A question about fairness

Hi guys

Please note that it's not an "Angry Troll Post"... it's just that I'm not sure if that's right and want to hear what you think about that.

http://steamcommunity.com/app/233250/discussions/0/864976837927768704/

Thank you for reading.

Is it fair? Completely. Is it worth paying $90 to get something early you could wait and get for $40? Well you probably should have asked yourself that before you bought it.

You're paying for Alpha along with the other things such as the Theta and the Artbook.

If your friend doesn't feel that to be worthwhile that is fine, that's his call, you need to decide for yourself if something is worth it.

Don't forget, it's not like Uber has been using all the proceeds since the Kickstarter to line thier own pockets, they've been rolling all that stuff back into the game.

For me, I don't regret a single cent, I know I could have just sat on the sidelines and waited for release, I would have been able to get the game much, much cheaper, but in the end, I backed it during the Kickstarter to help it reach people well beyond myself.

Mike

Ok let me ask you in another way. You buy a car with a non finished motor for 20'000$ but with some extras and vinyls. You help the mechanician develop the missing parts by reporting it and with suggestions and whatever. After a few months the mechanician says ppl who will buy the same model of car with a finished motor for 10'000$ will get the same extras but without the vinyls. Do you find this would be fair even if you tried to help find and reporting those missing parts?

Now don't tell me you could drive a car with a non finished motor without any problems and without reporting this to the mechanician.

Now tell me again, is this fair? My mind says that I should be happy to be able to help but at the same time some friends of mine are thinking I'm a total idiot... so do you know how it feels and what other ppl are arguing about?

Did you read the comments on http://steamcommunity.com/app/233250/discussions/0/864970587226651407/ ... I don't mind if they don't like it but it is a point to argue about, not?

That's just their slightly immature way of saying they aren't into the whole Kickstarter/Early Access thing.

The $90 is your way of saying "I support the development of this game and I want to play it" and they are just saying "I want to play it and that's it." Both are fine, but you certainly aren't an idiot.

As for the extras, the way I see it, they are negligible.

It's kind of an apples to steaks comparison. Try this: Why do early adopters of 4k televisions pay so much more, despite the fact that there's almost no 4k content, HDMI 1.4 spec doesn't support more than a 30hz refresh, and most of the TVs have issues or bugs?

Because they want to support the format.

And they will all go to hell for that.

False. What is being said now is the same as what was said at the beginning: the final price will be consistent with other games but if you donate additional money earlier, you will get early access to PA in an alpha/beta state. If you failed to understand that, the responsibility lies with you.

Or because the TV seller was too good at selling ... It looks like I have to live with the fact that a lot "non-develop-supporter" are making fun about the "develop-supporter"

About the comparison ... it was about the content and not about if you'll support something or not.

If I want to support an awsome game I can also buy useless things like skins but you still get a skin. But 50$ for an Artbook....You can say now "but you got an alpha access and you will be able to play beta too!" ...but alpha and beta are not supposed to be for playing but more for testing, not? You know why a lot of ppl are saying "I'll wait for the 40$ version of the game"

IF the early buyer is told in advance that the price will drop like this I can't see a problem with this. If he doesnt like the early high price he can just not buy the car that early and wait.
It was pretty clear that PA will cost less and less the longer you wait, so nobody really can complain.

The issue is not fairness, but value. All value is subjective in the minds of individual people. There is no such thing as a "fair" price besides what a buyer and seller freely agree upon.

Also, the OP sees fairness only from his own perspective - Uber feels that $40 is too low currently. What of Uber's "fair" price?

Anyone else notice a contagious silly idea that comes up a lot when it comes to small game developers? The idea of "supporting" businesses as if purchasing a product were generously charitable? I did not pay $90 to kindly support Uber. I paid $90 to play a game that I care about seeing made right from the beginning. Well worth it! But I want that game, not just a good effort.

Game developers are not 5 year old kids running a lemonade stand. I'd "support" 5 year olds. I trade value for value with everybody else.

Nobody should complain, but because most people either feel entitled or don't do their research they still end up complaining.

Psst. You just reworded the phrase "I bought this game to support it."

Ok I made a mistake in that text ... I should have said "The mechanician says that in a few month you'll get the same model of car at the cost of only 10'000$ with...." So I know the buyer was told but you have to know what the point of this post is.... the question is not if you've payed too much or not, the question is "is it fair or not" because there is a 557 pages post on the Steamforum about the price and there are so many ppl that could support the game but wont because of the content/price comparison. As I said, if you find alpha and beta access an excuse for that price it's about to you to decide if thats fair or not. A lot of ppl I know says definitely NOT and I can live with that price because I don't mind to support something I'd like to see getting to the top.

My post can be misunderstood as a complain but please it wasn't my intention to make it look like one. I just want to hear if YOU think that's fair or not because of that other Steampost in which everyone is arguing about.

Sorry about that, I have to explain myself better.

The car analogy doesn't really work simply because no one in their right mind will attempt to drive an unfinished car. Even though PA is unfinished you are still able to currently play it, safely.

This one is much better:

Those people don't understand the concept of fairness. Uber has not lied to anyone, or coerced anyone into doing anything. They have been, to the best of my knowledge, completely above-board with regard to the pricing scheme all along: you can wait until release and get the game for $40, or you can pay additional money to gain early access. There is absolutely nothing, anywhere, that says it is unfair for you to be deprived of a product you have not paid for.

Your analogies about cars and TVs are good, but a bit too far from our industry. Let's pick something closer:

Is it fair to sell alpha or beta access to a game that is going to be free-to-play at release?

Theoretically if you add or remove equal values at both sides of the equation, it shouldn't change. So, if we remove 40$ release price, we will have a model with 50$ alpha and 20$ beta access to a free-to-play game. Is it fair? I think yes. I think I even saw something very similar somewhere... And PA is just this +40$.

I know what you mean. There was something like that with DOTA2 in which you could buy a package with skins and an access for beta even if some ppl got it for free but I think that the TV one is atm. the best comparison for PA... my one was about the content and not about the support.

Well in the case of the content it's time = money.

I did not. I stated that I bought the game to support me. This was in response to Uber's open offer to support me at the cost of $90, of course, which I accepted.

Full disclosure: I also said "WHEEEEEEEE!" as I entered my card info. So I kind of got more than I bargained for.