Sign in to follow this  
KestrelPi

The goal itself - 89%!!!

Recommended Posts

In 48 hours we are at 51% of the funding goal.

This is a great start. This campaign needs to do as well as DFA at least to succeed. So far it's doing a little better, but there's a few reasons to be concerned:

During the DFA campaign, announcements such as the DRM free version, Linux support and EFIGS led to Massive campaign boosts. This time they are already frontloaded so they'll have to come up with other stuff.

On the other hand the investment angle means there is scope for the campaign to get bailed out by bigger investors as happened with the first fig campaign.

One thing is clear, this one failing would likely ruin fig and disrupt DF's future plans so I bet they'll find a way.

Still, I created this thread to talk about the progress toward the funding goal itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On the other hand the investment angle means there is scope for the campaign to get bailed out by bigger investors as happened with the first fig campaign.

Both investment sources (The private investments and the Fig investments) don't count towards the crowdfunding totals. I'm not sure if the crowdfunding will still succeed if it doesn't reach its goal, which means that money isn't collected, and the Fig investments aren't collected, and so on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the campaign is going spectacularly well at the moment.

The announcement of what is essentially Psychonauts 1.5, a remastered Full Throttle, and maybe, MAYBE a sequel to Brutal Legend if this campaign succeeds, with more news in store is gonna keep the momentum strong. Some people are only just finding out or maybe just scraping some cash together to pledge so I'm pretty optimistic it's not gonna slow down for a while

Also I believe the Fig investments do in fact count towards the crowdfunding totals shown on the site. There's a little button near the current fund numbers that breaks down where the money is coming from and the ratio of Fig investments to pledges are almost even, give or take 200k

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The thing that worries me is the budget meaning all/most of Doublefine working on this (http://www.doublefine.com/forums/viewthread/17557/#397281). Bit of a concentrated risk (though if you were going to bet everything on one game, maybe this is the one to do it on)

He did say though that they'll likely have smaller projects going on at the same time.

The last two times Double Fine worked on a project of this size, the whole studio was working on it and they almost went kaput because of publisher problems. That's the whole reason why the studio shifted to smaller, indie titles focusing on multiple project leaders as opposed to big budget AAA Tim Schafer led games.

This time around, though, the studio has the benefit of getting the funding through non-traditional methods, as well as the benefit of having income of their own earned after 10 years of profitable games.

They also have the wisdom gained from the rough start in their early years, so they likely will have other projects going on at the same time, just to make sure that there are new projects in the pipeline to make sure that the cash flow stays in the green.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to call shenanigans, but did the amount of days left on the campaign countdown recently increase?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not to call shenanigans, but did the amount of days left on the campaign countdown recently increase?

It looks like it did, by about five days. It's at 37 days now, but according to the google cache of the page, it was originally down to 32 days.

I don't know if it's intentional, or a glitch (I'm not sure how fig works, so I'm not sure if they have flexible campaigns like indiegogo, it's possible that they do).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope that the golden rule of kickstarters, where the big campaigns reaching 65-70% of their funding always seemed to get funded, applies to fig too.

And it does feel good that with a goal that high, and the other funding contributors specified, the goal for this campaign should be enough to actually make the game, unlike many kickstarters (not DF's) that sets a goal that they know is to low, and then just hopes it works out.

For this to reach the goal, they need less then $50k per day, so with just some proper updates to keep it visible, they should reach the goal without any worries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On the other hand the investment angle means there is scope for the campaign to get bailed out by bigger investors as happened with the first fig campaign.

Both investment sources (The private investments and the Fig investments) don't count towards the crowdfunding totals. I'm not sure if the crowdfunding will still succeed if it doesn't reach its goal, which means that money isn't collected, and the Fig investments aren't collected, and so on.

Are you sure about that? Because that definitely was NOT the case for the first fig campaign. Both investments and reward based funding went into the same pool. You could tell because the total would jump up whenever they opened up another tier of investment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think they mean to say that Fig investments count towards the goal but that the private investments from the mystery investor don't. Fig investments definitely count, and you can see a breakdown of backer pledges versus investments by clicking the info icon ("i") below the progress bar. It's great to see that there's so much backer interest in this game. The last campaign on Fig got about $100k in investor interest but really tanked in terms of backer interest. It being a f2p on an unestablished funding platform probably didn't help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I worry about the number of backers. The original Double Fine Adventure KS managed to get 3.3m with the help of 90.000 backers. In this case, it looks like less hardcore fans are pledging big bucks, but occasional/small backers, who were such an important asset to the success of Broken Age's KS, seem silent. I don't know...

...what's the best path to victory? Less, more generous backers or a big crowd of "minor" supporters?

Could hardcore fans be enough to get to 3.3m?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I worry about the number of backers. The original Double Fine Adventure KS managed to get 3.3m with the help of 90.000 backers. In this case, it looks like less hardcore fans are pledging big bucks, but occasional/small backers, who were such an important asset to the success of Broken Age's KS, seem silent. I don't know...

...what's the best path to victory? Less, more generous backers or a big crowd of "minor" supporters?

Could hardcore fans be enough to get to 3.3m?

Less and more generous backers is the best way. Then you get the more dedicated ones, that understands crowdfunding. And every backer gained, is one less sale when the game is finished.

I don't see this project failing now, with 52% in just a few days. I was really worried about their future crowdfunding projects when they decided to go with Fig instead of Kickstarter, but they were really smart to use Psychonauts for their next step.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't doubt that the campaign will be success in terms of gathering the money.

What might be a remote concern is that Tim is so bad when it comes to managing his budget.

You know, sticking with your budget, something he seems to hate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't doubt that the campaign will be success in terms of gathering the money.

What might be a remote concern is that Jim is so bad when it comes to managing his budget.

You know, sticking with your budget, something he seems to hate.

Bad? What are you comparing it to then?

And when you say he hates sticking to a budget, you don't think you're simplifying a pretty complex issue a bit too much?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't doubt that the campaign will be success in terms of gathering the money.

What might be a remote concern is that Jim is so bad when it comes to managing his budget.

You know, sticking with your budget, something he seems to hate.

Bad? What are you comparing it to then?

And when you say he hates sticking to a budget, you don't think you're simplifying a pretty complex issue a bit too much?

I think opinions like this one are a huge reason, why I think this campaign will be a lot more difficult to bring to success than DFA or MC. Most people don't (want to) get, that Broken Age is not the game they wanted to make for 300000$. Add the widespread opinion about Spacebase (this is actually the only criticism i can understand) and a certain other group that hates Tim into the mix and you get a huge crowd of haters, who will try everything to make this fail. Everywhere I read comments about this there is more than one post warning about backing this. This makes me really sad and a bit afraid for this to fail, even though it looks great right now.

While Broken Age was not exactly what I expeted and while I think Act 1 was too easy and the split into two parts was not well handled from the PR side of thing, I really enjoyed the endproduct and did not regret backing in any way or at any time during development. It seems to me, that Massive Chalice, which is not my type of game (not backed/bought/played yet), went really well, too. So I do not see any problem in backing this again (did so yesterday), but others who are undecided may not back this because of a few comments, that often don't even get simple facts straight. Yesterday i read a post somewhere, that Broken Age is still not finished. And that was not a post from last year, it was posted after the fig campaign started...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While Broken Age could use Act III instead of end credits explaining of what happens next, they pretty much finished the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think they mean to say that Fig investments count towards the goal but that the private investments from the mystery investor don't. Fig investments definitely count, and you can see a breakdown of backer pledges versus investments by clicking the info icon ("i") below the progress bar. It's great to see that there's so much backer interest in this game. The last campaign on Fig got about $100k in investor interest but really tanked in terms of backer interest. It being a f2p on an unestablished funding platform probably didn't help.
Yea. Honestly I was surprised that one ever got off the ground. It seemed doomed from the start and was a really poorly updated campaign too. Buuut this one seems to have a much better plan behind it. Did you see the first update post/video?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
While Broken Age could use Act III instead of end credits explaining of what happens next, they pretty much finished the game.

I think it is quite ok to end open ended like that. But some people still seem to think it is not finished (eihter because they think there should be more explanation at the end, or because they did not follow the development, or because they just want to hate it), and that may prove problematic. I really hope this will suceed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think they mean to say that Fig investments count towards the goal but that the private investments from the mystery investor don't. Fig investments definitely count, and you can see a breakdown of backer pledges versus investments by clicking the info icon ("i") below the progress bar. It's great to see that there's so much backer interest in this game. The last campaign on Fig got about $100k in investor interest but really tanked in terms of backer interest. It being a f2p on an unestablished funding platform probably didn't help.
Yea. Honestly I was surprised that one ever got off the ground. It seemed doomed from the start and was a really poorly updated campaign too. Buuut this one seems to have a much better plan behind it. Did you see the first update post/video?

Yeah, I think most successful campaigns are planned out at least a couple of months in advance, and have meaty updates every 2-3 days. That one failed to create any kind of buzz, in spite of being from the developer of the well-known Scribblenauts games, 5th Cell. I've been much more impressed by the campaigns for DFA, MC, Jenny LeClue, CrossCode and Indivisible, to name a few, and I think anyone new to running a crowdfunding campaign should study a few campaigns to see what it takes to run a successful campaign.

I haven't had a chance to watch the update video yet, but I'll do so as soon as I've gotten the kids off to bed tonight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On the other hand the investment angle means there is scope for the campaign to get bailed out by bigger investors as happened with the first fig campaign.

Both investment sources (The private investments and the Fig investments) don't count towards the crowdfunding totals. I'm not sure if the crowdfunding will still succeed if it doesn't reach its goal, which means that money isn't collected, and the Fig investments aren't collected, and so on.

Are you sure about that? Because that definitely was NOT the case for the first fig campaign. Both investments and reward based funding went into the same pool. You could tell because the total would jump up whenever they opened up another tier of investment.

I guess I'm not sure, then! They certainly seemed separate, what with that brain diagram showing four distinct areas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People who take the cheap options essentially pre-order the game with nice discount.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
People who take the cheap options essentially pre-order the game with nice discount.
Assuming the project is successful and the game actually ships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
People who take the cheap options essentially pre-order the game with nice discount.
Assuming the project is successful and the game actually ships.

That goes without saying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
People who take the cheap options essentially pre-order the game with nice discount.
Assuming the project is successful and the game actually ships.

That goes without saying.

Not really. "Pre-order" comes with the expectation that you will receive the game, and it usually occurs within a few months of the game going on sale. Crowdfunding has no such assurance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's superficially similar to a pre-order, but it's harmful to crowdfunding to think about it that way. People believing that backing a project is synonymous with a purchase is the number one leading cause of backers turning out to be Veruca Salts who want their golden gooses right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I mean. I like to think my meager contribution is a sincere effort towards helping the campaign reach its goals, and isn't some shady tactic to get the game for less than it's worth. If I could pledge more I would, but oh man those conversion rates are not looking good for this part of the world.

Pretty sure that's the majority of cases with a niche game like Psychonauts, that doesn't seem to enjoy wider appeal outside of the fanbase.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't doubt that the campaign will be success in terms of gathering the money.

What might be a remote concern is that Tim is so bad when it comes to managing his budget.

You know, sticking with your budget, something he seems to hate.

The problems that Tim Schafer and Double Fine had with the budget of Broken Age have already been addressed. They won't be having the same problem now.

1. Broken Age had to have an engine coded for it, as they didn't have a 2D engine for their games before it. They already have a functional 3D engine for their games, Buddha, so they don't have to worry about coding that, which took a significant chunk of development time and money.

2. They had to design characters from scratch. They don't have to do that this time as they already have the main characters and their personalities from the first Psychonauts, and the character models have already been updated.

3. They didn't have a story going into Broken Age. They had a plan for the story for the $200,000 flash game sized adventure they were planning to make (since half of the budget was planned to go to 2 Player Productions for their documentary), but when they unexpectedly received 8 times what they were asking for, a flash game sized adventure wouldn't work (it would be a little silly to keep a game that small and keep the same scope they planned, but spend the rest on graphics, music, and sound effects, so the scope had to be made larger). There is a story for Psychonauts 2 going into it.

4. They already have the scope planned out for Psychonauts 2, which will be about the same size as Psychonauts. They plan for it to take 2 and a half to three years (releasing in 2018), about half the time of the development for the first one, for the same reasons as point one and two. They had to make a brand new engine for Psychonauts, as it was their first game, and they had to design all of the characters and their personalities from scratch. The fact that they don't have to do either this time around will cut development time drastically.

5. They learned a lot from the first kickstarter campaign and already improved upon it with Massive Chalice. The plan for that game was made right from the start, the scope stayed consistent, and they were a lot better with communication with both backers and non-backers as regards to the development of the game. The lessons learned with Massive Chalice will be used in the handling of Psychonauts 2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"something something tim broken age budget"

"something something space base"

57725519.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm aware that Broken Age was made because they ended up gathering way more money than expected.

That was not the point so I didn't mention it.

I doubt he purposely went beyond the budget.

Spacebase DF-9 was a different case and that was just failure to sell enough well. Still that community is calling funders of Psychonauts 2 as idiots.

I have pledged Psychonauts 2 btw. I have not really told my own opinion as of yet.

I liked Broken Age too. Felt like what we got was better than what the campaign initially pitched.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What some people continue to believe happened:

DF: "Oops, we ran out of money. Didn't see that coming. Heh. Now what are we going to do?"

What actually happened:

DF: "We are on course to make a game like X using the money we have now, but now that we stand back and look at it... that doesn't sound like the best result. A game like Y sounds like a better result, but it will require more money than we have right now. Should we stick to the current course and make X or should we figure out a way to go for Y instead? Either way there are risks, but weighing the two options.... let's go for Y."

These are actually very different things.

The first implies mismanagement, lack of foresight, flying by the seat of one's pants.

The second one implies foresight, risk balance, planning, consciousness of product value, decision-making.

It's like if I said, "I won $1,000! I'm gonna cook everyone a steak dinner with it! Let's go!" and everyone was excited because steak is delicious. So I went and bought $1,000 worth of steak and brought it home and started frying it up, all according to plan, but then I was like, "Now that I've got it in front of me and am looking at it... should I do just steak? I could dice it up and make a stir fry to make things more interesting. I'd have to go over the $1,000 I won and buy some more ingredients out of pocket, but it would be a better dinner.... Let's do that instead."

And then some people were like, "How could you fail to plan this dinner so bad? You have no management skills, do you?"

And I was like, "You're welcome, I guess?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this