Oculus Rift Buyout Leads To Torrent Of Anger On Kickstarter

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT
 

The only good thing I see coming out of this is more bad press for kickstarter. How anyone can think giving money to "companies" with next to no consumer protection was a good thing I'll never know. I don't give money to beggars for the same reason I don't give money to kickstarter. You can't control what they do with the money afterwards. That's why if I feel inclined to get involved I give beggars food and become a legal investor.

Charli:
You donate, and you are promised a thing.

That's the very definition of an investment. Donation is when you give WITHOUT expecting anything in return. If you chip in with your money on a bigger project and promised some kind of return, that's an investment. Oculus took the money of many individuals promising an indie developed, affordable VR gear. With selling the whole thing to Facebook, they've broken that promise.

It's like you give me money so I could build a big house, and in return for your money, I offer you the right to stay at that house whenever you want. Then when the house is almost complete, I sell the whole thing to a giant corporation. Now, I'm f@cking rich and you are stuck with a landlord who will paint all the rooms bright blue, install a PA system that will blare adverts 24/7 in every room and may or may not make you pay rent on top of that.

Heh.. so in truth this whole project was "How can the project founder get enough money and attention to sell out to a big corporation and get filthy rich"?

This is why kickstarter is so deliciously easy to abuse. Many people complain about the scammers on that service but this one takes the cake. The backers financed this sellout with their own money for crying out loud.

The founder of the company is a made man/woman now and doesnt have to work a single day in his/her live anymore for all he/she cares, and all it took was the dreams of alot of hardware nerds on the internet that had the audacity to believe in something.

Makes the whole thing look like the intention was a sellout from day 1. And as Jim of Jimquisition himselfe said.. the whole tech looks to be doomed from the get go to be relegated as some gimmick.. like camera controlled games.. 3D.. or the ouya.

MAkes you think that the project founders themselves hadnt much faith in the project and where only out to make big bugs as fast as possible.

"most people will see why [I could not say "No" to so much money]."

here fixed that to you.

Scars Unseen:
*shrug*

It's hardware. It will be good, or it will not. That is the only basis on which I will make my purchasing decision. I certainly don't give a shit whose logo is pasted on the front of the damn thing. In all likelihood, Facebook will find a lot of profitable uses for VR that the guys at Oculus might not have thought of, but as long as it doesn't interfere with my intended use of the Rift(playing games), I don't give a shit about that either.

asking for facebook to not interfere with things that you like over potentially increasing their profits is like asking facebook to not interfere with things that you like over potentially increasing their profits

wulfy42:
I pretty much called this reaction, and as I said yesterday, the best solution is to simply pass on the "profit" at least in some small way to the original backers.

2.5 mill was collected, pay back 25 mill (10x the original investment) to the backers, and thank them for helping to get the project where it is today.

That still leaves a HUGE profit for the company, and would probably help prevent so many angry backers.

That is the right thing to do (and no, i'm not a backer).

It's not mandatory, nothing legally says they need to do it etc, but heck, due to the efforts of the backers, they just made freaking 2 BILLION dollars. Even if you only count the 400 million for now, you still would have a massive profit for every single employee....even if you tossed 25 mill to the backers as a thank you.

Doubt it'll happen, but it's what I would do.

Why on earth do they need to give the backers anything back? much less 10x as much as what they back them with?. That is beyond ridiculous, they promised nothing beyond what the kickstarter campaign said which I'm guessing was the headset or whatever, so why do they need to give anyone anything more. They sold the company, even if they had been bought for 19 billion like whatsapp did they still shouldn't give any of the backers a cent of that money. They weren't investors, they don't deserve a piece of the pie, they deserve what was advertised for the backers which is the headset, right? so that's what they get, buyout by facebook or not.

No one who backed them in kickstarter is entitled to a cent of that money, are you people crazy?.

As long as you get your headset I don't see what all the butthurt is about. I don't really care either way, I don't understand the fb hate even though I don't use fb but this could be a positive thing, fb has a lot of money so that's never a bad thing. I'm sure it will be fine for gaming and not fb games precisely, so shut your yap people.

Playbahnosh:

Charli:
You donate, and you are promised a thing.

That's the very definition of an investment. Donation is when you give WITHOUT expecting anything in return. If you chip in with your money on a bigger project and promised some kind of return, that's an investment. Oculus took the money of many individuals promising an indie developed, affordable VR gear. With selling the whole thing to Facebook, they've broken that promise.

It's like you give me money so I could build a big house, and in return for your money, I offer you the right to stay at that house whenever you want. Then when the house is almost complete, I sell the whole thing to a giant corporation. Now, I'm f@cking rich and you are stuck with a landlord who will paint all the rooms bright blue, install a PA system that will blare adverts 24/7 in every room and may or may not make you pay rent on top of that.

Nope.

The only thing that you are promised in return for your money is outlined in the tier that you pledge at. Kickstarter is very clear on that, and if that isn't okay with you, use your money for something else(like actual investment, which Kickstarter is not). As far as I'm aware, all Kickstarter pledges have been fulfilled, which means that Oculus doesn't owe anyone anything, as - once again - Kickstarter is not an investment platform.

They will make it cheaper with what? Pop-up advertising? Sounds ridiculous, but I wouldn't put it past Facebook.

tacotrainwreck:
They will make it cheaper with what? Pop-up advertising? Sounds ridiculous, but I wouldn't put it past Facebook.

If they follow through with what they mentioned(sports event and classroom telepresence), then I could see them using the Rift as a loss leader in hopes of opening those and other new markets, possibly profiting off of licensing deals with sports leagues and/or universities. It's not that different an idea from what the console developers do with games. Naturally, they could go the Google route as well, making money off of ad-to-play games. But that would be more of a decision on the game developers end(whether to make your game ad supported or not) that Facebook would merely be in a position to profit off of.

There are a lot of ways to profit from this that don't involve mandatory pop-up ads like some resurgence of turn of the century era NetZero dial-up service. And even if that did turn out to be what we get, someone will just hack together some custom firmware that eliminates the ads anyway, so I still maintain that the hardware is all that matters here.

Well I highly doubt I will be interested in buying Occulus rift now. In the hands of facebook is just so unappealing.

As long as the backers get what was promised to them depending on the tier of payment they payed, then there is nothing than can do. They got what they paid the money in for, they dont know a percentage of the company or any product thats made. Having said that i understand why people are annoyed, what was once an idea that only gamers believed in and backed financially, has now been bought by FB now that all the hard work has been completed.

Andy Chalk:

RJ 17:
Well of course they're pissed off about this deal. Why the hell did they bother paying up with their own cash if some mega-corp like Facebook is just going to come in with $400 million anyways? That literally defeats the entire purpose behind crowdfunding, and essentially means that everyone that backed the Oculus just pissed (x) amount of money away.

I don't see how you (and a lot of other people) come to that conclusion. No Kickstarter backing means no product, which means no buyout - you can't have one without the other. And do you really expect companies like Oculus to attenuate their success to a level you find successful? You want it to be a hit so your money isn't wasted on a failed, dead-end product, but not so much of a hit that it'll attract bigger players with money to throw around?

People on Kickstarter paid to support the development of the headset in exchange for set rewards, which they will receive. Nothing has changed. So why the anger?

Because for a lot of backers it's not just about the final product but also about helping the common man (woman) stand up to the mega-corporations and be successful without needing those mega-corporations. It's about cutting those large publishers, corporations, and rich executives completely out of the loop.

It's about having the little guy make a successful product, become big, and shake his fist in the face of the corporations and say, "See?! You didn't believe in me or my product. You didn't want to fund my ideas because you didn't believe there was enough profit in it for you! Well the people believed! They backed me and my ideas and look at me now! And YOU, Mr. CEO, get none of my success!"

So when that guy then turns around and sells out to those very same corporations it only further strengthens the idea that corporations eventually own everything and the backers are merely there to pay all the costs of the initial risk (which the corporation no longer has to pay) and get the Kickstarter guy a stronger position to barter from to ask for a higher selling price.

To look at another example...Star Citizen. Chris Roberts went to Kickstarter because no publisher wanted to risk investing in a space shooter. There was no "market" for it. So Chris wants to cut them out of the loop. The people pay for the game to be made and the Star Citizen devs, once the game is launched, are supposed to get all the profits themselves. Now imagine if EA came along and said, "Wow Chris! $50 Million paid by your backers. You were right. There IS a market for this game." And then EA gives Chris "an offer he can't refuse" which he accepts and now EA owns Star Citizen. The Development costs were paid by the people but the profits go to EA. Chris Roberts takes his EA money and runs and all the other developers who WERE part of something special are back to being owned by a publisher.

If it were only about the final product then there would be no need for all the Kickstarter tiers. Who in their right mind would pay $10,000 for a copy of Star Citizen when the $50 backers get that very same game? Sure the higher tiers get bonuses but there's no way in hell the bonuses are valued at $10k. Backers pay $10k because they believe in the cause and when the cause sells out to a mega-corporation then those $10k backers are left with a $50 product and $9,950 worth of now-tarnished bad-taste-in-your-mouth fluff and broken dreams.

Andy Chalk:

RJ 17:
Well of course they're pissed off about this deal. Why the hell did they bother paying up with their own cash if some mega-corp like Facebook is just going to come in with $400 million anyways? That literally defeats the entire purpose behind crowdfunding, and essentially means that everyone that backed the Oculus just pissed (x) amount of money away.

I don't see how you (and a lot of other people) come to that conclusion. No Kickstarter backing means no product, which means no buyout - you can't have one without the other. And do you really expect companies like Oculus to attenuate their success to a level you find successful? You want it to be a hit so your money isn't wasted on a failed, dead-end product, but not so much of a hit that it'll attract bigger players with money to throw around?

People on Kickstarter paid to support the development of the headset in exchange for set rewards, which they will receive. Nothing has changed. So why the anger?

The comment to which you are responding addresses just one of several sources of discontent with the aquisition. I would say the principal source of discontent is that the aquisition is indicative of a change in the preceived fundamental intended use of the device, from one of dedicated gaming (with the possibility of other industrial applications as well such as medicine) to one of social media. The developement team promoted the product on Kickstarter as the former. In light of the latter, pledgers believe themselves - and rightly so - to have been duped, that the product for which they invested money will no longer be the product promised to them at the time they invested. This is a legitimate concern, rather than arbitrary, baseless "anger". They feel additionally, that they, in the end, have unwittingly invested in Facebook's vision and Facebook's future, for which the device is now presumably a vehicle.

Consider shareholders who would overthrow a board of directors for taking a company in a direction different from what,in order to solicit their investments, was initially promised . The principal is the same.

Ratty:

PrinceOfShapeir:

Ratty:
I don't use facebook because they creep me out and I don't like to have their ads shoved in my face, and that's a free service. Why would I pay hundreds of dollars to enable them to shove ads in my face even more?

So glad I didn't fund this. I'd call Carmack a POS for selling out like this, but I'm pretty sure for 2 billion dollars I would have sold out to.

What makes you think John Carmack had anything to do with this?

He's not complaining about it https://twitter.com/ID_AA_Carmack so I assume he was ok with the deal. And his name being attached was certainly what led a lot of people to donate to the Kickstarter.

Honestly, as long as Carmack is working on tech he finds interesting I don't think he gives a shit about the business side of things.

Andy Chalk:
The Oculus Rift Kickstarter page is being flooded with negative comments from backers unhappy about yesterday's acquisition by Facebook.

I still reckon this is just a build up for an April Fool's joke. They are having to become more elaborate and realistic in order to maintain the shock of the "gotcha!" moment.

Andy Chalk:

People on Kickstarter paid to support the development of the headset in exchange for set rewards, which they will receive. Nothing has changed. So why the anger?

It appears that the anger stems from the sentiment that one backs a Kickstarter project not for goodies, but to enable the creation of something they want.

Facebook's general consumer-facing business practices are notorious in their own right, but there is also nothing being done at all - by either party - to assuage the fears of the Rift simply becoming a proprietary device, closed off from use by everything backers wanted to do with it.

And while legally these are some very uncharted waters, I really can't blame people for being upset that Facebook's interests just completely superceded the mission statement advertised on Kickstarter.

EDIT: It appears that Vagabondwillsmile ninja'd me in both timeliness and eloquence.

Andy Chalk:

People on Kickstarter paid to support the development of the headset in exchange for set rewards, which they will receive. Nothing has changed. So why the anger?

In fact, they have already received all rewards back in 2013. The Kickstarter was for the Devkit 1.

This is pretty much the equivalent of if Subset Games would be bought by a publisher right now, and the people who backed FTL wouldbe complaining about how their money is being misapplied.

Playbahnosh:

Charli:
You donate, and you are promised a thing.

That's the very definition of an investment. Donation is when you give WITHOUT expecting anything in return. If you chip in with your money on a bigger project and promised some kind of return, that's an investment. Oculus took the money of many individuals promising an indie developed, affordable VR gear.

Yes, and it delivered all of those indie developed, affordable VR gear to the backers.

Playbahnosh:

Charli:
You donate, and you are promised a thing.

That's the very definition of an investment. Donation is when you give WITHOUT expecting anything in return. If you chip in with your money on a bigger project and promised some kind of return, that's an investment. Oculus took the money of many individuals promising an indie developed, affordable VR gear. With selling the whole thing to Facebook, they've broken that promise.

It's like you give me money so I could build a big house, and in return for your money, I offer you the right to stay at that house whenever you want. Then when the house is almost complete, I sell the whole thing to a giant corporation. Now, I'm f@cking rich and you are stuck with a landlord who will paint all the rooms bright blue, install a PA system that will blare adverts 24/7 in every room and may or may not make you pay rent on top of that.

It's not quite an investment in the eyes of law, an investment usually gives back monetary value, by the definitions of kick-starter, what you're donating first of all may still not come to you within reasonable circumstances, the crowd funded nature of it has to allow for that to happen or they'll run into all sorts of problematic litigation so it is still technically a fund, donated to. So it cannot be deemed by law an investment... and if people start demanding kickstarter become an investment corporation then...it'll be saddled with the same rules and regulations that others adhere to.

I was not aware they'd promised the project would remain indie and under their control, but if that is true then the loose agreement is indeed broken. But I haven't heard that from anyone so far, it seems like that was just a 'what we're aiming for' writ. Most of the 'we give money and you get', clauses are usually straightforward, you give X and we give you X thing, if nothing of that has been withdrawn I think those trying to back out are going to have a hard time with it.

The most they can do is plead that the project mislead buyers but even then nothing about the facebook purchase has so far changed the item in question, nothing has yet been implied.

Oh my, what would Facebook be up to now...

Reading your personal info and tastes from your brain, or perhaps to sell your iris type directly to the NSA? :p

Paranoia aside though, no thanks.

well, seems like facebook has been set as a contender for the "unreasonable hated company that is close to being hitler" lottery, besides EA, microsoft and activision that is.

now zuckerberg can really watch you masturbate..
image

the only thing that is really shocking is that facebook can buy stuff with make believe valuable stock.

If you want a return on your investment, go to the stock market. Did anyone seriously use Kickstarter with the intent that the person/company getting the funding has to bend to their every whim? Or,that there is a return on the investment. You donate money to help someone's cause or product development, Oculus Rift was made, and it looked attractive and was thus bought by a bigger company.

If it wasn't Facebook it would have been someone else people on the internet would whine about.

Also, anyone complaining about "sellouts" would not deny a two billion dollar offer either.

vagabondwillsmile:

To look at another example...Star Citizen. Chris Roberts went to Kickstarter because no publisher wanted to risk investing in a space shooter. There was no "market" for it. So Chris wants to cut them out of the loop. The people pay for the game to be made and the Star Citizen devs, once the game is launched, are supposed to get all the profits themselves. Now imagine if EA came along and said, "Wow Chris! $50 Million paid by your backers. You were right. There IS a market for this game." And then EA gives Chris "an offer he can't refuse" which he accepts and now EA owns Star Citizen. The Development costs were paid by the people but the profits go to EA. Chris Roberts takes his EA money and runs and all the other developers who WERE part of something special are back to being owned by a publisher.

This was my very first thought after hearing about the Facebook buyout of Oculus. While I've got emotional investment in the OR, I don't have any financial dog in that fight. I've got a couple hundred bucks into Star Citizen, as well as a lot of dreams. If EA gets their grubby mitts on Starcitzen, I'm never crowdfunding another thing.I was going to pre-order the next OR dev kit this week (I was holding out for 1080p and 6dof), but I think I'll wait now.

I feel sorry the employees at Oculus. I've worked at two different small local companys that did well enough to get bought out. Both times, the CEOs/Owners were sold the moon and the stars, but they didn't read the fine print. Those same CEOs and Owners parroted down the same BS to the employees. The CEOs/Owners ended up rich, shafted, and bitter. The employees? We just got shafted and bitter.

I learned a lot from those experiences. I learned that Newark, NJ is what Gotham would be like without Batman. More importantly, I learned that the moment I discover my employer is selling out, I need to find another job. Also, all the new people hired with that influx of cash from the buyout are the first to be let go.

Andy Chalk:

RJ 17:
Well of course they're pissed off about this deal. Why the hell did they bother paying up with their own cash if some mega-corp like Facebook is just going to come in with $400 million anyways? That literally defeats the entire purpose behind crowdfunding, and essentially means that everyone that backed the Oculus just pissed (x) amount of money away.

I don't see how you (and a lot of other people) come to that conclusion. No Kickstarter backing means no product, which means no buyout - you can't have one without the other. And do you really expect companies like Oculus to attenuate their success to a level you find successful? You want it to be a hit so your money isn't wasted on a failed, dead-end product, but not so much of a hit that it'll attract bigger players with money to throw around?

People on Kickstarter paid to support the development of the headset in exchange for set rewards, which they will receive. Nothing has changed. So why the anger?

For starters, I'm not angry. I didn't back this thing so I've got no dog in this fight, I was just pointing out that those that did back it have a right to be angry. It's all a matter of perspective, of course. But hey, you're the one that wrote the article, so you tell me why the people that backed this thing are getting all up in arms about it. :P

My theory is that it does make people feel like they wasted their money, though I do agree with you that without the Kickstarter to get the project off the ground in the first place then Facebook likely wouldn't have been interested in the first place. Still, once Facebook's money does get involved, I'd still imagine that those that did back the Kickstarter feel like they wasted their money since the project was bought (that is, now being funded) by Facebook making the Kickstarter a moot point at this point. Sure, they'll get some rewards, but isn't one of the points about doing a Kickstarter so you won't have to be dealing with big name companies in the first place? Or at least that you tried getting a big name company to fund your project and when that didn't work you decide to start up a Kickstarter?

eh, I don't really care. I'm still going to buy an Oculus anyways. If this extra money improves the quality of the OR or gets it out faster, I'm not gonna complain. I find it kinda funny that people aren't angry over OR selling out, but selling out to facebook specifically, as if they sold out to someone else it would be better or something.
At least, that's how I read it.

Toadfish1:
Oh well.

All aboard the Morpheus train!

Its going to be the second time Sony managed to be ahead by not really doing anything, just letting the competition make their own mess

I agree with them. They invested in a revolutionary piece of GAMING hardware. Not a fucking social media portal for your face. And I have little doubt that Facebook is not interested in gaming at all beyond retaining some of the Rift's support for the short term.

EDIT: And yeah, my hopes are with Morpheus now.

wulfy42:
I pretty much called this reaction, and as I said yesterday, the best solution is to simply pass on the "profit" at least in some small way to the original backers.

2.5 mill was collected, pay back 25 mill (10x the original investment) to the backers, and thank them for helping to get the project where it is today.

That still leaves a HUGE profit for the company, and would probably help prevent so many angry backers.

That is the right thing to do (and no, i'm not a backer).

It's not mandatory, nothing legally says they need to do it etc, but heck, due to the efforts of the backers, they just made freaking 2 BILLION dollars. Even if you only count the 400 million for now, you still would have a massive profit for every single employee....even if you tossed 25 mill to the backers as a thank you.

Doubt it'll happen, but it's what I would do.

crowdfunding backers aren't investors. You can't expect a financial return on the money you've put in as that is in no way shape or form the nature of your relationship with the company. It's just a pre-order, but earlier than those have historically been offered. There won't be any money payed out to backers.

Palmer can talk all he wants, but the way i see it, he has compromised the long term gains of a potential game changer in the gaming industry for some short term gain, even if its for the good of the customers as he says

just thinkg, what if valve had let themselves be bought by EA or some other publisher like that? where would PC gaming be? hell, where would ALL OF GAMING BE?, its clear steam influenced digital distribution on all fronts, the oculus couldve been something like this, but not now, my hopes for this piece of tech have dimished greatly

plus now ill never be able to be with my waifu

plus if they fuck this up theyll never hear the end of it, mark my words, and lets not talk what that would do the yet unborn VR industry, even if Sony manages to pull something off with their VR headset

ShakerSilver:

Toadfish1:
Oh well.

All aboard the Morpheus train!

Yes, let's all get hyped for the cheap knock-off VR headset that runs on closed platform with inferior specs.

inferior platform, yes, but knockoff? Sorry, Morpheus had a working prototype two years earlier than Rift did.. If anything, Rift would be the knockoff.

YodaUnleashed:
but its the whole 'coporation is evil' shtick that annoys me - either stop buying anything funded or produced by a corporation or stop lumping them all together and those that make deals with them as 'sell-outs'. Many don't seem to have noticed but corporations tend to run a lot of things around this little place we call Earth. Its certainly not perfect, but it ain't no 19th century either; corporations are not the spawn of satan.

Not all corporations are evil. Facebook is however. And yes, i dont buy anything from facebook nor do i use it. whats your point?
Oh, and corporations were around all the way down to 16the century. Heck, 15th if you consider insurances and banks corporations. (and iwth insurances even before). Corporations are not inherently wrong. they just need to be sensibly controller not to become evil.

Tanklover:

No one who backed them in kickstarter is entitled to a cent of that money, are you people crazy?.

actually, they are entitled in ALL of that money. thats because they invested in a company, and then sold the company, except the CEO of the company kept the money.

Those people ran the risk when they Kickstarted Oculus Rift in the first place. They're entitled to their opinions (vapid as they are), but it's best to leave the actual creative and business decisions to the people who know what they're talking about.

See that Reddit thread with Palmer Luckey trying to reason with complainers by making valid points from an informed position and getting only "YOU SOLD OUT!" and "FACEBOOK IS THE EVIL!" in response.

These guys used Kickstarter not to build a product but to build a business to sell. Typically you use venture capitol to do that. Pretty despicable if they don't refund backers.

Strazdas:

actually, they are entitled in ALL of that money. thats because they invested in a company, and then sold the company, except the CEO of the company kept the money.

No, they didn't invest. They pre-ordered an OR Devkit 1. That is all. They may have put money in, but they got what they paid for back out. End of.

I'm pissed, but only on the basis that VR tech is now in the hands of two distcint corps. One who has a history of putting ads in and taking data out. The other, a history of shitty gaming gimics.

Kingjackl:
Those people ran the risk when they Kickstarted Oculus Rift in the first place. They're entitled to their opinions (vapid as they are), but it's best to leave the actual creative and business decisions to the people who know what they're talking about.

See that Reddit thread with Palmer Luckey trying to reason with complainers by making valid points from an informed position and getting only "YOU SOLD OUT!" and "FACEBOOK IS THE EVIL!" in response.

You call them valid points, others would say he was just trying to justify the sellout. Sellout is exactly what it was, literally. He sold the company. Usually the people whose money you used to build that company would get a cut, but because he used Kickstarter he gets ALL that money himself, split among whoever is a stakeholder at Oculus.
Backers have every right to be mad as hell about it.

Amir Kondori:

Kingjackl:
Those people ran the risk when they Kickstarted Oculus Rift in the first place. They're entitled to their opinions (vapid as they are), but it's best to leave the actual creative and business decisions to the people who know what they're talking about.

See that Reddit thread with Palmer Luckey trying to reason with complainers by making valid points from an informed position and getting only "YOU SOLD OUT!" and "FACEBOOK IS THE EVIL!" in response.

You call them valid points, others would say he was just trying to justify the sellout. Sellout is exactly what it was, literally. He sold the company. Usually the people whose money you used to build that company would get a cut, but because he used Kickstarter he gets ALL that money himself, split among whoever is a stakeholder at Oculus.
Backers have every right to be mad as hell about it.

^^this.

I'm kinda surprised this crowdfunding fad lasted as long as it did. I mean, it's friggin common sense! I jolt down some grandiose ideas and asks total strangers to finance my fever-dream, promising only some knick-knack, a place in the "special thanks" section or a skype call/dinner with majestic me. If I do succeed in the campaign and actually produce something worthwhile, I get to keep all the patents, copyrights and profits for myself. All that without investing a single dollar of my own. If the campaign doesn't succeed, the backers get their money back and nobody lost anything. If the campaign succeeds and I fail to produce anything worth a damn, whatever, right? It wasn't my money, what do I care. I just shove out whatever unfinished crap I managed to cobble together and call it a day (Dark Matter anyone?).

Or, I can do what Oculus did, and sell my company for the worth of a small country's entire GDP, buy an island and live like a king for the rest of my life. There is literally no way campaigners can lose with crowdfunding. Sure, they might need to endure some moaning and thrash talk when things go south, but that's kinda small price to pay considering the return.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here