Being as the thread title can't even get the title of the game correct, I knew this thread was going to be a treat!
Zontar said:
And if it was another funding campaign, that would be an argument. But for an actual store, it's not... and yes, the Kickstarter argument is not a valid argument because of the very nature of Kickstarter)...
You can't just say that it's not an argument, and move on, without actually explaining
why it's not an argument. Pricing the different early access versions the same everywhere is called respecting your customers and early supporters. As a Kickstarter supporter of Planetary Annihilation myself, I wouldn't have had it any other way. On Kickstarter, they sold early access to the game. If the same early access had of been cheaper elsewhere in comparison to Kickstarter, I'd have asked for my money back. I paid for a
finished copy of the game and early access to development builds of that game - why is someone else getting the same thing cheaper
and earlier when they've bought it much later than myself, after I've assumed the risk by pledging funds earlier in the process?
Further to your point, unlike Minecraft - which actually
did increase in price as development rolled on - you'll find PA cheaper today on Steam than it was during the previous portion of the development cycle. The price has decreased several times, actually. I know this, because I've bought several copies for friends. Once the game is finished, the price will be the release price. This respects the Kickstarter backers, and ensuring customers are treated the same everywhere, rather than leaving some out in the cold. No one is forcing you to buy an expensive "early access" version of a game, especially when you can simply wait for the game to be released and priced for significantly less. Your issues seem woefully unjustified.
Also, your developer doom-saying with relation to "early access" is, frankly, embarrassing. Kickstarter has successfully provided the alternative funding methods that the greatest developers of yesteryear were crying out for when EA and Activision were ravaging the industry. Warren Spectre, Richard Garriot, Marc LeBlanc, Hal Barwood - they would have killed for this type of funding method up to even ten years ago.
Games prices globally have largely remained static for years, and publishers are spending hundreds of millions to compete in the AAA space. Risk adverse is too soft a term for the aversion to originality that is plaguing this industry as a result of these two factors. And yet, here's early access - getting funding directly from the fans, who are literally throwing money at developers to get the titles that publishers simply will not fund.
What bubble do you think exists in this early access space? How was it created? Exactly how is this space making games more expensive then can be justified?
Your post can summised as:
"
Kickstarter argument is terrible because.
Games are more expensive because early access because.
There is a bubble because.
It will burst because and hurt developers because."
What are you talking about? You're throwing terms around, and none of it makes any sense
whatsoever.