I think that’s enough feedback for now. If you have something constructive to contribute, you may do so, but keep in mind that we’re bearing down on our deadline and won’t have time to address any major concerns. If you see something small, please point it out.
Thank you to everyone that has provided critique through the campaign, we know the project means a lot to all of you.
How can you continue to help?
spread the word, there are a number of great threads with links to content that can be shared with communities and media. The IMGUR gallery that got over 550k views! All of our videos! Live streams shared with a timestamp for relevant viewing! Subscribe to our twitter feeds and Facebook page, (they are getting great visibility at the moment)
Get streamers and reviewers interested in playing the game and sharing our campaign with their followers. Get them our contact info and we’ll get them hooked up. Or provide information where we can reach out directly. There is no way we’ve been able to contact everyone, so definitely make suggestions!
Answer questions on our public Media!!! First study our pitch for the game, and then go check out the comments section of various media published thus far. There are plenty of questions, and we can’t answer all of them, we have literally thousands of questions being fired our way.
Please be positive in your replies, we want them to love us and our community
We still have some more media on the way, and will be implementing various ideas to increase funding in the final days of the campaign. Stay tuned as usual.
What if you still have suggestions?
We have limited time, so please keep try to keep any further suggestions on point, constructive, and preferably short. With only 10 days left, keep in mind our focus should be on expanding the audience and visibility of the project, not on tweaking the existing media.
Thank you again, may your space-beards gleam glorious among the stars.
You have to take into account that it was linked to a very general audience and the link was not too obvious(you had to expand the gallery to actually see that it even had a KS link in it), it was quite a few levels removed from the KS and thus there was a very small conversion rate.
The conversion rate was about 0.9-0.7% … that’s the ammount of people not only getting to the Kickstarter page but also pledging. I think that’s really good.
I wonder if @INovaeFlavien or @INovaeKeith have looked carefully at the numbers for boosting their posts on Facebook?
I was just having a quick investigation and for about $100 you can reach additional 20-50k people on your Facebook post, Based upon a pledge of $20 for the basic game, you only need a conversion rate of 0.002% to cover your marketing costs.
I think it’s worth considering especially if you have a really effective video in Facebook native format. Native video gets a much wider reach and auto-plays in the feed.
The combat montage may be a good video to boost. Can you get any data on which of the videos you’ve released attract the most engagement?
That video appears to be criticising the process for buying likes on a page, not boosting a particular post. The boosted page can also be geographically targeted which avoids the main issue that’s being highlighted there.
Facebook is far from perfect and there is a lot I don’t like about it. Unfortunately it is where everybody is and a good source for new backers who are not exposed to any of the current channels where Battlescape is being shown.
Also a conversion rate of 0.002% is a pretty low target and probably a good bet even if a high proportion of views end up going to click farms. But the click farms are usually trying to produce fake likes, not post views.
Boosting posts makes them visible to people that haven’t liked your page. Whether you like it or not, if it effective at bringing in more backers and is cost effective, it should be done.
I know it’s fairly effective because a promoted post for another KS campaign came up in my feed the other day and I was interested enough to go and check their page. I had no previous interaction with their page before that.
This is definitely a self-interested comment, but I strongly feel like they should start giving away multiple copies of the game at earlier tiers, at least at the ‘dev’ tier. Not dev-access builds, mind you, just copies of the released product.
Great idea imo. This suggestion by Wargrim wouldn’t add any work. Right? Why not name a few deserts and mountains etc? Like for example:
Name a crater: New limited 100 tier (can have tons of these)
Name a large crater: New limited 150 tier
Name a tall mountain: New limited 250 tier
Name a desert: New limited 500 tier
Name a mountain range: New limited 750 tier
Name a large asteroid: New limited 1000 tier
Name a continent: New limited 1500 tier
Name an ocean: New limited 1500 tier
What is stopping you from taking full advantage of your greatest asset: the procedural terrain? Seeing the popularity of the 2,5k naming tiers you literally HAVE to do something like this.
Edit: The only risk is perhaps higher naming tier pledgers reverting to lower tier due to being happy enough to name just a mountain instead of the whole planet…
Having named geographical features would be nice and would bring the planets to life a little more. Of course, there’s a level of scope creep involved that might make it more trouble than it is worth. Star ports, space stations and NPC ships might be a better option as they are already named in the prototype.
Instead of adding new tiers, could they not be listed as add-ons?
Seeing the popularity of the 2,5k naming tiers you literally HAVE to do something like this.
Otherwise I like the ideas!!