Is Kickstarter getting too big?

[Farrell]

Kickstarter can be a beautiful thing.  I've supported several comics projects (including the Oceanverse hardcover I'm eagerly awaiting) and several gaming projects.

Video games are very expensive to make, unless they're very simple, like Flash games.  Commercial games are the result of many hours of work by dozens or hundreds of people.  Because they're expensive, it's unusual that the people who make the games are the same people who can finance them.  Enter publishers, with all of their meddling, cost cutting and bottom line thinking ways.  Obviously, we still get good games out of it, especially from developers who have earned some industry cache, but what if we could have unfiltered creations of whatever genre talented people wanted to make... Kickstarter seems to be making that happen.

"Graphic adventure games don't sell."  Now one of the best adventure game makers ever, Tim Schafer of Double Fine, got 3.3 million through Kickstarter to make one.  I'm proud and excited to be a part of that, and it costs me a whopping $15.

"Turn based RPGs are a thing of the past."  Maybe in Gamestop they are, but the guys making Wasteland 2 have been pledged over 2.2 million and the Shadowrun Returns project has over $800,000 with half a month to go.  

Those games literally weren't going to ever happen without Kickstarter, so I'm inordinately grateful that it exists.  Comics, especially the majority of comics I buy and read, have always relied on small publishers/self publishing, so it feels different to me.  As expensive as printing and such can be, it's not comparable to game development.   So there's that.

As far as comics go, I see nothing wrong with Kickstarter being used by any creators, no matter how successful, to get original projects made.  Success is relative anyway, and you can probably count on one hand how many American comics creators are able to parlay their popularity into a very good living without the benefit of work from outside the comics industry.  I'll potentially support any projects that appeal enough to me, and give me value for my money.  I already hate the fact that guys like Phil Hester don't seem to be supported enough by the market as it is to do the kind of books he excels at.  If Kickstarter is what it takes for creators like him to do what they want to do (which, coincidentally, is very often what I'd like to see them doing), then all power to them.

I do have some reservations, though, many of which have been mentioned.  Let's face it: comics creators (look out for a generalization here; I'm painting with a broad brush) aren't known for their timeliness.  It's uncomfortable enough for me to pay for things three months in advance, which is an industry norm.  It's even more uncomfortable to pay for them a year or more in advance, as is often the case with Kickstarter projects.  Add to that the possibility of never actually seeing a finished project and, yeah, I'm not looking at this as a solution to all our woes, replacing the publishing industry as we know it.  

And then there are situations like Tony Harris.  He's basically my poster boy on how NOT to conduct a Kickstarter campaign.  Don't ask for $60,000 to work on a book that is partly finished, expect donors to pay for the book separately at any but the very highest pledge amounts, and pursue publishing deals even though you're asking for the money to publish the book.  That kind of thing gives the whole website/movement a black eye.  I only know what I've read here about FairyQuest, but if true, that seems like an abuse of the system, a bandwagon-riding money grab.  

At the end of the day, although they may irk me, I can simply ignore pitches like Harris' and support those I'm excited about.  All in all, I feel like there is tremendous potential for Kickstarter to give us access to undiluted versions of our creators' passion projects, and to feel a personal satisfaction in helping them bring those creations to the world besides.  Way more good than bad.

[JasonF]

If I can come away with a hardcover or collected edition of the work for not much more than it would cost me on the shelves? Yeah, you've got a good shot at my ducats.

That's the takeaway for me as well.  Is the reward you're offering worth the money I'll have to spend?  If the answer is yes, then I'll go for it.  If the answer is no, then I'll pass.  So when I decided I wanted the new Supernatural Law collection at the price Batton Lash was asking for it, I pledged.  On the other hand, the Jenkins/Ramos book isn't worth $30 to me sight unseen, so I took a pass.

[S. Earl]

"Graphic adventure games don't sell."  Now one of the best adventure game makers ever, Tim Schafer of Double Fine, got 3.3 million through Kickstarter to make one.  I'm proud and excited to be a part of that, and it costs me a whopping $15.

And let us not forget that it helped the might Al Lowe return to Larry Laffer!
http://www.gamezebo.com/news/2012/04/05/kickstarter-picks-leisure-suit-larry-land-lounge-lizards-reloaded

[Farrell]

And let us not forget that it helped the might Al Lowe return to Larry Laffer!
http://www.gamezebo.com/news/2012/04/05/kickstarter-picks-leisure-suit-larry-land-lounge-lizards-reloaded

Cool!  I'm tempted.  I've actually never played the original...only a couple of the later ones (in which one is he a woman?)  And Freddy Pharkus: Frontier Pharmacist.

Here's the direct link to the Kickstarter.  They're about halfway to the goal right now: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1451923705/make-leisure-suit-larry-come-again

[Night (Travis) Nurse]

"Turn based RPGs are a thing of the past."  Maybe in Gamestop they are, but the guys making Wasteland 2 have been pledged over 2.2 million and the Shadowrun Returns project has over $800,000 with half a month to go.  

Thanks for that, I had no idea. I LOVED Shadowrun and this is awesome. I dont spend enough time looking through Kickstarter.

Travis

[RickV]

Personally I am usually a little antsy of Kickstarter because there is no moderation and it puts more of the pressure on the fans of something over the creators of something and investing in quality kinda goes up in smoke unless you have previous knowledge of the person involved.

Also the bigger it gets the more the signal vs. noise ratio will become lopsided.

[Jeppe]

Thanks for that, I had no idea. I LOVED Shadowrun and this is awesome. I dont spend enough time looking through Kickstarter.

It looks super awesome. I was a little disappointed to begin with because there didn't seem to be any Mac support, but since they added that I have enthusiastically become a backer 

[electric mayhem]

news about how Kickstarter and Indiegogo could change:

http://www.deadline.com/2012/10/crowdsourcing-law-indie-film-financing-kickstarter/

Crowdfunding websites such as Kickstarter and Indiegogo so far have been only moderately useful for most independent filmmakers trying to finance their next movie, but that could change significantly under the federal JOBS Act passed earlier this year, said members of a panel at the Digital Hollywood conference, which wraps today in Marina del Rey.

Under previous rules, crowdsourcing sites couldn’t offer equity stakes to contributors. Instead they receive modest tokens of appreciation such as T-shirts or tickets to screenings — in other words, they get nothing more than the satisfaction of helping a movie get started. The new law will allow intermediaries such as crowdsourcing sites to sell members modest equity stakes in films, up to $10,000 or 10% of each user’s income. The project must set a fundraising goal and if it doesn’t raise at least 60% of that, no money would change hands. “There are many more opportunities to come and we’re just seeing the start of this,” said Keri Putnam, executive director of the Sundance Institute, which has raised $3 million on behalf of 85 films through Kickstarter. The SEC is currently establishing regulations under the new law.

Previously, films such as Primer have used Kickstarter funds to get made and find an audience. Writer-director David Fincher recently raised $100,000 in 26 hours on one of the sites to finance creation of his next script, though panelists suggested Fincher’s fundraising was more a marketing ploy to engage his fans in his next project. “What we found with crowdfunding is that it’s a great catalyzer” of fans, said Putnam. “Once you’ve got your audience there, they become great ambassadors for you. We’ve found that the size of a Kickstarter audience can actually affect what a movie might do” at the box office.

The sites have become media darlings even as traditional film financing by banks has largely disappeared, replaced by a complicated mix of tax breaks, rights presales, equity stakes by rich individuals and interim loans against revenue projections. “Bankers aren’t involved in making films anymore, and I’m happy about that because of the mentality,” said producer Cassian Elwes, a veteran indie film rep formerly based at WME. “On any given movie there are multiple investors. What I’m trying to do is construct deals so that on paper, on paper, you’re ahead of the game before you start shooting the movie.”

Under the existing legal structure, “Kickstarter people don’t get an equity stake,” said producer Christian Halsey Solomon, whose film credits include American Psycho and Legionnaire. “That limits the number of projects that can get funded. I don’t believe Kickstarter is the solution to the problem. People are only going to give you the money if they think you need it. The typical action film with Dolph Lundgren in it is not going to get money from Kickstarter.”

Creators have in a few cases raised millions of dollars from crowdfunding sites, though most bring in far less. Creators must post a fairly detailed description of their project, set a fundraising goal and then meet it within 30 days. If the goal isn’t met, no money changes hands. Crucially under the new law, these small-time investors don’t need to be “accredited,” regulatory speak for wealthy people with minimum annual income or assets who can afford knowledgable investment advice.

Skeptics are worried the changes will open the way to fraud, and then a reactive clampdown that kills off the opportunity for legitimate filmmakers. “I’m more skeptical of the equity markets, and the lack of regulation,” said David Travers, a partner in private equity fund Rustic Canyon Partners, which has invested in the Machinima YouTube original-content channel. A legislative reaction to flaws in the legislation ”may come in early 2013, after the first big ripoff happens.”

Changes the game a bit...  and makes these campaigns, which I would call investments now, a bit more safer or dangerous?

[Wood]

news about how Kickstarter and Indiegogo could change:

http://www.deadline.com/2012/10/crowdsourcing-law-indie-film-financing-kickstarter/


Changes the game a bit...  and makes these campaigns, which I would call investments now, a bit more safer or dangerous?

Far more dangerous. And given the opacity of movie accounting, I can already see the class action lawsuits brewing when a film does well and the investors are informed that the movie didn't break even so they get nothing.

[krelyan]

Far more dangerous. And given the opacity of movie accounting, I can already see the class action lawsuits brewing when a film does well and the investors are informed that the movie didn't break even so they get nothing.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjn1Y9YcIQM

[BobBretall]

Far more dangerous. And given the opacity of movie accounting, I can already see the class action lawsuits brewing when a film does well and the investors are informed that the movie didn't break even so they get nothing.

    I've heard all about "Hollywood accounting".   They screw over creators all the time, I see no reason why some small fry kickstarter investors would get anything back for their contribution to most films.

Better to go into it with your eyes open about it just being a gifted donation to the film-makers.