Jump to content

Photo

Discounted Pledges. HUH??


  • Please log in to reply
92 replies to this topic

#1
Capt_Kangaroo

Capt_Kangaroo
  • Backer
  • 91 posts
  • Joined: 05-November, 2014

WHY has the "I did it my way", been discounted by 15%.

This is just a massive slap in the face for the very people that backed this game at the Kickstarter level.

Really disappointed that they have chosen to go down this path so early in the game..., and "why" only this pledge?? why not all of the pledges?? Could somebody please explain??

 

Cheers

 

 


  • 2

#2
Demosthenes

Demosthenes
  • Backer
  • 39 posts
  • Joined: 04-November, 2014

Why? Doubtless to add an incentive for people to purchase and/or upgrade to it, that's generally why places offer discounts.

 

As for backers being upset, those individuals need to get a solid grasp of the difference between purchasing a product and pledging toward a crowdfunding campaign. While some may be so deluded as to think the 600k raised so far is going to be enough to make this game to its fullest, the reality is that quality games take lots of money to produce and Descent: Underground still needs every dollar it can raise in order to help make the game a reality. They're trying to make this game on a shoestring budget right now, so if they need to provide incentives for new backers to come in and current backers to up their pledge, I'm okay with that. Besides, every dollar spent on this discounted package brings us that much closer to unlocking things like the Torch.


  • 5

#3
blessu

blessu
  • Backer
  • 206 posts
  • Joined: 10-April, 2015
  • United Kingdom

Why? Doubtless to add an incentive for people to purchase and/or upgrade to it, that's generally why places offer discounts.

 

As for backers being upset, those individuals need to get a solid grasp of the difference between purchasing a product and pledging toward a crowdfunding campaign. While some may be so deluded as to think the 600k raised so far is going to be enough to make this game to its fullest, the reality is that quality games take lots of money to produce and Descent: Underground still needs every dollar it can raise in order to help make the game a reality. They're trying to make this game on a shoestring budget right now, so if they need to provide incentives for new backers to come in and current backers to up their pledge, I'm okay with that. Besides, every dollar spent on this discounted package brings us that much closer to unlocking things like the Torch.

Ditto, could not have said it any better. 


  • 0
'don't get caught'

#4
Capt_Kangaroo

Capt_Kangaroo
  • Backer
  • 91 posts
  • Joined: 05-November, 2014

Why? Doubtless to add an incentive for people to purchase and/or upgrade to it, that's generally why places offer discounts.

 

As for backers being upset, those individuals need to get a solid grasp of the difference between purchasing a product and pledging toward a crowdfunding campaign. While some may be so deluded as to think the 600k raised so far is going to be enough to make this game to its fullest, the reality is that quality games take lots of money to produce and Descent: Underground still needs every dollar it can raise in order to help make the game a reality. They're trying to make this game on a shoestring budget right now, so if they need to provide incentives for new backers to come in and current backers to up their pledge, I'm okay with that. Besides, every dollar spent on this discounted package brings us that much closer to unlocking things like the Torch.

Firstly, I am far from deluded believing that 600k is enough to fund the game..., far from it.., it's a miserable pitance to what is required, my point being EXACTLY what you point out..., the very difference between crowd funding and purchasing...., I "PURCHASED", the "I did it my way" to "help" fund the kickstart campaign to get over the line..., had I known that it would become worth 15% less after a few months, I wouldn't of done it, that simple, I would of waited. DU still would of got my money for my PURCHASE..., (because, once the game became fully funded, that's what it legally became, wether you choose to believe that or not is entirely up to you) and I would of saved 15% to spend on something else down the track.

Secondly, "IF" it is to provide an incentive to new backers, then make it 15% on ALL pledges, at least then ALL of us original backers would be out of pocket by the same amount....., then watch the forum light up.

I believe, if this is the tactics that are going to be employed by companies making crowd funded games, the crowd funding will dry up very, very quickly.

 

Cheers


  • 1

#5
Wingman

Wingman
  • Game DeveloperDev
  • 1,950 posts
  • Joined: 04-November, 2014
  • United States

Hey great question.

Essentially we needed a way to test some of the new store funtionalities and this was a first step. We want to grow the community, and things like this will help all of us.

We are about to get rid of all or most of the pledge levels soon, and go to something more robust for everyone.

And during this test, maybe we can unlock a stretch goal - wouldn't that be cool. I guess we could have done everything but we thought a small focused test was more effective.

WM

  • 4

#6
Ezekeel

Ezekeel
  • Banned
  • 88 posts
  • Joined: 06-November, 2014
  • United States

I fully agree that discounting packages before the game is even released is a slap in the face for older backers. The earlier you back the better the perks should be - end of discussion! If packages are discounted then the right thing to do would be to give the older backers the difference as store credit. Let us not travel down the same road as CIG did - we all know it leads to very dark places.


  • 1

#7
Demosthenes

Demosthenes
  • Backer
  • 39 posts
  • Joined: 04-November, 2014

Firstly, I am far from deluded believing that 600k is enough to fund the game..., far from it.., it's a miserable pitance to what is required, my point being EXACTLY what you point out..., the very difference between crowd funding and purchasing...., I "PURCHASED", the "I did it my way" to "help" fund the kickstart campaign to get over the line..., had I known that it would become worth 15% less after a few months, I wouldn't of done it, that simple, I would of waited. DU still would of got my money for my PURCHASE..., (because, once the game became fully funded, that's what it legally became, wether you choose to believe that or not is entirely up to you) and I would of saved 15% to spend on something else down the track.
Secondly, "IF" it is to provide an incentive to new backers, then make it 15% on ALL pledges, at least then ALL of us original backers would be out of pocket by the same amount....., then watch the forum light up.
I believe, if this is the tactics that are going to be employed by companies making crowd funded games, the crowd funding will dry up very, very quickly.
 
Cheers

No, see, this is what I'm talking about, you've got it all wrong.
 
You pledged at the I Did it My Way support tier, and in gratitude for your help in funding the development of the game you were promised certain perks, namely a copy of the game, a couple of ships, and some other doodads. You purchased nothing. Your grasp of the legalities surrounding crowdfunding is lacking, I'm afraid. Funding of a project does not translate pledges to the status of a purchase. Purchases are a guaranteed thing, there is no guarantee even now that you will get a playable game out of your pledge. Purchases are generally returnable, there is no legal mandate for pledges to be refunded, companies that do so do it of their own volition. If the game fails to happen because the wheels fall off or they run out of money, you have no recourse whereas with a purchase you have some guarantee of result. A pledge is a donation to a cause, not a purchase. 
 
 
Your entire post demonstrates that you clearly had the wrong idea about this whole thing going into it. You're talking like a shopper displeased because the vacuum cleaner they bought a week ago went on sale this week and if they'd known they'd have waited. Crowdfunding is about supporting a cause that you believe in and helping it to become a reality, not your personal benefit.
 

I fully agree that discounting packages before the game is even released is a slap in the face for older backers. The earlier you back the better the perks should be - end of discussion! If packages are discounted then the right thing to do would be to give the older backers the difference as store credit. Let us not travel down the same road as CIG did - we all know it leads to very dark places.

This is such a bad idea I don't even know what you were thinking when you came up with it, except, perhaps, of your own wallet.

 

Let's start by laying down a baseline. $600,000 is not the amount of money raised so far to develop this game. That number, or more appropriately the one on the front of this site, represents the gross number raised but does not represent several important costs. For example, it would be foolhardy to assume that everyone who backed on Kickstarter actually ended up paying for their pledge. Then when you add in Kickstarter's cut and credit card fees you really start to take a chunk out of things. And finally, there's costs for things like T-Shirts, Soundtracks, etc. that aren't represented in that number. If they're lucky a normal T-Shirt purchase nets them about 50% of the purchase price... make no mistake, merchandise is something that game companies produce as a necessity to make their fans happy.

 

Now, let's look at your idea. Say they give everyone $15 in store credit, the most likely purchase is going to be a t-shirt because it brings the price down 50% and brings the cost of the t-shirt into a much more comfortable range for a lot of people. Best case, if you then deduct that $15 from the $30 price, there goes most if not all of their profit on that purchase, the profit which actually funds the development of the game. Best case scenario they make $2-3 which, frankly, for all of the work that goes into shipping out a physical product for a small operation like DS isn't even worth getting out of bed. Worst case... they lose money on the purchase which does none of us any good.

 

Please think about the consequences of an idea before suggesting it, your wallet isn't the only consideration.

 

 

 

Moving slightly off-topic and on a more personal note, these nebulous claims you make trying to tie things to CIG do little to help your points and more to undermine them than you likely realize. First off, you assume that the reader is familiar with the actions of CIG. Secondly, you assume that the reader is aware of the specific action you're alluding to taken by that unrelated company. And finally, by making these assumptions and providing no context for your association makes you come off as a doomsayer, a charlatan, seeking to stir up support of his point with no substance behind it. To be clear, I'm not accusing you of having no substance behind the claim, I am pointing out to you how it comes off.

 

If you think you've got an example of a situation where the actions of another company are similar and wish to draw a comparison, elaborate on it, tell the story. But at the same time don't just be like "CIG did this and it's bad!" provide substance. 'Witty' two-line posts filled with buzz words are good at stirring up emotion but if you actually care, take the time to document the association and raise concerns, not accusations. Don't affirm the consequent, the fact that action A led to result B at another company is not proof that action A will lead to result B here. Definitely bring up the concern, point out that such an action had a detrimental result elsewhere, but don't state as a matter of fact that it will happen here, that's a logical fallacy.


  • 3

#8
Ezekeel

Ezekeel
  • Banned
  • 88 posts
  • Joined: 06-November, 2014
  • United States

No, see, this is what I'm talking about, you've got it all wrong.

 

You pledged at the I Did it My Way support tier, and in gratitude for your help in funding the development of the game you were promised certain perks, namely a copy of the game, a couple of ships, and some other doodads. You purchased nothing. Your grasp of the legalities surrounding crowdfunding is lacking, I'm afraid. Funding of a project does not translate pledges to the status of a purchase. Purchases are a guaranteed thing, there is no guarantee even now that you will get a playable game out of your pledge. Purchases are generally returnable, there is no legal mandate for pledges to be refunded, companies that do so do it of their own volition. If the game fails to happen because the wheels fall off or they run out of money, you have no recourse whereas with a purchase you have some guarantee of result. A pledge is a donation to a cause, not a purchase. 

 

 

Your entire post demonstrates that you clearly had the wrong idea about this whole thing going into it. You're talking like a shopper displeased because the vacuum cleaner they bought a week ago went on sale this week and if they'd known they'd have waited. Crowdfunding is about supporting a cause that you believe in and helping it to become a reality, not your personal benefit.

 

If it quacks like a duck... Good look arguing theses difference in front of a court in Europe where customers actually have rights.

 

Besides all your legal jibberjabber completely misses the central point which is the morality. I expect Wingman do to the right thing, because it is the morally right thing to do and not because some law forces him.


  • 0

#9
Custard

Custard
  • Backer
  • 191 posts
  • Joined: 10-March, 2015
  • Australia

Hello Captain Kangaroo,

 

I do not know if this is helpful or correct, but I noticed a "Change Package" feature that mentions downgrading and account credit. You can access it in your Client Area > Purchases and click on one to find the button. Don't mind me if you already tried it or maybe it's not available to change to a discount version. 


  • 0

#10
Demosthenes

Demosthenes
  • Backer
  • 39 posts
  • Joined: 04-November, 2014

If it quacks like a duck... Good look arguing theses difference in front of a court in Europe where customers actually have rights.

 

Besides all your legal jibberjabber completely misses the central point which is the morality. I expect Wingman do to the right thing, because it is the morally right thing to do and not because some law forces him.

Descendent Studios is not a European company making any such legislation, were it to happen, difficult to enforce, and further were they not to deliver the game they would most likely be bankrupt and insolvent making any such legislation utterly pointless.

 

As for the central point, let's be honest here, we're not arguing morality, we're arguing entitlement. People who pledged to support the development of a game feel entitled to things they were never promised. There's no moral mandate that they not discount things, quit trying to confuse the issue.


  • 0

#11
Fallarnon

Fallarnon
  • Web DeveloperWeb
  • 416 posts
  • Joined: 04-November, 2014
  • United States
x24

Hello Captain Kangaroo,
 
I do not know if this is helpful or correct, but I noticed a "Change Package" feature that mentions downgrading and account credit. You can access it in your Client Area > Purchases and click on one to find the button. Don't mind me if you already tried it or maybe it's not available to change to a discount version.


That language is part of the software suite powering our store, downgrading is not an option in our current configuration.

  • 1

#12
Custard

Custard
  • Backer
  • 191 posts
  • Joined: 10-March, 2015
  • Australia

[dev]
That language is part of the software suite powering our store, downgrading is not an option in our current configuration.[/dev]

Thanks for clearing that up.


  • 0

#13
Ezekeel

Ezekeel
  • Banned
  • 88 posts
  • Joined: 06-November, 2014
  • United States

No, see, this is what I'm talking about, you've got it all wrong.
 
You pledged at the I Did it My Way support tier, and in gratitude for your help in funding the development of the game you were promised certain perks, namely a copy of the game, a couple of ships, and some other doodads. You purchased nothing. Your grasp of the legalities surrounding crowdfunding is lacking, I'm afraid. Funding of a project does not translate pledges to the status of a purchase. Purchases are a guaranteed thing, there is no guarantee even now that you will get a playable game out of your pledge. Purchases are generally returnable, there is no legal mandate for pledges to be refunded, companies that do so do it of their own volition. If the game fails to happen because the wheels fall off or they run out of money, you have no recourse whereas with a purchase you have some guarantee of result. A pledge is a donation to a cause, not a purchase. 
 
 
Your entire post demonstrates that you clearly had the wrong idea about this whole thing going into it. You're talking like a shopper displeased because the vacuum cleaner they bought a week ago went on sale this week and if they'd known they'd have waited. Crowdfunding is about supporting a cause that you believe in and helping it to become a reality, not your personal benefit.
 

This is such a bad idea I don't even know what you were thinking when you came up with it, except, perhaps, of your own wallet.

 

Let's start by laying down a baseline. $600,000 is not the amount of money raised so far to develop this game. That number, or more appropriately the one on the front of this site, represents the gross number raised but does not represent several important costs. For example, it would be foolhardy to assume that everyone who backed on Kickstarter actually ended up paying for their pledge. Then when you add in Kickstarter's cut and credit card fees you really start to take a chunk out of things. And finally, there's costs for things like T-Shirts, Soundtracks, etc. that aren't represented in that number. If they're lucky a normal T-Shirt purchase nets them about 50% of the purchase price... make no mistake, merchandise is something that game companies produce as a necessity to make their fans happy.

 

Now, let's look at your idea. Say they give everyone $15 in store credit, the most likely purchase is going to be a t-shirt because it brings the price down 50% and brings the cost of the t-shirt into a much more comfortable range for a lot of people. Best case, if you then deduct that $15 from the $30 price, there goes most if not all of their profit on that purchase, the profit which actually funds the development of the game. Best case scenario they make $2-3 which, frankly, for all of the work that goes into shipping out a physical product for a small operation like DS isn't even worth getting out of bed. Worst case... they lose money on the purchase which does none of us any good.

 

Please think about the consequences of an idea before suggesting it, your wallet isn't the only consideration.

 

 

 

Moving slightly off-topic and on a more personal note, these nebulous claims you make trying to tie things to CIG do little to help your points and more to undermine them than you likely realize. First off, you assume that the reader is familiar with the actions of CIG. Secondly, you assume that the reader is aware of the specific action you're alluding to taken by that unrelated company. And finally, by making these assumptions and providing no context for your association makes you come off as a doomsayer, a charlatan, seeking to stir up support of his point with no substance behind it. To be clear, I'm not accusing you of having no substance behind the claim, I am pointing out to you how it comes off.

 

If you think you've got an example of a situation where the actions of another company are similar and wish to draw a comparison, elaborate on it, tell the story. But at the same time don't just be like "CIG did this and it's bad!" provide substance. 'Witty' two-line posts filled with buzz words are good at stirring up emotion but if you actually care, take the time to document the association and raise concerns, not accusations. Don't affirm the consequent, the fact that action A led to result B at another company is not proof that action A will lead to result B here. Definitely bring up the concern, point out that such an action had a detrimental result elsewhere, but don't state as a matter of fact that it will happen here, that's a logical fallacy.

 

And if people buy digital items for their store credit the company does not lose any money. I personally have no interest in owning or wearing a video game t-shirt since I am a grown-up who likes to have coitus.

 

Most people here are familiar with CIG and their history. If you are not, then I am sorry - but that is your problem not mine.


  • 0

#14
Ezekeel

Ezekeel
  • Banned
  • 88 posts
  • Joined: 06-November, 2014
  • United States

Descendent Studios is not a European company making any such legislation, were it to happen, difficult to enforce, and further were they not to deliver the game they would most likely be bankrupt and insolvent making any such legislation utterly pointless.

 

As for the central point, let's be honest here, we're not arguing morality, we're arguing entitlement. People who pledged to support the development of a game feel entitled to things they were never promised. There's no moral mandate that they not discount things, quit trying to confuse the issue.

 

I am talking morality. I find it insulting that you dare to question my motivation while you not even know me. Go further down that road and we will have a problem.


  • 0

#15
Strife

Strife
  • Backer
  • 49 posts
  • Joined: 11-March, 2015
  • United States

I am talking morality. I find it insulting that you dare to question my motivation while you not even know me. Go further down that road and we will have a problem.

2oT1WRv.jpg

 

Idle threats do NOT belong in this community.  If you have valid concerns, voice them.  DU will address them if they are brought up in an appropriate manner, as they have been from the beginning.


  • 5
"Oh, you've never seen what a drunk duck looks like flying? Wait until Alpha..."

#16
LotharBot

LotharBot
  • Advisory Board
  • 1,407 posts
  • Joined: 11-March, 2015
  • United States

Good look arguing theses difference in front of a court in Europe where customers actually have rights.

 

Kickstarter backers are not customers, nor are they investors; they are patrons (see this explicit blog post, from the day before kickstarter itself went live.)  

 

Patronage is an idea well known in Europe -- individuals would fund artists and craftsmen to produce their best work, with the full knowledge that their best work might turn out to suck or might never be finished.  There are no product guarantees, there is no cut of future profits, there is only the understanding that the person you chose to fund will make their best effort to use the funds you provided to produce their best work based on the expectations laid out by both parties at the time you became a patron.

 

I expect Wingman do to the right thing, because it is the morally right thing to do and not because some law forces him.

 

The right thing is to make the game to the best of his ability.  This will involve fundraising efforts, including sales, discounts, limited-time deals, store credits, and so on.  He is under no obligation, legal or moral, to guarantee that early backers will have always gotten the best deal.  Patronage comes with risks, and one of those risks is that other patrons might get a better deal than you because they backed sooner, later, or simply at a different level or in a different way (Francesco del Giocondo got the best deal out of Leonardo da Vinci -- the Mona Lisa -- but Ludovico Maria Sforza can't complain about merely getting the Last Supper.)  I'm sorry that you misunderstood the risks, but hopefully it helps to have this clarification.


  • 4
Come play original Descent! Full version setup instructions or Shareware unzip-and-play
Voice chat on Descent Rangers Mumble server address mumble.descentrangers.com port 31393

#17
Demosthenes

Demosthenes
  • Backer
  • 39 posts
  • Joined: 04-November, 2014

And if people buy digital items for their store credit the company does not lose any money. I personally have no interest in owning or wearing a video game t-shirt since I am a grown-up who likes to have coitus.

 

Most people here are familiar with CIG and their history. If you are not, then I am sorry - but that is your problem not mine.

 

IF

 

So, now you're going to throw tu quoque and burden of proof into the equation... if you don't care about making a reasoned argument that people from all walks can follow, that's your problem. Just don't be upset if people dismiss your arguments because you fail to substantiate them.

 

I am talking morality. I find it insulting that you dare to question my motivation while you not even know me. Go further down that road and we will have a problem.

 

What is immoral about offering discounts? Am I to believe that you don't buy things when they are on sale at a discount because of your moral convictions? If so, congratulations on standing on your principles, I guess. Sales are a reality, and in this case as the item being offered is a pledge, not a purchase, they're not even devaluing anything by offering it at a lower price. If you choose to be insulted by my calling a duck a duck, so be it.


  • 0

#18
Custard

Custard
  • Backer
  • 191 posts
  • Joined: 10-March, 2015
  • Australia

Please guys, it's not very friendly so far..  :wacko:

 

One simple fact that exists, regardless of considering these transactions to be donations to support the game, is that the game items do have value and are a substantial factor in adding incentive to buying in to each tier. It's not very thoughtful to disregard that, or to chew someone out because they value that a bit more.

 

Yes, it strikes me as odd that they discount the item that Captain Kangaroo talks about, to test store functionality? Having discounts on items is normal of course. Still, when you help to support a product in the state farthest from an actual product, on faith alone, it's a normal thing that the items you receive are already on 'discount' as a courtesy for that faith and support. I don't think it should be expected, and I don't think it's anything like a slap in the face to discount this items later, it's more like the absence of being polite.

 

It probably would have been a little more tactful to have rolled out the re-vamped reward tiers that are coming soon before initiating discounts, then no original backer would have felt their toes were stepped on. Just my two cents.


  • 2

#19
Ezekeel

Ezekeel
  • Banned
  • 88 posts
  • Joined: 06-November, 2014
  • United States

2oT1WRv.jpg

 

Idle threats do NOT belong in this community.  If you have valid concerns, voice them.  DU will address them if they are brought up in an appropriate manner, as they have been from the beginning.

 

Cute picture. Use your words next time and I might care to respond.

 

 

Things are actually quite simple: The Kickstarter campaign was very close and every pledge counted. WM and team owes the KS backers their gratitude for making this project possible. So I would consider it morally wrong to make these people regret their decision to back the project early - especially since they were explicitly asked to do that by WM.

 

For me this clearly is a question of morality and integrity. To make it clear, if this is the way WM wants to run his show then I personally have not the slightest interest to be part of it anymore. That being said, I have high hopes that he will see my point and rectify the problem.


  • 0

#20
Renegade-Shank

Renegade-Shank
  • Backer
  • 928 posts
  • Joined: 05-November, 2014
  • United States
I agree with Custard's easement of the situation.

Both sides have valid reasons for their views, but the negative way some of the posts are being articulated invite negative replies. Sometimes people let their emotions get in the way of what they are trying to discuss.

I personally believe that if a discount is given on the exact same package someone has pledged for they should be given store credit, though I understand that Descendent Studios doesn't have to do that.

Putting an existing package up for less with no changes to the content will upset those who have backed at the pledge level, and more than likely put them off from pledging further, where as giving them store credit could encourage them to pledge for the next tier or adding more funding in other ways. Even if the pledge with store credit added for a T-shirt only brings in $1-2 more, it is worth getting out of bed for the goodwill it will generate in the community.

Goodwill = more likeliness to pledge more and to spread word about a project, encouraging others to back it.

Bitterness = less likeliness to pledge more, as well as telling people to stay away from a project.

Just my 2 PALs.
  • 2
Remember, no matter what community you come from outside of this one, we are all part of this community and in this together.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users