Kickstarter - stupid question

[ukaserex]

I realize this is probably a very, very insanely stupid question. But, I've been on my feet for a good while and am just now able to sit down, having made more bread pudding than I ever thought humanly possible. At least I smell good, though. Sure, I smell like something really good to eat, instead of smelling sexy, but I have to take what I can get.

The kickstarter promotion for MWM/TPP is soon approaching. I saw a tiered reward, based on how much was contributed - but isn't money I send an investment? That is, don't we get shares of stock, (of course not! They're not on the exchange yet!) or something equivalent?

I'm all for rewarding hard work. You make me a game, I pay to play it. Not a new concept. But, to fund the effort on the front end, when there's nothing concrete to guarantee its completion (not that I doubt it will happen) I'm wondering if I'm part-owner, or just one of those swell guys who had a little surplus cash at the right time that figured a donation to this cause was as good as a donation to http://www.ransomcafe.com/ because I'll get a statue of my character's likeness in some place within the game.

And yes, I do realize this question is probably better served at the MWM boards, but the last time I was there, it seemed rather empty.

[Ice Trix]

A kick starter is more like a pre-purchase that uses the pre-purchase funds to create the product.
You don't become a share holder, part owner or anything at all like that.

An example is for a board game that has been designed, and the designers lack funds to manufacture the actual physical board & pieces. So they do a kick starter, and the funds go to producing the board game.
Typically the tiered reward is used to encourage more money to be donated/pledged. So the board game example might give autographed copies of the game for people who paid $10 more than the basic pledge which purchases the game.

Many kick starters have both tiered rewards for money pledged and overall bonuses for total amount raised, e.g. you might pledge the basic amount for the board game, but as the project raised double the goal, they will add an extra board, or higher quality art. Or for a MMORPG it might be extra costumes, archtypes etc.
It's pretty tricky to juggle the rewards and tiers, as too many can lead a project into being delayed.

Kick starter returns your money if the kick starter fails to get what they set as their funding goal (ie money pledged). If the kick starter achieves their funding goal, the wording of the kick starter contract implies you can seek repayment if the project fails, but the reality is that has yet to happen AFAIK. Kick starters have run late, the people behind them have run off with the money, or just mismanaged it really badly.

The Pen & Paper RPG community (where most of me experience with kick starters is from) is full of good and bad stories, the 'consensus' seeming to be that you should only pledge what you would be prepared to lose. You should also try to judge how realistic the project seems to be, and if it has well structured time frames etc.

[JaguarX]

I realize this is probably a very, very insanely stupid question.

Well I think there is no such thing as a stupid question...well I take that back. A stupid question is one that is unasked and instead put on the backburner in favor of  assumptions.

Tell you the truth until relatively recently I didn't know much about kickstarter, and still going over parts of their policies as we speak. but from what I gather, it's like what Ice Trix said.

[Osborn]

A kick starter is more like a pre-purchase that uses the pre-purchase funds to create the product.
You don't become a share holder, part owner or anything at all like that.

That's a very, very dangerous assumption and one that is likely to foil the good faith of Kickstarter in time.

A closer example is that you become a stock share-holder with 0 shares, 0 ownership of the product and you earn 0 dividends from your stock buy.

This can still be useful, because guaranteeing nothing is sometimes all that a small time indie outfit that has no other recourse than Kickstarter can guarantee. You're not pre-ordering a product, or pre-purchasing a product. You're gambling that a product might get made and doing so because the power structure that exists as it does won't take the risk for you, except that in this case you're guaranteed nothing out of it, unlike a traditional producer who might get rights to the IP or what not.

If you believe in the product enough to make that gamble, more power to you. I've been a part of several kickstarter projects myself. But that's all it really is.

But believing Kickstarter is a pre-purchase is troublesome for 2 reasons: One, it will create resentment if and when (and the more kickstarters are started, the less 'if' it becomes and the more 'when' it becomes) a highly paid project folds up. Producers have many ways to alleviate losses in this scenario, but you have none. When you presume that you do or that your money is going towards some future game that the makers only have to 'discover' already built buried inside the marble, so to speak, then you're setting yourself and the Kickstarter community up for an eventual and very rough fall.

Two, it allows people with means that don't require Kickstarter to function and traditionally have done business fine without it to abuse the Kickstarter model, and thus abuse you, by allowing them to forgo normal channels of fundraising and ensuring capital for ventures and to bypass paying stock holders money by tricking you into basically becoming their venture capital source by tricking you on the nature of Kickstarter.

So please, don't tell people they're pre-ordering a product when they use a Kickstarter. The system can be a lot of good for a lot of talented people that exist outside of the traditional publishing system, but you do it no favors in making promises with the system that can't and won't always be kept.

[Noyjitat]

Love you ukase and I'm only posting this to be friendly. It doesn't your question though hehe. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=daYKTvCBNz8

[Zombie Man]

Giving to KS should be considered a totally free, no-strings-attached, *gift*.

Now, that being said, *if* the project is successful, the projects likes to reward the KS gifters with a free return gift, such as a finished product for free. But the project doesn't have to. It's all about freely funding worthwhile projects.

Now, since many project promise free return gifts based on how much you give, it can seem like something is being sold, or that there is an investment being made, but that's not the case.

[JaguarX]

yeah reading article about TPP kick starter and some comments bring up some good points. When I'm finish reading I'll probably ask in the TPP section after searching for the answers on the TPP main website.

[saipaman]

I'm a Kickstarter addict and I've only had one successfully funded project that didn't complete and provide the promised rewards.

In that particular case, the person actually refunded all the contributions.

[JaguarX]

I'm a Kickstarter addict and I've only had one successfully funded project that didn't complete and provide the promised rewards.

In that particular case, the person actually refunded all the contributions.

wait what? That can happen?

What would have happened if say for some reason they either don't complete and or don't provide the promised rewards?

From what I gather from kickstarter, it's left between the person that contributed and the maker of the game.

[Golden Girl]

because I'll get a statue of my character's likeness in some place within the game.

If that's true, then ethical alarm bells should be ringing.

[JaguarX]

If that's true, then ethical alarm bells should be ringing.

what you mean?

Getting a bit antsy between that article and a few stuff here. I don't like feeling antsy especially when on the flip side I whole heartedly believe 110% in these projects.

[Golden Girl]

what you mean?

I mean that allowing people to make a permanent mark on the game only if they're at a certain level of wealth and able to spend it during a certain period of time is the complete opposite of an community focused project  - it discriminates against CoH fans who might not be able to afford the required level of payment, or are unable to raised the required amount within the KS window. If they're actually going to do that, then they're gating a popular CoH request behind a limited time pay wall - and that's unethical.
Making your mark on the game world should only be done through gameplay that everyone has an equal and fair chance of achieving, and not restricting it to players with a certain wealth level at a certain point in time.

[JaguarX]

I mean that allowing people to make a permanent mark on the game only if they're at a certain level of wealth and able to spend it during a certain period of time is the complete opposite of an community focused project  - it discriminates against CoH fans who might not be able to afford the required level of payment, or are unable to raised the required amount within the KS window. If they're actually going to do that, then they're gating a popular CoH request behind a limited time pay wall - and that's unethical.
Making your mark on the game world should only be done through gameplay that everyone has an equal and fair chance of achieving, and not restricting it to players with a certain wealth level at a certain point in time.

you know... I never thought of it in that manner. You make a very valid point there.

[Zombie Man]

I mean that allowing people to make a permanent mark on the game only if they're at a certain level of wealth and able to spend it during a certain period of time is the complete opposite of an community focused project  - it discriminates against CoH fans who might not be able to afford the required level of payment, or are unable to raised the required amount within the KS window. If they're actually going to do that, then they're gating a popular CoH request behind a limited time pay wall - and that's unethical.
Making your mark on the game world should only be done through gameplay that everyone has an equal and fair chance of achieving, and not restricting it to players with a certain wealth level at a certain point in time.

So, all those hospitals and universities with wings named after their donor are unethical?

All those public projects, like a park, where donors get their names on the bricks in the road are unethical?

So, every single friggin' sale on earth that's available for a limited time is unethical?

So the CoH devs which had their own NPC personas in the game was unethical?

Please, Golden Girl, you don't know what you're talking about. The Phoenix Project's KS rewards are not selling pay-to-win power or top spots on leader boards.

Go find some other well to poison.

[Zombie Man]

I should also add:

Just because a donor gets an in-game thanks doesn't rule out players from getting their avatars to be especially saluted with statues or named NPCs or buildings or whatever may be decided.

But to expect that someone who freely gave thousands of dollars to make the game even possible can't get an in-game thanks is ridiculous. It would be like expecting NCsoft when it first produced CoH not to get their logo on the splash screen. "Hey! Players can't get their names on the splash screen... THAT'S UNETHICAL!!!"

puh-lease

[Ice Trix]

That's a very, very dangerous assumption and one that is likely to foil the good faith of Kickstarter in time.

(snip)

So please, don't tell people they're pre-ordering a product when they use a Kickstarter. The system can be a lot of good for a lot of talented people that exist outside of the traditional publishing system, but you do it no favors in making promises with the system that can't and won't always be kept.

I'm guessing you read my first line and skipped the rest of my post.

[Ice Trix]

Giving to KS should be considered a totally free, no-strings-attached, *gift*.

Now, that being said, *if* the project is successful, the projects likes to reward the KS gifters with a free return gift, such as a finished product for free. But the project doesn't have to. It's all about freely funding worthwhile projects.

Now, since many project promise free return gifts based on how much you give, it can seem like something is being sold, or that there is an investment being made, but that's not the case.

No. A kick starter is not a gift. It should not be considered a gift. No one involved in running a kick starter should have that mentality. It's scarey that you, a part of that kick starter team is saying that. It is not about freely funding projects.

See the terms and conditions, http://www.kickstarter.com/terms-of-use . Particuarily "Project Creators are required to fulfill all rewards of their successful fundraising campaigns or refund any Backer whose reward they do not or cannot fulfill."
Projector backers must fulfill the rewards. It's what they agree to.

[Ice Trix]

wait what? That can happen?

What would have happened if say for some reason they either don't complete and or don't provide the promised rewards?

From what I gather from kickstarter, it's left between the person that contributed and the maker of the game.

As in my first reply, some RPG Pen and Paper kick starters have had people run with money, or mis manage funds etc.
Aside from chasing it up legally from your personal end (untested afaik) there will be nothing you can do if a kick starter fails.
Though failure is very different to running off with the cash.
For a long forum thread, http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?688479-Kickstarter-Failstarter-lt goes over the issues from both sides.

[downix]

you know... I never thought of it in that manner. You make a very valid point there.

No, she's not.

[Ice Trix]

I mean that allowing people to make a permanent mark on the game only if they're at a certain level of wealth and able to spend it during a certain period of time is the complete opposite of an community focused project  - it discriminates against CoH fans who might not be able to afford the required level of payment, or are unable to raised the required amount within the KS window. If they're actually going to do that, then they're gating a popular CoH request behind a limited time pay wall - and that's unethical.
Making your mark on the game world should only be done through gameplay that everyone has an equal and fair chance of achieving, and not restricting it to players with a certain wealth level at a certain point in time.

Things like statues and other ingame items are very common for computer game kick starters. While I dislike the idea of 'private' rewards the phoenix project intended on offering (seriously if someone pays to get to design a costume, do you really think they will decide not to get that reward just because others in the game would get it to wear it as well) calling it unethical is a huge stretch of the word.

[Zombie Man]

No. A kick starter is not a gift. It should not be considered a gift. No one involved in running a kick starter should have that mentality. It's scarey that you, a part of that kick starter team is saying that. It is not about freely funding projects.

See the terms and conditions, http://www.kickstarter.com/terms-of-use . Particuarily "Project Creators are required to fulfill all rewards of their successful fundraising campaigns or refund any Backer whose reward they do not or cannot fulfill."
Projector backers must fulfill the rewards. It's what they agree to.

Well, if the KS didn't offer any rewards, then what a donor gives would be a gift.

However, I was unclear on the part of the project creators by using the word 'gift'. I most certainly intended that the *offer of a gift* was meant that the gift would be actually given. That's a contractual agreement. However, the Project Creators don't have to offer anything and if they do offer something it can be termed a gift in that the freely chose to offer it, but, as you said, once the offer is made, they are contractually bound to give it.

[Ice Trix]

Even if a Kick starter doesn't offer rewards, the person giving the money isn't giving a donation, its for the 'hope' of the product the kick starter is offering. You cant have a kick starter that doesn't actually offer something.

[lapucelle]

Let's think about this whole thing. A Kickstarter is a time limited event, in which a fairly large sum is intended to be raised. A MMO costs money. Star Wars: The Old Republic was a hundred million dollar product, I seem to recall hearing. MWM's version is not going to raise even a tenth of that, of course, that would break all kickstarter records.

But money is going to be needed, and quite a large sum, under what is considered, at best, a promise and a hope for the future. You've got to look at what MWM demonstrates, and say to yourself, 'I feel confident these people will pull this off.' And some people will believe in the project, and want to contribute... more. That statue, that costume, that building, can be considered MWM thanking the person contributing for their early, early faith in the project. Because it will take some time for the game to come out. Personally, I'm just downloading Shadowrun Returns, which funded April '12.

Some of their offers were:
"the shadowruns you design will be MARKED with a special GLYPH so they'll be highlighted and easy to identify" ($500)
" we'll use YOUR IMAGE to CREATE AN NPC CHARACTER for the game. It's our choice what NPC you'll be but if you have a suggestion, we'll listen." ($1000)
" we'll create the art for one EXCLUSIVE CUSTOM PLAYER CHARACTER based upon your description and/or sketches. When your friends hire your character, they'll get to see it too! (Limit 2 revisions.)" ($2500 - they sold 12 of those.)
"1 Large or 2 Small custom art assets created for you to be used EXCLUSIVELY in your missions (Limit 2 revisions) + a CONSULTATION with our Art director and Level Designer to help tune one of your shadowruns." ($7500)

Now, clearly, that money wasn't going to go all to make those characters or assets. Those things, which would probably only be seen by the player, are pure bragging rights and belief in the project.

Now, some people feel that being able to purchase these things for only a limited time is unethical. Well, I do find that an odd choice of words. Again, is a digital statue worth $500? Probably not. It's about expressing faith in the game. And the way kickstarters work, you only have limited time to make that initial nut of money. And that initial nut of money is important in more ways than the obvious. RSI, you know, Star Citizen, used the number of backers and the amount invested in that kickstarter to show to venture capitalists to say 'hey, there's real interest here. Invest in us, and you'll get return.' So having things that cost more, inviting people to show their faith, and bust through the stretch goals, will bring more and more money to the game. And the more money you bring to the game, the better the game will be. Because, frankly, time is money. If you have no money, you have one, two artists working after hours. If you have money, you can hire those artists to be full time. And that means more and better art, faster.

The more money, the more game, faster.

Kickstarter is the way to get that.

The promised return on your investment is hope.

Sound cool to you guys?

Edit: While typing, I see Trix summed up what I'm saying in one line.

[Zombie Man]

Even if a Kick starter doesn't offer rewards, the person giving the money isn't giving a donation, its for the 'hope' of the product the kick starter is offering. You cant have a kick starter that doesn't actually offer something.

Oh, come on. Did you really think I thought KS was for handouts? That was sort of obviated by my use of "project creators", no?



typo edit

[saipaman]

wait what? That can happen?

What would have happened if say for some reason they either don't complete and or don't provide the promised rewards?

From what I gather from kickstarter, it's left between the person that contributed and the maker of the game.

The only thing that would happen is that a lot of people would be disappointed.

[JaguarX]

The only thing that would happen is that a lot of people would be disappointed.

I would imagine so and some probably a bit more than disappointed.

I mean, what happens or what prevents a game maker or kickstarter project person from taking the money and running off with it? Would you have to sue them, assuming they use real contact information, especially with games? And I think Kickstarter mention that most don't because of reputation but that doesn't bring the money back nor prevent them from just simply creating a new identity and repeating process.

[lapucelle]

I suspect some of the contributors would be able to afford a lawsuit to force either the promised product or a refund, mind you. A number of people who might contribute are well enough off and passionate enough to do that. As far as 'real contact information', remember, that money has to get to a bank account somehow. I'm sure between Amazon, Kickstarter, and a number of other people, there's more than enough evidence to track an errant kickstart person down.

But the MWM devs are 'us'. A number of them were involved in the Katrina relief (and yes, I remember how that got screwy) and have both learned from that incident, as well as remained the good people they were then. Any purchase, and any kickstarter especially, is a measure of how much trust you have in the people who are making it. In this case, in the community of City of Heroes.

Personally, I like those odds.

[JaguarX]

I suspect some of the contributors would be able to afford a lawsuit to force either the promised product or a refund, mind you. A number of people who might contribute are well enough off and passionate enough to do that. As far as 'real contact information', remember, that money has to get to a bank account somehow. I'm sure between Amazon, Kickstarter, and a number of other people, there's more than enough evidence to track an errant kickstart person down.

But the MWM devs are 'us'. A number of them were involved in the Katrina relief (and yes, I remember how that got screwy) and have both learned from that incident, as well as remained the good people they were then. Any purchase, and any kickstarter especially, is a measure of how much trust you have in the people who are making it. In this case, in the community of City of Heroes.

Personally, I like those odds.

cool stuff.

well the MWM devs are people I heard about, but really don't know much about them and might occasionally talk to online but I talk to dozens of people online and probably wouldn't invite them over to the crib or interact with them in real life based off of online relationship. But I'm naturally about as nervous as a fat squirrel in an Alabama Hunter's lodge when it comes to crossing over that online thing into real life. Thus I'm trying to measure it in terms of how likely they are to at least attempt severely that the game is made and takes off. Of course if it crashes due to unforeseen circumstances out of anyone's control, I wont be angry at all and probably wont even bother asking for anything back at all even if I could. It's a risk. Probably a crazy small one, but a risk nonetheless. As long as it don't seem they will run off or the project look suspect which so far it don't although I suspect more info will be released later, then I'm all good. And thus far I like what I see overall. 

[ukaserex]

I thank most of you for your replies.

  Noy, man, I do really, really miss the msrs, the iTrials and tfs. Far more than I ever thought I would. 

I think, for me, the kickstarter represents something like a bit of kindling to a smoldering ember. MWM, left alone, could burn out, or it could catch. But, with the kickstarter (acting as kindling), it has a better chance of turning into a real fire.

Sadly, as I've stated elsewhere in these forums, I've got to have my gall bladder removed soon, and I don't have insurance. September 8th is a bit off, and I'll certainly try - but with the hospital bills looming, I'm just not sure I'll be able to support the effort in any way other than atrocious puns.

For example: I thought I saw Noyjitat practicing sign language in front of a mirror. I was mistaken. It was just some dumb guy talking to himself.

As for Golden Girl's commentary - I have to re-read it and think about it. Typically, I gloss over those comments because they used to have too many emoticons.

Have a nice day!

[JaguarX]

I thank most of you for your replies.

  Noy, man, I do really, really miss the msrs, the iTrials and tfs. Far more than I ever thought I would. 

I think, for me, the kickstarter represents something like a bit of kindling to a smoldering ember. MWM, left alone, could burn out, or it could catch. But, with the kickstarter (acting as kindling), it has a better chance of turning into a real fire.

Sadly, as I've stated elsewhere in these forums, I've got to have my gall bladder removed soon, and I don't have insurance. September 8th is a bit off, and I'll certainly try - but with the hospital bills looming, I'm just not sure I'll be able to support the effort in any way other than atrocious puns.

For example: I thought I saw Noyjitat practicing sign language in front of a mirror. I was mistaken. It was just some dumb guy talking to himself.

As for Golden Girl's commentary - I have to re-read it and think about it. Typically, I gloss over those comments because they used to have too many emoticons.

Have a nice day!

yeah good luck with that gall bladder removal. Yeah crap happens.

I think I need a new engine for the Jaguar. Think since I haven't started if or a while, dealing with electrical issues the oil from the tensioners drained out. Problem is when starting either the pump was slow or one of the holes are clogged, the oil didnt get there in time and the chain jumped before the tensioner could do it's job. Looking at 4-7thousands not including labor. Don't sound or look like I bent valves but to reset timing and everything new tensioner, chain, and maybe the oil pump, I'm looking at about the same price anyways. smdh.

[Golden Girl]

I should also add:

Just because a donor gets an in-game thanks doesn't rule out players from getting their avatars to be especially saluted with statues or named NPCs or buildings or whatever may be decided.

So you'll make sure you word it clearly so that people who pay for a statue now know that everyone might get access to their own statue for free at some time in the future? I'm sure you wouldn't want to scam people out of money on a false promise of exclusivity.

[Golden Girl]

Even if a Kick starter doesn't offer rewards, the person giving the money isn't giving a donation, its for the 'hope' of the product the kick starter is offering. You cant have a kick starter that doesn't actually offer something.

The concept behind KS is good, but most projects seem to use it as a mild form of coercion to bounce people into handing over money before a randomly set deadline.
A normal donation system is a much more transparent and democratic way of raising money, as it puts everyone on the same level without anyone being able to buy special status or rewards within the game - people are able to give as much or as little as they like, whenever they like, without ever feeling like they're missing out on anything through a lack of money or time.

[JaguarX]

The concept behind KS is good, but most projects seem to use it as a mild form of coercion to bounce people into handing over money before a randomly set deadline.
A normal donation system is a much more transparent and democratic way of raising money, as it puts everyone on the same level without anyone being able to buy special status or rewards within the game - people are able to give as much or as little as they like, whenever they like, without ever feeling like they're missing out on anything through a lack of money or time.

What is this normal donation system you speak of? And why wasn't that chosen, if you know?
Didn't know that was an option.

[Golden Girl]

What is this normal donation system you speak of? And why wasn't that chosen, if you know?
Didn't know that was an option.

It's just a simple page or button put on your website that people can click and donate any sum of money at any time to the website - for example, at the bottom of the Titan page is a button marked "buy us a cup of coffee" - http://www.cohtitan.com - click it, and it takes you to a page where you can make a donation to help the Titan Network with their running costs. There's no time limit on when you can give them money, and no perks for being wealthy enough to give them large sums - the only reward is the continued existence of the Titan Network, just like the only reward for a donation to a game project is the creation of the game.
Probably the most well known example of a simple donation system is the one that Wikipedia pushes from time to time when they need extra funds to help keep their site going - but you can also donate at any time by clicking  the "donate" link near the top of the index on the left -  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page.

This kind of system is very transparent, democratic and community-friendly, and doesn't divide donors up into haves and have-nots with a time-gated and wealth-based reward system.

[downix]

I thank most of you for your replies.

  Noy, man, I do really, really miss the msrs, the iTrials and tfs. Far more than I ever thought I would. 

I think, for me, the kickstarter represents something like a bit of kindling to a smoldering ember. MWM, left alone, could burn out, or it could catch. But, with the kickstarter (acting as kindling), it has a better chance of turning into a real fire.

Sadly, as I've stated elsewhere in these forums, I've got to have my gall bladder removed soon, and I don't have insurance. September 8th is a bit off, and I'll certainly try - but with the hospital bills looming, I'm just not sure I'll be able to support the effort in any way other than atrocious puns.

For example: I thought I saw Noyjitat practicing sign language in front of a mirror. I was mistaken. It was just some dumb guy talking to himself.

As for Golden Girl's commentary - I have to re-read it and think about it. Typically, I gloss over those comments because they used to have too many emoticons.

Have a nice day!

Good luck with the gall bladder.

A piece of advise from when my wife's aunt had hers out, be sure to have the doctors get a good scan of your pancreas while they are in there. Gallbladder surgery is one of the rare times you can get a good look at the pancreas and get a baseline for future scans, and pancreatic cancer is one of the most deadly forms out there. Having that baseline gave the doctors earlier notice of the cancer, and my wifes aunt is alive today because of that.

[JaguarX]

It's just a simple page or button put on your website that people can click and donate any sum of money at any time to the website - for example, at the bottom of the Titan page is a button marked "buy us a cup of coffee" - http://www.cohtitan.com - click it, and it takes you to a page where you can make a donation to help the Titan Network with their running costs. There's no time limit on when you can give them money, and no perks for being wealthy enough to give them large sums - the only reward is the continued existence of the Titan Network, just like the only reward for a donation to a game project is the creation of the game.
Probably the most well known example of a simple donation system is the one that Wikipedia pushes from time to time when they need extra funds to help keep their site going - but you can also donate at any time by clicking  the "donate" link near the top of the index on the left -  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page.

This kind of system is very transparent, democratic and community-friendly, and doesn't divide donors up into haves and have-nots with a time-gated and wealth-based reward system.

yeah? That sounds wonderful.

I yearn for game where there isn't a divide between the has and has nots. I didn't think it was even possible. That system do sound community friendly. For a game though, would they be able to add say something like a progress bar to show how much is raised?

[Golden Girl]

yeah? That sounds wonderful.

I yearn for game where there isn't a divide between the has and has nots. I didn't think it was even possible. That system do sound community friendly. For a game though, would they be able to add say something like a progress bar to show how much is raised?

Yes, you can have public progress bars - and you can even itemize the progress to enhance motivation and transparency, and break down what might seem like a daunting goal into smaller goals - for example, you tell people that you need x dollars to help implement x concept/idea/system - this sets a smaller funding target, while letting people know exactly what their money would be spent on. Once that goal is complete, you announce the next one, and so on. This also forces the developers into much greater accountability - they need to deliver on each of these goals as they go along, rather than the much more vague Kickstarter approach of demanding a sum within a limited time for a set of large promises.
If you can't afford to donate, say, $1000 to a KS campaign within the set timeframe, you're out of luck - if you can donate, you're still just contributing to a general game making fund, with little transparency. But under a fair donation system, you donate as much as you like, when you like, with the added bonus that by helping a project reach its smaller goals, you get to see if they can deliver or not, without having to invest nearly so much at one time.

[lapucelle]

Of course, this system GG suggests does have the little issue of not having the accountability of Kickstarter. And not having the infrastructure, advertising, and backend of Kickstarter, either.

If, at the end of a month, the target goal is not made, on Kickstarter, nobody's out any money.

Further, the progress bar is managed by Kickstarter. You know it's honest. On a number of other methods, the progress bars have been known to be... less than honest. And the money's sunk the moment you spend it. You give Wikipedia money, it's gone. You give, say, Free Republic money... someone looked at the progress bar. It was hardcoded not to change. With Kickstarter, you know the kickstartee isn't screwing around with that. Either the project is popular enough to succeed... or it's not worth doing. You have to make judgement calls about these things. Do you really think that a 'donate' button with no urgency involved will prompt people to spend fifty dollars? Or do you think that they'll decide to do it later, if at all?

I don't think that's very fair to the donor or recipient at all. But it all depends on your definition of fair.

There are reasons people like Kickstarter.

Now, I understand that GG likes the 'oh just give us money' method, and that's a wonderful thing to use. It's entirely possible to use it in addition to the Kickstarter. Robert Space Industries has. But they kickstarted too. There's no reason the two methods have to be exclusive.

But I'm not going to speak about whys and wherefores before that sort of thing is announced, I can't speak for MWM in that.

I'm just going to say that Kickstarter _has_ been proven to work. And it works well enough that they've made entire movies with it.

I, uh, don't understand why you think the potential for a free statue is scamming, GG. Can you explain that a little further?

Do you feel Kickstarter itself is unethical? What projects on Kickstarter were ethical, and what projects were unethical?
Was Double Fine Adventure unethical?
Was the Veronica Mars movie unethical?
Was Shadowrun Returns unethical?
How was Penny Arcade's 'give us money for no ads' less ethical than a donate button on their website? Is it the pure time element?

[JaguarX]

Of course, this system GG suggests does have the little issue of not having the accountability of Kickstarter. And not having the infrastructure, advertising, and backend of Kickstarter, either.

If, at the end of a month, the target goal is not made, on Kickstarter, nobody's out any money.

Further, the progress bar is managed by Kickstarter. You know it's honest. On a number of other methods, the progress bars have been known to be... less than honest. And the money's sunk the moment you spend it. You give Wikipedia money, it's gone. You give, say, Free Republic money... someone looked at the progress bar. It was hardcoded not to change. With Kickstarter, you know the kickstartee isn't screwing around with that. Either the project is popular enough to succeed... or it's not worth doing. You have to make judgement calls about these things. Do you really think that a 'donate' button with no urgency involved will prompt people to spend fifty dollars? Or do you think that they'll decide to do it later, if at all?

I don't think that's very fair to the donor or recipient at all. But it all depends on your definition of fair.

There are reasons people like Kickstarter.

Now, I understand that GG likes the 'oh just give us money' method, and that's a wonderful thing to use. It's entirely possible to use it in addition to the Kickstarter. Robert Space Industries has. But they kickstarted too. There's no reason the two methods have to be exclusive.

But I'm not going to speak about whys and wherefores before that sort of thing is announced, I can't speak for MWM in that.

I'm just going to say that Kickstarter _has_ been proven to work. And it works well enough that they've made entire movies with it.

Yeah true. From what I gather, Kickstarter have some accountability...until that goal is reached and the project gets the money than it's sunk and what happens after that happens and is between the donor and the game maker after that.

Seems like both has ups and downs. 

Although I question the advertising effectiveness given the low success rate about 1/3rd of game that make their goal. Seems like people donate games that know and or knew about before posting on kickstarter.

Maybe using both is a way to go, especially for TPP since the kick starter date is publicized it seems and wouldn't be a good look if they backed out now, they could use the donation thing if for some reason the kick starter money runs out.

[lapucelle]

Yes, the accountability ends when the goal is made or not, but that's still an improvement over, say, Indiegogo, which delivers the money regardless of the goal being made. Saying you're going to kickstart is a statement that you have confidence in what you're doing, that you know you'll have the fanbase to pull off the request you make.

The advertising effectiveness I meant was that there's a population there, you have automatic mailings for the updates, and so on. It's up to you to spread the word, but you have the tools to do it with, to format the updates and design the information you're putting out. A donate button gives you no mailing list, for example. At least, not by default.

I'd consider 1/3 of everything meeting their goal a pretty good success rate, really. But that's just me. I suppose it depends on your expectations.

[Golden Girl]

I, uh, don't understand why you think the potential for a free statue is scamming, GG. Can you explain that a little further?

In any MMO there are 2 levels of reality - the lore/setting, and the players - and finding ways for the players to permanently affect the lore/setting is vital for immersion - letting players simply buy their way into it is unethical, because it sets up a real world financial barrier that has nothing to do with playing the game - players should earn a statue for being a badass hero during an epic storyline, not for having a badass bank balance.

[lapucelle]

I see. So how do you feel about unique costume pieces? Are statues unique here, or is offering costume pieces only to people who paid for them in the kickstart unethical?

Would you feel better about this if people could buy statues after the kickstarter ended?
Would you feel better about this if people could buy statues after the game launched?

In order for a MMO to be made, it is going to require an amount of money. Again, many MMOs cost as much as feature films these days. How would you suggest a company entice people to contribute that money, given that many kickstarter veterans say that physical objects often cause many more problems than they serve, often costing more than the money they contribute?

I believe Steve Jackson Games' kickstarter left them several thousand in a hole, simply because OGRE was such a success. 

[Zombie Man]

In any MMO there are 2 levels of reality - the lore/setting, and the players - and finding ways for the players to permanently affect the lore/setting is vital for immersion - letting players simply buy their way into it is unethical, because it sets up a real world financial barrier that has nothing to do with playing the game - players should earn a statue for being a badass hero during an epic storyline, not for having a badass bank balance.

You keep using that word, 'unethical,' I assure you, you don't know what that means.

[JaguarX]

You keep using that word, 'unethical,' I assure you, you don't know what that means.

well unethical means lacking moral principles. Which then what is ethical and unethical all depends on what is considered moral principles and who or what those principles are based of off which can vary from person to person situation to situation. So anything and everything can be ethical and everything and anything can be unethical. Depends on the person view.

Like many think it's unethical to kill, but ethical if the killing take place in a middle of a war while still some people think killing even then is unethical while a few minor few think it's ethical to kill for what ever reason they choose (although laws tend to draw the line so there is some sort of standard).

[Golden Girl]

I see. So how do you feel about unique costume pieces? Are statues unique here, or is offering costume pieces only to people who paid for them in the kickstart unethical?

That's just as unethical - if you're claiming to make a game for CoH players, gating costume pieces behind a time limited pay wall would be staggeringly bad decsiion.

Would you feel better about this if people could buy statues after the kickstarter ended?
Would you feel better about this if people could buy statues after the game launched?

If they don't clearly mark the KS ones as non-exclusive, it'd  be a bait-and-switch - but if they do clearly mark them as non-exclusive, then there'd be no motivation to buy them within the KS timeframe.

In order for a MMO to be made, it is going to require an amount of money. Again, many MMOs cost as much as feature films these days. How would you suggest a company entice people to contribute that money, given that many kickstarter veterans say that physical objects often cause many more problems than they serve, often costing more than the money they contribute?

The enticement should be the prospect of creating the game - an honest game project stands or falls by its ability to inspire perk-free donations.

[Golden Girl]

You keep using that word, 'unethical,' I assure you, you don't know what that means.

I know exactly what it means - which is why I'm using it for this kind of behavior.

[Aggelakis]

Well, the OP was answered and now we're off in weirdo wordplay land. Locking thread!