Kickstarter seems to be the latest craze but is it really all it says it is? When there are other models like World of Mass Development that actually gives money back to gamers rather than just a game, is Kickstarter just taking advantage of gamers?
KickStarter is very clear about what it offers. I don't think anyone is confused. It's not a scam unless someone is being deceived.
Yeah I have had that feedback a lot in regards to the article. I guess the main point I was trying to make is that compared to the WMD model of supporting a game in development, Kickstarter really offers nothing back to the gamer. It is a win win situation for the developer regardless of how the game turns out. Where as with the WMD model the gamer can not only support the developer but the developer supports the gamer too by giving a share of profits back to the gamer. With Kickstarter it is essentially a donation\pre order. With WMD you are actually an investor.
Trust me I'd rather be the investor than letting some know nothing shareholders dictate gaming developers.
It's better for the game that the developers keep the profits. Since you get something for your donation, you don't lose. It doesn't have to be a residual return. Not all gamers are that greedy.
I think one of the games on there was a scam but that's not Kickstarter's fault.
I agree with inven0 and ratraceme. Investors and shareholders dictate the games we play (seriously wtf has gaming come to?) I like that devs and gamers have a direct connection with KickStarter and puts gaming back to where it belongs, on fun, creativity and interactive entertainment. I trust Kickstarter with my money more than I trust Activision, Capcom or EA. Heck, I wouldn't trust them with a virgin wearing a chastity.
Thanks for the comment, but I am not sure you actually read the article or know what WMD is. The WMD model is exactly what you are describing, a direct connection between the developer and the gamers. The difference is that through WMD not only can you give feedback to the developers, but if the game is successful, the developers also give you money back. So by "investing", I mean you are supporting the developer and it is a 2 way street, not a one way street like Kickstarter. I am not talking about public companies like EA, I am talking about getting gaming projects off the ground and the developers saying thankyou back to the gamers by giving something back. How that isnt a better model than Kickstarter I will never understand.
Yes, WMD is like Gambitious...but I don't mind either way. The thing is, many core gamers just want the product and the product finished right. If I had to pay $100 for a dream game and I wasn't getting anything back other than that dream game (no drm, no online passes, etc.,etc.,) I don't see it as a one-way street. it's a two-way street because devs get the money and I get the game. For people unsure about the project then yes, an "investment" might suit them, but for others like myself, where it's not about the money but the experience of the game itself, then Kickstarter suits us just fine.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.