"But then no one might get the new content!" So effing what! If you don't want to buy it, don't! And if you do think the promise of more content later is enough to justify it, then DO buy it! I'd...consider you an idiot for spending 20 dollars on the promise of new content in the future considering game devs' reputation these days. (It might be crap, it might be less, it might not come out at all anyway.) But that's just me. I agree with TB in this. Don't buy an early access game because it might become good later (early access), and don't spend money on just promises.
You can't really compare a game dev to Red Cross imo. Game devs have a very shoddy track record over all with their promises and means of getting money. Promises not kept, worse quality than advertised, some devs just plain running away with the cash, etc. Not saying naughty dog will do this. But the past has shown us that a game dev asking for 20 dollars to reach a 'donation goal' for extra content, while they're clearly not short on profits, is shady at best.FC Groningen said:In general, do you think people or companies haven't asked for donations in similar or better circumstances? Take the American Red Cross alone for example which has a balance of billions of dollars, but are still asking for donations. I'd say just the financial situation alone should not exclude them from the liberty to ask for donations. I personally prefer such donations over the donations for example youtubers are receiving for filling the channels with their noise. Let people pay and ask if they feel like it.