Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

How Long Before the Kickstarter Bubble Bursts?

Soulskill posted more than 2 years ago | from the when-people-realize-they-don't-have-that-much-patience dept.

Businesses 192

An opinion piece at Gamasutra takes a look at the recent success of Kickstarter campaigns for video game projectsDouble Fine's adventure game and a sequel to Wasteland each raised around $3 million. Hundreds of other projects have sprung up, hoping to replicate that success — but will it last? From the article: "I am convinced that Tim Schafer and his team at Double Fine know how to deliver a game (mostly) on time and (mostly) on budget. Brian Fargo too. Is that true for all 314 of the current Kickstarter projects? What about the projects which get started but never finished? If publishers like LucasArts can cancel games that are almost finished or like Codemasters can pay for a game it never saw, what certainty do pledgers have that the game that they have paid for will ever see the light of day? We are still in the early days of our Kickstarter relationship, the early days of falling in love. Everything our partner does is wonderful. We gloss over the risks, we ignore the downsides, because the glory of falling in love is everything. I think we have about six months left of that period. Towards the end of this year, some Kickstarter projects are going to start slipping. Some will see their teams collapse amidst bicker recriminations. Some pledgers are going to start getting very angry."

cancel ×

192 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

No bubble. (5, Insightful)

RyuuzakiTetsuya (195424) | more than 2 years ago | (#39920985)

Might see a drop off, and a leveling off, but a bubble burst?

That implies there's a bubble. Direct financing of projects is the future, not a fad.

Re:No bubble. (2)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39921009)

yeah as usual a shitty article title.

Re:No bubble. (5, Interesting)

Anubis IV (1279820) | more than 2 years ago | (#39921121)

Agreed. About the only thing I can see is someone else coming along to steal Kickstarter's thunder, but the idea behind Kickstarter isn't going anywhere in the foreseeable future. It may suffer some setbacks among the people who don't understand the difference between what Kickstarter does and making a pre-order on Amazon if there are higher-profile failures or scams, but there are many people (myself included) who are interested in funding these sorts of projects and understand the risks therein, and we're not going away. If anything, the number of people who "get it" is increasing.

Re:No bubble. (2)

zlives (2009072) | more than 2 years ago | (#39921421)

Does any one have some info on a completed project by kick starter.
I like the idea of kick starter. I had no problem paying for an early beta for taleworlds mount and blade. but i am wondering... are there any successful projects that can highlight this as more than idealistic.

not trying to be a troll, just really want to know.

OoTS - mostly like that. (3, Informative)

khasim (1285) | more than 2 years ago | (#39921757)

The Order of The Stick reprint drive.
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/599092525/the-order-of-the-stick-reprint-drive/posts [kickstarter.com]

This may also be the first instance of the project developer (Rich Burlew) being so completely involved with the supporters as the project exceeded the initial goal.

Flip through the updates notifications to see what he added as enticements to get to each new level. And what his progress has been on delivering on those commitments.

100% transparency and thousands of fans eagerly awaiting delivery.

Re:OoTS - mostly like that. (1)

glassware (195317) | more than 2 years ago | (#39922233)

But... Rich hasn't completed his project. And Rich has a terrible history of overpromising and underperforming deliveries (i.e. comic release schedules).

I'm sure he's being transparent, and he's a really good artist and very well intentioned. I'm just not sure he's going to be able to follow through on everything he promises.

Re:OoTS - mostly like that. (3, Informative)

TheGavster (774657) | more than 2 years ago | (#39922309)

I would say that OOTS is a very good example of a Kickstarter project demonstrating transparency in the face of a lot of challenges. Rich has a vast number of obligations from the drive and will probably spend the better part of a year paying them off, but keeps the backers up to date with regular announcements. I would forward something like the Fifty Dollar Follow Focus (http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/2120229387/50-dollar-follow-focus) as an example of something that went through the whole process smoothly: People pledged, the goal was met, equipment was purchased, and the product was made and sent out.

Re:OoTS - mostly like that. (3, Insightful)

lgw (121541) | more than 2 years ago | (#39922315)

I think this is the model that will survive: folks with a track record of delivering good stuff looking for funding to do something new. This gives funders both an expectation of quality, and of the history of making it on scedule (in Rich's case, well, let's just say no one will be too surprised or upset if it's very late - but that expetcation was set going in).

Re:No bubble. (1)

SomePgmr (2021234) | more than 2 years ago | (#39922049)

I've backed a number of projects, all funded projects went to completion. Only one was software related...

http://darkskyapp.com/ [darkskyapp.com]

Aside from that I've done a few art and electronics related ones. But I think most people see the writing on the wall... soon you'll actually be investing, not making donations with little "thank you" gifts.

Shameless plug... (1)

sortadan (786274) | more than 2 years ago | (#39922429)

Here [kickstarter.com] is my friends project. Super smart bunch of people. If the kickstarter bubble bursts (through a sullied reputation or scamming or whatever), another one will come along to replace it that learns from the mistakes of the past. It's a clearly good idea. Allowing small niche markets to find and fund engineering and creative talent is something that will always be desirable.

Re:No bubble. (3, Interesting)

Svartalf (2997) | more than 2 years ago | (#39923143)

Not completed, but looks like it will finish: Schlock Mercenary: Capital Offensive [livingworldsgames.com] - mainly waiting on the printers for the parts to the game; artwork and design's done.

And you could do a bit of Google-fu (http://www.kickstarter.com/discover/successful [kickstarter.com] ) and see the other projects out there for yourself... ;-D

Ogre! (3, Insightful)

khasim (1285) | more than 2 years ago | (#39921645)

About the only thing I can see is someone else coming along to steal Kickstarter's thunder, but the idea behind Kickstarter isn't going anywhere in the foreseeable future.

I hope it doesn't go anywhere because it is a great idea.

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/847271320/ogre-designers-edition [kickstarter.com]

Kickstarter allows the developer to get in direct contact with the people who are willing to commit to his/her project. Which is GREAT in cases like the above example. Things that were abandoned long ago can be revived without having to secure millions of dollars of investment cash.

Re:No bubble. (3, Insightful)

Jessified (1150003) | more than 2 years ago | (#39922085)

I think a more formal reputation system to use Kickstarter will become necessary (think Ebay).

Similar problems happen with any online transaction. There needs to be some way to ascertain the likelihood that you will get screwed.

Kickstarter should require verified identification for project starters, and there should be a reputation system, where people get to look at the "feedback" of previous projects (i.e. did the project live up to expectations?)

Re:No bubble. (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39921155)

Pretty much this. "Bubbles" are what happen when too many people start investing in something (homes, dot.coms), then pull out during a panic, causing a spiral of decreasing value and investors losing their shirts.

You can't "pull out" of a Kickstarter for a loss; it's not an investor relationship. Sure, you can decide to pay them, then decide not to pay them (but only if the project is ongoing), but once the Kickstarter ends, it's done: you've paid them, they get your money, and you have to trust them to deliver the goods.

If there's a "panic" and people start pulling out of Kickstarters know what happens? Nobody loses any money because the project doesn't get funded and the creatives just don't do the project. You can't put in $100, then decide later you don't want to do it and only get back $20. Kickstarter is the check and balance system that the dot.com era needed to prevent a bursting bubble.

Re:No bubble. (3, Insightful)

jkgamer (179833) | more than 2 years ago | (#39921855)

You can't "pull out" of a Kickstarter for a loss; it's not an investor relationship. Sure, you can decide to pay them, then decide not to pay them (but only if the project is ongoing), but once the Kickstarter ends, it's done: you've paid them, they get your money, and you have to trust them to deliver the goods.

... You can't put in $100, then decide later you don't want to do it and only get back $20. Kickstarter is the check and balance system that the dot.com era needed to prevent a bursting bubble.

While you and I might not see this as an investment, I suspect many people will. Yes, they may not be investing in a piece of the company, however, they are expecting to get something back for their money. (Is it possible to offer a portion of future profits through Kickstarter as a reward?) Kickstarter is a great idea, but I don't have faith that the general public will see it for what it really is, a good faith gamble that your project will come to fruition. How long before the media starts hyping it up and it gets perceived as the next big investment wave? How long before lawyers get involved and starting suing to get that $100 back when the promise isn't delivered? How long before the spammers/scammers/incompetents start loading it up with bogus projects? I may well be wrong, and truly I hope that I am, but I have to side with the overall point of the article and state that I believe this will be a short-lived fad.

No profits (3, Informative)

publiclurker (952615) | more than 2 years ago | (#39922037)

All you can get out of your "investment" is what they claim they will give you. If you only give them a token amount because you just think it's nice idea, you'll only get a thank you card, or perhaps a mention on their website. For greater amounts of money, you can get an actual thing, being a copy of the game, the bracket they are planning on making, etc. For even more money, all you get is more of the same, or perhaps a new choice of colors, feedback on creating a game level, etc.

re: general public (3, Insightful)

King_TJ (85913) | more than 2 years ago | (#39923001)

Well, for one thing? I think most big investors are more demanding and meticulous with their spending/investing. They're not interested in making a big cash outlay into a Kickstarter project - because they're already funding similar things using a more time-tested, traditional model; venture capital firms. They want you to come to THEM with a solid business plan in hand, and sell them on it. They don't want to spend time on a web page, poring over all the little projects people proposed to work on.

Kickstarter is to VC what Prosper.com is to traditional bank loans. It's an alternative way to try to round up some money.

As for lawyers? This may upset/insult some of them to say it, but basically? Lawyers are parasites -- a necessary evil in a dishonest world, perhaps. But parasites nonetheless. Eventually, they get involved in pretty much *every* business or legal transaction individuals in society can conduct. So sure, there will be lawsuits someday related to Kickstarter projects. Will it destroy the whole concept though? I don't see why it should, any more than personal injury law destroyed businesses hiring workers to perform physical labor, or any more than divorce lawyers destroyed the concept of marriage?

Re:No bubble. (2)

jmerlin (1010641) | more than 2 years ago | (#39922431)

You're looking at this solely from the perspective of investors, which in the case of housing and doctoms was partly the owners. In this case, the sole persons to be harmed by this bubble are the entrepreneurs and engineers, because we are not financial institutions funding startups. We're the people creating products at high risk in hopes of getting funding, which is relatively low-barrier-to-entry right now. When the bubble bursts and that barrier reaches the sky, those who took the risk get nailed by the harmful effects, while the financial institutions laugh.

Just because it doesn't harm investors as much as entrepreneurs, doesn't mean it's not a bubble.

the enthusiasm bubble could burst (2, Insightful)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 2 years ago | (#39921165)

right now kickstarter is in the idealistic phase. you give money to people you don't know with great expectations. it doesn't take many silver tongued con artists to put a dent in those expectations. then the cynicism kicks in (no pun intended)

don't get me wrong, i love kickstarter, but this is the romance period, and after awhile people might become more jaded

i hope not, really, i hope not. and maybe eventually we can invent extra trust building methodologies to give people more confidence when they give

Re:the enthusiasm bubble could burst (4, Informative)

IICV (652597) | more than 2 years ago | (#39922725)

right now kickstarter is in the idealistic phase. you give money to people you don't know with great expectations. it doesn't take many silver tongued con artists to put a dent in those expectations. then the cynicism kicks in (no pun intended)

Look, I may not know these people personally - but I think Brian Fargo's [wikipedia.org] resume speaks for itself, as does Jordan Weisman's [wikipedia.org] . I may not know who Matthew Davis or Justin Ma are, but I can see (and so did the IGF) that they have a really great start [ftlgame.com] on a game. If any of them don't deliver, it's going to be because something happened and they couldn't, not because they scammed thousands of people.

The only people who'll get bit by Kickstarter are the ones who don't do enough due dilligence on the projects they're backing; a Kickstarter with no prototype, no vision and no developer pedigree just isn't going to go anywhere.

That's what ended up nearly happening with Nekro and the Hardcore Tactical Whatever by the way - they almost failed, because they lacked at least one of the three and the other two weren't present enough to make up for it. Nekro has a great vision, but they don't have much of a prototype and its developers just don't have the pedigree; if it wasn't for TotalBiscuit, the project probably wouldn't have happened. The Hardcore Tactical Whatever had no vision and no prototype, even though it had some of the developers of Rainbow 6 behind it.

Double Fine Adventure, Wasteland 2 and Shadowrun Returns, on the other hand, all have great developer pedigrees and awesome visions; it's okay that they don't have prototypes, because we all know that Tim Schafer, Brian Fargo and Jordan Weisman can come up with great games - and if they don't, it'll be because development is a bitch (and at least on Double Fine's part, it'll all be on film!)

Not a bubble at all... (1)

wikthemighty (524325) | more than 2 years ago | (#39921169)

Seems Kickstarter is more like business used to be... create an idea, shop it around to get capitol to market said idea. This is just a way to show your idea to the entire internet at once, and get small (but numerous) bits of capitol instead of a lot from one (or a few) investors. It'll work great for some, and not for others - the main thing it changes is the chance to get financial backing directly from people interested, instead of having to go through a large publisher like EA.

Re:Not a bubble at all... (1)

DragonWriter (970822) | more than 2 years ago | (#39921381)

Seems Kickstarter is more like business used to be... create an idea, shop it around to get capitol to market said idea.

The difference is that the people providing the capital aren't doing it in exchange for either equity or debt stakes, they are doing it exchange for something else, usually some form of the regular product that is being funded.

This is a really good deal for the businesses using Kickstarter, but only a good deal for funders if they have a strong emotional investment in the potential product itself and the products actually get made as expected. It wouldn't take a lot of products that fail to deliver after being funded to substantially weaken the funder-side perception of it being a good deal in general.

Re:No bubble. (4, Funny)

Kenja (541830) | more than 2 years ago | (#39921367)

Buying pet food online is the future, not a fad!

Re:No bubble. (5, Funny)

RichardJenkins (1362463) | more than 2 years ago | (#39922729)

Everyone I know buys pet food online<creepy>, but none of us have pets</creepy>.

Right conclusion, bad rationale (3, Insightful)

DragonWriter (970822) | more than 2 years ago | (#39921453)

That implies there's a bubble. Direct financing of projects is the future, not a fad.

Future vs. fad is irrelevant. You can't have a bubble burst because Kickstarter sponsorships aren't a tradeable commodity, so people turning off of the Kickstarter model won't burst anything. There's no market for there to be a bubble in.

If people stop sponsoring through Kickstarter, you'll just have a reversion to people actually having to take a business plan to people who will most likely demand debt or equity stakes in the business to raise capital to launch a new consumer product business (or to expand an existing business to a new consumer product using funds other than the profit of the existing business.)

Re:No bubble. (1)

Sir_Sri (199544) | more than 2 years ago | (#39921755)

Kickstarter isn't investment. It's giving them money in the hopes that it shows publishers there is a market for these products.

Most Kickstarter projects will fail, quite possibly wasteland 2 will be an unmitigated disaster and fail as well. Much as the summary suggests these guys can get it on time and on budget we don't actually know that. We know they can make a product, and we know that they have a good creative vision, but it's like giving 100 bucks to a student for a painting. You're hoping that in the long run they'll be able to sustain themselves on their own. But we don't know if they've ever been on time or on budget, we know obsidian (who they are getting some people from) made a great fallout new vegas, it sold a shitload of copies but it didn't meet the 85 metacritic score required for a bonus, so they had to lay people off. Ex interplay CEO is ex CEO of a company that is basically bankrupt and has been for a while.

The best Kickstarter does is let you take your donations from the community, and go to a publisher and say 'this is how much interest people have in this project, sight unseen, and without guarantees, give us more money to make it work'. What we will hopefully get in the next few years is how big that multiplier has to be, do pubs have to kick in 10%, 90%? 80%? Maybe there are more factors at work that just how much interest there is. I'm not sure I'd give money on kickstarter for someone who said "we need 6million dollars to make a game and 20 million to advertise it to everyone that isn't donating on kickstarter so we can actually make money', but that's a pretty realistic estimate for a half decent project. A mega project feel free to add a zero to each.

Kickstarter will drive a certain amount of the future, it will give people a voice in what content is created so that it's not a bunch of MBA's with spreadsheets figuring out what the most profitable game to make based on the last 5 years will be. But it's not going to completely change investment. If you were putting 10 grand into Wasteland 2 you had to be in a position to lose 10 grand in exchange for basically one copy of the game and some name recognition. The vast majority of us, even game developers can't throw that kind of money at a game project. Relying on steve wozniak to forget his pocket change so you can make a game isn't a business strategy. Games that only get 15 or 20k in funding might see a small mobile release, but they don't exactly have a lot to take to a big release. Sure, there will be the occasional minecraft, but most of them will be student projects growing into something or trying to revitalize a lost franchise.

Re:No bubble. (5, Insightful)

nine-times (778537) | more than 2 years ago | (#39922013)

Yeah, this premise seems biased and kind of... leading. I've seen lots of posting in the past 6 months that seems to be rooting for people to be disappointed by Kickstarter projects and for the whole Kickstarter system to fall apart. What's the deal here? Is it just someone setting themselves up to say "I told you so!" later, so that they can seem smart? Is it some kind of astroturfing?

We've had investment firms and real-estate agents and game publishers and everyone else scamming our money for years. We keep giving them money. Game publishers put out bad games, and we waste money buying them, but that doesn't make us question whether the retail model "bubble" is going to burst. We don't say, "There are a lot of investors losing money in the stock market, and a lot of investors are getting angry. When is the stock market fad going to end?" The big difference with Kickstarter is that it's not all about giving money and control to people who are already rich and powerful.

There isn't *that much* of a difference if I buy the latest Tim Schafer game from a major publisher and it turns out to stink, or if I fund Tim Schafer's Kickstarter campaign and get the game "for free" and the game turns out to stink. Really, there are 2 differences: (a) if the publisher makes the game first, I can read the review before I buy; and (b) in the kickstarter model, Tim Schafer probably has more creative control. Therefore, the whole thing comes down to the question, "Do I generally trust Tim Schafer to make a good game?"

mod parent up? (1)

QuasiSteve (2042606) | more than 2 years ago | (#39922237)

I was going to post something along these lines...

What's the deal here? Is it just someone setting themselves up to say "I told you so!" later, so that they can seem smart? Is it some kind of astroturfing?

...then saw that you already did, so was going to mod you up... only to see that I can't mod or have no mod points to mod with.

It's a combination of "I told you so!" and news sites just wanting to drive 'bad news' in general. Bad news gets more eyes. More comments. More facebook likes. More tweets. And, ultimately, more advertising money.

Re:No bubble. (1)

sethmeisterg (603174) | more than 2 years ago | (#39922887)

Amen to that. As long as there are quality project in need of funding, this method will continue to succeed. I am really looking forward to funding all kinds of reboots of Sierra games in particular -- I loved them in the 90's.

Re:No bubble. (1)

mrmeval (662166) | more than 2 years ago | (#39923677)

Consider them a narcissistic macrodouche who hates it like they hate themselves.

trigger needed (1)

ozduo (2043408) | more than 2 years ago | (#39921015)

history tells us that some sort of trigger is needed to start the panic. One glitch in Facebooks share price could cause another dot com style crash.

It will probably change, but for the better. (5, Insightful)

multiben (1916126) | more than 2 years ago | (#39921035)

One of the things that makes this sort of funding different is that a vast majority of pledgers are contributing very modest sums of money. Can you really get pissed off if you lose $50 in a venture? For a lot of people this sort of funding gives them the chance to participate in something they would otherwise have never got an opportunity to be involved in. I think that what we will see is a refinement of the system and people maybe being a little more selective and those who are seeking funding becoming more professional. I do believe that in some form or another it is here to stay.

Re:It will probably change, but for the better. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39921467)

I agree with the limited risk portion of your initial post. One things that comes to mind is the lottery. Chances of winning are quite tough. If one person purchases 50 Lotto tickets each week, they will win the jackpot about once every 5,000 years. So I would ponder that having a Kickstarter campaign as having a much higher chance of succeeding and a better investment versus a game.

Re:It will probably change, but for the better. (2)

Missing.Matter (1845576) | more than 2 years ago | (#39922609)

Can you really get pissed off if you lose $50 in a venture?

I dunno, judging by some of the comment threads I've read on Kickstarter, there's a lot of talk about class action lawsuits on projects that seem to be going belly up. This talk is championed by people who "only" invested $50 or so, but it seems to be more of an issue of principle, or maybe just a lack of anything else going on in their lives.

Re:It will probably change, but for the better. (2)

Svartalf (2997) | more than 2 years ago | (#39923171)

It's just being sue-happy. They think they can get something out of doing this...when in reality, they'll get NOTHING.

Kickstarter Project to replace Kickstarter? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39921045)

Does anyone want to start a Kickstarter project to replace Kickstarter?

Re:Kickstarter Project to replace Kickstarter? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39921183)

You've been beaten by RocketHub and indiegogo. But have fun.

Re:Kickstarter Project to replace Kickstarter? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39921461)

I'd love to.
Kickstarter as is right now is pretty god damn broken for anything useful.

The site is pretty obtuse in various areas that all comes together to create a right headache.
It is like PHP in a way. Broken in various ways that just gets annoying.
In particular though, it isn't useful for games funding.

Worse yet is it is way too easy to scam people through it.
Without any decent way to express project funding logically, it allows people to just come up with any crap figures pulled out their asses.
Sadly this has happened quite a few times recently.
I've seen projects that could be funded on several k pretty easily that are asking for considerably larger values. (some cases not even having a team where the budget numbers would imply a team-size budget)
Then of course there is the fact that people can't really be made accountable for failures or even outright scams. (not been tested as far as I know, yet!)

So, what to do?
A site that gives people a way to realistically show off the way they will be budgeting their projects.
Double Fine, for example, went through the way they'd be using their funding, went in to great detail at that. This is why they were loved as much as they were when they got funded with so much money, well beyond what they'd ever think they would see.

Let obtuse website design. Kickstarter is just a pain to browse.
Games -> videogames. Really? Clicking twice to get to a sub-category? Why not just have them all at once? Saves both on resources and clicks. Clicks more than anything are a huge waste of bandwidth since they will be likely loading pages they won't need to be on. (I personally like some traditional games though, but just the general idea)
The paging system is annoying at times.
NO WAY TO ORGANIZE.
Default organization equally seems to be somewhat based on popularity. That is wrong. So wrong. Random (by the day) by default.
NO (visible?) WAY TO VIEW CANCELLED / FAILED. (what if I wanted to still follow it??)

Currently, I'd not go near it for self-funding. The noise of so many people using it and the obtuse paging, awful default ordering and lack of any actual organization is just hurting projects more than it is aiding.
It will hit a saturation point if it continues to increase in use. That is going to suck pretty bad for those poor people who actually needed funding and were completely decent about it, but never had a huge following or fanbase.
Kickstomping is going to be the future of Kickstarter in a pretty damn near future. Please fix it guys. Please.

Kickstarter would never do that. (4, Funny)

yerktoader (413167) | more than 2 years ago | (#39921075)

Kickstarter would never lie to us. Kickstarter wouldn't hit us or cheat. Kickstarter is complex and brooding, and sometimes it has trouble expressing it's emotions is all...

Now if you'll excuse me, I need to ice this bruise. I accidentally fell into the door.

Re:Kickstarter would never do that. (3, Informative)

am 2k (217885) | more than 2 years ago | (#39921569)

Kickstarter would never lie to us.

No, they don't. See Who is responsible for fulfilling the promises of a project? [kickstarter.com] on their FAQ. Spoiler: They don't claim to verify anything other than that the project idea itself is ok for Kickstarter.

Insist on Free Projects Developed in the Open (5, Interesting)

zotz (3951) | more than 2 years ago | (#39921095)

Insist on Free Projects Developed in the Open

That way, if things don't quite pan out, the assets may still be useful or someone else may be able to finish things up.

all the best,

drew

Bubble may be a 'hot' word, but it's the wrong one (1)

UCFFool (832674) | more than 2 years ago | (#39921111)

Kickstarter backers will mature, but it's not a bubble, there will not be a burst, but the project vetting process will improve as revenue increases for Kickstarter, as well as the maturity of the backers. It's an evolution, not a bubble. Saturation? Maybe.

Re:Bubble may be a 'hot' word, but it's the wrong (1)

Attila Dimedici (1036002) | more than 2 years ago | (#39921223)

I agree that it is not a bubble. The author may be correct that Kickstarter is not a sustainable model, but it will not "pop". If the author is correct, Kickstarter will just fade away, not burst.

Re:Bubble may be a 'hot' word, but it's the wrong (1)

Githaron (2462596) | more than 2 years ago | (#39921273)

Kickstarter backers will mature, but it's not a bubble, there will not be a burst, but the project vetting process will improve as revenue increases for Kickstarter, as well as the maturity of the backers. It's an evolution, not a bubble. Saturation? Maybe.

I would assume Kickstarter would start doing some kind of background check and creating a scoring algorithm to be a decent indicator of risk. For example, the more money involved, the greater the risk. The more successful projects a group has completed, the lower the risk. The less experience someone has at the type of project he is advocating, the greater the risk. At that point, people can support a project without going in blind.

Re:Bubble may be a 'hot' word, but it's the wrong (1)

wisnoskij (1206448) | more than 2 years ago | (#39921387)

Do you know the definition of a economic bubble? Because it is a perfectly reasonable to theorise and probably correct to say that KS is in a bubble.
If it will burst or just level out is the only real question here.

Re:Bubble may be a 'hot' word, but it's the wrong (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39921969)

No, it isn't a bubble. A bubble does have a definition and in the context of economics it pretty much has to be some sort of investment.

When you buy in on a KS and give the money at the end, you're buying something specific. It might be a name on a list or a cool board game, but you're buying something. Now, individual projects may fail, but if you get people scrambling for the exits all that happens is that KS fails and the projects fail. Nobody loses money in KS unless an individual project fails or the project gives out too much swag for the requested funds.

Kick start my analysis of kick starter (1)

noh8rz3 (2593935) | more than 2 years ago | (#39921115)

All, Please invest in my kick starter project to determine when the kick starter bubble will burst. There is no timeline and no deliverables. Budget is $10 million. First 100 people to invest get an autographed copy of the report. Thanks.

Re:Kick start my analysis of kick starter (1)

icsEater (1093717) | more than 2 years ago | (#39921289)

All, Please invest in my kick starter project to determine when the kick starter bubble will burst. There is no timeline and no deliverables. Budget is $10 million. First 100 people to invest get an autographed copy of the report. Thanks.

Sadly, projects like this already exists in kickstarter. Exhibit A: http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/ribwt/step_1_get_money_from_kickstarter_step_2_abandon/ [reddit.com]

Too bad there's really no way to give feedback. I wish kickstarter would work more similar to a traditional VC. You receive rounds of funding based on performance goals and deliverables instead of a lump sum to spend on whatever you want.

Re:Kick start my analysis of kick starter (1)

Vanderhoth (1582661) | more than 2 years ago | (#39922075)

Actually that is a good idea. I've contributed to several projects and I was thinking what might be nice is to have a several step plan outline. The initial round of fund gathering followed by some benchmark. Then I could donate more if the project is meeting or exceeding their timeline.

Can money be returned if a project is unfinished? (5, Insightful)

Heliosphere1 (2620037) | more than 2 years ago | (#39921205)

A while ago I started developing an indie Elite-like game (yes, it runs on Linux...). I'm funding it out of my personal savings (scary...) but I've had Kickstarter recommended to me by a number of people as a funding alternative. I know very little about it. The indie oriented spirit of the place looked nice enough. I've seen other projects in the genre I'm developing that aren't as far along as mine raise significant funding on Kickstarter, but I've held off because of a few things that are unclear to me. For one, if I funded the development of my project in this way, what happens if something prevents the project from being completed? The Kickstarter info says there is no guarantee that a finished product will be produced, so nominally "nothing happens", but there are large risks involved with developing an indie game with its own custom engine from scratch. Many start, few succeed. I think I would find it quite ethically difficult to live with if I accepted people's money to make something, and for whatever reason wasn't able to complete the project to my or their satisfaction. Even if it is only a small amount from each person, I'd end up feeling pretty miserable if they paid it expecting a finished project which never came to pass. I was never able to find any info about whether a mechanism exists to return funding if projects cannot be completed.

Re:Can money be returned if a project is unfinishe (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39921313)

Use gaymaker, fagget, and you're problems will disapeer.

Re:Can money be returned if a project is unfinishe (1)

wisnoskij (1206448) | more than 2 years ago | (#39921339)

Yes and No
Since the money will already have been spent, most developers would not want to throw more money after bad even if it were right.
But I imagine that the KSs might be able to sue the developer for damages over his breaking of the contract.

Re:Can money be returned if a project is unfinishe (1)

Heliosphere1 (2620037) | more than 2 years ago | (#39921493)

But I imagine that the KSs might be able to sue the developer for damages over his breaking of the contract.

I was pondering it more in a voluntary sense. Say for example that I, as a game developer, due to circumstances beyond my control am unable to finish the project I started. This happens quite often even with the best of initial intentions ... even on well funded commercial projects, let alone tiny-scaled single-developer indie games. If this happens, is there some established mechanism for me to return funds to the people who were kind enough to support the project, without anybody having to sue anybody?

I suppose in many cases the money is simply gone, but for me the alternative to my game project is finding a "real job", in which case I think I'd feel somewhat morally compelled to attempt to return people's hard earned money for a project that never came to pass.

Re:Can money be returned if a project is unfinishe (1)

am 2k (217885) | more than 2 years ago | (#39921709)

I was pondering it more in a voluntary sense. Say for example that I, as a game developer, due to circumstances beyond my control am unable to finish the project I started.[...] If this happens, is there some established mechanism for me to return funds to the people who were kind enough to support the project, without anybody having to sue anybody?

Kickstarter itself doesn't provide any.

I suppose in many cases the money is simply gone, but for me the alternative to my game project is finding a "real job", in which case I think I'd feel somewhat morally compelled to attempt to return people's hard earned money for a project that never came to pass.

If you don't have a "real" job besides the Kickstarter project, how are you paying your rent/food/equipment/etc? If you use the Kickstarter money for that, it's gone by the time you know you have failed.

If you do have a job besides the Kickstarter project, it might go on forever, since there is no extrinsic motivation for you finishing it on time. This has already happend with game projects on Kickstarter, and the backers were not amused. I researched one of these events, and the developer specifically said in an update "I had multiple projects going with a deadline, and the Kickstarter one was the only one where slipping the date wouldn't mean having to pay for a contract violation." That was two years ago, and he still hasn't delivered.

Re:Can money be returned if a project is unfinishe (1)

Heliosphere1 (2620037) | more than 2 years ago | (#39921967)

If you don't have a "real" job besides the Kickstarter project, how are you paying your rent/food/equipment/etc?

It's my last few work years before retirement. I'm funding it out of my retirement savings, which is a dangerous thing to be doing, but I'd rather do something I enjoy doing even at some personal risk. I can do so for several years, but at the cost of living well below a poverty income level while I'm doing it. There are personal costs to that, such as forgoing even cheap vacations.

Kickstarter could (hypothetically) provide a safety margin. If some unexpected expense should appear, such as my (already old) car dies, it's quite possible the project could be completed with KS funding, but not without.

If you use the Kickstarter money for that, it's gone by the time you know you have failed.

Perhaps, but if my project fails I will find a few more years of a normal job, in which case there is a funding source again, some of which could be returned to the KS investors. It appears this doesn't fit into the model, which is fine. I just didn't know either way, before.

Re:Can money be returned if a project is unfinishe (1)

am 2k (217885) | more than 2 years ago | (#39922199)

You could just build a webpage describing the project and ask for preorders (using paypal or Fastspring or whatever), then do some (free) social media advertising.

Re:Can money be returned if a project is unfinishe (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39921517)

In most cases the actual contract is for bumper stickers and the like.

Re:Can money be returned if a project is unfinishe (2)

darkwing_bmf (178021) | more than 2 years ago | (#39921485)

First, don't build a game engine.

Second, the ethics is this: You have to make a good faith effort to achieve the goal you are getting contributions for. You have to use the contributions on things that will materially contribute to the project at hand. If you try and fail, you're ethical. If you spend the money on unrelated things or are extremely incompetent with spending ("Hey guys, I used all of your money to buy some magic beans!") then you're unethical.

Re:Can money be returned if a project is unfinishe (1)

Kergan (780543) | more than 2 years ago | (#39921763)

First, don't build a game engine.

Oh, I'm absolutely certain that Torval, van Rossum and Matz were all told the same thing.

First, don't build an OS...

First, don't build a computer language...

Well, duh... What do you care if I find that it's interesting to do so?

Re:Can money be returned if a project is unfinishe (1)

PlastikMissle (2498382) | more than 2 years ago | (#39921839)

"Well, duh... What do you care if I find that it's interesting to do so?" That's a fine sentiment for a hobby project. But for a project with an expected deliverable within a set time frame most of the time pragmatism beats idealism.

Re:Can money be returned if a project is unfinishe (2)

darkwing_bmf (178021) | more than 2 years ago | (#39922819)

This is exactly right. If you want to complete your first game, don't reinvent the wheel. Use an engine that other teams have spent years developing and debugging so you can concentrate on the game part.

Once you've demonstrated you can build games and have a few successful titles under your belt, then go ahead and use the money you've earned and, more importantly, the lessons you've learned to write your own engine if you still want to.

Re:Can money be returned if a project is unfinishe (1)

am 2k (217885) | more than 2 years ago | (#39921931)

First, don't build a game engine.

I personally don't have an issue with him building a game engine, but it should be the only project there :)

Re:Can money be returned if a project is unfinishe (1)

Shikaku (1129753) | more than 2 years ago | (#39921901)

Lots of troll answers here...

Serious answer, so that you can fulfill your promise: add a clause about the game saying "I promise to release this game to the public if funded OR if I can't for some unforseen circumstance, release all assets including source code and art into [public domain or CC or your license you want here]"

Re:Can money be returned if a project is unfinishe (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39922023)

That's idealistic, but it would probably make people a lot more comfortable with the prospects. The downside is that it communicates a lack of confidence in the ability to get things done.

If the project does happen to fail later on, you can always contact the people that backed it about donating it to the PD, CC or some other way of making it free to all.

Re:Can money be returned if a project is unfinishe (3, Insightful)

Zeussy (868062) | more than 2 years ago | (#39921913)

I got my game initially crowd funded. If you are worried about something happening to you and being unable to finish a project, that just says to me: "I am not really committed". If this game is your love and your passion, the money is to help you concentrate on this passion, and you will finish it. If it is just something you like doing, it is not really enough. If your worry is about being hit by a bus, shit happens, deal with it.

Next up, if you are serious about crowd funding, and want to get a large amount of money (i.e enough to live on for a year or 2, hire some contractors for work outside your skill set). My 2 bits of simple advice are, build a community. Crowd funding is about getting the community to help you make a game that they want (both you and your community should be wanting the same game). Don't just put it on kickstarter I hope they come. You need a community first. My second bit of advice, is if you are an unproven games developer, build some sort of vertical slice of the game, to a high standard. (E.g. a demo of just ship to ship combat, nothing more.). This is to show case you and your team (if applicable) skills, to help build trust that you can produce this game.

Re:Can money be returned if a project is unfinishe (1)

Heliosphere1 (2620037) | more than 2 years ago | (#39922163)

and want to get a large amount of money (i.e enough to live on for a year or 2, hire some contractors for work outside your skill set). My 2 bits of simple advice are, build a community. Crowd funding is about getting the community to help you make a game that they want (both you and your community should be wanting the same game).

Thanks very much for the thoughts. I will set up a forum for a community at some point. I've struggled with this "make the game everybody wants" vs "make the game I want to make, and see who's interested" dichotomy, but am biased towards the latter. The direction popular gaming has gone in recent times does not interest me much. If I wanted to go where the market seem to be, for example, I'd make a $2.99 2D cell phone game, or FPS #90338932. I think I'd rather make something I want to make, though I know it to be a very small niche, and hope there will be enough people interested to support it. Just as you say, following one's passion. I'd rather make a little bit of money and do something I find cool, than the other way around.

demo of just ship to ship combat, nothing more

Ship to ship combat is in progress and coming along decently :). And it's designed for as much community expandability as I was able to manage. Thanks for comments. I had a look at your page; looks pretty cool.

Re:Can money be returned if a project is unfinishe (1)

Daetrin (576516) | more than 2 years ago | (#39922261)

The way to build a community is to clearly express what it is that _you_ want out of the game and then attract other people who want the same thing. Do listen to any comments they might have of course because they might come up with something that inspires you, but as long as you're clear up front about what kind of game you're making you're not beholden to them to make any changes you don't want.

Minecraft didn't start out as a poll of "what do you guys want to see in a game?" Notch built the type of game he wanted to make and was lucky enough to build a huge community around it.

Of course there's always the chance that your ideas just won't appeal to enough people to build a self-supporting community, but given how large and diverse the gaming population is it would have to be a pretty extreme case for no one else to like it.

Re:Can money be returned if a project is unfinishe (1)

Zeussy (868062) | more than 2 years ago | (#39922719)

If you want more detailed thoughts, comments, just drop me an email.

Re:Can money be returned if a project is unfinishe (1)

sethmeisterg (603174) | more than 2 years ago | (#39922889)

Who cares if it runs on Linux. The /. community is not your target market. Pick the platform that will net you the largest customer base.

Re:Can money be returned if a project is unfinishe (1)

Heliosphere1 (2620037) | more than 2 years ago | (#39922967)

Note that I did not say, "only on Linux"... In any case, there are factors beyond picking the "largest customer base" that enter into the picture.

Re:Can money be returned if a project is unfinishe (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39923691)

Yes, the total amount of virginity you currently have, which is a limit approaching infinity. Target Linux, that way it runs like every other free SDL shit game on Windows. However considering your lack of confidence in your own ability to finish a product, it's surely going to be pretty shitty regardless.

Sounds like a likely time period (1)

wisnoskij (1206448) | more than 2 years ago | (#39921251)

But it all depends on how big the failed projects are and how big the failure is.
I image they are legally obliged to deliver so I imagine all/most failed projects will deliver something, if what they deliver is worth anything that will be the question.
And of course KS could be used to scam, we have no way of kn ow if the developer has any intention of delivering.

That is why in my opinion KS is best for known developers wanting to do bigger then normal projects, have more freedom, or to fund project that publishers will not; And is not a great new way for ambitious new developers to get into the field.

Ignores why kickstarter... (5, Insightful)

blahplusplus (757119) | more than 2 years ago | (#39921271)

... projects were successful to begin with. There is a lot of negative gamer sentiment that many beloved older games and genre's stopped being produced by big publishers because the publishers deemed they were 'dead' or they just wouldn't yield the kinds of profits they want to keep shareholders happy.

It doesn't help that many modern games have been butchered (in terms of functionality, LAN, etc) or chained to DRM and always online connections.

Hype cycle (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39921319)

Like all such concepts, it's bound to follow the hype cycle. We're still approaching the "peak of inflated expectations".

might burst, but has been going on for a while (4, Interesting)

Trepidity (597) | more than 2 years ago | (#39921393)

The general funding model has been successful for at least a bit longer than Kickstarter in particular has been around, so it's not a completely new thing. Therefore I have a little more confidence in its longevity, though it could always still turn out to be a slightly longer flash in the pan, of course.

One early proposal was John Kelsey and Bruce Schneier's Street Performer Protocol [schneier.com] (1998), describing basically the same collect-funds-until-threshold model.

One successful effort I know of from ten years ago was Einstürzende Neubauten, a cult-popular German industrial/avant-garde band, which left their label and focused on crowdfunding starting in 2001. In 2002, they raised around $70,000 [wikipedia.org] to record an album despite using a pretty unorganized system, and repeated that several times. There have been some others since then as well before Kickstarter centralized them, such as David Lynch's effort [lynchthree.com] .

It is pretty clear these are investments on risk (1)

RichMan (8097) | more than 2 years ago | (#39921405)

Sure there have not been any spectacular failures yet. But there are ZERO guarantee's you will get your rewards. That is pretty clear. And it will become clearer the more failures there are.

I don't personally know of any actually failures -

Noted point on risk MusOpen, 621% funding based on slashdot exposure.
Funded Sept 2010 - Still has not delivered.
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/Musopen/record-and-release-free-music-without-copyrights?ref=live
http://entertainment.slashdot.org/story/10/09/12/1350202/orchestra-to-turn-copyright-free-classical-scores-into-copyright-free-music

It does seem to be slowly progressing and actually about to release the recordings. So it seems it will deliver in the end.

Failed projects, scams will prove it's mainstream (2)

rsborg (111459) | more than 2 years ago | (#39921427)

Kickstarter will hit mainstream when there are numerous failed projects or several high-profile scams. The fact that most of these are weeded out by proper feedback and loop-inclusion will likely reduce the number and keep the entire crowd-funding mechanism feasible.

Also keep an eye out for high-profile competitors run by or funded by major companies as happened to Groupon (ie, Google Offers, LivingSocial, Amazon Deals, etc). When this happens, the likelyhood for the negative events increases - that can be associated with the mechanism can reflect poorly on the canonical brand as well.

Re:Failed projects, scams will prove it's mainstre (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39921717)

Considering that they seem to do very very little, if any due dilligence, i wouldnt be surprised if a lawsuit or the government shuts them down first.

Seems like a great way to fund a diabolical plot under the guise of 'contributing to free software' .

Insanity (0)

countach (534280) | more than 2 years ago | (#39921475)

Having seen more than my fair share of software projects, its kind of insane to invest money into new start software. On the odd occasion you might make a lot of money, but most times, kiss your money goodbye. And in Kickstart you don't even have the possibility of making a lot of money, do you? All you get is a free copy of the game isn't it? That is real insanity.

Re:Insanity (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39921565)

And in Kickstart you don't even have the possibility of making a lot of money, do you? All you get is a free copy of the game isn't it? That is real insanity.

Absolutely. It's not just Kickstarter, either. The other day some guy tried to sell me some painting, purportedly by a guy with one ear, for several million dollars.

Imagine that! Several million, and all I'd get is a freaking picture.

Sheesh, the nerve.

tl;dr: The only insanity here is your unfamiliarity with humanity and the fact that we will insist people take all our money to provide us with novel amusements that we enjoy.

Re:Insanity (5, Insightful)

multiben (1916126) | more than 2 years ago | (#39921883)

Some people do not ascribe a monetary value to every action they make. For instance, the other day I gave money to a charity. My ROI is 0%, but I still enjoyed doing it.

Re:Insanity (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39923193)

Some people do not ascribe a monetary value to every action they make. For instance, the other day I gave money to a charity. My ROI is 0%, but I still enjoyed doing it.

If you don't ascribe a monetary value to every action then your ROI was actually more than 0%, it just isn't measured in $, it's measured in units of enjoyment.

Re:Insanity (1)

Beelzebud (1361137) | more than 2 years ago | (#39922629)

It's never presented as an investment.... You are helping to support something that interests you. Nothing more, nothing less.

Investors are smart (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39921507)

This is not a case of random people putting money into a company they know nothing about. These 2 companies used as examples are well known quantities with known talent. People put money in because of that. If you get a sketchy company pitching an idea that doesn't hold water, then its not like they'll have the support that these 2 projects have. Yes, its inevitable that some large project will fail to deliver as promised. But that's why its important to not throw your money at just anything...know your developers!

Kickstarter's failure is itself (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39921611)

It's going to get replaced by competitors if they don't open up to other countries.

Well... (1)

englishknnigits (1568303) | more than 2 years ago | (#39921737)

anyone investing in anything should know there are risks involved. Anyone who knows anything about video game development knows that the completion, let alone success, of a video game is highly unpredictable. Knowing this, most people won't get that angry or upset at a project failing although there will certainly be lots of disappointment. We also aren't talking about the kind of investment where people are dumping their life savings into it or banking their retirement on a financial return on their investment. Sure, some idiots who didn't understand what they were investing in will get pissed off and never invest again but I think that will be the exception rather than the rule. Maybe I'm too optimistic (wow, don't get to say that often) but I doubt it.

A Few Possibilities (1)

brit74 (831798) | more than 2 years ago | (#39921937)

I'm not sure if Kickstarter is a "bubble" that will burst. But, I do think there might be a risk of Kickstarter plateauing. I could see two major reasons why kickstarter might start to stumble in the future:

If there start to be more projects that fail. Projects can fail for a large variety of reasons - I work in the games industry, and I've seen a lot of college-age people try to get game projects started only to have them unravel because of conflicts within the group, or someone got too busy with school or their girlfriend or underestimated the amount of work required to create their ambitious project, etc.

The second major reason is that there might be an increase in fraud - people setting up projects that are designed purely to take people's money and disappear. Kickstarter says they don't police what people are doing with the money (which makes sense, since it'd take a lot of effort to do that). Take, for example, this fraudulent project which fortunately ended up getting outed before they reached their goal (which means they got no money in the end):

"There was a fairly high profile hoax/scam thing on Kickstarter for “Mythic: The Story Of Gods And Men” that was swiftly pulverized by community sleuthing. As suggested previously, one is - in many cases - funding the “idea” of a game, ideas being a quantity in ready supply. If they had been less stupid, less obvious in their ruse, they could have taken in their eighty thousand dollars and then promptly evaporated. We may expect the next villain to utilize a more sophisticated approach."
http://penny-arcade.com/2012/05/04 [penny-arcade.com]

The "Mythic" game was *super* ambitious, but they only asked for $80,000. It was so ridiculous it just screamed "fraud", so I'm not surprised they got found-out. A more capable fraudster could do a lot better job about not putting up red-flags.

There is at least 1 project that has delivered (3, Informative)

Seven_Six_Two (1045228) | more than 2 years ago | (#39921947)

that I know of. It's called Diaspora. It's a piece of social networking software with distributed servers, and the goal is for people to be able to share without having all of their data owned perpetually by some corporation. Their site has been running the software for a while now, and I was running a node too. It's open-sourced, so those people and companies who invested are free to continue the project if they wish. I suppose that's a bit different than just funding a game, because with Diaspora, the benefits are for everyone, and don't depend on some unknown release date. http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/196017994/diaspora-the-personally-controlled-do-it-all-distr [kickstarter.com]

Fund my kickstarter project to get laid! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39921973)

Need money for ho!

Bicker recriminations? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39922087)

Some new-fangled combination of bickering with bitter recriminations?

Guarantee? None. (4, Insightful)

Bieeanda (961632) | more than 2 years ago | (#39922333)

That's right. There is no guarantee that you will get anything out of a project you've pledged money to, even if they go fifty times over their minimum and they've promised you your choice of knit keyboard cozies when they roll off the machines. And you know what? That's how Kickstarter's designed. You're not buying anything-- you've made a pledge, a donation toward getting the project staffed and completed. Promises of goods are 100% on the project team to deliver-- Kickstarter is totally, completely unrelated to fulfillment in any way, shape or form... which is going to cause some squawking when the first big project fails after it's been funded. There has already been at least one fraudulent computer game project, with pledge levels lifted entirely from another project, and photographs of the developers' HQ stolen from an unrelated company, that has fortunately been eliminated by the Kickstarter staff.

Bottom line is, Kickstarter isn't a storefront. If you're going to pledge money to a project, don't drop more on it than you're comfortable giving away to a school fundraiser, or a local charity.

Re:Guarantee? None. (3, Interesting)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 2 years ago | (#39923093)

Unless the kickstarter says so. Steve Jackson games GUARANTEES that you will get a designers edition of the Ogre Release if you pledge $100.00 That is a hard Guarantee by him.

It's called choosing projects where there are real professionals behind and not some kid in his mom's basement who has a pipe dream that will never be. RESEARCH who is behind the kickstarter before you jump in.

Step 1: (2)

Beelzebud (1361137) | more than 2 years ago | (#39922605)

Learn what an economic bubble is. When you give money to a Kickstarter project you want to support, it is a donation, not an investment. There can be no bubble, as there is no market to create an inflated value on anything.

Bursting? Like the Paypal Bubble? (2)

Sarusa (104047) | more than 2 years ago | (#39922835)

You may see some disappointment and realignment of expectations, but this the basic idea is such a good one that I can't see it just *pop*ing out of existence.

Look at Paypal - they treat their customers like shit on both sides (sellers and buyers) and will randomly seize accounts in hopes they can keep some of the money, yet almost everyone still uses them because it's too damn useful.

Perhaps people will finally realize that Kickstarter means what it says - you are GIVING money to fund a project, and any rewards are gifts the project is GIVING you but not directly for your funding (wink wink), because US law won't let you invest in anything for reward without crippling regulation.

A little more rigor in your Kickstarter project selection might be a good thing all around, but again, it's something we 'need', so the demand will be there on both sides. I've backed several projects and so far so good, but I take some care in selection and realize it's possible I'll get nothing in return. It's a donation, and anything you get back is surprise presents!

Before the bubble bursts... (0)

sparkydevil (261897) | more than 2 years ago | (#39922893)

...donate $10 to my project! http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1630450133/crisscross-social-search-engine

A lot of real businesses are using it. (1)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 2 years ago | (#39923077)

Steve Jackson games, Relaunching OGRE, it seems that Slashdot current editors dont thing the biggest Geek game of all time is news.
Shadowrun as a video game under control of the guys that designed Shadowrun and not the morons that could not design a game if they wanted to at EA or SONY. Topped 2 million and will be released DRM free.

And a ton more.

Kickstarter is a way for people to get things made that the morons in executive board rooms refuse to make.

Re:A lot of real businesses are using it. (2)

CronoCloud (590650) | more than 2 years ago | (#39923393)

Steve Jackson games,

If it's Steve Jackson games, why do they need Kickstarter...they're Steeve Jackson Games. I'm beginning to think that Kickstarter is just for those who've already hit the "big time" but want to make some kind of ultra-niche vanity project that appeals to their hardcore fanbase and thusly wouldn't actually SELL in todays market, without spending their own capital.

Relaunching OGRE, it seems that Slashdot current editors dont thing the biggest Geek game of all time is news.

OGRE? The biggest geek game of all time? OGRE? You have got to be kidding. Even in the glory days of tabletop gaming, which are loooong gone, OGRE was a niche game. The biggest Geek game of all time is obviously D&D, which not only still survives in tabletop form and can still be bought in any bookstore, but inspired games on computers and consoles, has had a TV show AND movies, based on it.

Hell, even Battletech is bigger than OGRE.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>