I totally agree with Kurufinwe. It's a bit too much right now, and many feel like "me too!" efforts that have been quickly thrown together just to jump on the bandwagon. The adventure game audience probably can't sustain this many fan-funded projects at the same time, neither monetarily or in terms of interest.

I also want to point out that DFA is by no means the first adventure game to go the Kickstarter route. The soon-to-be-released Resonance ran a Kickstarter campaign back in 2009. It raised $2k (which was actually not a bad result, though obviously it's only a fraction of the total funding of the game).

That's debatable. You could just the same argue that the adventure game audience has already grown in numbers based on the hype around the most interesting and largest kickstarter adventure game campaigns. You could also argue people's enthusiasm can still go on for quite a while - people feel like they're buying their future games this way - coolest titles there have been for years - and not just being charitable to some small indie creator.

I think any "skeptical" predictions and evaluations are currently pointless. Even announcing the Tex Murphy campaign so early on at the price of some momentum might not have been a bad move. The situation is too unprecedented.

No offence intended to the Kickstarter groups, but there is a certain "begging for change" feel to this situation. When Double-Fine did it, I got excited because it seemed like a cool idea to invest in a game for a change. But then when everyone else did it, I got the same feeling I get when I'm swarmed by homeless people and charities on the street. They know I have money, they saw me give some away, and they'd like some too.

I think it's my sympathies at play more than anything, because I know giving to these Kickstarter projects is a voluntary thing. But I'd still feel bad if Al and Jane didn't make over $3M for their games as well - and I totally want them to succeed. I'll probably give to their projects once I get my job situation sorted out, but for now, I think all the hype is gone. At least until after my first investment goes through. It's all too much at once.

I do appreciate the Tex Murphy team giving us a heads-up, though. Holding out until later gives us more time to comfortably ease into supporting their project.

Because Activision owns the rights to GK.

No, this analogy doesn't work. You're not giving your money at Kickstarter to bums, who will spend it on grain alcohol. You giving them to well known artists, who would love to make high quality games for fans, but the studios doesn't see enough profit in them.

We will see if the Kickstarter games will have the same quality, as when they were produced under a big studio. I'm just wondering, what will happen, if a successfully funded project's budget is grossly under-projected, and the money run out in the middle of development. Will they just splice the game together as is to deliver something to backers? Or just start another kickstarter?

Also none of these kickstarter projects actually come to our face and beg or force us to do anything. I understand the feeling, I wish I had a lot more money so I could back every nice project there is, but that is my personal guilt and I am the one who's going through those projects and clicking the links myself, no one is forcing it down my throat and the project owners aren't putting any guilt on me (some donators might do that though but that's another issue).

I was also drawing the analogy towards charities as well - things I wish I could help with more often because I know it's for a good cause, but a sudden onslaught of them simply overwhelms me.

I think it's just the personal shock of seeing so many Kickstarter projects pop up in so short a time with so many big names attached. And everybody's enthusiasm for these projects is contagious, so it's a mixture of shock and personal guilt for not being able to donate to everyone right away.

Not to mention I still feel like there's more surprises coming.

Sheesh, I'm totally lost by all this money talk because I can't see what money has to do with creativity. Money won't give anyone good ideas for a game, and it's the ideas that count. Sometimes creative people just burn out, like writers get writer's block, and how will money help that? Seems like someone could blame not having funds for the reality of not having the creative ideas. The ego does need a lot of protecting for all of us, and for creative types that probably goes double.
Personally, I rhink Roberta and Ken Williams did the smart thing when they quit and went on to other things, much as I was so sorry to see them go.

There are 3 kickstarters online related to adventure games now and one coming next month(Tex Murphy).

Sheesh, I don't see what is "overwhelming" you people. I actually wish we had more adventure projects to back. I understand not being able to pledge 100 bucks to every cool project that pops up, but the lower tier options? Always agreeable. I am far from rich myself(I'm a student on a tight budget).

Unless of course you are those pirate guys that bankrupt the people who make the games you play...

The ugly side of Kickstarter: the risks in backing game dev campaigns are greater than you think

An interesting read.

Yeah, it worries me with many kickstarters iv seen that they havnt fully thought out the expenses of the rewards. For pinkerton road for example, for any 5k+ backer they are flying an entire band to you anywhere in the US!!! That could easily cost half of the 5k by itself. (possibly closer to the whole 5k if theres several+ people in the band and moving equipment...)
..and..theres 25 of those available... thats a tour!! That costs alot of money.

If Scarlet Furies is touring US anyway, adding those private gigs to the existing tour isn't that expensive or difficult... and even if they have to travel somewhere just to do a private gig, they can always try to do some public gigs in the area during their trip.

The link Winterfury posted was a good read. For sure there are risks in Kickstarter, and I would never give money to some unknown indie team for their first game project. I'm really excited about Jane's CSG model and I hope her studio will be a success, but only time will tell.

Excellent read! Very much sums up my view on Kickstarter.

That is a very good article that all backers need to read.

Anyone expecting that the $300k that is raised is all game funds needs to realise that out of that money comes Kickstarter and Amazon's cut, Taxes, the cost of all the various "rewards" and probably other costs all before one line of code is written.

I try to only back experienced and know developers. One's who know all that stuff and can budget for it, ones that i'm fairly sure will deliver a game at the end of it.

It is going to happen sooner rather than later that one of these projects is going to be a spectacular failure either through non completion of hte game or just delivering something cheap and dreadful that doesn't live up to the lofty ideals the backers envision.

Backers beware.

It was interesting to note that the author mentions that Kickstarter uses the term Backer rather than Investor. A Backer gets into the game expecting something more tangible, e.g., a T-shirt, than does an investor who is looking at a financial return on the money invested.

I would certainly agree that the complete cost of doing something has probably been grossly underestimated by the vast majority of those seeking development funding. When one factors in the cost of printed stationery, the stamp, the time cost of the person folding and stuffing an envelope, etc., the cost of a simple thank you letter easily approaches $5. My guess is that most people don't think further than the cost of the stamp.

I have wondered the same thing. I guess backers are expecting same kind of stuff that they get with deluxe versions of big AAA games. It would make much more sense to give backers all sorts of digital goodies, because they are usually cheaper to develop and distribute. For example a 'making of' documentary is a one time cost and after that the digital distribution costs nothing.

http://www.violentgamerreviews.com/2...tarter_29.html

Kickstarter scam project.

Let's keep our motivations in check and not give into paranoia.

That PA article misses the important point that we're risking our money to give a chance to creators who wouldn't be able to fund their games otherwise. No 100% success guarantee, no immediate reward - and that's quite clear.

If some other backers are willing to give money to anything that looks remotely pretty on a video clip, then indeed - given what's available in stores - it's an investment just not worth the risk.

Indies with promisong, interesting pitches should be taken into consideration though, not just experienced developers with bussiness people on board.

In some cases, yes. There are a few people who've been trying to get funding for years and this is their last attempt.

BUT, I get the feeling that many folks are seeing the fan response to a few campaign and thinking about kickstarter as their 1st choice. It's risk free money, and if it goes through, great - you can keep your money in the bank and transfer the whole risk to the fans.

Especially indie devs -- if an indie needs 10K for a project, they dont need kickstarter. Don't tell me they can't put in 10K from their own savings or raise it from friends and family. I stay clear of all these project - Anybody raising small amounts on kickstarter just hasn't tried hard enough to raise the money - and that is a warning sign about commitment in big red letters.

Right, there are no indies who are barely making a living. Everyone who needs a small sum of money is much more suspicious than the big spenders.

But somehow I backed 2 adventure games for 2K or less: Resonance and A Life Flashes By and both resulted in most worthwhile productions. And no one did find it strange the creators used kickstarter.