KickStarter Kickstarter Watch.

[Spectacle]

"Upholds their responsibilities"? Paypal is worried that some backers will be butthurt if the poll at the end of the project doesn't go the way they want and cry for their monies back. Withholding money isn't going to help with anything, just make it more likely that the project fails due to running out of funds.

 

[J_C]

http://www.vg247.com/2013/04/23/skullgirls-crowdfunding-stymied-by-paypal/

PayPal has put the brakes on the Indiegogo campaign for Skullgirls, leaving Lab Zero Games unable to pay its staff.

The money transfer service withheld funds, saying it was not willing to take the risk that backers would demand refunds at the end of a poll to select which DLC characters will be developed.

[...]
Lab Zero CEO Bartholow took to NeoGAF to vent his frustrations, and in a series of posts collated by GamesIndustry, revealed that PayPal finally unfroze the account but withheld $35,000 as collateral. Other developers have not experienced this problem using rival services like Amazon, Bartholow said, and he has filed a complaint with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

I'm quite impressed by Paypal. So far Kickstarter has proven to be completely hands off even with projects where they certainly should have intervened. Good on them for stepping into the ring to make sure everyone upholds their responsibilities, even if it is mainly to avoid problems for themselves in the future. This is exactly what Kickstarter needs to start doing. They need to become the oversight that many of these really small developers seem to need. I imagine Paypal would even have advised against the path taken by Logic Artists & Conquistador, but probably could not have done anything since they had used their money up already.

Kickstarter could do that, but Paypal had no fucking right to do this. They are a money sending service, that's it. They shouldn't care about who sends money for what reason. The fucking bastards take their fees off from the money, it's their duty to handle the refunds if there will be any.

 

[Excommunicator]

I'm not getting into a technical discussion about this because the details are all hearsay but the article claims they refused to deal with refunds. In this country (I know it isn't the same elsewhere) it's against the law not to give a refund when someone requests it (obviously within reason) and it's a very important law in my opinion. It's quite ridiculous to say they won't do refunds, especially when we are talking about a product which hasn't yet been delivered. Of course the money is going to be spent. You don't only offer refunds on the condition that you have enough money in your bank account to pay for it. A professional project would simply factor these things in.

The whole issue could have been avoided by the developer just saying "yes, we will offer a refund" as is their responsibility. It's an extra character in the game - how many people could possibly ask for a refund on that basis? It's a single stretch goal based around a majority decision poll. They had very poor judgement when they essentially decided they have no responsibility to offer refunds to people.

It isn't an issue about what strictly is or isn't within the duties of Paypal. Pedantry like that is how you end up with companies being let off on things because they aren't illegal despite being highly immoral. There should always be a body looking out for the customer, and I like that Paypal is providing a kind of safety net to the customers here, regardless of ulterior motives.

 

[Spectacle]

How is it looking out for the customer to keep money in the bank instead of using it to fund the project? When I back a crowdfunding project I want the entire pledge to be spent on development, not for a fraction of it to be held in reserve in case some whiny bitches demand a refund.

 

[Vault Dweller]

http://www.vg247.com/2013/04/23/skullgirls-crowdfunding-stymied-by-paypal/

PayPal has put the brakes on the Indiegogo campaign for Skullgirls, leaving Lab Zero Games unable to pay its staff.

The money transfer service withheld funds, saying it was not willing to take the risk that backers would demand refunds at the end of a poll to select which DLC characters will be developed.

[...]
Lab Zero CEO Bartholow took to NeoGAF to vent his frustrations, and in a series of posts collated by GamesIndustry, revealed that PayPal finally unfroze the account but withheld $35,000 as collateral. Other developers have not experienced this problem using rival services like Amazon, Bartholow said, and he has filed a complaint with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

I'm quite impressed by Paypal. So far Kickstarter has proven to be completely hands off even with projects where they certainly should have intervened. Good on them for stepping into the ring to make sure everyone upholds their responsibilities, even if it is mainly to avoid problems for themselves in the future. This is exactly what Kickstarter needs to start doing. They need to become the oversight that many of these really small developers seem to need. I imagine Paypal would even have advised against the path taken by Logic Artists & Conquistador, but probably could not have done anything since they had used their money up already.

Kickstarter could do that, but Paypal had no fucking right to do this. They are a money sending service, that's it. They shouldn't care about who sends money for what reason. The fucking bastards take their fees off from the money, it's their duty to handle the refunds if there will be any.

No money processing business can function this way. 10% they take (or whatever) isn't insurance against default. It's a payment processing fee. For example, to be able to accept a credit card payment, you need to pay Visa 6-8% (don't recall the exact number, but it's tied to your volume), etc.

When we were looking for a payment processor several companies turned us down because the game wasn't ready yet, which means a lot of risk for very little gain for these companies. So, in the example above, PayPal processes 700k, takes 70k (if they take 10%), give half to credit card companies, pays salaries to people involved, and for this privilege they should be on the hook for 700k? If the company fails to deliver many people would demand their money back and since they can't take nothing from the studio, they will demand their money from PayPal. It's not fair but that's how it is.

 

[felipepepe]

Whole problem comes from that whole "money back" issue... there is probably some sort of weird law forcing paypal to give it back, and they do their best to cover their asses in case anyone sues them, even at the expense of the original reciever...

 

[J_C]

Vault Dweller I'm not sure I get what you are saying. The money Paypal is withholding is used to develop the games. So they withhold the money because there is no guarantee that the devs will make the game, but the devs can't make the game because Paypal is withholding the money. It doesn't makes sense.

Furthermore, if there would be some gamers, who are not satisfied with the game and want paypal to pay their money back, paypal should just say fuck you, because in terms of kickstarter, you don't deserve a refund. In what bases the gamers demand a refund?

So whatever I buy through paypal (meaning everything) I can demand a refund from Paypal if I make up a story about a failed product or not being satisfied with a game etc.

Paypal should be fucking thankful for these devs for using their service for the Kickstarters. This means that a lots of money goes through them, and they can cut of lots of transaction fees. I say devs should stop using Paypal if these assholes are not giving them the amount they deserve.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Vault Dweller I'm not sure I get what you are saying. The money Paypal is withholding is used to develop the games. So they withhold the money because there is no guarantee that the devs will make the game, but the devs can't make the game because Paypal is withholding the money. It doesn't makes sense.

The problem, the way I see it, is that the developer is refusing to accept financial responsibility, feeling that they are free to spend the money the way they see fit without any obligations. This isn't how the rest of the western world works.

Furthermore, if there would be some gamers, who are not satisfied with the game and want paypal to pay their money back, paypal should just say fuck you, because in terms of kickstarter, you don't deserve a refund. In what bases the gamers demand a refund?

Again, that's not how it works. Visa, for example, guarantees all payments. If the company you paid to went bankrupt or disappeared, you can call Visa and ask for your money back. This has been a business standard for a long time. A payment processor can't say "we know nothing, we just take money". They will be asked "well, why the fuck do you take money on behalf of some questionable companies? It was your responsibility to ensure that they are reputable and reliable" and they will most likely use a potential lawsuit and have to pay 1000% more than what they got, which isn't good business.

Paypal should be fucking thankful for these devs for using their service for the Kickstarters. This means that a lots of money goes through them, and they can cut of lots of transaction fees. I say devs should stop using Paypal if these assholes are not giving them the amount they deserve.

Ok, I looked it up. PayPal charges 1.9-2.9 for local transactions and 3.9 for international. So on 700k, they make whooping 27k and probably give half to the credit card companies, which leaves them with 12-15k. For this kinda mad profit, they should definitely throw in a blowjob.

 

[J_C]

I understand. But what could the developer do? They are gathering the money for the sole purpose of making the game. Without it, the project is in danger. I don't think Paypal gets this.

 

[Grimlorn]

I understand. But what could the developer do? They are gathering the money for the sole purpose of making the game. Without it, the project is in danger. I don't think Paypal gets this.

Yeah but developers should add 5% or whatever is normal to their budget to account for refunds and other things. They shouldn't expect the banks to cover their refunds. I think that's the point. To protect conumers from possibly being scammed or not getting the product they were promised.

 

[Vault Dweller]

I understand. But what could the developer do? They are gathering the money for the sole purpose of making the game. Without it, the project is in danger. I don't think Paypal gets this.

All PayPal asked for is that the developer accepts financial responsibility for potential refunds. Instead of doing so, the developer whined like a bitch.

 

[Grimlorn]

The funny thing is they can probably say they'll cover the refunds and paypal will release the rest of the money.

 

[toro]

Here's one I just noticed: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/defiantmouse/lex-laser-saves-the-galaxy-again-0, which seems interesting. DOn't know if it's any good

The concept doesn't seem very fleshed out nor very original and the campaign has already failed judging from what they got until now, I won't include it in the list for now.

It's like a rpg buffet, but with more salad instead of aperitifs. In other words: please don't put that shit on the list. There is too much garbage anyway.

 

[Kz3r0]

Atari 2600 Star Castle has been released.

And now a very peculiar case, the game has been released commercially but the backers seems that are not receiving it:
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1067367405/pinball-arcade-the-twilight-zone/comments

 

[Jaesun]

Cool to see that Atari guy got the games shipped out. That was a rather neat project. Glad it worked out.

 

[Excommunicator]

Exactly. It all comes down to not accepting responsibility. I wouldn't be on the side of Paypal if the developer had agreed to honour those responsibilities, but I see no reason why Paypal would have withheld that money if they had.

Seriously, think of it in a general business context. He's the CEO of a company that just received 800k from the public to deliver a specific product and his response is "But we are spending every last cent of this money! We have no contingency of any kind for possible refunds and we reject the responsibility that we have to provide those refunds. LOL YOLO" Sound like reasonable business practice?

As for the comment about these things being donations rather than payments: it's complete fantasy. Kickstarter is very rarely used as a donation system and that's the way it should be. They're promising to deliver a specific product at a specific price point. It's standard business for the most part, it's just less professional overall and customers are much, much more willing to part with their money in uncertain circumstances. This is why I think Kickstarter management should be much more hands on with everything that goes on there, to the point of having consultants who review pitch before they go up, monitor it during the funding run AND guide them once funding is successful. With some of the pitches that show up on there, it's clear they don't properly review the pitches before they become active, and it really reflects on them. I also think kickstarter should be quite prepared to honour refunds in the event that the developer falls way short in delivering what they offered. This will give integrity to the system.

Remember, no one is forcing anyone to make lofty or highly specific promises. You can't just say "anything goes in marketing because it's just marketing". The more you promise, the more money you will probably get, and the more responsibility to have to deliver on those promises.

 

[JudasIscariot]

Pinging Jaesun

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/995134339/the-realm-game

 

[Tytus]

Pinging Jaesun

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/995134339/the-realm-game

They worked on The Thing - insert fuse box counter joke here - but seriously the pitch video looks terrible - they couldn't even be bothered to show that game footage, they just directed the camera on a computer screen.
Though I don't have anything against point and clicks - the more, the better.

 

[tuluse]

On kickstarter you're only promising to make a best effort to produce something, not that it will be done.

 

[Tytus]

On kickstarter you're only promising to make a best effort to produce something, not that it will be done.

Yeah that's why Kickstarter should have some mechanism in place that when you succesfully fund and don't deliver you can be sued for damages. It would scare away people that aren't serious about their goals.

 

[J_C]

On kickstarter you're only promising to make a best effort to produce something, not that it will be done.

Yeah that's why Kickstarter should have some mechanism in place that when you succesfully fund and don't deliver you can be sued for damages. It would scare away people that aren't serious about their goals.

Depends. If devs would be sued if the they don't release the game at all, then I agree with it. But if they finish the game, but some assholes don't like it, they shouldn't be allowed to sue the devs. Because if this became standard practice, nobody would use KS. There would be no guarantee that some faggots don't sue them because they were expecting a AAA title from 100.000 dollars.

 

[Tytus]

On kickstarter you're only promising to make a best effort to produce something, not that it will be done.

Yeah that's why Kickstarter should have some mechanism in place that when you succesfully fund and don't deliver you can be sued for damages. It would scare away people that aren't serious about their goals.

Depends. If devs would be sued if the they don't release the game at all, then I agree with it. But if they finish the game, but some assholes don't like it, they shouldn't be allowed to sue the devs. Because if this became standard practice, nobody would use KS. There would be no guarantee that some faggots don't sue them because they were expecting a AAA title from 100.000 dollars.

Yes, I meant in the situation when they took the money and weren't able to finish the project. But the quality of the product itself shouldn't be in question. That was risk on your part.
Also they should viable to be sued if they for example advertised it as an rpg game but turned into a FPS during the development.

 

[Spectacle]

On kickstarter you're only promising to make a best effort to produce something, not that it will be done.

Yeah that's why Kickstarter should have some mechanism in place that when you succesfully fund and don't deliver you can be sued for damages. It would scare away people that aren't serious about their goals.

This is already possible with existing rules and laws, check out what happened with the "hanfree" ipad stand.
The chances of actually getting any money back if a project isn't delivered at all is slim though, most of the time you'd just be suing a bankrupt corporate shell. It's hard to get any money from the actual people behind unless you can prove intentional fraud.

 

[Tytus]

On kickstarter you're only promising to make a best effort to produce something, not that it will be done.

Yeah that's why Kickstarter should have some mechanism in place that when you succesfully fund and don't deliver you can be sued for damages. It would scare away people that aren't serious about their goals.

This is already possible with existing rules and laws, check out what happened with the "hanfree" ipad stand.
The chances of actually getting any money back if a project isn't delivered at all is slim though, most of the time you'd just be suing a bankrupt corporate shell. It's hard to get any money from the actual people behind unless you can prove intentional fraud.

It's not even about getting the money back. Every kickstarter project that starts should have terms of service agreement you have to sign where it's says that if you get funded but won't deliver kickstarter can basically take over your remaining resources (like computers you used to develop the product) as damages. That way every company that starts a project would do it, only after being sure they can do it.

 

[Destroid]

On kickstarter you're only promising to make a best effort to produce something, not that it will be done.

No, you are in fact promising you will deliver a product, at least in most cases. There are no guarantees about quality though.