With a $25,000 goal and a $15 game price the project would be looking at a target number of 810 to 1,130 backers to reach 100% funded. Getting over 500 backers is the tough part. A short-term goal for momentum reasons is that the campaign should try to exceed 30% funded before halfway through the Kickstarter campaign's run. Ideally 15% to 30% or more is raised in the first 7 days to have a good chance of being in a position where a surge in the final week can get the project funded.
$1 tier: A good idea.There is no $1 tier. I will continue to strongly recommend $1 reward tiers. Every backer counts for project momentum and project ranking. A better ranking means more internal exposure. Offering something more than a thank you, like a digital desktop wall paper or being listed in the credits, can bring in more backers.
$10 tier: Early bird version of $15 tier.250 $10 slots would contribute at least $2,500 (10% of goal) when filled. That is good. Not too many and not too few slots.
$15 tier: Adds copy of game.An immediate big problem is that this tier does not provide a strong enough incentive to contribute to the campaign now instead of just waiting for the game to release. It is right now really just a copy of the game without much compensation for the risk backers take on. Even as something as simple as being listed in the game's credits can get someone to pledge now instead of buying it later. Get multiple people's opinions about if a $15 price is too high or not. Pricing too high sinks campaigns quickly. Pricing too low makes it harder to cover funding distances. I hold the opinion that it is better to go too low than too high. A discount that is not an early-bird discount could be built into the tier (Such as $3 off the $15 planned release price). Again, get a bunch of people's opinions on this.
$20 tier: Early bird version of $25250 $20 slots would contribute at least $5,000 (20% of goal) when filled. If the basic price is $15, then the tier's price is a $10 savings.
$25 tier: Adds an additional copy of game.If the basic copy is $15, then the tier's $25 price is a $5 savings. A question to ask yourself is what to do if someone want to pledge for 3 copies. To facilitate this, an add-on rewards system is actually a good candidate until the $100 tier. Looking forward in the rewards a lot of headaches can be avoided by using an add-on reward system. The $20 tier could be kept the same because it is difficult to implement discounts for add-on rewards. At the $100 tier or above a few additional copies could be automatically thrown in to help pad the value up.
$35 tier: Adds beta, soundtrack and digital art book but only has one copy of game.The content could be serve the project better at a lower price point. Ignoring the early-bird tiers, the jump is $15 to $35 which is way bigger than I'd like to see. Backers in the low end of the price range are much more sensitive to small increases in price than backers at the higher end of the price range. It helps to look at things with percents. When a price jump is more than 200% take a second look at it. The next reward tier is $50 which is another relatively large price jump that would be expected to reduce the number of backers that would proceed past $35. The $1 to $50 range is where to expect most of the campaign's backers, so most of the attention should go into tuning that area. Sometimes designing Kickstarter rewards is like designing a gentle
fishladder to get the most out of backers. If the rewards don't flow well, then the average pledge per backer amount can suffer meaning more backers will be required to reach the same funding goal.
$50 tier: Adds a postcard.I really like postcard rewards. I have a
few hung on my wall. Using the 4x6 format means they can fit inside photo frames like an small art print. The tourism industry has helped kept the cost of mailing individual post cards low. If mailing multiple postcards (With different art) to the same backer, it can be cheaper to send them together in an envelope. The art style of the game works well for postcard art prints. Remember to not go crazy with logos of "Thank you for backing" when the intention of a postcard is as an art print. The postcard should serve as a piece of art to display even if someone didn't know it was from a video game.
$75 tier: Adds a t-shirt and some other details.T-shirts are both a headache to fulfill because of the surveys, blank shirt selection, sizes and shipping, but at the same time they've proven to be a popular choice for backers. I keep seeing project creators decide to have a price jump from $75 to $100 which is strange because the project then misses out in the $80 to $90 range that can be good performing reward tiers. People argue about how many reward tiers a project should have. Instead of trying to meet a specific amount tier, I've been recommending covering funding hotspots and creating a good flow to the rewards.
$100 tier: In-game message on side of barn.I like this tier. It finally mentions being listed in the credits.
$150 tier: Design a level.Double-check your time-cost for fulfiling this reward. I could repeat that over and over for the following reward tiers. You don't want to lose money on reward tiers.
$200 tier A: Design a block.Good. It is limited to 10 slots which is good in that it prevents the reward from becoming too popular.
$200 tier B: Music in game.A bit strange as a reward idea.
$300 tier: In-game portrait.Double-check your time-cost.
$500 tier: NPC character.Good.
$1,000 tier: Design a character.Good. When there isn't a reward tier to hold a larger pledge, that creates a disincentive to pledge that much. An example is that no $5,000 tier means less chance that a stranger would pledge $5,000. At the same time it is important not to stretch the content in the rewards structure too much just so that it can end at a new upper range.
First impressions of the rewards structure is that there isn't really much happening in it. It feels too sparse. More digital-only content should be brainstormed. The game does seem difficult to brainstorm reward content for. It is not like a RPG where backers could get a cool alternate sword. Backers could be distinguished in some way with a skin or badge from other players. There could be a backers-only category to the leaderboards.
The Greenlight page went up Janaury 23rd. It has become very clear that lauching a Kickstarter campaign and Greenlight campaign at the same time is more effective than launching one even a few days before the other. Greenlight pages often have interest peak at the beginning. If the Kickstarter campaign comes later most of the views the Greenlight page could have generated will have already disappered. If the Kickstarter campaign goes before then people may not vote the Greenlight page up if the Kickstarter campaign doesn't look too healthy.
The game went onto Square Enix's Collective platform. The poll had 37% Yes and 63% No.
Platforms are listed as PC and Mac. I highly advise having an answer prepared about a Linux version. It is one of the frequently asked questions in the video games category on Kickstarter. On IndieDB the engine is listed as Unity. I personally get worried when I see a game going after console ports.
Some people will dismiss the project based on its art style. Hardcore PC gaming community has developed a stigma against casual looking art styles or art styles that look like they are targeting a very young demographic.
A Kickstarter launch party is planned for Thursday April 16th. A standard 30 days length would have the campaign end on Saturday May 16th which is very strongly not recommended. It could severely harm what the amount the project can raise. Weekends see a significant drop in traffic to the platform. That week would also risk competing against the strong campaigns that wait for the middle of a month to launch due to the paycheque cycle for many workers. I suppose the start date won't change due to the arrangements already made for that day.
If sticking with the April 16th launch, increasing the run to 32 days would have it end on a Monday which should result in a much healthier final 48 hours. Running 33 days to end on the Tuesday is potentially a little bit better due to the weekly cycle for many bloggers. It would also potentially make better use of the reminder e-mails that go out to potential backers that starred the project. Having the last 48 hour reminder e-mails go out on a weekend can reduce their effectiveness because inboxes on weekends often get backlogged.
Moving the launch hour is probably also not an option you would consider. A 19:00 (I am assuming EST) launch would already miss most of the traffic for that day. It would effectively be like launching on a Friday. The hour on the deadline should avoid ending in the morning for the Eastern Time Zone.
A late Thursday launch is a bit problematic for press. It is too late in the day for many blogs to post about the campaign when it is finally live. Earlier in Thursday can actually be a good time for press because Thursdays are some blog's slow days, but the project wouldn't be live in those hours. The campaign isn't high profile enough to get a series of posts for the launch from the same blog. Friday is a generally bad day for the performance of press articles, but that may have to be when the press goes up. Press would need to be contacted before launch. Messaging some bloggers on a Friday can be the equivalent of messaging them on Sunday night. The project page could use more content that bloggers could actually do commentary with. They need something to talk about instead of just regurgitating a press release.
There are a lot of placeholder graphics right now. The banner images for sections of the project page, the team biography blurbs and some other pieces of art are very good.
The project page text usually undergoes many many iterations in the final build up to launching. It always feels like a little more polish and rephrasing is necessary.
Remember when doing the pitch to frontload gameplay content. The team showing up in the first few seconds can be a waste of time as it is taken as a turn-off by many regular Kickstarter users. Put the game first. The first 30 seconds needs to convince them to keep watching.
The risks and challenges section needs work. It is brief and a bit odd feeling. Don't forget about the portion lost to taxes.
There is the small note of "
In the single player mode, solve tricky puzzles by placing the platforms we give you into the level to reach the end, and test your problem solving platforming skills!". My instincts tell me that the project needs to go much much deeper into this singleplayer puzzle solving. Some people won't care about the multiplayer. They will need a good enough single player experience to get them to pledge.
Another thing is at least have an outline for what the project updates will be. Even better is to actually get to work on the big updates before the campaign even launches. Having to work on big updates during the campaign can pull effort away from the marketing. Many people think they can churn out a high rate of good updates during the campaign, but then end up burnt out.
Developer
