I’ve done Fig twice now. I believe it was for Psyhonauts 2 and PoE 2. They suckered me in because of Psychonauts 2, there was no way to say no to a sequel to one of my favorite games. And then PoE2 they sucked me in because of giving away discounts for backing their other games.
So I guess it’s Fig and Kickstarter for me. The last project I backed on Kickstarter was Overload, the new game by the guys who did Descent. Their little demo was so good, I felt like they deserved my money just for that. And then for good measure, I bought the game again a second time.
Same here. I haven’t seen anything I’ve backed on Fig complete yet, but I’m confident Psychonauts 2 will be released at least. But I guess I don’t care as much which crowdfunding platform is used, it’s more based on how interesting I find the project and how confident I am that the developers will follow through.
I mean, Kickstarter’s allowed some pretty shifty projects in the past. The big potential issue with Indiegogo (aside from visibility and, last I tried it, less site design chops) is/was their option for “flexible funding”, where the project creator receives any pledged funds regardless of whether the goal is reached. They also offer “fixed funding”, which is the Kickstarter style all-or-nothing model. But it is something to check on IGG projects.
I’ve backed a few things on Indiegogo, but they’ve all been fixed-funding projects. (Flexible funding has always felt like its primary reason to exist in the first place is to enable scams.) The main reason for a legitimate project to use Indiegogo over Kickstarter is the way funds are distributed; rather than waiting until the campaign is over, the initial funding goal is collected and distributed to the project creator when it’s met, with the intent being that they can actually work on stuff at that time rather than having to wait another month and a half for the campaign to end and then for Kickstarter to finish collecting pledges.
Speaking of, Indiegogo success Them’s Fightin’ Herds is out in early access today!
They originally planned to do a proper release with the first episode of story mode (the rest will be free updates) today, but ran into some setbacks with that and a few other features, so it’ll be in early access for a while. I played it a bit, and it’s got some cool stuff going on, but it clearly needs work - right now, it’s got a lot of unfinished or missing animations, unpolished UI, and some odd bugs.
Yeah flexible finding is primarily the issue. It really draws the scams.
Also there’s been a number of times when a kick starter has been identified as shady as fuck and kicked off that site only to pop up immediately after on indie gogo.
Medieval city builder Foundation is promising none of that boring gridded urban planning in this simulation! $22 US to buy in.
Frankly, pretty much all the features in this are in Settlers 7 (including a kind of customizable palace), but for an indie dev this doesn’t look too bad, and it’d be nice to be able to play with systems like this without the AI enemies always kicking my ass.
Don’t know if anyone else is following or participating in the Endeavor Kickstarter but I’m really pleased with how they’ve blown through their stretch goals. Lots of otherwise cardboard counters now will get wooden pieces, there’s an organizer being designed, lots of new options added. Glad I got in on this one.
It still does I think. I’ve backed on multiple platforms, but because Kickstarter only charges you if successful, I feel like it’s the most trusted. At least for me it is. I’ve had no problems with Fig or IndieGoGo though.
Thanks all, again super helpful. Sounds like Kickstarter is still the default choice with others having pros and cons. I will say I think Indiegogo’s post funded system of In Demand seems pretty cool. But apparently you can use it even if you were funded on KickStarter (for an xtra fee) so thats cool.
Benefit Corporations are different. Benefit Corporations are for-profit companies that are obligated to consider the impact of their decisions on society, not only shareholders. Radically, positive impact on society becomes part of a Benefit Corporation’s legally defined goals.
Huh. I have never heard of Benefit Corporations before this. I like the idea but I wonder if there will end up being a practical difference between that and companies that just happen to be run in a positive way at a given moment.
The change happened around three years ago and they’re legally obligated to it, so it’s not just an empty promise. Compared to normal corporations where they’re legally obligated to maximize shareholder value but they might do good things for appearances now and then (to in turn increase shareholder value).
Here is one of their statements from their first year of being a PBC:
