Hacker News Reader

Comment by papsosouid | Hacker News Reader

It is pretty sad that kickstarter gets abused like this so much. Garriott is filthy rich, and has been in the game industry for decades. There is absolutely no need for him to be seeking financing from us, he could pay for it a dozen times over out of his own pocket. His reputation means he could easily get actual funding if he doesn't want to risk his own money. But instead, he abuses the willingness of ordinary people to take all the risk for him, and get nothing back in return.

View on HN

Or ... this is a good way for him to see if there's actual interest in the product. And given his track record of actually finishing stuff, it seems like this is relatively low risk as far as Kickstarter projects go.

Neither of your points address the concern I raised. This is a guy who paid $30M to go in to space for fun. A guy who lives in a castle. If he wants to make a game, he can. He doesn't need kickstarter at all. He is simply using it to make a game for free, rather than investing in it personally. The idea behind kickstarter was to allow people who couldn't get funding through traditional channels an opportunity to appeal directly to their potential customer base for funding. Not a way to make rich people richer with no risk to themselves.

Note: He did not go to space for fun. He is major shareholder in a couple of space-related business, and he do active science work in space and ice caps.

Also he wanted to follow his father footsteps (his father is a astronaut that actually went to space).

But yes, he could have paid the game himself...

You have a more narrow view of what Kickstarter is than most, and more narrow than Kickstarter itself. All they say about themselves is, "Kickstarter is a funding platform for creative projects." If you don't like it don't fund it, but if it is any consolation, big projects like this bring a lot more eyeballs and money to Kickstater, and will end up helping smaller projects get funded. I had never funded anything until Doublefine Adventure, but now I found at least one thing a month.

1) He has been trying to sell a lot of his land and fancy house in Austin for a couple years now [1] [2]. It's hard to say how much he's worth anymore with the money he's spent on other projects.

2) He married an investment banker[3] who I'm sure has a lot more financial sense than he does and doesn't want him throwing his personal money at the game.

3) The company make this game (Portalarium) had some layoffs a few months back[4]. I'm guessing they are trying to get funding to keep the company going as they don't seem to be working under any publisher.

4) Richard Garriott has a following in the gaming industry that he may as well use to keep his project going. Just like he did with Ultima Online back in the day (had to pay to be in the beta as EA didn't want to back his project), he is going to people to help keep the game funded.

[1] http://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-detail/8207-Two-Co...

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Britannia_Manor

[3] http://blogs.forbes.com/people/laetitiagarriottdecayeux/

[4] http://massively.joystiq.com/2012/12/17/portalarium-hit-with...

EA acquired Origin for $35,000,000. If I remember correctly, Garriott only walked with $20,000,000 -- before taxes. I think his lawsuit with NC Soft netted him $32 million -- before taxes as well. 52 million taxed is maybe 30 million out the door (very rough estimate here). His space trip cost 30 million alone, nevermind everything else in his life. I would estimate that Garriott probably has a few million dollars in the bank, none of which he should have to risk on a venture that fans are willing to pay for.

And the millions of dollars he made owning origin while they produced hit games.

>none of which he should have to risk on a venture that fans are willing to pay for.

I am amazed at the amount of anti-entrepreneur sentiment here on HN of all places. How do people seriously suggest that an entrepreneur should not have to invest anything in their own venture?

You've got it exactly backwards. Your sentiment is anti-entrepreneur, as you're trying to dictate who is or who isn't an entrepreneur by an artificial and entirely subjective $$$ funding basis.

There's no set definition of funding requirements to be considered an entrepreneur.

Not have to invest anything? Try putting a price on his reputation and time.

>as you're trying to dictate who is or who isn't an entrepreneur by an artificial and entirely subjective $$$ funding basis.

No I am not. I am saying it is unfortunate that what was a way for small independent projects who could not get funding through normal channels is being taken over by rich people using it as a platform to avoid having to take any risk.

>Try putting a price on his reputation and time.

The last time he made a game that didn't suck was what, 1992? If the garbage he slapped his name on since then hasn't ruined his reputation what risk does this carry? And he isn't investing his time, he is the name put on the project, he isn't actually sitting down and writing the code.

Sounds like you probably shouldn't contribute, then.

Shit, why didn't you say something sooner!

I agree that a lot of people are "abusing" Kickstarter and just cashing in on nostalgia. But ultimately it is up to the consumer (or backer) to determine what they think is a farce and what is not. Garriott might be caching in on his legacy to some degree, but he has also clearly put hard work into this game, which many other veterans have not (they simply show concept art, or worse yet, nothing at all). If Garriott were just programming this himself in his basement, it might be a different matter, but he has team members that depend on him for salary/benefits, and he has already had to go through layoffs. It would seem kind of foolish to turn down "free" money in the name of being virtuous, and risking more layoffs.

That money from the NCSoft lawsuit was to make back money is lost from stock investments [1]. It's hard to say how much he came out ahead or behind on that lawsuit (after lawyer fees and whatnot).

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tabula_Rasa_(computer_game)#Lit...

> He is simply using it to make a game for free, rather than investing in it personally.

It's worth pointing out that he's only asking for 1 million, which is nowhere near enough for the kind of game he's promising. He also says that money has been sunk into production already.

That was pretty much his last $30M, at least at the time.

? Kickstarter functions in this case as a pre-ordering process. They do not "get nothing back in return" - they get a copy of the game when it's done.

That's like saying that rich entrepeneurs should fully fund their next company, rather than seeking VC. Sure, it's one way to do it, but it's not the only way...

Except VCs get equity, they get a return on their investment. Not a copy of the product. Do you think ycombinator should have funded dropbox in exchange for a free dropbox account? Like I said in the post you replied to, he has access to VC funding. He chose not to take it because he can abuse kickstarter to get the same funds without giving up anything in return. It is nothing like saying they should fund it personally instead of taking VC money, I specifically said taking VC money was one of the two options he should have taken.

How is it an abuse? Because you don't like it?

How about treating the backers like adults who can make their own decisions? Your position comes across as very patronizing.

Because it is contrary to the stated purpose of kickstarter. I am treating the backers like adults. Why do you think that "hey, that's really not what kickstarter is for" is patronizing?

You say it is contrary to the stated purpose of Kickstarter. Can you link or quote something to back that up? All I've ever seen them say is that it is a platform to fund creative projects. This is a creative project.

For game developers, even millionaire game developers, Kickstarter offers some level of freedom from real big bilion dollar game publishing corporations. So even if Richard Gariott has a lot of money, maybe you can at least appreciate he is a little guy in the context of the game publishing business.

http://www.kickstarter.com/blog/kickstarter-is-not-a-store

First, I don't see anything on that page that would disqualify this project.

Second, why is this project a staff pick by Kickstarter if it somehow violates the spirit of their rules?

http://www.kickstarter.com/discover/categories/games?ref=hom...

The same reason blatant scams get allowed, kickstarted has a significant financial incentive to allow as much as possible. Why would they shut down a kickstarter that will put $50,000 in their pockets?

How does that possibly fit with your claim that it is against the stated purpose of Kickstarter? Kickstarter gets to define what their purpose is, and their actions are as clear as their words. You'd have stronger ground complaining about Kickstater than this project.

Where exactly is that stated? As far as I know, and according to the FAQ and project guidelines of Kickstarter, there's no rule or implicit understanding that only creators who can't fund their own projects should apply. In fact, they specifically mention that KS is about more than money.

And I find it patronizing because your complaint is about the poor backers who get nothing for their money. Why exactly do you feel qualified to judge that on their behalf? It's up to them to know what they get in return, and if that should or not be important in their decision to back the project.

Yeah, they were pretty explicit that KS is for funding projects and not really a pre-order system. http://www.kickstarter.com/blog/kickstarter-is-not-a-store

That document bolsters the notion that this game project is ideal for Kickstarter, as they're not using Kickstarter as a store.

That wasn't papsosouid's complaint, which pertained to the fact that the project creator can afford to pay for the project, and so shouldn't be using KS.

He's doing a tremendous service to Kickstarter in fact. It's beautiful that the platform can be used to get the ball rolling on a potentially fantastic new gaming world. One of the most renowned video game developers in history chooses to use crowd funding to kickstart his new game, and directly involve those who are willing to take a risk with their money because they want to see the game exist - what a tremendous accomplishment for Kickstarter.

Well, you may get some form of return in that you probably get the game cheaper via kickstarter in exchange for taking on some risk.

VCs also put a lot more money than $45 into it. Besides that fact, Kickstarter has to approve any project that appears on the site, so THEY obviously feel this is perfectly okay. I trust their opinion above some random person on the internet who wants to keep KS 'pure.'

Also this project is good for KS because it will likely bring at least a few new people onboard to join the site and fund this project (seem to recall them saying once people join they tend to start funding more projects), not to mention the obvious that they get their cut to help fund further improvements on the site.

Rich entrepeneurs should fully fund their next company, rather than seeking VC (or KS).

Rich entrepreneurs should not fully fund their next company, and instead should seek VC or KS.

I think that for projects like this, Kickstarter is becoming less a place to raise funding, but more of a place to gather publicity. The site is fast becoming a household name and as far as games go, has high prestige for a place where alternative, retro, hardcore games go to be revived.

He's exchanging money for copies of the game, not to mention other trinkets, as a form of funding. There's absolutely nothing wrong with it, and he isn't abusing crowd funding. Quite the opposite in fact.

You act like people are being forced to pay up for the kick starter.

What you apparently want to change is free will.

Lord British is back, that alone is enough for me. I love that man, he is always willing to push the boundaries - a very rare in prohibitively nowadays expensive game dev world. Why should he risk his kingdom when he can assess interest very effectively with Kickstarter while maintaining more creative freedom (either by having more leverage in negotiations with publishers and/or banks). One million dollar is nothing in comparison to most AAA games, it will still be risky. I love the thought of being able to help kick starting another Ultima project! Love & peace my friend.

He was rich. He spent most of his money fulfilling his lifelong dream to go into space. (His dad was an astronaut...) He has a half-built "castle" in Austin which he had to stop building because of his space endeavor. He hasn't had a successful game in a long time. Since UO, really. He may have gotten some money from NCSoft lawsuit / settlement recently but I don't remember which way it went.

Even rich people here in SV often take investment for their new startups after the first. It's silly to go it alone, risk everything, and not recruit people with skin in the game. Even if he didn't need the money, it's worth it for the PR alone, which will benefit everyone into the game since it will take longer to die a lonely death.

>Even rich people here in SV often take investment for their new startups after the first.

Yes, in exchange for something. They don't ask for funding from people and offer them nothing in return, forcing them to take all the risk while he stands to make all the profit.

Well, the risk for people backing someone with his track record is pretty minimal.

I agree with you, though. To me the spirit of kickstarter is getting the small folk off the ground not as a pre-order channel for established players.

Kickstarter or someone else should spin off a cleverly named 'pre-order/guage public interest' site.

Nothing apart from a game?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com