http://store.steampowered.com/earlyaccessfaq/ It certainly seems as if Valve sees Early Access not as extension to their sales. If you just want to make money you can always put up a pre-order with a special price. Early Access is something different. PA is true to the idea of Early Access.

The problem is not PA, the problem is that Early Access is frequently misunderstood and abused as cheaper pre-order.

No, but I don't go on steam to pledge either.

125% premium is probably not what valve meant.

In the olden days, the videogame market wasn't of the same nature. Gamer input wasn't required because .... those gamers (final consummers) were 10 years old on average, daddies (mommies?) were just blindly paying.

My humble point was just : Why on earth would they put such a high price for early access, it will just limit the 'alpha feedback' to rich AND enthusiastic people. Which will definitely not be the same from *just entuthiastic* people.

I consider that 'anticipated demographic game-niching' which is, if not highly debatable, surprising at the very least.

Edit: and I wanted to make a 'not a joke' about, "if people give us their mind, money, time and love we can make a new religion!"

In fact Uber tried to put the game as pre-order for $40 on Steam. Why wouldn't they? They sell the game on their own shop for $40 right now. Valve has strict rules that would not allow it. If you want Early Access you have to make a price for instant access. You can't have different versions with different prices for some reason. this was confirmed by another Indie developer on the Steam forum.

You don't think that a small Indie developer can tell Vave to sell a game if Valve thinks the price is not okay? Valve put it on the front page of Steam, full exposure, with the other featured top titles. You don't get there by accident. Valve changed the "Now Available" from yesterday to "Now Available in Early Access" to avoid confusion. But they are 100% okay with the price, especially since PA made it into the top sellers.

I know backers will be up in arms, but seriously speaking, the pricing of this particular Kickstarter compared to other ones we have seen come and go, is a bit of a ripoff considering its mainly multiplayer (with a tacked on skirmish mode - TAs strength was singleplayer as i recall), and the stupidly priced alpha access. People who paid are just trying to justify the price they paid.

Reason?! How dare you bring reason in here?



And how did you know about the phone both?

Primary difference being, Steam is not a funding incentive, it's a store.

But people who funded it did just that - funded it. They should consider paying more, because they pay for something more than a game.

When a game is funded twice the amount, I wouldn't expect them to still charge that much. It's not funding anymore, it makes no sense.

Usually, if you pay for alpha or beta, you pay LESS than a finished game and get a full game after. Paying MORE for alpha and beta access makes really little sense.

... ?

And you can still use it as such. It's very simple: buy the game when it's released. They are simply giving you an extra option which you are free to ignore. I seriously don't see how that can be construed as something negative.

c) think about some other extra perks for kickstarters than just fucking early access.

No. It's a service you fucking pay for.

I thought I am free to criticize as well?

The whole logic behind alpha access got turned upside down. It's logical to offer a discount for people who are eager and kind enough to pay for alpha access and offer their feedback in return. Because, you know, that lowers the development costs by some degree. I could understand that flip flop on kickstarter, where people pay more for shit usially you pay less for, for varied reasons. It makes no sense at all to do this after the game got fully funded.

You don't need to tell me I can ignore it and don't buy it. I can post why I think it's wrong just as much as I want.

Sigh... I give up.

I know, you can only make posts about planetary annihilation if they are positive and only when you agree with their policy.

It's only logical.

I'm not saying you're wrong. It's your opinion. I don't tell you "You should hate them!" like you're telling me "you should like it or ignore it".

Difference between us: I criticise them for their policy, not criticise you for what you think about that. You, on the other hand, criticise me, for having my opinion.

I'm uncomfortable in general about the "Early Access" and alpha funding stuff. I just don't understand, even if the developers really need the cash, why any developer would allow their work to be released into the public in such an incomplete state. You only have to see the toxic and nasty atmosphere in the forums of any game on Steam that is released under their Early Access program. I just don't see why any developer wouldn't want to only release their work, their art if you will, until it's completely finished and "at it's best" for customers.

Not only that, but in my opinion the Early Access release diminishes the actual release date of the full version.

I understand why on Kickstarter someone might pledge more money for digital extras and just to help the game more in general, but actually PAYING to act as a alpha/beta tester to report bugs? Are people not aware that QA is actually a job people normally get paid for?

Fair or not access to a beta or alpha is a good way to get more from people in kickstarter. If you then give that same access to anyone for half the price later on, or indeed a quarter of the price in this case I believe, you not only piss off those who paid before during the campaign but you also create a disincentive to buy those tiers in future campaigns.

It's just all-around a bad idea. If you really think they messed up, it was in offering the alpha and beta tiers in the kickstarter campaign to begin with.

I believe so. I wasn't following their kickstarter campaign. If I knew then they are going to charge extra for early access, I would criticise it then.

It makes no sense. Couldn't they think of some other rewards for double the price of the game alone? I know, they probably didn't want to give early access to every backer who paid for the game, because that would be too many prople at once, but hell... Give something more to them, so they don't get pissed when you release alpha and beta access on other platforms.

On the other hand, some people, who give money on kickstarter and expect to get the game (or features) cheaper than when it's done, are probably doing it wrong...

Honestly, they're between a rock and a hard place on this one. They can't very well undercut the backer tiers, so their choice is to offer these high prices or not at all. Given that, I can understand the decision to make the offer, as well as the backlash against it. This is why I think crowdfunding gamng projects really need to put beta and alpha access at lower tiers. In the context of a super-special backer bonus it might look okay, but closer to release as a pre-order perk it looks like a scam at this kind of price-point.

From my perspective, I can't help but say "meh". I remain on the sidelines for Planetary Annihilation, interested but not yet committed.