Hacker News Reader

Comment by tibbon | Hacker News Reader

What I find most interesting about this Kickstarter trend is that it is proving game publishing companies wrong. Publishers think that it isn't worth the money/time to build games like this. They want the next Angry Birds/Modern Warfare, full of DLC upgrades, in-app purchasing and facebook spam with the core gaming experience being secondary at best.

While the investors/publishers don't think its worth it monetarily, users are demanding higher quality games and putting their money where their mouth is.

Its also a huge shift. Instead of guessing what gamers might want, putting money in, and seeing how the game does- this enables developers to get their idea fully vetted monetarily and demand-wise upfront, then take the time to develop the game.

View on HN

I don't disagree but I think there's one big problem here:

Kickstarter has no guarantees. As soon as one of these projects falls through / doesn't meet expectations the idea is going to start having problems. All it takes is one company to take $250,000 then not deliver and they undermine the entire idea.

Publishers take risks and publish games that might not be successful and if they're not successful the publisher takes the hit, not the consumer, the consumer is never made to care about failures but if consumers are the ones funding these games failures will start to matter.

Your're right; Though that's why most of the record-breaking Kickstarter projects come from companies that are inherently trustworthy based on some previous track record: Leisure Suit Larry, Shadowrun, that previous Lucas Arts guy. They all proved time and time again that they are capable of creating fantastic games. Even more, the gamers know what to expect. I reckon it's much much harder to gain Kickstarter records like this when you're virtually unknown and your idea isn't a mere extension / sequel of something well known.

That doesn't mean it's bad, though. It's like a protection shield against the scenario that you outlined.

> Publishers think that it isn't worth the money/time to build games like this.

And arguably it isn't. There's little doubt there's money in it, but not enough money to make it worth a large publisher's time.

Bingo. Some of these kickstarted games may make massive profits; others may make the game, and then fail to sell many boxed copies because there's no market. Then they've essentially broken even.

That may be a success in their eyes - they got to make a new game, and the backers got a copy - but breaking even isn't "showing publishers what's what."

I think it's more a question of markets. Kickstarter aims for a far smaller market of educated die-hard fans. These huge Kickstarter records are in big part due to a limited set of fans who are willing to pledge 10.000 or 20.000. At a rate of roughly $30 per game sold (for traditional publishers) that equals to more than 600 sales for one user. In addition to that, the budget for the game is greatly decreased since there're less marketing costs.

Traditional publishers, in contrast, try to aim for a huge market, and then also need to market to that huge market. The broader the market, the simpler the game has to be. Angry birds is a good example of that.

Disclaimer: I'm currently working with friends on a game too that, much like Angry Birds, is a easy to understand simple game idea that tries to appeal a big and broad market. I'm a huge fan of insanely complex games like dwarf fortress, minecraft, or (hopefully) the upcoming notch game, though.

Complex games are some that (most) publishers would in my mind want to stay away from.

If the guy who makes Dwarf Fortress pitched that to EA, he'd be laughed out of the room. ASCII graphics? A super complex game? They wouldn't get it. Probably the same with Minecraft. EA would be asking for DLC's, achievements posting via some proprietary Facebook app, and micro-transaction purchases to buy more blocks. Plus super heavy DRM. They wouldn't have thought it would sell and wouldn't have touched it as a publisher. Their loss.

dont let these kickstarter hype stories fool you, the audience for these kind of games is tiny compared to Angry Birds/Modern Warfare type of games

Does it really matter if the audience is tiny?

If you have a people who are willing to pledge enough for you to make a game that they enjoy and leaves you net positive in the bank, I think that's a worthwhile enough cause. There are plenty of creative people who are just as happy (if not happier) making things for a smaller but more passionate fanbase.

The traditional AAA game industry is build based on the idea that targeting the mass market is the only viable business strategy; Kickstarter's been getting so much buzz lately because it's one of the few examples in modern gaming history that suggests there might be a commercially viable alternative for those who would prefer, for whatever reason, to not operate within the AAA model.

They want the next Angry Birds/Modern Warfare, full of DLC upgrades

I chuckled at this as one of the kickstarter levels on this project gets you enhanced abilities.

Really, though, does everything have to be so binary? Isn't HN above this "stereotype the worst of the worst and cast it as the only alternative" false dichotomy?

There are plenty of incredible games that publishers have supported. And in this case these guys are claiming that they're going to create a PC and a Mac version for $400,000? Really? Most "real" game cost many millions of dollars to bring to fruition.

$400,000 seems like a reasonable amount to make a game. Maybe not a super polished AAA game, but it seems they are being ruthless about cutting features to keep it in budget.

for $400,000 you could easily retain 4 people to work on it full time for a year.

> And in this case these guys are claiming that they're going to create a PC and a Mac version for $400,000? Really? Most "real" game cost many millions of dollars to bring to fruition.

I got the impression that they were making the game anyway (for PC and tablets), and are going to use the kickstarter money to provide a Mac version, level editor, translations, additional character types, and possibly an additional city. Could be wrong though, it's not 100% clear and I agree that $400,000 can't possibly be enough to make a whole game of this magnitude.

If they were originally planning to develop it for the iPad, then developing a Mac version isn't that much of a stretch. I'm guessing they're going for the iPad since you have a more direct layer to C/C++ & OpenGL and the iPad is a bigger market in the tablet space.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com