Ashes of Creation - Delayed, spawned spin-off game, seemingly progressing HEX- Defunct Camelot Unchained- Perpetual development hell Star Citizen- Perpetual development hell and totally changed from it's Kickstarter goals/stated project. Elite: Dangerous- launched! Shroud of the Avatar- launched but flopped Crowfall - multiple delays, seems to be inching to a launch Chronicle of Elyria- Utter failure City of Titans- Development hell Dual Universe- Years late but seems to be nearing a launch
So from the top 10, I'd say one was an actual success. SotA you could toss in too if you really wanted to. All the others either outright failed or have experienced years of delays with no guarantee of ever launching.
So... to answer the question posed in the title: How horrible has the Crowdfunded MMO experience been? Its been fucking HORRIBLE.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Going down: The Repopulation: currently in Early Access/playable state - Win.
Zenith: Slated to be Released this Year - We shall see, but still - Fail.
Adventure Quest 3D - Launched/playable. - Win.
TemTem - Released/Launched - Win.
Dual Universe - Currently in a Beta/Playable state - Win
City of Titans - Currently Not Playable - Fail.
Chronicles of Elyria - Direct Scam - Fail
Crowfall - Currently in a Alpha/Playable state - Win.
Shroud of the Avatar - Launched/Released - Win.
Elite: Dangerous - Launched/Released - Win.
Star Citizen - Still in Development/Not Playable - Progress being made but still - Fail.
Camelot Unchained - Still in Development/Not Playable - Progress being made but still - Fail.
Hex - Launched/Released - Win.
Ashes of Creation - Still in Development, Supposedly Playable State - Progress being Made but still - Fail
So.. break down: 14 total projects.
We have 8 games in a playable state, that count as Wins.
We have 6 games that are not in a playable state that count as Fails.
Of the 6 games that failed, We have 1 game that was a direct Scam and 1 game that just vanished into Vaporware.
So.. when you look at it, this is not that bad pretty good.
Only one was a direct Scam.
Which bring us back to Kickstarter's role in all this, how would Kickstarter know, out of these 14 projects, which one was the direct scam during the funding phrase?
(Revised as data provided by Rhoklaw about Dual Universe being in a playable state) (Revised as data provided by DafAtRandom about Hex, having launched)
Post edited by Ungood on
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
Going down: The Repopulation: currently in Early Access/playable state - Win.
Zenith: Slated to be Released this Year - We shall see, but still - Fail.
Adventure Quest 3D - Launched/playable. - Win.
TemTem - Released/Launched - Win.
Dual Universe - Apparently has Gameplay Footage - But no Launch - Fail.
City of Titans - Currently - Fail.
Chronicles of Elyria - Direct Scam - Fail
Crowfall - Currently in a Alpha/Playable state - Win.
Shroud of the Avatar - Launched/Released - Win.
Elite: Dangerous - Launched/Released - Win.
Star Citizen - Still in Development/Not Playable - Progress being made but still - Fail.
Camelot Unchained - Still in Development/Not Playable - Progress being made but still - Fail.
Hex - vaporware? - Fail.
Ashes of Creation - Still in Development, Supposedly Playable State - Progress being Made but still - Fail
So.. break down: 14 total projects.
We have 6 games in a playable state, that count as Wins.
We have 8 games that are not in a playable state that count as Fails.
Of the 8 games that failed, We have 1 game that was a direct Scam and 1 game that just vanished into Vaporware.
So.. when you look at it, this is not that bad.
Only one was a direct Scam.
Which bring us back to Kickstarter's role in all this, how would Kickstarter know, out of these 14 projects, which one was the direct scam during the funding phrase?
First of all, a playable state means nothing. A win would be getting the product promised during the original KS campaign. That being said, The Repopulation is a working game, but not the game that was originally advertised. I know this because I'm a $500 backer. Secondly, Dual Universe is in open BETA and plenty of people are participating / playing it.
It would be impossible to complete the project during the KS fundraiser, as the creator does not receive their funds till the Kickstarter campaign is over.
If Dual Universe is in a playable state, that was a mistake on my part. I am going to correct that now, thank you for the insight.
I set the win/fail metric by if they had a playable product at this time, that was the only metric I used.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
I want to be clear, that there is no reason for Kickstarter to have all the data, of who did what, where, when, why and how. Keep in mind their involvement ends, the second the money changes hands. They make this very clear, many times over, that when the project timer is up on their platform, regardless if it reached it's goal or not, they are done with it
The Data they boast is their Successfully funded projects, and I want to say this again, "Funded" this is not to be confused with completed, because, again, once the money changes hands, Kickstarter removes themselves from the picture entirely, their part in the process now complete.
For the people wondering where the 9% comes from, it was done as a 3rd party Research Project by the University of Pennsylvania, that involved over 30,000 projects over the course of 6 years, and the results were published by news outlets, like Time magazine, for example. The results were also made aware to Kickstarter, who, while KS publicly thanked them for the info (Which they do not use on their official site), again, they made it clear they were not a store, and were not selling a product, and there was always a risk of failure with these kinds of ventures.
Some fun facts. The most common projects that fail are those that were asking for less then $1,000.
Now, reality check, Do I think the dozen or so MMO's that have gone through KS would have made some massive dent in their overall numbers. Well, when you consider that they have funded 198,484 projects to date, and raised over $5.6 Billion Dollars, the answer would be No.
I am not going to trust some person that made a study done in 2016 covering 2009 - 2015. Notice no platform will actually release their own data? All these platforms point to this study LOL. This study admits it only covers a small sample, and it collaborated with Kickstarter, and was supplied its data from Kickstarter.
Nobody else is going to release a study to confirm this info? I know the platforms wont because if they lie and are caught they could be sued. Why would they, when they can get people like you willing to link some bogus study.
I want to be clear, that there is no reason for Kickstarter to have all the data, of who did what, where, when, why and how. Keep in mind their involvement ends, the second the money changes hands. They make this very clear, many times over, that when the project timer is up on their platform, regardless if it reached it's goal or not, they are done with it
The Data they boast is their Successfully funded projects, and I want to say this again, "Funded" this is not to be confused with completed, because, again, once the money changes hands, Kickstarter removes themselves from the picture entirely, their part in the process now complete.
For the people wondering where the 9% comes from, it was done as a 3rd party Research Project by the University of Pennsylvania, that involved over 30,000 projects over the course of 6 years, and the results were published by news outlets, like Time magazine, for example. The results were also made aware to Kickstarter, who, while KS publicly thanked them for the info (Which they do not use on their official site), again, they made it clear they were not a store, and were not selling a product, and there was always a risk of failure with these kinds of ventures.
Some fun facts. The most common projects that fail are those that were asking for less then $1,000.
Now, reality check, Do I think the dozen or so MMO's that have gone through KS would have made some massive dent in their overall numbers. Well, when you consider that they have funded 198,484 projects to date, and raised over $5.6 Billion Dollars, the answer would be No.
I am not going to trust some person that made a study done in 2016 covering 2009 - 2015. Notice no platform will actually release their own data? All these platforms point to this study LOL. This study admits it only covers a small sample, and it collaborated with Kickstarter, and was supplied its data from Kickstarter.
Nobody else is going to release a study to confirm this info? I know the platforms wont because if they lie and are caught they could be sued. Why would they, when they can get people like you willing to link some bogus study.
I am glad that a study run by an educational institution like the University of Pennsylvania is what you classify as "Bogus". Maybe the problem is not the study, but that fact that you don't like the results, so nothing anyone does that does not agree with what you want to be the case, will placate you.
Also, Kickstarter gives all their stats, as far as they pertain to their direct company and their responsibly, which includes how much they have raised, what amount of ventures have been successfully funded, how many have not, and break down into categories as well.
All of which can be found in the link I provided. Here is again for anyone that didn't see the first link I provided: https://www.kickstarter.com/help/stats
Feel free to find the golden bullet you so dearly seek.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
Going down: The Repopulation: currently in Early Access/playable state - Win.
Zenith: Slated to be Released this Year - We shall see, but still - Fail.
Adventure Quest 3D - Launched/playable. - Win.
TemTem - Released/Launched - Win.
Dual Universe - Currently in a Beta/Playable state - Win
City of Titans - Currently Not Playable - Fail.
Chronicles of Elyria - Direct Scam - Fail
Crowfall - Currently in a Alpha/Playable state - Win.
Shroud of the Avatar - Launched/Released - Win.
Elite: Dangerous - Launched/Released - Win.
Star Citizen - Still in Development/Not Playable - Progress being made but still - Fail.
Camelot Unchained - Still in Development/Not Playable - Progress being made but still - Fail.
Hex - vaporware? - Fail.
Ashes of Creation - Still in Development, Supposedly Playable State - Progress being Made but still - Fail
So.. break down: 14 total projects.
We have 7 games in a playable state, that count as Wins.
We have 7 games that are not in a playable state that count as Fails.
Of the 7 games that failed, We have 1 game that was a direct Scam and 1 game that just vanished into Vaporware.
So.. when you look at it, this is not that bad.
Only one was a direct Scam.
Which bring us back to Kickstarter's role in all this, how would Kickstarter know, out of these 14 projects, which one was the direct scam during the funding phrase?
(Revised as data was provided by Rhoklaw about Dual Universe)
Just want to point out Hex was not vaporware. I did play that game for a little bit. Not a bad game, actually. But Hearthstone was sadly the better one.
Going down: The Repopulation: currently in Early Access/playable state - Win.
Zenith: Slated to be Released this Year - We shall see, but still - Fail.
Adventure Quest 3D - Launched/playable. - Win.
TemTem - Released/Launched - Win.
Dual Universe - Currently in a Beta/Playable state - Win
City of Titans - Currently Not Playable - Fail.
Chronicles of Elyria - Direct Scam - Fail
Crowfall - Currently in a Alpha/Playable state - Win.
Shroud of the Avatar - Launched/Released - Win.
Elite: Dangerous - Launched/Released - Win.
Star Citizen - Still in Development/Not Playable - Progress being made but still - Fail.
Camelot Unchained - Still in Development/Not Playable - Progress being made but still - Fail.
Hex - vaporware? - Fail.
Ashes of Creation - Still in Development, Supposedly Playable State - Progress being Made but still - Fail
So.. break down: 14 total projects.
We have 7 games in a playable state, that count as Wins.
We have 7 games that are not in a playable state that count as Fails.
Of the 7 games that failed, We have 1 game that was a direct Scam and 1 game that just vanished into Vaporware.
So.. when you look at it, this is not that bad.
Only one was a direct Scam.
Which bring us back to Kickstarter's role in all this, how would Kickstarter know, out of these 14 projects, which one was the direct scam during the funding phrase?
(Revised as data was provided by Rhoklaw about Dual Universe)
Just want to point out Hex was not vaporware. I did play that game for a little bit. Not a bad game, actually. But Hearthstone was sadly the better one.
The question posed in the OP was "How many of these have actually launched and survived". Sadly HEX, which I never played but did hear good things about, did not survive.
From the top 10 Kickstarters in the list only Elite and SotA meet that criteria (although I list SotA very grudgingly… it's not quite dead!). Seems like the guy you quoted wants to stretch from the OP to include Alpha states and pretty much any game that hasn't closed shop as a "win". Well, whatever floats your boat I guess. Sounds like of like Mr. Tiger's Blood Charlie Sheen's kind of winning.
The answer to "Exactly how horrible has the Crowdfunded MMO experiment been"? is simple: It's been fucking horrible!
Post edited by Slapshot1188 on
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
I am glad that a study run by an educational institution like the University of Pennsylvania is what you classify as "Bogus". Maybe the problem is not the study, but that fact that you don't like the results, so nothing anyone does that does not agree with what you want to be the case, will placate you.
Also, Kickstarter gives all their stats, as far as they pertain to their direct company and their responsibly, which includes how much they have raised, what amount of ventures have been successfully funded, how many have not, and break down into categories as well.
All of which can be found in the link I provided. Here is again for anyone that didn't see the first link I provided: https://www.kickstarter.com/help/stats
Feel free to find the golden bullet you so dearly seek.
Note that Kickstarter will not release a single stat from reviews of backers about satisfaction.
Here is a very telling stat:
19,373,386
Total backers
6,531,129
Repeat backers
Pretty big drop-off there. That's over 11 years, only 34% ever backed another project. That's assuming they are not counting the repeat backers as separate people which they probably are. So its likely an even smaller percentage of actually unique people that ever backed again.
Secondly, Dual Universe is in open BETA and plenty of people are participating / playing it.
I need to update myself on DU, it seemed like an interesting title. Iirc they said they will not do any more wipes, even though it is labelled as "beta", and also that, while playable, it was very rough and poorly optimized. Is that correct? I remember skimming through a recent YT video and seeing lots of graphical glitches, but it seemed pretty playable alright.
While some might find DU playable I think it's really stretching the definition of that term at this point in it's development.
If they really won't be doing any more wipes then it's launched in my book, regardless what dev stage they claim it's currently in.
Edit: apparently wipes are still possible as the game transitions to launch, however the Devs are being a bit cagey around the subject. Here's the latest info I could find from an Oct 2020 forum discussion.
"To everyone who didn't see Captain Jack's interview with JC today, JC made some clarifications. If NQ does a server wipe they will give everyone "magic blueprints" of their constructs that will not require materials to place so that people can keep their progress."
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Going down: The Repopulation: currently in Early Access/playable state - Win.
Zenith: Slated to be Released this Year - We shall see, but still - Fail.
Adventure Quest 3D - Launched/playable. - Win.
TemTem - Released/Launched - Win.
Dual Universe - Currently in a Beta/Playable state - Win
City of Titans - Currently Not Playable - Fail.
Chronicles of Elyria - Direct Scam - Fail
Crowfall - Currently in a Alpha/Playable state - Win.
Shroud of the Avatar - Launched/Released - Win.
Elite: Dangerous - Launched/Released - Win.
Star Citizen - Still in Development/Not Playable - Progress being made but still - Fail.
Camelot Unchained - Still in Development/Not Playable - Progress being made but still - Fail.
Hex - vaporware? - Fail.
Ashes of Creation - Still in Development, Supposedly Playable State - Progress being Made but still - Fail
So.. break down: 14 total projects.
We have 7 games in a playable state, that count as Wins.
We have 7 games that are not in a playable state that count as Fails.
Of the 7 games that failed, We have 1 game that was a direct Scam and 1 game that just vanished into Vaporware.
So.. when you look at it, this is not that bad.
Only one was a direct Scam.
Which bring us back to Kickstarter's role in all this, how would Kickstarter know, out of these 14 projects, which one was the direct scam during the funding phrase?
(Revised as data was provided by Rhoklaw about Dual Universe)
Just want to point out Hex was not vaporware. I did play that game for a little bit. Not a bad game, actually. But Hearthstone was sadly the better one.
Oh, it went into a playable state? Great! Thanks for the heads up.. Will revise my Post.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
Note that Kickstarter will not release a single stat from reviews of backers about satisfaction.
Here is a very telling stat:
19,373,386
Total backers
6,531,129
Repeat backers
Not sure how much we can read from this, even though it is an interesting number. You could have both repeat backers that were satisfied neither time ("fool me twice" kind of guys) and people backing once because they were interested only in that project and were actually satisfied.
That's assuming they are not counting the repeat backers as separate people which they probably are. So its likely an even smaller percentage of actually unique people that ever backed again.
That's stretching it. I do not read it like that.
I don't see it stretching at all. If someone donated to 500 projects you don't think they going to count that as 500 repeat backings? If they were unique backers they likely would have used that term.
I will tell you what also, after reading reviews on this, a standard practice is for the people who start the Kickstarter to donate to their own project to get to the goal quicker, I believe Ashes of Creation founder admitted to this. Another point, is I don't know if you can donate twice to the same campaign, but if you can, then that's another repeat backer.
Finally, since Kickstarter posted these numbers, then you can almost guarantee that the percentage of repeat backers does not exceed this amount. So that's an absolute cap at 34% of repeat backers. It will only go down with any scrutiny.
My point was clearly around the 91% "success" number that was tossed out as some kind of proof that there was no problem. That number is utterly misleading when we look at MMORPGs launched on the site. Kickstarter has all the data. They advertise and push out emails to solicit money for projects based on their type. I think it would be eye opening to have a legit number that showed the rate of these projects that launched successfully (reasonably on time and reasonably complete with what they promised).
Also, the comparison to the stock market really falls flat. Kickstarter makes money based on a one time transaction with each company. After the campaign ends, they are proud to say that their relationship with that company ends as well.
The NYSE on the other hand makes money through an ongoing relationship with each company that will pay them fees. Also, to be listed on the NYSE there are actual requirements that serve as a check as to whether the company is listing worthy. It has to have 400 shareholders. It was to have over a million dollars in publicly traded stock and that stock has to be worth something like 30 or 40 million dollars. There is also a minimum share price for the NYSE.
Kickstarter is more like the OTC which lists penny stocks. OTC actually publishes exponentially more information than what I asked for. They have a a program called Compliance Analytics that is updated twice a day.
Oh yeah... and Kickstarter makes a flat 5% off the top. So the more extravagant Kickstarter's (MMOs) make them more money. If Kickstarter just had flat fees for each project then this would not be an issue, but instead, Kickstarter is incentivized to push the riskiest projects as they make the most profits. And yes, they push them as my inbox can attest.
One time or ongoing, the nature of the relationship is otherwise quite similar.
None of the requirements for being listed on the NYSE you mention include guaranteed success of the companies nor does their relationship with those listed include the oversight of them. Also, the NYSE suffers no penalty should any of the companies listed fail to operate to the desired standard of it's shareholders or go out of business entirely.
There is no requirement for Kickstarter to emulate the practices of the OTC.
There isn't an issue with Kickstarter charging a percentage either. It is by no means unusual for companies to do so for their services.
That Kickstarter notifies you of projects they feel may be of potential interest to you is something you can opt out of at any time and didn't have to agree to in the first place. So, as far as pushes go that's pretty gentle.
Note that Kickstarter will not release a single stat from reviews of backers about satisfaction.
Here is a very telling stat:
19,373,386
Total backers
6,531,129
Repeat backers
Not sure how much we can read from this, even though it is an interesting number. You could have both repeat backers that were satisfied neither time ("fool me twice" kind of guys) and people backing once because they were interested only in that project and were actually satisfied.
That's assuming they are not counting the repeat backers as separate people which they probably are. So its likely an even smaller percentage of actually unique people that ever backed again.
That's stretching it. I do not read it like that.
I don't see it stretching at all. If someone donated to 500 projects you don't think they going to count that as 500 repeat backings? If they were unique backers they likely would have used that term.
I will tell you what also, after reading reviews on this, a standard practice is for the people who start the Kickstarter to donate to their own project to get to the goal quicker, I believe Ashes of Creation founder admitted to this. Another point, is I don't know if you can donate twice to the same campaign, but if you can, then that's another repeat backer.
Finally, since Kickstarter posted these numbers, then you can almost guarantee that the percentage of repeat backers does not exceed this amount. So that's an absolute cap at 34% of repeat backers. It will only go down with any scrutiny.
In general I believe that the numbers show a general dissatisfaction with the Kickstarter process. That said I'll answer some of your points:
1. A repeat backer is likely just counted once. an account is a repeat backer if it backs 2 projects or 50.
2. Its against the KS rules to donate to their own projects. Not saying someone couldn't make fake accounts and do so, but that would be against the rules.
3. You can increase (or decrease) your pledge amount for each project but can only donate once per project. You could create a second account to donate at a different level if that is what you wanted. So yes, I have 2 accounts with KS due to that and would count as 2 repeat backers even though I am only one person.
4. Correct.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
My point was clearly around the 91% "success" number that was tossed out as some kind of proof that there was no problem. That number is utterly misleading when we look at MMORPGs launched on the site. Kickstarter has all the data. They advertise and push out emails to solicit money for projects based on their type. I think it would be eye opening to have a legit number that showed the rate of these projects that launched successfully (reasonably on time and reasonably complete with what they promised).
Also, the comparison to the stock market really falls flat. Kickstarter makes money based on a one time transaction with each company. After the campaign ends, they are proud to say that their relationship with that company ends as well.
The NYSE on the other hand makes money through an ongoing relationship with each company that will pay them fees. Also, to be listed on the NYSE there are actual requirements that serve as a check as to whether the company is listing worthy. It has to have 400 shareholders. It was to have over a million dollars in publicly traded stock and that stock has to be worth something like 30 or 40 million dollars. There is also a minimum share price for the NYSE.
Kickstarter is more like the OTC which lists penny stocks. OTC actually publishes exponentially more information than what I asked for. They have a a program called Compliance Analytics that is updated twice a day.
Oh yeah... and Kickstarter makes a flat 5% off the top. So the more extravagant Kickstarter's (MMOs) make them more money. If Kickstarter just had flat fees for each project then this would not be an issue, but instead, Kickstarter is incentivized to push the riskiest projects as they make the most profits. And yes, they push them as my inbox can attest.
One time or ongoing, the nature of the relationship is otherwise quite similar.
None of the requirements for being listed on the NYSE you mention include guaranteed success of the companies nor does their relationship with those listed include the oversight of them. Also, the NYSE suffers no penalty should any of the companies listed fail to operate to the desired standard of it's shareholders or go out of business entirely.
There is no requirement for Kickstarter to emulate the practices of the OTC.
There isn't an issue with Kickstarter charging a percentage either. It is by no means unusual for companies to do so for their services.
That Kickstarter notifies you of projects they feel may be of potential interest to you is something you can opt out of at any time and didn't have to agree to in the first place. So, as far as pushes go that's pretty gentle.
1. Not at all. An ongoing fee structure only makes me money if you exist to pay the fee. An upfront one time fee means I don't give a shit. That also covers your third point.
2. The NYSE has a massive amount of oversite by the SEC, which is quite a difference. Want to see similar oversite applied to Kickstarter? Then we can make it an apples to apples comparison.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
World of Warcraft cost $100 million to develop over 5 years with 40-80 developers working full time from 1996-2001.
Expecting a that a team of 5-20 amateur "developers" are going to create any game worthwhile within the same timeframe for just a couple million dollars is laughable.
To truly compete nowadays, it would require a team of 100-200 professional developers and a minimum of $200 million dollars to create anything worthwhile in 5 years or less. Even Amazon is struggling to do it.
Knowing that, it's so painfully obvious that crowdfunded MMO's are scams in disguise.
Kickstarter is not the one to blame here, it's whoever is giving these crowdfunded games money. These scams will continue to exist so long as gullible and naïve people continue to give them easy money.
I am glad that a study run by an educational institution like the University of Pennsylvania is what you classify as "Bogus". Maybe the problem is not the study, but that fact that you don't like the results, so nothing anyone does that does not agree with what you want to be the case, will placate you.
Also, Kickstarter gives all their stats, as far as they pertain to their direct company and their responsibly, which includes how much they have raised, what amount of ventures have been successfully funded, how many have not, and break down into categories as well.
All of which can be found in the link I provided. Here is again for anyone that didn't see the first link I provided: https://www.kickstarter.com/help/stats
Feel free to find the golden bullet you so dearly seek.
Note that Kickstarter will not release a single stat from reviews of backers about satisfaction.
Here is a very telling stat:
19,373,386
Total backers
6,531,129
Repeat backers
Pretty big drop-off there. That's over 11 years, only 34% ever backed another project. That's assuming they are not counting the repeat backers as separate people which they probably are. So its likely an even smaller percentage of actually unique people that ever backed again.
Why would Kickstarter pushes stats over what they aren't responsible for? The satisfaction of backers is up to those backed.
That fewer back more than once can be due to disappointment as you speculate. It could also be due to many other reasons, such as not finding any other projects of interest or that crowdfunding was atypical behaviour for some of them and only done in a single instance of particular interest.
It's not really a type of service one would necessarily expect repeat business.
Lets see.. MMO's have at best a 10% retainment rate, and no doubt surprisingly less if charted over 10 years, this is called a Turnover rate, which most of us already know about.
Kickstarter not only retained almost 40% of their backers to donate towards more than one project.
If you even bother to read to the 1 Star Reviews, they have a similar theme where they are treating KS like a store, where they were expecting to buy a product, and thus blaming KS for their issues with a creator. Almost without fail, these negative reviews make it clear they did not realize (never read the agreement maybe?) that once the money changes hands, Kickstarter makes it clear that they are no longer involved in the project and everything from that point on, is between them and the creator.
Does not stop these people from getting butthurt and blaming KS tho. One review was even asking people to report them for fraud... that you Brainy?
On the flip side of this.
If you read the 5 star Reviews, they all have the same theme, mainly being they realize that KS is not a store, they are not selling you a product, and that you need to do your due diligence and check up who and what you are backing.
So tells the quality of people that realize the quality of the service they are using.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
Lets see.. MMO's have at best a 10% retainment rate, and no doubt surprisingly less if charted over 10 years, this is called a Turnover rate, which most of us already know about.
Yeah I think you just pulling that number out of thin air. You saying 10% people pay a sub for 1 month then never pay again in their entire life? Yeah I don't believe that at all. I call full BS.
Plus over 10 years, that means anyone that played vanilla then played classic would count as a repeat player. So the longer the timeframe the greater the number of repeat players.
I think you are thinking along the lines of them keeping customers paying forever from day 1 till current. Which has zero to do with anything we have been talking about.
The repeat backers we talking about don't have to back a project every month for 20 years to qualify. All they have to do is back ONE more project EVER.
Lets see.. MMO's have at best a 10% retainment rate, and no doubt surprisingly less if charted over 10 years, this is called a Turnover rate, which most of us already know about.
Yeah I think you just pulling that number out of thin air. You saying 10% people pay a sub for 1 month then never pay again in their entire life? Yeah I don't believe that at all. I call full BS.
Plus over 10 years, that means anyone that played vanilla then played classic would count as a repeat player. So the longer the timeframe the greater the number of repeat players.
WoW Boasts they have over 100 Million Unique accounts, 4.88 Million Unique Accounts Logged into Vanilla Wow.
Feel Free to do the math.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
Lets see.. MMO's have at best a 10% retainment rate, and no doubt surprisingly less if charted over 10 years, this is called a Turnover rate, which most of us already know about.
Yeah I think you just pulling that number out of thin air. You saying 10% people pay a sub for 1 month then never pay again in their entire life? Yeah I don't believe that at all. I call full BS.
Plus over 10 years, that means anyone that played vanilla then played classic would count as a repeat player. So the longer the timeframe the greater the number of repeat players.
WoW Boasts they have over 100 Million Unique accounts, 4.88 Million Unique Accounts Logged into Vanilla Wow.
Feel Free to do the math.
Yeah no clue where you pulling 10% from at all with this statement lol. In fact this statement tells me ZERO about repeat accounts. Additionally no matter how I work those numbers I cant get to 10% anywhere.
In regards to Kickstarter - If you backed 1 project, then 1 minute later you backed another project but never again used the service you would be considered a repeat backer.
Using this standard wow probably has near 99% repeat players. I mean how many people log in, but never logged in again ever in their life.
I think you have left the building with this line of reasoning.
I have no idea why people are trying to punish Kickstarter.
They make it clear, their entire platform is to connect creators with backers.
Kickstarter did nothing wrong, if the Creator screws people, than the Creator is the Asshole that did wrong and should be punished, not Kickstarter.
That is like someone feeling that should be allowed to kick you personally in the face for what your coworker did, because "You are both in the same company"
I think the problem comes directly from the terminology. 'Creators' implies something being completed and delivered to the public. Too many game development projects have failed to be a 'creator' even under the broadest terms.
And, yes, Kickstarter (and other independent fund raising efforts) should be held liable for contributing to the situation when fraud is involved. After all, funding a criminal act is also a criminal act.
Only if they knew it was a criminal act while they were directly involved.
Case in point, if you were picking up a friend at a diner, and had no idea they shot someone, should you be charged with murder, because you took them home?
Charged with murder, no. Accomplice to murder, maybe depending on the specifics.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
I have no idea why people are trying to punish Kickstarter.
They make it clear, their entire platform is to connect creators with backers.
Kickstarter did nothing wrong, if the Creator screws people, than the Creator is the Asshole that did wrong and should be punished, not Kickstarter.
That is like someone feeling that should be allowed to kick you personally in the face for what your coworker did, because "You are both in the same company"
I think the problem comes directly from the terminology. 'Creators' implies something being completed and delivered to the public. Too many game development projects have failed to be a 'creator' even under the broadest terms.
And, yes, Kickstarter (and other independent fund raising efforts) should be held liable for contributing to the situation when fraud is involved. After all, funding a criminal act is also a criminal act.
Only if they knew it was a criminal act while they were directly involved.
Case in point, if you were picking up a friend at a diner, and had no idea they shot someone, should you be charged with murder, because you took them home?
Charged with murder, no. Accomplice to murder, maybe depending on the specifics.
The Specific being that you needed to know a crime had been committed, just saying.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
Lets see.. MMO's have at best a 10% retainment rate, and no doubt surprisingly less if charted over 10 years, this is called a Turnover rate, which most of us already know about.
Yeah I think you just pulling that number out of thin air. You saying 10% people pay a sub for 1 month then never pay again in their entire life? Yeah I don't believe that at all. I call full BS.
Plus over 10 years, that means anyone that played vanilla then played classic would count as a repeat player. So the longer the timeframe the greater the number of repeat players.
WoW Boasts they have over 100 Million Unique accounts, 4.88 Million Unique Accounts Logged into Vanilla Wow.
Feel Free to do the math.
Yeah no clue where you pulling 10% from at all with this statement lol. In fact this statement tells me ZERO about repeat accounts. Additionally no matter how I work those numbers I cant get to 10% anywhere.
Yah, helps if you know what you are talking about, which as we have all seen here, you really don't.
The 10% comes from the fact that WoW had at one time 10 Million Active Unique Accounts, while also having 100 Million Total Unique Accounts on file, ergo, a 10% retainment rate.
I thought you owned your own business this is like basic stuff anyone who even wants to try to sell anything should know.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
There's actually been many studies over the years regarding MMO retention rates and for the most part 10% retention after a year would be considered quite high, the real figures appear more like 3%, and this is in the F2P space.
I did like their reference to when a F2P game could expect to see an increase in "quality" players vs tourists.
"Stabilization and Dedicated Late Arrivals
For free-to-play MMOs we see stabilization occurring generally 24 months after release, as this is a period in which the quality of newly arriving players improves.
Players that start playing at this time are generally introduced by word-of-mouth or have made the decision to join after more careful consideration rather than trying the game out of boredom or serendipity.
Consequently, retention among these late arrivals skews higher, with roughly 40% of users logging on one day after their first login and 2 percent of them returning on the 30th day after they first log in."
EVE fairs quite a bit worse, falling to 10% in the first week, but as mentioned, it is a cruel "game" and more of a universe simulation than what players are traditionally looking for.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
WoW Boasts they have over 100 Million Unique accounts, 4.88 Million Unique Accounts Logged into Vanilla Wow.
Feel Free to do the math.
Yeah no clue where you pulling 10% from at all with this statement lol. In fact this statement tells me ZERO about repeat accounts. Additionally no matter how I work those numbers I cant get to 10% anywhere.
Yah, helps if you know what you are talking about, which as we have all seen here, you really don't.
The 10% comes from the fact that WoW had at one time 10 Million Active Unique Accounts, while also having 100 Million Total Unique Accounts on file, ergo, a 10% retainment rate.
I thought you owned your own business this is like basic stuff anyone who even wants to try to sell anything should know.
Its not my fault you cant seem to make any sense of what you say, and your math skills are lower than a 6th grader. To each their own, but don't blame me for it.
So you make a statement showing Wow current 100mil accounts, with 4mil unique users somehow I am supposed to extrapolate that you are using the current 100m number with a 10yr old active users number? Why would you even do that, how does one even correlate to another.
If you are going to use 10yr old active users, don't you think you should be using 10yr old total users?
What does Wow Monthly users have to do with repeat backers from Kickstarter anyway. Its not like we are talking Monthly Kickstarter users.
Your logic like your math is so flawed. LOL get real.
Comments
Ashes of Creation - Delayed, spawned spin-off game, seemingly progressing
HEX- Defunct
Camelot Unchained- Perpetual development hell
Star Citizen- Perpetual development hell and totally changed from it's Kickstarter goals/stated project.
Elite: Dangerous- launched!
Shroud of the Avatar- launched but flopped
Crowfall - multiple delays, seems to be inching to a launch
Chronicle of Elyria- Utter failure
City of Titans- Development hell
Dual Universe- Years late but seems to be nearing a launch
So from the top 10, I'd say one was an actual success. SotA you could toss in too if you really wanted to. All the others either outright failed or have experienced years of delays with no guarantee of ever launching.
So... to answer the question posed in the title: How horrible has the Crowdfunded MMO experience been? Its been fucking HORRIBLE.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Going down:
The Repopulation: currently in Early Access/playable state - Win.
Zenith: Slated to be Released this Year - We shall see, but still - Fail.
Adventure Quest 3D - Launched/playable. - Win.
TemTem - Released/Launched - Win.
Dual Universe - Currently in a Beta/Playable state - Win
City of Titans - Currently Not Playable - Fail.
Chronicles of Elyria - Direct Scam - Fail
Crowfall - Currently in a Alpha/Playable state - Win.
Shroud of the Avatar - Launched/Released - Win.
Elite: Dangerous - Launched/Released - Win.
Star Citizen - Still in Development/Not Playable - Progress being made but still - Fail.
Camelot Unchained - Still in Development/Not Playable - Progress being made but still - Fail.
Hex - Launched/Released - Win.
Ashes of Creation - Still in Development, Supposedly Playable State - Progress being Made but still - Fail
So.. break down: 14 total projects.
We have 8 games in a playable state, that count as Wins.
We have 6 games that are not in a playable state that count as Fails.
Of the 6 games that failed, We have 1 game that was a direct Scam and 1 game that just vanished into Vaporware.
So.. when you look at it, this is not that bad pretty good.
Only one was a direct Scam.
Which bring us back to Kickstarter's role in all this, how would Kickstarter know, out of these 14 projects, which one was the direct scam during the funding phrase?
(Revised as data provided by Rhoklaw about Dual Universe being in a playable state)
(Revised as data provided by DafAtRandom about Hex, having launched)
If Dual Universe is in a playable state, that was a mistake on my part. I am going to correct that now, thank you for the insight.
I set the win/fail metric by if they had a playable product at this time, that was the only metric I used.
I am not going to trust some person that made a study done in 2016 covering 2009 - 2015. Notice no platform will actually release their own data? All these platforms point to this study LOL. This study admits it only covers a small sample, and it collaborated with Kickstarter, and was supplied its data from Kickstarter.
Nobody else is going to release a study to confirm this info? I know the platforms wont because if they lie and are caught they could be sued. Why would they, when they can get people like you willing to link some bogus study.
Here is a better indication of the real results.
https://www.trustpilot.com/review/www.kickstarter.com
Let me summarize
Also, Kickstarter gives all their stats, as far as they pertain to their direct company and their responsibly, which includes how much they have raised, what amount of ventures have been successfully funded, how many have not, and break down into categories as well.
All of which can be found in the link I provided. Here is again for anyone that didn't see the first link I provided: https://www.kickstarter.com/help/stats
Feel free to find the golden bullet you so dearly seek.
Just want to point out Hex was not vaporware. I did play that game for a little bit. Not a bad game, actually. But Hearthstone was sadly the better one.
From the top 10 Kickstarters in the list only Elite and SotA meet that criteria (although I list SotA very grudgingly… it's not quite dead!). Seems like the guy you quoted wants to stretch from the OP to include Alpha states and pretty much any game that hasn't closed shop as a "win". Well, whatever floats your boat I guess. Sounds like of like Mr. Tiger's Blood Charlie Sheen's kind of winning.
The answer to "Exactly how horrible has the Crowdfunded MMO experiment been"? is simple: It's been fucking horrible!
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Note that Kickstarter will not release a single stat from reviews of backers about satisfaction.
Here is a very telling stat:
19,373,386
Total backers
6,531,129
Repeat backers
Pretty big drop-off there. That's over 11 years, only 34% ever backed another project. That's assuming they are not counting the repeat backers as separate people which they probably are. So its likely an even smaller percentage of actually unique people that ever backed again.
If they really won't be doing any more wipes then it's launched in my book, regardless what dev stage they claim it's currently in.
Edit: apparently wipes are still possible as the game transitions to launch, however the Devs are being a bit cagey around the subject. Here's the latest info I could find from an Oct 2020 forum discussion.
"To everyone who didn't see Captain Jack's interview with JC today, JC made some clarifications. If NQ does a server wipe they will give everyone "magic blueprints" of their constructs that will not require materials to place so that people can keep their progress."
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
I will tell you what also, after reading reviews on this, a standard practice is for the people who start the Kickstarter to donate to their own project to get to the goal quicker, I believe Ashes of Creation founder admitted to this. Another point, is I don't know if you can donate twice to the same campaign, but if you can, then that's another repeat backer.
Finally, since Kickstarter posted these numbers, then you can almost guarantee that the percentage of repeat backers does not exceed this amount. So that's an absolute cap at 34% of repeat backers. It will only go down with any scrutiny.
One time or ongoing, the nature of the relationship is otherwise quite similar.
None of the requirements for being listed on the NYSE you mention include guaranteed success of the companies nor does their relationship with those listed include the oversight of them. Also, the NYSE suffers no penalty should any of the companies listed fail to operate to the desired standard of it's shareholders or go out of business entirely.
That Kickstarter notifies you of projects they feel may be of potential interest to you is something you can opt out of at any time and didn't have to agree to in the first place. So, as far as pushes go that's pretty gentle.
1. A repeat backer is likely just counted once. an account is a repeat backer if it backs 2 projects or 50.
2. Its against the KS rules to donate to their own projects. Not saying someone couldn't make fake accounts and do so, but that would be against the rules.
3. You can increase (or decrease) your pledge amount for each project but can only donate once per project. You could create a second account to donate at a different level if that is what you wanted. So yes, I have 2 accounts with KS due to that and would count as 2 repeat backers even though I am only one person.
4. Correct.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
2. The NYSE has a massive amount of oversite by the SEC, which is quite a difference. Want to see similar oversite applied to Kickstarter? Then we can make it an apples to apples comparison.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Expecting a that a team of 5-20 amateur "developers" are going to create any game worthwhile within the same timeframe for just a couple million dollars is laughable.
To truly compete nowadays, it would require a team of 100-200 professional developers and a minimum of $200 million dollars to create anything worthwhile in 5 years or less. Even Amazon is struggling to do it.
Knowing that, it's so painfully obvious that crowdfunded MMO's are scams in disguise.
Kickstarter is not the one to blame here, it's whoever is giving these crowdfunded games money. These scams will continue to exist so long as gullible and naïve people continue to give them easy money.
Why would Kickstarter pushes stats over what they aren't responsible for? The satisfaction of backers is up to those backed.
That fewer back more than once can be due to disappointment as you speculate. It could also be due to many other reasons, such as not finding any other projects of interest or that crowdfunding was atypical behaviour for some of them and only done in a single instance of particular interest.
It's not really a type of service one would necessarily expect repeat business.
Kickstarter not only retained almost 40% of their backers to donate towards more than one project.
That's pretty amazing IMHO.
As far as this link goes:
https://www.trustpilot.com/review/www.kickstarter.com
If you even bother to read to the 1 Star Reviews, they have a similar theme where they are treating KS like a store, where they were expecting to buy a product, and thus blaming KS for their issues with a creator. Almost without fail, these negative reviews make it clear they did not realize (never read the agreement maybe?) that once the money changes hands, Kickstarter makes it clear that they are no longer involved in the project and everything from that point on, is between them and the creator.
Does not stop these people from getting butthurt and blaming KS tho. One review was even asking people to report them for fraud... that you Brainy?
On the flip side of this.
If you read the 5 star Reviews, they all have the same theme, mainly being they realize that KS is not a store, they are not selling you a product, and that you need to do your due diligence and check up who and what you are backing.
So tells the quality of people that realize the quality of the service they are using.
Yeah I think you just pulling that number out of thin air. You saying 10% people pay a sub for 1 month then never pay again in their entire life? Yeah I don't believe that at all. I call full BS.
Plus over 10 years, that means anyone that played vanilla then played classic would count as a repeat player. So the longer the timeframe the greater the number of repeat players.
I think you are thinking along the lines of them keeping customers paying forever from day 1 till current. Which has zero to do with anything we have been talking about.
The repeat backers we talking about don't have to back a project every month for 20 years to qualify. All they have to do is back ONE more project EVER.
Feel Free to do the math.
Yeah no clue where you pulling 10% from at all with this statement lol. In fact this statement tells me ZERO about repeat accounts. Additionally no matter how I work those numbers I cant get to 10% anywhere.
In regards to Kickstarter - If you backed 1 project, then 1 minute later you backed another project but never again used the service you would be considered a repeat backer.
Using this standard wow probably has near 99% repeat players. I mean how many people log in, but never logged in again ever in their life.
I think you have left the building with this line of reasoning.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
The 10% comes from the fact that WoW had at one time 10 Million Active Unique Accounts, while also having 100 Million Total Unique Accounts on file, ergo, a 10% retainment rate.
I thought you owned your own business this is like basic stuff anyone who even wants to try to sell anything should know.
I did like their reference to when a F2P game could expect to see an increase in "quality" players vs tourists.
"Stabilization and Dedicated Late Arrivals
Players that start playing at this time are generally introduced by word-of-mouth or have made the decision to join after more careful consideration rather than trying the game out of boredom or serendipity.
Consequently, retention among these late arrivals skews higher, with roughly 40% of users logging on one day after their first login and 2 percent of them returning on the 30th day after they first log in."
https://www.alistdaily.com/strategy/understanding-free-to-play-mmo-retention/
EVE fairs quite a bit worse, falling to 10% in the first week, but as mentioned, it is a cruel "game" and more of a universe simulation than what players are traditionally looking for.
https://kotaku.com/eve-online-developers-discuss-ways-to-stop-new-players-1835909279
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Its not my fault you cant seem to make any sense of what you say, and your math skills are lower than a 6th grader. To each their own, but don't blame me for it.
So you make a statement showing Wow current 100mil accounts, with 4mil unique users somehow I am supposed to extrapolate that you are using the current 100m number with a 10yr old active users number? Why would you even do that, how does one even correlate to another.
If you are going to use 10yr old active users, don't you think you should be using 10yr old total users?
What does Wow Monthly users have to do with repeat backers from Kickstarter anyway. Its not like we are talking Monthly Kickstarter users.
Your logic like your math is so flawed.
LOL get real.