i honestly don't think anyone would have cared about this practice at all except that a specific creator made sure to make a big fuss about it, which prompted his audience to do the same and said creator has a significant financial interest in opposing Launch Boom. an interest they in no way disclosed then they have the gall to claim that it is Launch Boom that is being manipulative and dishonest while they pretend to be consumer advocates when in actuality they are competitors of Launch Boom
@maxwallace94912 күн бұрын
I might be misremembering, but I did do the dollar pledge for their follow up game because we enjoyed Botany so much. I thought it said it was refundable if you decide not to back. It is possible that I misinterpreted it, my email confirmation doesn't mention it.
@iansutton74162 күн бұрын
very fair analysis - even with a company with a track record (notably AR), the 'tip of the iceberg' presented gives concerns about how much is still to be developed, and how long that might take. With a new creator (or as @deathnavy has discovered, one who had a previously failed attempt), that risk is multiplied significantly. If the game felt truly special in concept, then perhaps I might take such a risk. There are very few instances of that, and this is not one of them. If someone else does feel it that special, then I wish them and the project creators good luck and a mutually positive journey together.
@Gamebent12 күн бұрын
Alex at Boardgameco works for Gamefound, and his bias has been shown towards CMON, so I don't trust what he says about any campaign on Gamefound. Having said that, I agree with the unnecessary "bloated" feel of the game. I also noticed that the scenarios are insanely long, well over 3 hours each.
@deathnavy2 күн бұрын
With a bit of research I discovered that forgotten tales studios was actually KoA studios but they renamed after a failed kickstarter a couple years ago called kingdoms of akandia. They since changed their name and made Sirens from the feedback given in that campaign. Seeing how much has raised i’m sure we will get a product, however the lack of information for the scenarios worries me. I’m backing at core with a potential upgrade to gameplay tier, but that’s as far as I’m going. The game has great theme and gameplay from what I’ve seen.
@kanalune3 күн бұрын
The art and theme drew me in, but the actual gameplay fell flat for me from what I’ve seen. And pretty pricey too.
@CoxJul3 күн бұрын
Watched Playing Solo's playthroughs and the setting/narrative/gameplay was a very clunky combination. Pretty miniatures but... been there, wasted money on that before. Your call on the scope is spot on.
@franckboyer37943 күн бұрын
I know that is not the topic of this video, but what do you think about the $1 pledge in KS campaigns? What are their pros (I guess it allows people to take almost no risk at all before the PM opens) and cons (if all backers do that, then the KS will fail...)? Thanks! :)
@Deadlinkz5 күн бұрын
Great game, waiting for a new video
@GamerPhysics7 күн бұрын
Thanks so much for putting this out, clear and honest information especially for backers in the UK. I totally understand the amber rating for he risk assessment I've been in the group of backers waiting on a campaign to ship and seeing the company doing campaign after campaign asking for more from us; but IV always delivers. Usually by the time the campaign starts they are well into talks with Panda about production and have received samples back which means a much shortened timeline compared to other crowdfunded games, and as you said, they've done this before and are even warning in this campaign that fulfillment is running up against Lunar New Year as a potential delay. I am by no means unbiased (I mod their discord server, where the team is quite active). Thanks again for the analysis!
@shouldyoubackit7 күн бұрын
And this is the thing, even if a company has some campaigns open, if they’re proving solid preparation and planning it definitely helps to add confidence as a backer but unfortunately it’s just one of those things where even the best planned campaign could be hit with something out of the blue. From what I’ve heard from backers even here in the comments they’re a solid bunch which was the vibe I was getting anyways and I genuinely do love the work they put out
@shouldyoubackit8 күн бұрын
Hey everyone! Just wanted to share this comment from BoardGameGeek which I think is helpful to hear and equally has insights I didn’t have in the video: Moonrakers is deckbuilding and Brink is worker placement. You don't need one to enjoy the other, and as someone who's played all the IV games I think Brink might be my favorite. Want to add that they have consistently delivered early on past KS projects. One of the two games on boats right now I think is running a little behind or one is running ahead and since both are now arriving at the same time IV just refunded shipping charges to people who backed both because they are just going to ship them together. This seems like a lot of work for them to have to go and do this but is super cool that they think of the customers first. There one of the only companies I still back on crowdfunding because they don't go silent and they go above and beyond.
@user-ik2ps1fu5e8 күн бұрын
Thumb down for false thumbnail.
@thejfreak938 күн бұрын
I would say they are a pretty sure bet as far as delivery is concerned. I mean, as sure of a bet as any Kickstarter can be at least. It's between this and Deep Regret for me, and I think I want the push your luck of Deep Regret just a hair more.
@marcogagetti33808 күн бұрын
2025?!
@Lordborg9098 күн бұрын
When I heard someone describe it as "Catan in space", and I really thought about my group, its a hard pass for me
@shouldyoubackit8 күн бұрын
I can see the parallel due to the hex tiles but with the council and voting mechanics it seems like there might be a bit more to it (though to be fair Catan came to my mind too when I initially saw it)
@Lordborg9097 күн бұрын
@@shouldyoubackit just the fact my group cant behave itself when it comes to negotiation, so any game with this as the main mechanic is probably a no for us haha
@shouldyoubackit7 күн бұрын
I feel that pain 😂
@designhacker15569 күн бұрын
This channel is criminally underrated, especially when there are kickstarter-related channels out there with multitudes more that aren't half as good. The transparency and authenticity is something that is so crucial for a "should I buy this?" type decision, and the fact that many of the videos released answer that question with "No, I don't think you should." gives SYBI heaps of credibility.
@shouldyoubackit8 күн бұрын
That means a lot thank you
@tettixgames7 күн бұрын
Agreed. More eyes on Samuel's incredibly well researched and presented assessments!!
@johannesbreuer12919 күн бұрын
Thx for the review! Super helpful as always 😊
@garkham9 күн бұрын
I really loved IV for Moonrakers but as a solo player, I won't back this one. 😔
@shouldyoubackit9 күн бұрын
Have you taken a look at Moonrollers?
@lmedved50009 күн бұрын
For me, personally, IV peaked early mechanics wise with Moonrakers. Every other game is kind of bland and not worth the ridiculous prices they charge. Also, a note on the "set in Moonraker's universe". It's kind of a nothing statement to me. I enjoy Moonrakers and have the titan edition but..... what universe? There's no lore unless you specifically read the comic book they included with the Titan Edition kickstarter (which was.... fine?) or you played the Luminar game mode for Moonrakers which also was just.... fine. It's like they think they've created this amazing narrative world bristling with interesting stories but it's really just cards with somewhat interesting art and weird names. That's kind of it. The marketing for this game also is so unbelievably up its own ass and the way the studio carries themselves has been a massive massive turnoff for me. Incredibly high prices for the product they deliver and kind of boring mechanics surrounded by "glitzy" art (which in the case of Fractured Sky was also just bad IMO). That said, just my opinion! A lot of other channels are singing the praises of this game and the studio so maybe there's something I'm not seeing. Good coverage, thanks for the video!
@corbinowens24379 күн бұрын
Do you do these videos before or after the Kickstarter is finished?
@shouldyoubackit9 күн бұрын
Before the Kickstarter is finished.
@corbinowens24379 күн бұрын
@@shouldyoubackit okay, wasn’t sure how you had so much info on them before they’re released. But it’s great info nonetheless!
@eledv452110 күн бұрын
Thanks for showing the solo mode! After watching 2 solo playthroughs (yours and slickerdrips'), it's growing on me, at first I was a bit puzzled cause it's very different than the competitive mode. It'd be nice to watch a part 2!
@shouldyoubackit10 күн бұрын
Looks like I’ll have to get editing a part 2 :)
@eledv45219 күн бұрын
@@shouldyoubackit Yes, please!!
@nope783210 күн бұрын
Consumers are confused by crowdfunding because this ad is disguised as a review. This was paid for and made to look good on the kickstarter's main page.
@shouldyoubackit10 күн бұрын
So for clarity I haven’t been paid a dime otherwise as per advertising law here in the U.K. I would be obliged to disclose it. I met Judson at U.K. Games Expo this year where he was showcasing the game, I wasn’t able to get a demo but we spoke and I said I was following the campaign as I’d been served some pre-launch ads and it looked interesting. We spoke via email after the expo and he wanted to send out a copy so I could see what the game was like in order to give me thoughts, so he sent out a prototype of the game (that he had been using to demo). I’ve had the prototype for two weeks and this morning I’m posting it to another reviewer. Again, I’ve not been paid a dime. I’ve marked a paid collaboration on this video because I’ve been sent a prototype (which I am now sending on). I’m incredibly transparent about this kind of thing, I think it’s very dangerous to assume money has transferred hands just because I recommended the game. If you watch this channel you’ll know that not every game I mention gets recommended. Aside from that if you’ve any questions I’m about whether I’ve been compensated or not I’m more than happy to answer.
@ThePhiloctopus9 күн бұрын
@@shouldyoubackit Right, but event though you haven't been paid, you still received preferential treatment by getting the game early, you have some positive relationship with the designer, and there is a (however small you believe) social pressure on you to provide a positive review in exchange. All that might amount to effectively nothing, but we don't know that. Consider a person who has met the designer and received an advance copy in good faith, versus a person who went out and bought the game with their own mony after release. You will agree, these situations are not the same. FWIW I also backed this game. I like the artwork and there seems to be a nice and accessible push your luck element. I hope I'm not disappointed next March!
@shouldyoubackit9 күн бұрын
Hey there! So a couple of things, I make sure that anyone who asks me to cover their campaign or who offer to send a game for review recognise and agree that I am not obliged to say anything positive about their game. As such there are some games that haven’t been on the channel because they didn’t want to continue the conversation further. There are other campaigns here on the channel (and some videos I’ve got recorded) where I say I wouldn’t recommend backing the game. Again for clarity I am backer #35 for Deep Regrets, I was sent a prototype which I have now sent back. I get the argument for ‘you’ve received something therefore your opinion is tainted’ but I think it puts very little faith in the normal humanity of us as creators and the integrity we’re trying hard to build. I know it’s been modelled poorly in the past but for me and this channel I’m doing everything possible to be open and transparent, I declare it verbally in this video too and all I can do is ask you to judge me on my actions as opposed to what other creators have done on the past. All I’ll say is hold me to account in that if you ever see me with a game and I haven’t declared it, shout it out. I’ll likely do a video and unpack this further but either way i appreciate you sharing your thoughts
@OriginalGingaNinja8 күн бұрын
Not sure where you get the idea consumers are confused by crowdfunding? Seems like a very sweeping statement. Also very odd that your accusing someone of trying to be underhanded and declaring this is a paid add. Can't help but feel you have some kind of grudge with the designer / publisher or this channel. I've watched a few vids on this game and there's nothing in this video that stands out as being different to anything said anywhere else. I'd personally agree with 'safe' project comment based on their previous campaigns. Alex Radcliffe also covered this in his most recent to back or not with a similar opinion. I'm not sure someone being lent a game for 2 weeks counts as payment. Also if your assumption is that anyone has been sent a game for review is biased then I'd advise not to watch any crowdfunding reviews - how would anyone ever be able to review it without being sent it? I would say you need to make your own decisions if a game is for you, everyone's tastes different so just because a reviewer likes it doesn't mean you will and vice versa.
@nimblegoat14 сағат бұрын
@@ThePhiloctopus You sound very sanctimonious and with righteous anger on behalf of a few. Most of us understand what this video is about , we have our big boy nappies on , and can look after ourselves . You add nothing of value and no additional info we can not see for ourselves. You seem put out that Other People than your esteem self get an early review copy. Wow when did this start to happen , like always. What is the alternative? that would appease you , no previews . Just info on the kickstarter , gamefound page . Being able to play in a digital version? Like I said you just sound annoyed just because , you get annoyed easy . We know how to look after ourselves and do due diligence . The Channel here did some , looking at track record, saying his players concern. Personably looks a good quick game, light, doesn't drag a bit of fun, Do I need it , no . Do I have other light games already yes .- does it have a cool social element in the market like an auction or bidding no . So my take good game for someone without such a game , still could be fun if you need a solo game as well . Also i think the cool fish would be great with younger kids, they could create their own games with the different fish even if std paper clips and magnet fishing lines ( probably best sleeved )
@hockeyislife768610 күн бұрын
I’m confused like how do you have it? Why do I have to wait like a full year
@nope783210 күн бұрын
because he was paid to say this
@shouldyoubackit10 күн бұрын
So for clarity I haven’t been paid a dime otherwise as per advertising law here in the U.K. I would be obliged to disclose it. I met Judson at U.K. Games Expo this year where he was showcasing the game, I wasn’t able to get a demo but we spoke and I said I was following the campaign as I’d been served some pre-launch ads and it looked interesting. We spoke via email after the expo and he wanted to send out a copy so I could see what the game was like in order to give me thoughts, so he sent out a prototype of the game (that he had been using to demo). I’ve had the prototype for two weeks and this morning I’m posting it to another reviewer. Again, I’ve not been paid a dime. I’ve marked a paid collaboration on this video because I’ve been sent a prototype (which I am now sending on). I’m incredibly transparent about this kind of thing, I think it’s very dangerous to assume money has transferred hands just because I recommended the game. If you watch this channel you’ll know that not every game I mention gets recommended. Aside from that if you’ve any questions I’m about whether I’ve been compensated or not I’m more than happy to answer.
@iciiciban5 күн бұрын
@@nope7832Bruhh you are everywhere. Whats your problem? If you dont like the game don't get it
@AquaticAbomination9 сағат бұрын
@@nope7832 All the flavours in the world- and you chose salty for no reason
@nope78329 сағат бұрын
@@AquaticAbomination chips
@uiopgamer464711 күн бұрын
Indeed
@optiplanetomatosoup11 күн бұрын
I'd love to see a part two!
@educationRnR1Ай бұрын
And a year on I have just heard of this game. A year on V-Commando only seems to be available on eBay for quite a high cost so, whilst your assessment was valid and probably correct at the time, i imagine now that may have changed. I have just backed a late pledge for the 'all-in' package which i am looking forward to. Thank you for this video, and others, on this item 👍
@shouldyoubackitАй бұрын
Let me know what you think of it when it arrives!
@johannesbreuer1291Ай бұрын
Sounds like fun! Thx for the review 😊
@iansutton7416Ай бұрын
Any thoughts / insight into the creators? New / new to crowdfunding?
@shouldyoubackitАй бұрын
New to crowdfunding but the benefit is that the game, unless they add some new things, is done and just needs to be printed which is a big help in figuring out risk. I believe they have some premium add ons but it seems they’ve done their homework and pre-planning
@iansutton7416Ай бұрын
@@shouldyoubackit thanks!
@BoxedMeeplesАй бұрын
Really pleased this plays as well as we hoped
@megecАй бұрын
Glad to see these videos pop up on my front page again. Always enjoy your advice.
@shouldyoubackitАй бұрын
Thanks so much!
@colinettle43942 ай бұрын
$195 dollars for collection edition to the uk work out at £155 including shipping and vat 😢😮.
@MorganFleurDeLys3 ай бұрын
This issue in the community is 100% new to me. Having said that, I'm going to take LaunchBoom's side on this one. They're not doing anything wrong. I just fundamentally disagree with the premise, arguments, and conclusions being made against this method of customer acquisition. It's fine in this situation because up until this point, LaunchBoom and their partners are doing things the correct way. Also, and respectfully, I'm going to disagree with your revisionist history definition of the word "clickbait". Clickbait is about deception, always has been.
@shouldyoubackit3 ай бұрын
Haha I appreciate the cheeky banter about my clickbait definition, I should clarify that that’s not my personal concoction and is instead the technical definition of clickbait and equally well documented (ie in ‘The KZread Formula’ by Derrel Eeves) however it ties in with what you’ve said about Launchboom and their approach to the preorder. The technical term of clickbait can lead to it being ethically used, unfortunately though we’ve seen a gargantuan tsunami of it being misused leading to mistrust around it and so the negative representation of the practice is now more prevalent and known that the ethical if that makes sense. But always appreciate the conversation 😄
@pm712413 ай бұрын
Not sure where the immoral part comes in here? Unless you classify most people buying games on kickstarter as having an addiction which is exploited (which is maybe not entirely unfounded), then the answer is rather simple: Don't buy games you don't need.
@KaitlynWitman3 ай бұрын
Hey there! I am so grateful for this video, and that this practice is being discussed. I am the CEO at Rainfactory and I actually have a strong opinion on the $1 reservation concept and also have data analysis on analyzing the "vip vs non-vip" email lists of clients who came to me after having a poor experience with Launchboom. Please let me know how best to follow up, I want to get the word out that there's a better way out there than this ❤
@hagarthelucky3 ай бұрын
Thank you for that considerate and calm thinkpiece. For many reasons, I have personnally stopped backing games (mostly), so I don't have a strong opinion as to the "good" or "bad" of this trend. But I would like to offer that there is something more to asking for a dollar instead of simply asking for your email or even asking to follow or subscribe to a pre-campaign for a specific bonus if I then back it. Because we are now talking about non-refundable real money, the technique introduces a version the sunk cost fallacy. I don't "waste" my email by giving it to the pre-campaign, but that 1$ will feel "wasted" unless I back the project.
@shouldyoubackit3 ай бұрын
This is a very quick reaction response to your comment and so not a fully response by any means as you raise a good point (and also thank you for the kind words) but in every board game example I looked at (aside from Geeknson) the preorder money was 100% refundable. Although as I’ve said in another comment, it’s hard to know how willing people would be to go to the bother of going through the process to have it refunded.
@hagarthelucky3 ай бұрын
@@shouldyoubackit Thank you for taking the time to look into this. I'm sorry I made a hasty assumption, and the money being refundable should lessen the feeling of potential loss for not backing in the end.
@Luke_L3 ай бұрын
I appreciate your take on this issue. However, I’m still with Chris George on this marketing tactic. He showed how what launch boom said in their video (directed to disgruntled backers and content creators) differed to what they had on their web page (directed to potential customers). The difference was telling. And it makes sense. They’re a marketing company. It’s their job to make something look as great as possible while hiding anything that might not look so good. I don’t want my crowdfunding dollars to fill a marketing company’s coffers. I will vote with my dollar and stay away from projects that work with such companies.
@shouldyoubackit3 ай бұрын
Totally valid, I know RoomandBoard took a good portion of their video going through the article that you’re alluding to and while I could’ve dove into it I wanted to try and keep as close to the main topic as possible but I totally hear you
@joeferreti94423 ай бұрын
Honestly, extremely high prices and increased delivery times alone is harming board game crowdfunding. The payment of money for the right to follow a not yet started project and maybe get some extra is ridiculous and just the cherry on top.
@shouldyoubackit3 ай бұрын
The amount of campaigns I can feesably back has dropped massively due to VAT and shipping. At this point I try to wait until retail which sucks because I would love to support more campaigns
@successfulgeek3 ай бұрын
I have no issue with a $1 tripwire offer to get people to buy. I think it is a very powerful tool in the marketing toolbag. The big issue though is with it around crowdfunding. If someone like Stonemaier did a $1 pre-pre-order for a game I would be fine with it. Crowdfunding isn't a pre-order though. All the risk is on the backers with crowdfunding. Crowdfunding is an interest free loan to create something. So I won't back anything that has a $1 pre-order bonus. I know I am just one person but because of the fundamental difference between a true pre-order and crowdfunding, the $1 pre-order for a campaign is truly predatory.
@shouldyoubackit3 ай бұрын
Oh absolutely, if it was used as a piece of conventional marketing in the typical retail space it’d be a completely different matter but it seems out of place in the board game crowdfunding space. As others have said in the comments, it’s like crowdfunding the crowdfund
@jerdes20813 ай бұрын
People that preorder games on kickstarter already victims of FOMO and they mental health not in a good place. We don't need more aggressive marketing tactics for this poor fellows.
@shouldyoubackit3 ай бұрын
Im not sure if this is what you meant but I wouldn’t classify everyone who backs something on crowdfunding as having an issue with their mental health
@peterriecks91263 ай бұрын
Comparing email collection turnover to $1 turnover is skewed data because they are completely different examples of emotional attachment. People giving email addresses understand that the delete button is easy to use. If they see more information and realize the game isnt for them, it's no big deal. A 10% turnover or lower is not surprising. When a person is asked for money, that's a whole different level of interest. If they are willing to put in their financial info, they already know that they are absolutely interested and that there is a high likelihood that they are going to back the game. I'm surprised that the turnover rate for this commitment is not higher than 50%. The data isn't skewed so much as it compares apples to oranges. For marketing companies to represent the turnover percentages as comparable is disingenuous at best. The marketing companies are using these figures to market themselves and the game companies that buy in are showing these bogus comparisons because that is what sold them in the first place. This is classic post-purchase rationalization. It doesn't look good that, when i pointed this out in the comments of Mark's video, my comment was deleted. It's his channel and he has every right to curate the comments however he sees fit but, by ignoring my point, it shows that discussion was not the main interest of his video. It also shows that he read my point and maybe, just maybe, there's not a good rebuttal to pointing out that the comparison is flawed.
@shouldyoubackit3 ай бұрын
But then by extension should we not compare free gifts to email campaigns because there is also a different degree of emotional attachment there too? (I totally hear your point though, I’m just being difficult 😄)
@peterriecks91263 ай бұрын
I get that an incentive to be involved early is certainly beneficial to the creators, but any financial transaction before the campaign is just problematic. The whole purpose of crowdfunding sites is to provide a secure place to invest in ideas. If it becomes normalized to spend money on a different site before the campaign starts, it becomes easier for backers to get scammed. It's not the dollar that I'm concerned about. It's all of the financial information. If some first-time creator scams a few hundred people out of their credit card data, they would not have as much to lose as a company like Kickstarter would if they did the same thing. What's to stop anyone from just charging a dollar? If it becomes normalized enough, the creators could just charge the full price for a deluxe edition and just use Kickstarter to back the base editions (essentially making KS nothing more than a preorder site) unless the backers want to pay even higher prices. We already have base games, KS exclusives, and pre-campaign exclusives. It really is ridiculous. By using the $1 system, it tells everyone that you think this is a good idea. Clearly, I don't. I don't have a good solution. I just know that this is a bad direction for the community.
@VaultBoy133 ай бұрын
I think one of the problems is that you're believing LaunchBoom's metrics. When you compare these games' trajectories vs. similar games without a $1 pre-launch, the first 48 hour spikes are similar. The long-term conversion is similar. Botany and Kelp are successful regardless of the conversion rate of the $1 backers. There's no study that's been done to differentiate between correlation and causation. LaunchBoom is going to manipulate their metrics. Their job is to manipulate data to make creator's believe that they're providing a service. The $1 is a step backwards for crowdfunding. In the early days of crowdfunding, campaigns often had a limited number of early-bird slots. Saving $10 or getting a $10 reward did create an early surge. However, it was clear that the bad feelings generated from seeing that you missed out on the deal resulted in a loss of potential customers. It took time for creators to pivot away from this. At the worst, early-birds these days are following on Gamefound or backing in the first 48 hours. These are a more consumer friendly practice, because backers simply need to participate in the platform to be informed, plus the practice is transparent to anyone that misses out. Compare that to $1 where by and large the campaigns don't want those not "in the know" to be aware there was a special offer. They don't want informed consumers. They flag posts on BGG about the $1 pledges to have an admin remove them from the game's forums. They don't want a trace of that $1 advertising. Their market penetration for these $1 pledges is abysmal when compared to the number of people actually backing these projects. I don't know if that's by design, because they couldn't afford to give the $1 bonus to every backer. The marketing data being gathered is poor, because they're not even tapping into a large base of their potential customers. On top of that, this new system has now created another hurdle for gamers that actively crowdfund games. We've only needed to know about the prelaunch pages on the systems (Kickstarter, Gamefound, etc.) to access any early-bird rewards. This is no longer true. Backers now need to buy every newspaper to find out if there's a coupon somewhere that saves them anywhere from $5-25 (or with the tables $100). That's a poor customer experience. It's one of the biggest failures in this practice. We currently have are creators that have drunk the Kool-Aid like Dux Somnium. They actively defend LaunchBoom at LaunchBoom's request. There's likely a kickback that Dux Somnium receive. But, if you look at reddit discussions about LaunchBoom, Dux Somnium regularly jumps to their defense with canned responses. And, part of the canned response indicates that LaunchBoom encouraged them to respond. I see this as evidence of how dishonest LaunchBoom are and the lengths they'll go to to manipulate consumers. The company doesn't even want to allow honest discussion about their platform, they "release the hounds" whenever there is criticism. We also have creators that have received the feedback about the $1 pre-launch microtransactions, and have stepped away from it. The best ones cancelled it before launching their games. The good ones have shifted their campaigns so that everyone gets the $1 bonus. And, the OK ones have indicated they won't use the practice on future products. There's a clear indication that backers don't want the extra hurdle of a microtransaction. They don't want to waste time actively searching for the pre-launch deals for games they're interested in. They don't want to miss out for not being 'in the know". They wanted to be treated well by creators that are effectively begging them for money. On a more personal level, board gaming is a saturated market. I cannot afford to own (nor store) every game that I'm interested in. A $1 pre-launch campaign makes for an easy disqualifying factor. If you enjoy jumping through an extra hoop to be treated like a valued customer, then by all means... jump.
@shouldyoubackit3 ай бұрын
You raise a ton of great points and my response would go on forever if I responded to all of them 😄 You’re absolutely right about the data we have access to and the correlation vs causation side of things. The most unbiased data I was able to find was regarding Kelp as it came from the developers who passed it on to Stonemair games as opposed to it coming from Launchboom. If your comments are being deleted when raising valid points I don’t think that that’s cool so even though there may be points that we have different perspectives on I appreciate the fact that you’re sharing them here :)
@BoardGameCo3 ай бұрын
I think having alternate voices in the mix is always a good thing, and particularly in this case where the voices for the tactic are those who stand to benefit from it, I think it's good to have a voice in the mix that isn't financially motivated. That said, of course I disagree with everything else you said. Just kidding. In actuality, I think you presented things great and overall I agree with lots of what you said....but I also do genuinely believe (as you seem to as well in the last 5 minutes) that this is a new line in the sand compared to any other marketing currently out there. You're prepaying for the oppurtunity to prepay. I don't believe that's ever been done before, I believe it is a new low, and if it's a new low....we have to decide if we're ok with moving the goalposts, or pushing back. For me...I'm pushing back. Thanks for the video!!
@shouldyoubackit3 ай бұрын
Thanks Alex! I think for me the crux is that as a marketing tool I can see the value in the practice and I don’t think it’s wrong, I just don’t think it needs to be used in crowdfunding due to the nature of what crowdfunding is because as you say, it turns into a prepay of a prepay.
@ijcat.online3 ай бұрын
I think "line in the sand" is a good way of putting how I feel about it. I accept a lot of the marketing tactics used in the crowdfunding space and understand why they are utilized, but this is kind of that line for me. Asking for money before the campaign launches is crazy to me and it's not a trend I want to see continue and becoming more egregious so it's an easy pass for me if a creator wants to use it.
@shouldyoubackit3 ай бұрын
And I think knowing that is super important, and feeding it back to project creators is doubly important. For me, i wouldn’t go for these preorders simply because, especially with the Geeknson campaign, there’s no benefit to giving the £100, the product is the same price, I just have to fork over a non-refundable £100. There may come a time where there is a perfect implementation of something like this, but we may just not be there yet (or there’ll be a new trend and we all move on the that 😄)
@iansutton74163 ай бұрын
The one thing that struck me as bizarre with asking for money pre-campaign, is where there's no information about what is being offered in the campaign. As someone who does heavy investigation of a campaign before committing to it, the idea of a blind payment seems reckless.
@shouldyoubackit3 ай бұрын
I’ve seen a few people who’ve used this who have given extensive information on the core pledge and the items on offer but you’re right in that that doesn’t seem to be the norm
@CoxJul3 ай бұрын
These conversion rates on the second or third ask, the big ask, have already filtered interest down through the first (or second) small request so what are we actually getting a 45-55% return from? 45-55% of that 10% that were converted by the first ask?? Not sounding that good when you look at it that way or have I misunderstood?
@shouldyoubackit3 ай бұрын
That’s a great question and I think your characterisation is correct but also not as bad as you think. So what Launchboom have said is that if you give the $1 you’re ‘30 times more likely to buy.’ If you give an email you’re 1-10% more likely to buy. You’ve correctly pointed out that with each step you’re in essence shrinking that pool of people, however from what they’ve shared it’s still converting to revenue. For example for Botany they had 8,734 people sign up to the mailing list (step 1 or 2 depending on how you’re looking at the funnel), 2,641 spent the dollar, and I can’t remember the exact number Dustin shared about people who backed from the dollar but I believe it was around 48-50 percent which converted to almost $100k. So although the pool of people is shrinking, it’s still bringing in a lot of revenue for the creator.
@Tylers_Dad3 ай бұрын
Darn. Not the video I was expecting. It felt a little apologetic towards marketing companies, and it's not cool to hear someone say that what I believe is "naive"
@shouldyoubackit3 ай бұрын
I’m sorry that that’s what you felt I was saying and equally that you felt you were being belittled (if that’s the right way to interpret it) in what I said. That wasn’t the intention even though I stand by the point I was trying to make.
@TisButAScratch6663 ай бұрын
Really well measured and honest assessment. Your position resonates better with me than Alex or Chris' assessments and critiques. This manipulation isn't new, rather the iteration is new to this space. And most of us still have a choice.
@shouldyoubackit3 ай бұрын
I really resonated with a lot of Alex’s points, and the fact he took time to talk to people in the industry about is super helpful (this was what he chatted about in his second video). We always have a choice but in the face of tactics or techniques like this some of us have an easier time of fully realising our choice. The key thing for us to continue to do as consumers in this hobby is to continue sparking these conversations and speaking up when we feel lines are crossed. It’s healthy to hold one another and the creators accountable in a constructive way, and in the long run it’ll help our hobby and the industry I think.
@HeeeeySteve3 ай бұрын
Thank you for the video. While I do disagree with most of this it is nice to hear an alternate viewpoint to such a polarizing issue.
@shouldyoubackit3 ай бұрын
Thank you! I appreciate that!
@iansutton74163 ай бұрын
In terms of robust, but respectful challenge, I'd say Chris (Liege of games) and Alex (Boardgameco) are both very comfortable with acknowledging differing views. I very much used to enjoy Alex's 'coffee table' chats prior to him taking up his Gamefound role - back then he had a great talent for recognising and explaining a full range of arguments. I very much doubt either would have problem with differing opinions being offered up. FWIW I've never done a $1 campaign pledge, and have remained wary of that more basic 'foot in the door' technique. Personally I find such marketing uncomfortable. Is this different? Yes by giving an exclusive mini expansion for that $1, they've not just got the dollar making the backer feeling invested, but also identified what the backer will 'lose' if they don't complete a full pledge (not just a dollar, but a physical deliverable). You are right that foot in the door is an old technique, but for me this a higher level of mental manipulation, and that makes me even more uncomfortable. In my mind, I'm thinking "they're trying to manipulate me - that makes me trust them less". Considering crowdfunding is based on trust, that's problematic for me. If we are very diligent about our decisions, I think there's merit in your argument about opt-in marketing. It's not only more effective, but less annoying. I wonder how long before we get tailored averts on our televisions when watching a sport or movie? Perhaps if I had a favourite band, and wanted to be informed if they were touring, it very much would feel acceptable to signup to a list that advertises their tours. Sadly there are people who have got horribly carried away with crowdfunding boardgames, and I feel uncomfortable that such techniques may worsen their problem buying. It's a fair comment that it's not a binary thing of everything being fine until they crossed the line with this, but rather a spectrum of influence/manipulation with this just the next little step along. Crowdfunding is currently in a difficult space, with VAT now properly paid, and production/shipping costs increased, whilst cost of living does impact many. High profile failures add to that. How will it adapt over the next 2-3 years? It will be interesting to see, and this is just one aspect to watch. A very interesting video - well done.
@shouldyoubackit3 ай бұрын
Absolutely, I think the other creators in this space do a great job of appreciating differing opinions which is a breath of fresh air. We don't see that in every space and it's definitely something to be celebrated. I totally hear you on the $1 front though, I'm someone who equally hasn't purchased a $1 pre-order simply because it's not for me (or there aren't enough minis involved :D) but I think your point is equally why creators absolutely need to offer the pre-order as refundable (although really who is going to go through the hassle for a $1 refund which is another thing). On opt-in marketing the fascinating thing is that the only place we're not receiving targeted ads based on our interests is on terrestrial TV. Streaming services serve interest based ads, Spotify, KZread, almost every other platform is serving us ads based on our interest. The old TV folks just haven't got the tech yet to also introduce it but it's all around us. Yeah that was a point I had also made, some of us are able to easily say no to the preorder but there are some out there who are still in the excited got-to-back-everything phase and they could get swept up in this, which is why constructive feedback to publishers and creators is so important. I think there is a healthy balance to all of it, and tactics like this can exist, but there's got to be regulation or accountability for it to work.
@samhugo58703 ай бұрын
Thank you for your inside and opinion! I wonder would this technique would work, if the dollar would be used to donate to social NGOs and you would not gain any Game expansion?
@shouldyoubackit3 ай бұрын
I’m afraid that could be perceived as worse. If we already perceive the practice as manipulation, then saying that the dollar would be donated to charity would be even clearer manipulation as our refusal to give the dollar then is perceived as a refusal to support charity.
@VaultBoy133 ай бұрын
@@shouldyoubackit Creators are already using the line that the $1 transaction will allow them to be more green with their production under the guise that the $1 transactions allow them to gage how many copies to produce. It's present on multiple LaunchBoom funnel pages. It's too formulaic for it to be coming from the creators. I don't know how anyone would believe that spin. Clearly, the number of backers on crowdfunding will more clearly determine the number of copies to produce. Additionally, the publisher is going to produce excess copies for retail. They want to be making money steadily through retail (if they can). Limiting their production to be green is a lie. It's just more manipulative marketing cooked up by LaunchBoom.
@samhugo58703 ай бұрын
@@shouldyoubackit Hhm I wonder if that would be the Case?? I don’t know anything about how often this comes up, when you are living in the States or Northern Ireland. Here in Germany, I got asked on every PayPall transaction, if I would increase my amount of payment one €uro, so this €uro could be donated to some sort of charity organization…
@iansutton74163 ай бұрын
@@samhugo5870 That's another very interesting side discussion, about how commercial, marketing driven and manipulative many mainstream charities have become. Is the means worth the end? That's a really tough question. I am however thankful that we eventually banned lurching 'chuggers' in the UK, greeting strangers in the street like long lost friends, as a way to get a foot in the door to seek direct debit regular payments to the charity. It really was intrusive, and for me very much crossed the line of morality.
@shouldyoubackit3 ай бұрын
Agreed but then that goes back to the point Alex made where creators are giving BS reasons for using it which this sounds like too. If a creator said ‘hey doing this gives us data that helps refine our advertising to increase the likelihood of funding/ producing more revenue’ I’d at least credit them with being honest
Пікірлер
i honestly don't think anyone would have cared about this practice at all except that a specific creator made sure to make a big fuss about it, which prompted his audience to do the same and said creator has a significant financial interest in opposing Launch Boom. an interest they in no way disclosed then they have the gall to claim that it is Launch Boom that is being manipulative and dishonest while they pretend to be consumer advocates when in actuality they are competitors of Launch Boom
I might be misremembering, but I did do the dollar pledge for their follow up game because we enjoyed Botany so much. I thought it said it was refundable if you decide not to back. It is possible that I misinterpreted it, my email confirmation doesn't mention it.
very fair analysis - even with a company with a track record (notably AR), the 'tip of the iceberg' presented gives concerns about how much is still to be developed, and how long that might take. With a new creator (or as @deathnavy has discovered, one who had a previously failed attempt), that risk is multiplied significantly. If the game felt truly special in concept, then perhaps I might take such a risk. There are very few instances of that, and this is not one of them. If someone else does feel it that special, then I wish them and the project creators good luck and a mutually positive journey together.
Alex at Boardgameco works for Gamefound, and his bias has been shown towards CMON, so I don't trust what he says about any campaign on Gamefound. Having said that, I agree with the unnecessary "bloated" feel of the game. I also noticed that the scenarios are insanely long, well over 3 hours each.
With a bit of research I discovered that forgotten tales studios was actually KoA studios but they renamed after a failed kickstarter a couple years ago called kingdoms of akandia. They since changed their name and made Sirens from the feedback given in that campaign. Seeing how much has raised i’m sure we will get a product, however the lack of information for the scenarios worries me. I’m backing at core with a potential upgrade to gameplay tier, but that’s as far as I’m going. The game has great theme and gameplay from what I’ve seen.
The art and theme drew me in, but the actual gameplay fell flat for me from what I’ve seen. And pretty pricey too.
Watched Playing Solo's playthroughs and the setting/narrative/gameplay was a very clunky combination. Pretty miniatures but... been there, wasted money on that before. Your call on the scope is spot on.
I know that is not the topic of this video, but what do you think about the $1 pledge in KS campaigns? What are their pros (I guess it allows people to take almost no risk at all before the PM opens) and cons (if all backers do that, then the KS will fail...)? Thanks! :)
Great game, waiting for a new video
Thanks so much for putting this out, clear and honest information especially for backers in the UK. I totally understand the amber rating for he risk assessment I've been in the group of backers waiting on a campaign to ship and seeing the company doing campaign after campaign asking for more from us; but IV always delivers. Usually by the time the campaign starts they are well into talks with Panda about production and have received samples back which means a much shortened timeline compared to other crowdfunded games, and as you said, they've done this before and are even warning in this campaign that fulfillment is running up against Lunar New Year as a potential delay. I am by no means unbiased (I mod their discord server, where the team is quite active). Thanks again for the analysis!
And this is the thing, even if a company has some campaigns open, if they’re proving solid preparation and planning it definitely helps to add confidence as a backer but unfortunately it’s just one of those things where even the best planned campaign could be hit with something out of the blue. From what I’ve heard from backers even here in the comments they’re a solid bunch which was the vibe I was getting anyways and I genuinely do love the work they put out
Hey everyone! Just wanted to share this comment from BoardGameGeek which I think is helpful to hear and equally has insights I didn’t have in the video: Moonrakers is deckbuilding and Brink is worker placement. You don't need one to enjoy the other, and as someone who's played all the IV games I think Brink might be my favorite. Want to add that they have consistently delivered early on past KS projects. One of the two games on boats right now I think is running a little behind or one is running ahead and since both are now arriving at the same time IV just refunded shipping charges to people who backed both because they are just going to ship them together. This seems like a lot of work for them to have to go and do this but is super cool that they think of the customers first. There one of the only companies I still back on crowdfunding because they don't go silent and they go above and beyond.
Thumb down for false thumbnail.
I would say they are a pretty sure bet as far as delivery is concerned. I mean, as sure of a bet as any Kickstarter can be at least. It's between this and Deep Regret for me, and I think I want the push your luck of Deep Regret just a hair more.
2025?!
When I heard someone describe it as "Catan in space", and I really thought about my group, its a hard pass for me
I can see the parallel due to the hex tiles but with the council and voting mechanics it seems like there might be a bit more to it (though to be fair Catan came to my mind too when I initially saw it)
@@shouldyoubackit just the fact my group cant behave itself when it comes to negotiation, so any game with this as the main mechanic is probably a no for us haha
I feel that pain 😂
This channel is criminally underrated, especially when there are kickstarter-related channels out there with multitudes more that aren't half as good. The transparency and authenticity is something that is so crucial for a "should I buy this?" type decision, and the fact that many of the videos released answer that question with "No, I don't think you should." gives SYBI heaps of credibility.
That means a lot thank you
Agreed. More eyes on Samuel's incredibly well researched and presented assessments!!
Thx for the review! Super helpful as always 😊
I really loved IV for Moonrakers but as a solo player, I won't back this one. 😔
Have you taken a look at Moonrollers?
For me, personally, IV peaked early mechanics wise with Moonrakers. Every other game is kind of bland and not worth the ridiculous prices they charge. Also, a note on the "set in Moonraker's universe". It's kind of a nothing statement to me. I enjoy Moonrakers and have the titan edition but..... what universe? There's no lore unless you specifically read the comic book they included with the Titan Edition kickstarter (which was.... fine?) or you played the Luminar game mode for Moonrakers which also was just.... fine. It's like they think they've created this amazing narrative world bristling with interesting stories but it's really just cards with somewhat interesting art and weird names. That's kind of it. The marketing for this game also is so unbelievably up its own ass and the way the studio carries themselves has been a massive massive turnoff for me. Incredibly high prices for the product they deliver and kind of boring mechanics surrounded by "glitzy" art (which in the case of Fractured Sky was also just bad IMO). That said, just my opinion! A lot of other channels are singing the praises of this game and the studio so maybe there's something I'm not seeing. Good coverage, thanks for the video!
Do you do these videos before or after the Kickstarter is finished?
Before the Kickstarter is finished.
@@shouldyoubackit okay, wasn’t sure how you had so much info on them before they’re released. But it’s great info nonetheless!
Thanks for showing the solo mode! After watching 2 solo playthroughs (yours and slickerdrips'), it's growing on me, at first I was a bit puzzled cause it's very different than the competitive mode. It'd be nice to watch a part 2!
Looks like I’ll have to get editing a part 2 :)
@@shouldyoubackit Yes, please!!
Consumers are confused by crowdfunding because this ad is disguised as a review. This was paid for and made to look good on the kickstarter's main page.
So for clarity I haven’t been paid a dime otherwise as per advertising law here in the U.K. I would be obliged to disclose it. I met Judson at U.K. Games Expo this year where he was showcasing the game, I wasn’t able to get a demo but we spoke and I said I was following the campaign as I’d been served some pre-launch ads and it looked interesting. We spoke via email after the expo and he wanted to send out a copy so I could see what the game was like in order to give me thoughts, so he sent out a prototype of the game (that he had been using to demo). I’ve had the prototype for two weeks and this morning I’m posting it to another reviewer. Again, I’ve not been paid a dime. I’ve marked a paid collaboration on this video because I’ve been sent a prototype (which I am now sending on). I’m incredibly transparent about this kind of thing, I think it’s very dangerous to assume money has transferred hands just because I recommended the game. If you watch this channel you’ll know that not every game I mention gets recommended. Aside from that if you’ve any questions I’m about whether I’ve been compensated or not I’m more than happy to answer.
@@shouldyoubackit Right, but event though you haven't been paid, you still received preferential treatment by getting the game early, you have some positive relationship with the designer, and there is a (however small you believe) social pressure on you to provide a positive review in exchange. All that might amount to effectively nothing, but we don't know that. Consider a person who has met the designer and received an advance copy in good faith, versus a person who went out and bought the game with their own mony after release. You will agree, these situations are not the same. FWIW I also backed this game. I like the artwork and there seems to be a nice and accessible push your luck element. I hope I'm not disappointed next March!
Hey there! So a couple of things, I make sure that anyone who asks me to cover their campaign or who offer to send a game for review recognise and agree that I am not obliged to say anything positive about their game. As such there are some games that haven’t been on the channel because they didn’t want to continue the conversation further. There are other campaigns here on the channel (and some videos I’ve got recorded) where I say I wouldn’t recommend backing the game. Again for clarity I am backer #35 for Deep Regrets, I was sent a prototype which I have now sent back. I get the argument for ‘you’ve received something therefore your opinion is tainted’ but I think it puts very little faith in the normal humanity of us as creators and the integrity we’re trying hard to build. I know it’s been modelled poorly in the past but for me and this channel I’m doing everything possible to be open and transparent, I declare it verbally in this video too and all I can do is ask you to judge me on my actions as opposed to what other creators have done on the past. All I’ll say is hold me to account in that if you ever see me with a game and I haven’t declared it, shout it out. I’ll likely do a video and unpack this further but either way i appreciate you sharing your thoughts
Not sure where you get the idea consumers are confused by crowdfunding? Seems like a very sweeping statement. Also very odd that your accusing someone of trying to be underhanded and declaring this is a paid add. Can't help but feel you have some kind of grudge with the designer / publisher or this channel. I've watched a few vids on this game and there's nothing in this video that stands out as being different to anything said anywhere else. I'd personally agree with 'safe' project comment based on their previous campaigns. Alex Radcliffe also covered this in his most recent to back or not with a similar opinion. I'm not sure someone being lent a game for 2 weeks counts as payment. Also if your assumption is that anyone has been sent a game for review is biased then I'd advise not to watch any crowdfunding reviews - how would anyone ever be able to review it without being sent it? I would say you need to make your own decisions if a game is for you, everyone's tastes different so just because a reviewer likes it doesn't mean you will and vice versa.
@@ThePhiloctopus You sound very sanctimonious and with righteous anger on behalf of a few. Most of us understand what this video is about , we have our big boy nappies on , and can look after ourselves . You add nothing of value and no additional info we can not see for ourselves. You seem put out that Other People than your esteem self get an early review copy. Wow when did this start to happen , like always. What is the alternative? that would appease you , no previews . Just info on the kickstarter , gamefound page . Being able to play in a digital version? Like I said you just sound annoyed just because , you get annoyed easy . We know how to look after ourselves and do due diligence . The Channel here did some , looking at track record, saying his players concern. Personably looks a good quick game, light, doesn't drag a bit of fun, Do I need it , no . Do I have other light games already yes .- does it have a cool social element in the market like an auction or bidding no . So my take good game for someone without such a game , still could be fun if you need a solo game as well . Also i think the cool fish would be great with younger kids, they could create their own games with the different fish even if std paper clips and magnet fishing lines ( probably best sleeved )
I’m confused like how do you have it? Why do I have to wait like a full year
because he was paid to say this
So for clarity I haven’t been paid a dime otherwise as per advertising law here in the U.K. I would be obliged to disclose it. I met Judson at U.K. Games Expo this year where he was showcasing the game, I wasn’t able to get a demo but we spoke and I said I was following the campaign as I’d been served some pre-launch ads and it looked interesting. We spoke via email after the expo and he wanted to send out a copy so I could see what the game was like in order to give me thoughts, so he sent out a prototype of the game (that he had been using to demo). I’ve had the prototype for two weeks and this morning I’m posting it to another reviewer. Again, I’ve not been paid a dime. I’ve marked a paid collaboration on this video because I’ve been sent a prototype (which I am now sending on). I’m incredibly transparent about this kind of thing, I think it’s very dangerous to assume money has transferred hands just because I recommended the game. If you watch this channel you’ll know that not every game I mention gets recommended. Aside from that if you’ve any questions I’m about whether I’ve been compensated or not I’m more than happy to answer.
@@nope7832Bruhh you are everywhere. Whats your problem? If you dont like the game don't get it
@@nope7832 All the flavours in the world- and you chose salty for no reason
@@AquaticAbomination chips
Indeed
I'd love to see a part two!
And a year on I have just heard of this game. A year on V-Commando only seems to be available on eBay for quite a high cost so, whilst your assessment was valid and probably correct at the time, i imagine now that may have changed. I have just backed a late pledge for the 'all-in' package which i am looking forward to. Thank you for this video, and others, on this item 👍
Let me know what you think of it when it arrives!
Sounds like fun! Thx for the review 😊
Any thoughts / insight into the creators? New / new to crowdfunding?
New to crowdfunding but the benefit is that the game, unless they add some new things, is done and just needs to be printed which is a big help in figuring out risk. I believe they have some premium add ons but it seems they’ve done their homework and pre-planning
@@shouldyoubackit thanks!
Really pleased this plays as well as we hoped
Glad to see these videos pop up on my front page again. Always enjoy your advice.
Thanks so much!
$195 dollars for collection edition to the uk work out at £155 including shipping and vat 😢😮.
This issue in the community is 100% new to me. Having said that, I'm going to take LaunchBoom's side on this one. They're not doing anything wrong. I just fundamentally disagree with the premise, arguments, and conclusions being made against this method of customer acquisition. It's fine in this situation because up until this point, LaunchBoom and their partners are doing things the correct way. Also, and respectfully, I'm going to disagree with your revisionist history definition of the word "clickbait". Clickbait is about deception, always has been.
Haha I appreciate the cheeky banter about my clickbait definition, I should clarify that that’s not my personal concoction and is instead the technical definition of clickbait and equally well documented (ie in ‘The KZread Formula’ by Derrel Eeves) however it ties in with what you’ve said about Launchboom and their approach to the preorder. The technical term of clickbait can lead to it being ethically used, unfortunately though we’ve seen a gargantuan tsunami of it being misused leading to mistrust around it and so the negative representation of the practice is now more prevalent and known that the ethical if that makes sense. But always appreciate the conversation 😄
Not sure where the immoral part comes in here? Unless you classify most people buying games on kickstarter as having an addiction which is exploited (which is maybe not entirely unfounded), then the answer is rather simple: Don't buy games you don't need.
Hey there! I am so grateful for this video, and that this practice is being discussed. I am the CEO at Rainfactory and I actually have a strong opinion on the $1 reservation concept and also have data analysis on analyzing the "vip vs non-vip" email lists of clients who came to me after having a poor experience with Launchboom. Please let me know how best to follow up, I want to get the word out that there's a better way out there than this ❤
Thank you for that considerate and calm thinkpiece. For many reasons, I have personnally stopped backing games (mostly), so I don't have a strong opinion as to the "good" or "bad" of this trend. But I would like to offer that there is something more to asking for a dollar instead of simply asking for your email or even asking to follow or subscribe to a pre-campaign for a specific bonus if I then back it. Because we are now talking about non-refundable real money, the technique introduces a version the sunk cost fallacy. I don't "waste" my email by giving it to the pre-campaign, but that 1$ will feel "wasted" unless I back the project.
This is a very quick reaction response to your comment and so not a fully response by any means as you raise a good point (and also thank you for the kind words) but in every board game example I looked at (aside from Geeknson) the preorder money was 100% refundable. Although as I’ve said in another comment, it’s hard to know how willing people would be to go to the bother of going through the process to have it refunded.
@@shouldyoubackit Thank you for taking the time to look into this. I'm sorry I made a hasty assumption, and the money being refundable should lessen the feeling of potential loss for not backing in the end.
I appreciate your take on this issue. However, I’m still with Chris George on this marketing tactic. He showed how what launch boom said in their video (directed to disgruntled backers and content creators) differed to what they had on their web page (directed to potential customers). The difference was telling. And it makes sense. They’re a marketing company. It’s their job to make something look as great as possible while hiding anything that might not look so good. I don’t want my crowdfunding dollars to fill a marketing company’s coffers. I will vote with my dollar and stay away from projects that work with such companies.
Totally valid, I know RoomandBoard took a good portion of their video going through the article that you’re alluding to and while I could’ve dove into it I wanted to try and keep as close to the main topic as possible but I totally hear you
Honestly, extremely high prices and increased delivery times alone is harming board game crowdfunding. The payment of money for the right to follow a not yet started project and maybe get some extra is ridiculous and just the cherry on top.
The amount of campaigns I can feesably back has dropped massively due to VAT and shipping. At this point I try to wait until retail which sucks because I would love to support more campaigns
I have no issue with a $1 tripwire offer to get people to buy. I think it is a very powerful tool in the marketing toolbag. The big issue though is with it around crowdfunding. If someone like Stonemaier did a $1 pre-pre-order for a game I would be fine with it. Crowdfunding isn't a pre-order though. All the risk is on the backers with crowdfunding. Crowdfunding is an interest free loan to create something. So I won't back anything that has a $1 pre-order bonus. I know I am just one person but because of the fundamental difference between a true pre-order and crowdfunding, the $1 pre-order for a campaign is truly predatory.
Oh absolutely, if it was used as a piece of conventional marketing in the typical retail space it’d be a completely different matter but it seems out of place in the board game crowdfunding space. As others have said in the comments, it’s like crowdfunding the crowdfund
People that preorder games on kickstarter already victims of FOMO and they mental health not in a good place. We don't need more aggressive marketing tactics for this poor fellows.
Im not sure if this is what you meant but I wouldn’t classify everyone who backs something on crowdfunding as having an issue with their mental health
Comparing email collection turnover to $1 turnover is skewed data because they are completely different examples of emotional attachment. People giving email addresses understand that the delete button is easy to use. If they see more information and realize the game isnt for them, it's no big deal. A 10% turnover or lower is not surprising. When a person is asked for money, that's a whole different level of interest. If they are willing to put in their financial info, they already know that they are absolutely interested and that there is a high likelihood that they are going to back the game. I'm surprised that the turnover rate for this commitment is not higher than 50%. The data isn't skewed so much as it compares apples to oranges. For marketing companies to represent the turnover percentages as comparable is disingenuous at best. The marketing companies are using these figures to market themselves and the game companies that buy in are showing these bogus comparisons because that is what sold them in the first place. This is classic post-purchase rationalization. It doesn't look good that, when i pointed this out in the comments of Mark's video, my comment was deleted. It's his channel and he has every right to curate the comments however he sees fit but, by ignoring my point, it shows that discussion was not the main interest of his video. It also shows that he read my point and maybe, just maybe, there's not a good rebuttal to pointing out that the comparison is flawed.
But then by extension should we not compare free gifts to email campaigns because there is also a different degree of emotional attachment there too? (I totally hear your point though, I’m just being difficult 😄)
I get that an incentive to be involved early is certainly beneficial to the creators, but any financial transaction before the campaign is just problematic. The whole purpose of crowdfunding sites is to provide a secure place to invest in ideas. If it becomes normalized to spend money on a different site before the campaign starts, it becomes easier for backers to get scammed. It's not the dollar that I'm concerned about. It's all of the financial information. If some first-time creator scams a few hundred people out of their credit card data, they would not have as much to lose as a company like Kickstarter would if they did the same thing. What's to stop anyone from just charging a dollar? If it becomes normalized enough, the creators could just charge the full price for a deluxe edition and just use Kickstarter to back the base editions (essentially making KS nothing more than a preorder site) unless the backers want to pay even higher prices. We already have base games, KS exclusives, and pre-campaign exclusives. It really is ridiculous. By using the $1 system, it tells everyone that you think this is a good idea. Clearly, I don't. I don't have a good solution. I just know that this is a bad direction for the community.
I think one of the problems is that you're believing LaunchBoom's metrics. When you compare these games' trajectories vs. similar games without a $1 pre-launch, the first 48 hour spikes are similar. The long-term conversion is similar. Botany and Kelp are successful regardless of the conversion rate of the $1 backers. There's no study that's been done to differentiate between correlation and causation. LaunchBoom is going to manipulate their metrics. Their job is to manipulate data to make creator's believe that they're providing a service. The $1 is a step backwards for crowdfunding. In the early days of crowdfunding, campaigns often had a limited number of early-bird slots. Saving $10 or getting a $10 reward did create an early surge. However, it was clear that the bad feelings generated from seeing that you missed out on the deal resulted in a loss of potential customers. It took time for creators to pivot away from this. At the worst, early-birds these days are following on Gamefound or backing in the first 48 hours. These are a more consumer friendly practice, because backers simply need to participate in the platform to be informed, plus the practice is transparent to anyone that misses out. Compare that to $1 where by and large the campaigns don't want those not "in the know" to be aware there was a special offer. They don't want informed consumers. They flag posts on BGG about the $1 pledges to have an admin remove them from the game's forums. They don't want a trace of that $1 advertising. Their market penetration for these $1 pledges is abysmal when compared to the number of people actually backing these projects. I don't know if that's by design, because they couldn't afford to give the $1 bonus to every backer. The marketing data being gathered is poor, because they're not even tapping into a large base of their potential customers. On top of that, this new system has now created another hurdle for gamers that actively crowdfund games. We've only needed to know about the prelaunch pages on the systems (Kickstarter, Gamefound, etc.) to access any early-bird rewards. This is no longer true. Backers now need to buy every newspaper to find out if there's a coupon somewhere that saves them anywhere from $5-25 (or with the tables $100). That's a poor customer experience. It's one of the biggest failures in this practice. We currently have are creators that have drunk the Kool-Aid like Dux Somnium. They actively defend LaunchBoom at LaunchBoom's request. There's likely a kickback that Dux Somnium receive. But, if you look at reddit discussions about LaunchBoom, Dux Somnium regularly jumps to their defense with canned responses. And, part of the canned response indicates that LaunchBoom encouraged them to respond. I see this as evidence of how dishonest LaunchBoom are and the lengths they'll go to to manipulate consumers. The company doesn't even want to allow honest discussion about their platform, they "release the hounds" whenever there is criticism. We also have creators that have received the feedback about the $1 pre-launch microtransactions, and have stepped away from it. The best ones cancelled it before launching their games. The good ones have shifted their campaigns so that everyone gets the $1 bonus. And, the OK ones have indicated they won't use the practice on future products. There's a clear indication that backers don't want the extra hurdle of a microtransaction. They don't want to waste time actively searching for the pre-launch deals for games they're interested in. They don't want to miss out for not being 'in the know". They wanted to be treated well by creators that are effectively begging them for money. On a more personal level, board gaming is a saturated market. I cannot afford to own (nor store) every game that I'm interested in. A $1 pre-launch campaign makes for an easy disqualifying factor. If you enjoy jumping through an extra hoop to be treated like a valued customer, then by all means... jump.
You raise a ton of great points and my response would go on forever if I responded to all of them 😄 You’re absolutely right about the data we have access to and the correlation vs causation side of things. The most unbiased data I was able to find was regarding Kelp as it came from the developers who passed it on to Stonemair games as opposed to it coming from Launchboom. If your comments are being deleted when raising valid points I don’t think that that’s cool so even though there may be points that we have different perspectives on I appreciate the fact that you’re sharing them here :)
I think having alternate voices in the mix is always a good thing, and particularly in this case where the voices for the tactic are those who stand to benefit from it, I think it's good to have a voice in the mix that isn't financially motivated. That said, of course I disagree with everything else you said. Just kidding. In actuality, I think you presented things great and overall I agree with lots of what you said....but I also do genuinely believe (as you seem to as well in the last 5 minutes) that this is a new line in the sand compared to any other marketing currently out there. You're prepaying for the oppurtunity to prepay. I don't believe that's ever been done before, I believe it is a new low, and if it's a new low....we have to decide if we're ok with moving the goalposts, or pushing back. For me...I'm pushing back. Thanks for the video!!
Thanks Alex! I think for me the crux is that as a marketing tool I can see the value in the practice and I don’t think it’s wrong, I just don’t think it needs to be used in crowdfunding due to the nature of what crowdfunding is because as you say, it turns into a prepay of a prepay.
I think "line in the sand" is a good way of putting how I feel about it. I accept a lot of the marketing tactics used in the crowdfunding space and understand why they are utilized, but this is kind of that line for me. Asking for money before the campaign launches is crazy to me and it's not a trend I want to see continue and becoming more egregious so it's an easy pass for me if a creator wants to use it.
And I think knowing that is super important, and feeding it back to project creators is doubly important. For me, i wouldn’t go for these preorders simply because, especially with the Geeknson campaign, there’s no benefit to giving the £100, the product is the same price, I just have to fork over a non-refundable £100. There may come a time where there is a perfect implementation of something like this, but we may just not be there yet (or there’ll be a new trend and we all move on the that 😄)
The one thing that struck me as bizarre with asking for money pre-campaign, is where there's no information about what is being offered in the campaign. As someone who does heavy investigation of a campaign before committing to it, the idea of a blind payment seems reckless.
I’ve seen a few people who’ve used this who have given extensive information on the core pledge and the items on offer but you’re right in that that doesn’t seem to be the norm
These conversion rates on the second or third ask, the big ask, have already filtered interest down through the first (or second) small request so what are we actually getting a 45-55% return from? 45-55% of that 10% that were converted by the first ask?? Not sounding that good when you look at it that way or have I misunderstood?
That’s a great question and I think your characterisation is correct but also not as bad as you think. So what Launchboom have said is that if you give the $1 you’re ‘30 times more likely to buy.’ If you give an email you’re 1-10% more likely to buy. You’ve correctly pointed out that with each step you’re in essence shrinking that pool of people, however from what they’ve shared it’s still converting to revenue. For example for Botany they had 8,734 people sign up to the mailing list (step 1 or 2 depending on how you’re looking at the funnel), 2,641 spent the dollar, and I can’t remember the exact number Dustin shared about people who backed from the dollar but I believe it was around 48-50 percent which converted to almost $100k. So although the pool of people is shrinking, it’s still bringing in a lot of revenue for the creator.
Darn. Not the video I was expecting. It felt a little apologetic towards marketing companies, and it's not cool to hear someone say that what I believe is "naive"
I’m sorry that that’s what you felt I was saying and equally that you felt you were being belittled (if that’s the right way to interpret it) in what I said. That wasn’t the intention even though I stand by the point I was trying to make.
Really well measured and honest assessment. Your position resonates better with me than Alex or Chris' assessments and critiques. This manipulation isn't new, rather the iteration is new to this space. And most of us still have a choice.
I really resonated with a lot of Alex’s points, and the fact he took time to talk to people in the industry about is super helpful (this was what he chatted about in his second video). We always have a choice but in the face of tactics or techniques like this some of us have an easier time of fully realising our choice. The key thing for us to continue to do as consumers in this hobby is to continue sparking these conversations and speaking up when we feel lines are crossed. It’s healthy to hold one another and the creators accountable in a constructive way, and in the long run it’ll help our hobby and the industry I think.
Thank you for the video. While I do disagree with most of this it is nice to hear an alternate viewpoint to such a polarizing issue.
Thank you! I appreciate that!
In terms of robust, but respectful challenge, I'd say Chris (Liege of games) and Alex (Boardgameco) are both very comfortable with acknowledging differing views. I very much used to enjoy Alex's 'coffee table' chats prior to him taking up his Gamefound role - back then he had a great talent for recognising and explaining a full range of arguments. I very much doubt either would have problem with differing opinions being offered up. FWIW I've never done a $1 campaign pledge, and have remained wary of that more basic 'foot in the door' technique. Personally I find such marketing uncomfortable. Is this different? Yes by giving an exclusive mini expansion for that $1, they've not just got the dollar making the backer feeling invested, but also identified what the backer will 'lose' if they don't complete a full pledge (not just a dollar, but a physical deliverable). You are right that foot in the door is an old technique, but for me this a higher level of mental manipulation, and that makes me even more uncomfortable. In my mind, I'm thinking "they're trying to manipulate me - that makes me trust them less". Considering crowdfunding is based on trust, that's problematic for me. If we are very diligent about our decisions, I think there's merit in your argument about opt-in marketing. It's not only more effective, but less annoying. I wonder how long before we get tailored averts on our televisions when watching a sport or movie? Perhaps if I had a favourite band, and wanted to be informed if they were touring, it very much would feel acceptable to signup to a list that advertises their tours. Sadly there are people who have got horribly carried away with crowdfunding boardgames, and I feel uncomfortable that such techniques may worsen their problem buying. It's a fair comment that it's not a binary thing of everything being fine until they crossed the line with this, but rather a spectrum of influence/manipulation with this just the next little step along. Crowdfunding is currently in a difficult space, with VAT now properly paid, and production/shipping costs increased, whilst cost of living does impact many. High profile failures add to that. How will it adapt over the next 2-3 years? It will be interesting to see, and this is just one aspect to watch. A very interesting video - well done.
Absolutely, I think the other creators in this space do a great job of appreciating differing opinions which is a breath of fresh air. We don't see that in every space and it's definitely something to be celebrated. I totally hear you on the $1 front though, I'm someone who equally hasn't purchased a $1 pre-order simply because it's not for me (or there aren't enough minis involved :D) but I think your point is equally why creators absolutely need to offer the pre-order as refundable (although really who is going to go through the hassle for a $1 refund which is another thing). On opt-in marketing the fascinating thing is that the only place we're not receiving targeted ads based on our interests is on terrestrial TV. Streaming services serve interest based ads, Spotify, KZread, almost every other platform is serving us ads based on our interest. The old TV folks just haven't got the tech yet to also introduce it but it's all around us. Yeah that was a point I had also made, some of us are able to easily say no to the preorder but there are some out there who are still in the excited got-to-back-everything phase and they could get swept up in this, which is why constructive feedback to publishers and creators is so important. I think there is a healthy balance to all of it, and tactics like this can exist, but there's got to be regulation or accountability for it to work.
Thank you for your inside and opinion! I wonder would this technique would work, if the dollar would be used to donate to social NGOs and you would not gain any Game expansion?
I’m afraid that could be perceived as worse. If we already perceive the practice as manipulation, then saying that the dollar would be donated to charity would be even clearer manipulation as our refusal to give the dollar then is perceived as a refusal to support charity.
@@shouldyoubackit Creators are already using the line that the $1 transaction will allow them to be more green with their production under the guise that the $1 transactions allow them to gage how many copies to produce. It's present on multiple LaunchBoom funnel pages. It's too formulaic for it to be coming from the creators. I don't know how anyone would believe that spin. Clearly, the number of backers on crowdfunding will more clearly determine the number of copies to produce. Additionally, the publisher is going to produce excess copies for retail. They want to be making money steadily through retail (if they can). Limiting their production to be green is a lie. It's just more manipulative marketing cooked up by LaunchBoom.
@@shouldyoubackit Hhm I wonder if that would be the Case?? I don’t know anything about how often this comes up, when you are living in the States or Northern Ireland. Here in Germany, I got asked on every PayPall transaction, if I would increase my amount of payment one €uro, so this €uro could be donated to some sort of charity organization…
@@samhugo5870 That's another very interesting side discussion, about how commercial, marketing driven and manipulative many mainstream charities have become. Is the means worth the end? That's a really tough question. I am however thankful that we eventually banned lurching 'chuggers' in the UK, greeting strangers in the street like long lost friends, as a way to get a foot in the door to seek direct debit regular payments to the charity. It really was intrusive, and for me very much crossed the line of morality.
Agreed but then that goes back to the point Alex made where creators are giving BS reasons for using it which this sounds like too. If a creator said ‘hey doing this gives us data that helps refine our advertising to increase the likelihood of funding/ producing more revenue’ I’d at least credit them with being honest