The crowdfunding thread

[John]

The Best of Kickstarter 2012

It was quite a year for crowdfunding. Here are the raw stats for Kickstarter alone in 2012:

• Total Pledged: $319,786,629
• Total collected: $274,391,721
• Total backers: 2,241,475
• Successfully funded projects: 18,109

Music projects had the most successfully funded projects with 5,067. Game projects led the way with over $83 million pledged and 1,378,143 total pledges. And 17 projects raised over $1,000,000. That's a lot of generosity, and all this in just Kickstarter's third year of existence.

Hit the link to read about the Kickstarter movie project that was nominated for an Oscar, the Kickstarter-funded opera that premiered at the Kennedy Center, the Kickstarter-funded robots exploring our planet's oceans, a Kickstarter marriage proposal, and perhaps coolest of all, the civilian space suit!

[Mike Dunn]

and perhaps coolest of all, the civilian space suit!

Damn -- I should have asked for one for Christmas .

[John]

Kickstarter recommendation: ROAM

Category: Computer game
Pledge goal: $40,000
Current pledges: $102,518
Current backers: 3,526

Minimum pledge required to receive game: $15

Pledge deadline: Feb. 24, 2013, 3:14 p.m. ET
Status: FUNDED

ROAM website

ROAM Kickstarter video[/b]

Artist's Project Description: THE END has dawned. The world is transforming into a nightmarish hellscape rife with vicious, flesh-eating monstrosities. Are you one of the resilient, embattled few who has what it takes to survive? Will you defy the seemingly impossible odds or will you succumb to the to the horrors that lurk in the dark?

You and up to three friends (online co-op) must scour a grim, ravaged world, where you have complete freedom to choose where you roam, what you do, and how you allocate and use the precious-few resources you will find on your journey. Every action in the game represents a choice - and each choice has pros, cons, and consequences.

Key features
Exploratory:

• Survive in a free-roaming zombie-apocalypse-themed world
• Every map is uniquely generated for endless replayability

Dynamic:

• The world becomes continuously more dangerous
• Inhabitants of the world (friendly or not) react to your choices.
• Zombies mutate randomly and bandits may plan raids on your supplies

Customizable:

• Personalize found or crafted items with upgrades and enhancements
• Outfit your survivor and followers with the gear and items of your choice

Rewards skill:

• Precision-aiming system allows for perfect accuracy
• Place your traps in the most effective spots
• An efficient killer uses less ammo and draws less attention

Rewards strategy:

• Gain assistance from specialized survivors (such as a doctor or paramedic) for specific bonuses (healing)
• Logically select and arrange your defenses for maximum effect
• Choose how to engage your foes: attack overtly with guns blazing - use stealth and misdirection to avoid or engage selectively - or flee and live to fight another day

Accessible:

• Simple, intuitive gameplay with remappable controls.
• Online co-op multiplayer lets you survive with up to 3 friends

John says: You can't go wrong with zombie-killing co-op, but ROAM adds a number of unique touches to make things interesting. The niftiest hook is the ability to learn schematics that will allow you to build increasingly complex structures from which you can fight off enemies. And zombies aren't the only things you have to worry about; hostile human survivors of this apocalypse are out there, too. If that weren't enough, both zombies (through mutations) and hostile humans (through alliances with one another) become progressively greater threats over time).

There are other neat aspects. Maps are randomly generated, so there should be plenty of replayability. A crafting system will allow you to create gear and weapons. Even neater, ROAM requires you to consider the basics of life. You need to eat and drink, and you need tools. You're going to have to venture out into the zombie-infested wilds to find what you need. But those hostile humans are roaming about, too, looking for the same things you are. Not only are you competing with them in the wild, but you have to worry about them raiding your base and stealing your supplies while you're away.

That's where co-op comes in. Up to four players can work as a team, with some venturing out to scavenge for necessities and NPC friendly survivors while others hold down the fort. Gather enough friendlies and soon you'll have a formidable part-human, part-AI fighting force.

If all this weren't enough, the stretch goals (which are surely going to be hit, given how quickly the game has almost reached funding) include a bunch of exciting developments. At $45,000, we get drivable vehicles that can be customized and fitted with armor. At $50,000, we get a player skill system where your character starts with innate abilities and learns new skills as the game progresses. Expect more stretch drive goals to be announced (and hit) before the campaign ends.

Of course, I'm always impressed when people pursue their passion, especially against difficult odds. ROAM is all the more impressive for being the product of a two-man team: Ryan Sharr and Zach Barson. Ryan comes with experience in the industry. He worked for Gas Powered Games, doing 3D modeling on Age of Empires Online. Ryan's skill with modelling shows in the impressive ROAM video linked above.

For your consideration: I'm thinking of doing something different this time around. I've already backed ROAM at $15, but I would be willing to up my pledge to the $55 tier that gives four copies of the game, each outfitted with special Kickstarter backer-only perks. If three of you express your interest in backing ROAM at a cost of $10, then I will make the upgrade and provide you with the beta codes when they are released late this year (I will absorb the remaining $25 cost). The game will be available on both Mac & PC and should come with fairly reasonable system requirements, so pretty much any of us are candidates to run the game.

But we must act fast if we are to do this! Only 135 more backers may elect the $55 tier. So do we have three interested zombie-slayers amongst us?

[John]

Not surprisingly, ROAM has already funded. In fact, it has already hit not just one but three stretch goals. Thus, drivable/customizable vehicles, a player skill system, and pre-game character customization are all going to be a part of the final game. At the $70,000 pledge level, an advanced stealth system will be included, allowing players to go prone, duck into closets, roll, shimmy along ledges, and take cover against vertical surfaces. Enemies will receive upgraded hearing and sight mechanics, as well. Finally, payers will have the option of pursuing goals and participating in scenarios driven by world events outside of the general survival sandbox.

My offer from before still holds. If there are three of you who want in on ROAM but don't want to pay the $15 minimum to secure a copy of the game, I'm willing to upgrade to the $55 funding tier that will provide four game keys, and I'll pass one along to each of you. You can chip in $10 instead of $15; I'll cover the remaining $25. We each get a few extra goodies, too, including some extra gear, outfits, and a digital copy of the game's soundtrack.

It's a neat and tidy solution for a game that sounds like it's going to be a hella lot of fun in 4-player co-op mode. And again, there will be both PC and Mac versions, so all are welcome. But if you're interested, we need to act fast: there are only 69 slots left on the $55 funding tier.

[Bill]

I'm a little interested. The biggest thing holding me back is my impatience. It just feels wierd prebuying a game 6 months to a year before I get to play it.

[Mike Dunn]

The Creator of Civilization V has a Kickstarter

Allow me to repeat that.

The Creator of Civilization V has a Kickstarter

Pick John up off the floor.

The Creator of Civilization V has a Kickstarter

Jon Shafer, who was lead designer of Civ V, now is an indie game developer and today he announced his first project, which is being kickstarted, "At the Gates." Like Civ V its turn-based and 'historical.' But there the similarity ends. You play as Barbarians (and therefore you may be heading for the gates) trying to overthrow an ancient civilization.

At the Gates is an empire builder similar to Sid Meier's Civilization. Starting with a small tribe, you must explore the world, exploit its scarce resources, and eliminate or outsmart potential enemies. The game starts simple but grows in complexity until you command a mighty economic and military powerhouse.

Over the course of a single game your tribe will migrate to more lush and bountiful lands, conquer and barter with other clans, work alongside the Romans, learn from them, and finally destroy them. Along the way, you'll need to master the art of war and craft cunning plans to strengthen your kingdom - all while enduring the worst mother nature can throw at you!

I've never backed a kickstarter but this might be my first.

[John]

I'm a little interested. The biggest thing holding me back is my impatience. It just feels wierd prebuying a game 6 months to a year before I get to play it.

I totally hear you. Crowdfunding is a very strange concept in many ways. We're used to paying for a product that we receive either instantaneously or, at most, within a few days. The concept of paying money and then waiting months, even years to enjoy that product is completely foreign. And here's the real kick in the pants - if you just wait until the product comes out, you might be able to get it for even less than if you helped fund it! Certainly that's true at the higher tiers (assuming you're not receiving multiple products for your greater investment).

So why in the world would anyone consider laying out cash for an IOU? Great question, and different people will answer it differently. For me, part of it is that I believe in the old axiom that you have to give if you expect to receive. I don't want to be the guy who says, "Gimme, gimme, I want, I want!" but fails to put his money where his mouth is. I look at each dollar spent as a vote cast, so when I crowdfund, I'm not actually buying a product but rather voicing my support (through an expenditure of cash) for a concept of a product. My hope is that other companies and individuals within the same industry will see my vote tallied up with the votes of thousands of others and realize that the masses have spoken in a meaningful way, not just by saying they want a particular product but that they are committed to the success of that product, by God.

I'm also a huge proponent of backing the little guy who is toiling to make a really great product, the kind of product that I wouldn't be able to find in the mass market. You'll see that reflected in the kinds of projects I have been pimping here:

• A top-down isometric, turn-based CRPG, made by the independent developer behind the classic Infinity Engine CRPGs
• A PC-centric space combat, trade, and exploration simulator, made by the man behind the Wing Commanders and Freelancer
• A procedurally generated, free-form space sim sandbox, made by one kid who is so confident in his vision that he took leave from his studies at Stanford to pursue it
• A post-apocalyptic co-op game that focuses as much on building and dealing with your fellow survivors as with killing zombies, made by a two-man team

When we're talking games, I can't get these things from EA, Microsoft, Sony, Activision/Blizzard, et al. In all cases, it usually takes independents with vision to make innovative products. But in the past, even if an independent developer had an interesting vision, he had to go through the big boys of his particular industry to get the necessary funding. Most likely, the idea would be rejected as too risky, not commercial enough. Even if it was funded, endless compromises would have to be made before the bastardized product saw the light of day.

Now, I can play a small role in helping innovative products make it to retail and retain what was innovative about them in the first place. That's a good feeling, good enough that I'm willing to pay a little now for nothing but a promise. And I mean it: it really does feel good to feel like you're helping making something you care about a reality. I wholeheartedly recommend giving it a try, whether it be for computer games or anything at all that you're passionate about. When you find something, post it here. Speaking of which...

The Creator of Civilization V has a Kickstarter

Mike, you rock. I almost posted this earlier this evening, but I said to myself, "No, let's see if anyone posts it on their own... I want to see if there's "situational awareness" about potential crowdfunding projects amongst PEBA members." And look! Here it is!

Mike said it himself: he's not a crowdfunding guy. So the fact that he's pimping Jon Shafer's At the Gates should be a clear signal that this is a project you want to pay attention to. The reason to be excited about this project is the man behind it. As Mike noted, Jon Shafer was the lead developer of Civilization V, a game us PEBA-ites are quite familiar with. He has gone independent, starting a new company to realize his particular vision for the 4X strategy game. And what does that vision entail?

• Adapt to an ever-changing landscape as the seasons change. Craft plans where you not only survive but hope for fields to dry up, marshes to flood and rivers to freeze solid.
• Build a robust economy by finding and exploiting new resources. Deposits slowly deplete so you need to always be on the hunt for more - even if they belong to your neighbors. If none are nearby, a better option might be to migrate your entire tribe to a different part of the world!
• Vanquish enemies on the battlefield by deftly maneuvering around them and destroying their chains of supply. But make sure your own are protected, as tactical victory means nothing if your armies then starve to death!
• Forge lasting diplomatic relationships with other leaders by lending them a hand in times of need. If Attila’s people are starving, sending him grain might earn you a friend for life.
• Fight or cooperate with the Romans - and become more like them. Barbarian kingdoms become more “Romanized” and gain access to powerful new technologies as they interact with the two halves of the Empire.
• Play on a geographically accurate map of Europe or 100% randomly-generated worlds.
• Lead one of eight factions, each with unique strengths to take advantage of and challenges to overcome.

Mike isn't the only one excited about At the Gates. The Kickstarter campaign is less than 24 hours old and already it's halfway towards being funded. That's right... $20,000 in just 12 hours!

Okay, now all that hype being laid out, let me fess up that I am not intending to back At the Gates. Why not? Well, for one thing, Mr. Shafer is already doing pretty well for himself, and while that's no knock against his project, he doesn't completely qualify as a "little guy" to me. The game is certain to be funded without my help; again, no knock at all, just a fact. If it was dripping with personal appeal, I'd be in for sure, but the game seems very narrow in focus, perhaps a bit too much for my tastes. Much is made of the need to feed and supply your troops. That sounds somewhat intriguing, but I'm not sure how appealing that would be in actual gameplay. It sounds like a fabulous Civ V mod, but as a $25 game (the minimum price tier which entitles you to a copy), it's perhaps a little too specialized for my tastes. The absence of multiplayer is one final knock against the game.

Still, don't let me sour you to At the Gates. Why don't you decide for yourself if it's worth your donation? Check out Mr. Shafer demoing the first 15 minutes of gameplay. It will give you a great idea of what the game is all about. (And, side note: I really, really appreciate when a new project has something to actually demonstrate instead of just selling you on fabulous ideas that may be totally pie in the sky. This demo is really excellent!)

Now go support ROAM, At the Gates, or both! And if you're backing ROAM, let me know first... we might be able to get it cheaper if we work together!

[Bill]

I'm still trying to figure out why I would play at the gates and not civ 5?

[John]

I'm still trying to figure out why I would play at the gates and not civ 5?

'Cause it's the latest design from the man who made Civ V! You gotta figure that if you liked his work there, you'll like his work here.

[John]

A couple interviews with developers of Kickstarters that have been featured in this thread...

With $7.7M raised via crowdfunding, Chris Roberts makes his sci-fi game in the public eye

This is a fabulous interview. Not only does he give details about the development of Star Citizen (including the choice to go with a pseudo-perma-death system), but Roberts gets into the nitty-gritty of funding a game, both through traditional publishing and via the independent route. It's extremely illuminating and well worth your time. Here's a snippet:

If I were doing this as a traditional VC deal, the amount of the company I owned would be much smaller. I would be more beholden to investors who are like, “What’s our exit plan in four years?” “EA’s offering a lot of money. Why don’t you sell to them right now? We want out of the deal.” That may not be the best answer for the game itself. It may be better to just keep it Valve-style and grow and curate it properly and not worry about other things.

The nice thing about doing the crowdfunding is it validated demand. It set an expectation of where it can end up. It allows me to have better control of the destiny of it on a long-term basis. That’s important to me. I lost Wing Commander when Origin was bought out. It’s always frustrating to lose control over an IP that you think you can still do a lot with. I like the idea of being able to run Star Citizen in a way that can be about Star Citizen. The CCP guys run EVE and make their decisions based on what’s going to be good for EVE. It’s not, “Oh, we need to make sure that we work with our new digital online platform that sells all these other games.”

When you’re hooked in as part of a publisher, all of a sudden there are all these other demands. They’re not necessarily bad things, but there’s other things going on and other priorities. It’s not just about what’s best for the Star Citizen universe. I’m happy about being in the situation where we are now. I feel like I’m going to be allowed a greater degree of control and freedom to make decisions for the universe and the community that I wouldn’t have had in another scenario of getting funding.

* * * * *

At the Gates Q&A with Jon Shafer!

At the Gates is the new game by Jon Shafer, lead designer of a little game called Civilization V. Mike pimped Shafer's new project earlier, and given how many Civ V fans we have, I highly suggest you consider donating even though the game has already met it's $40,000 funding goal. Your backing can help the game hit its stretch goals, which include mod support, a map editor, and two new playable factions! Here's a bit from the interview with Shafer:

The real focus on ATG is on strategy over tactics. There’s certainly some measure of micromanagement in the game, but it’s a completely different scope from Civ. There are no Worker units to order around, no population to allocate in cities, no production or research meters to wait on, etc.

Instead, there are empire-wide resource stockpiles, settlements which can build units but not much else and aren’t fixed in one location, an emphasis on the supply system in combat, and so on. We’re very much making a concerted effort to get away from some of the fiddly bits that are common in other 4X games.

[John]

ROAM has concluded its successful Kickstarter campaign, bringing in $102,518 in pledges, over two-and-a-half times its goal of $40,000! Every last stretch goal was hit. When the game arrives early next year, you'll now see extra features like a player skill system, character customization, and advanced stealth and cover system, the option pursue goal and participate in scenarios driven by world events outside the general survival sandbox, and drivable and customizable vehicles. Speaking of those, the two-man development team recently released a prototype video showcasing vehicles in ROAM and how you might expect them to work. Looks like zombie-splattering fun!

Meanwhile, At the Gates has easily met its own $40,000 funding goal. With 11 days left in the campaign, and sitting at $71,192 in pledges, it's all about how many stretch goals get hit. All the modding-based goals - XML and DML mod support, and a map editor - are already in the bag. At $85K, At the Gates will feature ten playable factions instead of eight. I get a feeling Jon Shafer better start dreaming up new stretch goals soon, because this campaign is heading north of $100K when all is said and done.

[Mike Dunn]

I get a feeling Jon Shafer better start dreaming up new stretch goals soon, because this campaign is heading north of $100K when all is said and done.

They added two more:

At $125,000 we'll be adding additional map generation options to the game. Right now we're planning on shipping with a single random continents script, but should this goal be hit we'll be making it possible to adjust the percent of land or water, the shapes of the landmasses, the quantity and density of resource deposits, and more. This stretch goal will also mean we include a map of the earth to go along with the map of Europe we're already planning on delivering.

And finally, if we manage to get all the way up to $200,000, we will develop an "expansion" for AtG which makes the Roman factions playable. Many of the core mechanics will remain similar, but we'll be re-tooling the game experience specifically for the declining, non-nomadic empire. As the Romans, your focus is very much on using your diplomatic might to try and manipulate the barbarian tribes which surround you. There will also be a replacement for the Romanization system that allows yo u to obtain goodies more technologically advanced than the barbarians could dream of!

Also, everyone at $25 now gets a Mac and Linux version as well. And they're going to do an iOS version as well (not included in the base package).

[John]

Kickstarter recommendation: Torment: Tides of Numenera

Category: Computer game
Pledge goal: $900,000
Current pledges: $4,188,927
Current backers: 74,405

Minimum pledge required to receive game: $25

Pledge deadline: Friday Apr 5, 8:00pm ET
Status: FUNDED

Torment: Tides of Numenera website

Torment: Tides of Numenera Kickstarter video pitch
Torment: Tides of Numenera Chris Avellone video endorsement[/b] (NSFW)

Artist's Project Description: Torment: Tides of Numenera is a game set in the world of Monte Cook’s new tabletop RPG setting, Numenera. Torment continues the thematic legacy of Planescape: Torment, a critically acclaimed role-playing game from 1999 that's considered by many to be a hallmark for storytelling in computer RPGs. With Torment, we're striving to create a rich role-playing experience that explores similar deep, personal themes. Here's the scoop:

• Torment is a single-player, isometric role-playing game.
• You will play a single, specific character, though you will encounter optional NPC companions you may choose to include in your party.
• The story-driven game will have a rich dialogue system and approach similar to that of Planescape: Torment.
• The game will be developed in the Unity engine for PC (Windows), Mac, and Linux platforms.
• The game will be available in English, French, German, Italian, Polish, Russian, Spanish.
• The game will be distributed DRM-free. (You’ll be able to get it from Steam, and other DRM-free download options will be made available.)

John says: I'm cheating a bit here. Torment: Tides of Numenera doesn't need your help. It reached its funding goal within seven hours of opening up its Kickstarter drive this morning. I believe it's the fastest Kickstarter project ever, of any kind, to reach $1,000,000 in funding. I have a feeling that's not the last record this campaign will break.

So, uh, yeah... there's some demand for a spiritual successor to arguably the greatest CRPG of all time. I'm already on board. Should you be? Well, first, do you remember Planescape: Torment? If, like me, you do remember that game, then you're probably not reading this any longer; you have probably already rushed off to get in on the Kickstarter campaign.

Okay, what about the rest of you? Is this drive worth twenty-five? That's a pretty hefty minimum price to pay; most game Kickstarter campaigns let you in the door for between $10-20. Why should you fork over all that green for a game that you'll have to wait until the end of 2014 to play, especially when the game is already funded?

Despite the amazing pedigree of Planescape: Torment, backing Torment: Tides of Numenera isn't as big a slam dunk as you might think. The good news is that the project is being designed by two of the three original designers of Planescape: Torment: Colin McComb and Monte Cook, whose upcoming pen-and-paper role-playing game Numenera will be the setting for Torment: Tides of Numenera. But Chris Avellone, who served as lead designer on Planescape: Torment, is busy working on Project Eternity (previously pitched in this thread), so he won't be helping out here. He did give the inXile team a vote of confidence in the hilariously NSFW video linked at the top of this post. Obviously, his involvement would be better than an endorsement, but it's still nice to see.

So what about inXile? Their established body of work isn't terribly impressive. Of course, one must remember that McComb and Cook weren't responsible for inXile's misses. inXile is behind another Kickstarter campaign that parlayed nostalgia into fabulous financial success: Wasteland 2. It's a game that would probably tell us more about inXile's suitability for Torment: Tides of Numenera than anything else they have done. An early alpha gameplay video looks promising, but unfortunately Wasteland 2 is not yet out, so we can't really judge anything from it.

Nostalgia won out for me, but I admit I would have felt better if there was an early gameplay video or at least some rough mock-up gameplay screenshots included with the Kickstarter pitch. I ended up hedging my bets and backing at the lowest level that gets me a copy of the game. You'll have to decide if it's worth it for you or not. Planescape: Torment was one of the greatest single-player gaming experiences of all time. It boasted a rich story in a unique setting, with complicated moral choices that had true meaning. If Torment: Tides of Numenera can recapture even some of that magic, it will be well worth your money.

[Mike Dunn]

Thanks for highlighting this John. I went in for $45 today which gets me both Wasteland 2 and this Planescape reworking. I have played both of the originals. I realize the devs may drop the ball, but I am giving them the benefit of the doubt.

I hope they take their time with both, I'm in no hurry. I just want them good.

[John]

First, an update on Torment: Tides of Numenera. The project has amassed pledges almost 3x in excess of the original funding goal. A whole mess of stretch goals have been met, but since this project still doesn't have prototype gameplay to show off and thus is a bit of a leap of faith, I put the most stock in the addition of new team members with track records. Mur Lafferty, Tony Evans (who worked on Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic II, Dragon Age II, Neverwinter Nights 2, and Mask of the Betrayer), Monte Cook, and George Ziets (who is also writing for Project Eternity) have all joined the writing team. It's encouraging to see quality writers being added to a game whose success will depend heavily on its writing quality. Stretch goals at $2.75M and $3M are well within sight.

Now on to something different. Remember how I said that Torment: Tides of Numenera set a record for the fastest Kickstarter project to reach $1M? It did that in under seven hours. Impressive, huh? Yeah, well, that record didn't last very long. A new project just hit $1M in funding in 4 hours, 24 minutes. It's not for a game but for a movie, and it's got everybody talking. First, the straight news story:

'Veronica Mars' movie fundraiser raises $2M in less than one day

"Veronica Mars" fans just bought themselves a big-screen version of the cult favorite TV series.

A crowd-sourcing campaign on the Kickstarter website to raise $2 million for the project hit its goal in less than a day.

"Veronica Mars," which starred Kristen Bell as a young sleuth, ended its three-season run in 2007. With Bell's help, series creator Rob Thomas started the effort Wednesday to make a big-screen version.

More than 33,000 contributors had pledged $2.1 million as of Wednesday evening, and the total was still growing.

If you're not familiar with Veronica Mars, don't feel too bad; most people aren't. Despite being a darling of critics, the show was perennially at the bottom of the TV series ratings rankings during its three-year run on UPN and the CW. It was finally cancelled in 2007. Six years later, it has found new life on the silver screen thanks to a wildly successful Kickstarter campaign, and opinions on the matter are all over the map:

‘Veronica Mars’ Just Changed the Movie Business

Collectively, the fanbase sent a thundering message to studios. It said, loud and clear, that it will give up large sums of money, with no traditional investment ties, to fund a geek-oriented project. There will very likely be further developments in what could be known as the Mars model, with other producers and studios attempting to find similar fundraising success. As the Veronica Mars counter ticked quickly up to $2m, we watched the business change in real time...

Even after paying Kickstarter fees, taxes, and to create and distribute the incentive rewards offered to donors, the studio has (at press time) about $1.95m to add to whatever it already planned to spend on the movie. (Update: The Wrap says... the outpouring of fan and media interest is likely to drive the budget funds higher without any extra capital required from the studio.) (A rough guideline to how much comes off the top of a Kickstarter campaign, I’ve been told, is 30%.) It may well end up with a lot more than that; there are another 29 days to go in the campaign. After those initial fees are paid, WB is beholden to no one for that money.

Think about that for a second.

How will this change film development? Outsourcing is the word plaguing the VFX industry right now, and fans just proved to WB that it can outsource fundraising for certain projects. This is a time when studios are less willing than ever to pay for development costs. (Ask a screenwriter about their one-step deal.) So what happens when a studio realizes it can get other people to pay for parts of the process, with only a couple strings attached? (Again, there are taxes, fees, and rewards to pay for. All one-time payments.)

The 'Veronica Mars' Kickstarter Win Won't Revolutionize The Movie Business

On the face of it, this seems like a watershed moment for independent film financing. Passionate filmmakers could suddenly be free of the burden of searching for investors willing to put money into their films but also expecting returns. The Veronica Mars fans aren’t investors. They won’t demand an audit if the movie doesn’t seem to make money. They’re happy with their t-shirts, DVDs and scripts that they received as premiums for their donations...

But when you look more closely at the project, you realize this is not going to be the new model. There were very specific reasons why this project worked. There was already a script and all of the players (including big name star Kristen Bell) were already on board. There was also already a distributor in place, a rarity these days for any independent project.

Then there’s Veronica Mars‘ fan base. There aren’t many shows that have quite as loyal a group of fans as Mars. It takes an enormous effort to pry even a little big of money from someone for something like a Kickstarter project. The backers have to be really and truly invested and in love with the project. Maybe when Community gets canceled they’ll have something like this ready and waiting but it’s not a fit for every canceled show.

There’s Room For Everyone At Kickstarter (Even Studios)

Warners (because they’ve held onto the copyright) will be distributing and making money off a movie that fans are funding. Depending on the deal they have with Thomas, the studio was just handed a free movie to do with what they please, and that’s caused a lot of concern among the people that get concerned about this kind of thing.

But you know what? It’s going to be okay...

1. Veronica Mars is an ultra rare phenomenon. It’s a cult television show whose passionate fans persisted despite low ratings. They’ve called out for its return for years, and its creator has had countless phone calls and meetings trying to make something happen again. With Arrested Development taken care of by Netflix, you can count on one hand the properties that match Mars on these fronts, and even though studios are taking notice this morning, it’s highly unlikely that there’ll be a massive flood of studio projects hitting Kickstarter tomorrow.
2. Even if there are, even if we reach a point where studios are collectively putting up dozens of big movies on Kickstarter, the market will absolutely take care of itself. There will be a bigger backlash against the practice if it gets out of hand, and if there isn’t, who is any single person to tell fans what they should give their money to? If someone has waited a decade for a new Firefly series, isn’t $35 for a t-shirt and digital download a steal at twice the price?
3. It’s also pretty ridiculous to think that Veronica Mars‘ success is taking away anything demonstrable from any of the indie projects on the site. No one was on the cusp of donating $10 to a promising video artist’s stop-motion project when their Twitter feed lit up with the news.
4. And, if anything, there’s a higher probability that the high profile and larger buzz brought more attention to what Kickstarter is doing, which is a win for everyone.
5. Speaking of which, it’s a good time to remember that Kickstarter is a rising tide that lifts all boats. It’s not like the service has been fundamentally altered simply because a giant company discovered a use for it. They’re not making it exclusive to studio use or anything.
6. Oh, and if you’re still concerned about how the fabric of indie filmmaking has been altered here, you certainly don’t have to donate anything.

The Case against Kickstarting the VERONICA MARS Movie

Fans that are funding the Veronica Mars movie are basically buying a ticket twice, and the film is only marginally for them. It’s for Warner Bros., and I have difficulty believing Warner Bros. will adhere to the terms laid out on the Kickstarter page. Not even VOD titles open theatrically and then release for digital distribution a few days later. They work the other way around. Are we supposed to believe that Warner Bros. will go to the trouble of prints and advertising (P&A) only to cut themselves off at the knees after one weekend? Furthermore, the Kickstarter page also doesn’t specify how wide the studio will release the film, so if you live in a small town and want to see the Veronica Mars movie on the big screen, you might not get what you thought you were paying for.

Kickstarter can conceivably be both for indies and studio films, but the latter feels like exploitation of the fans. Yes, the fans are free to spend their money however they see fit, but shouldn’t their money at least pay for the cost of a ticket? This reminds me of when Universal was “test-screening” Serenity and fans were paying to attend a screening of an unfinished film. Any other movie test-screens for free, but Universal took advantage of a fandom’s “support”. Warner Bros. will ease their own financial burden on Veronica Mars while double-charging fans.

Anyone Know of a Better Charity Than the 'Veronica Mars' Movie?

Which brings up the larger issue of Kickstarter as a whole. Most of these campaigns aren't people who need the money, they're people who just want it. The same could be said for lots of actual charities, sure — if you boil the word "need" down enough, nothing but food, water, and air is left. But here in the bourgie, comfy confines of wealthy Western society, we're talking about people like the indie musician Amanda Palmer, who raised $1.2 million on Kickstarter to make and distribute a folk album. That's all. Amanda Palmer, who is married to successful author Neil Gaiman and has been a prominent musician for a decade or so. Handed $1.2 million because she asked for it. People are free to spend their money however they want, but there's something so unseemly about the asking, isn't there? Maybe that reaction is owed to some overly reserved New England quality in me that I should fight against, but I can't help but feel that Kickstarter campaigns for stuff like this, that is stuff people are having no trouble selling elsewhere, are a bit gauche. Plus it's too easy...

Another part of my revulsion is, yes, likely to do with the simple fact that art-related Kickstarter campaigns strip away the pretense that art and commerce aren't inextricably linked. Money has always been part of the commercial art game, but the budgeting and haggling is usually done out of view, by a few select professionals. Kickstarter, though, puts the economic reality right out in the light for all to see. Someone like Amanda Palmer is essentially telling us that she doesn't want to work on spec, so if we want to hear something new, we have to pay in advance. At a moment when we're discussing the complexities of for-pay creativity, Kickstarter openly democratizes the compensatory system. I intellectually know that's probably a good thing, but my gut still finds all the upfront money talk to be a bit unrefined, let's say. Art should exist for art's sake! Crassly bringing money into the conversation sullies everything.

The Veronica Mars Kickstarter Isn't Charity, It's An Omen

Here is my major issues with Mr. Lawson’s worldview. He is not alone in appearing to prefer that artists to seek their patronage from established institutions instead of appealing directly to their fans. Which in my eyes is illogical. What does it matter if patronage is sought from a few rich individuals, corporations, and institutions or from the masses? Does the problem lay with the gross wealth inequity in our society? Wouldn’t moving the locus of economic activity away from the few towards the many help balance that equation?

To my eyes the ability of a large pool of people of modest means to fund creative work that was previously only the purview of the very wealthy is an unequivocal good. Why should anyone waste their time trying to convince a bunch of wealthy financiers that they deserve support if they can just cut out the middlemen?

There is a whole lot to digest here, and I apologize with presenting you with the dreaded "Wall o' Text," but especially for someone who is about to dive into a field that is currently undergoing its own revolution, I find this development fascinating. I don't for a second think we have heard the end of this model for funding movies; in fact, I expect a wave of copycat projects looking to capitalize on nostalgia. Indeed, we already have word of what might be the first in that wave.

Whether all this is good or destructive for the business is beyond my ken. I imagine it will be a measure of both. At the start, it's likely to skew heavily in favor of the studios - again, they get to capitalize on nostalgia for free funding. But people are savvier than you think, and I don't believe it likely that they'll just blindly fund project after project. Eventually, there will be a shift. Studios will find Kickstarter funding harder to come by. They will have to give something to get something. At that point, more people might start to view this not as exploitation but as a viable new frontier for filmmaking.