Broken Age

[Hot Heart]

And in a single paragraph, Ethan goes and summarises exactly what I was trying to say...

[deanb]

And the publisher gets their money to fund further studios and projects from where? It ain't from advertising. Advertisements, if anything, are the major drain on entertainment industry costs, not a source.

 

The boundaries are more solidly defined than when they were with a publisher as far as funding goes though. A publisher can always throw more money at you down the line, with a KS project you're generally stuck with what you've got unless over a year into the process of your development a party outside of your control goes and implements an "Early Access" sales system which can provide a kind of saving grace. If SEA didn't exist what was going to be their plan? There likely was no outcry until now because 9 months ago when it was clear it wasn't going to hit the target it wasn't said that they'd miss the target by nearly two years.

 

Risk averse publishers? Sure many of thier games are the sure fire hits. But it's hardly like the guy that's making a game that's the same kind of game he's been making throughout his career using funds entirely from people he is unbeholden to, as opposed to dipping into his own pocket, is a guy that is taking a risk. At most he'd get a dint in reputation, and just be able to shrug it off as "KS was new and untried on big scale projects". And I'm sure my view on the puzzle platformer scene and it's undue unchallenged acceptance as being "more creative" is well known.

 

When the game got bigger though they should have re-budgeted. Project management. You sit down and go "we have this much money, this will cover x amount of voice actors, x amount of programmers for x amount of months. Here's projections with an error of margin". However it seems as if DF/schafer's method of project management was "we have 8 times the cash, shouldn't need to worry about anything with that much excess". I don't think the FTL guys success with their KS is down to having a mostly done game, I think it's mostly down to just having better project management skills. They had all the temptation in the world to make their game bigger and longer to develop and so on with the excess cash, but they knew what they'd said the backing would get and that it'd be a dark path to go down, and so just popped out what they promised.

 

Even accounting for an acceptance that they must spend all the cash raised and not the initial $400K budget, they have gone over budget. Otherwise they wouldn't need more money to finish the game and not have to cut out 75% of the game. And of course it's not going to be less than $400K worth of game.

 

A kickstarter project is still the same as a kickstarter project. It's just another useful example as a point of comparison (especially since you don't seem to like the comparison between two overly-funded video game kickstarters), and technically TN brought that one up so blame it on him. The main point of the comparisons/analogies is that there is no onus on the project to change the project if the funding is in excess, and many other projects have managed to deal just fine with being funded more than they needed.

 

@TME: And the vagueness of "better and better" doesn't bother you? For a project that was trying to pitch themselves on openness the "better and better" is something that could be translated in any manner. Compared to "Over a six-to-eight month period, a small team under Tim Schafer's supervision will develop Double Fine's next game, a classic point-and-click adventure." "$400,000" "French, Italian, German, and Spanish" "PC, Mac, Linux, iOS, and Android". It just seems arbitrary to be fine that the game has gone over $400K it was meant to cost, to now going over the $3.8million that it's still not actually going to cost.

[Hot Heart]

This didn't come out of the blue. Updates for backers show precisely what stage it's at; I don't expect a documentary to give me a financial report. And for those checking the updates, they'll know that actual production didn't begin until September 2012. In fact, it was around March 2013 that Schafer said was a 'good sounding time' for the game's release. Yes, they're now way off, but it establishes that people were always expecting more for no extra cost. And it was February 2013 when people saw the design vs. money tension and rescoping come up. At that point, it had become clear to Double Fine that things would go beyond reasonable expectations, thus rescope and seek alternative funding.

 

If your customers are your backers, then you're trying to gauge and balance these expectations. If we're going to talk about a 'right to complain', then I'm getting a game that will be worth more than the originally envisioned $400k (and it's with modest cuts, not the 75% mentioned earlier) without having to pay any extra, and I have no qualms with that timeframe.

[deanb]

They took 6 months to even start? Despite originally going to be mostly finished at that point in original plan? I guess they at least started how they aimed to carry on. Shame they've failed to hit both their original launch time, their second launch time, and I guess we'll find out this time next year if they even hit their way-way out in the future third launch target.

 

Backers are customers now? Though it's not meant to be pre-orders? And no doubt the final game will be worth the $4million+ it'll have eventually costed instead of the $400K it was meant to be, bit of a no brainer. Though it's definitely not going to be the game that was pitched and backed (and given the cuts it's not going to be the rescoped game either). Though I guess it's to each and their own on how much weighting is placed in the "not paying extra" element. A game like SRIV might cost $40million to make, and cost $60 to buy a copy of, and GTAV cost like $120million and at no extra cost to you, still be $60 to buy. People didn't really feel slightly to be paying $15 for a $400K 6-8mth small team game. Also I can't see it being universally praised to find out the game is going to take four times longer than originally pitched.

[Hot Heart]

Pre-production was taking place in that six months (so I guess longer than expected). Just illustrating how folks were already expecting a larger game, rather than DF pocketing the extra money, but never spoke up then.

 

And I'm talking from the point-of-view of the developer since it is a very direct relationship. They need to treat backers as customers since a lot of it is down to reputation/goodwill as well, especially if they want them to buy their games or back other projects. Though, as I've been trying to establish, DFA is a rare exception in that there was no design document or at least a very loose one (and 1/4 of the funds intended to be allocated to the documentary). If people are concerned about how this might affect other game projects, I think that's an important distinction to make and emphasise. And I think it's acceptable that they've found alternative means of revenue without asking backers to cough up more or going to a publisher.

 

As long as it is now what they say they will deliver, I think it will be OK. Being further along, I figure it must be easier to estimate. Going back to publisher-funded games, we don't see all the things that get cut. We may hear about some of them through artbooks and stuff, but we can't put a cost (or how much money was 'wasted') to that either. Journey's team of 18 took three years instead of one, and bankrupt Thatgamecompany in the process. Do we know if the game was going to be much larger than the few hours it takes to complete? How much can we tell is 'onscreen'?

 

If Broken Age still has voice-acting and music (no mention of those being cut) and other such improvements, it will still appear to be of a higher production value than originally pitched and certainly one over on other smaller games they've done, like Costume Quest and Stacked. And, besides, at this point I really think we've made slightly too big a deal of it.

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

Shouldn't they treat them as investors rather than customers? What you described doesn't really fit for customers.

[Hot Heart]

I dunno. With investors you're kinda going, "These are the expected returns, etc." without really focusing on how the finished product will play, whereas with backers you are going "This is the sort of game I want to make." As has been mentioned, though, the lines are a little blurred.

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

I think it's more investor than customer. Like, you just have to come out with something, but there is not specific expectation that has to be met for quality. Just the expectations from the Kickstarter of it being an adventure game that is bigger than originally planned.

[TheMightyEthan]

I think it's more like a customer in terms of what they're expecting back.  I would wager most people who back a game on KS back it because they want that game, whereas investors (typically) just want some kind of monetary return.  Investors don't care how good the game is as long as it sells, while backers are going to want to get a game they enjoy.

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

Yeah, but that's now how Kickstarter works. We're just going in circles at this point.

[Mister Jack]

That said, kickstarter doesn't guarantee that the game will ever come out. You're supporting it as a show of good faith but there are no promises except that the money will be used for what they say it will be used for. If the project dies before it's finished, you aren't owed a thing.

[deanb]

Oh, well pre-production is part of production. Kinda made it sound like they'd not started until months in (which wouldn't be the first KS to do that.)

 

Lacking a design document, omitting the frequent greenlight meetings, etc. It's sounding less and less like this is a game that's providing an insight into how games are made and more into how this one game was very specifically made, as well as an eventually late template on how not to do a KS campaign. Also wasn't the documentary only $20K or so of the original, how has it ended up swelling to 25% of the budget? (making the documentary nearly twice the original projects budget). Apart from it still being an adventure game made by Tim Schafer it seems it's not really hit much of the original pitch. (Not to say it's not going to be bad, but it has pretty much fucked up on every single bullet point of the project pitch).

 

They're only slightly beyond the projected half way line, and when they said March that'll be about the same point in the project length as they are now. So I'm not thinking they're any more solid at gauging the actual launch date than when they first pitched. Also I think at the end of the day given the pseudo-transparency of the project I'm not sure this'll give much more info on what is cut than through artbooks and stuff too.

 

Voice work and music was kind of assumed given it was to be on-par with stuff like Day of the Tentacle. They were pitching old-school, not super dooper retro. A lot of the cost in Costume Quest and Stacked was through it being 3D, something that (as best I can tell, and given the original pitch) BA is avoiding using.

 

I would say the eventual solution, though KS guys enjoy money too much to implement it, would be to put some kind of a cap on funding, say 125% funding or something. Anything beyond can potentially go through the projects website but at that point the project is funded and much anything else is just pre-orders really.

 

And yeah, FDS is pretty spot on. Kickstarter isn't meant to be used as a pre-order service. That's what stores are for. It's meant to be backing (though not really investing) into projects. The project team should be treating it as that way too, the backers are investors into your project and pitch, not purchasers of a product you may or may not produce (not all KS projects are even entirely sellable as a product anyway).

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

That said, kickstarter doesn't guarantee that the game will ever come out. You're supporting it as a show of good faith but there are no promises except that the money will be used for what they say it will be used for. If the project dies before it's finished, you aren't owed a thing.

 

Well except your money back. What's steam's policy on that?

[TheMightyEthan]

I agree backing a KS isn't a preorder, but they're not just straight investors either.  Like HH said, it's a weird middle ground between the two.

[Mister Jack]

I could be wrong but I don't think you're even entitled to your money unless they never actually spent any of it on the project and is just sitting there. It seems like a sticky situation. If a project raises 400,000 dollars but for whatever reason the project has to be canceled After they spend 300,000 of it, how do they decide who gets the last 100,000?

[TheMightyEthan]

I think the only time you're entitled to your money back from a KS is if it's like a scam, where they just took the money and ran.  And even then, you only get it back if they can get it back from the people, KS isn't going to eat the loss.

 

I have no idea what Steams policy is with Greenlight.

[deanb]

 

That said, kickstarter doesn't guarantee that the game will ever come out. You're supporting it as a show of good faith but there are no promises except that the money will be used for what they say it will be used for. If the project dies before it's finished, you aren't owed a thing.

 

Well except your money back. What's steam's policy on that?

 

If we're talking about Early Access titles, unlike Pre-orders where it is possible to get a simple refund before the game is out (sometimes a nice bonus to being European, 3 day window to see if a game is super-fucked), Early Access games are treated as being launched, so no easy refunds without media campaigns such as with The War Z.

 

For Kickstarter, if a project is backed there's a minor buffer window where the money is transferred to the project, after that you're SOL on getting money back without legal intervention. Though given in most cases it's like $15 or so you're likely to eat it as a loss. The guys that pay like $1000 for a night out on the town with project team however might not roll with it. There has been a couple incidents where a project has come across as a scam, though most of the time that's during the funding stay. Such as that Mythic game with all the stolen artwork.

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

 

 

That said, kickstarter doesn't guarantee that the game will ever come out. You're supporting it as a show of good faith but there are no promises except that the money will be used for what they say it will be used for. If the project dies before it's finished, you aren't owed a thing.

 

Well except your money back. What's steam's policy on that?

 

If we're talking about Early Access titles, unlike Pre-orders where it is possible to get a simple refund before the game is out (sometimes a nice bonus to being European, 3 day window to see if a game is super-fucked), Early Access games are treated as being launched, so no easy refunds without media campaigns such as with The War Z.

 

For Kickstarter, if a project is backed there's a minor buffer window where the money is transferred to the project, after that you're SOL on getting money back without legal intervention. Though given in most cases it's like $15 or so you're likely to eat it as a loss. The guys that pay like $1000 for a night out on the town with project team however might not roll with it. There has been a couple incidents where a project has come across as a scam, though most of the time that's during the funding stay. Such as that Mythic game with all the stolen artwork.

 

 

I was referring to this:

 

 

If I am unable to complete my project as promised, what should I do?

"If your project is successfully funded, you are required to fulfill all rewards or refund any backer whose reward you do not or cannot fulfill. A failure to do so could result in damage to your reputation or even legal action by your backers."

 

A company like DF would obviously refund people's money. More shady projects... well that's part of the risk and that's why lawyers exist.

[TheMightyEthan]

Yeah, but I have a feeling that even if you sued them, unless you could show they acted wrongfully in some way you're going to be SOL even there.  If it just legitimately failed as a business project, the court would probably just say you made a bad investment, move on.  It's possible I'm wrong though and they'd say you had a contract to deliver a specific thing and you are responsible for that contract.  I think the fact that it's made very clear up-front on KS that these projects might not succeed though would be enough to cover them.

[Hot Heart]

Lacking a design document, omitting the frequent greenlight meetings, etc. It's sounding less and less like this is a game that's providing an insight into how games are made and more into how this one game was very specifically made, as well as an eventually late template on how not to do a KS campaign. Also wasn't the documentary only $20K or so of the original, how has it ended up swelling to 25% of the budget? (making the documentary nearly twice the original projects budget).

 

Voice work and music was kind of assumed given it was to be on-par with stuff like Day of the Tentacle. They were pitching old-school, not super dooper retro. A lot of the cost in Costume Quest and Stacked was through it being 3D, something that (as best I can tell, and given the original pitch) BA is avoiding using.

 

I would say the eventual solution, though KS guys enjoy money too much to implement it, would be to put some kind of a cap on funding, say 125% funding or something. Anything beyond can potentially go through the projects website but at that point the project is funded and much anything else is just pre-orders really.

 

If they hadn't started the game at all, you would've heard people complaining at the very start.

 

I believe the idea was to show a game completely from scratch (and obviously not all games are made the same, it was more a 'Double Fine documentary').  From what I can tell, the documentary was planned as $100k of the original $400k (not sure how much it's grown in relation to the finished budget). There's an interview that sheds a little more light, as to how the game was originally a bare minimum deal (and definitely not on par with Day of the Tentacle when it was at $300k).

 

And I'm not sure your solution would work because then you're already conflating funding with pre-orders. As has been said, it's a tricky situation.

[TheMightyEthan]

What might be a good idea would be KS requiring in their little FAQ section about risks and whatnot a little explanation of what will be done with any funding above the goal.  Specifically whether the project will be expanded in scope and, if so, a general idea of what direction that expansion might take.

[Mister Jack]

If something horrible happens and Broken Age is canceled (unlikely), then I'm pretty sure all those kickstarters will just have to deal with it. Double Fine's problem is with budgeting, not using the money dishonestly. That kickstarter FAQ is more like a piece of advice than an actual rule. If they kill the project, their reputation will be ruined with their supporters and a few angry people might file lawsuits, regardless of whether they have merit. Nobody wants that.

[deanb]

Yeah it seemed a bit odd to me the suggestion that they'd spent 6 months not working on the project. But as I said it'd happened with projects before and given the vastly expanded time scale of BA it seemed plausible.

 

I imagine the production costs of the video side of things will have expanded quite a bit given it'll have gone from a 6-8 month project to a 2 year dealy-o. Which I'm kinda curious if 2PP are happy with that. It kinda keeps them off the map for quite a lot longer than expected working on a single project. Of course it's also 2 years of guaranteed work.

 

Eh not really combining the two. My solution (Well not really mine, in light of the BA budget issues it's a thing many minds have suggested and I agree with it) works on the assumption of KS as a backing/investment, not as a pre-order. The pre-order side of things (assuming it's a project with pre-orders) comes later through sales on projects site or relevant storefront (Steam, Etsy, iTunes, etc)

 

Yeah the KS FAQ's are mostly guidelines. KS rarely enforce the rules, especially on larger projects. They're pretty hands off to a large degree. 

[Mr. GOH!]

DF fucked up how they have handled Broken Age. Not irretrievably so, but they still fucked up. They communicated their decisions to backers poorly. They communicated their vision of the game poorly. They overdesigned the game for their budget. That is not an indictment of kickstarter, it's folks on both sides of the kickstarter deal learning what to do and what not to do on kickstarter video game projects. It's what happens when businesses figure out how to handle a new source of financing projects. It is not some demonstration that kickstarter video game projects are shitty, or fraudulent, or whatever. 

 

I think we already have seen reactions to DF's strategy in the inXile and Obsidian kickstarters; good descriptions of the essential gameplay, style, and features of their projects on day one. Regular, yet realistic, stretch goals to make communicate where the money over the minimum will be going. Regular updates on progress after the project has been funded. 

 

Backers are NOT investors. They are consumers. A pledge is, effectively, a preorder whose price, above a floor set by the project, the backers picks based on what s/he feels the promised product will be worth to him or her. Yes, some whales may throw in big bucks because they just like a project, but mostly it's guys like me who think a modern game in the same vein as Plansescape Torment is worth $100. 

Edited July 13, 2013 by Mr. GOH!

[deanb]

Keep in mind KS is for more than just games, not all projects are things that can be pre-ordered. And while there is an overlap of sorts, a pre-order within retail space would have different rules to a backing in a KS project. In fact I think the legal ground on KS with regards to the mix is currently in an untested grey zone. But that's for another thread. With Broken (and Planescape to tune of $100K too actually) there is as mentioned Steven Dengler. Already thrown $1million at DF before Broken Age KS and has thrown more at them for broken age, but I'm not sure how much or if part of the KS backing amount. I'd wager given prior investments that this was something with a bit more than a game expected back.