Sorry your browser is not supported!

As our campaign is ending I wanted to write about our experience, it can be read here:

http://ljis17.com/when_indie_dream_turns_into_indie_reality_aka_our_kickstarter_disaster.php

Comments and discussions are welcome.

But of course!

Finally, the Kickstarter honeymoon is over, people can stop relying on it to take the place of actual work. Too many 'indies' think that KS is the solution to their financial woes. Not enough indies just bloody well get on with it and accept that they might have to stretch themselves to meet their own goals.

I keep bringing up the point that too many professionals are swinging from that bandwagon - we can't expect any exposure on a small 5k project, while Tim Shaffer is doing the robot because he doubled his target within 5 minutes.

Indeed.

Nice article, but you shouldn't stop there; KS is a tool, not god. Keep at it, and keep your dev-blogs going. Exposure and community building takes years, unless your name is near the top of Google's top searches; a marketable strategy is going to take very long to prepare and execute.



Saying they liked the video is by no means the same as liking the video, and the game concept. It is about what people do, not what they say or post up on a website. I've said very little to the developers of video games I purchase. But that is the tip of the ice berg; no one truly knows why the visitors where not funding or spreading the word, no one but the visitors themselves.

Anyway, at least the mistakes can be used to steer your tactics in the right direction. But as Van B says, you guys should just get on with the work, considering what was suggested by the low fund support.

You have clearly ran an excellent campaign and I'm sorry the kickstarter did not go better for you.

I like the game idea, I would probably buy the game but would not back the kickstarter. For me, to back something on kickstarter it has to be something that really excites or is very original.

I hope you can still complete this game.

I don't exactly get the point of kickstarter. I mean, so you asked for $5,000. What exactly are you going to buy with that money? A new computer? Or is it just to give yourself a salary during development?

for a small indie teams in video games, it often goes to purchasing media assets, software licenses, hire out freelance contractors for things like concept art, modelling, music, basically to fill any holes in your teams skillset.

for larger company projects, mostly to staffing, contactors, and operating costs.

most kickstarters state how they plan to use the funding on thier main project page.

Sorry about your Kickstarter campaign. I've recently suffered the same blow on Indiegogo with Cars Incorporated.

The main problem is actually getting enough attention and you sure did invest a lot of effort into that part. It seems to me crowdfunding has gone the way of all new things: It's been taken over by "the big ones".
Crowdfunding used to finance small time projects now it's setting record after record with huge projects by professionals who could usually raise their funds otherwise.

But remember: The only way to fail is to give up. So keep your heads up and focus on pushing your project forward even despite the failed crowdfunding attempt.

You have given me some good ideas to get attention in your article though. So thanks for that and good luck for your continuing efforts.

Yeah Westmere, main thing for us has been the lack of visibility.

Your game looks cool btw, but I guess your should seek some advice how to play it out more nicely on the graphic side.

Anyways The End is Nigh, 15 hours left on our Kickstarter:
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1396394944/last-jungle-in-sector-17

test

just had a look over the kickstarter page, looks like it will be a lot of fun to play! sorry it doesnt look to fund this time, but you can always fix what didnt work, get the word out and relaunch.

here are my impressions:

presentation could use some polish. it looks fun, but there was no real hook, no strong call to action. the message did not come across as "check out this awesome game, and here is why you will want it...(blah blah)... dont miss out!" but rather was more "here is this game we are making and could really use your help, please?" it may be a fine distinction, but it can really make a difference when it comes to motivating people to take action and jump in with a pledge.

the backstory is clearly developed, but doesnt seem to have much direct impact on the gameplay in this particular game. i feel it could be condensed into a short, tight, movie trailer type blurb to reduce page clutter on the kickstarter main page and let the full story and history unfold in game, or through an update. the project page should be kept focused though, just enough to provide the setting. and always always call to action. something along the lines of "stranded alone on a space station, and facing a fleet of hostile aliens, can you survive with nothing more than a small fighter, a lonely AI, and your own skill and wits?"

the graphic novel art work: more please. it is a unique feature, and well done. this should be featured more prominently, higher up in the page, more frequently in the video. the video itself would probably benefit from being approached more as a trailer than a demo: intro a scene with a graphic novel page then cut to gameplay relevant to that scene. back and forth. tell a quick story and get people engaged with it.

pricing and reward tiers are always tricky. my only experience here is in having pledged on a few kickstarters. i think you could combine and push up some of the lower end tiers. people willing to spend more than 1 are usually willing to spend at least 10, and so you could have moved 2, 4, 8 into 10 and likely pick up another 100 or so on the current backer counts. granted that sort of thing wouldnt have affected the outcome greatly this time around, but shows an example of narrowing the focus into good solid price points, not only based on what you think a tier is worth, but on shopper menality and an understanding of what people are willing to pay. this isnt the appstore where there is a big difference in willingness to pay .99 and being willing to pay 4.99 for an app. if someone is interested enough in the project to fund it at $4, they would also probably fund at $10 if there were no other options between $1 and $10. from what ive seen on other projects, in game rewards tend to sell better than stuff like tshirts and mugs, but you have the swag filling some prime tiers between $50 - $150, (plus you have additional production costs to supply these physical things, eating into the funds ctually going to the game, whereas in game rewards cost you nothing), and yes you also get the previous tiers wit them, but to me as a potential pledger, they are not worth the bump in price point over the $25 alpha. your alpha and beta tiers should be valued higher (id put alpha at least $75 if not $100-125), also you can have multiple tiers at the same price point, to give more flexibility on the offerings at a given price point to cover different interests.

while you are absolutely correct that coverage and exposure are key, these will come to nothing if the presentation and marketing are not also spot on. if someone stops in to look at the project, you only have one shot to grab them. if a project doesnt interest me at first glance, i wont be pledging and i wont be coming back to check out updates. i will go ahead and drop in a pledge to show my support of the project and i hope this insight into the mind of a viewer/potential pledger helps if you decide to relaunch it in the future.

What is "zero-g navigation"?
What is "boids based AI"?
What do you mean by "puzzle units"
Why is "Base game" a stretch goal? That sounds very ambiguous if you are not talking about the core game.

The game looks fun and kind of interesting, but you made one huge, gigantic, colossal, disastrous mistake with your campaign: you didn't show yourself. It's not good enough to just show the game and how cool it is; you are not asking people to buy your game, you are asking them to trust you with their money and assuring them that you can deliver on your promises. You need to show your face and talk to the people, convince them that you are a dependable and organised person who can get the job done, not just someone with some coding and art skills and game ideas.

As another failed KS campaigner, I feel your pain. It definitely isn't the solution to funding problems any more. As Van alluded to, these days that 30% odd of successfully funded gaming projects are huge studios/famous developers who cash in on their fame, or people with finished games effectively offering cheap pre-orders. The only small indie titles that get funded are those that are very special or unique in some way and hit a nerve.

I personally will only ever use KS again for projects that are already successful, to perhaps fund an enhancement pack, or just to get additional orders on some abstract update.

This notion that it can actually help fund a development cycle is false for the vast majority of small indie teams.