Kickstarter Is a Full-Time Job

What do you wish Kickstarter did differently?

Holdwick: In an ideal world, Kickstarter would already have PayPal support built in. I know that is a tricky issue, and I realize why they don't have that, but I do think it would make the service better. There were a lot of people who didn't have credit cards and because of that couldn't back [our campaign] via Amazon. PayPal has a system in place to handle that situation, and that's why we ultimately added PayPal to our campaign ourselves.

Shumaker: I think it would be nice if Kickstarter let you message everyone in a given backer group. As far as I can tell, they don't do this, which is frustrating. I also think it would be nice if they had some sort of feature that exported all backer data into an Excel sheet that had info about email addresses, backer levels, additional comments, rewards, all of that. Maybe this is something in the works, but the process of organizing backer info is very tedious and can definitely be made faster and easier. Also, a lot of the questions we got asked were actually answered in our FAQ, so I think the FAQ section needs to be more visible.

How would you describe your relationship with your backers?

Coombs: Excellent. You get vocal people who disagree with your approach, but that's OK. They're just passionate about your project. They want it to be awesome, which is exactly why they put their money in. Bottom line: they gave up their hard-earned money (in a recession no less) for what essentially amounts to a hope and a promise. You really owe them, and if you talk to them with a genuine voice, they return with equally genuine feedback. We love them. They let us chase our dream, and you really can't thank them enough.

Shumaker: We realize that we owe this entire game to them, that Barkley 2 would not be happening if it hadn't been for the generosity of nearly 5,000 people who, for some reason, decided our ridiculous idea about a basketball-less, post-Space Jam world was a good one. We would like to have a completely open relationship with them, and we plan on sending monthly emails out that show not only our progress, but who we are as people and as a team. We also maintain constant contact via Twitter, where we regularly answer questions and post stupid garbage that I guess in some way indicates that we are, in fact, working on the game.

I think it's important for people who run Kickstarter campaigns to constantly show progress. They don't need to be specific about what they're doing, but it's really important for them to let backers know that their product is constantly being worked on and the money is being put to good use. I have seen so many Kickstarter backers getting disgruntled about projects that have stopped updating or responding to fans. People who run Kickstarter campaigns absolutely have an obligation to be as transparent as possible.

Star Command is a space ship-simulation-adventure game in the same vein as Game Dev Story.

How beholden do you feel toward backers with regard to design? If the majority of backers agreed on an idea that you and your team thought was bad or did not fit with the game's design, how would you resolve the issue?

Smith: It's an interesting question, and something I'm sure many studios have had to wrestle with. For us, as we were so far along the development pipeline, most of the decisions with regards to design had already been made. Ultimately, I think it's important to stress that while feedback and ideas from a community is fantastic, final say has to be with the designers--the professional creatives the studio hires for the very purpose of making such decisions. I think backers know you have the game's best interests at heart, and hopefully they can trust those decisions. Again, it's about transparency; if you clearly explain why that idea doesn't fit the design of a game, there shouldn't be an issue.

Shumaker: I guess one example of this is the Space Jam song. To us, the Space Jam song represents resting on the laurels of the previous game, kind of like saying Barkley 2 would have the same jokes and content of the original game, but it's something people supporting the game really wanted. We looked up how much it would cost to license the song (it was prohibitively expensive) and made it a stretch goal. We never reached it, but this was an example of something similar to this.

I think backers know you have the game's best interests at heart, and hopefully they can trust those decisions. Again, it's about transparency; if you clearly explain why that idea doesn't fit the design of a game, there shouldn't be an issue.That said, I really don't think people who run Kickstarter campaigns should feel obligated to include ideas the majority of backers agree on. People run Kickstarter projects specifically to avoid publisher and outside influence. Kickstarter is all about receiving the capital needed to have autonomy over your own projects, and if people did not like the ideas we have for our own game, they would not have supported it. I don't think most of the people who support Kickstarter campaigns do it on the condition that developers make weird fan concessions to them; they have a better understanding of the game development process than that.

We were in a fortunate position where we weren't forced to make considerable design concessions to meet our goals. If things had been different I really don't know what we would have done. I can understand why people would want to do this but I think what we wanted happened to coincide with what backers already wanted.

Coombs: We feel that we are beholden to one thing: a great game. They invested their money to see the project come to life, and we made a promise that it would be as good as we could possibly make it. For example: we had originally promised to have a game that was like X-Com in nature with turn-based squad combat. We were really far into making that happen, and we just realized it wasn't fun. We had to make the switch to real time. And yes, when we told everyone that, people were, understandably, pissed. But, again, we promised the best game, not the best design doc. There have been a ton of design changes to the original concept, but we think the game is more fun, and that's the bottom line. We think they would agree.

What impact do larger, celebrity-driven projects, such as Obsidian's Project Eternity or Molyneux's Project GODUS, have on the ecosystem of Kickstarter?

Smith: They certainly bring a wider audience to Kickstarter, establishing crowd funding as an acceptable route of funding for any developer, regardless of size or status. Our industry figureheads (Schafer, Molyneux, Chris Roberts, etc.) are instrumental in establishing the platform as a valid one. While there has been a slight backlash against developers relying on their status, and the overreliance on nostalgia, I don't see an issue here at all. When you consider the bigger picture, [their presence] can only be seen as a good thing.

Clairvoire: It's hard to say, though they certainly inspire folks like me to give [Kickstarter] a shot. They were just a group of folks who had good ideas and the ability to make those ideas happen. I certainly don't have the pedigree they do, but seeing folks backing them--just because they wanted to give them the chance--was just inspiring.

It's kind of like Aerosmith getting on Kickstarter to make a new album--sure, it's cool that they're on there, but is it really the right venue? We like seeing the little guys get a chance.I think what will make the most difference is once these games come to pass. If they flop, it will be incredibly harmful to everyone's confidence in Kickstarter. Kickstarter is built on confidence, essentially, and without that there's nothing. Double Fine and all the other bigger Kickstarters have set a pretty high bar. So if they were to do poorly, after building so much confidence, it would put a lot of doubt into people's minds. I'm pretty optimistic this won't happen, but if it did, folks might be too wary to ever try it again.

If they succeed, then hopefully crowd funding will take off. I might be looking way too far ahead, but it would be nice to see an end to publishers and all the problems they bring to the creative process of bigger games.

Coombs: They're good but very dangerous in our books. Clearly Kickstarter is an open platform, and everyone should be permitted to put whatever project they want on there. However, the spirit of kickstarting is giving people their first shot or helping projects that never would have seen the light of day get going. So when you look at a project like Ouya, that's interesting because without going to the public, it's hard to say if that ever would have been a reality.

The same goes for FTL, Oculus, and countless others. But when guys like Molyneux get involved, it starts to get very gray. This guy has a track record and can seek out publishers, private venture, or even his own capital. It's kind of like Aerosmith getting on Kickstarter to make a new album--sure, it's cool that they're on there, but is it really the right venue? We just like seeing the little guys get a chance. We will have to see how that all works itself out though.

In Barkley 2, the movie Space Jam is canon and has led to into a post-cyberpocalyptic future.