough to follow through, have a major personal stake in the processes versus just reputation.  This way it weeds out those who through ineptitude or malicious intent would take advantage of those who desire to fund the games they dream about.

ArChWind

Originally posted by Jojin

 

It seems it didn't take long for individuals to take advantage of the ability to sell the desire for a dream; which is the essence of kickstarter.  Plus, with this method of funding there is no obligation should the dream not be made.

Now it seems many new games are heading to kickstarter before release.  If you look at the pledge lineup, it mimics what we used to have a pre-orders bonuses.  The only difference is, with these pledges money can be gathered prior to development and should things go bad, the final product doesn't have to be delivered.

Maybe I am cynical, but this just seems ripe for abuse.  So much so, as we are starting to see with a couple of mismanaged and multiple rounds of kickstarter drives, the concept of crowd funding will be ruined.

Perhaps it should be modified to give some sort of liability to the developer.  Something to maintain a balance so those who are truly gifted enough to produce and devoted enough to follow through, have a major personal stake in the processes versus just reputation.  This way it weeds out those who through ineptitude or malicious intent would take advantage of those who desire to fund the games they dream about.

You won't see mine there but yeah it is kind of getting out of hand. Kind of like porn did in the 90s.

 

troublmaker

So Kickstarter began as a sort of online patronage format for artists.

How patronage works is people contribute to the artist so that they can continue their work.  People who are patrons get a sense of charity and feel better about themselves.  If people want to be patrons it's fine, it's their choice.

I think the problem with Kickstarter isn't so much that it's becoming a pre-order... but people are only using it to gain grassroots support for their games.  The grassroots origins is an advertising tool that heavily promotes word of mouth.

It's bad when Peter Molyneux is on Kickstarter.  This guy created Populus, Black and White, and the Fable franchise.  He knows people at Microsoft, Activison and about 30 other publishers who would be interested in his game.  Instead he throws it up on Kickstarter....

winter

Originally posted by Jojin

 

It seems it didn't take long for individuals to take advantage of the ability to sell the desire for a dream; which is the essence of kickstarter.  Plus, with this method of funding there is no obligation should the dream not be made.

Now it seems many new games are heading to kickstarter before release.  If you look at the pledge lineup, it mimics what we used to have a pre-orders bonuses.  The only difference is, with these pledges money can be gathered prior to development and should things go bad, the final product doesn't have to be delivered.

Maybe I am cynical, but this just seems ripe for abuse.  So much so, as we are starting to see with a couple of mismanaged and multiple rounds of kickstarter drives, the concept of crowd funding will be ruined.

Perhaps it should be modified to give some sort of liability to the developer.  Something to maintain a balance so those who are truly gifted enough to produce and devoted enough to follow through, have a major personal stake in the processes versus just reputation.  This way it weeds out those who through ineptitude or malicious intent would take advantage of those who desire to fund the games they dream about.

Why should it be modified?

In the game world ones repuation is a big thing at stack. Fail to deliver on your kickstarter and it unlikely players will let you live it down to have a second.

  As it currently stands it seems many players are fine with the ineptitude and malicious intent of big name publishers that push out buggy fail MMO/games with false advertising chasing the casual sheep herd look for wow type success. If you want to start policing something maybe it should be them?

  I have a feeling some of the Big name developers actually have a bit to feqar of lossing some control of the Herd. What if the next WoW like succuss came froma mere Kickstarter company can you imagine the Shit hitting the fans at Blizzard/EA/SOE ?

 Having said that anyone that ever plans to fund a kickstarter sgould have thier eyes open to the risks. Take responsibility for your own money don't expect  their to be a Goverment or Big brother protecting you from your own choices

g4m3sh4rk

Originally posted by Jojin

 

Perhaps it should be modified to give some sort of liability to the developer.

Hmmm... now this is a touchy subject. If you give liability to the developer you run the risk of it becoming a type of legal loan sharking. Currently it is illegal to "fund" someone and then attempt to collect on your loan. That is why creditors exist. But what kind of liability do you think would be appropriate that doesn't include money and also doesn't rely soley on merit?