@Gooeykat @melkathi @SergioMX At this point you are misconstruing what I wrote. I didn't say the rewards are valueless, I wrote "backing purely for the contents of the reward packages is bad value."
@Gooeykat @melkathi @SergioMX "So if you are saying that for 31% of backers in this particular kickstarter, the value may not be there, than I agree!"
Did I say that? What I said more than once before was backing purely for the contents of the reward packages is bad value. The true value comes from supporting something they are enthusiastic about.
As for those 31% who backed more than $20, as I've written else where you can number me among those 31% so I clearly don't think it's bad value the value doesn't stem from the reward but being able to support a game that would otherwise not be possible without crowd funding. There are plenty of reasons to back the project but $20 now for a game years down the line as good value for money? I'm sorry but that's just dumb.
At time of hitting fully funded only about 19,000 of the $20. Funding about 33% off the top of my head. Now they are all sold funding $500,000 out of $1,450,000. A bit over 33%. Add up the other packages that are close to retail you still find less than half with most of the backers accounted for. A majority of the funding comes from a small minority of backers.
As for your minimum wage earner a 16 year old living with their parents with no or token outgoings working part time on minimum wage probably has more disposable income than a lot of people working full time. Some one on minimum wage, if they work a 40 hour week (not sure what the average is in the US but both the US minimum wage and labour laws are awful) that's about 6% of their income before tax.
I'm not arguing that $20 is more than most people can afford though it is certainly more than a lot of people can afford. It is however more than most people should throw away casually on a regular basis and even as entertainment budget it can go a lot further than a game that will PROBABLY be out in over a year and SHOULD be good.
@Gooeykat @melkathi @SergioMX I didn't say it was an investment what I said is the reward packages are bad value for what you pay (in part because of risk) AND SO the reason to back even the lower amounts is to support the game. As I wrote in response to another comment if supporting the game isn't the motivation and you have the patience to wait for it to come out then you will get a much better deal waiting for it to go on sale on steam without the risk of the game never being made and having a fair idea whether it's any good or not.
If you look at my original post you'll see I show there is a small minority backing with on average $250. I don't think $250 is "a very small amount of money for most people". People paying under or about retail prices are producing less than half the funding. It's that minority that generated most of the money when it was near fully funded. I didn't argue the similar to retail cost crowd will go, it's that the big spender backers may lose their appetite and if that happens that will significantly decrease the amounts of money crowd funding can generate.
As for only being a worry for some one under 16, trust me, for most people in the real world casually throwing away even $20 quickly adds up let alone $250.
@u1tradt I hope you are right but part of what is making crowd funding so exciting right now is how cavalier people are in backing projects. If attitudes do sour over a few high profile horror stories even with much better protection the good will won't necessarily return. You are making a very rational point but I don't think people behave entirely rationally. Indeed I think there people who back largely don't do it out of rational self interest.
But like I wrote at the start I hope you are right because it's great that a fairly ambitious and other wise massively commercially risky game like this can not just get funded but receive such resounding and tangible support from the fans. I hope that continue to happen.
@edinko "I simply failt to see what exactly is wrong with a 20 dollar preorder for a hopefully big rpg"
QFT
You also simply fail/refuse to see the difference between backing on Kickstarter and a pre-order.
If you want good value go check out the bundle with Plane Scape Torment on GOG right now. If you want to support more games in genre go to Kickstarter. Actually people should do both.
@edinko You have entirely missed my point. The $20 reward isn't particularly low price, not just because you have none of the protections of any reasonable pre-order scheme. If it was just about price some one who has the patience to pay their money now and wait over a year then surely have the patience to wait for the first steam sale and get the game for under $10. The $20 reward is bad value for its content. Even at $20 the only reason to back is a desire to support the game. Personally I'd like to see Obsidian make a game where they aren't getting screwed over by their publisher which is why I backed (and backed more than $20).
However add up the current $20, $25 and $35 reward packages taken and that covers about 30,000 of the 35,000 but only less than half of the money generated so far. Even now that wouldn't be enough to have fully funding goal. The money made on Kickstarter isn't from cheap or even full price pre-orders its from good will and mostly the good will of a minority, not the masses.
Having backed it and enthused about Obsidian I also want to say despite such amazing results kick starter isn't next big thing in funding games, we're probably near the peak of what it will achieve and it's not going to last. In fact these may well be the golden days of crowd funding.
Kickstarter drives like this get funded quickly on the good will of a few, not as truly popular movement. When it hit $1,000,000 it was with about 24,000 backers. At that point about 19,000 of the $20 packages were sold so assuming everyone with that package contributed exactly $20 that's about $380,000. The remaining $620,000 being paid for by the other 5,000 or so backers which comes out as about $124 a piece. However of those 5,000 I suspect the majority were the $35 package (really wish I'd screen shotted earlier to get some accurate numbers) based on the numbers sold now (arround 4,300 $1,350,000 total) about 3000 backers at $35 at that point is a realistic estimate. That leaves the remaining 2,000 averaging $250 or so. So getting fully funded so quickly comes down to a tiny minority of dropping quite a lot. In fact roughly 50% of the funding came from under 10% of backers. Since getting fully funded the total has moved a lot slower however number of backers, while also rising slower hasn't slowed as much. That suggests the majority of big spenders have already done their thing.
The fact is that funding on Kickstarter is usually awful value for money for backers. It's not an investment, if the project makes huge profit KS backers won't see a penny. If it tanks they aren't technically creditors so again they don't see a penny. The reward packages offered are the only tangible return, in this case the $20 package is arguably reasonable value for money but everything else not so much. Further it's only reasonable value compared to the pricing of the game on release however paying then has the advantage of you actually getting the game without waiting over a year. Take into account the risk that the project could tank or suck and even the $20 reward package is bad value.
The currency projects on kick starter trade on is good will. I felt it was worth funding because I want to support this genre as much as I want to support this particular game but ultimately it's some what hollow. Video games are a mass media where you measure sales in millions, or at least fractions of millions. The tens of thousands backers this has isn't a significant trend in the wider market. Less so an enthusiastic 2,000, even if they are willing to drop couple of hundred dollars on a game
Kickstarter is however a great deal for the party that's looking for funding. A good outcome for Obsidian with this game, if it's a modest success the copies given away might be under 10% of total sales. A bad out come (given they release the game) then it's significantly more but the kickstarter money is funding they don't have to pay back or lose a cut of other sales for. It's pretty much risk free.
The problem is that the good will bubble could burst. A couple of high profile Kickstarter projects sinking or being crappy when they do get to market can do a lot of harm. However success stories with projects making big money off of backing that never sees a return also have potential to be harmful. I wouldn't take much for that 10% of investors can quickly dry up at which point commercial Kickstarter campaigns which generate silly money (such as the Oculus Rift) just won't happen any more.
To be clear, I'm not saying don't back this game, indeed if you are fan of the kind of games this wants to revive you should. I am however dubious that crowd funding in the long term can make a big difference to the games industry.
WeWerePirates' comments