I am reworking a failed Kickstarter deck design, would love your feedback

[Brodyds]

A couple of years ago I set out to design a new deck of playing cards, and ended up with the Vitruvian Classic Deck. It seemed to be a polarizing deck, with people either loving it or hating it (First image). Rather than working it until most people loved it, I decided to just launch it on Kickstarter and see what happened. It pulled in a few thousand on the crowdfunding platform, but was ultimately not funded.
So afterwards what I wanted to do was rework it. The most common complaint was that it was too busy or too trippy. So I wanted to use a minimalist design that maintained the basic logo. I worked with that idea and came up with a design that I liked with various color themes (metallic ink too).

What I'm hoping for with this post is that I can get a general idea of how this new minimalist design might be received. Let me know your thoughts and favorite variation. Also, would you back this? Respond  yes, no, or maybe (explain the maybe).

see more: ig: @vitruviancards

[Don Boyer]

A couple of years ago I set out to design a new deck of playing cards, and ended up with the Vitruvian Classic Deck. It seemed to be a polarizing deck, with people either loving it or hating it (First image). Rather than working it until most people loved it, I decided to just launch it on Kickstarter and see what happened. It pulled in a few thousand on the crowdfunding platform, but was ultimately not funded.
So afterwards what I wanted to do was rework it. The most common complaint was that it was too busy or too trippy. So I wanted to use a minimalist design that maintained the basic logo. I worked with that idea and came up with a design that I liked with various color themes (metallic ink too).

What I'm hoping for with this post is that I can get a general idea of how this new minimalist design might be received. Let me know your thoughts and favorite variation. Also, would you back this? Respond  yes, no, or maybe (explain the maybe).

see more: ig: @vitruviancards

Consider this:

You said you were able to get enough people interested in the original design to raise a few thousand in pledges - but not enough to get your deck made.  Have you thought about simply taking that design, leaving it alone, and simply making it more affordably by using a different printer?  I've seen projects successfully funded and fulfilled for as little as $1,000 just by making the right choice of printer for the job.

MakePlayingCards.com (MPC) is one of the more popular and reliable printers on the more-affordable end of the scale.  They use a digital printing press and a laser cutter instead of a die cutter, so they can offer their custom print work for less than the big companies and even the mid-sized ones.  It's worth considering to scale your project to the number of people who were interested the first time around, add up the number of decks they wanted and see what you'd need to raise if you used MPC as your printer instead.  You might be pleasantly surprised to find you could have made it with the amount pledged or less.

[flexdeck_mike]

Congrats on keeping on. I would say that your new design is nothing like the original so if I was to bet, you're likely to face a similar battle but in the opposite direction. Ie some may think it too minimal.

To answer your question though, I think I like the purple version the best of these with green a close second.

I'd think folks would expect the pip and court cards to also have a similar minimalist feel to them.

Have you tried working on pulling back a bit on the original so it still has a similar feel but with a little less going on?

Good luck!

[Ron]

I second Mike's comment. Try and re-work/ improve the first design. The minimalist theme is a different idea/deck. Good luck!

[Brodyds]

Thank you all for the feedback.

Don, I used MPC for my prototype deck, but was not impressed with the quality of stock (the actual print was great though)-- cards wouldn't fan at all, weave shuffle was difficult. Maybe a different stock would have done the trick though. But then again, maybe the people who were interested in this particular deck wouldn't be the ones to do fans and weave shuffle, so it wouldn't matter. My goal was high because I wanted to put out a deck with an exquisite feel and good handling. But I certainly agree with you that the goal could have been modified to make it be successfully funded. I will definitely keep that in mind for my next launch. 

Mike and Ron, good points. I will keep it in mind to maintain some of the details, but simplify the overall design. That's a great idea. I may have to think about it for a bit and put it on the back burner for now though.I had an idea for a third design that I'm excited about and I want to keep this momentum. I may post about it here in a bit.

Thanks again for the feedback, y'all! It can be really hard to get feedback from people who don't know you, so I appreciate you taking the time.

-Brody

[Don Boyer]

Thank you all for the feedback.

Don, I used MPC for my prototype deck, but was not impressed with the quality of stock (the actual print was great though)-- cards wouldn't fan at all, weave shuffle was difficult. Maybe a different stock would have done the trick though. But then again, maybe the people who were interested in this particular deck wouldn't be the ones to do fans and weave shuffle, so it wouldn't matter. My goal was high because I wanted to put out a deck with an exquisite feel and good handling. But I certainly agree with you that the goal could have been modified to make it be successfully funded. I will definitely keep that in mind for my next launch. 

Mike and Ron, good points. I will keep it in mind to maintain some of the details, but simplify the overall design. That's a great idea. I may have to think about it for a bit and put it on the back burner for now though.I had an idea for a third design that I'm excited about and I want to keep this momentum. I may post about it here in a bit.

Thanks again for the feedback, y'all! It can be really hard to get feedback from people who don't know you, so I appreciate you taking the time.

-Brody

There's a reason why MPC decks are difficult to weave shuffle.  They don't use a standard die cutting machine to cut their cards from the deck sheet off the printing press.  Instead, they use a laser that makes a perfectly squared cut, without the normally beveled edge that a die cutter creates.  So yes, not good for a deck for magicians or cardists, but perfectly fine for someone who's making a deck for game players.

As far as the stock - well, what stock did you order?  They offer different grades of stock, low to high.  Consider upgrading next time.

I'm glad you were pleased with the printing.  They've improved a lot over the years.  They use a digital press rather than an offset press like some of their competitors - it's what helps them keep the cost down and allows them to make the tiniest of print runs for people, but it also means that some designs don't come out quite as nice as others - digital presses have trouble with certain shapes and colors.  I've seen decks with heavily right-angled geometric designs come out with printing defects.  But if you're happy with the work, clearly your design is compatible with their press type.