So... quite a while has passed. No games out yet, but we can still spew out a few random thoughts on Kickstarter as a phenomenon so far. From my point of view, there is way too much negativity AND way too much optimism on the subject. Seems like some people severely overestimate Kickstarter's potential or start talking about developers like friends instead of companies looking for profit. Some people react to this by digging themselves down in the opposite ditch and claiming Kickstarter is just preordering without knowing anything at all. The latter are actually kind of right - except that isn't a very good reason to be pessimistic (see why below).
For example, in the
Shadowrun thread,
slackerwizrd quotes
Gurkog as follows:
If backers want to mod with post-Berlin content they will have to use the Steam Version. That probably shat on the hopes of a few backers. I am still happy that they swiftly refunded my pre-order upon request (they can at least get that done on time).
It would seem that HBS isn't keen on the idea
either, but rather it was imposed onto them by the Shadowrun IP owner (i.e., Microsoft). It would have probably been better if they were more forthcoming at the start of the campaign, but I guess my cynical side believes that HBS kept it a secret because of the potential lost in revenue on the Kickstarter campaign.
and I must admit that it amuses me a bit that some people apparantly thought companies using Kickstarter quit being companies and started being everybody's best friend. Since when did someone looking to profit on you become your friend?
This will be my most central point: Kickstarter gives companies a way to turn a profit on a small to medium market that was inaccessible to them before. But
this is a good thing for us, because we ARE a small to medium market and we want stuff targeted at us.
This is all it is for now; a way for someone to profit on us, mainly in the way we want them to. In other words: they get to make the games they want to make, we get to buy the product we're interested in (or rather, play the games we want to play). Don't think this is some sort of charity where you allow the developers to make the game they've always dreamed of making and then they repay you with the game you've dreamt about playing. That makes the two of you friends who are giving each other stuff. You're not. You're customer and they're company. You buy, they sell.
Even worse: you're customer paying up front (a bad way to purchase something - preordering is paying blindly and with no information). You're doing this
because it's the only way to get the product you want. If these companies could secure financing for their games in some other way, of course we would prefer that. Then we could wait till after the game was made and decide - with full information - whether to buy or not. Now we are buying in the blind because
it's the only way.
Now, I like Fargo a lot, and he might have some good points. Tighter relationships between developer and customer might turn out great for better games or at least games that better meet the audiences expectations. Removal of the classic, meddling publisher is obviously a great benefit. And so on. That's all really cool. But that
still doesn't eliminate the fact that in the end, Kickstarter is simply the only way for us to buy the product we want and for them to make it for us (to turn a profit). For all their talk of spending money out of their own pockets, of course most of these developers are looking to profit from this in the long run. Kickstarter is not volunteer work. For people like Fargo it's a way to get back in the business of making shit they enjoy making for people who like playing it. They want to return to make a living on us, and we want them to do that.
That doesn't make us friends, it makes us a good pairing of customer and company. For smaller developers, these guys want to launch a career on these games.
Both Fargo and the smalls devs are spending their own resources in the hopes that they can turn a profit later. They're investing, just as we are. No developer - big or small - is in this for the product of the isolated Kickstarter alone.
The points Fargo raises actually might have really awesome effects on the business (though it remains to be seen if they will). Of course there are also pitfalls. However the central point of my post is this: you're customer, they're company. You're looking for quality product, they're looking for profit. Never forget that.
I actually think the reason people like
Vault Dweller are so skeptical of Kickstarter is because so many people give off the impression that Kickstarter is some kind of way to eliminate all the problems of a capitalist, mass-appeal games industry. And it's really not. Though it might solve a couple of issues, most minor, it certianly brings a few of its own.
The reason we should be optimistic about Kickstarter is simply because it's the only thing we have, where we had nothing before! If you care about oldschool RPGs of
any variety - if you actually want these games and you want to play them, things are better now than before simply by virtue of these kinds of games actually being produced again. For me, this is an improvement over nothing almost no matter the business model. In other words, Vault Dweller is right when he doesn't buy into the hype, but he is wrong when he concludes that this must mean he should be pessimistic.
That said, Kickstarter right now - without us being able to weigh the benefits - is still worse for the consumer in many ways. It looks like we're gonna get the games we want - but we're getting them by sacrificing some of the perogatives we have on a normal market. The customer is betting a lot more than he used too, and the same is not true for the developer.
TL;DR: Kickstarter is still a business, we're still customers and developers are still companies. We should still be happy, because the products we're interested are actually "at risk" of being produced now, where before the chance of that was 0%. But don't forget that developer and player are not buddies - one is looking for profit, the other for product.
PS. I think Kickstarter's potential to diminish the role of the publisher is awesome. But whether it has the desired effect - especially with a pay-blindly-up-fron system in place - remains to be seen.