Quote from: Kyle Aaron;10895811. make product
2. sell product

There's a reason we do it in that order.

There have always been exceptions to that rule. Kickstarter is hardly the first time people take pre-orders, and some business are pretty much pre-order only. Kickstarter just set up a business model to do so with more basic consumer level goods in cases where the maker wasn't able/willing to create it without pre-orders set - though now it's often also used to bypass normal supply chains and gain a larger margin. (Kickstarter takes about 8-10% off the top - but that sure beats a retailer taking 50%.)

It's certainly been abused, but it's not an inherently flawed model.

A "pre-order" occurs when the product has been substantially completed, and needs only finishing touches, printing and so on. This is a different thing to a kickstarter, when the person typically does not even begin any substantial work until they have been pledged or given a certain amount of money.

It is inherently flawed, and inherently fraudulent. Our hobby started with people producing things and spending money out of their own products to get them out there. Gygax and Arneson didn't do a kickstarter for OD&D, they worked their day jobs, set money aside, and went ahead and printed a whole stack of books, physically pasting the covers on the boxes themselves. Our hobby started that way, and can continue that way.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;1089586A "pre-order" occurs when the product has been substantially completed, and needs only finishing touches, printing and so on. This is a different thing to a kickstarter, when the person typically does not even begin any substantial work until they have been pledged or given a certain amount of money.

You're arguing it's terrible, because it's like a job?

And that's not even true, BTW. Lots of work is put into many Kickstarters before they go live.

Even though I have backed many KS, I don't fully disagree with Kyle Aaron. The site did begin with the idea to fund ideas, but after too many "ideas" became nothing, backers focused naturally on projects that were mostly done, and that's when KS became more about pre-orders.

Quote from: Charon's Little Helper;1089573I have seen some KS RPGs use their backers as a beta test, which for some people is a substantial bonus.

That is a substantial bonus for both the backers AND the KS. I'm a big fan of those. It's one of the things I haven't been thrilled with CMON and Monolith because their rules would definitely benefit from more interaction with backers. I know the playtest aspect is harder with boardgames, but I've seen very few that did print and play for the backers as part of the development. It's a shame because backers are motivated playtesters since they are already financially invested in the success of the game.

Quote from: Spinachcat;1089572How attending a live concert related to buying a game off KS for more money than your FLGS?

It is an example of people spending more money then they have to to get products that they can get cheaper from other places.

If that example is too confusing then it is like people buying from their local game shop instead of from Amazon.

QuoteIf KS offered some communal experience of the game itself, then I'd see the relationship. On KS, your only communal experience is during the purchase and the wait for shipping via the comment section. It's unfortunate because I think there's value in the KS community continuing post-launch but I've rarely seen that happen.

That is strange, I can not think of one Kickstarter that I have backed where it went straight from pay for Kickstarter directly to get shipment without anything in between.

Quote from: Ratman_tf;1089577In the case of kickstarter, it would be like giving money to a dude organizing a concert, and watching the concert crash and burn in the planning stage, nothing gets produced, and the person doesn't get to listen to any music at all.

I'm not even against the idea of kickstarter, but goddamn, there's a reason it's got a rep as a place where terrible projects go to burn up other people's money on their way to failure.

Maybe I have just been lucky.  The worst kickstarter that I backed still managed to cough up at least some of the project, so we got a couple of tracks of the album so to speak.

Quote from: Charon's Little Helper;1089573I have seen some KS RPGs use their backers as a beta test, which for some people is a substantial bonus.

I have seen Monte Cook Games pushing the pay extra to help playtest idea.

Quote from: Omega;1089552[...]
For some insane reason marketing tends to get on a single "BELIEF!" track and ride fanaically it no matter how horribly it fails.

In today's competitive market, marketing is hard, so marketers may be tempted to adopt a bad but easily applicable methodology which lead them to succ... failure !

Quote from: Omega;1089552"The Five Year Plan will force customers to keep rebuying the game because they are stupid cattle!"
"Catering to the SJWs will garner us MASSIVE sales!"
"Fans are bad. They think bad things like having, gasp, expectations! We have to get rid of them!"
"We need to get more minorities to play! So lets just drop them into everything willy nilly. Better yet lets replace established characters with them. They are too dumb to be insulted by this anyhow!"
[...]the overarching marketing belief is that the customers are cattle that will willingly be led to slaughter. And looking at how some gamers act. They are not wrong.

Have you ever been in the business of selling something to clients ?

The difficult part is not listening to clients, the difficult part is analyzing their feedback, in order to devise a successfull marketing strategy.

And clients may believe that companies listen to them so they can sell them the products they want, but companies (hopefully) listen to clients to understand the products the clients need or crave, and to sell it to them at a price that can make them a profit.

Quote from: Omega;1089552"If you tell the customers its a "hobby game" or better yet, prestige! Then they will pay ten times the normal price because they are stupid cattle!

It's arguably more profitable to sell clients the product they crave "(Prestige!" "Shiny !" "Exclusive !") than the products they need. What's a company to do ?

I guess the bootom line here is that if (creating and) selling products was as easy-peasy as you seem to believe, more people would do it and more people would do it successfully (i.e making a buck in the process rather than merrily going into bankruptcy and lifelong debts).

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;1089586A "pre-order" occurs when the product has been substantially completed, and needs only finishing touches, printing and so on. This is a different thing to a kickstarter, when the person typically does not even begin any substantial work until they have been pledged or given a certain amount of money.

It is inherently flawed, and inherently fraudulent. Our hobby started with people producing things and spending money out of their own products to get them out there. Gygax and Arneson didn't do a kickstarter for OD&D, they worked their day jobs, set money aside, and went ahead and printed a whole stack of books, physically pasting the covers on the boxes themselves. Our hobby started that way, and can continue that way.

You could say the same thing about investing. Lots of people lose their ass investing in start ups that fail, some people get in on the ground floor of something great and make a fortune. That doesn't make investing inherently fraud.

KS is no different, as long as the creator is upfront about the status of the project then it is up to the backer if the risk is worth the reward. If the creator isn't upfront about the status of the project, then that is fraud. Failure does not necessarily equal fraud.

I'm pretty conservative about the KS I back, but I would never presume to tell someone else how much risk they can accept with their money.

Quote from: Toadmaster;1089596You could say the same thing about investing. Lots of people lose their ass investing in start ups that fail, some people get in on the ground floor of something great and make a fortune. That doesn't make investing inherently fraud.

KS is no different....

Are you familiar with the concept of an accredited investor? You're not allowed to invest in a startup, unless you are one. And the qualifications to become one basically boil down to: You have to be rich. (Successful doctor rich not Jess Bezos rich.) This isn't to discriminate against poor people, it's to protect them, because too many people would lose their life savings. Startups are very high risk, so not only do you need be to able to afford the accountants and lawyers needed to do due diligence and avoid all the pitfalls, you also have to be able to afford to lose the money.

The traditional Kickstarter -- the woolly-eyed "I have an idea" newcomer, in contrast to the modern Kickstarter slash preorder from established companies -- is similarly high risk. But it's not an investment, because if you invest in a startup, you get equity. Which means if it does well, you'll make money. And if does very well, you'll make lots of money. That's not true for Kickstarters, where at best you're going to get the product you were promised. So it's all risk, and no real upside. That's why publishers love it, because it transfers the risk, without having to give away any equity. The only real mitigating factor is there is (usually) a lot less money involved.

Quote from: Spinachcat;1089588Even though I have backed many KS, I don't fully disagree with Kyle Aaron. The site did begin with the idea to fund ideas, but after too many "ideas" became nothing, backers focused naturally on projects that were mostly done, and that's when KS became more about pre-orders.

Pre-orders never give you a thrill of "how far will this thing I bet on go".  It's pre-order+.

Quote from: Pat;1089599Are you familiar with the concept of an accredited investor? You're not allowed to invest in a startup, unless you are one. And the qualifications to become one basically boil down to: You have to be rich. (Successful doctor rich not Jess Bezos rich.) This isn't to discriminate against poor people, it's to protect them, because too many people would lose their life savings. Startups are very high risk, so not only do you need be to able to afford the accountants and lawyers needed to do due diligence and avoid all the pitfalls, you also have to be able to afford to lose the money.

Perhaps ironically, this is no longer true. The very concept behind Kickstarter (crowdfunding) has now opened up venture capital for startups to the masses. All you need to do is click a few buttons on a form to declare yourself a 'sophisticated investor'. The crowd funding site you are investing through does the due diligence for you (though you can still do your own).

Quote from: Winterblight;1089603Perhaps ironically, this is no longer true. The very concept behind Kickstarter (crowdfunding) has now opened up venture capital for startups to the masses. All you need to do is click a few buttons on a form to declare yourself a 'sophisticated investor'. The crowd funding site you are investing through does the due diligence for you (though you can still do your own).

It's still true, I was careful with my wording. The JOBS Act did carve an exception, but it's very limited. But more topically, it really has nothing to do with Kickstarter, except in the sense that both use the word "crowdfunding".

Quote from: Pat;1089606It's still true, I was careful with my wording. The JOBS Act did carve an exception, but it's very limited. But more topically, it really has nothing to do with Kickstarter, except in the sense that both use the word "crowdfunding".

Sorry, you stated that you had to be "rich", which what I'm stating isn't true. I can assure you that I am not rich and I have put venture capital into dozens of  of startup companies, some that don't even have a product. I don't want to derail the thread. I'm simply pointing out the irony of the fact that the reason it no longer holds true is because of crowdfunding, which is what Kickstarter does/is, which is the very thing that is being debated.

Quote from: Winterblight;1089609Sorry, you stated that you had to be "rich", which what I'm stating isn't true. I can assure you that I am not rich and I have put venture capital into dozens of  of startup companies, some that don't even have a product. I don't want to derail the thread. I'm simply pointing out the irony of the fact that the reason it no longer holds true is because of crowdfunding, which is what Kickstarter does/is, which is the very thing that is being debated.

Would you mind saying how you're doing that because as far as I know you still need to be an accredited investor or a friend/family to invest in a startup early on.  Even some of the pre ipo share selling sites require you meet the accredited investor requirements.

Are you saying your stating to the site you're an accredited investor even if you aren't one or are you saying they don't really ask?

Quote from: Shasarak;1088611Nope, they paid for the TSR IP.  Turns out that you can not copyright game mechanics.

This gets spouted regularly. It needs to die.