Return to “Kickstarter Campaign”

Re: Rewards - Suggestions

#16
Some folks are turned off from backing a game because of in-game rewards for higher pledges... Kind of how people don't like day one DLC, but, in this case, it's day one DLC not everyone will have or get.

Just my two cents. I think the Kickstarter is doing really well without the goodies, but, if it'll inspire more people to donate than not, then maybe it's a good idea. I don't really know. I'm just aware that some people were completely turned off from backing Thorvalla because of its $30 pledge, which I believe provides backers an exclusive dungeon and quest.

Re: Rewards - Suggestions

#17
barnthebear wrote:Some folks are turned off from backing a game because of in-game rewards for higher pledges... Kind of how people don't like day one DLC, but, in this case, it's day one DLC not everyone will have or get.

Just my two cents. I think the Kickstarter is doing really well without the goodies, but, if it'll inspire more people to donate than not, then maybe it's a good idea. I don't really know. I'm just aware that some people were completely turned off from backing Thorvalla because of its $30 pledge, which I believe provides backers an exclusive dungeon and quest.
I'm not a fan of exclusive backer content myself. Especially if it's locked at higher pledge levels. That said, I've been told it works and I really want this campaign to raise as much as possible, so I'll swallow the pill, personally.
Also, there's already a custom version at level $1k. That's a whole "small-to-medium" feature that only one backer will experience. There are 5 such rewards and one has been claimed already. In comparison, a gift given to all backers doesn't sound too bad. ;)

Re: Rewards - Suggestions

#18
It really does work. Take a gander at Greed Monger, another KS project that has reached and doubled its goal based largely off of large, $1,000+ pledges. I'm not saying promise backers the moon or, attractive as the idea is, a Death Star (that's no moon!). But some unique hook, or better several at different add-on price ranges much as Star Citizen did its dizzying array of ships, to drive further investment. For instance, it was mentioned on Josh's blog that mining will be dome via lasers. What if a unique ship were introduced that could cannibalize entire asteroids?

Re: Rewards - Suggestions

#19
I am someone who like rewards. The hard truth is people will pay for things they like sure, but they will pay more if they get exclusive rewards. And I mean exclusive. If the rewards are eventually released as DLC or add-ons during promotions after release, for example, you will lose faith with a portion of backers, a portion of your customer base. So I do not mind if I do not get an advantage, I will happily pay for vanity rewards, tweaks (like that custom tier, but that is outside of my budget).
Image To boldly go where no one has gone before

Re: Rewards - Suggestions

#20
Ringo wrote:I am someone who like rewards. The hard truth is people will pay for things they like sure, but they will pay more if they get exclusive rewards. And I mean exclusive. If the rewards are eventually released as DLC or add-ons during promotions after release, for example, you will lose faith with a portion of backers, a portion of your customer base. So I do not mind if I do not get an advantage, I will happily pay for vanity rewards, tweaks (like that custom tier, but that is outside of my budget).
I agree, but those exclusive rewards do not have to be in-game rewards. The way I see it, there are plenty of possibilities to make awesome exclusive rewards outside of the game itself. The Elder Council is a good example of that. Or in projects where that make sense, vanity rewards that actually put you or something you created in the game for everyone to see. I'm not sure there is a real need to lock game content away from most backers or from anyone who will buy the game after the campaign...
Matthew Cason wrote:It really does work. Take a gander at Greed Monger, another KS project that has reached and doubled its goal based largely off of large, $1,000+ pledges. I'm not saying promise backers the moon or, attractive as the idea is, a Death Star (that's no moon!). But some unique hook, or better several at different add-on price ranges much as Star Citizen did its dizzying array of ships, to drive further investment. For instance, it was mentioned on Josh's blog that mining will be dome via lasers. What if a unique ship were introduced that could cannibalize entire asteroids?
If you say so. But according to Kickstarter stats, the reward level that contributes the most dollars is the $100 (all projets combined). And the SC rewards were pretty smart, since they gave premium access to content that is _not_ locked for everyone else. Lifetime insurance is exclusive, but nothing prevents another player from getting the ship and defending it well or getting it again and again, so nobody is really locked out.

Re: Rewards - Suggestions

#21
Ringo wrote:If the rewards are eventually released as DLC or add-ons during promotions after release, for example, you will lose faith with a portion of backers, a portion of your customer base.
I've got things to add.

I was there when Harebrained Schemes announced they wanted to make an exclusive mission for backers that would link Shadowrun Returns with the console Shadowrun games. Most backers argued that it'd be better for that mission to be accessible for everyone... maybe exclusive for a little while but then released to everyone afterwards. That's what the vast majority of people wanted. So I'm not sure this "portion of backers" that would lose faith matters that much... My guess is it depends entirely on the project and the people backing it and generalizations are bound to fail.

Backers are not the customer base. We already got the game (or the promise of the game, anyway), for one thing. We're investors. Not traditional ones looking for profit, but we're investors still. Now, my guess is, most people who back a project want it to succeed and not just on Kickstarter. Ideally, the customer base should be many times bigger than the backer community. For that to happen, we have to talk about the game to as many people as possible well after the campaign ends and we have to fund it so that it's as good as possible. And that's not "as good as possible for 5 rich people who threw $5k at the game," it's not even "as good as possible for backers," it's "as good as possible for everyone."

Now, I know that is a little overreacting. The 5 custom versions will likely not take much from LT's quality (unless the features they ask for are really time-consuming, but then I assume Josh would veto :roll:). It was different with the Shadowrun Returns mission, because it linked the storyline with other games through which a big part of the community had discovered Shadowrun in the first place, so most of us felt it was really important and should not be locked from future players. It depends on the community and it views each and every reward.

Re: Rewards - Suggestions

#24
ACH0225 wrote:Maybe if one donates enough, one can create a ship or station, name it, and it will be added to the database thingy and NPCs will rarely use it.
From the Home Page:
Why Isn't There an Option to Have In-Game Planets/Stations/Systems/... Named After Backers?

I thought long and hard about this one. It seems to be the norm for Kickstarter projects these days, to have backers included in the game in some way more than just the credits. While I am eternally grateful to my backers, I feel that I must place the utmost importance on creating an immersive experience. Backer names will no doubt seem out-of-place, perhaps even jarring, to players in the game world. In addition, the naming systems in the game use a system that is far more complex than a simple random list, so that names have certain characteristics based on faction and region. There's simply no way to integrate backer names into the game without breaking the immersive, procedural experience that I want Limit Theory to be! But you can certainly get a shout-out in the credits!

Re: Rewards - Suggestions

#26
Atarun wrote:
Ringo wrote:If the rewards are eventually released as DLC or add-ons during promotions after release, for example, you will lose faith with a portion of backers, a portion of your customer base.
I've got things to add.

I was there when Harebrained Schemes announced they wanted to make an exclusive mission for backers that would link Shadowrun Returns with the console Shadowrun games. Most backers argued that it'd be better for that mission to be accessible for everyone... maybe exclusive for a little while but then released to everyone afterwards. That's what the vast majority of people wanted. So I'm not sure this "portion of backers" that would lose faith matters that much... My guess is it depends entirely on the project and the people backing it and generalizations are bound to fail.

Backers are not the customer base. We already got the game (or the promise of the game, anyway), for one thing. We're investors. Not traditional ones looking for profit, but we're investors still. Now, my guess is, most people who back a project want it to succeed and not just on Kickstarter. Ideally, the customer base should be many times bigger than the backer community. For that to happen, we have to talk about the game to as many people as possible well after the campaign ends and we have to fund it so that it's as good as possible. And that's not "as good as possible for 5 rich people who threw $5k at the game," it's not even "as good as possible for backers," it's "as good as possible for everyone."

Now, I know that is a little overreacting. The 5 custom versions will likely not take much from LT's quality (unless the features they ask for are really time-consuming, but then I assume Josh would veto :roll:). It was different with the Shadowrun Returns mission, because it linked the storyline with other games through which a big part of the community had discovered Shadowrun in the first place, so most of us felt it was really important and should not be locked from future players. It depends on the community and it views each and every reward.
If backers are investors then the important viewpoint is not that of the most backers but that of those who contributed most, in other symbols, 1*$1000=100*$10. From this perspective exclusive content for high level backers makes sense (so long as those backers believe it should be exclusive) as does the elder council.

Note: I am not an extremely high level backer myself nor am I saying that this is my personal viewpoint
Last edited by Tesseract on Sat Nov 24, 2012 7:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Re: Rewards - Suggestions

#27
I am not able to back a very high amount, cannot afford the T-shirt. So means no Inner Council for me. But I am still suggesting exclusive rewards. These are incentives for people to back this during the KS stage. No one needs to be locked out, it is a choice left up to the backer (or investor). We are investors, and investors typically want a good return. Incentives are like dividends, extras paid out by good investments. Look at the tier where Josh promises limited edition CDs if you back that tier ($100) and above, which is only available in KS.
Image To boldly go where no one has gone before

Re: Rewards - Suggestions

#28
Tesseract wrote:If backers are investors then the important viewpoint is not that of the most backers but that of those who contributed most, in other symbols, 1*$1000=100*$10. From this perspective exclusive content for high level backers makes sense (so long as those backers believe it should be exclusive) as does the elder council.

Note: I am not an extremely high level backer myself nor am I saying that is is my personal viewpoint
Kickstarter backers are investors in the sense that they have a vested interest in seeing the fundraiser for the project that they support reach a successful conclusion. In the end, however, a successful fundraiser does not guarantee that the project itself will bear any tangible fruits. Furthermore, while higher contributions are 'rewarded' with various promotional items, contributors are in no way buying shares in the project or the entity creating the project. Other than pledge fulfillment, project owners are not specifically beholden to backers whatsoever. As such, while savvy developers are likely to treat their most substantial contributors as VIPs, they are also likely to keep the opinions of their target audience foremost in mind. It comes as no surprise then that developers encourage the formation of as large a community as possible to support and inform their decision-making during the development process.

Umm, please excuse the verbal hemorrhage. :oops:
I know not what life is, nor death.
Year in year out-all but a dream.
Both Heaven and Hell are left behind;
I stand in the moonlit dawn,
Free from clouds of attachment.

Re: Rewards - Suggestions

#29
Tesseract wrote:If backers are investors then the important viewpoint is not that of the most backers but that of those who contributed most, in other symbols, 1*$1000=100*$10. From this perspective exclusive content for high level backers makes sense (so long as those backers believe it should be exclusive) as does the elder council.

Note: I am not an extremely high level backer myself nor am I saying that this is my personal viewpoint
Well that viewpoint that you are not saying is yours is wrong, IMO.

Again: the objective is to build the best game possible and the best community possible and to reach the most gamers after release. So backers who contributed $1k will hopefully represent nothing but a drop in the total LT gaming community. Otherwise, we (as backers) failed.

So, even by your own equation, a $1000 backer would only be as important as 67 $15 backers and 50 $20 backers (remember you can't get the game for 10). And that's in financial contribution value. That's not the only value of backers however: we are here to provide insight as to what the gaming community would want and build a community specifically for LT.

You seem to like math. Let's do some. :ugeek:
There are, as of this writing, 1000 $15 backers and just one $1k backer. This big-dollar backer is financially worth 15 times less than the 1k $15 backers. In terms of input and insight and community-building, s/he is worth exactly as much as any other backer.

So the most important viewpoint is definitely that of the community as a whole, not any specific backer, no matter their $ contribution.

Re: Rewards - Suggestions

#30
I dislike pay-to-win situations as much as anyone else, but the whole point of pledge tiers is to give more back to those who give more to the project. It isn't elitism. It's capitalism. Which is what makes Kickstarter work. For -every- pledge, there needs to be a reward. Add-ons and additional rewards only sweeten the pot and encourage backers to up the ante. Give us additional ships and content, and I for one will shell out even more. To each their own, and I can only speak for my own wallet, but it has nowhere near finished doing its whole duty to Limit Theory if additional rewards and add-ons are offered.

Online Now

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron