--- In , dcndcn13@... wrote:
>
> Whatever you want to call them, the point is there is a reason that
> T5 broke all of the kickstart records. If you look at the list in a
> recent Fellow Travellers message, it shows the list of previous
> record-holders.
But why does that matter? Kickstarter isn't some giant cock-waving exercise, it's a means to raise money for a project. T5 was completely funded within a few days - the other $200,000+ was raised just by people throwing more money than was actually necessary at it (and I really don't think that a few colour plates and deckplans is really worthy of $200,000 - they could do the whole damn book in full colour with professional-level artwork and deckplans and still have money leftover).
> So the moral is, if you want to be successful kickstarting something,
> don't kickstart something brand-new, "kick re-start" something that's
> already been around for a long time.
I'm not sure that's the moral I take from this, or the moral that we should take from it. The moral I get from it is "if you can rely entirely on 'goodwill and nostalgia' then you don't need to make any actual effort to *sell* your product because you'll have people throwing money at you in their droves regardless of its quality". Because that's what's happened here.
Personally I suspect that when people finally get what they spent a lot of cash for months down the line, they'll realise in the cold light of day that it actually wasn't worth the money. For crying out loud, there's a significant number of people have spent over *$500* on this thing. It's mindboggling to me.
>
> Whatever you want to call them, the point is there is a reason that
> T5 broke all of the kickstart records. If you look at the list in a
> recent Fellow Travellers message, it shows the list of previous
> record-holders.
But why does that matter? Kickstarter isn't some giant cock-waving exercise, it's a means to raise money for a project. T5 was completely funded within a few days - the other $200,000+ was raised just by people throwing more money than was actually necessary at it (and I really don't think that a few colour plates and deckplans is really worthy of $200,000 - they could do the whole damn book in full colour with professional-level artwork and deckplans and still have money leftover).
> So the moral is, if you want to be successful kickstarting something,
> don't kickstart something brand-new, "kick re-start" something that's
> already been around for a long time.
I'm not sure that's the moral I take from this, or the moral that we should take from it. The moral I get from it is "if you can rely entirely on 'goodwill and nostalgia' then you don't need to make any actual effort to *sell* your product because you'll have people throwing money at you in their droves regardless of its quality". Because that's what's happened here.
Personally I suspect that when people finally get what they spent a lot of cash for months down the line, they'll realise in the cold light of day that it actually wasn't worth the money. For crying out loud, there's a significant number of people have spent over *$500* on this thing. It's mindboggling to me.