Sath Jun 22, 2013 @ 2:09am
Kickstarter Is Not A Store?
So I want to share some of the things that struck me as... odd with this whole mess. I was reading up on some of the Kickstarter things and I found something that I think is interesting. On the kickstarter wikipedia page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kickstarter) I came across something and I think this game really applies to it. Under the Guidelines section it reads

"The guidelines are designed to reinforce Kickstarter’s position that people are backing projects, not placing orders for a product. To underscore the notion that Kickstarter is a place in which creators and audiences make things together, creators across all categories are asked to describe the risks and challenges a project faces in producing it. This educates the public about the project goals and encourages contributions to the community.[38]"
Which links to:
http://www.kickstarter.com/blog/kickstarter-is-not-a-store

The part that I thought was interesting is where it says "The guidelines are designed to reiforce Kickstarter's position that people are backing projects, not placing orders for a product."

So if kickstarter is not a store, then why was this thread started?

"[UBER Thread] Pricing and the Kickstarter
Our pricing for this stage of early access was determined by our Kickstarter. The stages of our early access for ALL users, which was determined during our Kickstarter, is:

June through August: $90 for early alpha access, during the time where we're still locking down features and making tweaks to the flow of the game. Clarification: this is a permanent access - Alpha, beta and retail. (Galactic edition equivalent with all addons)

September through November: $60 for beta access. The game will be much more complete at this time, but with a lot of balance work still to do and more optimizations to get it working on as many systems as possible. Again, permanent access: beta and retail. (Warfare Edition equivalent with all addons)

Retail: December 2013 (Combat edition equivalent)

This is the pricing determined over a year ago. Our Kickstarter set these levels, and while we understand people may not like it, it's the decision we had to make.

But that is the schedule if you want to wait until the price drops to a level you're more comfortable with.

Thanks,
Garat / Marc Scattergood
Producer, Uber Entertainment"

Something weird here? What do you all think?

My personal opinion sorta on/off topic: So why do people think that just because they pledged $90 to help support A PROJECT that it wouldn't be fair to sell it cheaper then what you pledged? YOU DONATED, you didn't BUY it. They gave you the game as a gift!!
Showing 1-15 of 20 comments
< >
Kronos943 Jun 22, 2013 @ 2:29am 
i agree. somepeople just need to be greatful. its not like they can leave the game price as 90 forever no one would buy it! its like firefall or neverwinter. if you payed an grand amount of money you get instant acess and some other goodies thats what they are doing right now. because if they stoped selling the game, gave everyone access and no one donated anymore the game would never get finished.
Pukepile Jun 22, 2013 @ 2:46am 
STEAM is not kickstarter. I will say one thing. After this fiasco I will no longer support kickstarter games. Or early releases.
DarkSaber2k Jun 22, 2013 @ 3:02am 
Originally posted by Pukepile:
STEAM is not kickstarter. I will say one thing. After this fiasco I will no longer support kickstarter games. Or early releases.

Or how about just Uber, since they are the greedy w*****s in this.
Meldiron Jun 22, 2013 @ 3:08am 
Originally posted by Enyaw:
Originally posted by Pukepile:
STEAM is not kickstarter. I will say one thing. After this fiasco I will no longer support kickstarter games. Or early releases.

Or how about just Uber, since they are the greedy w*****s in this.
Unlike the generous people that whine because they don't get alpha for free.
DarkSaber2k Jun 22, 2013 @ 3:10am 
Originally posted by Meldiron:
Originally posted by Enyaw:

Or how about just Uber, since they are the greedy w*****s in this.
Unlike the generous people that whine because they don't get alpha for free.

Toxic development practices should always be spoken out against. I didn't even want this game BEFORE this mess.
johna (Banned) Jun 22, 2013 @ 3:31am 
This is a scam. These 'developers' frankly are just conning people.
moralitis Jun 22, 2013 @ 3:35am 
Originally posted by johna:
This is a scam. These 'developers' frankly are just conning people.
and how is it a scam? are you being deceived in any way?
Sath Jun 22, 2013 @ 11:08am 
Something I don't agree with is the alpha price. Granted I can't change that but I will still express my opinion on it. If the game is going to be $40 at release then adding another $50 on top of that just so that I can do the job of a tester (someone who gets PAID to do that) is complete bs and nothing but a money scam. Hell for another $50 I should get the next title they release for free! - My opinion
Last edited by Sath; Jun 22, 2013 @ 11:22am
Thranduil Jun 22, 2013 @ 11:23am 
I don't think backing a kickstarter counts as just donating. The project owner is still required to fulfill the promises he makes. And is free to include promises that make it worthwhile for backers to chip in.

In this case, Uber decided to add a clause that they wouldn't sell for a lower price than the backers got. There have actually been kickstarters where the product was already sold, at a lower price, than the one the backers got, before the backers got their reward. Essentially, the backers got the message: screw you, we already have your money!
Such a strategy might get one a lot of customers upon release, but not a whole lot of new investors in future kickstarters.

I do think 90$ is a bit overpriced for alpha access, but I can't fault them for remaining true to their original promise to the backers. I'm not going to buy this at 90$, but it will make me more likely to back any of their future kickstarters.
Sephrax Jun 22, 2013 @ 11:28am 
Originally posted by Thranduil:
I don't think backing a kickstarter counts as just donating. The project owner is still required to fulfill the promises he makes. And is free to include promises that make it worthwhile for backers to chip in.

No, there's no such rule in KS. That's why so many thought that Ouya was a scam. It sounded a bit too good to be true.
Sath Jun 22, 2013 @ 11:42am 
Originally posted by Thranduil:
I don't think backing a kickstarter counts as just donating. The project owner is still required to fulfill the promises he makes. And is free to include promises that make it worthwhile for backers to chip in.

I havn't been able to find anything that validates it otherwise.

Originally posted by Thranduil:
In this case, Uber decided to add a clause that they wouldn't sell for a lower price than the backers got. There have actually been kickstarters where the product was already sold, at a lower price, than the one the backers got, before the backers got their reward. Essentially, the backers got the message: screw you, we already have your money!
Such a strategy might get one a lot of customers upon release, but not a whole lot of new investors in future kickstarters.

I do think 90$ is a bit overpriced for alpha access, but I can't fault them for remaining true to their original promise to the backers. I'm not going to buy this at 90$, but it will make me more likely to back any of their future kickstarters.

This is what I am getting at... Kickstarter is not a store. They were given a gift depending on how much they pledged... They didn't buy anything...
Thranduil Jun 23, 2013 @ 1:57am 
Originally posted by Sephrax:
Originally posted by Thranduil:
I don't think backing a kickstarter counts as just donating. The project owner is still required to fulfill the promises he makes. And is free to include promises that make it worthwhile for backers to chip in.

No, there's no such rule in KS. That's why so many thought that Ouya was a scam. It sounded a bit too good to be true.

Well, I'm not a lawyer, but reading the terms of service (http://www.kickstarter.com/terms-of-use?ref=footer), I found the following:

- Project Creators are required to fulfill all rewards of their successful fundraising campaigns or refund any Backer whose reward they do not or cannot fulfill.

- Project Creators agree to make a good faith attempt to fulfill each reward by its Estimated Delivery Date.


OK, the wording is vague enough that a competent lawyer can probably weasel out of it. You could say it only applies to actual rewards (which are fulfilled: backers have alpha access), and not to any promises not to sell under that price.

Though I guess that in the end, what matters to me personally is more that they made a promise to a group of people. They then kept that promise, even if they might not have been legally liable if they didn't. Kept it, in fact, while it might well be losing them customers.
And as much as you might argue that they could get away with it, I cannot really fault them for that. A word is a word, even if not legally enforcable.

Still not buying it at 90$, myself, but I do intend to give it a look at reatail price.
BigDukeSixx Jun 23, 2013 @ 2:03am 
This thread is just another stupid argument against paying $90. Either pay the money or hiss off.
BigDukeSixx Jun 23, 2013 @ 2:05am 
Originally posted by Sath:
Something I don't agree with is the alpha price. Granted I can't change that but I will still express my opinion on it. If the game is going to be $40 at release then adding another $50 on top of that just so that I can do the job of a tester (someone who gets PAID to do that) is complete bs and nothing but a money scam. Hell for another $50 I should get the next title they release for free! - My opinion

The don't pay it, you idiot! Actually, you calling this a scam is libel and I hope you get sued.
Reverend Atheist Jun 23, 2013 @ 2:12am 
Originally posted by Thranduil:
Originally posted by Sephrax:

No, there's no such rule in KS. That's why so many thought that Ouya was a scam. It sounded a bit too good to be true.

Well, I'm not a lawyer, but reading the terms of service (http://www.kickstarter.com/terms-of-use?ref=footer), I found the following:

- Project Creators are required to fulfill all rewards of their successful fundraising campaigns or refund any Backer whose reward they do not or cannot fulfill.

- Project Creators agree to make a good faith attempt to fulfill each reward by its Estimated Delivery Date.


OK, the wording is vague enough that a competent lawyer can probably weasel out of it. You could say it only applies to actual rewards (which are fulfilled: backers have alpha access), and not to any promises not to sell under that price.

Though I guess that in the end, what matters to me personally is more that they made a promise to a group of people. They then kept that promise, even if they might not have been legally liable if they didn't. Kept it, in fact, while it might well be losing them customers.
And as much as you might argue that they could get away with it, I cannot really fault them for that. A word is a word, even if not legally enforcable.

Still not buying it at 90$, myself, but I do intend to give it a look at reatail price.

Woah Woah Woah. You're making entirely too much sense here. You did research AND shared it? Heresy. That's not how these forums work. I expect to see 120% more opinions, 79% more 'this is a scam' and 74.6% more "support this business model and the gaming world will end.'
Showing 1-15 of 20 comments
< >
Per page: 15 30 50
Date Posted: Jun 22, 2013 @ 2:09am
Posts: 20