It’s time for another Good Idea / Bad Idea: Creative Crowdfunding

Granted, I’m coming at this article from a very skeptical viewpoint. Right from the start, I find the idea of raising a few thousand dollars essentially to  just write rules a little outrageous.

First, let’s look at what exactly creative crowdfunding is:

Crowdfunding is one of the more interesting neologisms of the last few years. It takes the idea of crowdsourcing (which is getting services delivered by crowds) and applies it to raising money. In the RPG industry, it is often referred to as “patronage projects”.

Now, I’m all for interesting experiments involving compelling ways to connect with fans and give them a reason to buy, and I love finding out about platforms that enable such things. But like I said, I have to admit that I’m pretty skeptical about the basic concepts behind using creative crowdfunding as it relates to RPGs, which not only lets you fund an creator, but also vote on the creative decisions they make.

I understand why it is done, in terms of getting greater fan buy-in. However, as much as I like crowdfunding of things, that doesn’t mean that creative decisions should be crowd decided. I can see it work in some cases, but making creative decision by committee is difficult enough. In this case, the creative decisions are being made based on the popular vote, with apparently little actual input from where it counts.

When it comes to things that involve insight, analysis or opinion, crowdsourcing tends not to work that well. This isn’t all that surprising. However, moving the fans directly into the decision making process seems like a disaster waiting to happen. I should be clear: I’m all for fans having ways to participate, and have their voices heard, but that doesn’t mean that artists should have to follow their suggestions. It seems likely that the design-by-mass-internet-committee will serve mainly to make weaker, less inspired decisions.

I think they are a very good idea and a very positive way of funding new works, especially for niche or specialist products.

I know the money is meant to cover more than writing – there is art, layout, publishing to name a few, but honestly, it often doesn’t feel that way. Often times, I feel as though people are saying “Hey, I’ve got some ideas for a game. Who wants to pay me to write it?” It often sounds a bit desperate.

And to top it all, the benefits of being a patron are often dodgy at best. As a consumer, there are already a lot of existing projects out there that I want to be giving my money to, and I don’t want companies to feel that they owe me anything – especially in the form of some of the benefits out there.

I mean, what exactly am I getting out of it? For example, if I donate $600 to a project, I get two autographed books and discounts on others? I’m sorry. That’s not really something for me. That’s a total waste of my money. I don’t want to pay for fan fiction. There’s enough free stuff online now to get me by if I want to go in that direction.

I have seen examples where these sorts of projects lead to some spectacular work. For example, Daniel Solis’ Happy Birthday, Robot! is probably the finest example to come out of this type of funding. Why? It is original. It’s not based in any existing genre, it has no competitors that put out a licensed version of the same kind of game, and was clearly written with heart and soul.

But Daniel’s game is the exception to the rule, I think. I think there are far too many projects that lack that heart and soul out there, and I fear that creative crowdfunding may turn into the way games from smaller publishers see the light of day in the future, and I don’t like that prospect.

So my stance is this: I don’t like buying anything until I get to see and approve of the finished product. If a gaming company makes a good product of sufficient quality, I’ll buy it… but when I am ready to do so.

So what about you, dear readers?