NPR takes a gander at board game funding through Kickstarter
NPR has a small article on the Kickstarter trend for funding board games. Also a bit on the potential impact on the industry.
Posted Jul 5, 2020, 1:09 PM UTC
988120
I'd like to hear more about the extent to which companies use it purely as a marketing and sales tool. In theory, Kickstarter is for raising funds to get a project off the ground. But what fraction of successful Kickstarters are for games that a company already knows they can make and sell successfully and already has the capital needed to do so (and may have in fact already invested significant capital)? Or in extreme cases, perhaps even secured distribution deals?
On the flip side, the article mentions why Kickstarter is not as good for video games, but I wonder if there are other industries that would benefit from adopting more of a Kickstarter culture.
102
Marketing is alot of the point of KS. It's more efficient for companies to use the facility that KS provides than to try to do it themselves. KS has eyeballs waiting to look, reputation already established, hype practices mapped out.
Even "good" projects might not do nearly as well without KS marketing. It has a huge reach, the minor companies who use it just could not replicate what it offers.
66
As newbies, we put out a survey on our first Kickstarter asking people where they'd heard about us (Facebook, Twitter, Youtube, you know/met us personally, etc). We also included an "Other".
We forgot to include "Kickstarter" which was something like 90% of the responses.
12
Wowsers. Though actually that makes sense to me, there are few places I personally would "discover" a game and KS is one of them. Unless it was prominently mentioned on BGG front page or covered by one of the couple of review sites I follow, I'd either see it on KS or not at all.
3
There's now way newbies could afford advertising like that.
As much as KS has I problems being used a platform for big companies, for indies it's the only option.
6
yep there is literally no other place to discover new games as easy as KS. most times I'll start with KS and then look at youtube for more info or something.
1
Or maybe its about the interest free financing
10
It's interest free, but not fee free
7
~8% fees, for everyone's info.
10
It's about funding too, it's also about logistics. These are the barriers that smaller publishers face in getting to market.
3
Nah, the point of doing a Kickstarter is to raise capital without having to give up any ownership of your company.
0
Well yeah, that's what the crowdfunding model is. Small producers raise capital for capital-intensive project phases.
2
Also a big advantage to game creators for Kickstarter campaigns is the fact that they don't have to spend money on storage. Once the product is finished and shipped it pretty much goes directly to the backers. The creators don't have to spend money on storage while they wait for people to place orders for their game. In an industry where the profit margin is relatively small this is a major advantage.
24
This doesn't require the apparatus of Kickstarter though, does it? I would think that you could get the same advantage from all pre-order sales. It's just that all KS sales are pre-orders.
6
Yes and no. A pre-order presupposes that you have a finished product. It's usually a purchase for a specific product that you will receive. Many of the Kickstarters are not finished games and there's no guarantee that you will get what you pay for. Are there Kickstarters that basically use the platform as a pre-order? Absolutely. But an actual pre-order and a kickstart are fundamentally different.... Even if the latter is often treated as the former.
14
A good example of this is the P500 system from GMT games. Once they get 500 or near 500 orders they will do a print run
12
Plus, they only charge you when it's ready to ship, not a year ahead of time.
5
Kickstarter allows a company to more precisely gauge demand.
6
The main sales for big companies are still trough retail. I think they just keep doing KS because why not. Easy up front money they essentially can run away with if they want to and have no obligation to supporters.
This is what makes Kickstarter so attractive to individual makers and less attractive to other gaming industries — like video game makers. It takes a lot of startup value to create your own video game, for instance, but for board games, you only need a good enough idea and a well-placed Kickstarter page to gauge public interest.
Not only that but most video games take at least 5 years to develop and are more challenging to make, so there is a lot more risk.
And with platforms like steam they can easily self-publish a game, put it in early-access for years and still make money from it, even if they never finish it properly. The boardgame scene doesn't have a platform with so many existing users where you can get money up-front like that over long periods of time.
6
That original purpose of Kickstarter hasn't been at the forefront for at least a decade (at least for boardgames that have a snowballs chance in hell to get funded). At first I ranted against that myself but I've come to see it in a more benign light.
Yes big board game companies already have the capital to make the game but boardgames are a somewhat risky business. You need to know pretty well how many copies you'll be able to shift of your game. If you overprint you can easily undo all the profit you made and end up with a noticable loss. So a primary function of Kickstarter is as a tool to estimate demand for the game. And I don't begrudge them this.
Still not a fan of the KS exclusives and stretch goal whoring that goes on...
3
I wasn't intending to rant, and I don't think there's much "wrong" with how KS is used. I just feel like it's a natural thing to discuss in an article titled "board game funding through KS," and it would be interesting to see some journalism that goes even slightly beyond what even the most casual board gamers know about KS.
1
I don’t have a problem with big companies using Kickstarter to drum up interest.
It’s like Pepsi putting a huge billboard right next to my little one; that’s good for them and good for me too.
2
I’m working on a board game now and we’re definitely looking to KS as our main source of sales and marketing. We have other avenues too but like some other folks said, the audience and pre-production interest is huge.
2
For the most part, every extremely successful Kickstarter campaign did not need Kickstarter for the financing.
You cannot be successful on Kickstarter without dropping a fair amount of money on art and a fair amount on marketing. There are not many people who would buy a game they have never played, without seeing the art that helps bring it to life - especially when there are tons of other campaigns from established companies with mind-blowing art.
1
My only issue is the article only talks about the upside and none of the downsides. KS is not a store not a pre-order system like many like to call it. While there are companies that reliably deliver, there are plenty of r/ShittyKickstaters . KS should be forced to put up a note when You pledge that requires you to acknowledge that by pledging you understand that You may loose 100% of your pledge and KS also takes no responsibility for whatever happens.
You have crap companies like Golden Bell and Ninja Division that have taken backer money and not delivered. KS is a great platform for fraud and if there are issues KS is not going to help you in any way and neither is your credit card company in most cases. KS has rules which they selectively enforce. The only time they get involved is if there is an IP issue because they could get in trouble too. Otherwise, they state, and love to say that it is buyer beware. Sure, you can sue but good luck if you are in another state or country than the creator. Given the cost of even small claims court fees, it may not be worth the cost to even bother.
KS has Zero consumer protection. You are pledging on a idea and promise but no guarantee of delivery. While many have surged to KS while being locked up in their homes, many, and I will argue most people, are going in blind into KS.
I myself have backed many games over the last 10yrs and have been lucky to not have been burned but I know a few who have been burned and stories people have posted on this sub.
I am not saying don't risk taking a chance on KS, just be aware that you have with every project the chance of losing everything you pledged because a creator can walk away and know that he has very little risk to being made accountable or sued because neither KS cares nor are there any real protections for you.
While some will quote some case in Seattle with the AG getting involved and you may even find a document on the FTC website saying they had planned to investigate these are rare, far inbetween and do not expect anyone to help you if a creator walks away with your money.
47
I once backed a game originally called Minions. First thing that happened was Universal/Illumination bitchslapped them with IP name infringement suits (don't even remember what they changed the name to in the end).
Second big issue was that they massively overstated how much of the work was done (at least half of the card art wasn't complete - they had at least one update that was literally them asking if anyone did digital art and wanted to contribute)
There was also no sense of urgency - we got updates about how things were being delayed because two of the creators were a couple and they needed to take time away to plan their wedding. I honestly couldn't care less that you're a couple, getting married, etc.
Which brings me to my last bit - there's no eject button and no recourse for the backers if shit goes off the rails. I finally got my game over 3 years late. I was so frustrated by the whole kickstarter experience, all the bullshit, etc that I didn't want it anymore. I rifled through the cards one or twice and then it sat on a shelf collecting dust until it was tossed on the goodwill pile the next time I was clearing out my closet.
8
Obviously a conversation that's floated around the community long time ago, but it's neat to see NPR cover it. Certainly Kingdom Death: Monster was my big kick, but there have been many others I've excitedly tracked from start to finish. The only dud I've gotten was Endure The Stars; great premise, but lackluster execution.
21
For me the dud was Kill The Unicorns. It was the worst experience and that's including the other game where they shipped it with a single sheet of sheet music to exploit a loophole in shipping costs
4
Just say Unbroken.
4
And give them any brand recognition? No thanks. I didn't bother playing it after I finally did get it, and the story of the sheet music is more important to people reading that didn't know than "just saying Unbroken".
5
God dammit.
This was to be the first solo game that I owned, was looking forward to playing it in my new house after separating. I guess the good news is that I now simply ignore anything to do with Golden Bell Studios.
2
I think the board game industry tends to be a good fit for something like kickstarter, and I view it as a positive development overall for boardgames, specifically. There are industries for which it tends to be a better or worse fit. For example, I'd say it has probably been a bad thing overall for the video game industry.
I think it works best for creative endeavors, especially those with a particular niche or core fanbase. The worst projects seem to be those involving technology or capital goods, like smartwatches, or grills, or sportswear. The sort of stuff that would have been on infomercials in the 90s.
7
It's worth remembering that Kickstarter boardgame culture is very dangerous for your FLGS. FLGS need to have high velocity of turnover, since their margins are low. When a game goes to Kickstarter, a FLGS typically cannot back it (because the time to get a return on investment is so high) and it eats at the demand they normally service. There is clearly a huge market of people willing to lend creators hundreds of millions of dollars in interest-free financing, whether they need it or not, and this is damaging the FLGS economy. Now, whether we need the FLGS is something you're going to have to decide for yourself, but it's worth being aware of what Kickstarter is doing to them.
4
That’s a very interesting conversation to have. While we all care about our FLGSs and want them to succeed. It also narrows creators’ margins when they need to go through publishers and distributors to retail. Either way, someone is losing out. I’m by no means a SME on this topic though. I’m just getting into board design myself and what I know is limited to what I’ve read and listened to.
3
i only have 3 projects pending arrival right now. This is the lowest it's been in a long time. Excited to back something new, but there appears to be a lull for the time being.
2
I’ve only backed one and a half kickstarters. One was for some Wizard dice that I was excited for but that slowed down as the fulfillment date kept getting pushed back further and further due to issues with plastic quality control in China. Still, following the updates was rather fascinating. And I was thrilled when I received them. They looked and felt awesome and even after the wait I was happy I backed them. Side note- I then Had to move across country and they, along with a box of my smaller board games accidentally got donated to goodwill. I miss you awesome wizard dice.
The half was just a Kickstarter I bought from a friend. Siege of the Citadel 2nd edition. I think it’s 4 years past due at this point. I bought it for a fraction of the KS price from him because he was sick of waiting and had given up on it. I still check monthly for updates and hopefully I’ll see it sometime in 2021.
2
What game was the article referring to when mentioning the creator that lost his house to pay for the shipping/completion of the campaign?
2
I think it is glory to Rome the black box edition
4
Isn’t it a little late in the ‘game’ for a Kickstarter article? The cat has been out of the bag for years in the Board Gaming community...overall, it’s nice NPR took the time to publish this article...I am a decades long devotee of NPR...but I get the feeling many traditional Kickstarter backers have become hesitant to fund games with so many ‘misses’ regarding new games, production and timely delivery...no rational person can expect each new game to be the next ‘Gloomhaven’...but overall, in the board game community, am I wrong to think Kickstarter is beginning to lose that fresh, NIS, heavenly glue and ink scented luster responsible for the ‘rebirth’ of board gaming about a decade ago...will we see competitors to Kickstarter? Will brick and mortar game stores suffer? Are the LGS’ suffering? What can the board game community anticipate? Is Kickstarter the end all-be all for new, exciting, lifestyle altering board games? What are your thoughts? Enlighten me, I’m sort of new to collecting and playing board games and depend on podcasts, Reddit and The Dice Tower for reviews, recommendations and guidance. Thanks everyone!
1†
i agree i thought this was written like 2-3 years ago. def late to the game but there are still some big KS projects in board games out there.
1
Yes, one might say there are too many? K$ most definitely played a big part in the revitalization of interest in board games as other companies (FFG, Rio Grande, AH, Days of Wonder and others) continue to develop, expand and market great games. You’re five years late to the ‘game’ if you’re just now learning of K$....
0
Every article is fluff.
1
[removed]
1
My thing about kickstarter is while I love a lot of the things that have come out of it I also feel like you are investing in an idea for absolutely no payback other than the ability to purchase that end result of that idea...
Which feels right on point with late stage capitalism honestly.
1
Raising 13 million is no joke. The board game hobby is growing.
1
It’s just catan with extra steps
0
Looks like Catan
-1†
[deleted]
-5†
It’s an article from a major mainstream news outlet - they are going to use an image that has high recognition while having at least some connection to the subject of the article. You should be happy they use Catan, not so long ago they would have used a picture of Monopoly or Chess for basically any board gaming story.
19
The problem isn't the level of gateway game, the problem is everyone using the same gateway game for their header. Besides, a game in the header somewhat close to Catan can elicit a similar reaction while also hooking the reader in. A game like Clans of Caledonia (a KS game, notably) or the new Castles of Burgundy both have similar pastoral landscapes and types of components. But once the visitor is caught, they'll see that the game is actually unfamiliar and be intrigued. What is this game? It looks like Catan! I've seen this sort of thing happen on the non-boardgame subreddits, and I've seen it happen in real life at countless meetups, parties, and game nights. I think everyone using Catan just because everyone uses Catan is lazy journalism, especially from an outlet I expect to be more creative and more respectful of its audience's intelligence.
-4†
And the dumbest part is that Catan isn't even remotely contemporary anymore, it's old as fuck. It's older than half the people on this sub. It's not just that they're using the same game over and over as a token for hobby gaming, it's that it's no longer a hobby game and it's so old that it's completely irrelevant to the discussion.
3
Except they didn't go take a picture of Catan. The way most of these articles work is they use Getty Images (which is indeed the source for the picture in the article) to find an image they can use since they don't have to worry about either paying someone a license, or buying whatever game and setting it up and taking images. If the photographer doesn't own a specific game, it's unfair to expect them to buy that game to get a picture of it for one article.
If you go to Getty Images, most board game images are of things like monopoly. There aren't pictures for most games (you mentioned Clans of Caledonia and Castles of Burgundy - neither of which I could find Getty Image results for). So Catan therefore becomes the default, since it has tons of images there.
If you want pictures of other games, I suggest take some yourself that are high quality, and put them up on Getty Images. But the reason there's a picture of Catan definitely isn't lazy journalism.
10
I am surprised Wingspan hasnt taken over as the poster-child of modern board gaming.
1
It is well known but Catan is a household name so I would be surprised if wingspan took it over.
I personally have never been a big fan of Catan but must acknowledge it's massive following even among people that won't play any other boardgames.
4
EXACTLY.
It reads like an article someone started 15 years ago and only recently got around to finishing.
1†
[removed]
-8
Writer of this article mentions the dopamine rush you get when your project reaches its goal. I backed my first ever kickstarter project three weeks ago, and I am glued to the page, watching the numbers rise and new stretch goals get revealed, it's completely addictive. I feel called out lol.
Edit: used the wrong neurotransmitter, it is dopamine.
I've backed about 150 projects over the last ten years, and that rush wore off for me a while ago. I enjoy watching projects I'm excited about or from creators I like succeed but once I back it, I rarely look at the numbers and don't jump on every stretch goal announcement.
Yeah, same here. I sometimes forget I even backed a game until I get a shipping notice. It's like random Christmas.
"Yay! Thank you, me, that was so thoughtful. It's just what I wanted."
Kickstarters are gift to Future Me from Past Me.
I always say they're past me's explanation for my broke-ness.
Nice
My favorite part of Kickstarter. I've considered the possibility of making a business out of the idea. You buy something but we don't ship it for months so you get a nice surprise present later.
AliExpress! ;-))
On the other hand, that will probably happen to me too once it ends. Lotta time between now and next year.
Exactly this. I don't actually ever remember being particularly emotionally invested in or following projects, once I make the decision to back. My process is often "Oh, hey, that sounds dope as hell. Backed." (forget completely that I backed the project) "What's this email? Oh, a project I backed hit the funding goal. Cool. I look forward to getting that game in a couple of years." (immediately forget about the game again) "what's this, they need my shipping info? Oh, right, I forgot about that project. I should probably log into Kickstarter and see if I have anything else coming up, too."
Thats me as well, though once in a while I'll log into kickstarter and see what backed project might be coming in the mail soon. And wind up backing 2 or 3 more coming down the pipeline!
100% this.
I am here too
Does backing mean you were the one that came up with the idea for the board game and needed funding?
Or does it mean you donated x dollars to someone else’s board game and when they finish you get it sent in the mail?
backing means you are the customer.
Backers donated money to the project.
Shouldn't that be dopamine? I think endorphins are produced through excercise as a fight-or-flight aide.
Perhaps the pain of seeing your empty wallet triggers the release?
“We’re having sheep miniatures tonight with a side of vegetable miniatures!”
They're related: among other things endorphins block GABA in the central nervous system, which in turn increases the production and release of dopamine. Dopamine is associated with pleasure and reward, endorphins with euphoria.
Huh, you're right! And I was quoting from the article too.
I have backed 100s of projects and never had this reaction. I view it as a business transaction. I back the project then check in the last day to manage my pledge. Fill out the pledge manager if there is one when thay happens. Otherwise I have zero interaction with the project.
I think when you think about what Kickstarter was originally, projects that may or may not reach their funding goal, it makes sense to have this reaction. Now it's just more of a pre-order system where you basically know a project will get funded. I think they added stretch goals basically to get back to people getting excited and them wanting to put more money into a project.
In my mind there are 3 main categories of games on kickstarter today.
1.Pre-Order games with exclusives or a discount as an incentive to back. (CMON)
2.Super deluxe, ambitious or extravagant games that are expensive to produce with a niche audience and without kickstarter would never get enough publicity to get made. (Cthulhu Wars, Gloomhaven or SHEOL)
3.Small indie developers who need kickstarter to get capital to make their game. These are games that could be pitched to traditional publishers, but maybe the developer wants to keep it indie. (Bargain Quest, Welcome to)
The third type still occurs, they just don’t normally make huge waves in the boardgame scene.
Personally I'm not a fan of any game being on Kickstarter that doesn't need to be, ie any game from a reasonably successful publisher that could just produce the game without it. These companies are using it to mitigate risk and that's not the intended purpose. I will never back a game that I know will have a commercial release no matter what.
That said, I'm just against the very idea of pre-ordering in general. I think products were better when consumers had more power. I think we've gone too far away from the old days where companies had to prove themselves first and then they got the money. The only exception I make is early access video games because they have an evolving demo I can actually play and continually evaluate as it is developed. I don't really consider this a pre-order because I'm actually getting the product, at least partially.
I don't really understand the mentality of people who pre-order. What is the purpose when you know you can just buy it when it comes out, after you know if it's good or not? Backing projects that really need your help is one thing, but pre-orders are just you giving a company money interest free for no reason. Do people get a high from being able to say they bought the product first or something?
I'd say two and one have a lot in common. I'd put Gloomhaven in the small indie developer group too since Gloomhaven was their first game and I don't believe the company has made any other games. I agree that these games are niche and need a Kickstarter system to sell their games. I'd say for 3 is that they don't make huge waves because of how people are on BoardGameGeek if people were to look for games to play and these games are ranked lower. I think Welcome to is a known game in boardgame groups and gets played quite a bit and could be mass-marketed. Fog of Love was picked up by Walmart and was exclusive by them for some time.
There is some overlap between these. Pax Pamir is both the second and third types. Especially with the first edition.
Gloomhaven needed a kickstarter to happen. Do you think the company would have any trouble making Frosthaven on their own after their success?
With the low funding goals the bigger projects these days have, they have their funding goal within minutes anyway. And stretch goals are just there to keep the page active so they stay at the top of the rankings on the site.
A lot of the initial funding goals are really BS though. Many of the hardware projects have goals set to only $10,000 or so so that they can brag about meeting their goal really fast when in reality they need $100,000+ to actually make and deliver their project at scale. For many projects the stretch goals are the actual goals and the initial goal is just artificially lowered so they can brag about meeting it quickly and because if they don't people wont back their project. Kickstarter added a budget management beta run to layout how much and how you'll use your funding but most of the large projects ignore it because their real budget is 10X or 100X larger than their funding goal. The "project's we love" thing is also a somewhat silly arbitrary system of promotion where they layout guidelines for getting onto it like being transparent about your funding goal but then ignore most of those guideljnes during the selection process. The marketing budgets of the large projects alone can be far greater than what their initial artificial goals are set to.
TLDR: Most large projects cost a lot more than $10,000 or whatever their goals are to build and deliver.
Source: I'm a kickstarter creator and have been studying projects and trends.
Yeah, when I see things that say funded in X hours or hour or minutes. I just like yeah, no surprise. The indie ones that it's really nice to see them take off. I feel like everyone is usually more prepared these days when it comes to these projects. When indies get big, it can be a problem, like if you look at the Glory to Rome example in the article or Fog of Love.
I still back those sorts of projects. I back projects from first time designers, first time creators, etc. I just never felt the need to hang on everything that happens in the campaign. I really only care about the end result.
Most comment sections also are cesspools of human interaction. You usually have the one or two people who post the same thing over and over. Or the people who have appointed themselves the ambassador of the campaign and anytime someone has an idea they disagree with they shutdown the conversation. Or the person who is disgruntled from a previous campaign spamming away. Or it is just a general slow moving chat room and anyone who has a real campaign question just gets lost in their random jibberjabber.
I never interact with people in the comments. I don't think there is any reason to do that.
Ah, don't forget the person who has a question about the project, but is easily answered on the campaign page and FAQ, but they can't bother to read, so they post the question 15 times (along with a few other people), and when they are told where they can find the information they get pissed and can no longer deal with it and curse the project and all those who touch it along with their entire bloodline...
You don't care at all about what bonuses they're adding to decide whether you back it or not? I'm much more of a last few days backer. I want to see how it's going before backing. I know this means I'm relying on people like you to back it first, but I'm always surprised when people are willing to back with so little information.
Well, I wouldnt back the game if I wasnt happy with what I was getting for my money, so anything on top of that is exactly that, a bonus. I dont speculate on kickstarters, meaning I dont back with my money now in the hopes that what I am getting will be acceptable to me by the time the campaign ends.
I really dont need much information at all to back. I know what I like and I know what my group will play. Based on that I can skim a kickstarter and just know from experience if it will work or not. Of all the games Ive backed, maybe 5 havent gone over well, so that's a pretty good average.
That's good that you're able to back things that turn out to be good games. I don't have so much confidence in my ability to estimate such things without solid reviews and such. I also generally don't find projects to be good value without stretch goals added, but I guess that's just a difference of perspective or the size of our wallets. I have some 500+ games and I still don't trust crowd funded games for the most part.
[deleted]
What did you back
Fire Tower, looks super fun and easy to convince family to play.
I’ve got fire tower, it is a lot of fun but don’t think to much about the theme, lol. 2 player and 4 player works best, 3 player kinda feels like bullying in that one player is always between the other two.
It’s a good laugh though and very easy to teach and play.
I can neither confirm nor deny having refreshed kicktraq an unreasonable number of times.
This is why I hate the boardgames Kickstarter trend.
Both the KS projects I backed funded within minutes and have no stretch goals, so this has not happened to me yet.
It feels just as good at project 247.
Wait, have you really backed 427 projects? Dang!
I remember that high and it caused me to back a ton of projects over the course of 2 year period. That spell has been broken after receiving a number of them and being underwhelmed and spending way too much on KS. I still back a project or two a month but luckily I no longer have an emotional tie in and I developed a more critical eye towards projects. The faster you get that critical approach the better it’ll be for your wallet and the less disappointment you’ll experience.