Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
The Almighty Buck Games

The Dangers of Beating Your Kickstarter Goal 168

jfruh writes "In March of 2012 legendary game designers Tim Schafer and Ron Gilbert ran a Kickstarter to design a new adventure game, asked for $400,000, and came away with more than $3.3 million. Their promised delivery date was October 2012. Now it's July 2013, and the project still needs cash, which they plan to raise by selling an 'early release' version on Steam in January 2014. One possible lesson: radically overshooting your crowdfunding goal can cause you to wildly expand your ambitions, leading to a project that can't be tamed."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

The Dangers of Beating Your Kickstarter Goal

Comments Filter:
  • Ah... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by dyingtolive ( 1393037 ) <`brad.arnett' `at' `notforhire.org'> on Monday July 08, 2013 @06:49PM (#44220373)
    Surely you mean "The Dangers of Overextending the Scope of Your Project Beyond What Resource Allocations Allows".

    I guess that's not scary enough though.
    • Re:Ah... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Flozzin ( 626330 ) on Monday July 08, 2013 @07:12PM (#44220563)
      You would have thought though, that before they wildly expanded in order to spend 8 times what you wanted in funding, you would deliver on your core game.
      • Re:Ah... (Score:5, Interesting)

        by SJHillman ( 1966756 ) on Monday July 08, 2013 @07:19PM (#44220613)

        I always enjoyed games that had a good core and then released expansion packs later that actually expanded on the game. It was almost like getting two great games. Total Annihilation was good, Core Contingency made it better. Diablo II was good. Lord of Destruction made it better (although in this case, the expansion was essential to actually finishing the storyline). StarCraft was good, Brood War made it better. It seems expansions that really expanded the game died out around ten years ago. Since then, expansions are more like content packs - they tend to just add more of the same.

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by sjpadbury ( 169729 )

          Someone hasn't looked at Civilization V, then.
          Civ V was good.
          Gods and Kings made it better.
          Brave New World (releases in about 4 hours for me) according to reviews is making it even better still.

          • by EzInKy ( 115248 )

            To me Civ3 was the ultimate in gaming fun. Certainly Civ4 was easier to play on Linux, but they so overdid the graphics that gameplay seemed to be a secondary consideration. As for Civ5, my understanding is that they severly restricted the ability to build decent armies.

            • by C0R1D4N ( 970153 )
              I think the armies are the biggest improvement by far from iv to v. No longer stacking units allows you to actually place your units in strategic locations (spearmen defending archers, etc). Now if only they would split building and recruitment so you can do both simultaneously.
              • by mjwx ( 966435 ) on Tuesday July 09, 2013 @02:31AM (#44222689)

                I think the armies are the biggest improvement by far from iv to v. No longer stacking units allows you to actually place your units in strategic locations (spearmen defending archers, etc).

                Actually Civ 5 allows more of this. Spearmen sit in front of your archers, archers shoot over the spearmen. This and cities that can attack make it a game of turtles. Forget any other strategy.

                Add to this the fact the AI is crap and you have the reason I still play Civ 4.

            • by BergZ ( 1680594 )
              What you hear is true.
              As someone who has played all 5 of the Civilization games to-date I have to say that they've streamlined the game.
              I've always loathed the process (in Civs 1 - 4) of naval invasion. It's my least favorite part of those games.
              In Civ 5 they have removed *most* of the hassle of naval invasion. You don't have to build transports. You just send your unit to the coast and say "embark" and a transport appears out of nowhere to carry the unit across the water.
          • Can't fuckin' wait. I usually prefer the more peaceful victory conditions and it sounds like brave new world is gonna deliver.
        • by miknix ( 1047580 )

          Finally! Someone who likes Total Annihilation. I still play it though, it works great using wine!

          • Are you able to get networking to work well under Wine? When I try it the cursor moves around at about half a frame per second and makes it completely unplayable. This is the only reason I have left for keeping Windows machines around (though I am hoping Planetary Annihilation can take its place, and that will supposedly be designed to run on Linux).
          • Played it this morning. My copy is from Good old Games. The $6 they charged for a working install that worked on a win7 machine without having to find all 4 cd's and related keys and making sure they weren't scratched was sooooo worth it. Even for a game I already bought twice.
          • To me it's still the best RTS ever created.

            • Re: Ah... (Score:5, Funny)

              by iamhassi ( 659463 ) on Monday July 08, 2013 @10:43PM (#44221699) Journal
              Yes TA is great but what's with the system requirements? 64 megabytes for the larger maps is outrageous! ;)
              • Especially considering the largest maps (IE: 81 x 81 iirc) are still massive compared to almost every other RTS made since then, although 40x40 was the largest that came with the game. Supreme Commander is the only one I can think of that you can have maps on that scale. TA was also years ahead in terms of integrated fan-made content from the ground up. Download a new unit? Just drop it in the totala folder to use. Same for maps. No installing, no editing, and there were some great fan-made tools to resolve

          • Another TA fan! Wohoo! okay, I mostly turtled, built vulcan, and then just sent waves of Hawk's until the enemy base were gone, mine were gone, or he'd built too much air defense..

            Anyway.. As a TA fan, I keep a close look on Planetary Annihilation [uberent.com] - I just hope they get that good old TA feeling into it (they say they focus more on TA than SupCom, but we'll see)

            Alpha is out, and there are a lot of gameplay videos [reddit.com] out, but I am waiting for beta before I get my toes wet.

            • by miknix ( 1047580 )

              There was this time I was playing against a single friend in a huge map. As usual, I started building a massive wall of air and land defense and sending small waves of land forces to distract the enemy. Guess what? Around the time I had my Big Berta almost built, suddenly all my base got covered with enemy bomber and fighter planes! I could not believe it, I couldn't see anything else than air planes flying! It turned out that my friend spent the whole game producing airplanes into a remote map area and at

              • Hehe, yeah, the AA defense in TA had some problems with large air swarms. Think they just moved too fast for the in-game engine and defenses to keep up properly.

                Hence, why you made large fucking swarms, and just set them to patrol the enemy base. They'd need an equal fuckton amount of air defenses to stop it, making it impossible to do anything else (and they slowly got killed, too.. And then your base stop existing)

      • Sometimes that tight fisted manager standing over your shoulder demanding results yesterday actually has a useful purpose.

        Putting a creator and an editor and a producer all in the same person results in problems. Look at the "director's cut" versions of movies, they rarely are better than the trimmed down original. You need someone to say "you're done now, please stop".

        Yes, they realized after funding that their small adventure game didn't have to be small and could be the size of one of their older games

    • Re:Ah... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by hairyfeet ( 841228 ) <bassbeast1968@gm ... minus herbivore> on Monday July 08, 2013 @07:18PM (#44220605) Journal
      I think it was Nicholas Meyer (of Star Trek II fame) who said "art thrives on limitations" and time and again we have seen that, you get a big budget and you go overboard and end up with a mess. Maybe in the future others will learn and set some sort of upper limit on their kickstarter?
      • Not every project needs an upper limit, but some certainly do. A friend of mine did the 3Doodler kickstarter and it also wound up unexpectedly successful. (Blew through the original goal in the first few hours, and wound up making a few million dollars at the end of the 30 day campaign.) When they sold out of the planned first batch, there was a bit of a scramble to estimate how quickly a second batch could be made, how big it should be, etc. But, they didn't change the design of the product, so they we

    • by beckett ( 27524 )
      also, the developer shouldn't be eating, rolling and smoking, blowing his nose, wiping his ass, fanning himself, or wearing [venturebeat.com] development money.
    • Yes. Project Scope Management would have handled this.
  • by Anonymous Coward

    Project costs way more than expected. News at 11.

    • by Arkh89 ( 2870391 ) on Monday July 08, 2013 @07:04PM (#44220495)

      --- a/Message
      +++ b/Message
      - Project costs way more than expected. News at 11.
      +People are not able to forecast accurately costs of a project (time, money, etc.). News at 11.

      • by SeaFox ( 739806 )

        If a project that was projected to fit within a $400,000 budget can't be completed with $3.3 million the issue is a lot bigger than bad estimation.

        • When the Kickstarter brought in more money then asked for the scope of the project was expanded. Unfortunately, it was expanded a little to much.

          • by Creepy ( 93888 )

            Yeah - I think some games have much saner budgeting than others. Both games I've backed are still listed as on-time and within budget, and one is almost in beta (and not due for another year) suggesting they may be ahead of schedule. The other hasn't given as many specifics, but has said they are progressing well and are still on time. They didn't say anything about on budget, but most of their add-ons were localization related (and since voice work is outsourced, probably realistically obtainable goals to

        • by dingen ( 958134 ) on Tuesday July 09, 2013 @05:15AM (#44223289)

          People keep saying this, but would you really have been happy if they had stuck to the 400k project and kept the rest of the money on their bank account?

          Obviously, the increased budget has allowed them to expand the project. This is a good thing, it means the money people put in is actually used on the game. More money = more game.

          So unfortunately, the bigger game they are making now has gone over budget. It's really no big deal, as they have found a good solution, which is to release part of the game early in order to generate income to finish the rest of the game. They're not asking for more money, they are simply adjusting the release schedule.

          Projects going over budget are a fact of life. These things happen all the time. The only reason we're hearing about it at all is because it's a crowdfunded project and the crowd has a right to know what is happening with their money. But don't think other games you are playing were finished on time and within the projected budget, because they're not.

  • by Hentes ( 2461350 ) on Monday July 08, 2013 @06:53PM (#44220411)

    Only buy a finished product unless you have money to burn.

    • Even if this lesson was something worth to be learned it wouldn't be learned from this example as the people who financed it on Kickstarter will have their product in the end, mismanagements aside.
      • by Hentes ( 2461350 )

        How do you know that?

        • Firstly because he has a name that is worth a lot more than what he took so he has all the interest in the word in delivering the game.

          Secondly because his company managed to deliver several games already, so he is obviously capable of doing so.

          And last but not least because he already announced a solution. He will deliver the game in two parts. The first part will be available at about the expected date and the sells will be used to finance the second time. Kickstarter backers and whoever buys the fi
      • by jordanjay29 ( 1298951 ) on Monday July 08, 2013 @08:43PM (#44221073)
        Reality check: not every project that succeeds on Kickstarter delivers a final product.
        • Sure, but Tim Schafer isn't everybody. I don't want to repeat myself so I advise you to refer to my previous post in this same thread .
    • by Flozzin ( 626330 )

      This is what I am doing. Yes, some corporate games suck, but I don't have money to blow funding someones pet project. Plus I don't know what I will be doing years from now. Maybe I gave up gaming altogether. Maybe they drastically change their concept to something I don't want. Maybe, they just flat out lie(WarZ).

      You can give to kickstarter groups. I've been screwed before, thanks.

    • by Sir_Sri ( 199544 ) on Monday July 08, 2013 @07:16PM (#44220595)


      Kickstarter is a lesson to investors and publishers etc. that there is money available for things they didn't think there was a market for. If no one funded star citizen or project eternity or the like then we would go another 10 years without good space combat games and isometric RPG's. As it is we'll probably see a lot, some of which will suck (and some of which will be the kickstarted projects unfortunately), but the 'product' you're buying on kickstarter is really paying to create a genre or a product family or the like. Sure, you might get star citizen or some adventure game that *might* be good. But expectations are high on those. I'll be happy if funding star citizen means one of the big guys picks up on 'space sims can make money again? Hurray!' XWing vs Tie Fighter 2015' or whatever.

      • by abies ( 607076 )

        If no one funded star citizen or project eternity or the like then we would go another 10 years without good space combat games and isometric RPG's.

        You are mentioning it as if Star Citizen was already released and delivered what it has promised. We might have similar discussion in another 2 or 3 years, this time mentioning Star Citizen running out of budget and hoping to sell under-developed version on Steam to get some more money...

  • Bad Planning (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 08, 2013 @06:55PM (#44220423)

    'It's a bad plan that can't be changed' – Publilius Syrus c.100 BC

    Release the core game as it was intended on time and add the extras (in game, ports to other platforms, whatever...) later.

    This needs to be planned for Kickstarters from, well, before the start. Because you might get more money than anticipated, but not more time.

    • by Teancum ( 67324 )

      Release the core game as it was intended on time and add the extras (in game, ports to other platforms, whatever...) later.

      This needs to be planned for Kickstarters from, well, before the start. Because you might get more money than anticipated, but not more time.

      This is so true. I know some people with a successful Kickstarter campaign begin to get caught up in the hype and promise the Moon and anything else they can think up in order to keep the ball rolling. They really shouldn't get caught up in the hype, other than to be promising minor cosmetic things or as suggested promise that they will be on the development path well after the original release. I completely agree.

      I've been involved with several startup companies over the years, and the worst disaster wa

      • by khallow ( 566160 )

        We blew over a million dollars in the course of about 18 months

        I saw a start up do 70 million in a similar length of time. It was obscene, but more entertaining to watch than the usual train wreck. I think the business plan went something like:

        1) Come up with a great idea and get 70 million dollars.

        2) Ok, let's hire a few hundred college grads, pack them in our styling Silicon Valley cube farm, and party!

        3) Here comes the investors. Everyone look busy!

        4) Shit. We need actual product. Better hire some contractors to write that crap.

        5) I rock at ping pong!

    • The problem is how kickstarter seems to work. They include the stretch goals right there in the initial pitches. So not only do they have to get the time and resource planning reasonably correct for the first goal, they need to also get good estimates for all subsequent stretch goals. So the more stretch goals that get funded the more likely it is that they're going to slip up.

      Now sometimes the stretch goals are probably not too bad. Project Eternity as I recall had stretch goals that were relatively si

      • by gl4ss ( 559668 )

        dude, it's a sw product. they can just weasel out on the stretch goals.
        the REAL PROBLEM is that they apparently don't/didn't know what they wanted the game to be, so wearing the money as clothes was what they did with it.

        they had no idea what the core product should/would be! that's why they need MOAR MONEY! they would always need MOAR MONEY! until they had a stroke of luck and figured out what the game would actually be.

        don't fucking pay them upfront.

  • by CmdrEdem ( 2229572 ) on Monday July 08, 2013 @07:00PM (#44220469) Homepage

    Like not taking into account the Crowdfunding site share, Paypal transfer tax (depending on where you live and what site you did use), country, state and city taxes. If you are opening a business there are costs for that too. To properly employ someone is very expensive in some countries (guess what: taxes, social security and so on).

    People will eventually learn how to calculate all this, but indies went too eager to the crowndfunding bubble and did not consult their accountants to see how much game development actually costs. Ow yes... accountants also cost money.

    You could say that Tim was victim of his own success, but I say he was victim to his own creativity combined with over-excitement.

    • by Dahamma ( 304068 )

      You could say that Tim was victim of his own success, but I say he was victim to his own creativity combined with over-excitement.

      Well, hopefully it's too soon to name any victims yet... though I have to say I'm glad to see the scope was extended to a larger, more in depth adventure game, almost all of his others have been well worth it. Then again, I'm fine with waiting until it's actually finished to buy it...

      • Yes, Tim is pretty good at his job. Full Throttle would be at my Top5 game of all time if I ever bother to make such list. What I meant is all this discussion is blown out of proportion because of hype. If it was a non-kickstarted project it would be canceled and thrown into Limbo until someone really asked about it and the fate was revealed. They were open about what is happening and deserve some kudos for that. And while you can say they have the moral obligation to be open in this case, they could simply

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      ...You could say that Tim was victim of his own success, but I say he was victim to his own creativity combined with over-excitement.

      Sure, one could say that...or one could also say that someone who has been in business long enough to be referred to as "legendary" should at least know the basics of business before making rather large financial guesstimates on general costs. Things like employer taxes and medical insurance plans aren't exactly corporate secrets.

      • Well... It is very common to go over-budget in most, if not all, games. And the costs of running a business are no secret. Any local, trustworthy accountant (yeah, pretty limited bunch but they exist) can tell exactly how much it will cost. But Kickstarter stretch goals are a completely new beast, and therefore hard to predict.

        I don`t have business experience, but it`s pretty obvious to me that, as you make a bigger project, more and more money is spent in management. Management that can barely keep things

    • by Sycraft-fu ( 314770 ) on Monday July 08, 2013 @08:13PM (#44220913)

      While developers like to hate on publishers, and often with good reason, one thing they usually do is have some business and accounting sense to keep projects on track. Developers can have a "just another couple months and it'll be great!" mentality whereas a publisher understands that time is money, a lot of it. Every month you spend on a project has a big cost. Hence it can be important to release earlier, even if it does mean cutting back.

      Shadowbane and Duke Nukem Forever are two great examples of developers just running away with the "we'll just work on it until it is whatever our vision is," sort of thing and failing massively.

      The problem with the Doublefine thing is that it seems to be a creative person at the helm, and that can mean bad business decisions. It's a nice sentiment to say "Let creativity run wild," but in the real world, you have to consider business concerns.

      I'm more optimistic on Wasteland 2 because Brian Fargo is at the helm and he's a business person. He seems to well understand the need for getting things out the door and working on doing what you can with the resources you have, even if it is less than you want to do.

      Todd Howard had some good points on this during his keynote about this kind of thing: "Your ideas are not as important as your execution," and "We can do anything, we just can't do everything." Both are very true. You have to decide what is going to be in and what isn't, because you haven't the time or resources to implement it all, and what you do implement needs to be good because the grandest ideas are blunted in an unplayable game.

      • I agree that if you want to make a game you must understand that you don`t have the resources to do everything. Being so, the secret here is what you do first and when to stop making new stuff to make the stuff you already have the best you can.

        That said there is reason why publishers are hated. They are business only. They care little for creativity. They care only for profit. And you may say that for capitalism in general, but you can`t let that be the guiding line in a creative industry. A industry that

  • by Bieeanda ( 961632 ) on Monday July 08, 2013 @07:04PM (#44220491)
    Everything to do with Tim Schafer being constitutionally incapable of reining himself in. And you know, that's fine when you've got a publisher holding the purse strings, and ultimately able to put their foot down when things get out of hand, especially when it results in titles like Psychonauts and the other amazing adventure stories he's helmed. It's a lot less okay when you can't go to the publisher and ask for another million bucks to see things through.

    Actually, there is a problem with goals here-- specifically, that there wasn't one set in the first place. The Doublefine Kickstarter was an experiment that asked for money to finance the creation of a game, and a documentary film of the whole thing. Nobody knew what it was at first, certainly nobody expected it to get out of hand, and then Tim decided to make something Totally Amazingly New and proceeded to torpedo the budget.

    What he has now is a fantastic idea, but it's the kind of fantastic idea that wants a whole lot more money than the KS brought in, because it's going to require a lot of artists working their hands down to the wrists.

    • Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)

      by nitehawk214 ( 222219 )

      My theory is that Tim realized that people will give him money for making stupid videos and promises (that at least are backed up by his reputation as a great game maker, unlike a lot of other KS campaigns), and therefore he almost has to try to see how much money he can get before making the game. It is a giant snowball effect. The more money he gets, the bigger and better game he can promise, which means he needs more money, so more video shenanigans and dancing around trying to get people to give him yet

  • by cheesybagel ( 670288 ) on Monday July 08, 2013 @07:06PM (#44220501)

    Which is why you should stick to well defined objectives. Do the planned release. If you got more money than you expected then you release an expansion pack later for free.

    • If you got more money than you expected then you release an expansion pack later for free.

      Screw that! We aren't talking about a government or non-profit organization here...

      Release the $400,000 game you said you'd release, and everybody paid for. If you overrun the budget a bit, no problem. Just think of the rest of the money as extra sales of the game, in excess of your break-even point. Deliver them the copy of the game they paid for, and they'll all be happy.

      It wouldn't be a bad idea to use SOME of t

    • by Tom ( 822 )


      I'm about to launch my own kickstarter campaign, and one thing I gathered from the tons of advise that is out there by now is that you absolutely have to be clear on your goals and stretch goals.

      If at all possible (it's a lot easier with software than hardware), do what the parent said: Release what you promised and then invest the additional money into a free expansion pack.

      With hardware, I don't get why people invest feature creep at all. Your backers funded the item that you promised, and that is w

  • by NEDHead ( 1651195 ) on Monday July 08, 2013 @07:09PM (#44220539)

    in "The Producers".

  • by oneblokeinoz ( 2520668 ) on Monday July 08, 2013 @07:13PM (#44220573)
    For another example look at the Pebble watch.

    Originally wanted $100,000 in funding, wound up getting over $10 million. That changed the size of their problem from making 1000 watches, to making 100,000 watches. So now they had to scale their manufacturing by a factor of 100, which is a totally different set of problems to solve.

    There has been a lot of angst (some anger) at the delivery delays, most of the "investors" have been reasonably patient, some have been downright ignorant. One of the most popular forum topics is something like "I funded it on [date], why haven't I got my watch", where [date] was only a small number of days after the kickstarter campaign began, but in reality was when they were at over $5 million going up.

    Disclaimer: I'm still waiting (patiently) on my two watches. I should have just ordered black, or changed to black when they made the option available. sigh!
    • by Tukz ( 664339 )

      My primary beef with the Pebble campaign, is the fact they are shipping to retail before they are shipping to backers.
      What's up with that?

      I put my money on "AGENT Smartwatch" instead.

  • The key is to stick to your original stated goals, and not to expand them just because you get a bunch more money.

    People knew what they were buying with the KS, so there was no reason to radically up-scope the mission, especially to the point that the mission became unobtainable.

    • No, not really.
      90% of the time I get a KSer is because I know the game will have 200% more details than the developers had originally planed at that price point.
      And specifically, all money they raised must be spent designing the game, or it is fraud.
      I did see a KS project were the stretch goals were just more toys for the backers. But I personally thought that that went against the idea of KS backing, if not being technically fraud.

  • by kirkb ( 158552 ) on Monday July 08, 2013 @07:19PM (#44220611) Homepage

    When you've got a "creative type" in charge of managing a project, you get "creative project management".

    Where I work, if a 6-month project ended up taking 3 years, people would be fired. Or overthrown. Or lynched by a mob.

  • The Dangers of Bad Project Management
    The Dangers of Scope Creep
    The Dangers of your eyes being bigger than your stomach.
  • by Anonymous Coward

    I just don't understand why the scope was expanded at all.

    If I need $X to do W, and then find myself with $X+Y, I spend $X to do W, then keep $Y for a later Z.

    More specifically, he said "I want to make this game, and need $400,000". Once he got $3.3 million, he should have created and released the original game he had planned, and reserved the other $2.9 million for the next game.

    What kind of fucking idiot decides to spend all the money he has simply because he has it?

    • Statement titled "A Note from Tim" [gamasutra.com]

      Those of you who have been following along in the documentary know about the design vs. money tension we've had on this project since the early days. Even though we received much more money from our Kickstarter than we, or anybody anticipated, that didn't stop me from getting excited and designing a game so big that it would need even more money.

      I think I just have an idea in my head about how big an adventure game should be, so it's hard for me to design one that’s

  • Scope creep has always been capable of consuming even the most generous of budgets.

  • The issue comes from backers believing they're preordering a product.

    This is not what is going on here. What is going on is more akin to the Medieval practice of being a patron to an artist.

    We hand our collective money to an artist who says "I want to make something like this... And the more you provide me in funding the bigger and more grand a statue I can make."

    We as a group come together and pool our money and hand it to the artist saying "We like your vision. Here is a bucket of gold coins, go forth and create awesomeness".

    This makes more sense when you consider that the high end rewards are usually something like "A copy of the widget, plus lunch with the widget visionary"

    Noone pays 1000$ for a game. People pay 1000$ for artistic vision and being a part of seeing the vision realized.


    • by abies ( 607076 )

      As long as we can behead them if they don't deliver what we asked for, I'm ok with that. If you want medieval rules, let's go all the way.

    • by gl4ss ( 559668 )

      there's options for that kind of crowdfunding too.

      but kickstarters by far and large always have products listed that you will receive - with delivery date estimations and the videos are all about giving the impression that "yes we can deliver because xyz".

      • by Minupla ( 62455 )

        I'm certain that artists throughout history have made similar claims, human's don't change that much :).

        And similarly, I'm sure patrons said "It'd be even more awesome if you made it 10' taller, with the same delivery date. What about it? There's an extra sovereign in it for ya?"

        There's was a sign hanging on my boss's wall when I first started in IT (yes, it was a granite tablet). It sayth:
        "You can have it Fast, Good or Cheap, pick any 2 of 3"


        • by gl4ss ( 559668 )

          a game doesn't get good just because it's late..
          cheap and good (and slow) can't happen anyways since they're burning the money by day.

          the art type of kickstarters are tricky in this way though, but these as well did make promises - to people they were taking money from. the real problem however is that the fraud portion was in the part that they said they knew what game they were making when they didn't know, this is a problem with many ks game projects - they they don't actually have any scope and the scop

          • by Minupla ( 62455 )

            oh well, I just hope elite turns out ok eventually! if not then it's money paid as compensation for pirating frontier and ffe!

            It amused me greatly that Shroud of the Avatar had a tier for people who had pirated ultima or a previous game and were cleansing their karma :)


  • ... thank the backers for the gratuitous funding, come up with a reasonable scope for the game, and promise to use the rest of the money for funding the next game and/or for unforseen expenses that pop up during development?

Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo.