Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Verot

Basic Analysis Of Ks/pledge Backers

Recommended Posts

I'm not sure why but I was interested in the breakdown of the CF backers so I did some very basic analysis. With the assumption that the total pledge value on the main page is purely from KS/Pledge packages and not from any other store sales I worked out the following breakdown of backers by support level.

 

EDIT: Removed breakdowns because it looked awful, see google doc link below if you want to see more info. 

 

Supporters By Type

Supporter -  287 (1.37%) 

Contributor - 11341 (54.04%)

Copper -  3480  (16.58%)

Bronze -  1060 (5.05%)

Silver - 442  (2.11%)

Gold - 1492 (7.11%)

Amber - 1999 (9.52%)

Sapphire - 768 (3.66%)

Ruby - 71 (0.34%)

Emerald - 16 (0.08%)

Diamond - 13 (0.06%)

Bloodstone - 19 (0.09%)

Total 20988

Edited by Verot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm wondering what your source is for all this data? I get the KS part, that data is publicly available, but we can't see the numbers from the store?

Edited by Canth

ZCcquVD.png

THE most active European Crowfall community. Join us now!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm wondering what your source is for all this data? I get the KS part, that data is publicly available, but we can't see the numbers from the store?

 

With the assumption that the total pledge value on the main page is purely from KS/Pledge packages and not from any other store sales I worked out the following breakdown of backers by support level.

 


"Darken the moon and conceal the stars; our Light will never be extinguished." - The Tome of the First Flame

LW_sig_concept_7b_lighter_zpsu0zpsinn.jp


The Lantern Watch - A Crowfall-first guild. Welcome Home. Join us @ http://crowfall.shivtr.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The first thing I did was use the KS data that is accurate to try and determine what the percentages were for each package level.

Being that we know the total KS pledge value and the number of  KS pledges at each level it is easy to back that number out of the total backers/amount listed from the main site. This leaves us knowing how many store backers and what the amount they spent in relation to the total raised is and we simply need to determine how many of each package was sold.  I'm assuming that it would be possible (some math wizards could explain this better than me) to have a different combination than what I worked out but for the most part I tried to stay as close to the percentages found in the KS numbers.

 

Simply using the same percentages as the KS for the store backers left me with roughly $50,000 of missing revenue, so I was forced to tweak some of my estimates for the packages purchased from the store. Yes I agree that this is not a perfect representation of the packages sold I think that it is a decent representation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems likely that the backer distribution would have shifted upwards since the close of the kickstarter. A lot of that money is upgrades from lower tier packages to higher, not just new purchases.


Official "Bad Person" of Crowfall

"I think 1/3rd of my postcount is telling people that we aren't turning into a PvE / casual / broad audience game." -

Tully

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems likely that the backer distribution would have shifted upwards since the close of the kickstarter. A lot of that money is upgrades from lower tier packages to higher, not just new purchases.

 

My adjustments reflect exactly this. When using the same distribution as the KS I was left with a shortfall of about $50,000 which had to be accounted for. While I can't be 100% of how the numbers would flesh out I started by simply removing all but 1 supporter level ($5) from the Store pledges and redistributing those backers into other higher tiered levels.

Edited by Verot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Need to mitigate for likelihood of increase.  For example, it is far more likely that someone upgraded from amber to saphire or saphire to ruby than it is upgrading from ruby to emerald or emerald to bloodstone.


 

Er, what's "edging"?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think what's interesting about this data, especially as we get into testing, bronze and above make up a very small minority of the population. The lower tier pledges means a lot more people are interested, but they are still on the fence or aren't interested in testing. What this means in number is that 28% (5880) of the backer population will be providing feedback in the alpha testing compared to the 72%(15108) that only have beta access.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think what's interesting about this data, especially as we get into testing, bronze and above make up a very small minority of the population. The lower tier pledges means a lot more people are interested, but they are still on the fence or aren't interested in testing. What this means in number is that 28% (5880) of the backer population will be providing feedback in the alpha testing compared to the 72%(15108) that only have beta access.

 

Assuming my numbers are correct then yes but I'm guessing this was expected. Most players don't want to put down that much money upfront for one reason or another.

 

1. No desire to test a game which is still missing core game elements.

2. They have been burned in the past by a game which promised greatness but released in buggy/broken state without many of the expected features.

3. Financial considerations.

 

I know there are multiple reasons for some of the higher tier contributions but in my opinion most players who made those higher contributions are paying primarily for access. Early access comes with several benefits the most important of which I think are:

 

1. Deeper knowledge of the game mechanics which can lead to an advantage at launch.

2. Ability to help shape the development of the game by being able to provide more informed feedback to the developers on what works and what does not.

 

Yes I know some people just want to help ensure a game with so much promise actually gets created, but my personal belief is that the above 2 reasons are the primary benefits most early backers at the higher tier levels are looking for. I wish I had the disposable income to donate more because lets be honest, who would not like to have a chance to see the inner workings of a company where many of us will spend a significant portion of our free time. This is part of what makes MMORPGs in particular so attractive and why people are so opinionated, these worlds become a part of our lives to one extent or another, and the ability to sit back and have a few drinks with the people responsible for creating that immersive world is an experience that not many people get. If money were not a factor I'm sure ACE would be flooded by people who would like to help even in these early stages.

 

I happen to be one of those who changed my initial pledge from Amer to Sapphire. I can try to rationalize the fact that I spent that money on an unreleased game by telling myself the value of the things I'm getting are greater than the money I handed over, which I perceive to be the case. However,I have to balance that with the fact that many of the games I have played in the past have been short lived and certainly not the 2+ years it would take me in most subscription based games to spend that kind of money. Risk vs reward and for now the risk is worth it.

 

It would be cool if ACE did a small lottery to reward some of their early backers who may not have had the financial resources to ensure early access but who are nonetheless committed to this project. This of course would have to be balanced against the fact that some people would be disgruntled if they paid for Alpha 2 access and did not get into Alpha 1 when 100 lottery winners got into it. As long as the lottery is random to all players of a lower tier pledge then I think this could be mitigated, i.e. we get to Alpha 1 and ACE decides to lottery 100 spots into Alpha 1, as long as the Alpha 2 backers have the same chance to get in as the tiers below them then I don't think there is any cause to complain. Lottery winners would not be guaranteed a spot in the subsequent tests unless 1) they pledge level ensures they do 2) ACE determines that their contributions to testing warrant a special invite because they are a particularly good bug squasher.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...