NKD wrote on Jul 25, 2012, 13:15:

Verno wrote on Jul 25, 2012, 13:00:

Ugh, I wish people would stop bitching at what goes on Kickstarter and what doesn't. The crowd in general decides what gets funded and what doesn't

I don't think that's fair at all. For example we all frequently complain about other people doing things in the videogame market despite our ability to just ignore them and exercise our personal preferences and purchase rights. I know you're a part of that as much as the rest of us too :)

Yeah, there's nothing wrong with complaining about a particular KS not being worthwhile, but once people stray into "Kickstarter should start making more judgement calls about whats worthwhile." argument they are just being silly.

This isn't a project, it's funding a well established, ongoing business for an indefinite period of time with no actual guidelines or standards. So yeah obviously I'm going to exercise my rights not to fund it but I'm also going to voice my displeasure that they're allowing it on there despite all of those things.

Actually there are a list of goals, which include actual production of new material, and a time frame listed of one year. It's not unlike a comic saying "Okay for this much we can produce 12 monthly issues." Are they no longer allowed to come back for more in another year to produce more?

Many Kickstarters are there to produce a product that will then be sold. This is different in that it is not making anything that will be sold, it's free even to those who haven't contributed.

I just think the attitude of "You're too manestream to use Kickstarter" reeks of hippy bullshit. Who's to say existing projects can't change to an alternative funding model? I can think of a number of game developers who are "well established, ongoing businesses" that everyone here would cream themselves if they freed themselves of the shackles of a publisher.