I'll never understand this attitude.

Established studio =/= deep pockets.

Nope. The purpose of Kickstarter is to crowd fund projects. You're allowed to not back something because of the people involved, but this idea that you have to be new or small to use it is a mistake.

You know what? I'm Deaf, and I'm barely scratching by this month, and I don't own a PS3 or PS4, but you know what? I'm gonna throw a $15 wad at them.

They can't publish on other platforms. Sony owns the IP (or something like that) so other releases just can't happen.

Actually just read something that says Sony owns the IP

They are covering the difference. As in, this Kickstarter covers less than half the actual cost it's going to take. They can't risk all that money themselves as they DON'T have a big backer or deep pockets.

For years, a vocal bunch of people called for Harmonix to make another Amplitude. But sometimes the games some of us love are niche and just don't have enough people like us to love them. I've been wondering if the Amplitude Kickstarter is a painful example of just that.

It's a Sony owned IP (or some such thing) and they literally can't release it on non-PlayStation platforms.

Maybe I haven't been paying attention, but this is the first time in a while I've seen this Kickstarter referenced on Kotaku. And I can't think of many other times it's been covered on other gaming sites I frequent.

That's a bummer, but I believe it's for IP reasons, right? I had read that Sony still owns the rights to some of it.

Over the past few days, the Kickstarter has seen a serge in interest and backing from high-profile figures. Minecraft creator Markus Persson and actress Felicia Day asked their millions of Twitter followers to go back Amplitude, and the studio Insomniac Games gave $7,500 to the project yesterday. But time's running…

I too would rather give money to people who have actually demonstrated that they can deliver a product. Overpromised, underdelivered (or undelivered) games are the norm on Kickstarter (and Steam Greenlight) and I'd rather put my money in much later in the process if the risk is too high at the outset.

That's the funny thing, right? At least when you back a Kickstarter project by an established studio, you know they're not going to flake out and suddenly stop writing updates after a year.

I think people have in their head, "Why should I give this successful studio money to help make a game." The strange thing is I would rather do that than give some random person my money.

Glory to PC Master Race.

I LOVE co-op games. If you haven't checked it out yet, try http://www.co-optimus.com/ when you want to find out about co-op modes in games. I usually use it as a reference guide for more details on a particular title, but it's also a good way to use it the opposite way to find co-op titles. I usually filter by…

That's the worst thing about it. The more junk there is, the less space there is for the great games. It will turn developers away, when they realize that it's harder to get recognized.

It's not simply too many games. It's too many unorganized, poor quality, unfinished, re-hashed, re-released pieces of junk flooding the store.

You know what popped up on Steam seemingly out of nowhere for me?