Be Excellent To Each Other

Well, not really, because it's been clearly stated what you get.

You wouldn't pay that unless you were getting a return, but if someone else is, frankly, insane enough to hand over the cash, they're getting what they thought they'd get.

but the point stands, if you give away your money, then you can't expect anything in return. Unless stated other wise.

Or, you know, bloody clever.

Precisely.

EXTREME ANALOGY INCOMING

Jeve Stobs is your mate from school. He comes up to you one day with an idea. It's the MEGA ULTRA iPod. It hasn't been invented yet. It sounds fucking amazing. You want one. You'd love one. He asks you for $150,000 so he can make it. You oblige. You get a MEGA ULTRA iPod out of it. Jeve becomes a billionaire. You have an iPod.

Well yes, I'm not implying there's deception at work in this mechanism. Merely that it's amazing anyone would give more than $15 for a speculative game that may or may not get made, and may or may not be shit. Giving more would merely be stupid and I'm amazed it has worked.

Yup. And?

Everybody gets what they want.

If you're the one getting the cash rolling in, yeah, great!

Email sent

Indeed. So is this a case of not feeling sorry for people with more money than sense? I just don't think it's particularly classy of Schafer and co to offer such a donation option.

Do you get your $150,000 back?

And, like, super-worked, too, if the numbers on that website are anything to go by.

No. Which is why I think it's all too easy to get swept up in stuff like this. I wonder how many young and foolish people have dumped their savings into this to come out with a game and a poster, whilst Schafer drives off in his Ferrari.

Imagine if George Lucas had done that.. And you knew you helped make Star Wars.. They would be awesome and worth $15

$15 is understandable, because you get (hopefully) $15 worth of game.

$10,000 though...

Maybe you get a HUGE copy of the game.

To make it clear, I'm totally on-board with the $15 thing (or whatever price the game might actually cost) - as demonstrated with my support of the XCOM Xenonauts thing - but above and beyond that just seems a little immoral to me.

I imagine that the donations are a lot of $15...

For 10,000, I would want to try on the Princess's gold bikini!!

I think it's more egregious that none of the pledges involve you getting a boxed copy (of DFA), and you have to pay for the poster shipping on the $100 pledge.

You are the king of undersell. For $10k I'd want to have full boning rights on the princess for the weekend.

And super worked for many many other things as well

Is it the fact that Kickstarter exists as an entity you have a problem with , or is it the way that its being used for this one thing ?

The first Kickstarter bit i heard of was Neil Gaimen croudsourcing funding for "an evening with" http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/ama ... nda-palmer , and I see on the main page The Order of the Stick are using it to get some of their out of print books re-published : http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/599 ... =spotlight both of which seem like great ideas to me ?

I mostly agree with WTB. They are taking the piss. I will not be buying or pledging anything.

On the other hand, if anyone wants to give me £10, I may or may not give them an awesome home video. Give me £100k and you film it. £200k and fuck it, you can join in!

I don't have a problem with Kickstarter at all. I think it's a fantastic idea. I'm totally on board with the idea of crowd-sourcing investment as well. It's incredibly smart, and I'm surprised it doesn't happen more often. I am bothered about the fact that people are donating rather than investing in something that is potentially going to make its creator's a pile of cash. Particularly when those donations are potentially sizeable.

If your wife would feature in this video I think you may already have a PM from Throughsilver

I can't agree with this at all. It's just the same as Minecraft - pay us this (€10, or whatever it was) and you get this (unfinished game) and you might get this (finished game). The numbers and things you will get and might get are different, but that's all.

Same shit, different wrapper.

It totally isn't the same. When I bought Minecraft I paid £10 (or whatever) and got a game immediately. Also, I only had the option to pay £10. Besides, as I've said, I wouldn't have even started this thread if the only option was to pay $15 to fund the game. You get the game at the end and that's fine. As I've said repeatedly, it's the options of donation over and above that that irk me.

I think it's irresponsible and immoral frankly. Everyone knows these internet "warm fuzzy feeling" sensations drive people a little mad. It's exploitative. People would love to say "I donated $150,000 to create Minecraft, best game EVER!". This is exploitation of that mindset.

Except minecraft aren't saying 'Give us $500 and you'll also get a copy of the game, and, erm, a warm fuzzy feeling'.

This I think is the central point of annoyance.

Were you both this concerned with the Humble Indie Bundles?

I was when Harrison Ford was a no show.

Was the original Minecraft thing not simply a 'donate' button with paypal so you could chuck in what you wanted ?

What about those humble indy bundle things where people donate what they feel like , if the average is £1 and you put in £100,000 does that mean you should automatically get something more ?

Do you think that anyone who has ever commissioned a painting to go in a gallery is also an idiot?

You have more chance of boning Chewbacca than the pricess

Again, I think the Humble Bundles are great. I really don't think they're comparable to this. We're talking about funding the development of something - from scratch - against a "pay what you feel" model for something that already exists.

I know not of what you speak Craster.

From a basic moral perspective, it's pretty reasonable to expect some proportional gratitude and/or kickback from large investments in things. Whether the witless donor cares or not isn't relevent. Someone really keen on the game can simply turn down the benefit, except here no real benefit is being offered.

Depending on how early you got on the Minecraft boat, you might not have. You sent some money, you eventually got sent a game (I believe there was a minimum price, but no set price).

But they're selling more than one thing. It really isn't that different - "pay money for something that might not materialize".

But this is exactly the same as pay what you want, but with extra cool bonuses if how much you want to pay is a lot.

Edit: and people are only willing to contribute because they are an established developer, with a very proven track record. If it was people no one had ever heard of, they wouldn't have got any where near as big a response.

But people who pay more are getting more. We don't think it's worth the money, sure, but they do (because they paid it).

Yes, because I think most art is objectively valueless. Well, more specifically abstract art, and things that don't actually demonstrate an incredible level of technical skill. Subjective worth for objective bollocks. Pay for that and you're an idiot, in my most humble view.

And again I'll repeat that there's nothing shady or criminal going on, so there's no beef with that. We're arguing over whether that's worth it for what you get (it's not).

Except it's not. You're fronting cash for the development of something.

I did wonder what would happen if the project didn't materialise.


I don't think they could've made that any weaker or more vague.

Oh right - I wasn't. I totally don't think it is either, but I don't have a problem with other people thinking it is (although I am jealous of their ability to have lots of money but seemingly no sense).

That's kinda what happened with Facebook init. That cunts a billionaire whereas his mate who lent him some start up money got sucked off by some banging hot Asian bird.

I know which I'd like.

Nah, it's him playing Forza with you lot, while having a wank as Meaty takes him on the inside, from behind.

Also: If people want to donate that money, why not? It;s their money. Just because you'd want more than that in return for your donation, doesn't mean plenty of people wouldn't be happy to give it in return for some cheap tat.

I haven't read much of this thread btw...So someone who is right in the head has probably already said that. I agree with them!

Oh, it's totally not worth it to me. But it seems to be worth it to others.

WTB seemed to be suggesting it was exploitative and bad, rather than just not worth it, and that's what I was arguing against.

I'm just assuming that some of those are meant to be jokes, what with it being from the guys well known for making funny video games.

The rest are for fans to support their heros. People have been doing it for bands for years.

Wait, what?

You want me to feel sorry for someone who can afford to pay $150000 for a game?
I suspect the sound of my pity will be drowned out by their fleet of Ferraris...