Frustrated $1k backers start to rebel...

Slapshot1188

https://chroniclesofelyria.com/forum/topic/15759/brewmasters-rebel-here

Seems like they feel the "new" tiers offered at the same price level are superior to the old ones.


Not a good idea to piss off the people that paid $1k in real cash for some promised pixel property...  
Hell hath no fury as a Backer scorned.


Here is a sample quote from an actual "Tier 6" Backer:
As I said before, I started this thread so others could come and discuss, as I feel ripped off and I'd like the chance for people at my backing particularly to gather and voice their opinions about this pledge tier comparison.


Another from a different "Tier 6 backer:
We are less than a hundred brewmasters and many of them are really concerned.

Kyleran

Geez, you see the conciliatory "stay calm" tone of most of the respondents in that thread. Like they are all on Prozac or something.

(or kissing up, IDK)

I wouldn't last 3 days on those forums....

YashaX

Who are these people paying $1000 or more for a game years from release (if it is even released!)? I feel like I am from a different planet or something when I read about this stuff.

Elsabolts

Well at least CIG showed you picture promises.

lahnmir

Elsabolts said:

Well at least CIG showed you picture promises.

Whoa whoa, slow down there. SC is very different, it has Chris Roberts, it has.... stuff..... It.... dammit, it is awesome and will be the best thing ever!! Just you wait till 2025 when it releases!

Chronicles bad, SC good!

/Cheers,
Lahnmir

xyzercrime

YashaX said:

Who are these people paying $1000 or more for a game years from release (if it is even released!)? I feel like I am from a different planet or something when I read about this stuff.

They are humans, like us. They just happen to smoke different weed than most of us.

SpottyGekko

Players usually don't like it when their power and privileges in an MMO are "nerfed" after a while.

But when they PAID real money for that power and privilege, then all hell breaks loose...

Phry

xyzercrime said:

YashaX said:

Who are these people paying $1000 or more for a game years from release (if it is even released!)? I feel like I am from a different planet or something when I read about this stuff.

They are humans, like us. They just happen to smoke different weed than most of us.

Probably single too, if i spent that much on a game the wife would probably take a sledgehammer to my PC. O.o

beebop500

Holy cow, is SC contagious?

Phry

beebop500 said:

Holy cow, is SC contagious?

If so, then its the end of the world as we know it

Dakeru

SpottyGekko said:

Players usually don't like it when their power and privileges in an MMO are "nerfed" after a while.

But when they PAID real money for that power and privilege, then all hell breaks loose...

Real money for privileges.. and yet they insist that this game isn't pay to win.

rodarin

Regardless of the CiG comparisons they are directly to blame for this as they set the precedent, and until they outright fail it will give people the license to promise the world (in Roberts case the universe) and deliver little or nothing. Then even if you make more money than you need, find ways to make even more money to support yourselves in real life.

Problem with this project is they havent made enough money to be self sufficient yet so they flipped the script too soon. And they also offered things too close or in some peoples minds better to new comers that the elitist 'founders'  thought they would have exclusive access to.

If we live long enough we will look back on all these things and laugh at them and hopefully point to them as examples of how NOT to support a project. Or even how to get one financed.

CiG still has enough plausible deniability and enough white knights floating around to protect it but eventually theyre going to have to release some of the things they have shown people over the past 4 years. CoE isnt close to that yet but if (when) CiG fails to deliver their window of opportunity will be shut. Unless of course people are gullible (which they are) to think these guys are different....

Wizardry

First of all,you SHOULD realize that any game using cash shops or crowd funding cannot be trusted because change to pricing and unexpected CS changes will happen.

Now what bothers me is ALL the time,i mean all the time i hear people say "calm down" we need to approach this reasonably.Well guess what,the developer basically shits on you,says screw you ,doesn't care one bit about you anymore because now they are after new fishes in the sea and you are suppose to be more respectful than they were towards you?

If the developer actually cared about the people who keep them going they could have discussed it with backers first instead of just going ahead and stepping on feet.So you can see they chose to NOT act responsibly and couldn't give a crap about the backers anymore after they get your money,you SHOULD be outraged.

Furthermore,WHY do the backers have to come out and complain,why didn't the team choose to explain it FIRST before backers get mad,you see it really looks like they don't give a crap,they were just hoping nobody would complain.

Wizardry

I would have hoped more smart gamer's out there,as soon as i saw the whole plan was nothing more than a pitch to get crowd funding,i jumped right off that ship in a hurry.I loved the concepts of the game,on paper it looked great and in the beginning we all thought they were funding it themselves,then the shit hits the fan.

Also it was by no fluke it ended up on mmorpg.com because we should all realize by now that nothing ends up in a random article here it is all paid for advertising through deceptive methods.Take a long look up at the Revelation ad,yep remember that so called random out of nowhere article  lol yeah right,happens all the time here.

Slapshot1188

Wizardry said:

Furthermore,WHY do the backers have to come out and complain,why didn't the team choose to explain it FIRST before backers get mad,you see it really looks like they don't give a crap,they were just hoping nobody would complain.

Honestly, I do not think this was intentional. I don't think they set out to screw with guys that gave them $1k. IMHO it's just another example of good old incompetence.  Not sure if that makes it better... but that's my admittedly uninformed take on it.

I'm sure they will find a way to assuage the concerns of this group.  The question is whether their "fix" ends up pissing the next group off like dominos.

Elsabolts

Well anyway I was smart enough to invest almost 1k in real money to CIG and have gotten a FPS game, what more could you ask for ? Oh that's right I invested in 2 space ships which have yet to be made. Going on 4yrs now. I did ask in the 10 for the chairman if the Roberts had any Swiss bank accounts, still waiting for a response.

Tiamat64

Game not even out yet and it's already undergoing old-school whale vs new-school whale combat as a result of the developer increasing the incentives for spending cash.

It's not even original because, as pointed out by others already in this thread, Star Citizen did it first (but remember!  Neither of them are pay-to-win!)

BMBender

Anytime a games store "IS NOW LIVE" before the game itself ever goes gold, run don't walk to the exit.  Doesn't matter if it's EA, KS, CS, Pre-order, or beta; if the in game stuff can be sold before a game to use it in even exists the development focus is obviously not on the player or content(and likely won't change even if said game does release).  For those that feel burned over this, it was a predictable outcome.  Your biggest problem isn't the developer, it's in the mirror.

Arawulf

This is one of three things (or a combination of):
1. Lack of dev communication.
2. Lack of understanding by the backer.
3. Difference in vision.

I didn't take this thread as a rebellion at all. These players obviously care very much about the project and want to ensure that all is fair. Devs can certainly make mistakes, for sure. If that's the case, hopefully they will rectify. If it's not rectified to satisfaction, hopefully they will do the right thing and allow for refunds for players who can no longer follow the vision or trust the devs to handling things properly in the future.

YashaX

Elsabolts said:

Well anyway I was smart enough to invest almost 1k in real money to CIG and have gotten a FPS game, what more could you ask for ? Oh that's right I invested in 2 space ships which have yet to be made. Going on 4yrs now. I did ask in the 10 for the chairman if the Roberts had any Swiss bank accounts, still waiting for a response.

Whyyyyyy!!!???

(I mean that in a nice way, I just seriously cannot understand why people are spending so much money on things like this when there are so many great games out there that are fully functional/released.)

CrazKanuk

rodarin said:

Regardless of the CiG comparisons they are directly to blame for this as they set the precedent, and until they outright fail it will give people the license to promise the world (in Roberts case the universe) and deliver little or nothing. Then even if you make more money than you need, find ways to make even more money to support yourselves in real life.

Problem with this project is they havent made enough money to be self sufficient yet so they flipped the script too soon. And they also offered things too close or in some peoples minds better to new comers that the elitist 'founders'  thought they would have exclusive access to.

If we live long enough we will look back on all these things and laugh at them and hopefully point to them as examples of how NOT to support a project. Or even how to get one financed.

CiG still has enough plausible deniability and enough white knights floating around to protect it but eventually theyre going to have to release some of the things they have shown people over the past 4 years. CoE isnt close to that yet but if (when) CiG fails to deliver their window of opportunity will be shut. Unless of course people are gullible (which they are) to think these guys are different....

Please don't put CIG on a pedestal. They did not create this model or create the precedent for what you're seeing here. There has been upselling in crowdfunded games since the beginning, including upselling to higher packages at reduced rates. Honestly, if CoE is able to follow the same timeline as CIG with SC, based on the scope of CoE, I think backers should consider themselves lucky. 

As far as CoE goes, I think it's admirable that some people have enough confidence in the process to invest so heavily into something that is very high risk in a cross-section of the crowdfunding industry that's viewed as high risk as it is. I think that developers should ensure that early backers are well serviced and if someone wants to switch packages because they feel one is better than the other, then let them. At this point we're really talking about bits flying around the Internet, right? If the backlash is large enough then make the packages equivalent to each other. 

SpottyGekko

YashaX said:

Elsabolts said:

Well anyway I was smart enough to invest almost 1k in real money to CIG and have gotten a FPS game, what more could you ask for ? Oh that's right I invested in 2 space ships which have yet to be made. Going on 4yrs now. I did ask in the 10 for the chairman if the Roberts had any Swiss bank accounts, still waiting for a response.

Whyyyyyy!!!???

(I mean that in a nice way, I just seriously cannot understand why people are spending so much money on things like this when there are so many great games out there that are fully functional/released.)

What makes you think that people spending $1000's on CoE and SC aren't also spending $1000's on the "great games out there that are fully functional/released" ?

YashaX

SpottyGekko said:

YashaX said:

Elsabolts said:

Well anyway I was smart enough to invest almost 1k in real money to CIG and have gotten a FPS game, what more could you ask for ? Oh that's right I invested in 2 space ships which have yet to be made. Going on 4yrs now. I did ask in the 10 for the chairman if the Roberts had any Swiss bank accounts, still waiting for a response.

Whyyyyyy!!!???

(I mean that in a nice way, I just seriously cannot understand why people are spending so much money on things like this when there are so many great games out there that are fully functional/released.)

What makes you think that people spending $1000's on CoE and SC aren't also spending $1000's on the "great games out there that are fully functional/released" ?

Well at least they would be able to play those games and have a reasonable idea of what they were spending their money on. 

Are the people that dump thousands into these crowdfunding projects the same type of gamer that will spend thousands to pay to win in mmos? 

Slapshot1188

Arawulf said:

I didn't take this thread as a rebellion at all. 

The title of the thread was "Brewmasters rebel here"...

rodarin

CrazKanuk said:

rodarin said:

Regardless of the CiG comparisons they are directly to blame for this as they set the precedent, and until they outright fail it will give people the license to promise the world (in Roberts case the universe) and deliver little or nothing. Then even if you make more money than you need, find ways to make even more money to support yourselves in real life.

Problem with this project is they havent made enough money to be self sufficient yet so they flipped the script too soon. And they also offered things too close or in some peoples minds better to new comers that the elitist 'founders'  thought they would have exclusive access to.

If we live long enough we will look back on all these things and laugh at them and hopefully point to them as examples of how NOT to support a project. Or even how to get one financed.

CiG still has enough plausible deniability and enough white knights floating around to protect it but eventually theyre going to have to release some of the things they have shown people over the past 4 years. CoE isnt close to that yet but if (when) CiG fails to deliver their window of opportunity will be shut. Unless of course people are gullible (which they are) to think these guys are different....

Please don't put CIG on a pedestal. They did not create this model or create the precedent for what you're seeing here. There has been upselling in crowdfunded games since the beginning, including upselling to higher packages at reduced rates. Honestly, if CoE is able to follow the same timeline as CIG with SC, based on the scope of CoE, I think backers should consider themselves lucky. 

As far as CoE goes, I think it's admirable that some people have enough confidence in the process to invest so heavily into something that is very high risk in a cross-section of the crowdfunding industry that's viewed as high risk as it is. I think that developers should ensure that early backers are well serviced and if someone wants to switch packages because they feel one is better than the other, then let them. At this point we're really talking about bits flying around the Internet, right? If the backlash is large enough then make the packages equivalent to each other. 

Maybe but they took it to a whole other level. And I dont remember a lot of these 6 figure individual levels before CiG came along. Basically because none of these guys pretending to make a video game had the balls to ask for that much.

L.Ron Hubbard was (in)famous for saying 

“You don't get rich writing science fiction. If you want to get rich, you start a religion.”

I think they might have to rethink that one and change it to "You dont get rich starting a religion, you get rich writing a kickstarter campaign to a science fiction video game and turn THAT into a religion"

Phaserlight

CrazKanuk said:

rodarin said:

Regardless of the CiG comparisons they are directly to blame for this as they set the precedent, and until they outright fail it will give people the license to promise the world (in Roberts case the universe) and deliver little or nothing. Then even if you make more money than you need, find ways to make even more money to support yourselves in real life.

Problem with this project is they havent made enough money to be self sufficient yet so they flipped the script too soon. And they also offered things too close or in some peoples minds better to new comers that the elitist 'founders'  thought they would have exclusive access to.

If we live long enough we will look back on all these things and laugh at them and hopefully point to them as examples of how NOT to support a project. Or even how to get one financed.

CiG still has enough plausible deniability and enough white knights floating around to protect it but eventually theyre going to have to release some of the things they have shown people over the past 4 years. CoE isnt close to that yet but if (when) CiG fails to deliver their window of opportunity will be shut. Unless of course people are gullible (which they are) to think these guys are different....

Please don't put CIG on a pedestal. They did not create this model or create the precedent for what you're seeing here. There has been upselling in crowdfunded games since the beginning, including upselling to higher packages at reduced rates. Honestly, if CoE is able to follow the same timeline as CIG with SC, based on the scope of CoE, I think backers should consider themselves lucky. 

As far as CoE goes, I think it's admirable that some people have enough confidence in the process to invest so heavily into something that is very high risk in a cross-section of the crowdfunding industry that's viewed as high risk as it is. I think that developers should ensure that early backers are well serviced and if someone wants to switch packages because they feel one is better than the other, then let them. At this point we're really talking about bits flying around the Internet, right? If the backlash is large enough then make the packages equivalent to each other. 

That's a bit too much like 'pay no attention to the man behind the curtain' for my taste.  CIG may not have created the model, but they certainly pioneered it.  They have a GWR after all, and as @killion81 will tell you, size matters.

It's not untoward to think of CIG as an example of crowdfunding.  In fact, expecting it not to be used as an example seems downright sinister.