Sign in to follow this  
432652365324723456235134

Let's talk about Kickstarter price inflation

Recommended Posts

“Me wanty t-shirt but me no have $150.”

Yeah. Me too. But really, they aren't selling you a t-shirt for $150. The are trying to fund a game. To solicite your investment, they are offering a kick-back. Its like getting a pen when you open a checking account for a $50 minimum. No way is that pen worth $50, but they are using your investment to create something larger.

So basically no one is allowed to criticize the incentives they're offering.

Okay. What if the reward tiers weren't the way they were now? What if at $20 dollars you don't get anything, you just help fund the game as a goodwill sort of thing (and before you say it, yes I'm aware KS doesn't allow that). At $50 you fund the game and also get it when it's released

You could still say "It's not about you getting anything, it's about funding the game's development", but you'd obviously have a problem because you expect something for funding the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also does nobody besides me think it's a little strange that things like having your input be included as a part of the game you play come BEFORE seemingly lesser rewards like the shirt and poster?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
“Me wanty t-shirt but me no have $150.”

Yeah. Me too. But really, they aren't selling you a t-shirt for $150. The are trying to fund a game. To solicite your investment, they are offering a kick-back. Its like getting a pen when you open a checking account for a $50 minimum. No way is that pen worth $50, but they are using your investment to create something larger.

So basically no one is allowed to criticize the incentives they're offering.

Okay. What if the reward tiers weren't the way they were now? What if at $20 dollars you don't get anything, you just help fund the game. At $50 you fund the game and also get it when it's released

You could still say "It's not about you getting anything, it's about funding the game's development", but you'd obviously have a problem because you expect something for funding the game.

Okay besides the whole "How do you value your money" thing

Kickstarter is not an investment. You are still a consumer paying money to a company. They get all the profits to pay of their personel, invest further in the company and if possible, bonuses.

A publisher invests money and expects to make money in return to further invest to make more.

What does a backer get? Digital items that can be copied infintely and lose their value. physical items, that either wear and tear. and "might" one day be worth something. a backer is still a consumer, he doesn't invest. He supports company in hope said company will churn out more games in the unforseeable future. The kickstarter company in itself is an investment. They receive a cut for your support to the developer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
“Me wanty t-shirt but me no have $150.”

Yeah. Me too. But really, they aren't selling you a t-shirt for $150. The are trying to fund a game. To solicite your investment, they are offering a kick-back. Its like getting a pen when you open a checking account for a $50 minimum. No way is that pen worth $50, but they are using your investment to create something larger.

So basically no one is allowed to criticize the incentives they're offering.

Who's saying that? People are offering counter-arguments.

Okay. What if the reward tiers weren't the way they were now? What if at $20 dollars you don't get anything, you just help fund the game as a goodwill sort of thing (and before you say it, yes I'm aware KS doesn't allow that). At $50 you fund the game and also get it when it's released

You could still say "It's not about you getting anything, it's about funding the game's development", but you'd obviously have a problem because you expect something for funding the game.

If it was $50 for the game, the kickstarter would be failing. And so I'd want the price to be lower so it would succeed, since my top priority as a backer is for this thing to be succeeding. Right now, the kickstarter is succeeding VERY well, and I don't see that it would be doing much better with different prices - and there are drawbacks as people have pointed out, to giving out a lot of physical rewards at lower prices, because it means that there's much more money flowing out of the fund for rewards, instead of making the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're missing my point. I'm saying Kickstarters are not investments. I expect to get something for paying. Maybe it's the game, maybe it's a shirt, maybe it's my name in the credits. Maybe ALL of those things.

My problem is all the counter arguments basically boil down to "If you don't got the cash or if you're not happy with the rewards tiers, well fuck you buddy!".

And seriously, does NO ONE, absolutely no one find this very odd:

Also does nobody besides me think it’s a little strange that things like having your input be included as a part of the game you play come BEFORE seemingly lesser rewards like the shirt and poster?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"My problem is all the counter arguments basically boil down to “If you don’t got the cash or if you’re not happy with the rewards tiers, well %#$@&! you buddy!”.

Who said that? We are just talking about the ways each of us views kickstarter as a whole, and how Df has chosen to arrange their reward tiers. No one is being pissy. It may all just boil down to our individual perspectives on the whole crowd-funding situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You're missing my point. I'm saying Kickstarters are not investments. I expect to get something for paying. Maybe it's the game, maybe it's a shirt, maybe it's my name in the credits. Maybe ALL of those things.

My problem is all the counter arguments basically boil down to "If you don't got the cash or if you're not happy with the rewards tiers, well fuck you buddy!".

No they don't. Maybe some of them do, but my arguments, and others have been FAR more subtle than that, and actually it's kind of disheartening that you'd characterise them in that way. I've taken the time to read everything people have said in this thread, and consider how best to reply in a way that acknowledges the issue, but explains why I see it differently.

And seriously, does NO ONE, absolutely no one find this very odd:

Also does nobody besides me think it’s a little strange that things like having your input be included as a part of the game you play come BEFORE seemingly lesser rewards like the shirt and poster?

No, I don't, because giving someone a chance to put their personal stamp on the game costs DF very little, but giving out physical rewards is a costly process, for DF. I would expect them to make it more expensive, because a chunk of the money for that tier would be going towards the reward, rather than the game budget.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah but don't you think having a reward where something of yours ends up in the game is problematic, in several ways?

Submit your name and House preferences (color, sigil, motto, and castle name) to be included as one of the Bloodlines in the game!

One thing I see being a problem with offering this as a reward is where to draw the line. For example, if I pay the $100 and name my castle Dickcunt Keep or something, would they accept it? If they don't do I get a refund? Same thing applies to the mottos and sigils. Sigils I can see maybe having some copyright issues with people who assume their designs will still be under their copyright, but I think this is less likely than someone turning in something they didn't make. Then theres no telling how this will all look together in the end. It could end up being really disjointed-looking and weird

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah but don't you think having a reward where something of yours ends up in the game is problematic, in several ways?
Submit your name and House preferences (color, sigil, motto, and castle name) to be included as one of the Bloodlines in the game!

One thing I see being a problem with offering this as a reward is where to draw the line. For example, if I pay the $100 and name my castle Dickcunt Keep or something, would they accept it? If they don't do I get a refund? Same thing applies to the mottos and sigils. Sigils I can see maybe having some copyright issues with people who assume their designs will still be under their copyright, but I think this is less likely than someone turning in something they didn't make. Then theres no telling how this will all look together in the end. It could end up being really disjointed-looking and weird

Now here I definitely think you're inventing problems where there are none. Just like the credits in DFA, there will be some rules about what's acceptable (and it will probably be a bit stricter too, to minimise problems). It shouldn't take inordinate amounts of work to check them for abuse. And frankly, the chance that someone is willing to spend $100 on the game in order to abuse their reward is slim. It could happen, and maybe they won't catch every single case that could be a problem, but these aren't insurmountable issues by any stretch. If someone abuses it, or does something against the rules without realising, then they have to resubmit. Simple. And I think the sigils will probably not be completely player created designs, but rather something you composite from various assets, like a sort of family crest designer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that it's easy to mitigate the trolls just by releasing a sigil editor or fixed assets and by proofing the submissions. I think the bigger point Carl is trying to make, though, is that they are compromising their artistic vision even if it's in a very small way. You mentioned "full creative freedom without strings attached" on the last page, but that's not the reality here. Maybe someone working on this project would have wanted to develop a unique or at least consistant etymology for the different names of the houses. Names that all sound like they come from the same realm, you know? Unless they enforce very strict naming rules (which would be very difficult - how would you tell a customer that his family name doesn't fit the world you're trying to build and he'll have to make up a new name for his house?) the game is more likely to come out with a mash-up of very dissimilar names. This is far from a travesty, but it does limit in some small way how they can build their world and lore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the comparison of Kickstarter to Preorder holds up very well. The rewards on Kickstarter are completely optional. You're not buying a product - you're funding it's creation and encouraging the development of type of products you want. That's kind of what it's about (in my opinion.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't think the comparison of Kickstarter to Preorder holds up very well. The rewards on Kickstarter are completely optional. You're not buying a product - you're funding it's creation and encouraging the development of type of products you want. That's kind of what it's about (in my opinion.)

Me too. There's not such thing as the "kickstarter price going up", because there is no kickstarter price. When DFA was the kickstarter, you could donate a minimum of $1. This time with MASSIVE CHALICE, you can donate a minimum of $1.

What is REALLY being complained about here is that certain rewards are desired, and those rewards are being given to people who are donating amounts of money that are greater than what the complainer wishes to donate. Specifically, the reward of the game download is $5 more than it was for DFA.

This makes a lot of assumptions---the biggest one being that there are no development cost differences between DFA and Massive Chalice. Like maybe it costs more to make a TRPG than it does to make a point-and-click adventure game. Similarly, maybe the final game will be sold at a higher price than Broken Age? Maybe they just crunched some numbers and determined that it could work out better for them economically?

I definitely wouldn't back for $100 if the game download was at the $100 tier, because I'm too poor for that. But I'd still back a little bit so that the game would get made and I could buy it. I would just factor the later cost of purchasing the game into how much I was willing to donate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree that it's easy to mitigate the trolls just by releasing a sigil editor or fixed assets and by proofing the submissions. I think the bigger point Carl is trying to make, though, is that they are compromising their artistic vision even if it's in a very small way. You mentioned "full creative freedom without strings attached" on the last page, but that's not the reality here. Maybe someone working on this project would have wanted to develop a unique or at least consistant etymology for the different names of the houses. Names that all sound like they come from the same realm, you know? Unless they enforce very strict naming rules (which would be very difficult - how would you tell a customer that his family name doesn't fit the world you're trying to build and he'll have to make up a new name for his house?) the game is more likely to come out with a mash-up of very dissimilar names. This is far from a travesty, but it does limit in some small way how they can build their world and lore.

That's true, but it's a limitation that they've planned for from the beginning. It's not the same as, say, a publisher coming in and saying "Oh, your game has to have multiplayer now" or "You're not allowed to have this character say or do this that or the other." There's a world of difference when you're offering players a way of being involved from the outset that you can build right into your design. They're not compromising their artistic vision, because this is part of their artistic vision from the start - which is why it's there. If they had a vision that this was compromising, they wouldn't have chosen it as a reward, would they?

(Also, we still don't know what limitations they're going to put on people's house names, sigils, castle names. For all we know they already have a plan how to keep everything within their theme)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What is REALLY being complained about here is that certain rewards are desired, and those rewards are being given to people who are donating amounts of money that are greater than what the complainer wishes to donate. Specifically, the reward of the game download is $5 more than it was for DFA.

Nobody's complaining about the $5 increase in the price of the base game. In the OP I even said that $20 is a very reasonable price for a game. It's the higher tiers I'm having trouble with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's true, but it's a limitation that they've planned for from the beginning. It's not the same as, say, a publisher coming in and saying "Oh, your game has to have multiplayer now" or "You're not allowed to have this character say or do this that or the other." There's a world of difference when you're offering players a way of being involved from the outset that you can build right into your design. They're not compromising their artistic vision, because this is part of their artistic vision from the start - which is why it's there. If they had a vision that this was compromising, they wouldn't have chosen it as a reward, would they?

(Also, we still don't know what limitations they're going to put on people's house names, sigils, castle names. For all we know they already have a plan how to keep everything within their theme)

I'm not able to speculate on what is and isn't in DF's artistic vision, but just the fact that they planned for this from the beginning doesn't mean it wasn't a compromise in some way. Maybe they sat down and made a list of things they could do to reward the backers and chose the least disruptive one, but if they had total freedom they would have chosen to do nothing on that list. Or maybe they're totally into the idea. Maybe they're into the idea now but when weird name submissions start rolling in they won't be and it'll be too late to change. The point I'm trying to make is that even a planned-for limitation is still a limitation, and the Kickstarter model has its own set of benefits and downsides.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, I get that. The thing is that Kickstarters are always being pitched as good for the developer and good for the consumer, where the reality is more like it's good for the developer and good for the consumer that has lots of disposable income.

So... welcome to the real world? The people putting more money into the game are taking a larger risk (after all, the game right now is essentially an "idea" and nothing more.) There is even a risk it never gets made, DF goes bankrupt, and you lose all your dough. Those who put more into the game / take more risk and therefor reap a greater reward. It's the same practically everywhere in life in terms of risk/reward.

This is NOT a pre-order system... this is "crowdfunding" - you are essentially an investor... but are an investor who has given up all rights to the product and instead have been "paid off" with "perks."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't believe I've ever funded a Kickstarter game project at a level that has given me physical rewards, simply because as the original poster stated they are never good value for money, and I have funded several (Banner Saga, FTL, DFA, LoD, Sir You're Being Hunted). As a married professional I could certainly afford to back at higher levels, but again as the original poster stated there is some risk and a large amount of patience required in actually seeing a KS project complete. As such, I would rather give five projects $20 each for a DRM free digital download at some point in the future, than one project $100 for some nebulous game credits and a poster/t-shirt/key-ring.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, I get that. The thing is that Kickstarters are always being pitched as good for the developer and good for the consumer, where the reality is more like it's good for the developer and good for the consumer that has lots of disposable income.

So... welcome to the real world? The people putting more money into the game are taking a larger risk (after all, the game right now is essentially an "idea" and nothing more.) There is even a risk it never gets made, DF goes bankrupt, and you lose all your dough. Those who put more into the game / take more risk and therefor reap a greater reward. It's the same practically everywhere in life in terms of risk/reward.

This is NOT a pre-order system... this is "crowdfunding" - you are essentially an investor... but are an investor who has given up all rights to the product and instead have been "paid off" with "perks."

Guys, I get that crowdfunding is not the same as preordering. I get that they are two different systems with different aims and approaches. Message received. However, I do not believe that this knowledge somehow invalidates any comparisons made between them, or that this is "the real world" and that I should just learn to deal with it. Let's try not to shut down the discussion that way, okay? Things can always be changed and improved. Nothing is perfect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
*post*

Keep in mind that the 2PP videos for Massive Chalice will be free for anyone to watch whether they backed the game or not, through Vimeo or whatever hosting site 2PP goes with. It's only the HD downloads are only available to those that back for $50 or more.

Ah, good call.

They can charge what they want, it's not fair or unfair.

And yes, totally agree. In the end, it's crowd funding for the goal of funding a project, and any 'extras' they want to give as incentives are just that, like the free pen with a checking account, non-essentials that exist simply to reward the friend who chooses to pitch them money. It's fair to argue whether or not their incentives for different reward tiers are wise, but my personal opinion is they can charge whatever they want for each perk, since the goal is obtaining crowd funding.

It's not like any of the perks are essentials to the game experience. They're there as rewards for people being benevolent to donate to the cause. I've never felt it was wrong for kickstarters to have t-shirts and special bonuses at reward tiers beyond what I'm willing or can afford to pay, since they've pretty much always been extras that I don't have to have.

Just my opinion, and I respect anyone who feels differently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
*post*

Keep in mind that the 2PP videos for Massive Chalice will be free for anyone to watch whether they backed the game or not, through Vimeo or whatever hosting site 2PP goes with. It's only the HD downloads are only available to those that back for $50 or more.

Ah, good call.

They can charge what they want, it's not fair or unfair.

And yes, totally agree. In the end, it's crowd funding for the goal of funding a project, and any 'extras' they want to give as incentives are just that, like the free pen with a checking account, non-essentials that exist simply to reward the friend who chooses to pitch them money. It's fair to argue whether or not their incentives for different reward tiers are wise, but my personal opinion is they can charge whatever they want for each perk, since the goal is obtaining crowd funding.

It's not like any of the perks are essentials to the game experience. They're there as rewards for people being benevolent to donate to the cause. I've never felt it was wrong for kickstarters to have t-shirts and special bonuses at reward tiers beyond what I'm willing or can afford to pay, since they've pretty much always been extras that I don't have to have.

Just my opinion, and I respect anyone who feels differently.

Exactly. What I'm reading here, for the most part is, "I'd like to have the rewards from X tier.. but I don't want to pay that much for that tier" But that's what makes that tier appealing to some people, and yes, it DOES cater to those who have more disposable income because they WANT those people to part with said disposable income. If you want someone to pay $50 for a game that normally is only $20, you have to give an incentive.

If you don't have the money to buy in at that tier, or don't want to spend that much... it's unfortunate, yes, but you aren't going to receive that perk. I'm sure a lot of us would like to drive a Porsche or Ferrari as well... but it might be beyond our means.

You can make it known that you'd like to see a reward at a lower tier, and I've seen some kickstarters actually add a middling tier at those kinds of request. But there is no price inflation here what-so-ever. The game is essentially the same price at every tier... it's the extra $$$ that you put in that winds up earning the rewards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Exactly. What I'm reading here, for the most part is, "I'd like to have the rewards from X tier.. but I don't want to pay that much for that tier" But that's what makes that tier appealing to some people, and yes, it DOES cater to those who have more disposable income because they WANT those people to part with said disposable income. If you want someone to pay $50 for a game that normally is only $20, you have to give an incentive.

If you don't have the money to buy in at that tier, or don't want to spend that much... it's unfortunate, yes, but you aren't going to receive that perk. I'm sure a lot of us would like to drive a Porsche or Ferrari as well... but it might be beyond our means.

You can make it known that you'd like to see a reward at a lower tier, and I've seen some kickstarters actually add a middling tier at those kinds of request. But there is no price inflation here what-so-ever. The game is essentially the same price at every tier... it's the extra $$$ that you put in that winds up earning the rewards.

I've made a point about how I think there's room for improvement, so I should probably talk about exactly what I think could be done, right? Well, as you said, middling tiers would certainly be appreciated. I think another way to improve the system is a way that a lot of other Kickstarter campaigns have clued into already: Add-Ons! If I go check out Project Eternity, I see that I can buy a $65 physical edition of the game and add-on a t-shirt for $25, for a total of $90. While ideally they would let me buy the t-shirt with the $20 version of the game, this approach still seems fairly reasonable to me. $90 is a pretty close price to the $80 Special Editions that the big publishers do. I'm not forced to get things I don't necessarily want (like the strategy guide or extra copies of the game) this way and I save $10 in the end. Add-Ons are definitely an improvement on the basic Kickstarter model.

Also I get the gist of your analogy but I just have to say that the reason a Ferrari is beyond my means is because it's a highly-engineered sports car that can go 200 mph. A t-shirt can't go 200 mph.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've made a point about how I think there's room for improvement, so I should probably talk about exactly what I think could be done, right? Well, as you said, middling tiers would certainly be appreciated. I think another way to improve the system is a way that a lot of other Kickstarter campaigns have clued into already: Add-Ons! If I go check out Project Eternity, I see that I can buy a $65 physical edition of the game and add-on a t-shirt for $25, for a total of $90. While ideally they would let me buy the t-shirt with the $20 version of the game, this approach still seems fairly reasonable to me. $90 is a pretty close price to the $80 Special Editions that the big publishers do. I'm not forced to get things I don't necessarily want (like the strategy guide or extra copies of the game) this way and I save $10 in the end. Add-Ons are definitely an improvement on the basic Kickstarter model.

Add-ons are an interesting idea and I could see them becoming part of a good crowdfunding strategy. Right now, I'd be reluctant to use them since they're really not supported by Kickstarter. True, it's not that hard to add up the prices of several add-ons, and I've seen projects that have calculators (on external pages) to figure out pricing for more complex scenarios with international shipping costs... but there's no confirmation that your order was valid until after the project is funded and the project creator gets all the backer information. A lot of projects then require another survey to figure out which specific add-ons were selected by each backer (hopefully with the cost total matching what it should). I'm pretty sure that with tens of thousands of backers there will be a number of orders that were screwed up... and not only would that be a headache to deal with, it'd be a pretty lousy experience for the backer. Supporting add-ons would also strongly reinforce the perception that Kickstarter is a system for pre-orders. Finally, I think that add-ons would lead to really variable profit margins for each pledge, which would make it tough to set a funding goal in the current Kickstarter system.

All of these issues could be fixed with a different funding platform, but I really don't think they're a good idea on Kickstarter at the moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

these are all long posts but things are simple. it costs a lot of money to ship out all those physical things where the money was intended originally to pay the developers. that is what happened with broken age. Double Fine are being realistic and doesn't want to mislead anyone. simple :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What i like about the tiers is that they've cleaned them up. Quite some campaigns offer this many options that you loose interest in reading through all of the options or fall asleep. Starting with $20 is a fair price for a mid to complex indie game (and i'm glad that they didn't put any nonsense in front of that) but it isn't cheap either considering that quite some people are grabbing a copy for $15 easier. On the other side you could argue that you will see the docu online already but considering that you don't get the game in return immediately, offering something like backer access and a docu sounds like a fair compensation which shouldn't cost on top.

I see room for three options for the digital tiers, the bare minimum, the all included and something reasonable in between. If you balance it wisely enough and your project isn't complex two might be enough already but somehow i think there already is a gap between $20 and $50 and from there on to $100 it is already a step. Now if you add something special there might be additional digital tiers as well.

As for the physical tiers, generally spoken from a customers point of view, i miss that you don't get a boxed version or a t-shirt for less than $100. That's utalising the hardcore fans with intention. It's okay if they include a lot of stuff like a t-shirt, poster, blu-ray ... but it isn't anymore once it is only a box or a t-shirt. It might be good if you look at it from the perspective to optimise the funding (where everyone benefits from where premium offers also finance the cheaper ones) but i also prefer fair tiers and a boxed version or a t-shirt doesn't sound like premium to me (it might help preventing needless pollution though) plus it isn't clear which model generates more funding in the end.

You should be able to offer a basic physical tier for less, especially when all the money goes directly to the dev (minus costs for the physical stuff, the kickstarter fees, ...). You might also want to offer something like a t-shirt apart from the tier you've selected. This way you could sell more of them.

I know about the difference between what Kickstarter was meant to be and a preorder system but somehow if crowd funding is used by a company in a regular way, with which i'm totally fine with, then i somehow prefer seeing it as a preorder instead of a donation system and then the tiers need to be balanced wisely. $150 for a t-shirt, poster and shipping falls more into the donation than the preorder category.

Of course setting up the right tiers very much depends on the specific game you're offering. Somehow i ended up speaking more in a general way than about this game but oh well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we need to be careful not to be completely dismissive of the points some people are making here. Whatever else is true, it is true that for a lot of people, $50 is a much bigger commitment than $20, and $100+ isn't even something they can readily consider. It doesn't seem unreasonable for them to wonder if some compromise can't be made.

On the other hand, I do think the physical rewards are being offered at a premium this time for a very good reason. When I gave DF $120 for DFA, $10 of that was basically a tip, over and above what I had to spend for the reward. $10 was for delivery, but that probably doesn't cover it delivery since there's so much stuff, so the remaining $100 pays for the manufacturing costs of:

a) My limited edition boxed copy

b) T-shirt

c) Poster

d) The rest of the delivery costs.

I would be surprised if very much more than half of the money a $100 backer pledged actually went to the game and documentary budget rather than covering reward costs. While every time DF added something to the tiers, it paid for itself in the number of new backers it brought, they probably knew from the outset that this was unlikely to be the phenomenon that DFA was on Kickstarter, and so are being much more cautious about offering rewards at lower tiers that are going to take away from the actual game budget.

I am all for them introducing new digital reward tiers, or adding bonuses to the existing ones that make them more appealing (like they did with DFA). But with this second kickstarter project I do think they are absolutely right to be focusing on rewards that aren't as costly for them to produce. My $100 won't get me any cool physical stuff this time, but I take some comfort in the idea that the vast majority of it will be directly going toward the game budget.

If, later on they decide that the campaign is going well enough that they can afford to introduce physical rewards at lower tiers, they're welcome to of course, but it's a calculated risk - whenever you commit to anything extra, either digital or physical: you have to judge that the extra backers it'll bring will pay for the extra cost of the reward, and physical rewards are by far the most costly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If i remember things correctly Greg once posted the costs for the physical goods and at least to me they were surprisingly low. Beside of that a t-shirt they sell for $20, doesn't cost them $20, so they're already making a profit here as well. Anyway you need to experiment with a gut feeling in order to find out what the best way to get most of the funding is. In my opinion the high price thing isn't the best way to go here, at least for stuff like t-shirts. Signed stuff is another thing, you're more free to go with such more non-material values.

In numbers...

in the DFA more than 24% of the amount of backers from the cheapest tier also reached out for the physical tier.

in Massive Chalice (btw. i like the massive) it's not even 3%.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If i remember things correctly Greg once posted the costs for the physical goods and at least to me they were surprisingly low. Beside of that a t-shirt they sell for $20, doesn't cost them $20, so they're already making a profit here as well. Anyway you need to experiment with a gut feeling in order to find out what the best way to get most of the funding is. In my opinion the high price thing isn't the best way to go, at least for stuff like t-shirts. Signed stuff is another thing, you're more free to got with such more non-material values.

In numbers...

in the DFA more than 24% of the amount of backers from the cheapest tier also reached out for the physical tier.

in Massive Chalice (btw. i like the massive) it's not even 3%.

We don't need to guess, we can work this out quite accurately.

- $3,099,660 was the final project budget after fees, just from Kickstarter.

- All the sub-$100 tiers were digital only, and it we add them up, they account for about £1,370,000 of the budget after fees.

- So, the reward tiers accounted for about $1,730,000 of the project budget

- $473,231 is the cost of physical rewards, just from Kickstarter. Let's call it $470,000

Therefore the cost of the physical rewards accounted for about 27% of the backer money for the physical tiers.

That's not quite as big a percentage as I thought it might be, but that's partially because that includes the 1000 or so $250 backers, whose monetary contributions were much higher in contrast to the cost of their rewards. A back of an envelope estimate tells me that if you look at the $100 backers in isolation, it's probably more like 33%. It paid for itself, because the physical reward tiers proved so popular especially after the boxed version was announced, but that's still a scary percentage of money for a tier just to commit to rewards, as it could really backfire if the improved tiers had failed to bring in enough additional sales.

---

Anyway, there wasn't a real point to all that, I just thought it was interesting to work out.

To the last thing you said, I'd argue it's not a fair comparison yet. The number of people going for physical rewards skyrocketed halfway through the DFA kickstarter, when all the extra things were added to the $100 tier. We don't know if there are going to be any similar things for this project yet, because it has only just started.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's valid from listening to my gut feeling, talking to others and looking at the numbers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The physical version of a game in KickStarters also tends to include the other digital tiers, in the case of MASSIVE CHALICE that's $100 of digital rewards. Subtract the digital rewards, the t-shirt and poster is for $50, when t-shirts go in the DF store go for $20-25 and posters for $10, so it's $15-20 more than they'd usually charge. Clearly these reward tiers are not about reward value, they're about pledging to fund a game. It would be unfortunate if the physical reward tiers were generous with lots of backers choosing them and the game just reached its goal, KickStarter campaigns have had to guard against that scenario.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm on my phone so I cannot type out a big reply, but I've read about 90% of the posts here. The only thing I came here to say, to help better explain the increase in reward tiers is: Brad Muir is the one that says "Holy shit!" when he hears $500,000 was spent on the rewards in the DFA documentary. inXile and Obsidian have proven that $20 is a viable price for Kickstarter.

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