eromancer

Proposal for Major Patreon Campaign Changes! Need Feedback!

Added 2016-06-29 10:07:12 +0000 UTC

Hey guys!

We definitely would like your opinions and to see some discussion on this one! Some of you may not like the ideas we’re going to propose, and I want to remind you that this is just a proposal that we want your feedback on. That being said, we're considering making some changes to the Patreon campaign that we feel could be beneficial to everyone, so please hear us out. A few days ago we received news from Patreon that they would be releasing a major feature that I've been asking for for almost a year now, and that's the ability to charge patrons as soon as they pledge.

In a nutshell, this would improve things for us in a lot of ways. Our campaign is a pretty unusual one, and it often confuses new patrons (many of these patrons haven't seen a 'per creation' campaign before, which causes further confusion since they mistake seeing a $10 pledge as $10/month). For example, new patrons currently email me after pledging asking how they download the game. Rightfully so, as it is admittedly a pretty convoluted process. What then ensues is a string of emails, invoices, and manual record keeping. Basically, every new patron requires a significant amount of interaction simply because Patreon has some major drawbacks with the current design (when it comes to fitting our needs that is). Charging up front would fix this issue completely. All said, this is just one example of an issue I contend with daily due to the structure of the campaign, and all of these issues require a significant amount of time and energy that I don't get to spend on development.

To summarize, charging up front would fix these two glaring issues with Patreon and our current campaign structure's current design:

1. Patrons could no longer "sample" content. Basically, patrons can't gain access to the feed, download rewards, and then cancel their pledge without it actually ever processing.

2. I'd be able to pay my fellow developers more often than once every 3+ months (keep in mind it’s a tough sell to bring on new members as well when I can’t pay them regularly without taking on a lot of risk on my part).

These are both huge benefits, the first of which is one we've had to really work around (like having a separate forum for the Inner Circle tier for instance, when the Patreon feed would work fine if it weren’t for point #1). Now, here's the part where I really need your feedback! Patreon is choosing to only allow this feature for monthly campaigns. In an email they responded to my query as to why, and said that they would like to do this for per creation campaigns, but don’t have the inner workings figured out yet and don’t believe they’ll have it ready anytime soon. I can understand their focus on the monthly model is due to the overwhelming popularity of the monthly campaign model, though I've vocally not been a fan of this model because it gives creators the opportunity to exploit patrons. With their choice to improve monthly campaigns however it made us reconsider whether we could still provide the same (or better) experience while at the same time improving our situation as developers significantly.

To accomplish the above, here are the changes we are proposing.

1. Significantly reduce pledge amounts.

The $1 reward would change to $1 per month, and remain the same.
The $10 reward would become $3 per month. We may not have a major release every month, but we certainly would not have them more than three months apart. On months that we don't have a major release ready, we would have a significant Patreon update showing off content from the upcoming release. The bottom line is that patrons pledging at the $10 tier or greater now wouldn’t be penalized by the new model.
The $15 reward (Artwork PDF) would change to $5 per month.
The $45 reward (Inner Circle access) would change to $10 a month.
The print rewards would be consolidated down to two. $40 a month for US patrons and $50 a month for international patrons. These can't change more due to the cost of printing and shipping, however these rewards would also include Inner Circle access, making them equivalent to the current $70 and $80 tiers.

2. Perform releases entirely via the Patreon feed. A link would simply be posted, and anyone pledging at the appropriate tier could download it. Patrons would get the benefit of being able to access past releases this way. Doing it this way would have greatly simplified issues we had with V0.04 where people were downloading the initial bugged version even though we had sent out a fixed version.

3. Potentially do away with the (new) Inner Circle forum, since we could simply use the Patreon feed for a similar experience without jumping through hoops of having to authorize new users manually.

As a result, here is the summary of pros and cons that we think these changes may have.

PROS

The experience would be much more intuitive for new patrons (especially those who haven't seen charge per creation campaigns).
New patrons could simply pledge, be charged, then download the latest game version from the feed.
Due to the above, new patrons would receive their digital rewards instantly as opposed to days or sometimes months for those that don’t contact me directly and go through the invoice process.
Patrons pledging at the $3/mo tier or higher would also gain access to older versions, not just the most up to date one.
A much lower price point for new patrons to be able to experience what we have to offer.
I think the above could potentially lead to more patrons, meaning more overall funds (which also means more potential developers).
Current patrons would be pledging the same or less for the same rewards. I feel bringing the Inner Circle tier down to $10 would be within the price range for more people to give it a try.
I will personally have significantly more time for and have fewer interruptions from development work.
Releases and patches would be simpler for us, and if there are issues requiring early patching they would go much smoother for patrons as well (remember the V0.04 issues?). Replacing a link is a lot easier than sending out 1000+ messages and hoping everyone sees the newest one :D.
I can more easily pay fellow developers more often than once every 3+ months.
I will no longer have to keep and manage new records for so many non-Patreon pledges (since there won't be as many).
Assuming we follow through with bringing a community manager on board, this person would have a lot less busy work and could focus more on developing the community and bringing new patrons in.

CONS

Despite the above, I could see some being angry that there isn't always a full release every month. This is after all how I think we gained the trust of so many patrons early on. Granted, as I’ve said previously, our ability to produce content is only going to increase, so this may not be as big an issue later on.
New patrons would have to put more confidence in us to realize we aren't interested in exploiting patrons like some creators have done.
Some room for exploitation on the part of patrons is introduced, but if this becomes such a problem that the negatives of this proposed model outweigh the benefits, then we can just change back to per creation.

When would the proposed new campaign model begin?

There would need to be enough time for patrons to be made aware of it so that they can change their pledge amounts/rewards when the time comes, so not for a couple of months most likely.

Would I have to change my pledge manually?

As far as we know, yes (this would be a learning experience for us as well). I would post and send messages to everyone to let them know when and how to do so. Remember, this is all hypothetical for now.

Survey Time!

I’ve prepared a very brief survey for gathering feedback on this. Please comment below as well if you’d like, but please make sure you’ve read the above proposal before taking the survey or commenting. If you don’t understand something or want further info, feel free to ask about it before responding to the survey!

CLICK HERE TO TAKE THE SURVEY

Let us know what you think, and be honest! Please tell us if we’ve overlooked anything that would make the proposed model a negative experience for anyone.

Thanks!