• 159 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
#101 Edited by ch3burashka (5011 posts) -

First Knockin' Boots, now Penny Arcade. When did talking into a microphone become so fucking expensive that I need to pay for podcasts? This isn't even an 'evolution of the medium' - nothing has happened to prompt such drastic measures; they just want to see how much they can get away with.

#102 Edited by Nardak (463 posts) -

If Penny Arcade doesnt need the money from the kickstarter then the question is why are they even doing one? Is this simply out of pure greed? I mean they are organizing massive events each year and probably have other sources of income available for them.

And they cant do a simple podcast withouth asking for cash donations from their fans? That 10 dollar thing just ensures that they get all of the cash that is being pledged to them. If for some obscure reason they wouldnt have reached a more normal cash goal (like 5000 dollars) then they might not have received the cash.

Do you even know how much cash some of the more popular people on the internet are making? For example some of the streamers on twitch tv are making about 8000 dollars a month or more. I am pretty sure that the guys at Penny arcade are getting a nice little nest egg at this point.

Here is an article from the Hollywood Reporter talking about the current financial problems facing the "Aint it cool news" website: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/aint-cools-harry-knowles-cash-430734

This is the interesting part of the article:

While Ain't It Cool News had been making $700,000 a year in gross advertising revenue at its height in the early- to mid-2000s, that had dipped to the low-six figures by 2012.

There are also advertisements on the Penny Arcade site. While they might not be making that much money from the advertisements alone (not including the merchandise on sale) I think they are ok financially.

#103 Posted by rebgav (1429 posts) -

@rebgav: I'm not saying that the expectations are 100% guaranteed, I'm saying they exist. When you're donating, there are no expectations. The difference is pretty easy to understand.

About the 10$, they say and I quote "If funded we'll produce a season of 20 original episodes of "Downloadable Content”". They are saying that if they get funded, aka reach their goal, aka get 10$, then they will produce the podcasts. The 10$ are what is making this project possible. That's what they are saying.

@rebgav said:

Unlike most Kickstarters, this one will be funded and will deliver on the product on offer

Your certainty on this is pretty funny, in light of what you said just before.

My certainty is based on them already having met their $10 goal and having already proven that they can deliver 20 episodes of a podcast in some form. They own at least one microphone, I'm pretty sure. I'm not insisting that it's a set-in-stone guarantee, I'm just calling it.

"If funded we'll produce..." is not "if funded, that $10 will pay for...." If anyone needs to be disabused of the notion that $10 is enough to fully fund the project, that's on them. If setting a funding goal which is way below the actual cost of the project is remotely relevant then all Kickstarter projects, especially gaming related, need to be called into question. While you may disagree with the way that PA have presented their project they don't seem to have actually done anything wrong or even anything unusual.

Again, if people are donating to kickstarter projects and harboring any expectation of fulfillment then they do not understand the nature of their transaction. That is a problem with the perception Kickstarter in general, one which they show no signs of attempting to correct.

#104 Posted by YoungFrey (1321 posts) -

@nardak: Penny Arcade isn't poor, but they also have a staff of 14 (I think) and since when is making money a crime? They aren't running some geek charity (ok they do also run a geek charity, but that is unrelated). Maybe they didn't want to be seen as holding the podcast hostage. So they made the limit $10 (I'm guessing it's the minimum), and made the whole thing free if you wait 2 weeks.

#105 Edited by Nephrahim (1119 posts) -

Yeah, I don't.... I don't know about this.

It's pretty much just asking for Donations. Everyone knows they could do this without the funding, which is why it's only 10 dollars. I don't know if Kickstarter is supposed to be to just run donation campaigns for things you can already easily make...

#106 Edited by Weltal (2272 posts) -

Is there any reason why someone SHOULDN'T charge for content they create? It's their voices, their time, they should be able to charge for something they are putting effort into, if they think they can. It's not greed, its business. They make it, you want it, so they ask to be compensated.

Just as a note I have zero interest in the product and am not donating. It's really just that simple.

#107 Posted by rebgav (1429 posts) -

@nardak said:

For example some of the streamers on twitch tv are making about 8000 dollars a month or more.

Who? From where? "About 8000 dollars or more" sounds very precise.

#108 Edited by Nardak (463 posts) -

@rebgav: @nardak: That figure is from a streamer on Twitch named Towelliee. He is asked this question quite often and he is very open about the amount of cash that he is making.

http://www.twitch.tv/towelliee/new

Of course the amount varies a bit over time. It depends on the income from advertisements and from the subscription fees. Some of that cash goes to twitch tv.

For example towelliee had at one point 1500 subscribers (4,95x1500=7425 dollars a month).

#109 Edited by Morbid_Coffee (954 posts) -

@rebgav: I'd like to know what non e-sports stream consistently gets 80,000 viewers daily to make that much money. Because I'm looking at twitch right now and the most viewed stream right now has 26k viewers.

#110 Edited by Winternet (8006 posts) -

@rebgav said:

"If funded we'll produce..." is not "if funded, that $10 will pay for...." If anyone needs to be disabused of the notion that $10 is enough to fully fund the project, that's on them. If setting a funding goal which is way below the actual cost of the project is remotely relevant then all Kickstarter projects, especially gaming related, need to be called into question.

"If funded we'll produce..." is "If we get 10$ we'll produce...". Of course 10$ doesn't do shit. I said previously that 10$ doesn't fund shit. They are meaningless. That's why it's a mockery. It's using the kickstarter platform to get donations and not to make the project viable. In the end, they will be able to say that the project was 1000000% funded. It's stupid.

What you're trying to say is that this is similar to other projects (about games, let's say) that the funds they get are not enough to fully develop the product. The difference is that while the funds that a dev gets through kickstarter may not be enough to develop the game, they are essential for the project to become a reality. For example, they can get 800k on kickstarter and then get another 2M from a publisher to develop the game. But, still, those 800k are needed for them to then get the other money from the publisher. In this case, those 10$ are worthless. They are not essential for the project to be viable. Not one bit. There lies the difference.

@rebgav said:

Again, if people are donating to kickstarter projects and harboring any expectation of fulfillment then they do not understand the nature of their transaction. That is a problem with the perception Kickstarter in general, one which they show no signs of attempting to correct.

I'm afraid you're the one who doesn't understand. I expect to get my Double Fine adventure game. Jeff expects to get his Oculus Rift. I expect to get my ""Certificate of Authenticity" to show your love for John Drake and the Drake Tracker". I'm not donating. Jeff is not donating. We're both helping fund a project that we expect later to turn into reality so we can then own/experience the final product. And even expect to get other rewards while doing so. It's not a guarantee. But, it is an investment and as such, we expect something in return.

#111 Posted by PopeShabooda (46 posts) -

A lot of people here are angry about this Kickstarter, and a lot of people are confused about that anger. I apologize for the lengthy post, but I hope I can clarify a bit:

There is absolutely nothing wrong making money. In and of itself, the pursuit of money is one of the driving forces behind advances made the world over. But as a Penny Arcade fan, I can honestly say that this feels wrong.

It just feels wrong.

I've been a big fan of Penny Arcade for over a decade. I've bought all of their books, all of their games, some T-shirts, and even contributed to their previous Kickstarter. I've helped increase their readership by introducing their comic to dozens of people, and I've viewed thousands of advertisements hosted on their website.

I did all this because Mike and Jerry were me. They understood what I had to deal with, and showed me that there were others like me. They were, in a very real sense, role models. They were not making comics for money, they were doing it because they had things they wanted to say.

Remember when they called their podcast 'Downloadable Content,' and repeatedly joked that it was for 'Premium Members Only,' making fun of the very idea that someone would pay them money for it?

Remember when they made fun of ridiculous Kickstarters that didn't actually advance any project or technology, and instead existed only due to greed?

Remember when they named their site wide Twitter feed 'Penny Arcade Megacorp,' sarcastically referencing the idea that Penny Arcade would ever act like some faceless corporation?

Remember when you could follow Mike on Twitter without receiving daily advertising messages regarding his new reality show?

Remember when they put on conventions and sold the tickets to the 'outsiders,' the actual fans?

Those days are gone now. Replaced with apathy and cynical cash grabs. And, again, there is nothing, on the face of it, wrong with that. But as someone who felt an (admittedly) one-sided connection with these people, it feels wrong.

I don't know what happened, and frankly I don't care. The Mike and Jerry that I loved and supported are gone.

#112 Edited by StarvingGamer (8007 posts) -

What the fuck, you people.

  1. The entire internet is still trying to figure out how to monetize podcasts because right now, they're money-holes. The PA guys figured out a way that works for them.
  2. They are spending the money on recording equipment and an entire human being (audio guy). It's not like this really only costs $10 to do and they're pocketing the rest.
  3. When did our culture become so FUCKED that people take direct affront to the idea of OTHER PEOPLE paying for content?
  4. Kickstarter is not some fucking charity, it's a for-profit business. The spirit of Kickstarter is to facilitate other people getting their hands on money so that Kickstarter can make money. Full stop.
#113 Edited by rebgav (1429 posts) -

@rebgav said:

"If funded we'll produce..." is not "if funded, that $10 will pay for...." If anyone needs to be disabused of the notion that $10 is enough to fully fund the project, that's on them. If setting a funding goal which is way below the actual cost of the project is remotely relevant then all Kickstarter projects, especially gaming related, need to be called into question.

"If funded we'll produce..." is "If we get 10$ we'll produce...". Of course 10$ doesn't do shit. I said previously that 10$ doesn't fund shit. They are meaningless. That's why it's a mockery. It's using the kickstarter platform to get donations and not to make the project viable. In the end, they will be able to say that the project was 1000000% funded. It's stupid.

What you're trying to say is that this is similar to other projects (about games, let's say) that the funds they get are not enough to fully develop the product. The difference is that while the funds that a dev gets through kickstarter may not be enough to develop the game, they are essential for the project to become a reality. For example, they can get 800k on kickstarter and then get another 2M from a publisher to develop the game. But, still, those 800k are needed for them to then get the other money from the publisher. In this case, those 10$ are worthless. They are not essential for the project to be viable. Not one bit. There lies the difference.

@rebgav said:

Again, if people are donating to kickstarter projects and harboring any expectation of fulfillment then they do not understand the nature of their transaction. That is a problem with the perception Kickstarter in general, one which they show no signs of attempting to correct.

I'm afraid you're the one who doesn't understand. I expect to get my Double Fine adventure game. Jeff expects to get his Oculus Rift. I expect to get my ""Certificate of Authenticity" to show your love for John Drake and the Drake Tracker". I'm not donating. Jeff is not donating. We're both helping fund a project that we expect later to turn into reality so we can then own/experience the final product. And even expect to get other rewards while doing so. It's not a guarantee. But, it is an investment and as such, we expect something in return.

You can "expect" all you want but if they don't deliver you have no legal recourse. It's a pretty one-sided transaction there, call it whatever you like.

As I said many, many posts ago; There is no poverty clause. Kickstarter is not about creating unique opportunities, it's about funding products. Whatever idealistic nonsense they've managed to conflate with their actual operating procedure is completely irrelevant. That Penny Arcade could fund their own podcast and eat the costs is an utterly meaningless factor, at no point are the people running Kickstarter going to object, nor is it against their guidelines, nor is it unethical in general or in comparison to how any other Kickstarter campaign operates. Initial goal aside (itself an irrelevant factor at this point since they blew past it immediately) the campaign has the same "stretch goals and reward tiers" strategy as most other projects, they are asking for specific amounts of money to accomplish specific goals, they aren't saying "give us some money - we promise to do stuff with it, you guys."

Frankly, I think more crowdfunding projects should be handled this way. I prefer this method to begging poor and promising the moon on a stick, then failing to deliver.

#114 Posted by Winternet (8006 posts) -

@starvinggamer: The thing is that Kickstarter is not meant for that. Kickstarter's mission is not to be a pay-wall behind content. And it's not to make people money. It's to make projects come true. If they then want to make money out of it or not, that's up to the person/company behind the project to decide after the fact.

#115 Edited by Winternet (8006 posts) -

@rebgav: Dude, it's like you going to buy stocks. You're expecting a return out of your investment, but there are no guarantees. The company can go under and you don't get any money back. Do you call buying stocks donations as well? I sure don't.

#116 Posted by StarvingGamer (8007 posts) -

@winternet: Sorry, I misspoke, I meant to say Kickstarter is for facilitate other people getting their hands on money. I'll edit my post.

#117 Posted by YoungFrey (1321 posts) -

@starvinggamer: The thing is that Kickstarter is not meant for that. Kickstarter's mission is not to be a pay-wall behind content. And it's not to make people money. It's to make projects come true. If they then want to make money out of it or not, that's up to the person/company behind the project to decide after the fact.

I thought Kickstarter's mission was to make money for Kickstarter. Snark aside, Kickstarter is a way to avoid the immense hassle of dealing with thousands of small credit card transactions. A serious barrier to crowdfunding. I don't see how using the site for different purposes hurts things like indie game development. I see that as like saying rich people can't sell their crap on eBay because it's for people cleaning out their garages.

#118 Edited by Winternet (8006 posts) -

@winternet said:

@starvinggamer: The thing is that Kickstarter is not meant for that. Kickstarter's mission is not to be a pay-wall behind content. And it's not to make people money. It's to make projects come true. If they then want to make money out of it or not, that's up to the person/company behind the project to decide after the fact.

I thought Kickstarter's mission was to make money for Kickstarter. Snark aside, Kickstarter is a way to avoid the immense hassle of dealing with thousands of small credit card transactions. A serious barrier to crowdfunding. I don't see how using the site for different purposes hurts things like indie game development. I see that as like saying rich people can't sell their crap on eBay because it's for people cleaning out their garages.

I would say it's more like using eBay to sell money. It's not meant to do that, but I guess you technically can do it :)

#119 Edited by rebgav (1429 posts) -

@rebgav: Dude, it's like you going to buy stocks. You're expecting a return out of your investment, but there are no guarantees. The company can go under and you don't get any money back. Do you call buying stocks donations as well? I sure don't.

It's exactly like buying stocks except that you own nothing, there's no ongoing return, and you have instead just purchased the promise of goods or services. It's a pre-order, at best.

#120 Posted by Winternet (8006 posts) -

@rebgav said:

@winternet said:

@rebgav: Dude, it's like you going to buy stocks. You're expecting a return out of your investment, but there are no guarantees. The company can go under and you don't get any money back. Do you call buying stocks donations as well? I sure don't.

It's exactly like buying stocks except that you own nothing, there's no ongoing return, and you have instead just purchased the promise of goods or services. It's a pre-order, at best.

So, there are expectations after all. Then, it's not a donation. Boom!

#121 Posted by rebgav (1429 posts) -

@rebgav said:

@winternet said:

@rebgav: Dude, it's like you going to buy stocks. You're expecting a return out of your investment, but there are no guarantees. The company can go under and you don't get any money back. Do you call buying stocks donations as well? I sure don't.

It's exactly like buying stocks except that you own nothing, there's no ongoing return, and you have instead just purchased the promise of goods or services. It's a pre-order, at best.

So, there are expectations after all. Then, it's not a donation. Boom!

When you donate to a charity you expect that the money will be used for the purpose of the charity. If they blow the money on a rooftop hot tub, you have no recourse - just like a Kickstarter :p

#122 Posted by StarvingGamer (8007 posts) -

Remember when they made fun of ridiculous Kickstarters that didn't actually advance any project or technology, and instead existed only due to greed?

You're right, wanting to purchase dedicated recording equipment and to pay an audio engineer to ensure a quality product is fucking greedy.

Remember when they named their site wide Twitter feed 'Penny Arcade Megacorp,' sarcastically referencing the idea that Penny Arcade would ever act like some faceless corporation?

I agree, I can't think of a company further removed from the public eye. Providing us with weekly essays on their current mind-space, sharing their family interactions through their writing and their art, and giving us video insights into their personal lives falls far below the bare minimum of interaction I expect from the heads any business/company.

Remember when you could follow Mike on Twitter without receiving daily advertising messages regarding his new reality show?

What asshole would use Twitter to promote a project they created and are proud of? Fucking douches, amirite?

Remember when they put on conventions and sold the tickets to the 'outsiders,' the actual fans?

The fact that they blocked my IP from buying tickets to PAX is one thing, but the huge "NO ACTUAL FANS" sign on the front door is going too far.

#123 Posted by MideonNViscera (2257 posts) -

All I know is that their XBLA game sucked ass, so fuck them. That is all I know about Penny Arcade haha

#124 Posted by Winternet (8006 posts) -

@rebgav said:

@winternet said:

@rebgav said:

@winternet said:

@rebgav: Dude, it's like you going to buy stocks. You're expecting a return out of your investment, but there are no guarantees. The company can go under and you don't get any money back. Do you call buying stocks donations as well? I sure don't.

It's exactly like buying stocks except that you own nothing, there's no ongoing return, and you have instead just purchased the promise of goods or services. It's a pre-order, at best.

So, there are expectations after all. Then, it's not a donation. Boom!

When you donate to a charity you expect that the money will be used for the purpose of the charity. If they blow the money on a rooftop hot tub, you have no recourse - just like a Kickstarter :p

Really? Do I have to type "expectations of a return" every single time, instead of just shortening it to expectations? C'mon.

#125 Posted by Sergio (2050 posts) -

@youngfrey: The minimum is $1 with a limit of 1 backer reward.

#126 Posted by rebgav (1429 posts) -

Really? Do I have to type "expectations of a return" every single time, instead of just shortening it to expectations? C'mon.

Yep.

This became a silly semantic argument a while back but I think that the crux of the issue is the perception of Kickstarter and its uses, which is probably going to become a bigger problem in the future.

#127 Posted by JasonR86 (9608 posts) -

I love how fucked Kickstarter is. If I were smarter I'd throw all sorts of projects on there too.

#128 Edited by Vexxan (4615 posts) -

They should have just done a donation thingy on their site instead. I don't think this is the proper way to use Kickstarter because they're just asking for any amount of money. Their first Kickstarter wasn't exactly legit in my eyes either.

#129 Edited by Scrawnto (2434 posts) -

I've got no problem with this. They have the ability to make something that people want. They are letting people give them money for the thing they want. Penny Arcade did have a donate button on their site, once upon a time. This is basically just the 2013 version of that.

#130 Edited by GreggD (4477 posts) -
#131 Posted by rebgav (1429 posts) -
#132 Posted by ArbitraryWater (11477 posts) -

This is kind of gross, but I guess if people want it they can pay for it. Personally, the way that the PA guys have presented themselves in the past few years, with the whole Dickwolves and Ocean Marketing incidents, I'd be against doing so but people can do what they want.

#133 Edited by StarvingGamer (8007 posts) -

@jasonr86 said:

I love how fucked Kickstarter is.

Interesting. On your planet does "fucked" translate to "wildly successful"?

#134 Posted by Morbid_Coffee (954 posts) -
#135 Posted by YoungFrey (1321 posts) -

@sergio said:

@youngfrey: The minimum is $1 with a limit of 1 backer reward.

Are you saying it's not technically free? Because it is. If you are saying something else, I didn't catch it.

Backers get them first, and after two weeks every episode (barring those exclusive to backers) will go up as pay-what-you-want.

#136 Posted by JasonR86 (9608 posts) -

@jasonr86 said:

I love how fucked Kickstarter is.

Interesting. On your planet does "fucked" translate to "wildly successful"?

Sure.

#137 Posted by Sergio (2050 posts) -

@sergio said:

@youngfrey: The minimum is $1 with a limit of 1 backer reward.

Are you saying it's not technically free? Because it is. If you are saying something else, I didn't catch it.

Backers get them first, and after two weeks every episode (barring those exclusive to backers) will go up as pay-what-you-want.

No. I mean the minimum goal amount you can set a Kickstarter to is $1. And the fewest rewards you can set may be 1 - could be wrong, haven't seen one yet with no rewards. These settings don't stop anyone from continuing to contribute money beyond the $1, they just don't get the reward listed.

Max Temkin of CAH did this for Andy Baio of Waxy.org for the Spelunky Dance.

#138 Edited by SpaceInsomniac (3558 posts) -

@thesoutherndandy said:

@squirrelgod said:

Then don't give them money if you don't want. This isn't complicated: See something on Kickstarter that you want to support? Toss a few bucks their way. See something you don't care for? Move on with your life.

It sounds so simple doesn't it? It sounds like it should be so easy to grasp doesn't it?

Watching people on Twitter get freakin FURIOUS about this (not all the neg. responses were this way granted) was just so completely absurd to me. Like, I don't understand it at all. I get people not liking it and it being something to discuss but if this is seriously upsetting you, you are TOO DAMN CLOSE to video games and the industry surrounding it.

Maybe it was because I had just been watching the news (Benghazi, 3 girls escape TEN YEARS of imprisonment, massacre in Syria) before going on Twitter and reading about this but holy crap, the lack of perspective, and what people get super mad about is staggering sometimes.

I can absolutely see where you're coming from, and "Count your blessings" is always good advice for anyone, but "nobody should be mad about this, because there are much worse things that happen all the time" is quite literally a fallacy. And that same sort of fallacy could be turned around to attack this kickstarter as well, with a statement such as "how dare these assholes ask for money to make a podcast, when there are actually people suffering in the world, and many good charities don't receive enough donations!"

That argument loses a bit of strength due to their own charity work, but you could still claim that the money should be going towards their own charity.

Again, all fallacy, as far as I'm concerned. For me, what this really comes down to a handful of questions:

Would you be upset if PA simply put a "donate to Penny Arcade" button on their website? This is subjective.

Does PA really need the money to help them make a podcast? Do they even need one penny?

Does Kickstarter support "fund my life" projects? For those who do not know, they--supposedly--do not.

Has PA openly mocked the idea of "fund my life" projects in the past? As seen in the image above, yes, they have.

If they don't need the money, does that essentially make this kickstarter a "fund my life" project? This is also subjective.

Personally, I'm fine with every aspect of this, other than them using kickstarter. I feel that it veers uncomfortably close to the sort of "non-project" that isn't supposed to be a part of kickstarter. My level of basic disappointment or raging anger really has nothing to do with the argument. "People are too upset about this," is good friends with "there are better things to care about" in the selection of useful debate points here.

For the record, I'm just slightly bothered.

#139 Posted by Capum15 (4813 posts) -

"Meh" feels like the appropriate word, or sound, or whatever. People can do whatever the hell they want with their own money.

#140 Posted by kpaadet (409 posts) -

If PA wanted people to basically donate money to them they should just get a donate button on their site, but I guess a kickstarter page is probably more lucrative.

#141 Posted by RecSpec (3764 posts) -

The only "issue" I see with this is the way they are using Kickstarter for it, but then again, I've never been much of a fan of Kickstarter since the beginning.

Let people spend their money how they want to. Podcasts have always been things that lose money left and right. It's bad that for years and years no one has figured out a way to make money off them.

I find it hilarious that between this Kickstarter and another non-Kickstarter crowd-funded project I won't mention purely because the less said about it the better. This is the one that's getting the most hate.

#142 Posted by MordeaniisChaos (5730 posts) -

No interest in that, but I would pay for a weekly/bi-weekly video show where they play D&D with or without Chris Perkins. The one a year they do at the expo is never enough!

Yeah, I miss when they ran campaigns. I go back and listen to their old DnD campaigns regularly. So good. I would totally pay for that to be a regular feature.

@supamon said:

People can do what they want with their money but this is kinda ridiculous unbelievable ludicrous. They were podcasting before so they already have the equipment and they're asking for $10, which to me is basically saying " we don't really need the money but hell, our fans are going to give us a ton if we ask so ignoring our 2 conventions, multiple tv shows and merchandising, why the heck not?"

They had very little equipment, the quality on them was baaaaaad. Mad echo, bad mics, etc. At least any time I listened to them.

Also, they only asked for $10. So come on. I'm sure they will find a use for that money. They've never really been ones to screw people over or be extra greedy. I get the feeling a lot of the money will go towards rewards honestly.

Also, the podcasts previously lasted like 2-3 minutes if I remember correctly, so maybe they are planning on making them much longer, considering they will be paying a dude to do editing and buying all new equipment.

#143 Edited by YoungFrey (1321 posts) -

Also, they only asked for $10. So come on. I'm sure they will find a use for that money. They've never really been ones to screw people over or be extra greedy. I get the feeling a lot of the money will go towards rewards honestly.

Also, the podcasts previously lasted like 2-3 minutes if I remember correctly, so maybe they are planning on making them much longer, considering they will be paying a dude to do editing and buying all new equipment.

I'm guessing the cost to make this thing will be something like $1000 for good audio equipment. Maybe more, I have zero idea what audio stuff costs. Even if that is overkill it would be a good investment for future projects too. Why buy OK when you know you'll need great later. And then the time for staff to cut it all together. I'm going to be crazy and guess 2 hours per cast at $20/hr. I have no idea what they pay their staff but $40K doesn't seem crazy. So that is another $840. Then server costs. But even if it cost nothing to make and they got $100K from this. That sum spread out over their business isn't exactly winning the lottery. They employ like 14 other people and rent a decent office space and warehouse.

I will point out though, that the chance of their being PA merch spawned from this project is about %100. Somebody will say something hilarious and it'll go on a shirt, they will have one of their designers create a logo, etc ... And, unless my reading of the KS is bad, they said nothing about not having ads in it for the free version. So in the end, this project might pay for itself, with or without ads.

The previous podcasts lasted up to around an hour I think. They did a bunch of videos as part of their PA TV series, and those were edited to much shorter. And one of the reasons people clamored so much for the long ones back. Those short ones were such a tease.

#144 Posted by MordeaniisChaos (5730 posts) -

First Knockin' Boots, now Penny Arcade. When did talking into a microphone become so fucking expensive that I need to pay for podcasts? This isn't even an 'evolution of the medium' - nothing has happened to prompt such drastic measures; they just want to see how much they can get away with.

To do it right, you need hardware and software which can all be expensive depending on what you do with it. I bet you the equipment they use for the Bombcast is really fucking expensive. Sure, you could get by on a a couple of Snowballs and Audacity but the results won't be very good, honestly. In reality you need very nice mics, you need pop guards, you need a dedicated space (and that space needs to be way more than a table in a room. Do you remember OG bombcast, when there was echo and room noise like crazy? You need to have a room with sound dampening material, mics, stands for mics, good pop guards, a PC to record to, software to edit with, a compressor to keep everything listenable if you have a quiet/loud speaker (ie, Ryan). That can all add up. Especially if you want the capacity to record more than two people and have guests on the podcast, because mics can be expensive.

It's not $100,000, sure, but paying for a dude to be their "audio guy" is a huge expense. As are rewards. I think this is probably more of a way for them to get rewards out to the community and to gauge interest, as well as to pay for a room full of equipment and a new employee.

#145 Posted by RazielCuts (2931 posts) -

While the initial 'how can anyone ask for that amount of money?' usually hits me on first blush I get over it with 'ah, people can spend money on whatever they want, go for it.' . It's the awards to said projects that irk me. The audacity on some pledge tiers are just infuriating and shows how much of an inflated self worth these people have.

'Play a game with us for an hour' with an entry fee to be granted such a privilege valued at $1,000. Suggest a topic nearly triple that and a 'song' (didn't know these guys were musicians now?) at 5 times that. Yeah, getting a real 'for the community' vibe with those perks right there. Really makes me feel closer to them and not further apart at all. On the plus side it's heartening to see no ones actually pledged those amounts as of yet.

Online
#146 Edited by Maajin (1052 posts) -
@posh said:

"nobody is forcing you to spend your money on it" is a bullshit argument against this. that shouldn't mean you can't criticise it. it's like telling somebody "if you don't like romney, don't vote for him" and expecting that to silence any kind of political debate. the internet is usually pretty fast to question the integrity of journalistic outlets, constantly guessing at money changing hands between writers and publishers, and it also hates the money-grabbing capitalist bigwigs of video games like EA and activision, ruining video games with their always-online and DRM procedures. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that, I just can't see how you can defend this after denouncing all of that. is it just because it's penny arcade? let's not forget how shitty penny arcade are and how unfunny and reprehensible their content is. they have a bunch of money; they don't need donations. they didn't set the goal at $10 thinking they would just get $10, they just wanted a bunch more money. it's shameless, and probably against kickstarter's rules.

Hey, don't say Penny Arcade is shitty like it's a well known and highly accepted fact. I think they're great, supremely funny, very real and talented people I could listen to for hours and the good they make with Child's Play and PAX is unparalleled. I am happy to vote with my money for them to keep being like that any opportunity I get.

I also think it's pretty stupid to criticise "money-grabbing capitalist bigwigs of video games like EA and activision".

#147 Posted by rebgav (1429 posts) -

'Play a game with us for an hour' with an entry fee to be granted such a privilege valued at $1,000. Suggest a topic nearly triple that and a 'song' (didn't know these guys were musicians now?) at 5 times that. Yeah, getting a real 'for the community' vibe with those perks right there.

You don't think that the rewards which directly involve them might be in the higher priced brackets to limit how much of their personal time they're giving away, given that both have jobs and families?

I think that higher-tier rewards on Kickstarter projects are uniformly terrible and this one is no different but it makes sense that the best "value" is found in the lower tiers which may be attainable by more people. I think that the $250 tier is the last sensible proposition on this project and that's only by comparison to their webstore prices. Still, the point of these things is to generate money, it would be pretty counterproductive if the reward tiers were worth their price in merchandise.

#148 Edited by posh (461 posts) -

@maajin: did you read the link? how can you defend that?

I don't know if anyone has mentioned it yet, but the fact that they set the goal to $10 doesn't mean that's all they need, it means there's no risk involved in the process. all money donated to them will be their's guaranteed. it's much worse than asking for $50,000 for example. all reward, no risk

#149 Posted by TwoLines (2788 posts) -

Whatever. Don't like it- don't eat... I mean pay.

#150 Edited by MordeaniisChaos (5730 posts) -

@razielcuts: Those are all pretty cool in my book, but apparently you get to decide what the community does and does not want so I guess I should shut up.

No wait, that's you. Because it's not up to you what the community wants or doesn't want.

Also, those are only three of many perks. Also keep in mind you get everything above those, which at that level, starts to add up. And it is, again, supposed to raise money for the podcast, not just give to the community. But why not do it in a way that lets them give cool stuff to the community? Would it really be better for them to just get the money?

@nardak said:

There are also advertisements on the Penny Arcade site. While they might not be making that much money from the advertisements alone (not including the merchandise on sale) I think they are ok financially.

Um, no, there aren't? Any ads are just for their own merch/content. That's all I see anyway. Didn't they have a kickstarter so they could run the site without ads for a year or something? Maybe I'm just not seeing em, I dunno, but I can't remember seeing any recently.