Kickstarter: Mission Accomplished?

[Realmkeeper]

Firstly, I know a few of you forum regulars are also regular backers on Kickstarter - this is not about why you shouldn't back kickstarter indie games, but rather the likelihood of that backing coming into fruition.

 

After reading this post on A Look At Kickstarted Video Game Delivery Rates, I came away a little shocked and surprised.

The walk-away message is essentially that of the video games successfully backed on Kickstarter over the 2009-2012 period, only 37% came to a full delivery before Jan 2014 (The video game itself was released, not necessarily all the additional reward level content).

That's over 12 months after the successful backing of the last project!

(source: evilasahobby.com via Gamasutra.com)

 

So that's not too bad, right? 1 in 3 games that is fully backed comes into fruition between 1 and 3 years after receiving funding.

Sure, we all know of a game or two that have remained in development a lot longer than initially expected by it's financial backers, don't we?

 

Well, look at the delivery rates by backing values, and be surprised that is isn't the small 'hobby projects' making the statistics look bad, even though we may have thought it most likely the $100 video game would never get finished on that budget.

It seems the more money obtained through Kickstarter, and thus likely more backers interested and waiting on the finished product, the less likely the video game is to be delivered to a release standard.

(source: evilasahobby.com via Gamasutra.com)

 

That's two in every three video games that we back on Kickstarter that are never completed within their own delivery dates, and the more people involved in financially backing the project, the higher chance of basically throwing your money away.

Not only that, but the development times of the projects which did deliver could vary by well over a year after the initially stated release date.

 

Poor project or financial management by these project starters, or just a simple naivety of an overly ambitious indie or hobbyist developer?

Once finances have been sourced from people expecting some kind of return on their investment (less than 1% of backers typically expect nothing in return - success or failure, they're backing the project with the intent of helping it succeed), the project must forge ahead even if it means blowing out time and monetary budgets, or risk legal action against them.

 

Is it time to jump on the Kickstarter bandwagon and make a tidy little sum for that glossy project you've been planning, with no intention of ever taking it to completion? Or should we steer clear of crowd sourcing funds, and the planning, management, and delivery expectations that come along with it?

 

(Pretty pictures from the article linked at the beginning, the rest of the post just my thoughts and interpretation of the findings.)

What do you guys think about the delivery rates of video games backed on Kickstarter?

Is it too low, or to be expected? And how much would you be willing/able to effectively lose if you backed a project that either never intended to deliver, or was unable to deliver the promised product?

[RoboMat]

Personally I would never fund games that don't have at least an early playable version.

 

When I bought Minecraft or PZ I didn't buy them for the finished product ... I mean who knows if PZ will ever be "done". Minecraft was "finished" once they slapped a 1.0.0 on it, but the development still continues after all that time.

 

As long as I can have fun with that early version I don't really care if the game will ever be finished. I also wouldn't pay more than 10 bucks for an in-dev title.

 

Just my 2 €.

 

It bugs me that in the second chart the red 1% bar is bigger than the blue one

[Rathlord]

Personally I view every project I back (so far very, very few) on Kickstarter as a donation, not a purchase. It's something I give to people because I respect what they're doing, hope (but not expect) to be successful, and typically people I feel are qualified to handle the project. I also tend to stay as involved in the process as I possibly can be (I'm a closed tester for RimWorld, for example) so I can see what's going on. If things fall through I would be disappointed but not shocked or outraged. In my opinion, backing something on Kickstarter without that viewpoint is naive.

[harakka]

I don't think much about delivery rates as measured by the stuff linked to in OP. Failing on delivering at a certain date does not mean a complete failure. To me, not even a failure in any very significant sense. Consider that in the industry, big projects can take much more than 1 to 4 years to go from start of pre-production into gold.

 

Keep in mind (AFAIK) a project can't change their KS delivery dates after the fact. You got funded for 500% the minimum you set and that means your project scope gets expanded from the minimum plan, as outlined by stretch goals? And you communicate this clearly during the campaign? Your campaign page is still stuck with the old date estimate.

 

So this perhaps isn't the most useful way to estimate whether projects are delivering. Particularly in software dev where release dates are often nebulous anyway, especially when not pressured/blackmailed by a publisher. I think it's more a measure of how little people putting their projects on Kickstarter care about said dates.

 

There's also an older RPS article analyzing some specific Kickstarter projects and their deadlines and related Stuff And Things.

[Rathlord]

Aye, another good point; meant to hit on that myself but my woman distracted me.

[harakka]

To elaborate on the point about publisher forcing release dates, I think that's one of the coolest things about both Kickstarter funding and indie development. With Kickstarter you know from (almost) the start how much money you have for the project, and can actually afford to go for longer development if you budget accordingly. Obviously there has to be some preproduction before the KS campaign too, but not massively. With an indie project, your primary issue is how to not starve and freeze to death during development. If you manage that, you can work on your game for as long as you want to.

 

Contrast with the traditional model, where a publisher tells you that the game is either coming out by $date, even with 50% of the cool features cut out, or it's not coming out at all and everyone is sacked. Personally I can think of a number of games that could have done with more time in the oven, but were forced out raw by the publisher for whatever reason. I'd prefer they would have missed their release dates, even with a year or two, with those issues ironed out.

 

Obviously there's also the flipside where the publisher can force the developers of an eternally languishing project to finally make something releasable, anything at all, by cutting off the funding. On Kickstarter you just have to trust the devs to actually have interest in making and finishing the game they've pitched to you.

[Realmkeeper]

Obviously there's also the flipside where the publisher can force the developers of an eternally languishing project to finally make something releasable, anything at all, by cutting off the funding. On Kickstarter you just have to trust the devs to actually have interest in making and finishing the game they've pitched to you.

This is where I lose faith in backing Kickstarter projects... trusting the Devs.

Too many of them, in my opinion, have either an overly ambitious project and/or too little experience or forethought into managing the project, but successfully gloss it up to look like a desirable concept to throw fistfuls of cash at.

 

I think that given the numbers of only 1 in 3 funded games reaching release, my trust in Devs dwindles a little further.

Sure, you can carefully pick through the Kickstarter projects and back the ones most likely to succeed, but honestly, those aren't usually the ones you'd most like to see succeed.

[Jatta Pake]

Forgive my ignorance, but what happens if a game developer reaches their fund raising goal but doesn't deliver on the dates?  Is the money refunded back to the donors?  I take it, the answer is "no".

 

Sorry if this is a dumb question.  I've never really understood why anyone would "invest" in a Kickstarter.  It's not like one is buying stock in the new company, you just get some pre-order bonus based on the amount you pledge.  Isn't it more logical to invest your money elsewhere and buy a fully baked game or product (professionally reviewed) if/when it actually releases?

[Realmkeeper]

Forgive my ignorance, but what happens if a game developer reaches their fund raising goal but doesn't deliver on the dates?  Is the money refunded back to the donors?  I take it, the answer is "no".

 

Sorry if this is a dumb question.  I've never really understood why anyone would "invest" in a Kickstarter.  It's not like one is buying stock in the new company, you just get some pre-order bonus based on the amount you pledge.  Isn't it more logical to invest your money elsewhere and buy a fully baked game or product (professionally reviewed) if/when it actually releases?

No, but I think there's a disclaimer somewhere on KS that any dates given in an initial KS presentation are a 'guideline only'.

The main point of the article in the OP, is that only one in three games ever reach a stage of 'completion' or release, and of those completed most are significantly after the initial release dates given.

 

If the target goal amount is achieved, then the developer gets all the funds pledged regardless of intentions of when/if the game will be released.

[zombo]

Personally I view every project I back (so far very, very few) on Kickstarter as a donation, not a purchase. It's something I give to people because I respect what they're doing, hope (but not expect) to be successful, and typically people I feel are qualified to handle the project. I also tend to stay as involved in the process as I possibly can be (I'm a closed tester for RimWorld, for example) so I can see what's going on. If things fall through I would be disappointed but not shocked or outraged. In my opinion, backing something on Kickstarter without that viewpoint is naive.

This is a pretty good way to look at it, but there is one big problem.  We can't really know what happens behind the scenes, why something fails to deliver.  The "why" would be the factor that determines whether our reaction should be one of disappointment or outrage.  Still I agree that we should not be naive, and whatever the reason we should always be aware of the fact that there is no guarantee of anything.  Reasons for failure could be anything, from genuine failings with good intentions, to outright scams.  Again, in most cases we'll never know.

 

On a side note, I have always believed there will eventually be a crowdfunding "bubble" that will burst.  I'm also kind of expecting some big project to fail badly under suspicious circumstances or in some way that leaves the backers generally feeling ripped off, at which time some lawyers will decide to take a stab at it.

[Jatta Pake]

 

Forgive my ignorance, but what happens if a game developer reaches their fund raising goal but doesn't deliver on the dates?  Is the money refunded back to the donors?  I take it, the answer is "no".

 

Sorry if this is a dumb question.  I've never really understood why anyone would "invest" in a Kickstarter.  It's not like one is buying stock in the new company, you just get some pre-order bonus based on the amount you pledge.  Isn't it more logical to invest your money elsewhere and buy a fully baked game or product (professionally reviewed) if/when it actually releases?

No, but I think there's a disclaimer somewhere on KS that any dates given in an initial KS presentation are a 'guideline only'.

The main point of the article in the OP, is that only one in three games ever reach a stage of 'completion' or release, and of those completed most are significantly after the initial release dates given.

 

If the target goal amount is achieved, then the developer gets all the funds pledged regardless of intentions of when/if the game will be released.

 

 

Got it.  Sounds like my skepticism/confusion was well founded.

 

 

 

Personally I view every project I back (so far very, very few) on Kickstarter as a donation, not a purchase. It's something I give to people because I respect what they're doing, hope (but not expect) to be successful, and typically people I feel are qualified to handle the project. I also tend to stay as involved in the process as I possibly can be (I'm a closed tester for RimWorld, for example) so I can see what's going on. If things fall through I would be disappointed but not shocked or outraged. In my opinion, backing something on Kickstarter without that viewpoint is naive.

This is a pretty good way to look at it, but there is one big problem.  We can't really know what happens behind the scenes, why something fails to deliver.  The "why" would be the factor that determines whether our reaction should be one of disappointment or outrage.  Still I agree that we should not be naive, and whatever the reason we should always be aware of the fact that there is no guarantee of anything.  Reasons for failure could be anything, from genuine failings with good intentions, to outright scams.  Again, in most cases we'll never know.

 

On a side note, I have always believed there will eventually be a crowdfunding "bubble" that will burst.  I'm also kind of expecting some big project to fail badly under suspicious circumstances or in some way that leaves the backers generally feeling ripped off, at which time some lawyers will decide to take a stab at it.

 

 

I think the overall idea of crowd funding is intriguing.   It would be neat if Kickstarter morphed into a crowd-funded venture capitalist model that allowed you to buy actual stock in a start up company.  I'd be more likely to sign up if I thought dividends would be paid out for successful projects.

 

I also see the possibility of Kickstarter licensing out their system to big companies.  What if Google had a version of Kickstarter that allowed you to "pledge" into a project?  Companies could gauge interest in a particular concept before launching into full scale production.  It would be a glorified version of a pre-order but with the understanding if the product didn't hit profitability it would be scrapped.  Google let's employees commit 20% of their time to development passion projects.  This could show whether a particular innovation was worth pursuing.

[harakka]

 

Obviously there's also the flipside where the publisher can force the developers of an eternally languishing project to finally make something releasable, anything at all, by cutting off the funding. On Kickstarter you just have to trust the devs to actually have interest in making and finishing the game they've pitched to you.

This is where I lose faith in backing Kickstarter projects... trusting the Devs.

Too many of them, in my opinion, have either an overly ambitious project and/or too little experience or forethought into managing the project, but successfully gloss it up to look like a desirable concept to throw fistfuls of cash at.

If you don't trust them, for whatever reason, don't back them. Kickstarter certainly requires forethought on the part of the potential backer. There are projects that are borderline or plain unfeasible, or just shit. This is the case outside of Kickstarter too, we're just not the ones potentially funding them (usually).

Sorry if this is a dumb question.  I've never really understood why anyone would "invest" in a Kickstarter.  It's not like one is buying stock in the new company, you just get some pre-order bonus based on the amount you pledge.  Isn't it more logical to invest your money elsewhere and buy a fully baked game or product (professionally reviewed) if/when it actually releases?

I "invest" in a Kickstarter project because it's the sort of project I would like to see made, and the project's pitch demostrates capability to deliver on it. I don't consider it preordering, although getting the product in the endd is certainly a nice bonus. By giving them money I'm enabling the project to actually happen. This isn't just on Kickstarter, I view pretty much all of my alphafunding purchases this way too. Including PZ, back in the day.