Post by ProfessorPat in Goodbye Eternity's future comments

Viewing post in Goodbye Eternity's future comments

Let me preface this by saying I have zero issue with capping the demo at any revision. That's your choice and you're welcome to release whatever you want as free content. However, much of this comes across as a complaint that people aren't "buying" the game here.

Ultimately, it boils down to this: It's buying a game, not game development. Frankly, there's still no product to steal. Taking issue with people not buying a non-existent product is nonsense. The subscription model and the everything-as-a-service ideology has really broken the concept of actually buying something for far too many people. Nobody buys a car from some guy with three wheels and a windshield sitting on the floor with the expectation that he'll get them a whole car someday.

If you want to provide a service to raise funds, do so. Regular community interaction, development content, etc. are all a service for those that wish to participate. If you simply want money in exchange for development, you're working purely on donations.

Good luck with development, as the content we do have is solid for sure, but there's a reason people have been saying "it takes money to make money" for so long. Development is expensive, but the end user shouldn't be the one footing the bill.

BlueVash1 year ago(+2)(-2)

I fundamentally get what you're saying about buying a full game being very different from paying to develop something unfinished. However, I guess I just don't agree with the rest of what you say.

For one, it seems very clear to me from reading the store page that funding game development is exactly what anyone who spends money on this is doing. It says in many places the game in unfinished and under development. If anyone doesn't want to do that, that's perfectly understandable and reasonable, stick to the free demo. However, that doesn't mean there isn't anything to steal and the developers can't complain about people doing it.

This isn't a non-existent product, it's an unfinished product. Stealing blueprints is a crime, stealing ingredients is a crime, stealing prototypes is a crime. I just don't understand your reasoning there, it doesn't seem to match reality at all.

The service being offered for money here is a more developed version of the game and they're charging money for it. It's not for everyone, sure, but it is a legitimate business model.

And don't even get me started on the fact that people have paid for three wheels and a windshield on the floor expecting a whole car eventually, just ask Tesla.

ProfessorPat1 year ago(+3)(-1)

It’s not a failure to adhere to reality so much as a failure to convey what I actually meant…

I said there’s no product to steal. That is not true. There is a product here. It’s still theft, yes. What I intended, was a continuation of the thought that you’re supposed to be purchasing a game, not a piece of one. As such, the game still fails to exist, so there is no game to steal. There is still work to steal, a project, etc. That wasn’t an endorsement of piracy or anything, just a failure to address what I intended to.

With that said, I think piracy is wholly irrelevant to the topic at hand here. It is run on a donation model. As such, a purchase is a donation with a maybe attached to the full game, not a purchase of a fully fledged game. So the whole tone of the initial post here about how weak “sales” are an issue and how piracy is hurting everything was a bit ridiculous. The subscribers and the early adopters are all people willing to gamble on whether it might be completed, and if things are left purely to that sort of funding, it likely won’t if past experiences hold true. The stats on sales and piracy come across as whining and even a guilt trip rather than a simple “free access is capped here going forward, donate for more updates or we look forward to seeing you upon release” as it easily could have been. Again, the piracy angle came across as a way of guilting people into donating rather than anything relevant. Piracy is everywhere. That’s not news.

The game, up to now, had been following a schedule of early access to donors but free access to everyone eventually. So the idea that anyone is significantly harming anything by not donating, which is by it’s nature, optional, is a bit strange. As I said, capping the demo is fine whenever and ultimately makes a ton of sense for precisely the reason above. What real incentive is there to support it if you can just wait? Or not if you’re really insistent on piracy I guess.

With all of that said, I believe the price should be higher upon release (if it makes it there). Incentivizing the early adopters with more than just early access to what everyone got under the delayed “demo” model or even early access to the actual game under the current capped demo model is a good plan. Especially when you’re basically using early adopters as free play testers (or people paying you to test your game for you if you want to be extra cynical about it).

And unfortunately I can’t say the car example works outside of Tesla’s incompetence either thanks to the everything as a service issue I complained about right off the bat. BMW basically licenses half of “your” car’s features to you these days… My point there was a purchase of a full product should be just that, and so many have lost sight of actual ownership of anything or manufacturers/developers finishing things before expecting to be paid by their customers.

itch.io

Viewing post in Goodbye Eternity's future comments