Last week in my live book club discussion of A Crowdfunder’s Strategy Guide, we talked a little about stretch goals. It’s been a few years since I’ve written about stretch goal, so I thought I’d revisit the topic today.
Traditionally, a crowdfunding stretch goal is an improvement or addition to the core reward after a key milestone is reached during the campaign. Stretch goals are exciting ways to mark a project’s progress and instill a sense of collaboration among backers, though their presence or absence can often sour an otherwise fine project.
Also, back in 2019 when I last wrote about stretch goals, Gamefound didn’t exist as a crowdfunding platform for tabletop games. Unlike Kickstarter, Gamefound allows creators to build stretch goals into the platform itself, including a little progress bar at the top of the page to show backers how close they are to unlocking the next goal.
As a backer, I would say that I’ve almost entirely stopped looking or caring about stretch goals. I look at what the product is, what makes it different than something I already own, if it’s aesthetically pleasing/exciting, how much it costs, and who the creator is. If I’m on the fence, I’ll watch/read a few reviews. I recently backed Bark Avenue because it checked all these boxes for me–I didn’t even look to see if it had stretch goals (I just checked out of curiosity, and it does).
At Stonemaier Games, we stopped using crowdfunding years ago. We just try to create the best version of a product at an appealing price; we make it, freight ship it, announce it, open the preorder, and start shipping to customers. The preorder for Viticulture World was just 5 days ago, and some customers have already received their packages.
I have no plans to return to crowdfunding, but if I did, I would choose one of the following methods for stretch goals, both with the intent of offering a complete version of the project from day 1:
- Reveals instead of stretch goals: Quite similar to what I did for Viticulture World via the design diary posts, I would reveal the full rulebook on day 1 and then shine the spotlight in detail on a specific element of the game every day or so. This might include a few surprises along the way.
- Separate box for stretch goals: The day 1 core game product would be 100% complete, no stretch goals to make it bigger or better. Instead, stretch goals would create a separate expansion/promo box, clearly delineating the extra stuff from the core game. This separate box would be available to backers for free versus a price for future customers (i.e., no exclusives limited to the crowdfunding campaign).
That’s what I would do; which of the following methods do you prefer?
Story Voting: Rather than vote on the goals themselves, backers vote on decisions to be made by characters in the world, and those decisions result in unlocked game content. (Runika and the Six-Sided Spellbooks)- Grouped Goals: Group together similar components so each goal is substantial, and require several different targets (funding, # of backers, social media, etc) to be reached to unlock the goal. (Anachrony: Fractures of Time)
- Earned Stretch Goals: Backers “earn” badges by unlocking a variety of goals, then poll backers to spend the badges on the first stretch goal or save up for a bigger goal. (Fail Faster)
- Funding Quests: Reveal a new goal every day even if the previous “quest” is incomplete. This allows you to highlight each goal while conveying progression on incomplete goals. (Dice Throne Season 2)
- The “Root” Method: The core game would be 100% complete on launch day. All stretch goals are included for free in all core reward levels, and they would be compiled to form an expansion for the game. There would be no exclusives, just early and free access to the expansion content. (Root) I describe this method in more detail here.
- Story Reveals: Start with the best possible version of the product, but reveal a new element every day, either systematically (like The Legend of Korra) or by allowing backers to make story-driven decisions (Nanty Narking).
- Backer Count Thresholds: Use the number of backers as thresholds for unlocking new goals in addition to the funding level. (Euphoria)
Inclusive vs. Exclusive vs. Promo: Inclusive stretch goals are those that improve every copy of the product. Exclusive stretch goals are those that only backers receive. Promo stretch goals are included for free in every Kickstarter product and for an additional cost post-Kickstarter (promos and inclusive stretch goals are my recommendations, not exclusives). (Scuba)- Timing of the Reveal: Some projects show all of their stretch goals from the moment they launch, while others show none (or only some) until their funding goal is reached. (Toast)
- Graphic Design: While some projects display the list of stretch goals as a text-based bulleted list, others feature eye-catching illustrations. (Steampunk Rally)
- Backer Voting: Allowing backers to influence the order in which the stretch goals will unlock or the contents of those goals. (T.C. Petty and Get Adler)
- Global vs. Limited: Stretch goals apply to some rewards but not to others. (The Manhattan Project: Chain Reaction)
- Pre-Order Continuation: Stretch goals can continue to be unlocked after the project ends if the creator continues to accept pre-orders.
- Social Media Goals: Unlock new elements when you reach a certain number of Facebook likes, Twitter followers, Instagram fans, etc. The downside to these is that you might end up with a bunch of fans who don’t actually care about your content.
- Add-Ons: Some projects unlock new add-ons (at a cost) or even decrease the cost of add-ons as stretch goals are unlocked. (Avignon)
- Achievements: Give backers a bunch of different types of achievements and unlock new goals when sets of achievements are achieved. (Exploding Kittens and Treasure Chests)
- Flash-Funding Goals: Unlock a goal if and only if the funding goal is reached during a set amount of time, like within one week. (Trickerion and Infinities: Defiance of Fate)
- Eco-Friendly Upgrade: Make a more eco-friendly version of the product. (Earthborne Rangers)
- Higher Freelancer Payments: Give artists, writers, and other freelancers a special bonus if you reach a certain funding level. (Thirsty Sword Lesbians)
- Daily Goals: Reveal a new goal every day of the campaign. (Scythe)
- No Stretch Goals: Don’t include any stretch goals at all. (Hocus)
Let me know in the comments below how you feel about stretch goals, the methods above, and any recent projects you’ve seen that do innovative things with stretch goals.
If you gain value from the 100 articles Jamey publishes on this blog each year, please consider championing this content!
13 Comments on “The Current State of Stretch Goals (2022)”
Leave a Comment
If you ask a question about a specific card or ability, please type the exact text in your comment to help facilitate a speedy and precise answer.
Your comment may take a few minutes to publish. Antagonistic, rude, or degrading comments will be removed. Thank you.
[…] Gamefound’s killer features, the stretch goal status bar at the top of the page. But I think the importance of stretch goals may be decreasing anyway, so it isn’t a huge […]
I like to mentally divide stretch goals into “light side” and “dark side”.
Light side stretch goals:
– are based in real scale/efficiency considerations
– are non-exclusive (whether universal or promo)
– add to or expand an already complete game
Dark side stretch goals
– are purely for marketing purposes
– are exclusive
– are necessary parts removed from the actual base game (whether they’re genuinely locked behind stretch goals or will be included anyway regardless of whether the set targets are achieved)
I tend not to pay much attention to stretch goals for Kickstarters I back (there have been some I’ve avoided because they looked to be going too dark-side), but one thatI can remember is the Frosthaven campaign. Initially, Isaac was definite about not intending to do any stretch goals – as he said, there was no chance of not getting all the efficiencies of scale, so any stretch goals would have been purely for the sake of having stretch goals. When the project ended up setting records, Isaac did introduce one, maybe two stretch goals – one was to add another unlockable character to the game for hitting a convenient round total above KDM’s then-highest board-game funding. The debatable one was creating a physical version of the print-and-play final reward for the envelope X content as an add-on (planned to also be available from their webstore in due course) – which is debatable because it was added to the campaign as already unlocked.
What I liked about the Frosthaven stretch goal(s) specifically are that:
– the new character adds to the game without feeling like a necessary element that had been withheld.
– the stretch goal was presented as a celebration and/or a thank-you to backers for a huge (and real) achievement.
– the stretch goal was presented alongside a meaningful add-on giving existing backers a real reason to increase their pledge.
– the add-on was something that backers had been asking for/about.
Thanks for sharing! Do you think the stretch goal impacted the schedule for Frosthaven? As far as I can tell, the the project is on track to ship around 18 months after the original estimated date.
I suspect the stretch goal did have an impact, but less than a month’s worth – a significant chunk of the delay is due to Covid disruptions, and another chunk is due to scope creep (and it’s hard to say how far the two interacted – factories being delayed in being able to start production, so more content being developed, taking longer than expected, so production getting pushed back further, etc).
There were also a few unforeseen events that potentially added delays: Isaac broke his arm at one point; Cephalofair decided to hire a cultural consultant to go over the game’s content; the Broken Token scandal meant finding another solution for third-party organiser; Esoteric deciding not to make a Helper app meant finding a replacement developer.
Overall, the biggest single factor is probably still the fact that Frosthaven is roughly 50% bigger than Gloomhaven, but the other factors (including the extra character class) probably contributed (unless they happened to be entirely off the critical path).
I like quality upgrades over quantity! Thicker cards, insert (i mis an insert the most. When i buy a game and it lacks an insert, it is always sad to see.) etc. Most of the promo’s aren’t that good.
I agree 100% with Marco about the value of quality-related stretch goals. It’s great when publishers use their savings at certain volume thresholds to give us thicker cards/mats, or material with better core. I appreciate it when components are a little bigger with space for more art, or when the mats have a nice frosting to keep tokens from sliding around, or when the publisher can upgrade a card box from cardboard to tin, or when the miniatures have a nice paint/wash to enhance table presence.
Quality upgrades like these matter to me because I only buy games that I plan to play a ton of times (to save money). Maybe it’s how I was raised? Others are entitled to different perspectives, of course, but I don’t necessarily want a ton of expansion content if I’m buying a game for the first time. Instead, I’m more likely to want beautiful, durable components that my friends and I can enjoy for years to come. If we love the game, then I can always go and buy high-quality, durable expansions later on.
In addition, I tend not to judge publishers who use stretch goals as a carrot, even if those goals don’t correspond to manufacturing break points. If a publisher wants to say, “I will create X if we get at least Y backers,” but fewer than Y backers materialize, the publisher can spend more time and effort on another project (hopefully for a larger audience than Y) rather than creating X. True that some publishers might just be setting X and Y based on a cynical analysis of manipulative psychology, but not knowing their consciences, I prefer to give the benefit of the doubt and assume they have other things they can be doing with their time and just want to optimize by directing their effort toward the most productive ends.
I dislike content stretch goals. If a project has them, it makes me believe that, no matter how many get unlocked, there may be more content that we are not getting simply because of a marketing ploy.
I am even more intolerant towards exclusive goals. I haven’t backed any game with exclusive content or bought in retail any game that was kickstarted with exclusive content. I find it a lack of respect.
What stretch goals make sense for me as a costumer? Improvements to the quality of the game that become possible due to economies of scale, like bigger or better components/art.
Of course, as far as I know, my opinion reflects a very small segment of the current market, so it may be useless to you.
Thanks for sharing, Marco. I agree, the original intent of stretch goals was to leverage economies of scale–it’s changed over time to be much more of a marketing carrot on a stick. :)
Thanks for compiling this list of different SG methods!
I’ve tried different approaches in the 27 crowdfunding campaigns I’ve managed. I think there’s not a single method that fits all projects and not even creators. For example: while I’m now against Early birds and exclusive Stretch Goals, I believe they could be very helpful for new creators.
The category also affects this. A card game might have lower costs associated to its SG than a miniatures game. A wargame or resin-cast miniatures usually need to unlock SG as add-ons due to the high production costs. 3D-printable miniatures and RPG campaigns are also a whole separate thing.
Personally, I like the Root approach the most and that’s exactly the campaign I used as reference with my team when we launched Dragonbond: Lords of Vaala last year. But we might use a more traditional approach with a combination of promos and inclusive on our next one for the Dodos Riding Dinos expansion.
Thanks for sharing, William! I agree that there isn’t a one-size-fits-all approach for stretch goals (though I’m generally partial to the Root method too).
I’m like you Jamey and I back games because I want/like the game. Stretch goals have never tipped the decision for me. But clearly they move the needle for a lot of people still… or do they? How does one judge whether stretch goals do make a big difference in campaigns? It is an interesting question as a creator who plans on coming to Kickstarter. I’d love to do a campaign that makes a very simple value proposition on offering the best price for the best product we can make – and it ends there. But I worry that would be seen as “offering less”. I wonder… is that one of the reasons Stonemaier Games left Kickstarter?
Mike: The last time I wrote this post, I included a poll on which 57% of people said they cared “a little” about stretch goals, 28% said they cared “barely at all”, and 14% said they care about stretch goals a lot.
I think there’s something to be said of the psychology of making backers feel like they’re getting even more than they paid for, but you can do this in other ways than stretch goals. The “reveal” method taps into that psychology without using actual stretch goals.
This isn’t a primary reason I stopped using Kickstarter as a creator, but it certainly isn’t something I miss. :) I just want to make something awesome and share it with people, not make them work for it to be the best version of the product. I found myself designing for stretch goals instead of designing a great game. And there was some level of toxic behavior when I tried to play the game a bit differently on Scythe (after which I immediately switched to a standard stretch goal system and things calmed down).
Thanks Jamey… those numbers are interesting and I’ll bet the stretch goal interest has probably dropped even more since then but as a creator, it definitely can be risky to go against the expected norm; even if that norm isn’t very important to most people.