next »

[PompiPompi]

I was thinking of crowd funding using 8 bit funding.
Regardless if this has a chance to successed, I was thinking, is it justified?
How do people justify crowd funding?
I have a part time job. It doesn't pay much, I get help from my parents from time to time. I will complete and continue to work on my game(Sumerian Blood), regardless if I get funded or not. I will try to make a polished game, with the features I want, regardless of crowd funding or not. Although I admit it's kind of stressful, because I don't like my current situation where I am not making a lot of money and get help from my parents when I know I can earn about 5 or 6 times as much as I earn now if I get a full time job at a corporate company.
I thought maybe to say that if I will get crowd funded I will port my game to linux and mac, but I want to do that anyway. And it will be kind of odd if I port it anyway if I don't get crowd funded. So it's just a lie.
The best explaination I can think of, is trying to compensate for the time I invested in my game. I wish to earn from this game at least something equivalent to the time spent developing it, and maybe crowd funding can return part of that time spent.
So what do you think? How people justify their crowd funding?

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

it sounds like you don't really need the funding? my impression is that those games that ask for funding actually need it, and would not be able to be finished without the funding, or at least not as fast, and they wouldn't have as good art/music/etc. without the funding

i think of the "justification" like this: some fans of certain games/developers want to play their next game, and they want to pay something so that the game will exist in its best possible state, as soon as possible. i don't see a reason to deny fans the chance to pay for a game's funding. that's a whole lot better than it being paid for by loans, grants, venture capitalists, or corporations (which often ask for ownership rights in exchange). of all the funding sources possible for a game, i feel that a game's fans are the most moral source of funding, since they're the ones who will actually be enjoying the game and care most about how it's made. the other sources of funding come from people who just want to make money

[Moczan]

I think that compensation for the development time is a perfectly valid justification and I guess it's the main one behind most fundings not only crowd. I guess many indie developers sell games just because they have too. If I had more than enough money for my whole live, I would be more than happy to release everything I would ever create as a freeware game.

[Radix]

Philosophising aside what you're describing isn't a great hook.

[Chris Koźmik]

You *think* that you will complete the game, you can't be sure that your situation won't change and you won't need the money for living (especially since you are saying you do not earn enough to cover your full living expenses). So, it is not a lie to say you need these money to finish this game (because statisticly it makes you more likely to complete it and turn down awesome job offers that come in the middle of the project but that would force you to abandon the game - and these happen a lot more one would expect). In a long run getting fully funded by your income from game dev is the only path...

BTW, 8 bit funding seems like a pointless crowdfunding platform, when you check the recently completed projects you see games that gathered at most $200. Not worth it. I suspect the kickstarter is the only one that works (althrough it's US only, so not an option to most of us).

[Kapser]

To be honest, I'd rather fund one talented and passionate guy that just need food and motivation to get some dream game done than some studio or a guy that need money to hire artists and musicians. Kickstarters always look for justifications, but really the greatest projects comes from a lot of time and effort and dedicated developpers need some support.

However not everyone think like me and it will be hard to sell but I think it's justified if you know what you're doing and that the game will be completed and great. But if you plan on using 8bit funding you don't need as much justification as they are usually smaller amounts and indier projects. Focus on presenting one great project we want to play, and look for fan support and perks to offer your funders.

Edit: as Archibald said, 8bit funding still seem like a waste of time. Unfortunately for non-USA devs it's still hopeless to look for funding.

[PompiPompi]

True.
Well Paul, you didn't mention another funding method, and that is bootstrapping. I would think anyone who lives in a first world country can afford to bootstrap fund his game. Sure, it will take him longer to finish, and he might not be able to afford voice acting, but it's possible.
This made me think about something, does people who ask for crowd funding pay for their living cost? Or even, pay themselves salaries?
I remember going to a lecture of an enterpuerer, and he said that if you take money from investors, don't give yourself a salary. It doesn't look good. You should live on your savings instead.
So supposingly even enterpuerers don't give themselves salaries.
So do people asking for crowd funding really NEED this money? I don't think they do. But it probably helps.
Anyway, I might try 8-bit funding. My thought was also that this kind of funding is good to get attention to my game, to make people know my game exist. Even if they don't fund it. That in itself is good.
Though there is a risk with crowd funding. If people are not satisfied with the result of your game, or if you don't finish your game, it won't be nice. :/

[Christian Knudsen]

My thought was also that this kind of funding is good to get attention to my game, to make people know my game exist.

Note that crowdfunding seems to be more successful when it's a project with an already established fanbase. I don't think it works all that well as advertisement.

[Nix]

These guys broke down what they spent their Kickstarter money on: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/starcommand/star-command-sci-fi-meets-gamedev-story-for-ios-an/posts/208395

Kickstarter and similar sites aren't for pocketing a bit of spending money while working on your game. People tend to use it on things like marketing, equipment (xbox, iphones, ipads, android phones, new computers, etc), outsourcing assets like art of music, and working full-time. The projects that ask for the big numbers do so because they want to be able to work full-time, and that means giving up another job. They still need to pay rent and buy food while working on the game. If you don't need the money to get the game done, or aren't able to prove that the money will help you get it done significantly faster, then you almost certainly won't get funded. Projects that get funded are well justified (usually) and have a plan for using the money.

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

exactly; when i did the SD kickstarter i had a list of what i planned to spend the money on too. i think it helps to show people that you actually do plan to spend the money on the things necessary to make the game

the SD kickstarter money of about 1500$ (actually 1000$ because many of the amazon payments didn't go through and due to the various fees involved), from what i recall, was spent on these things:

igf entry fee: 95$
fmod shareware license: 100$
macbook for future porting to a mac: 700$
buying license for sound effects from soundsnap: 80$

*could* i have paid for those things on my own, without the funding? i probably could have handled the 100$ or less ones, given enough time to save up for them, but definitely not the macbook one, that was totally out of my price range

[PompiPompi]

Nix, I don't see how giving yourself a salary is used to finish the game. Sure, you will have to give up your job to work full time, but you can live on your savings, why should you get rewards for working on the game? Isn't the money used only to create the game? Giving yourself a salary is already making profit out of the game on expense of the donations.
I don't see how that is any different than having extra cash from the funding to use however you want. (It's not that the extra cash will be spent in las vegas, it is part of the living costs, obviously. Much like the "free" salary).
Though I agree that using the money to create the game is more sensible. I probably need a mac myself to port my game to iOS and Mac, I might have a 8 bit funding for that. Not sure it has a chance though.

[bateleur]

I've never seen crowdfunding as a particularly complex relationship TBH. It's simply a case of asking people if they want your game. Funding you means "yes" - everyone wins, so no need to feel guilty about anything. If you're going to do the game anyway that's even easier to justify because it means if the project gets part-funded (Kickstarter aside) you can still give your backers what they want.

That said, I think Christian Knudsen is right: crowdfunding doesn't work unless you already have a crowd.

[Chris Koźmik]

why should you get rewards for working on the game?

I find this statement disturbing... We make games, we could make other things but we still make games. People play these games and enjoy these. It's only fair that those who benefit from our sweat and blood (and the "blood" part is not an exaggeration as anyone who made a mid-bigger size game would agree) make sure we don't starve in the process. We are game devs and we are supposed to be kept well fed by the players who play our games. It's irrational to expect us to make games from our savings or to spend the money only on equipment. We are professionals, making games is our job. Would you expect a doctor to save your game for free? No. Still everyone seems to expect game devs to make games without any salary. That's unreasonable and unfair. If players believe we don't deserve getting paid for our effort they are welcome to play games made by hobbysts.

You make decent games, you deserve a salary.

[Christian Knudsen]

Would you expect a doctor to save your game for free?

That's why we need autosaves!

[PompiPompi]

Archibald, that is possible, but it should be stated that this is going to be used as a profit and as a salary beyond the minimum required to upkeep yourself.
I just don't think many people are going to donate money if they knew the money is going to be used as a salary and to fund your vacation to Hawaii.
The thing you forget is, the people donating money are also working hard for their money. They are donating from their salary and don't get a proportional return for their money(supposingly).
The return for their money comes in the form of a game you produce they can play with. That is why it make sense that the money they donate to you is used to produce said game, and not to pay for your leisure time.
That being said, don't twist my words and think I am against developers making a profit from the games. Though donations in crowd funding are more generous than what people would usually be willing to pay for a certain game. And they serve a purpose other than acquiring a copy of your game.

[ANtY]

I just don't think many people are going to donate money if they knew the money is going to be used as a salary and to fund your vacation to Hawaii.

It's sad that you don't understand that developers also need to live of something. Pay their bills, food, that's what the "salary" is used for, not some "vacation to Hawaii".

I still go to school and live at my parents place and thus I don't need any money to make games, but if I'd work full-time as an indie developer how am I supposed to live? Salary is something necessary.

[PompiPompi]

That's ok, as long as you mention to the donators that they are going to pay for your up keep. Also, I was talking about profit. You can get paid the bare minimum to survive, but you can also take a salary that match the industry standard salary of your level. So which did you mean?

[leonelc29]

i think everyone mean bare minimum, as this "salary" is needed for the developer to continue his/her developing work without starving or the risk of getting kick out of the house. Sure, you can live with your saving and all, but then since you have the saving, why ask for so much in kickstarter? so what everyone trying to say(i guess...) is, ask for this "salary" if you don't have enough saving to get through the developing day, or don't ask if you have enough saving to get through.(or maybe don't start the kickstarter at all)

Of course, this "salary" only cover what ANtY said, and not vacation or get drunk. Still, if people trust you and like your game, they doesn't mind putting their saving into your account.

Maybe you will understand more if you read some of the EndlessFluff blog post.

[Nix]

http://www.inc.com/slava-rubin/the-case-for-crowdfunding.html

Sort of relevant, though PompiPompi still seems to refuse to understand the very real costs behind making a game full-time.

[PompiPompi]

The costs of making a game, depends on how you make it.
There is the minimal living costs of the developer. There is hardware, internet(part of living cost actually) and etc.
What else? If you give someone a salary, it means you employe or contract people. Indie developers can avoid doing that by doing everything on their own or collaborate.
Paying someone a salary, or paying yourself a salary beyond the living costs is probably the biggest expenses though. You don't need to pay that if you collaborate or do anything on your own.
That is what I ment. I didn't mean indie developers don't need any money, heh.