ED Forums

ED Forums (https://forums.eagle.ru/index.php)
-   Western Europe 1944-1945 (https://forums.eagle.ru/forumdisplay.php?f=340)
-   -   The Battle of the Stretch Goal (https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=114788)

Hans-Joachim Marseille 09-30-2013 02:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Havner (Post 1890596)
Don't you guys read the description of a project you supposedly took part in? It was stated explicitly that 3 planes will be free. So if $0 gets you them $1 gets you them as well.

This whole KS hasn't been thought through as without stretch goals there is virtually no difference between $10 and $40 pledge (assuming you'll get p15d and dora before the release which is probably a case for majority). And the only difference between $0 and $10/$40 is/was alpha/beta access.

I did read it, and from the start there was no mention of the Mustang or Dora being included (rights owned by ED) nor 3 free RRG planes (Bf.109, Spitfire, P-47). Only later there was talk of the 3 RRG planes being included for free, a decision I think of as unfair and should be revised in the light of generating more KickStarter funds and fairness toward the "$40 and up pledgers" (the vast majority here) and future buyers of the game.

MACADEMIC 09-30-2013 02:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hans-Joachim Marseille (Post 1890642)
I did read it, and from the start there was no mention of the Mustang or Dora being included (rights owned by ED) nor 3 free RRG planes (Bf.109, Spitfire, P-47). Only later there was talk of the 3 RRG planes being included for free, a decision I think of as unfair and should be revised in the light of generating more KickStarter funds and fairness toward the "$40 and up pledgers" (the vast majority here) and future buyers of the game.

Sorry HJM you're not correct there. The three free aircraft together with the free game were in the kickstarter description from the beginning. This hasn't changed but now maybe it will.

MAC

NineLine 09-30-2013 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MACADEMIC (Post 1890649)
Sorry HJM you're not correct there. The three free aircraft together with the free game were in the kickstarter description from the beginning. This hasn't changed but now maybe it will.

MAC

I think he means that it wasnt clear, and that common sense spoke to the fact that 3 aircraft at the level of the P-51D wouldnt/coudnt be given away, which was what i thought at the beginning as well...

BabyJail 09-30-2013 02:54 PM

Could not be more obvious whats missing here. I sincerely hope that Ilya recruits a PR/community-manager guy in the near future..

Sharpe 09-30-2013 03:06 PM

messing around with the goals at this time in the KS itsself; isn't that a little risky?

Hans-Joachim Marseille 09-30-2013 03:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SiThSpAwN (Post 1890651)
I think he means that it wasnt clear, and that common sense spoke to the fact that 3 aircraft at the level of the P-51D wouldnt/coudnt be given away, which was what i thought at the beginning as well...

Exactly. Anyway, it's not worth fighting over and more changes will confuse this KickStarter even more (potentially damaging RRG's name), but I'm left with a sour taste and will probably leave my initial pledge at $100 instead of raising it for the final push.

NineLine 09-30-2013 03:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sharpe (Post 1890678)
messing around with the goals at this time in the KS itsself; isn't that a little risky?


I think so... at this point the bed is made.

He'd be better off starting smaller KSers later on for individual modules....

TimeKilla 09-30-2013 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Havner (Post 1890596)
Don't you guys read the description of a project you supposedly took part in? It was stated explicitly that 3 planes will be free. So if $0 gets you them $1 gets you them as well.

I feel sorry for anyone who pledged $1 to just help out or because they don't have the money with some folks views towards them

Diabolus 09-30-2013 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SiThSpAwN (Post 1890685)
I think so... at this point the bed is made.

He'd be better off starting smaller KSers later on for individual modules....

I totally agree! Let's see a high quality basic platform and as Sith states add the other layers later with smaller Kstarters. They would also, in all probability, have some income from sales to contribute to development too. Proof of the pudding maybe?

HornedGod 09-30-2013 04:11 PM

The most interesting tidbit that has been alluded to is the learning curve issue. I think this could be a major unique selling point of this project. If you have concrete ideas on how the learning how to fly a WWII combat aircraft can be made fun and engaging for a sustained period of time then I think that should be brought more into focus. The project needs a hook. This is it.

It would certainly be something that could grab the attention of both the press/media and lapsed flight sim fans. People who used to play flight sims (such as those that played them in the 80s/90s and those who’ve tried more recently but gave up because of the brick wall learning curve) I would think would be the next most obvious market to target. Getting their attention is going to require more than just promises of aircraft and fidelity. It needs information on how you can overcome the barriers that exist in current flight sims.

Games are continually evolving. Flight sim games need to do the same. Up till now the drive has always been to make things more realistic and with greater fidelity. I think everyone recognizes that while that has been a worthy endevour it has the side effect of making the genre less and less appealing to a lot of people. Those same people would probably have enjoyed playing flight sims from the early days if that’s all they knew. Everyone used to try out flight sims back in the early days. They were still pretty hard, but they were accessible. How can they be made accessible for modern times?

A new approach needs to be taken. Genres evolve and redefine themselves all the time. Is it time for flight sims to be redefined so that a whole new audience is exposed to them and would be willing to try them out?

I think this sort of approach would have a much better chance of getting much more money from a kickstarter campaign. If training/learning curve has as much focus on helping new people trying out a flight sim for the first time as it does for helping old hands learn new tricks and tactics then you’d still retain the support of the hard core but open up your market to many more. Without attracting the interest of those outside the hard core you’ll never get the kind of money that you were initially hoping for (multiple 100ks).

I don’t know what financing ED is providing or how important the 100k from this kickstarter campaign is but if you can afford to restart the kickstarter I would think that should be a serious option. I’ve been a game developer for 18 years and know that you’re not going to get many chances to do things like this.

The hard core fans who have supported this kickstarter will come back. We need to support every decent flight sim out there to just keep the genre we love alive. What we need from flight sim developers is a vision of how to get more people to love what we love. You can’t just continue to please us. You need to get every gamer to love playing flight sims again. You need to rekindle the success that flight sims had in the 80s and 90s. The best starting place for that is with WWII fighters.

If that’s not possible then I think it’s pretty clear from the comments on your best course of action:
- Restrict the initial planes that are free to non-backers to 1 or 2. You need to generate income right the start and that means you have to offer planes for sale from day 1. Since you can’t produce more aircraft you need to cut the number that you had originally planned to be free down.
- Do a second kickstarter at a later date to fund the B17.

Getting more publicity is the key to getting more backers and money. To do that you need to preach to more than just the converted. It sounds like that was what you were hoping to do from the beginning. Unfortunately, the initial (and existing) pitch (videos and text) is purely aimed at those who already love flight sims and will throw money at them to keep their hobby alive.

If you really want to get a much larger audience then you need to take the lessons learned from the past three weeks, regroup and pitch again. People looking to start companies have to do this all the time. You pitch and pitch and pitch. Refining your pitch as you go. IF a larger audience is your goal you need to tell them why they should back a genre that seems hard and alien to them. You need to redefine what it means to learn to fly in a flight sim. You need to crystalize that vision and then sell it. The media will report and follow things that are new. To get them on board you have to show that what cool new stuff you’re bringing to flight sims. Media exposure will be key to getting new eyeballs to check out the kickstarter.

This kickstarter has been a success. Up to a point. But if it’s hasn’t been enough to fulfill the real goal you have for this project (which reading between the lines it hasn’t) AND you have the backing to hit the reset switch and take another month to rebrand the project then you should. It’s okay to make mistakes. They’re only bad if you don’t learn anything from them. Ilya, if your passion is to get more people to love what you (and I and everyone that has backed so far) love then do over.


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:30 AM.

Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.