Situation About Game Development.

[Loyal]

So, over the past few months or so I've been involved with a group of people with the object of making an indie video game. The type of game, where/when it will be released, and other such details aren't important at this time (maybe later), but just to set the background.

Some time ago the idea came up to use Kickstarter to raise funds for game development, once we've developed enough to show something to the public. With that, we'll be able to afford things like useful software, hard supplies or computers, maybe even a paycheck since we're all basically college students just doing this in our free time. Good idea, comes with the benefit of basically free marketing, which we need because obviously nobody knows who we are.

Recently we got into discussing just what sort of rewards we should award our backers. Credit acknowledgments, sketches, things like that. The head of the project puts forth the idea that the largest reward, however much it would be for, would be to write a single backer in the game as a playable character.

I oppose this for a number of reasons. Chief among them being reputation. As mentioned we're a bunch of nobodies, trying to make a name for ourselves, and I'd prefer that we not be known as "that company that sold out on their very first game," or something similar that overshadows whatever (already miniscule) merit or scorn we earn from the game itself.

Otherwise I'm concerned from an artistic standpoint, as any character devised in this manner would probably feel very out of place in the story. Further, I'm uncomfortable with the idea of setting a precedent that we'd be willing to arbitrarily sell select aspects of our development to some random shmuck with cash to blow.

The reasoning behind this reward was that it would "involve the community more closely," which is something that we decided long would be a focus of our company. But I feel there are far healthier ways to go about that...

Am I being paranoid here? If not, what can I say to convince my project head not to go through with this? What might I be overlooking?

[Aldurin]

Disclaimer: The person who wrote this post has never done any actual game development, only tried taking a closer look at existing games and what does/doesn't make them tick.

Selling out to have a write-in character, even in name alone, hurts the artistic quality of a game, and should be heavily considered into how the character would be implemented into the system you have in mind. Since I don't know anything about your game beyond the idea of preset(?) selectable PCs, all I can say is look at the genre your game fits in, and see what the players of said genre drool over (especially Freemium games since they often make money off of simply selling color/texture swaps).

For involving the community, it's not that simple. Adding a single person in as a PC does not create that community connection, as it's just one guy and can even end up alienating the other 99.999% of your players since they're not characters because they aren't rich enough to throw around money like that one guy did. Great ways to involve the community vary on what kind of game you're making. I'll try to categorize some things.

Universal:
1. Listen to user feedback, especially since there are intelligent people out there that will gladly point out what could be improved/implemented.
2. If the players like it, keep it. Removing popular aspects of a game sends the message that you care more about your own ideas than the community that is intended to enjoy them (and since you're not EA (I hope), this can end badly).

If primarily single-player:
1. Have leaderboards. Give people a sense of competition.
2. Place in various features that give the player a sense of connection to what the game conveys. Though this is whimsical artistic stuff that doesn't apply all too well to games with minimal artistic focus.

If multi-player focused (I assume not if you're on a small team):
1. Allow custom and/or externally hosted servers. This helps appeal to more people and brings up the whole idea of how players can adjust the experience to their liking.
2. An extension of 1, but allow and support modding. If people create something cool with your game that other people like, you will see more usage/sales even if it's just for that mod. The most successful cases fall around Arma II and Source Engine stuff.

Kickstarter rewards for a small indie game will be hard to figure out, and I won't put any suggestions since I don't know your project.

[Amake]

It could work depending on the presentation. Basically go on and on about how you're involving the community and naming a PC after a supporter is just the best way you have to reward them. You should probably outline all the other ways you involve them too. If you must talk about business, focus on how the money is making it possible to make the game and/or make it as good as you can. Kickstarter is still an experimental business model but it sure beats selling out to big corporations etc.

And as long as they're just buying the name of a character it's hard to criticize your artistic integrity. There are stupider ways to come up with names.

[Jagos]

How can you "sell out" if you don't have much of a community or established base?

[Bells]

Dude... seriously.

I don't recall names, but i recall at least 5 Kickstarters that i saw that had rewards where the backer would become a character in the game.

99% of the time would be a common NPC with no part except to "be there", one zombie game would allow a backer to be made into a Zombie, essentially a target for everyone else playing the game, nothing special about it, just their likeness and name.

Those usually run on the 1~5k level reward... so really, something so tiny that can generate such a profit for a project, you really gonna nitpick?

Is not like you're bending your game world or rules to accommodate this one person just cause they were generous... you are just putting them on the screen instead of as a name in a credit roll... Hell, most of the time the only person who can TELL is the backer himself and his friends.

It's a really minor thing, don't worry about it.

Also, as far as rewards go... you have to think about the logistics of your rewards... i've seem testimonies of a few Kickstarters that didn't plan out their Rewards well and ended up loosing 65% of their funding just to provide what was promised.

If you can provide "In game" reward that tie in to the work you're already going to do AND doesn't cost you money, i call that a decent business plan.

You have to keep your base aware and around, but you don't have to let them run the show... 70 out of 100 people say you need more Hairstyles in your game, so you do that. Then 70 out of 100 people say your main character needs a little albino monkey wise cracking sidekick... and you say no cause that's not the direction your project is going.

Firm hand, open ears. And Get creative on those rewards. It must be things people want (like being in a game they helped fund) but that won't sap much of your resources of ANY kind. Though balance, but it's the best way to get things rolling.

[Meister]

Might want to cover your ass and reserve the right to reject any entries whole or in parts and retain creative control over the character's place in the game. Matter of fact just using someone's likeness and name, rather than "we put you in the game", seems like the safer bet.

[Krylo]

Originally Posted by Bells

Dude... seriously.

I don't recall names, but i recall at least 5 Kickstarters that i saw that had rewards where the backer would become a character in the game.

99% of the time would be a common NPC with no part except to "be there", one zombie game would allow a backer to be made into a Zombie, essentially a target for everyone else playing the game, nothing special about it, just their likeness and name.

Those usually run on the 1~5k level reward... so really, something so tiny that can generate such a profit for a project, you really gonna nitpick?

Is not like you're bending your game world or rules to accommodate this one person just cause they were generous... you are just putting them on the screen instead of as a name in a credit roll... Hell, most of the time the only person who can TELL is the backer himself and his friends.

It's a really minor thing, don't worry about it.

The proposed reward is to make the donater into a PC. That stands for player character.

That's not a minor thing.

And considering it's not a minor thing I'd argue not to do it, not for any artistic integrity, but because as a PC the inserted character is probably going to end up with abilities or dialogue or whatever else which, if they aren't happy with, will come back to bite you. Even if you cover your ass like Meister said, it might not be legally but if someone pays a few thousand to get in your game and feels they've been put into it in a way that demeans them or whatever, they're gonna make a shit storm.

And in order to try to avoid that you'd have to let them into the creative process.

If it was just an unimportant NPC or enemy with their likeness, then yeah, that'd be fine.

[Doc ock rokc]

Maybe y'all should make him/her into an unlockable player skin? That way your PC character isn't trashed and they CAN play as themselves.

[Loyal]

Yes, to clarify the plan is to have them as a playable character, not as a skin, not as just a name insert.

[rpgdemon]

Ignoring the issue at hand, when you do a kickstarter, remember to take into account the tax you will pay on the money that you raise. IE: If you need $10,000, you need to raise more than $10,000.