What KICKSTARTER(S) are you BACKING and WHY?

THUNDERBIRDS GAME & EXPANSIONS (Approx $99 / €88) plus shipping

Anyone else getting tired of $100 games on kickstarter starting to charge for shipping? I was fine with Conan doing it because I was getting around 180 miniatures and the value of the pledge was there, also it was only $90. It feels like a ripoff for most other games though.

I imagine they're all tired of taking a bath on shipping as their minis-heavy campaigns balloon under the weight of so many stretch goals.

I agree with you that it's kind of nuts, but I usually think it's nuts to back a game nobody's played for $100+, so paying to ship it is only a little extra nuts, and it's justifiable.

Chaz wrote: I imagine they're all tired of taking a bath on shipping as their minis-heavy campaigns balloon under the weight of so many stretch goals.

I agree with you that it's kind of nuts, but I usually think it's nuts to back a game nobody's played for $100+, so paying to ship it is only a little extra nuts, and it's justifiable.

Often times these $100 kickstarter games will go on sale for $50 on a CSI daily deal. I've seen Dark Darker Darkest for $30 on CSI and Myth for $35. Since kickstarter cuts out the middle man I would imagine that asking them to pay for shipping is fine in most cases.

It just seems like a lot of new games now just automatically charge $100 on kickstarter whether the game deserves the price or not.

Chaz wrote: I agree with you that it's kind of nuts, but I usually think it's nuts to back a game nobody's played for $100+, so paying to ship it is only a little extra nuts, and it's justifiable.

I as well think that all the people that already have the entire first wave of Star Wars: Armada preordered and paid for are crazy also.
Oh wait...That comment was supposed to apply to Kickstarter backers...My bad...Carry on...

Wetworks, remember that your $100 is also going towards the labor to individually pick and pack yours and hundreds of other custom orders. And the KS Exclusives have to be paid for somehow. So yeah, the age of free shipping is over, especially since stuff is coming often in two or more waves now.

Right now Thunderbirds just isn't showing me the value. Once in distribution I can get it much cheaper and with free shipping so that's why I haven't backed yet. I hope it get there, but we'll see.

I've pledged top tier for Thunderbirds because Thunderbirds. But like you VonTush I'm also keeping an eye on it to determine if the value is there at the end. I'll make my mind up on it at the 48 hour mark and may end up cancelling my pledge if I don't think the value is there. Gameplaywise I'm obviously expecting something Pandemic-like but hopefully some further previews will highlight something extra to lift it above Pandemic. For me, evidence that it can produce a good narrative will be key.

VonTush wrote:

Chaz wrote: I agree with you that it's kind of nuts, but I usually think it's nuts to back a game nobody's played for $100+, so paying to ship it is only a little extra nuts, and it's justifiable.

I as well think that all the people that already have the entire first wave of Star Wars: Armada preordered and paid for are crazy also.
Oh wait...That comment was supposed to apply to Kickstarter backers...My bad...Carry on...

Oh no, it could totally apply to non-Kickstarter preorders too. Basically, unless you're preordering something that is guaranteed to be in really short supply or comes with some incentive that makes it worth it, that preorder doesn't help the consumer at all. If a game comes out, and reviews and word of mouth is solid enough that it's worth $100, then swell, go for it. Before launch, you're taking a $100 gamble that it'll be worth it and that you'll get $100 worth of play/value out of it. My budget isn't large enough that I want to gamble with $100.

Early on I would have agreed with you, but must like the publishers have learned their lessons on not giving free shipping, I think consumers have learned their lesson to demand at least a game play video if not a rules draft. Most everything at this point there's enough out there that's really no different than games that have early copies given to the likes of Tom V to make a "review/advertisement" video. So just like a new release there isn't going to be close friends to provide opinions but there's enough to determine if it is a safer bet or not.

I'm probably a crank. There are only a few reviewers that I actually listen to these days, and most of them are around here, and otherwise I go by personal word of mouth from internet people I know. I'm totally cool with waiting a few weeks or months after release to find out if a game is worth the money or just pretty pictures and hype. If a game is really good, it'll be available that long, and I've got a shit-ton of games to keep me busy anyway.

And can't disagree with any of that. It is personal, it is the individual's choice to decide if they have enough faith in the designer, the publisher, anyone involved with the campaign. It's up to the individual if the dollars are worth the risk of coming home with a clunker.

Bottom line, is Kickstarter is a different way to buy. P500 is a different way to buy. Online at discount is a different way to buy. Pick up off the shelf and hold the box is a different way to buy. And each one comes with their own sets of risks and challenges...And that's why, for the life of me, I cannot understand the passive aggressive slides towards one method of buying a product. Don't agree? That's fine. But coming into a thread about projects people are backing and basically taking a shot at them...Is that really needed? Serve any purpose? Other than to get "Thank Yous" from others that don't like Kickstarter as a method of marking a product?

VonTush wrote: Bottom line, is Kickstarter is a different way to buy.

In some ways it goes back to the more traditional model, where you read a blurb in a catalog included in another game you purchased and take a flyer based on two sentences and a price. These went for $30 back in the 70s which is more or less the equivalent of dropping $100 now on a product sight unseen.

Granted, the world has changed and you have a lot more information to look at now. What floors me as often as not is people making the decision before there's any information out, for a game that's going to have information come out. Ghostbusters had just a box cover on display and people were on board, when waiting a week or two would give them a much better look at the game, and waiting six months would give them full-blown reviews and a chance to play and a chance to buy it at a cheaper price.

So the gaming continues. Kickstarters have early-bird prices designed to get their numbers over $50k in a hurry, fully aware that people will jump on them "just in case" they decide to buy at the end of the month. That gets the scare up, gets people looking and makes it look like the stretch goals are done deals and that the game has merit. But those numbers are softening. There was a game this past summer that contracted at the last moment and lost a couple of stretch goals. Supporters were disappointed and I would have been too. But that's how the campaigns are designed now -- front load like hell because that's what gets the game into the news cycle. Gamers making games, gaming the system.

I always fall back on "it's your money" and remind people that they're keeping the economy running for the rest of us. If being part of the purchase game is providing sufficient entertainment for your dollar then go for it. To some extent Kickstarter is a social game like The Sims. I had a lot of dog games and RPGs on my shelf as a kid that I never used and never got a dime for, so I'm a little less eager to participate.

I think the real trick with Kickstarter is to get on the games that are struggling. There's no run limit on the games that scream, so they'll be easy to find even with their exclusives later on when you have more information to decide on. The games that are just barely over the line . . . those are the games that will be hard to find and perhaps never reprinted. I'll be honest, I think it's just as likely those are the real winners as it is the ones with the big following.

S.

Agreed.
What most Kickstarters remind me of are late night infomercials to be honest. Complete with the "Call before the show is over" pressure and the "But wait there's more!" deal sweeteners. Kickstarter has provided an outlet for tried and true high pressure sales techniques. And the use of Early Birds is a solid way to ensure your campaign gets funded...Take the time window, shorten it to quickest reaction after the starting gun with a promise of "But wait, there's more!"

Maybe I just haven't been involved in bad KS programs, but every single one that I've backed I've had a very good idea of what I'm buying. Be it from rules or videos that were posted or prior experiences with games. And every single one has delivered more or less what I expected.

The ones that scream along though, at least with the Cool Mini ones I've looked at, if they are a hit the exclusive prices are insane. A $100 or $150 from the first season of Zombicide will now net you $1k+ on eBay. One character alone can get you $100+. Arcadia Quest I've seen $150 pledges sold for $300-$400.

And I fully disagree with going for the ones that are barely over the line. For the most part those are the ones that fade from memory quickly, assuming they were ever in the memory of non-backers. Gunship First Strike anyone? Those barely over the line ones are products for a very select and small group. And if a small game like Alien Frontiers or Sentinels does take off, it will go through a reprint cycle.

So my thought is there is no "trick" to KS. It is another mode to sell product and it is fully up to the buyer to decide: A) Is it something I'm interested in? What is being offered? C) What price is it being offered at? D) What are my expectations? E) What is the likelihood my expectations will be met?

Same exact process for any other game purchase though. I went through that same process with Mage Knight...Ignored the hype, ignored the rarity, ignored everything until I finally caved and decided to see what the game was about. Hate the game with a passion, respect the design, but absolutely devoid of any fun for me. I went through the process and my bet failed.

There's definitely a degree of hucksterism/risk variable associated with every kickstarter. I haven't had any trouble with KS projects besides the lateness of virtually all the projects. But I tend to kickstart games that have a very low degree of risk. Like, that Twilight Struggle Collector's Edition is coming. It's super late, but that's GMT for you. But I know it's coming, and there was only a very small chance from the beginning it was not coming.

That said, I think you could argue that the riskier projects actually get to the heart of what kickstarter was originally founded to be about. The ones I kickstart really *are* just a preorder system to raise some capital.

Same here, every project I've backed (10 with one active at this point) I've been very confident in.
Over half have been expansions or new editions to existing games I've already played. The rest I've gone in knowing pretty positively what to expect form either gameplay videos or skimming the rules that are posted.

So the latest CMoN kickstarter Blood Rage sold out it's 750 early bird spots in 3 minutes (it started at 3 PM EST) and is funded at $50,000. Let the tearing of hair and rending of garments commence! Does the Lang factor (all sorts of good games) outweigh the McVey factor (Sedition Wars)?

Edits:
80K in 20 minutes and the first non-update is out with a bullshit "this lightning start has caught us offguard" and we don't have an update ready. Or, why would we announce/pay for stretch goals when those targets will be broken quickly anyways? Nothing better than insulting the intelligence of your backers right off the bat.

McVey himself cannot be blamed for the quality of gameplay in Sedition Wars. Atleast not directly.
His relevance in gaming was always his modeling. From his days with GW, to WotC and now. He has had a hand in designer credits, and he's not a moron concerning game design fundamentals, but he isn't a designer.

Lang has made.some good games before. Great in fact. That said, the game play doesn't look like something I would be interested in. It might be incredibly awesome, but info as it stands with the two videos is pretty poor. Lots of glitz, but lacking in substance. Sedition Wars taught me that lesson to avoid such campaigns if your looking for good game play and not just pretty models.

The models do look terrific though. Outstanding miniature figure fodder for skirmish systems like A Song of Blades and Heroes.

Also, agreed on the excuse of not being prepared and just throwing out the first goal after initial heat died down. Its business, but still leaves a bad taste in the mouth. But what can one expect from a business that is associated with David Doust of Newwave minitures infamy from 12 years ago who commited internet fraud? The business he is linked with may be better run now and questionable practices are very much reduced in comparison to those days of his Alpharetta GA. OLGS, but sheisty decisions follow him wherever he is present. So I don't consider that a coincidence whenever it invariably does happen to occur with CMoN.