Preamble

About a week ago, the figureheads behind Wild Arms and Shadow Hearts debuted a double Kickstarter campaign to fund two projects billed as spiritual successors to those long-dormant franchises. These games are Armed Fantasia: To the End of the Wilderness and Penny Blood, and the teams behind both titles have decided to pool their star power together to get both projects some marketing attention. This combined crowdfunding campaign has since crossed the $1 million mark and has wholly smashed the original goal of $750,000 for both titles. As we speak, the teams working on each project are setting new stretch goals, and the games have since secured PlayStation 5, Xbox Series X|S, and Switch ports. The consensus has been mostly positive since the debut of the crowdfunding page, and given that funds and backers are still rolling in, I find myself in a weird position. Neither Wild Arms nor Shadow Hearts are the tentpole franchises they once were, but they boot vocal enough fans that want to see them return, and I don't want this blog to come across as raining on those people's parade. What the campaign is banking on is no different from what Eiyuden Chronicle: Hundred Heroes is attempting to do as it bills itself as a spiritual successor to Suikoden or what Bloodstained: Ritual of the Night accomplished just a few years prior. Likewise, I want to clarify that I am not implying that WILD BUNCH Productions and YUKIKAZE, the development houses connected to Armed Fantasia and Penny Blood, respectively, are guilty of criminal wrongdoing or deceptive marketing. However, something about this crowdfunding campaign still does not sit well with me.

First, and this will come up repeatedly throughout this blog, the combined nature of the Kickstarter campaign immediately comes across to me as a marketing gimmick. Many problems with the current campaign page would be demonstrably better had each game gotten individual Kickstarter pages with referral links and recommendations to the other project prominently affixed at the top. I get that Wild Arms and Shadow Hearts fit into two similar B-Tier JRPG niches, but each franchise aimed for wholly different tones and audiences. Wild Arms always had the reputation of featuring light-hearted and newcomer-friendly JRPG adventures. In contrast, Shadow Hearts started as a horror-themed JRPG, with its first outing being the highly atmospheric Koudelka. Likewise, both IPs have different progenies, figureheads, and sources of inspiration. Seeing spiritual successors to both franchises presented next to each other, as if they are a one-to-one swap, fucks with my brain in a way I still have not been able to get over even after a week.

Second, the presence of a handful of Kickstarter red flags has me concerned. Let's not beat around the bush. While Kickstarter, Indiegogo, Fig, and several other crowdfunding platforms have allowed hundreds of indie developers to secure the funds necessary to get their passion projects off the runway, none are perfect. For every example of an independent studio successfully reviving an oft-forgotten classic franchise, there is double that amount in scams or projects that never see the light of day. We live in a post-Mighty No. 9, post-Unsung Story: Tale of the Guardians, post-Star Citizen, and post-Ouya world. While there's no denying that great things have been done thanks to crowdfunding, there's also no denying the presence of abuse and malfeasance with the business model. Whether intended or not, the developers working on Armed Fantasia and Penny Blood haven't exactly put their best foot forward. Both projects, and the combined campaign, in general, have massive question marks that prevent me from getting excited or even humoring the idea of shelling out money to support the teams working on either game. So, without further ado, let's jump into some reasons for my hesitation.

Problem #1: The Kickstarter Tiers Are A GODDAMN FUCKING MESS!

As mentioned before, I'm still not sold on the premise of a "combined" Kickstarter. I understand there are two listed developers for each project and that the studios working on their respective games have plans to make the development process as transparent as possible. However, the fact the current Kickstarter page is trying to annotate tiers for TWO GAMES means that navigating and figuring out which tier to back is an absolute fiddly nightmare. I do not think I have seen a single Kickstarter page with as many backer options as the one for Armed Fantasia and Penny Blood. I give the teams behind these games credit; they have every conceivable base covered. There's even a ¥1,000,000 (~$7,120 or ~€7,200) tier aimed at business owners or people with connections in the video game industry.

That said, I find it impossible to figure out what cosmetic upgrade packs are worth the investment. My guess is most of them are worthless in the grand scheme because many of these upgrades are still entirely conceptual. However, Kickstarter was not designed to make navigating this many tiers a fun or intuitive user experience, and I found it downright PAINFUL scrolling down the tabs after ten minutes. It was nice of them to have "Click This Tier If You Want Both Games" options, but doing so means you have triple the number of choices to fan through. However, that's not the only issue of having this many tiers associated with a Kickstarter campaign. There's another issue with how the developers of these games have structured this campaign that I feel I can best articulate using images rather than words.

So, yeah, that's a mess if I have ever seen one! Again, I must emphasize that WILD BUNCH Productions and YUKIKAZE are not guilty of doing anything beyond the pale here. They are, in fact, following a Kickstarter playbook I have seen one too many times. While your brain might tell you otherwise, having graduated backer tiers as has been done here makes perfect business sense. Maybe, you went into the Kickstarter page only expecting to back the basic digital release tiers but noticed that for just $5 more, you could get some merch or an exclusive Kickstarter-only upgrade. Psychologically, $5 doesn't seem that much, so you make the bump once but then notice the tier above that one has a fancy sword and is only $2.50 more than the previous one. This template is how EVERY current Kickstarter works these days. The issue with this particular campaign is how "hard in the paint" they went, and I fear they are providing too many versions of the same games. The last thing you want to do is seriously fracture a new fanbase and cause early backers to feel like they opted into an inferior product. We will discuss why I think this campaign desperately needs better communication later. Still, as things stand, the aggressive tier model employed here makes it impossible for outsiders to feel comfortable making an informed decision. As a result, the current campaign page may scare away some consumers.

Problem #2: The Fundraising Goal Is Not Close To Enough Money Unless The Devs Aren't Telling Us Something

$750,000 across two game projects. That was the initial goal of this combined Kickstarter campaign. Now, the scope and sequence of each project are still up in the air. However, with both being billed as spiritual successors to long-standing video game series that delivered on full-fledged JRPG experiences, I think it is safe to say both are planned to be more in-depth than your average RPG Maker joint. I'm not going to pen what I think would be the "best" number of hours each game should boot for me to feel like they delivered on their initial promises when the Kickstarter first launched. Nonetheless, looking at what the development teams have already shown and indicated they have planned for each project makes me slightly concerned that something is up and the campaign is withholding some pertinent information. I feel that because, even at the current total of over $1,300,000, they still have not raised enough money for the two ambitious projects they are promising.

With this Kickstarter, there are a lot of possible scenarios to consider or run through your head. If we are going with the idea that all these projects needed were the initially advertised $750,000 split right down the middle for each game, then I think you need to temper your expectations. If all these two productions are using is their Kickstarter money, then, at best, the development teams MAYBE have enough to get a vertical slice put together that they can then pitch to a larger studio. However, I doubt that's the case considering both teams are already showcasing what looks like story and gameplay footage of projects that are well past the prototype phase. Coming from Xenoblade Chronicles 3 to these projects gave me an odd sense of déjà vu. The screenshots and demos they have shown thus far don't look fake and showcase big 3D avatars and combat sequences, and that's not something you accomplish without having some money in the bank.

Both projects being this far in development, signals one of two possible scenarios. Either:

A) They are starting with Kickstarter before they pitch the games to a larger studio with their backer numbers as evidence of why these projects are a good investment.

OR

B) The combined Kickstarter is being done purely for marketing, and these games don't necessarily need earth-shattering campaign numbers to keep the lights on.

I want to clarify that I have no moral issues with either scenario. Both have become widespread business models for larger named Kickstarter campaigns. However, a little transparency would go a long way for both projects. If the Kickstarter money is primarily going into marketing while also being marketing itself, there's a way to communicate that to your backers. I have seen dozens of campaigns start things off by stating, "This project is going to be made regardless, but we want to know how wide a net to cast or how many more people are interested in what we are making." The bluntness of this might initially rub some the wrong way. Still, more often than not, I have seen this specific example of transparent signposting resonate well and make sure the long-term ambitions of the developer do not clash with their backers. This point leads me to the first of my scenarios. In the year of our Lord 2022, you want to avoid a Shenmue III Kickstarter situation. Suppose you are still pitching possible partnerships with other publishers after debuting a Kickstarter. In that case, you might want to communicate that at some point before people get angry that their platform headcanons aren't real. Look, I'm not faulting someone trying to run a business, but history has shown that when a Kickstarter project locks in a deal with Sony or Nintendo after the fact, people get fucking pissed. I know the current Kickstarter page promises not to sign any console exclusivity contracts, but I doubt that rules out Epic throwing them a wad of money and blocking them from releasing their shit on Steam. Therefore, the lack of ANY clarity on either development team's "end goals" feels skeevy.

Problem #3: Supporters Prefer The Wild Arms Project Over The Shadow Hearts One, And Both Fanbases Want Completely Different Things

One of the reasons I highly doubt the currently raised Kickstarter funds are all Wild Bunch Productions and Yukikaze is working with is because the current proportion of Kickstarter backers is far from equitable. When scanning the individual backer tiers, you will notice Armed Fantasia (i.e., the Wild Arms-inspired project) outperforms Penny Blood (i.e., the Shadow Hearts-inspired project) about two-to-one. It is worth mentioning the vast majority of backers are selecting the tiers that support both games. Some of the individual tiers barely crest the 50 backers mark, whereas the duo tiers are already in the thousands. The most popular tier right now is the "Combo Digital Deal," which will likely break the 3,000 mark before the campaign ends. However, there's no denying that the Wild Arms-like project is getting more attention and press coverage than its Shadow Hearts equivalent. This detail poses a few problems in the future.

I again have to question if, long-term, these games would have been better off with individual Kickstarter campaigns. If one project netted more workable funds than the other, if the drives were separate, they would be better able to stand on their laurels rather than be judged by the production values or scale of the opposing project. Nonetheless, it is almost good that the Kickstarter backers have been slightly inequitable because one of these projects (i.e., Armed Fantasia) seems far more ambitious in scope and sequence. Armed Fantasia appears to be going for a more open-world format across a still unknown number of chapters or hours. In contrast, Penny Blood promises a more linear but cinematic experience. Similarly, the fanbases for each project want two almost diametrically opposed things. The fans backing Armed Fantasia want a fun, light-hearted adventure that showcases an enormous world on par with Wild Arms 2 or 3. The fans supporting Penny Blood care less about scale. Instead, their concerns lie in the new game emulating the first game's mood and tone and avoiding the mistakes committed with the third game, From the New World. I'm not going to suggest that this partnership can't thread this needle, but it won't be easy.

Finally, the combined Kickstarter has clarified that two development teams are working on each game. However, how these two teams interact with each other throughout their game's development remains muddy. For example, when you back one of the combined tiers that net you both games, you get TWO Discord invites, one for Armed Fantasia and the other for Penny Blood. Looking at the current Kickstarter page, both teams agree to surface each stage of their game's development. However, when you dig further, you find that both games have notably different development goals and release targets. There's also no mention of how the two projects will interact, if at all, and little context on why they sought out a combined Kickstarter in the first place. That, at least to me, seems like a recipe for disaster unless both teams are completely on the same page and will agree to withhold their products, so they launch around the same time. I can only imagine the nightmare situation of one project coming out and the other being one to two years behind schedule.

Problem #4: The Communication From The Devs Has Been Concerning

Speaking of pending release date controversies, let's discuss the number one reason why I'm not backing this campaign. If you scroll through the FAQ section of the current Kickstarter page, you will find what I consider the gravest Cardinal Sin in the realm of video game crowdfunding projects. While both games have a March 2025 date listed as the "expected" release date, both development teams want you to note that it is a placeholder and not even a fuzzy release target. You read that right. If you back either of these games, you are backing something with no promised or official release date! Don't believe me? Here's what they say on their Kickstarter page!

We have been here before, so I don't think I need to belabor this point as much as my previous ones. While a handful of crowdfunded video game undertakings have delivered on products with fuzzy release dates, most have not. Likewise, even if we interpret the March 2025 date as a target, which the development team doesn't want you to, that puts both games on par with Eiyuden Chronicle: Hundred Heroes. However, Eiyuden Chronicle raised over $4.5 million, and even it struggled with its three-year development cycle, especially with the pandemic in full swing. Armed Fantasia and Penny Blood will likely not face as many pandemic-related barriers. Still, with fewer resources and what I can only assume is less staffing, the challenges ahead are nothing to dismiss flippantly. Likewise, with Armed Fantasia and Penny Blood working with different design scales, I can only assume they are also operating under different development roadmaps. What one team or crew views as their "end goal" is not necessarily going to fly for the other. I think this alone is why both studios are so cagey about talking about solid release dates. They need to hash things out more in the coming months and years, so they are at least within a stone's throw of each other. And even when you look at a game like Bloodstained as a gold standard for spiritual successors to beloved Japanese-made classics, there are some caveats worth mentioning. Yes, Bloodstained is very good, but it took them four years to make the damn thing, and they're still working on stretch goals to this day.

I should note that some have noted the confusion related to the campaign's statement on its release might be a translation issue. I can see that, at least partially. As someone with Japanese-speaking relatives, I can see some non-native English-speaker-related struggles on this current campaign page. Nonetheless, they're still asking people to contribute their money in non-insignificant amounts and should be judged for their present lack of coherence. However, release date confusion isn't the only source of poor communication from this Kickstarter page. I have already discussed how the current Kickstarter does a TERRIBLE job of conveying why this needs to be a combined effort and how these two projects will interact. Another issue I have noticed is that the current campaign does a poor job of building the credibility of each game.

If you ask me to pick one of these two projects to see the light of day, nine times out of ten, I would say Penny Blood only because I have a soft spot for the insanity of the Shadow Hearts games. Nonetheless, Penny Blood's current director, Matsuzo Machida, has had a bit of an inconsistent track record. Sure, he was the mastermind behind the first two games and their fascinating mix of alternate history and Lovecraftian horror. However, he also is the person who ratcheted up the second game's "sex appeal" and insisted on including a lot of fanservicey bullshit in the third game. Things are EXACTLY THE SAME for Armed Fantasia, with Akifumi Kaneko, the lead designer and producer of Wild Arms, being the big named attached to the project. However, even he has a bit of a credibility gap, considering he was the figurehead that led the Wild Arms franchise to the highest of highs and the lowest of lows. You can give the man all the credit in the world for making and designing Wild Arms 2 and Wild Arms 3, but he was equally responsible for the bizarre design decisions in Wild Arms 4 and spearheaded many of the groan-inducing creative choices in Wild Arms XF. So, I need to ask which version of Wild Arms or Shadow Hearts we are getting.

I don't mention any of this to indict the names attached to either revival effort. Instead, I include it in this write-up to remind everyone that the people connected to this campaign have bumps and bruises in their careers, and there's no guarantee that what they are working on presently will manifest itself into a flawless stellar crystal. Likewise, if both teams are promising "throwbacks," I will insist on more clarity on what they mean. Saying you're "making a new Wild Arms game" or "a spiritual follow-up to Shadow Hearts" can mean way more than when Bloodstained promised a new Castlevania or Eiyuden Chronicle a new Suikoden. Wild Arms and Shadow Hearts have seen mechanical evolution and different storytelling styles attempted across their entries. So, the onus is on the teams working on Armed Fantasia and Penny Blood to articulate better what direction, both narrative and mechanical, they plan to take with each game before I would feel comfortable backing either. But barring that and clarity on my other points, I'm withholding my financial support. However, that does not mean I don't wish the best for these games and those working on them. With both Wild Arms and Shadow Hearts inactive, it's comforting to see someone taking the novel ideas from both series and putting them to use. However, only time will tell if you or I will ever get the opportunity to see that come to fruition.