This is incorrect. The FTC has gone after a number of people for abandoning kickstarter projects.
https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/blogs/business-blog/2015/06/dont-let-crowdfunding-be-your-doom
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Kickstarted in the butt, what happened to Project Tingler?
- Thread starter ParanoidRED
- Start date
This is incorrect. The FTC has gone after a number of people for abandoning kickstarter projects.
https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/blogs/business-blog/2015/06/dont-let-crowdfunding-be-your-doom
Personal funds and project funds are different. Zoe can spend her personal funds going on holiday as much as she wants and who gives a shit. People need to stop trying to make her going on holiday relevant to this discussion because it straight up is not, unless you can prove she siphoned money from the Kickstarter for it which seems incredibly unlikely.
That's not to say the actual discussion is invalid. Because it's not. Zoe has horribly mismanaged this kickstarter and should have been more transparent about the state of the project and its funding right off the bat, not after people starting kicking up a fuss about it.
That's not to say the actual discussion is invalid. Because it's not. Zoe has horribly mismanaged this kickstarter and should have been more transparent about the state of the project and its funding right off the bat, not after people starting kicking up a fuss about it.
Last edited:
I'm definitely not a fan of Zoe when it comes to game projects but that is a gamergate account bruh.
Last edited by a moderator:
Well her project funds are already gone and backers don't know what she did with it.
The game is far from finished and she's partying in Japan and staying in expensive Hotels.
Even if she's using her own money, shouldn't that go into the game she promised to make?
Uhh ok? I'm not gonna make a background check for every tweet that I find.
I agree that she should be up front about what progress was made using the kickstarter money and what she underestimated to cause it to go overbudget. That level of transparency is essential for kickstarter projects.
She can party in Japan all she wants, and no she shouldn't be required to use her own money to make it. That's not how projects work, that's not how businesses work.
Well you should. Because when you take random tweets as gospel but they're from hate groups, spoilers: they're probably not accurate.
All these failed/delayed Kickstarter video game projects only happen because whoever started them was a terrible manager. They do their calculations and think oh this is all the money they need but it's not enough in a long shot. They should double or triple the kickstarter goal after they've done their calculations.
I'm perfectly fine with using the "project funds" as personal funds though. This is basically your salary and god damn if you take 2 weeks off where is the problem?
The people who donated to the kickstarter should get their money back though if the thing is not released within a reasonable time frame after the originally estimated release date. I'd say if it didn't happen maximum 12 months after when the kickstarter states it should have been available then kickstarter should auto refund everything and the creators sit on the costs themselves.
I'm still wondering if Cryamore ever comes out.
I'm perfectly fine with using the "project funds" as personal funds though. This is basically your salary and god damn if you take 2 weeks off where is the problem?
The people who donated to the kickstarter should get their money back though if the thing is not released within a reasonable time frame after the originally estimated release date. I'd say if it didn't happen maximum 12 months after when the kickstarter states it should have been available then kickstarter should auto refund everything and the creators sit on the costs themselves.
I'm still wondering if Cryamore ever comes out.
I don't really have anything to say about Zoe Quinn's game, haven't followed it nor do I know how her finances work, but I've been researching for my own kickstarter project and everything I've read says this is actually bad advice. It's not the individuals salary, it's money for the company, of which you draw your salary from. Which is a long way of saying your salary derived from your kickstarter project should only be a fraction of the money you took in. If you're looking to run a company from your KS money, your salary needs to actually be as small as possible, too. Especially if you have a project where you'll have lots of extra expenses beyond the salaries of the programmer.
From my own company experience, I did a project with Schneider electric where I received $X for my work, and during that project, I was the only person on my payroll for my company. That doesn't mean all that $X money was my salary. Only a fraction of $X was my salary, the rest went back into the company, for other expenses beyond salary pay.
EDIT: To clarify, that's also not to say it's necessarily wrong or bad form to take a vacation, either. Again, nobody really knows the financial situation for this specific project, or how the vacation was funded. It's probably best for people without privy to their bank account to not try and guess what is paid from where, because there's just too many variables involved that we can't know.
She has a comic coming out with the new Vertigo imprint so it's not like the kickstarter was her only source of income. Projects need to be managed better but you also don't own a person when you crowdfund them.
Kickstarter sends them a bill with all the refund costs. If you can't pay the bill
then that's their problem and they should sell their car, belongings, house, condo whatever. Seems fair to me.
This really depends on if you have a company and what you do. What you say is true when there is a whole lot of other things involved besides just 1 person making a game by themselves and the equipment they already own and no need to produce physical rewards or whatever. You are absolutely right when this is not the case.
And even if I see it as salary for myself I would make sure it's calculated in a way that doesn't make me bleed money after way past when I will have released the game.
Nah entrepreneur failed, happens all the time. File for bankruptcy, try again.
Like I said, I don't know her finances, wasn't commenting on her company at all really. Additional sources of revenue like that are precisely why any sort of outrage over how someone is spending their salary is goofy, because individual people can have multiple sources of income.
That's a nice opinion to have, but it's not going to work in reality. Kickstarter will of course not do things that will deter people from starting projects like that.
Man, thank god failing at business does not mean literally eliminating all of your personal wealth like you are suggesting. That would make the risk of starting any business way, way too high. Like you said, an entrepreneur failed, happens all the time. Ideally, you want the person to be able to pick themselves back up and try again to be a contributing member of society, not completely eliminate all their value and reduce them to poverty. Jeeze.
Your company should be a separate tax entity from the individual. You are your company's employee. You are not your company. Your company failing should not mean you fail.
Similarly, the entire raison d'être for kickstarter is to help minimize the barriers to starting your own company or launching your own product, off of the good will of the public. That's why, ideally, your kickstarter tiers should be small enough that most can feel ok essentially gambling away their donation amount. $5 loss is something a person could, and should, be able to burden. I feel like a lot of KS get into trouble when they treat the site like a pre-order store, with expensive tiers. If there was a financial obligation like you're suggesting where failure means absolute ruin, then that goes against the very purpose of the site.
Failing to properly manage your kickstarter leads to indentured servitude now?
Even then would it be an issue?
I don't understand why people came up with this attitude that, because they used Kickstarter to fund a game, the developers need to be working on that game and doing nothing else until the game is completed.
Surely a part of her received Kickstarter money would be going towards her own salary and surely then it's not unreasonable for her to use said salary to take a vacation?
I agree that there needs to be more transparency with these Kickstarter projects but there also has to be a less aggressive and more reasonable attitude from backers.
This isn't really how Kickstarter is intended to work, I think?
Like, donating to a Kickstarter is just investing in the development of a potential game. Sometimes the return on an investment can be zero.
I bet even the larger companies have secured investment for a game and never managed to pay back all of the money or to even pay out expected profits. Cancelled projects, or projects that do not sell well, can probably represent literally millions of dollars of wasted investment. Maybe they will make it up with a big success down the line.
People need to figure out the difference between donating to a Kickstarter and buying a game "off the shelf". They aren't the same thing in any way.
In a sense something like Anthem is a "kickstarter" but the "backers" are massive corporations and the "backer rewards" are a share of any potential profits from the game. If something goes wrong and Anthem never gets released or if it flops then that's on the backers.
I'd question the logic of donating money to Zoe Quinn of all people but I think it's best to steer well clear of that conversation. :)
I completely agree with you and my post says basically the same thing as yours lol. By siphoning I meant taking money from the part not allotted for her salary, which yeah even then isn't that bad it's just poor management. And there's no reason to believe she did it. I bet she probably just underestimated how much it'd take to make the game.
Thinking of Kickstarter as an investment is honestly the wrong idea. Kickstarter isn't an investment. Kickstarter is a donation, really. I get what you meant, but really the word "investment" has the wrong connotations.
Yeah, I don't see what she has done wrong here. Poor management should almost be expected to be honest with these, basically amateur, projects.
I always try to keep in mind that certain people are always going to be happy to stir up controversy surrounding the developer here.
For me, I would not donate to a Kickstarter like this because I simply do not like the person running it and would expect to get no return on my investment but for people who have donated I think it's a gamble that hasn't paid off and they should just leave it at that. Don't donate next time.
People whining cos she has taken a vacation or because the game is taking too long or because she also gets money from other sources are in the wrong as far as I am concerned.
I'm guessing we will never see this game but that's not really a surprise.
I wonder what % of Kickstarters fail actually.
Probably a lot lower than you would expect, if I had to take a guess Videogames would have the worst % but even then there aren't that many that never result in something being shipped but that would be propped up by a lot of other popular Kickstarter categories. It's incredibly rare for example to see a board game or book Kickstarter fail to succeed, usually because they only need money for printing costs.
Even if it's a donation then I still think we need to look at these projects as "potential" games,
I could see the sense in promising a finished product if it's some kind of physical item or some kind of easy to produce content. Like if you give me 10 bucks then I will send you a signed photo or something but with something like game development it's just not going to be possible.
I mean you could literally come up with a game concept that is impossible to implement, get a whole ton of donations and then 6 months into development realize "oh crap, this can't be done". By that point you have burned through at least some of the donation money so it can't really be refunded.
The reason why I use "investment" is because there is a possibility of some return on your money down the line. Could be you get a rubbish game with a crappy artbook or the game is almost GOTY quality and you've got a shiny rare physical edition of a legendary game.. or you could get nothing.
"A Kickstarter pledge is just a donation, and the owner just underestimated the scale of the project, they ultimately don't owe you anything."
...
Imagine being cool with this and telling it to those who just lost $100's supporting someone who took other people's money, misallocated it, then turned their time and attention to making money from other avenues. Imagine having that level of entitlement and valuing money so little.
Plenty of indie devs put out games for no money inbetween their day jobs. Axiom Verge was made by one guy.
But apparently it's totally appropriate for Kickstarter owners to pay themselves a salary and produce nothing to show for it. They're the victims of other people's cynicism or naivety. Cry me a river.
...
Imagine being cool with this and telling it to those who just lost $100's supporting someone who took other people's money, misallocated it, then turned their time and attention to making money from other avenues. Imagine having that level of entitlement and valuing money so little.
Plenty of indie devs put out games for no money inbetween their day jobs. Axiom Verge was made by one guy.
But apparently it's totally appropriate for Kickstarter owners to pay themselves a salary and produce nothing to show for it. They're the victims of other people's cynicism or naivety. Cry me a river.
That's the nature of Kickstarter though. Especially when it comes to videogames.
You are donating to a project that one ought to assume with have a less predictable budget and deadline than say a book or a sculpture or something.
I think the owner definitely owes the backers some transparency regarding the project but how can you promise a finished product?
It's not "totally appropriate" it's just that when you put money into a kickstarter you should know that things could go wrong and you might not get anything or the release date might be further than what's indicated.
Yeah it sucks for people that put money into it but it is what it is. Use common sense when pledging money and don't put more money than you're willing to lose.
All of this is the wrong mindset, and what people are saying that you're not getting is that if you don't understand the dynamic of what Kickstarter actually is, you probably shouldn't be throwing around "$100's".
When you kickstart something, you are NOT buying a game. You are paying for development. You are literally paying someone's salary. What you get in return for that money, what is supposed to be done, is X number of salary hours worth of work. Smart and successful kickstarters are transparent, and document in meticulous detail all their hours of work on the project, so that when people sic the FTC on them for failing to produce, they can show that they indeed did produce X number of salary hours of work, but that their estimate that X number of salary hours of work would produce a product was incorrect.
Like, I'm confused as to what you think the money they take in from kickstarter is supposed to be used for if not things like salary pay. When people say they need $X for kickstarter, a major part of that pitch is figuring out how much money they need in order to survive those upcoming months working primarily on the game as their main job. That salary money, for most indie devs, is their rent, their food, their toilet paper -- you know, the very same things you use your salary for. Ideally, it should also be for licensing fees, and unforseen expenses, and all the other things that come from running a business.
As the person with the money, it's the backers responsibility to discern which projects they should and should not give money to. A good, smart kickstarter should give a pitch that looks a lot like what someone would give to a bank, or an angel investor, or any other traditional financial situation. They should have their burn rate calculated and ready to show, a business plan, estimated development schedule, etc. If the kickstarter in question doesn't have answers for this stuff, why are you giving them money?
Now, people like to point out that you can totally sic the FTC on kickstarters that fail to produce. But from what I've seen, those tend to come down on the kind of kickstarters where the devs didn't even do any work at all, couldn't produce any sort of log of their daily work. In other words, they asked for money to cover a salary so they could work 8 hours a day on a project and then didn't work on the project and instead farted around. I have no fucking clue if that's zoe quinn or whatever, I literally haven't followed this project at all. But if some slap-ass guy goes on kickstarter and promises the world and doesn't have dink to show you in their pitch that indicates they know anything about how to budget for game development, and you pay them, and they earnestly try and just fail miserably, then yeah dude, that really is on you for giving money to such a poorly managed project.
And, to put my money where my mouth is, I donated about $600 to Sixense for their STEMS, and even upped that an extra $100 once they needed more money. I have little faith by now that they'll ever ship. I still understand what Kickstarter is, and what the risks were, and accept that sometimes projects just fail. SIxense, in particular, had released a similar product before through Razer, and looked like a safe bet. From what I've heard and seen, they truly did use the money to try and develop what they set out to produce, it just failed, which happens.
You mention other indies somehow getting it done. Not every company is the same. Not every project is the same. Not every situation is the same. That's why there are so many financial opportunities for projects, because funding is not a one-size fits all situation. And, personally, knowing many indie developers, some of these people really do put everything they own into their project. It's honestly not healthy or smart to be taking out mortgages on your home for your project. Some do, anyways, because they have that much passion. Perhaps seek out those with that level of passion to invest in if that's what you require. But that others are not willing to go that avenue and instead turn to crowd funding or other alternative revenue models should not be made fun of.
I'm not donating 100s to a project unless I have good faith that even if the project fails, I know they tried every option and communicated along the way. If they burn that good will, the stink hangs around their name.
Which of course is a shame when Zoe Quinn has (more than) a massive stink around her name unduely, but it's hard not to side-eye this project.
At the end of the day the people who honestly believed the game would happen and were willing to bet their own money on it only have themselves to blame.
Kickstarting isn't like purchasing a finished product. You are instead investing in the people behind the project to deliver the product. And in this particular instance this was and is unlikely to happen.
Kickstarting isn't like purchasing a finished product. You are instead investing in the people behind the project to deliver the product. And in this particular instance this was and is unlikely to happen.
I didn't donate to this project, and I'm not only talking about this specific project. I have been slightly burned by others. Everything krejlooc said may be true - but what I am challenging is the reaction to it.
People have a right to question the motives and work ethic or those running failed Kickstarters, and they have a right to voice their dismay or disgust.
Calling them stupid for pledging and shifting the culpability onto them is real shitty. There may be no legal obligation to fulfill a project, but I have no sympathy for those who choose to pay themselves for full-time employment to work on a Kickstarter and then underdeliver. They could've worked a day job and done the KS project in evenings/weekends like most hobbyist indie devs and plenty of freelancers have to do.
It's fine if Quinn gets heat for this, morally justified, even - don't deflect it on to the backers.
People have a right to question the motives and work ethic or those running failed Kickstarters, and they have a right to voice their dismay or disgust.
Calling them stupid for pledging and shifting the culpability onto them is real shitty. There may be no legal obligation to fulfill a project, but I have no sympathy for those who choose to pay themselves for full-time employment to work on a Kickstarter and then underdeliver. They could've worked a day job and done the KS project in evenings/weekends like most hobbyist indie devs and plenty of freelancers have to do.
It's fine if Quinn gets heat for this, morally justified, even - don't deflect it on to the backers.
Last edited:
Who has called any backer stupid or shifted culpability onto them? Who has also asked for sympathy for any specific developer who has under-performed? You've read a whole lot into this page that really nobody has said.
As someone who is doing what you suggest (i.e. work on your passion project solely in spare moments of your life), let me tell you, that leads to projects which go at glacial rates. I have been working on a single game in my spare time, as you suggest, for over 11 years now. I can prove it, i have my dev log and screenshots with time stamps and everything. In that same time I have also A) dealt with (and been burned by) Angel investors, B) worked contract labor, C) been a full time employee for another company, and D) also worked side jobs in an unrelated profession. If you've never actually tried what you suggest, you probably shouldn't suggest it like it's no big deal. In truth, what you suggest is very similar to when people say, "if you don't like your job, just quit and find a new one." The realities of what that entails makes actually doing so far less simple than you imply.
Nobody has deflected onto backers. This entire conversation sprang up from comments about legal recourse stemming from a misunderstanding about how funds are to be appropriated in the first place. Hence the talk about donations, expectations, and salary.
I know exactly what you're talking about as I worked on a couple of games in my spare time for 3 years and both were released, albeit with plenty of cut content from the original plan otherwise we'd still be working on them after 5 years. I've got two more in the pipeline. So i take your point, but I just could never in good conscience take money off people and not deliver something tangible.
It rings alarm bells because how do you differentiate between tried-and-failed and... took-the-money-and-ran?
But shouldn't the people who invested in those people who failed to deliver the project be justified in being upset over not getting at least something from this?
Regardless who this game is made by, I wouldn't very pleased with putting money on a game's producers only to basically hear, "uh, sorry, can't make it guys, thanks for your money, bye!" (a tad reductionist but you get the point).
(This is not directed at Fushi just a general comment) I'm sorry I don't understand how it's okay with some people to get a pass on failed kickstarters but for others it's not. I'm not saying to send death threats or anything stupid like that, but if someone is dissatisfied with the outcome they're right to voice it reasonably. I almost backed Drift Stage and look at where that game is, it's effectively dead, and I'd be pissed if I was a backer to that project.
That's on the person who received the kickstarter money. It's up to them to show that they tried and failed vs ran a great campaign and pocketed the money and failed. I can look at something like Star Citizen, for example, and they produce multiple dev log updates per day, where they show exactly what they are working on and when they are working on. Doing contract work remotely from my house, I'm also familiar with tools that'll log automatically for you the exact times you had, for example, keyboard activity while on a specific window (i.e. your IDE). These are all things I've personally looked into because I'm interested in kickstarting something. These are things that, as someone asking for money, you should honestly be able to provide. If someone cannot provide that, or is vague, then yeah, that's when you should raise a stink. I did that a while back for Virt's Nueren, actually, and might do so again. But in the end, if I do wind up with squat and he farted everything away, my pledge was $15, and I can feel comfortable with that burn.
An aside, I DID back that project. They produced multiple demos. I think they've honestly run out of money, which is why it's dead, but no, I'm not pissed. The amount I donated to the project wasn't so big that I can still feel the pain of losing that money like 4 years later (I think it was only $10 in fact), and I feel confident by virtue of their released demo that they made an earnest effort.
And if that's how you feel fine, hey you got a demo out of it! Enjoy it! People can have different expectations, some more reasonable than others. I was amped to buy the game when it was released, but that doesn't look like it's happening anytime soon. I loved the music in it, would have even bought the soundtrack.
I'll just say that while I don't really know much of Quinn, I think some will give pause before backing a project she may be involved with if this connnues to happen.
They have every right to be upset, especially if the people delivering the product are not being transparent about the state of the project. But I also believe that anyone who expected this particular kickstarter to actually deliver to be naive, hence the "only themselves to blame" comment.
Ahh I see what you're saying my bad. Sorry reading comments sometimes I fail to get some people's inflection in what they write.
A person can live of 2k a month, patreon cuts aren't that big. It's flabbergasting that she spent 85k in 6 months?
EDIT: Timeline messed up for me, 2+ years, but they clearly did not scope the project properly. IF this comes out it's not a good look for funding anything Kickstarter from her in the future. It also seems that the team oversold Chuck Tingles involvement which is pretty... yeah.
Last edited:
Are people doing that?
Backers have the right to get pissed at Zoe about this. The issue is the people taking it a step further and going "why are you taking holidays" "why aren't you working on this full time even if the money ran out." Both of which are indefensible stances to take.
I really find it weird that people are suggesting that Zoe shouldn't take a vacation. It seems really possessive and weird. You can think that she didn't do optimally with this Kickstarter, but being upset about this is... nah.
What do you get paid a year?
If you make $85000 - that is 3x my full-time annual wage.
You have a writer who only has to work once and gets a one-off fee, and let's face it - Tingle dude should be cheap. Plus potentially a cut of the final profits. You can get music sfx and graphic assets produced freelance for this type of game for under $5k combined - easily.
Plus you're Zoe Quinn so presumably you have contacts and acting buds you can use for a few weekends - hell, every weekend for 3 months should still be affordable. You have the green screen and cameras, but these days a phone camera would do especially as you're green screening and can fix lighting in post - the characters all wear masks so you don't even need the same actors.
You have a script.
You have a location and actors.
You have the money and time.
It's total mismanagement of the project - a game of this type which looked this lo-fi and dumb should not take more than a year full-time and should not cost anywhere near the $85k that was swallowed up in it's production.
Like... if I had the script and wanted to make this game FOR NOTHING, I could get it done within 2 years in my spare time. Anyone with the tiniest indie dev experience could.
If they overstretched or were over ambitious scale the project down and release a first chapter to generate more income and interest.
It's only an indefensible stance if you personally have no concept of the value of money, or respect for other peoples, imo.
Last edited:
I don't disagree the project has been mismanaged, although you pulling numbers, time estimates and assumptions out of your ass doesn't help either. We don't know about the development of the game (which is another problem and a lack of transparency an unfortunate number of kickstarters fall into) so we have no idea what caused it to take so long and run out of money.
It's indefensible to think that because a project has been mismanaged the people involved with it should be working unpaid until it's finished.
It's indefensible to think that people shouldn't be allowed holidays while they are working on a project.
Those are what I said, not that getting annoyed that you backed a project that has been mismanaged is indefensible. Read.
I'm not really sure "just call in favors instead looking for good actors to pay fair wages, and skimp on camera quality for something that is entirely video" is really the solution here.
You also do not know what salary is needed to live where she lives, etc.
It's a little different but a big music act recently paid actors just $100 to appear in their music video. My point is that $85500, double the pledge target, should've been more than enough.
Is that something the backers should be concerned with? Nobody forced her to run this Kickstarter. Nobody forces anyone to run a Kickstarter and take peoples money.
