On a recent Radio Free Nintendo, the panel was discussing the failed Red Ash Kickstarter and they mentioned how it failed because Comcept hadn't proven anything yet. Mighty No. 9 has been subject to several delays and still isn't out. The host juxtaposed this situation to Yacht Club Games and Shovel Knight. If, and when, Yacht Club Games goes back to Kickstarter, he said, they'll be sure to find much more success.
Developers going back to Kickstarter is already happening. Larian Games raised close to a million dollars for Divinity: Original Sin and the game went on to be a formidable success,
having sold "well over" 500K copies as of September 2014. That's a large number for an indie RPG and it was hit in less than a year. Surely they've sold many more since with on-going Steam sales (it remains listed as a Top Seller). Now, a
Kickstarter for Divinity: Original Sin II is imminent.
This is only natural. Why wouldn't the company return to a business model that already worked for them once? But, does it really fit the narrative that Kickstarter is necessary to get these games off the ground? Could Larian Games really not get traditional funding now that they have proof that their games can be profitable? Could they not bank some of the money they made off the first game and use it to fund the sequel? We'll likely never know, because it is almost impossible to imagine that their Kickstarter will fail and there is no reason for a developer not to take money from fans so long as they keep lining up to pay out.
Those of you who pledge to Kickstarter campaigns, are you more likely to fund games that have a track record of successful Kickstarters or are you wary to give your money to projects that might not really need it? Where do you draw the line?
URL to share (right click and copy)