Crowdfunding disasters

It's kinda hard to discuss games that never existed, and the way Kickstarter works it's actually really hard to find the pages of failed projects, especially since creators can easily delete old accounts and make new ones if they don't want to be associated with a prior failure.

There was that game that got canned because the sun said it should be

Honestly, if you need kikstarter to get your project off the ground, it didn't deserve to exist in the first place. Lazy entitled hipster fucks think they have a right to money because they had an idea and want to pay other people to make it for them. No, you worthless fucking kike, you can produce something of value and then maybe I'll consider giving you my money (which was earned through actual labor, not sitting in a shared apartment smoking weed or at a coffee shop on my apple craptop). Fucking make something. I've made three fucking games that I am working on finalizing. Whereas the pieces of shit want hard cash for vague promises, won't even give shit about the mechanics half the time because of "muh copyright". If you really cared about making a good game, an not just money, you'd distribute your game for free. At least if it's and RPG. By charging money you're saying "this is a profit motivated venture and my game is a piece of shit". Trust me, if it's good, you'll get something from PWYW. Otherwise you're just being a slimy fuckin jew.

>>55256846
Yes, the sun said that game could not be made, and it wasn't. Proves the sun right though, dunnit?

>>55256861

You are a fucking moron. Irrational hatred of Kickstarter is just as stupid as unthinking trust for it.

Crowdfunding is an entirely legitimate method for raising money that can be used for both good and ill. A lot of shit has come out of Kickstarter, so have a lot of scams, but the existence of actually good games that have done well on that basis basically proves you don't have a point, just a prejudice.

>>55256846

Listen. If the motherfucking sun calls down to you out of the sky one day and tells you personally to stop your shitty crowdfunding campaign, wouldnt you?

Like, thats not an order I would feel safe refusing. Cosmic intervention tier shit is out of my weight class.

>>55256726
/tg/ shit generally doesn't fail as much /v/ shit. Most people who get funding already have a completed game laid out and just need something to cover production.
Where as with videogames they'll have maybe concept art and a plot

All the kickstarters I've funded have worked out fine, other than uniformly being late as shit.

>>55256910

Row row, anon.

>>55256861
>release all your shit for free and maybe I'll consider throwing some shekels your way otherwise you are a slimy hook nosed kike

INT was your dump stat huh?

>>55256917

It is worth being very aware of this though. Kickstarters are a lot safer when you're funding production, rather than development. Knowing how to assess a campaign, whether the goals seem achievable and if the budget makes sense for the promises can let you gauge how safe a campaign is pretty easily. I got burned a couple of times early on, but these days I get lots of great games for less than the retail price, often with exclusive little bits and pieces. Although I honestly get annoyed whenever games include actual mechanical elements as exclusives. Different art, sculpts or things like metal coins are all fine as exclusives IMO, but whenever it's something with an actual mechanical impact on the game that leaves me feeling really uneasy. I'm honestly less likely to buy a game later if it has a lot of kickstarter exclusive mechanical components, because I feel like I'm not getting the complete experience.

>>55256861
Don't be an idiot, the biggest /tg/ kickstarters have almost universally been successful products.

>>55256917

Indeed. With /v/, an idea is just an idea, with a lot of room to fail in actual implementation and quaility.

With /tg/, the idea is like 60% of the game. You can show a /tg/ game in detail with nothing more than a word doc that spells out most of the important bits of what makes that game tick. So its a lot easier to recognize what projects have something to them for /tg/, where /v/ projects need to sell you on the sizzle and not the steak.

>>55256968
No, no, of course content creators should live on charity instead of asking money for their product. Otherwise we'd have capitalism and that would be terrible.

>>55256889
>but the existence of actually good games that have done well on that basis basically proves you don't have a point, just a prejudice.
>some criminals are actually nice guys so we should let them all out of prison
You're retarded

>>55257041
Their ""product"" is a bunch of ideas on a piece of paper. I can get that on /tg/ for free. Loads of great games released for free and loads of paid games made by developers I can actually trust. Why would I spend money on some 23 year old nu male so he can spend 80,000 on professional art to cover for lack of an interesting idea for his game? (I.e. scythe, monster of the week, engine heart, and a fuckton of other indie darlings that suck cock.)

>>55257804

What you said makes literally no sense

>>55257839

IIRC aren't a lot of those games well loved and critically acclaimed? Why are you so mad that you have unpopular opinions? That people got games they enjoy through a funding method and feel like it was well worth their money should be a laudable success story, whether you personally enjoy the products of it or not.

>>55257839
>Their ""product"" is a bunch of ideas on a piece of paper. I can get that on /tg/ for free. Loads of great games released for free and loads of paid games made by developers I can actually trust. Why would I spend money on some 23 year old nu male so he can spend 80,000 on professional art to cover for lack of an interesting idea for his game? (I.e. scythe, monster of the week, engine heart, and a fuckton of other indie darlings that suck cock.)

But Engine Heart was released for free?

>>55258036
>What you said makes literally no sense
Exactly.it was an analogy.

>>55258036
Scythe is unoriginal overconplicated bland shit with pretty art.
Monster of the Week is an apocalypse world ripoff.
Engine heart is a ripoff of world of darkness for robots. Probably the best of the three though.

>>55258748

One that doesn't make sense. There is no logical basis to it, it's just a collection of words you presented as if it had some sort of meaning or relevance to the conversation at hand.

>>55258767

So, yes. You have opinions and don't like that significant numbers of other people don't share them and appear to be having fun with things you don't like.

You don't need to be so insecure about your opinions, anon, and blaming kickstarter for it is just kinda sad.

>>55258785
But kikstarter enables shitty products propped up by neckbeards with more money than sense. None of this products would survive in a real market, but since they havent been released yet they can make all the big promises they want.

It's the investing sales pitch performed on thousands who don't know better.

>>55259103

But none of that has any basis in reality. There are kickstarter games which went on to be very successful at retail, with the designers making expansions or whole new games with a more conventional publishing model.

Even if they aren't, why isn't kickstarter a 'real market'? People are trading their money for something they see value in. You've not given any solid evidence for why Kickstarter is a bad thing beyond that they make games you don't like... Which is irrelevant to all the people who have purchased, played and enjoyed kickstarted games.

Do you legitimately believe that it is impossible for a Kickstarter to ever produce a quality product, or a game you would actually enjoy? If so, why?

>>55259103
So things like reaper bones, raging heroes, kingdom death (for all it's faults), guildball, deadzone, whatever else mantic have done, the various shadowrun vidya and who knows how many niche miniatures projects that have all been successful are all bad and wrong?

>>55259669
>projects that have all been successful are all bad and wrong?
Of course not. Because you're cherrypicking examples. Comfirmation bias. Success makes more noise than even the most disappointed victim of a kikstarter ripoff.

>>55259977

But doesn't that torpedo your point, even if it's cherrypicked?

Besides, read the thread. There's some pretty strong guidelines for how to assess Kickstarter projects and know which ones are trustworthy, minimising the personal risk. That you might be bad at it doesn't mean it's not pretty easy to do.