Which Would You Prefer To Support A Game: Crowdfunding or *******?

[Uzuki]

So I'm getting closer to getting a Beta of my game up and now would be a good time to start looking into some crowdfunding options to cover some more expensive things for my game. So I have two options to go with: Kickstarter and *******. On the one hand, Kickstarter will allow me to get all the money at once and thus allows me to get the vast majority of resources I need now, build hype and can draw more eyes to the project, but on the other hand, I have to deal with promotional costs, stretch goals and material costs, and just not being able to reach the funding goal. While with ******* I can create a more manageable campaign that will be funded over time, won't have to rely on flash to sell and thus less stress on meeting goals, more focused on smaller patron amounts and can bring in more people and goals are more achievable. The only downside is that if I can't get enough eyes on the platform then progress will be slower then expected and it will take longer to work on the project.

So with all this in mind, which would you prefer to support a game project with? Bigger, one time payments or smaller, multiple payments over time?

 

[bgillisp]

Personally, I prefer neither, and instead prefer early access. That way at minimum I at least get an early version of the game in case everything falls apart.

 

[Silenity]

Personally, I prefer neither, and instead prefer early access. That way at minimum I at least get an early version of the game in case everything falls apart.

For real. I've help kickstart a bunch of RPG Maker games. EVERY single one of them have failed to deliver.
Remnants of Twilight looked so good and promising. Now it's been like over 3 years since it was successfully funded. And the creator still just gets on Steam all the time playing games. Like at least tell us something happened and you can't finish it. Rather than leaving us in the dark and going silent.

Or Arcadian Atlas. Which was a RPG Maker MV tactics game akin to FFT and the like. But after they got successfully funded they decided to build their own game engine which has delayed the project like 2 years. But at least they're more transparent about it.

 

[bgillisp]

Right. It's also kinda why we removed our crowdfunding section of the forums too, and also don't allow pateron links, as we had people trying to hold us responsible if their fundraising failed. Like it's our problem if you ask for 1.5 million and you get $50 and it is all from mom.

Also I've never crowdfunded an RPGMaker game. Maybe others do, but I personally only crowdfund if you have already established yourself some and have a little bit of a track record to prove you can finish a game. Though I've heard some do get pateron support, so IF you had to pick one of the two only I'd go with pateron, as a kickstarter is very likely to fail, especially in this day and age.

(Though I'd still suggest maybe Steam early access and give the backers the beta version of the game).

 

[MushroomCake28]

Personally I prefer crowdfunding. I prefer "pay once" to support, instead of giving a certain amount each month/post. As for early access, it could be one of the reward for being a ******* or participating to the crowdfunding, so it's not mutually exclusive.

 

[TWings]

Personally I prefer crowdfunding. I prefer "pay once" to support, instead of giving a certain amount each month/post.

******* also have a "pay once" (or rather pay per product) option, so that's not really a problem.

 

[Uzuki]

@bgillisp @Silenity Yeah I get where that comes from *Stares daggers at You Are Not The Hero*

I should have mentioned this in the OP, but the game will be completed outside of me dying during development. It's just that crowdfunding would help speed development up instead of paying solely out of pocket. I would prefer to not do early excuse mainly because it's partially puzzle and sequence driven and having that broken in parts wouldn't play well for the player. I do plan on having exclusive bi or tri-monthly demos for backers and I want to be completely transparent during development. It's honestly that big of a game and I'm hoping to have it done by fall of next year.

 

[MushroomCake28]

******* also have a "pay once" (or rather pay per product) option, so that's not really a problem.

Really? Wow, I didn't know. Well then that nullifies my previous comment.

But still, I don't know why but I would still prefer crowdfunding. It makes it look more like a community project than *******.

 

[lianderson]

My advice on the matter of crowdfunding, especially when it comes to pledging double digit dollars or more, is to not do it if the creator is brand new. And if they are brand new, don't do it until their game is about halfway done. Otherwise, you highly risk losing your money. There are some talented people out there with high levels of motivations, but a lot are just lazy game devs who make rationalizations and excuses for their lack of progress and poor decision making.

I'm 6 years in with my own game, with 2 left to go, and I've been thinking of doing a traditional crowdfunding for this last stretch. You know, get more assets for it and provide quality free content after its launch. So I've been reading people's opinions and what not on this topic. That said, I don't expect to make much money off of it. And honestly, neither should anyone else. Too many of us have been burned by new and/or lazy devs.

 

[dulsi]

I prefer crowdfunding. That said I have backed only one software project. There have been others that interest me but as a software developer I know how long it takes. If you have no record, the game would have to be very close to complete for me to back it.

 

[VisitorsFromDreams]

Its a tricky one in this day and age I think. The boom is certainly over. Thankfully after years of kickstarter duds there are finally some decent crowdfunded games coming out, though so far I dont know of any rpgm games that have been successfully funded and released.

I have never backed a kickstarter, though I have kept tabs on quite a few kickstarter RPG projects, Omori still doesnt have a release date but Glitched just got an October release date which is awesome. Both of these games had amazing trailers and in the case of Glitched a substantial demo to get me interested though.

I am more of a ******* fan myself, im subscribed to quite a few, though only ones related to game development and its an engine. In the context of that though its great getting weekly builds sent out to patrons for testing.

I think the biggest hurdle with both is having a following in the first place. Neither a kickstarter or a patron account mean anything if you dont have a decent sized following ready to spread the word and generate buzz. Setting up either is heaps of work and theres no real point if you dont have a fanbase ready to invest in it.

Thats the way I see things anyway.

 

[Meike]

I've never actually backed a game, but I support creators on *******.
Kickstarters give me this feel of having a high chance of failure, where Patrons tend to be set up with at least small rewards for certain tiers. ******* also makes me feel like the creator has more incentive/pressure to keep their patrons updated, as we pay monthly. If I'm not hearing anything from the creator, I can back out.

But yeah, as others have mentioned, fundraising won't work if people don't know who you are. Get a following first. Join some social networks, get active in game dev and other communities, etc.

Also, Early Access is probably a good step to go even if you do other fundraisers as well.

 

[eluukkanen]

Good to test and see which works the best. I recommend testing with small scale and growing from that. Too many commitments in ******* take away from the actual development