Back in the old days, devs released a crappy game and prayed some poor idiots bought it before the word spread it was shite.  Hell, devs still do this today.

But now days we have what's called kick starter where you just promise a game and people will give you money.  Can it be legitimate?  Yes.  But the potential for abuse is great in my opinion.  What are the safe guards so people don't lose their money?

I pay $60 for a game if I like it.  There's a lot of great ideas or games I would like to play but have no funding.  Would I be willing to pledge $1000 or $10,000 to a game's development to see it to fruition with no payout other than to play what in the end is a $60 game for what amounts to a few online trinkets, a title, or some other digital equivalent marking me as a founder.  Hell to the fooking no.

Now...if there was a promise to share in the rewards at release, like purchasing of stock or bonds, I might have a different view.

Back in the old days, gaming was about having a good time.  Now it's all about microtransaction, freetoplay scams and finding ways to part little nerds from their hard earned cash. 

That's my take.  Anyone here made any money from their 'investment' in kickstarter?

Originally posted by Terranah

Back in the old days, devs released a crappy game and prayed some poor idiots bought it before the word spread it was shite.  Hell, devs still do this today.

 

But now days we have what's called kick starter where you just promise a game and people will give you money.  Can it be legitimate?  Yes.  But the potential for abuse is great in my opinion.  What are the safe guards so people don't lose their money?

 

I pay $60 for a game if I like it.  There's a lot of great ideas or games I would like to play but have no funding.  Would I be willing to pledge $1000 or $10,000 to a game's development to see it to fruition with no payout other than to play what in the end is a $60 game for what amounts to a few online trinkets, a title, or some other digital equivalent marking me as a founder.  Hell to the fooking no.

 

Now...if there was a promise to share in the rewards at release, like purchasing of stock or bonds, I might have a different view.

 

Back in the old days, gaming was about having a good time.  Now it's all about microtransaction, freetoplay scams and finding ways to part little nerds from their hard earned cash. 

 

That's my take.  Anyone here made any money from their 'investment' in kickstarter?

kickstarter has only been around a couple years and all the bigger titles i have seen have only been funded in the past year or so, so little to early to tell.. if i get a really fun game out of ones I put money in like the repopulation and Star Citizen then yes ill say my "investment" was well worth it

i feel like its basically welfare for game devs. Its not an investment, there is no oversight on its use... no recourse for the "donator" if things go bellyup. It reminds me of those plastic buckets on convenience store counters with the little sign on it asking for your change..

I don't like the trend. If you have a good enough idea and the talent to make it you shouldn't have any problem earning funding the proper way.

I've always looked at it as encouraging the production of games I'm interested in.  I can always get more money, but I can't get entertaining games, nearly as easy.  I look at the past history of the Dev's and also their presentation.  I'm more than willing to risk some money to let people try their hand at producing an entertaining game.

Given how risk adverse most suits tend to be, is it any wonder that we see the endless number of limited difference theme games we have for years now?

What we DON"T need is for the heavy hand of government to get involved, to "protect" people.  Everyone should be expected to do their own research, and make their own choices.

The only return you will get is fun playing the game, should it ever be released.  What percent of all games kickstarted have been released?

Kickstarter takes 5% off the top of every contribution.  Pretty nice gig eh?  They do not garuntee your money back (thus releasing their own personal liability) should the company not meet the milestone or just flat out defraud you, because your money is given to the company or person making the game.  It is then the person or companies responsibility to pay the money back should they not meet their goals.  

I have 'investments' as well.  They pay me 5k per month, every month.  That is an 'investment'.  Kickstarter is just a way of donating money, as the OP said, without tax benefit.  Essentially you are just giving money away, and a fool is easily parted from his money as any scam artist can attest.

But as I stated, are there legitmate kickstarter projects out there, yes there are.  But think carefully before throwing your money down a black hole never to see again.

Originally posted by Terranah

The only return you will get is fun playing the game, should it ever be released.  What percent of all games kickstarted have been released?

 

Kickstarter takes 5% off the top of every contribution.  Pretty nice gig eh?  They do not garuntee your money back (thus releasing their own personal liability) should the company not meet the milestone or just flat out defraud you, because your money is given to the company or person making the game.  It is then the person or companies responsibility to pay the money back should they not meet their goals.  

 

I have 'investments' as well.  They pay me 5k per month, every month.  That is an 'investment'.  Kickstarter is just a way of donating money, as the OP said, without tax benefit.  Essentially you are just giving money away, and a fool is easily parted from his money as any scam artist can attest.

 

But as I stated, are there legitmate kickstarter projects out there, yes there are.  But think carefully before throwing your money down a black hole never to see again.

nm after reading the kickstarter terms they ARE required to come through or provide a refund

Originally posted by Wraithone

I've always looked at it as encouraging the production of games I'm interested in.  I can always get more money, but I can't get entertaining games, nearly as easy.  I look at the past history of the Dev's and also their presentation.  I'm more than willing to risk some money to let people try their hand at producing an entertaining game.

Given how risk adverse most suits tend to be, is it any wonder that we see the endless number of limited difference theme games we have for years now?

What we DON"T need is for the heavy hand of government to get involved, to "protect" people.  Everyone should be expected to do their own research, and make their own choices.

 What 'risk' are you speaking of.  You are giving them money.  If they steal it, you never see it again.  If they reach their milestone, you never see it again.  There is no risk involved, only giving them money.  Maybe you will get the money back if the company or person is honest, but why take a risk you don't have to?  Because you like to play good games.  Hell we all like that.  But that's not reason throw money at anyone making promises.

Anyone know what the percent of games kick started acttually get released to any kind of critical aclaim, or at the very least hailed as a success by gamers (which is the only true measure I care about anyway)?

Originally posted by Aerowyn

Originally posted by Terranah

The only return you will get is fun playing the game, should it ever be released.  What percent of all games kickstarted have been released?

 

Kickstarter takes 5% off the top of every contribution.  Pretty nice gig eh?  They do not garuntee your money back (thus releasing their own personal liability) should the company not meet the milestone or just flat out defraud you, because your money is given to the company or person making the game.  It is then the person or companies responsibility to pay the money back should they not meet their goals.  

 

I have 'investments' as well.  They pay me 5k per month, every month.  That is an 'investment'.  Kickstarter is just a way of donating money, as the OP said, without tax benefit.  Essentially you are just giving money away, and a fool is easily parted from his money as any scam artist can attest.

 

But as I stated, are there legitmate kickstarter projects out there, yes there are.  But think carefully before throwing your money down a black hole never to see again.

could say the same thing for any person that walks into a casino.. of course its a gamble.. you are gambling on an idea that a great game will be made and you are willing to part with some money to see it through(and usually get lots of nice perks for donating them money).. of course there is no guarantee pretty sure people who donate to kickstarter are well aware of that fact.. 

 Bad analogy.  In a casino you put money in a slot machine for a chance to get more money back.  In Kickstarter, you are forbidden under the companies policy to share in any of the profits or even a chance to share in profits.

It's nothing like gambling in a casino. 

Originally posted by Terranah

 

 What 'risk' are you speaking of.  You are giving them money.  If they steal it, you never see it again.  If they reach their milestone, you never see it again.  There is no risk involved, only giving them money.  Maybe you will get the money back if the company or person is honest, but why take a risk you don't have to?  Because you like to play good games.  Hell we all like that.  But that's not reason throw money at anyone making promises.

 

Anyone know what the percent of games kick started acttually get released to any kind of critical aclaim, or at the very least hailed as a success by gamers (which is the only true measure I care about anyway)?

 

 

 

 

again kickstarter is new (started 2009) it just started getting widespread attention in the past year or so most games take several years of development.. way to early to start claiming kickstarter is just basically a scam

Originally posted by TribeofOne

i feel like its basically welfare for game devs. Its not an investment, there is no oversight on its use... no recourse for the "donator" if things go bellyup. It reminds me of those plastic buckets on convenience store counters with the little sign on it asking for your change..

I don't like the trend. If you have a good enough idea and the talent to make it you shouldn't have any problem earning funding the proper way.

My thoughts exactly.

Originally posted by jdnewell

Originally posted by TribeofOne

i feel like its basically welfare for game devs. Its not an investment, there is no oversight on its use... no recourse for the "donator" if things go bellyup. It reminds me of those plastic buckets on convenience store counters with the little sign on it asking for your change..

I don't like the trend. If you have a good enough idea and the talent to make it you shouldn't have any problem earning funding the proper way.

My thoughts exactly.

 

issue is most publishers nowadays are just in it for the quick buck so instead of the planscape torments we get fifa 2013 or the next COD game.. you want to be unique and put out new ideas you are going to be much more hard pressed to get funding hence why i feel kickstarter is a great idea or we could just let EA eat up every decent developer left..

Originally posted by Terranah

Originally posted by Wraithone

I've always looked at it as encouraging the production of games I'm interested in.  I can always get more money, but I can't get entertaining games, nearly as easy.  I look at the past history of the Dev's and also their presentation.  I'm more than willing to risk some money to let people try their hand at producing an entertaining game.

Given how risk adverse most suits tend to be, is it any wonder that we see the endless number of limited difference theme games we have for years now?

What we DON"T need is for the heavy hand of government to get involved, to "protect" people.  Everyone should be expected to do their own research, and make their own choices.

 What 'risk' are you speaking of.  You are giving them money.  If they steal it, you never see it again.  If they reach their milestone, you never see it again.  There is no risk involved, only giving them money.  Maybe you will get the money back if the company or person is honest, but why take a risk you don't have to?  Because you like to play good games.  Hell we all like that.  But that's not reason throw money at anyone making promises.

 

Anyone know what the percent of games kick started acttually get released to any kind of critical aclaim, or at the very least hailed as a success by gamers (which is the only true measure I care about anyway)?

 

 

 

 

The context was that of the suits who make the typical decisions in the current gaming industry... As for the money, this is a hobby to me. I spend more than that in a given month any way.  If I can get a good, enjoyable game out of it, then I'm happy. If it doesn't turn out, then I'm not out much, and will add them to the list of those not to be supported in the future.

Originally posted by jdnewell

Originally posted by TribeofOne

i feel like its basically welfare for game devs. Its not an investment, there is no oversight on its use... no recourse for the "donator" if things go bellyup. It reminds me of those plastic buckets on convenience store counters with the little sign on it asking for your change..

I don't like the trend. If you have a good enough idea and the talent to make it you shouldn't have any problem earning funding the proper way.

My thoughts exactly.

 

Well, the reality of the VC area is a bit more complicated than that. Especially given the current economic problems.  Its not nearly enough to have good ideas, or even a good design document and experience. What the VC types want is minimal risk for the maximum ROI.  One has only to look around us to know whats wrong with that approach.  If all you want is Me Too type clones of various popular games, then by all means stick to that methodology.

If KS is able to cut out the VC middle men and produce entertaining games, then I'm more than happy to be part of the process.

Originally posted by Wraithone

Originally posted by jdnewell

Originally posted by TribeofOne

i feel like its basically welfare for game devs. Its not an investment, there is no oversight on its use... no recourse for the "donator" if things go bellyup. It reminds me of those plastic buckets on convenience store counters with the little sign on it asking for your change..

I don't like the trend. If you have a good enough idea and the talent to make it you shouldn't have any problem earning funding the proper way.

My thoughts exactly.

 

Well, the reality of the VC area is a bit more complicated than that. Especially given the current economic problems.  Its not nearly enough to have good ideas, or even a good design document and experience. What the VC types want is minimal risk for the maximum ROI.  One has only to look around us to know whats wrong with that approach.  If all you want is Me Too type clones of various popular games, then by all means stick to that methodology.

If KS is able to cut out the VC middle men and produce entertaining games, then I'm more than happy to be part of the process.

 Except almost no one is asking for enough to make a game. The majority just ask for enough to build something to interest investors. If they could interest investors to begin with they wouldn't need Kickstarter. The only way to interest investors is to build something very much like something that succeeded before. Which does nothing to address the core problem that investors aren't interested in investing in anything new. It's an epic wheel of fail.

Kickstarter is the exact opposite of a charity, it's free market capitalism.

You buy assets and support a company trying to make assets.

Charity is a social platform, it doesn't involve ownership or profits.

Originally posted by CalmOceans
Kickstarter is the exact opposite of a charity, it's capitalism.

 No part of capitalism involves throwing money away with no hope of return.

Originally posted by CalmOceans

Kickstarter is the exact opposite of a charity, it's capitalism.

You buy assets and support a company trying to make assets.

Charity is a social platform, it doesn't involve ownership or profits.

The person donating doesn't get any return. It's ultimately just a donation.