
Valve: Let Fans Fund Games Development - chaostheory
http://kotaku.com/5318368/valve-let-fans-fund-games-development
======
matthew-wegner
Mount & Blade did this. They allowed players to buy the game while it was
still in development. Early versions started off quite cheap, and they raised
the price as they did releases (culminating with version 1.0 at the final
retail price). Some info here:

<http://www.taleworlds.com/mb_buy_en.html>

Cortex Command is another game doing the same. The message on their website
reads:

"Please note that Cortex Command is currently a work in progress and NOT a
finished product! The campaign mode and missions are not yet present in the
version available right now. However, you may buy a discounted license today,
which will unlock the features of all future versions up to and including the
final with the full campaign in it!

As we at Data Realms continue to release more complete builds of the game, we
will also be reducing the discount gradually until we reach the final version
and full price of the product. So the earlier you buy, the better value you
get! Although we are very passionate about this project, we cannot guarantee
that it will be completed - that's why we offer the discounted price instead
of a pre-order deal at full price."

<http://www.datarealms.com/games.php>

Cortex Command is basically a one-man operation. Dan currently sells the game
at $18, with _identical bits_ at $38 labeled as a "support data realms"
version. He is very clear that the versions are the same; only the price is
different. A nontrivial amount of people buy the $38 version! Full disclosure:
Dan is a good local friend of mine.

~~~
ido
I've met Dan a few days ago in Sweden, and apparently he is making a decent
living off of Cortex Command.

------
psawaya
What happens if the project falls through/runs out of money? It would be cool
if the developers signed some sort of contract requiring them to open source
everything in such a case.

~~~
codedivine
Game developers many times use third-party IP (for example game engines). In
such a case, open sourcing is worthless.

~~~
psawaya
That's definitely true in a lot of cases, but many of the more indie-friendly
engines (like Source, I believe) are free or cheap for non-commercial use. I
think that works well with the fact that this funding model is most likely to
work with indie-scale projects.

------
calcnerd256
This could be like a more extreme version of pre-orders: fully-paid pre-orders
paid directly to the developers before development begins, with the potential
for there to eventually be no product. Who wants to bet on Duke Nukem Forever?
Maybe an agreed-upon fraction instead of the full amount. I'd pay $20 now for
a chance for DNF to come into existence later so I can pay the other $30 NPV
of it or however much (if I thought I would be a PC gamer by then).

------
nopassrecover
I'm not sure on the legalities etc. but the idea of investing in a particular
project with returns sounds great - it could help align the profit motive with
making a great game.

An interesting extension would be a similar approach to additional
features/content for existing products, although I'm not sure how you judge
the returns of this stuff beyond combining it in expansion/content packs.

------
kevbin
Would be a good model for some television series, too—if budgets could be
reasonably estimated and controlled.

------
roc
Nice idea, but in practice this could never work at scale.

A hundred, a thousand, a million stakeholders in a project? They'd have near-
zero say in the direction of the project and essentially no recourse if the
developer went off the rails.

~~~
whughes
It works for companies, doesn't it? I think you're putting too much stock (no
pun intended) in the "democratic" aspect of the idea. I could see it working
much better as a way of expressing support and vaguely influencing direction.
The stakeholders don't need to make every decision for the design team. That's
why there is a design team.

~~~
BrentRitterbeck
I'll probably be blasted for this, but I don't believe using democratic
principles in a company is a good idea. You need someone with a view of what
needs to be done and then you distribute out the work.

~~~
cdr
I downvoted, but for the "I'll probably be blasted for this" - don't
presuppose reaction.

------
drawkbox
This is the entire business model of indie games in many cases.

~~~
roc
The key difference is that people support indie developers by buying a
completed product; they don't have economic interest in an ongoing
development.

So there aren't any thorny legal and economic questions.

~~~
drawkbox
True that is the case with many, but in some cases online games like
<http://www.minecraft.net/> are solely supported by the fans, users of the
game as it is being built.

------
bbot
This has already been done.

<http://www.kickstarter.com/>

What is Kickstarter?

Kickstarter is a new way to fund ideas and endeavors.

Project creators can offer products, services or other benefits ("rewards") to
inspire people to support their project: A hot-air balloon ride to the first
person to pledge $300, an invitation to the BBQ for anyone who pledges more
than $5, exclusive daily video updates for anyone who pledges more than $1.
It's up to each project creator to sculpt their own offers and there's lots of
cool ways to do it.

I don't know if it's been used to fund a video game yet, though.

