Some Unsolicited Advice

[Foenum]

Hi guys. I've been following gaming crowdfunds as a hobby since Wasteland 2 and I love what you're doing with Indivisible. I noticed that you're having some difficulties with this campaign and I have some advice that I think might be helpful:

1. Stop trying to litigate every bit of negativity you see on the internet. Most of these people, for whatever reason, have already decided not to back your campaign and you will not be able to change their minds. Trying to engage them and "correct" them will come off as defensive, whiny, or worse. Believe me I understand exactly how frustrating it is to read people saying untrue things about you and your efforts, but the energy spent trying to fight them is either wasted or counterproductive. Grit your teeth and move on.

2. This sort of approach is extremely not helpful. It was obvious that such a thread (even the article itself) was going to become an "autopsy" where people talk about the campaign in the past tense and find things to nitpick. This creates a lot of negativity, and it is a wholly self-inflicted wound. The more you engage, the worse it gets. People need to see you as the happy warrior, the lovable underdog, not the bitter loser. Be positive or say nothing at all.

3. Instead of trying to fight negativity, focus on finding ways to adjust course. If it looks like you're listening and being accommodating and not defensive, you will get a much more positive reaction. It's too late to change your platform to Kickstarter, but I strongly suggest offering a new tier at $20 for the game itself and nothing else. Add something to the $30 tier to reward your early adopters; beta access, digital art gallery, whatever.

4. It's important to remember that fundamentally, crowdfunding is about making people feel good about donating. It needs to give them some kind of catharsis, there needs to be emotional reward. I emphasize again, any negativity or argumentativeness will hurt you no matter how right you are; this is about feelings and not logic. Doing things "right" and "transparently" doesn't actually help you unless there's some kind of metanarrative that gets people emotionally invested.

I understand that you're planning to release some kind of official video debunking various untruths you've seen around the internet. I would advise you that this will not have the desired effect; if it moves the dial at all it'll be temporary and negligible in the long term, and it could actually hurt you. Instead focus on a "soft relaunch" of the campaign: Make a new video showing all the members of Lab Zero at work, show the camaraderie, and show yourselves engaging with fans at a Skullgirls meetup or whatever. Make it a human story. Make it personal. Explain how important it is for you guys to remain together and do something you love and that the fans will love, and how important the Indivisible campaign is for that.

Then go on to say that you've received a lot of feedback about your campaign and that you have been listening and are now making changes to give people what they want. Announce the new, cheaper tier for impulse buyers, and the compensations being added to the $30 tier for early backers. Project humility and sympathy. You need to make people root for you, not just for the game you're offering. Offer the emotional narrative people need to feel good about supporting you.

 

[Mike_Z]

I strongly suggest offering a new tier at $20 for the game itself and nothing else. Add something to the $30 tier to reward your early adopters; beta access, digital art gallery, whatever.

To completely gloss over all your points (for better or worse), I'm curious: What makes you so sure the game is $20?

[edit]
Not that I disagree with them, just that part stuck out to me since I don't really go many placed to debunk things, except here.

 

[Flotilla]

Trying to engage them and "correct" them will come off as defensive, whiny, or worse. Believe me I understand exactly how frustrating it is to read people saying untrue things about you and your efforts, but the energy spent trying to fight them is either wasted or counterproductive. Grit your teeth and move on.

It's easy to say these things when it's not you who is hosting the crowdfunder, watching a huge amount of people spread misinformation that influences the opinions of people who may be on the verge of backing.

Anyone who thinks it's "whiny" of Lab Zero to correct people on misinformation (or blatant lies) clearly had their mind made up from the very start, and were always irrelevant to the success of the campaign. I appreciate the transparency of the Indivisible crowdfunding campaign, and addressing concerns/correcting misinformation is part of that.

 

[Ryin]

To completely gloss over all your points (for better or worse), I'm curious: What makes you so sure the game is $20?

This seems to be a somewhat common misconception, though. What do you think about adding that this is the game's retail price to the tier description?
Something like "Get the digital release of Indivisible for its retail price, in addition to the wallpapers and digital OST!"

 

[Okie Dokie]

I didn't see the implication in the OP's suggestion that the game should be or will be $20 upon release, but that having a $20 digital tier for backers is just a smart business move. Thousands of people might be interested in that to donate a little bit but see how expensive the asking price for the game tier currently is and they hold off.

Crowdsourcing isn't a pre-order service, so maybe the discount is worth it? It might be a costly mistake to be stepping over dollars just to pick up pennies.

 

[Mike_Z]

Yyyyeeeeeeessssssssss? It might look great, sure. Offering cheap prices usually does.

That is not necessarily good, or useful, advice for us.

Consider that console download codes cost money. Because of that, it makes very little sense to actually OFFER a $20 tier, REGARDLESS of how good it looks. After subtracting the code price, there's not enough money left from a backer at that level to be useful - 45% of that pledge money is gone. (In the absurd scenario we raised the whole $1,500,000 from that tier, we'd actually end up with $825,000. Missing $675,000 is not enough to make the game anymore.) Those dollars we "stepped over" turn out to also be pennies.

I'm not sure how many people would buy it, but we could MAYBE do a $20 Steam-only tier, because those codes are not $9.

[edit]
Also note that because $30 is currently the minimum for the game, if we now offered a $20 tier for just the game, everyone who decides they don't want the extra stuff and backs out to buy the cheaper tier costs us $10 of money we used to have. (Again in the absurd case, if all current Backer tier people did that, we'd lose $34,800.)

 

[BallotBoxer]

If we are talking about consumer psychology, I want the game to be a higher price. A cheap $20 has the downloadable game stigma of being short and sparse on features. $30, even as retail price, feels like a deal for an RPG with 20-30 hours for the main scenario alone.

I disagree with Foenum's first three points. The price is fair and directly engaging misconceptions is vital. I don't see any problems with Ravidrath's posts in the Neogaf thread or how Lab Zero is correcting misinformation. I think it would be more detrimental to ignore than to respond.

The fourth point about getting people emotionally invested is a good strategy worth exploration. It might bring in more funders. I already know Lab Zero is a great team of talented people so I don't need such a gimmick, but an introduction for the uninitiated would be helpful. Not a sappy sob story, but don't avoid the high stakes. A great idea for a video game is on the line. The future of this small company is on the line.

 

[The Dave]

Wait, I thought all the distribution costs were covered by 505- does that not include console codes?

Also, I think the soundtrack's been kind of undersold. Which is a shame, because that and the wallpaper are probably best priced for "impulse support."

A "Meet Lab Zero" vid could probably help. Clear misconceptions about the company, humanize it, that sort of thing.

 

[TetsuNoHitsuji]

I agree with the "Meet Lab Zero" sort of video too. So fr we've been talking lot about the game and what it has to offer, and it's awesome that we can talk about the game so much, but I think people kind of want to know what kind of company/studio they are funding. Maybe drive home how much the guys at Lab Zero love and care about their work and how they will have to disband if this fails.

 

[Lex]

Wait, I thought all the distribution costs were covered by 505- does that not include console codes?

They still need to get a decent profit from each game sold.

 

[KaboomKid]

I was under the impression that all copies of the game would include Beta access, at least on Steam, like we got for Skullgirls. $30 for Game+OST+Beta+Stuff is a pretty good deal compared to many campaigns. Didn't a similar package cost $40 on the TFH page?

A cheaper SteamGame-only tier probably wouldn't hurt as an option, but if someone's willing to part with $20/$25, I feel like they'd get a lot more value for their money by just saving a little extra, and upgrading to the next level.

 

[Mike_Z]

Wait, I thought all the distribution costs were covered by 505- does that not include console codes?

Even if they were to cover them, we're attempting to avoid "Hey 505, you're paying for 150% of all the money from this tier" because that's also not good business practice. With my same absurd example, if we raised $1.5m from that tier alone then 505 would end up putting in an extra $625k, which is a pretty raw deal.

It doesn't matter who is paying, that percentage sucks TOO much.

 

[Foenum]

Looking at the chart right now, this campaign appears to be at a critical point. The momentum you gained from all the Youtube coverage seems to be fizzling, and there is a real danger that you will sink back to a 10k or lower baseline. If that trend is allowed to continue for, say, a week, then you would need to raise nearly a million dollars in the remaining two weeks.

I'm not sure how many people would buy it, but we could MAYBE do a $20 Steam-only tier, because those codes are not $9.

I think that would be helpful; you might be surprised at how big the PC audience is alone for crowdfunding. Other campaigns have already set the precedent that the price of entry for a gaming crowdfund should be $15-20. Like the App Store, expectations regarding price tend to be universal even if they are unreasonable. $30 can go a long way on Steam, and there's so much competition that backers are reluctant to spend that much on a game two years in advance; this goes back to my earlier point that your pitch should not be purely transactional, that it needs an emotional component.

More importantly, adding a cheaper tier of any sort will show that you're doing something concrete to adjust course. Backers want to feel like they're being catered to, and giving that kind of appearance can only help you. It will also draw attention and generate discussion.

Also note that because $30 is currently the minimum for the game, if we now offered a $20 tier for just the game, everyone who decides they don't want the extra stuff and backs out to buy the cheaper tier costs us $10 of money we used to have. (Again in the absurd case, if all current Backer tier people did that, we'd lose $34,800.)

This presupposes that all your backers are on PC and are so eager to save $10 that they'd go through the trouble of contacting Indiegogo customer service, knowing that lowering their pledge would reduce the chance of the game being made at all. I am very confident that this will not happen on any meaningful scale.

 

[Mike_Z]

Ignoring all of the useful advice, again. (^.^) Sorry, I'm good at that.

I think that would be helpful; you might be surprised at how big the PC audience is alone for crowdfunding. Other campaigns have already set the precedent that the price of entry for a gaming crowdfund should be $15-20.

I personally am allergic to offering a tier where we lose 50% of the money made just by offering the tier. Might look great. Might also be a loss-leader that doesn't actually HELP US.
PC audience may be huge, but we'd need over three times as many of them at $20 as we'd need at $30 to make the same amount of money, even though it is not 1/3 of the price. I am not okay raising $1.5m just to have raised $1.1m?

I am very confident that this will not happen on any meaningful scale.

That's easy for you. It ain't your ass on the line, to be blunt.

I dunno, I guess I really don't look at crowdfunding analysis the same way you do. Momentum fizzling or whatever. We make it, or we don't. We do things that excite people, or not. The prototype helps, or doesn't. I don't predict the future, nor do I attempt to guess it, NOR do I panic whenever things slow down.

[edit]
And since I seem to be the only one from LZ responding to this, I guess this is the perspective we provide. :^P