Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="heruca" data-source="post: 7843645" data-attributes="member: 39068">There's frankly not a whole lot of isometric mapping software out there. Do some Google searches, you'll see for yourself.A few years ago, the "Dungeon Builder" Kickstarter campaign did really well. It was developing isometric mapping software for around $45 dollars that created mostly black & white/monochrome maps, and only for fantasy dungeon interiors. The campaign made something like $64K (given the exchange rates at the time). That software now sells direct from the developer's website for between 59 and 779 euros! That seems like a lot of money to me for software that ONLY makes isometric maps and has a relatively limited asset palette to work with.If you search for "isometric" on Kickstarter, you'll see that there's a new campaign currently running to add isometric mapping capability to already-existing mapping software (i.e. much less risk than creating an all-new mapping app). This new project features full-color artwork that depicts both interiors and exteriors, in multiple genres, and for a fraction of the price. This is for software that already makes top-down battlemaps, hex-crawl maps, and lets you edit Donjon-generated maps. Seems like a much better deal all around, right?So could somebody please explain the humongous discrepancy in funding performance to me? It seems to me that the new project should be well on its way to exceeding Dungeon Builder's funding. Instead, it is doing so poorly it may well not reach its modest $6K funding goal (though I suppose a lot could happen in the next 3 weeks), despite heavy promotion on RPG sites/forums, social media, map-making forums/groups, etc.I'm honestly baffled, because Dungeon Builder made more than the new project's entire funding goal in its first day! Is it because Dungeon Builder was basically already done and demonstrably working when they launched their campaign, while this other project is seeking the funding first so that it can do the necessary additional software development and pay the licensing fees for the art, and thus can't show the app "in use" in the project video? I thought that's what Kickstarter was for (unlike many who use the platform as a store for basically-finished projects).</blockquote>

Verification