I see your point; however, I don't think charging $750 for alpha testing is a 'perk'.
To me that is like claiming if you give generously to a Broadway show you'll be able to serve at the concession stand.
Again, they are setting donation tiers and offering x, y and z for those tiers.
And
in this case, it sort of makes sense. If I was agreeable enough to
donate, say, $1000 then I'd love to be in on the ground floor of the
game's development.
Another example ... if I
give $3000 to the Boston Symphony orchestra then I can have a very
special "in person" concert in their members only room and an invitation
for two do dinner with a BSO musician.
Is that worth it? Is it not? It's a "your mileage may vary" proposition.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
I want this game to succeed so badly but Jesus they still aren't even in Alpha yet? Like what the literal F. For a game in development this long, the game engine/graphics look so basic too.
I see your point; however, I don't think charging $750 for alpha testing is a 'perk'.
To me that is like claiming if you give generously to a Broadway show you'll be able to serve at the concession stand.
Again, they are setting donation tiers and offering x, y and z for those tiers.
And
in this case, it sort of makes sense. If I was agreeable enough to
donate, say, $1000 then I'd love to be in on the ground floor of the
game's development.
Another example ... if I
give $3000 to the Boston Symphony orchestra then I can have a very
special "in person" concert in their members only room and an invitation
for two do dinner with a BSO musician.
Is that worth it? Is it not? It's a "your mileage may vary" proposition.
Sure, I understand donation tiers and all that.
But we've come a long way in 20 years where a completed product was what earned money, and even at that you'd get complaints if the cost for the completed product crossed the $50 mark.
Compare with paying $750 to test an incomplete product that may never launch.
I think we understand each other. That said, Rise of the Fallen has crossed over into immoral territory - and if not that, then hoggish at the very least. They've taken it much too far.
So I have to ask: At what point would you consider it to be too far? Not the limit at which you wouldn't be willing to pay, but at what point should nobody being participating because it became obscene.
Paying 10K to view some alpha screenshot? Paying 10K to view some concept notes scribbled on a cocktail napkin? Paying 10K for a vial of the developer's blood?
At what point would you get squeamish and simply refuse to buy the product because they're pigs?
I want this game to succeed so badly but Jesus they still aren't even in Alpha yet? Like what the literal F. For a game in development this long, the game engine/graphics look so basic too.
For $750 you can get a peak at the alpha product - that sounds like quite a bit but if the game launches you get the first 3 months included.
So I have to ask: At what point would you consider it to be too far? Not the limit at which you wouldn't be willing to pay, but at what point should nobody being participating because it became obscene.
Paying 10K to view some alpha screenshot? Paying 10K to view some concept notes scribbled on a cocktail napkin? Paying 10K for a vial of the developer's blood?
At what point would you get squeamish and simply refuse to buy the product because they're pigs?
Well, that's the thing, there is no "limit" where a person shouldn't give money if they believe in the project.
That's the issue with this discussion, people are way too hung up on "I'm buying alpha access for $750! WTF!
NO!
you are NOT buying alpha access for $750. You believe in the project,
want to throw money their way and the perk for doing so, is you get
Alpha access.
Now, that's splitting hairs! But it's exactly what's going on here.
The
only thing is whether or not a person is giving money with the idea
that nothing might come of it. At least with these crowd funded games.
That's
the other issue, people expect to get something and if they can't then
they want their money back. Ridiculous. You give money regardless
because they are going to use that money for development. How can they
give you money back if they have already used it?
That's
why most people should never give to a crowd funded project. They don't
understand what they are giving for and what they are getting and what
the risks are.
As for me, I didn't give money
to Pantheon kickstarter because they showed nothing. They expected
people to throw money at them because of what they were promising and
that Brad was attached. I gave once I started seeing an actual world and
game play. $100 I think. that's my threshold to start giving.
If
I was a multi, multi millionaire I'd throw a lot more their way to
insure them finishing the project. Since I'm not they don't get anything
more. I don't know what their funding is but I suspect the game won't
launch unless someone throws a large chunk of money their way. But if
"I" was doing that I'd want to set milestones that they'd have to reach
before giving more.
I truly believe this game
is being developed in people's spare time at this point. They are
devoted but they only have enough time to give to something that they
might not even be getting paid for.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
But we've come a long way in 20 years where a completed product was what earned money, and even at that you'd get complaints if the cost for the completed product crossed the $50 mark.
Compare with paying $750 to test an incomplete product that may never launch.
I think we understand each other. That said, Rise of the Fallen has crossed over into immoral territory - and if not that, then hoggish at the very least. They've taken it much too far.
So I have to ask: At what point would you consider it to be too far? Not the limit at which you wouldn't be willing to pay, but at what point should nobody being participating because it became obscene.
Paying 10K to view some alpha screenshot? Paying 10K to view some concept notes scribbled on a cocktail napkin? Paying 10K for a vial of the developer's blood?
At what point would you get squeamish and simply refuse to buy the product because they're pigs?
I am not a big fan of alpha access for big money, however personally I think games should be able to charge whatever they want.
I am actually waiting to see if there will be an AMAZING game that is just beyond my budget to afford. If anything the problem is paying big money for bad games.
In pretty much every sector higher price items usually give you better quality. For some reason MMO's have capped themselves and there isnt increase quality = more money equation.
It really seems weird in this industry where most of the time alot of money = a really bad game, and a really good game is relatively cheap. Upsidedown world in gaming.
One reason for this is probably that a really good game will get so many users that they can afford to lower the price because of volume. Where on the other side a bad game will have such a small audience they need to convince a few whales with "god tier access" to support the game.
But we've come a long way in 20 years where a completed product was what earned money, and even at that you'd get complaints if the cost for the completed product crossed the $50 mark.
Compare with paying $750 to test an incomplete product that may never launch.
I think we understand each other. That said, Rise of the Fallen has crossed over into immoral territory - and if not that, then hoggish at the very least. They've taken it much too far.
So I have to ask: At what point would you consider it to be too far? Not the limit at which you wouldn't be willing to pay, but at what point should nobody being participating because it became obscene.
Paying 10K to view some alpha screenshot? Paying 10K to view some concept notes scribbled on a cocktail napkin? Paying 10K for a vial of the developer's blood?
At what point would you get squeamish and simply refuse to buy the product because they're pigs?
I am not a big fan of alpha access for big money, however personally I think games should be able to charge whatever they want.
I am actually waiting to see if there will be an AMAZING game that is just beyond my budget to afford. If anything the problem is paying big money for bad games.
In pretty much every sector higher price items usually give you better quality. For some reason MMO's have capped themselves and there isnt increase quality = more money equation.
It really seems weird in this industry where most of the time alot of money = a really bad game, and a really good game is relatively cheap. Upsidedown world in gaming.
One reason for this is probably that a really good game will get so many users that they can afford to lower the price because of volume. Where on the other side a bad game will have such a small audience they need to convince a few whales with "god tier access" to support the game.
yeah, that's a wait and see.
Their game is going to have to be "sooo" good that it peaks the interest of people wanting and updated Everquest.
And of course will have to be so good as to not be damaged by the "It looks like 2005" or whatever critics.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
So I have to ask: At what point would you consider it to be too far? Not the limit at which you wouldn't be willing to pay, but at what point should nobody being participating because it became obscene.
Paying 10K to view some alpha screenshot? Paying 10K to view some concept notes scribbled on a cocktail napkin? Paying 10K for a vial of the developer's blood?
At what point would you get squeamish and simply refuse to buy the product because they're pigs?
Well, that's the thing, there is no "limit" where a person shouldn't give money if they believe in the project.
That's the issue with this discussion, people are way too hung up on "I'm buying alpha access for $750! WTF!
NO!
you are NOT buying alpha access for $750. You believe in the project,
want to throw money their way and the perk for doing so, is you get
Alpha access.
Now, that's splitting hairs! But it's exactly what's going on here.
The
only thing is whether or not a person is giving money with the idea
that nothing might come of it. At least with these crowd funded games.
That's
the other issue, people expect to get something and if they can't then
they want their money back. Ridiculous. You give money regardless
because they are going to use that money for development. How can they
give you money back if they have already used it?
That's
why most people should never give to a crowd funded project. They don't
understand what they are giving for and what they are getting and what
the risks are.
As for me, I didn't give money
to Pantheon kickstarter because they showed nothing. They expected
people to throw money at them because of what they were promising and
that Brad was attached. I gave once I started seeing an actual world and
game play. $100 I think. that's my threshold to start giving.
If
I was a multi, multi millionaire I'd throw a lot more their way to
insure them finishing the project. Since I'm not they don't get anything
more. I don't know what their funding is but I suspect the game won't
launch unless someone throws a large chunk of money their way. But if
"I" was doing that I'd want to set milestones that they'd have to reach
before giving more.
I truly believe this game
is being developed in people's spare time at this point. They are
devoted but they only have enough time to give to something that they
might not even be getting paid for.
For me it all comes down to honesty of the sales/donation pitch. If you are HONEST and say this is going to take 10 years in our estimate and need $10,000,000 more and given that complexity it's got a high probability of failure... then sure... that's honest and nobody should complain.
If you make a pitch that says you can do it for 1,000,000 and in 3-4 years... and you are now at 10,000,000 and 10 years and still in some kind of pre-alpha... yeah I think that's either total dishonestly ot total incompetence. Now I'm not calling out Pantheon directly because they obviously had a huge disruption for Brad's passing. But I think each case needs to be looked at individually and there should be no blanket absolutions nor condemnations on all Crowdfunding projects. Yes, it's called a donation, but the question is always whether the pitch was honest or not. And I for one am 100 percent confident that many, if not MOST of these projects are known by the developers to be setting false expectations.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
So I have to ask: At what point would you consider it to be too far? Not the limit at which you wouldn't be willing to pay, but at what point should nobody being participating because it became obscene.
Paying 10K to view some alpha screenshot? Paying 10K to view some concept notes scribbled on a cocktail napkin? Paying 10K for a vial of the developer's blood?
At what point would you get squeamish and simply refuse to buy the product because they're pigs?
Well, that's the thing, there is no "limit" where a person shouldn't give money if they believe in the project.
I'm not really talking about it from the perspective of the doner. I'm wondering about the character of the developer.
This is an imperfect example but consider price gouging after a hurricane.
One could argue that if the gas station attendant is willing to sell for $15 a gallon and the customer is willing to pay $15 a gallon then there is nothing wrong with the transaction; however, this actually is considered criminal behavior. (price gouging)
Now yes, I know there are differences - the people contributing aren't in a desperate situation and so on. I'm not suggesting the makers of AoC are price gouging on a criminal level.
But what the example establishes is there is a point, even in a voluntary transaction and no matter how much the buyer believes in the transaction, where the seller can set a price that erodes one's estimation of the seller's character. When prices are unreasonable it is natural to doubt the character of the seller.
I don't know what the price point is for you; however, for me $750 with a "3 month subscription" perk is insulting. I can appreciate that you don't find it insulting but I most certainly do because I personally would be embarrassed to charge that for alpha anything.
So I have to ask: At what point would you consider it to be too far? Not the limit at which you wouldn't be willing to pay, but at what point should nobody being participating because it became obscene.
Paying 10K to view some alpha screenshot? Paying 10K to view some concept notes scribbled on a cocktail napkin? Paying 10K for a vial of the developer's blood?
At what point would you get squeamish and simply refuse to buy the product because they're pigs?
Well, that's the thing, there is no "limit" where a person shouldn't give money if they believe in the project.
That's the issue with this discussion, people are way too hung up on "I'm buying alpha access for $750! WTF!
NO!
you are NOT buying alpha access for $750. You believe in the project,
want to throw money their way and the perk for doing so, is you get
Alpha access.
Now, that's splitting hairs! But it's exactly what's going on here.
The
only thing is whether or not a person is giving money with the idea
that nothing might come of it. At least with these crowd funded games.
That's
the other issue, people expect to get something and if they can't then
they want their money back. Ridiculous. You give money regardless
because they are going to use that money for development. How can they
give you money back if they have already used it?
That's
why most people should never give to a crowd funded project. They don't
understand what they are giving for and what they are getting and what
the risks are.
As for me, I didn't give money
to Pantheon kickstarter because they showed nothing. They expected
people to throw money at them because of what they were promising and
that Brad was attached. I gave once I started seeing an actual world and
game play. $100 I think. that's my threshold to start giving.
If
I was a multi, multi millionaire I'd throw a lot more their way to
insure them finishing the project. Since I'm not they don't get anything
more. I don't know what their funding is but I suspect the game won't
launch unless someone throws a large chunk of money their way. But if
"I" was doing that I'd want to set milestones that they'd have to reach
before giving more.
I truly believe this game
is being developed in people's spare time at this point. They are
devoted but they only have enough time to give to something that they
might not even be getting paid for.
For me it all comes down to honesty of the sales/donation pitch. If you are HONEST and say this is going to take 10 years in our estimate and need $10,000,000 more and given that complexity it's got a high probability of failure... then sure... that's honest and nobody should complain.
If you make a pitch that says you can do it for 1,000,000 and in 3-4 years... and you are now at 10,000,000 and 10 years and still in some kind of pre-alpha... yeah I think that's either total dishonestly ot total incompetence. Now I'm not calling out Pantheon directly because they obviously had a huge disruption for Brad's passing. But I think each case needs to be looked at individually and there should be no blanket absolutions nor condemnations on all Crowdfunding projects. Yes, it's called a donation, but the question is always whether the pitch was honest or not. And I for one am 100 percent confident that many, if not MOST of these projects are known by the developers to be setting false expectations.
Yeah, I agree but these projects are filled with the "I'm a risk taker" type of people. They truly believe that they can do it but if they can't? Oh well! We tried. And they also took people's money with them.
In the end it has to be a "let the buyer beware" proposition.
I have to say that every crowd funded project that I've ever backed has come to fruition. Every one. Except the two mmorpg's I backed.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
So I have to ask: At what point would you consider it to be too far? Not the limit at which you wouldn't be willing to pay, but at what point should nobody being participating because it became obscene.
Paying 10K to view some alpha screenshot? Paying 10K to view some concept notes scribbled on a cocktail napkin? Paying 10K for a vial of the developer's blood?
At what point would you get squeamish and simply refuse to buy the product because they're pigs?
Well, that's the thing, there is no "limit" where a person shouldn't give money if they believe in the project.
I'm not really talking about it from the perspective of the doner. I'm wondering about the character of the developer.
This is an imperfect example but consider price gouging after a hurricane.
One could argue that if the gas station attendant is willing to sell for $15 a gallon and the customer is willing to pay $15 a gallon then there is nothing wrong with the transaction; however, this actually is considered criminal behavior. (price gouging)
Now yes, I know there are differences - the people contributing aren't in a desperate situation and so on. I'm not suggesting the makers of AoC are price gouging on a criminal level.
But what the example establishes is there is a point, even in a voluntary transaction and no matter how much the buyer believes in the transaction, where the seller can set a price that erodes one's estimation of the seller's character. When prices are unreasonable it is natural to doubt the character of the seller.
I don't know what the price point is for you; however, for me $750 with a "3 month subscription" perk is insulting. I can appreciate that you don't find it insulting but I most certainly do because I personally would be embarrassed to charge that for alpha anything.
Is $750 without any perks something you are willing to give for a project you believe in?
If not, quadruple your financial resources or until money is no object. At all. Then is it?
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
So I have to ask: At what point would you consider it to be too far? Not the limit at which you wouldn't be willing to pay, but at what point should nobody being participating because it became obscene.
Paying 10K to view some alpha screenshot? Paying 10K to view some concept notes scribbled on a cocktail napkin? Paying 10K for a vial of the developer's blood?
At what point would you get squeamish and simply refuse to buy the product because they're pigs?
Well, that's the thing, there is no "limit" where a person shouldn't give money if they believe in the project.
That's the issue with this discussion, people are way too hung up on "I'm buying alpha access for $750! WTF!
NO!
you are NOT buying alpha access for $750. You believe in the project,
want to throw money their way and the perk for doing so, is you get
Alpha access.
Now, that's splitting hairs! But it's exactly what's going on here.
The
only thing is whether or not a person is giving money with the idea
that nothing might come of it. At least with these crowd funded games.
That's
the other issue, people expect to get something and if they can't then
they want their money back. Ridiculous. You give money regardless
because they are going to use that money for development. How can they
give you money back if they have already used it?
That's
why most people should never give to a crowd funded project. They don't
understand what they are giving for and what they are getting and what
the risks are.
As for me, I didn't give money
to Pantheon kickstarter because they showed nothing. They expected
people to throw money at them because of what they were promising and
that Brad was attached. I gave once I started seeing an actual world and
game play. $100 I think. that's my threshold to start giving.
If
I was a multi, multi millionaire I'd throw a lot more their way to
insure them finishing the project. Since I'm not they don't get anything
more. I don't know what their funding is but I suspect the game won't
launch unless someone throws a large chunk of money their way. But if
"I" was doing that I'd want to set milestones that they'd have to reach
before giving more.
I truly believe this game
is being developed in people's spare time at this point. They are
devoted but they only have enough time to give to something that they
might not even be getting paid for.
For me it all comes down to honesty of the sales/donation pitch. If you are HONEST and say this is going to take 10 years in our estimate and need $10,000,000 more and given that complexity it's got a high probability of failure... then sure... that's honest and nobody should complain.
If you make a pitch that says you can do it for 1,000,000 and in 3-4 years... and you are now at 10,000,000 and 10 years and still in some kind of pre-alpha... yeah I think that's either total dishonestly ot total incompetence. Now I'm not calling out Pantheon directly because they obviously had a huge disruption for Brad's passing. But I think each case needs to be looked at individually and there should be no blanket absolutions nor condemnations on all Crowdfunding projects. Yes, it's called a donation, but the question is always whether the pitch was honest or not. And I for one am 100 percent confident that many, if not MOST of these projects are known by the developers to be setting false expectations.
Yeah, I agree but these projects are filled with the "I'm a risk taker" type of people. They truly believe that they can do it but if they can't? Oh well! We tried. And they also took people's money with them.
In the end it has to be a "let the buyer beware" proposition.
I have to say that every crowd funded project that I've ever backed has come to fruition. Every one. Except the two mmorpg's I backed.
Apparently crowd funding isn't the way to go for larger projects like anti-gravity or MMORPGS.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
So I have to ask: At what point would you consider it to be too far? Not the limit at which you wouldn't be willing to pay, but at what point should nobody being participating because it became obscene.
Paying 10K to view some alpha screenshot? Paying 10K to view some concept notes scribbled on a cocktail napkin? Paying 10K for a vial of the developer's blood?
At what point would you get squeamish and simply refuse to buy the product because they're pigs?
Well, that's the thing, there is no "limit" where a person shouldn't give money if they believe in the project.
I'm not really talking about it from the perspective of the doner. I'm wondering about the character of the developer.
This is an imperfect example but consider price gouging after a hurricane.
One could argue that if the gas station attendant is willing to sell for $15 a gallon and the customer is willing to pay $15 a gallon then there is nothing wrong with the transaction; however, this actually is considered criminal behavior. (price gouging)
Now yes, I know there are differences - the people contributing aren't in a desperate situation and so on. I'm not suggesting the makers of AoC are price gouging on a criminal level.
But what the example establishes is there is a point, even in a voluntary transaction and no matter how much the buyer believes in the transaction, where the seller can set a price that erodes one's estimation of the seller's character. When prices are unreasonable it is natural to doubt the character of the seller.
I don't know what the price point is for you; however, for me $750 with a "3 month subscription" perk is insulting. I can appreciate that you don't find it insulting but I most certainly do because I personally would be embarrassed to charge that for alpha anything.
Is $750 without any perks something you are willing to give for a project you believe in?
If not, quadruple your financial resources or until money is no object. At all. Then is it?
I'm not talking about it from the perspective of the doner, as I already stated.
Another example would be Ford dealerships marking up trucks by $10K during the pandemic. Some people still thought the truck was worth the price and bought them. In our affluent society, you'd be hard pressed to put a price tag on something, that with proper marketing, wouldn't sell. See NFTs. See Andy Worhol. See Star Citizen.
Now in the case of the trucks, even though everything was legal - and they sold - the 10K mark-up told me a little bit about the dealer. I made notes and I won't do business with them.
I'm sure they're terrified.
So when Pantheon has a 10K lifetime sub available (50 years), IMHO, it gives me insight into the character of the developer. Obviously, that isn't conclusive insight, and it may even be unfair. All I really need to know is they signaled early that they're not people I care to do business with - the buy in is too high...and in my opinion, hoggish.
So I have to ask: At what point would you consider it to be too far? Not the limit at which you wouldn't be willing to pay, but at what point should nobody being participating because it became obscene.
Paying 10K to view some alpha screenshot? Paying 10K to view some concept notes scribbled on a cocktail napkin? Paying 10K for a vial of the developer's blood?
At what point would you get squeamish and simply refuse to buy the product because they're pigs?
Well, that's the thing, there is no "limit" where a person shouldn't give money if they believe in the project.
I'm not really talking about it from the perspective of the doner. I'm wondering about the character of the developer.
This is an imperfect example but consider price gouging after a hurricane.
One could argue that if the gas station attendant is willing to sell for $15 a gallon and the customer is willing to pay $15 a gallon then there is nothing wrong with the transaction; however, this actually is considered criminal behavior. (price gouging)
Now yes, I know there are differences - the people contributing aren't in a desperate situation and so on. I'm not suggesting the makers of AoC are price gouging on a criminal level.
But what the example establishes is there is a point, even in a voluntary transaction and no matter how much the buyer believes in the transaction, where the seller can set a price that erodes one's estimation of the seller's character. When prices are unreasonable it is natural to doubt the character of the seller.
I don't know what the price point is for you; however, for me $750 with a "3 month subscription" perk is insulting. I can appreciate that you don't find it insulting but I most certainly do because I personally would be embarrassed to charge that for alpha anything.
Is $750 without any perks something you are willing to give for a project you believe in?
If not, quadruple your financial resources or until money is no object. At all. Then is it?
I'm not talking about it from the perspective of the doner, as I already stated.
Another example would be Ford dealerships marking up trucks by $10K during the pandemic. Some people still thought the truck was worth the price and bought them. In our affluent society, you'd be hard pressed to put a price tag on something, that with proper marketing, wouldn't sell. See NFTs. See Andy Worhol. See Star Citizen.
Now in the case of the trucks, even though everything was legal - and they sold - the 10K mark-up told me a little bit about the dealer. I made notes and I won't do business with them.
I'm sure they're terrified.
So when Pantheon has a 10K lifetime sub available (50 years), IMHO, it gives me insight into the character of the developer. Obviously, that isn't conclusive insight, and it may even be unfair. All I really need to know is they signaled early that they're not people I care to do business with - the buy in is too high...and in my opinion, hoggish.
I don't pretend to speak for the character of the developer. Should they not ask for 10k donations?
I think they should. I know they do as far as actual investors.
My issue would be asking for 10k and giving life time and THEN if the game launches revoking that.
Developers are complicated as they are artists as well as businesses. In the case of Pantheon they need money to finish the project so I think they can ask for anything they want.
They aren't offering to sacrifice a baby for 10k Just give people 50 years of real play. Now, you and I know that the game will most likely not last 50 years but if it did then you're covered.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
750.00 to get into pre-alpha, they can kiss my ass.
This is starting to look like some star citizen bullshit to me
SCION OF BLACK ROSE PLEDGE
$750 or $250/month for 3 months
...
3 months game subscription
...
This looks like the lowest pre-alpha pledge tier.
For $750 I get a whole 3 month subscription? These guys are permanently off my list.
At some point this gets insulting.
I think you are misunderstanding, you can pay 750 for this package or 250 a month for 3 months. This will get you full access to pre-alpha tests (when they schedule them) and all subsequent tests until the game launches (as some estimates on here 4-5 years from now) So if they permanently activate the testing servers you can play 24/7 for entirety of the testing process. Once it launches then you will receive 3 months of gametime subscription before you have to start paying.
So my thoughts are; 1) at $15USD a month that is about a 4 year subscription (if game was live) so if they test for the next 4 years+ before releasing. Win win.
2) There is nothing (MMORPG persistent world, not isometric, etc.) on the market or releasing anytime soon that I want to play besides Ashes of Creation or Pantheon. If either of these release a permanent testing server, I will most likely fork over the cash.
3)I have spent much more for 'entertainment purposes' and received much less in return. Also, I can afford it so not really and issue of cost.
750 dollar alpha stuff exist because people are willing to pay that sort of money for the access. It just wasn't an option back in the old days and I'm fine that option exists for people that really really really want to play it.
i would never pay that sort of money but that's because i won't play games without the polish.
Iselin: And the next person who says "but it's a business, they need to make money" can just go fuck yourself.
750 dollar alpha stuff exist because people are willing to pay that sort of money for the access. It just wasn't an option back in the old days and I'm fine that option exists for people that really really really want to play it.
i would never pay that sort of money but that's because i won't play games without the polish.
But would you, if money was no object, donate to a game you thought could be good but required funding?
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
So my thoughts are; 1) at $15USD a month that is about a 4 year subscription (if game was live) so if they test for the next 4 years+ before releasing. Win win.
Its not the same, this game is in pre-alpha, games at this level of garbage is generally free. I doubt this game will even be in a half way playable level at release, at this point it is absolute trash which is why they wont even let alpha player play.
You can try to justify this however you want. If you want to give them $750 dollars, go ahead. But this is not the same as a game that actually good and COMPLETE. There are plenty of games in a better state that cost much less.
If someone has low standards they can justify anything. There are so many games out there free that would love you to play their trash.
So my thoughts are; 1) at $15USD a month that is about a 4 year subscription (if game was live) so if they test for the next 4 years+ before releasing. Win win.
Its not the same, this game is in pre-alpha, games at this level of garbage is generally free. I doubt this game will even be in a half way playable level at release, at this point it is absolute trash which is why they wont even let alpha player play.
You can try to justify this however you want. If you want to give them $750 dollars, go ahead. But this is not the same as a game that actually good and COMPLETE. There are plenty of games in a better state that cost much less.
If someone has low standards they can justify anything. There are so many games out there free that would love you to play their trash.
Yeah I'm not buying the low standards thing. I have friends who think if you play video games you have low standards. So do you have low standards? You probably, like myself, don't look at it that way.
All this discussion about paying 750 for alpha is not taking account you are donating money. If you donate large amounts of money should you not get some sort of perk? As I've already pointed out, other organizations do give perks for donating money.
They want large donors and they are offering perks for large donations. If people believe the game will launch and will be something they'd like and they have no issue giving such large donations then I don't see any issues.
There are people who pay $1000 for a Patriots ticket. Or a Taylor Swift concert.
Not really seeing why that's more worthy than donating to development of a game.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
So my thoughts are; 1) at $15USD a month that is about a 4 year subscription (if game was live) so if they test for the next 4 years+ before releasing. Win win.
Its not the same, this game is in pre-alpha, games at this level of garbage is generally free. I doubt this game will even be in a half way playable level at release, at this point it is absolute trash which is why they wont even let alpha player play.
You can try to justify this however you want. If you want to give them $750 dollars, go ahead. But this is not the same as a game that actually good and COMPLETE. There are plenty of games in a better state that cost much less.
If someone has low standards they can justify anything. There are so many games out there free that would love you to play their trash.
Yeah I'm not buying the low standards thing. I have friends who think if you play video games you have low standards. So do you have low standards? You probably, like myself, don't look at it that way.
All this discussion about paying 750 for alpha is not taking account you are donating money. If you donate large amounts of money should you not get some sort of perk? As I've already pointed out, other organizations do give perks for donating money.
They want large donors and they are offering perks for large donations. If people believe the game will launch and will be something they'd like and they have no issue giving such large donations then I don't see any issues.
There are people who pay $1000 for a Patriots ticket. Or a Taylor Swift concert.
Not really seeing why that's more worthy than donating to development of a game.
Your arguement kinda flops with this idea that nothing has comparative value. Hotdog on the street corner normally $3 why not pay $5000 for support, can of soda - hey donation $10k, girl scout cookies hey donate $5k.
If you want to compare the donation value, then do that. But when a donation nets someone something like a building name, or some reputation gain or some future contract or your kid a guaranteed spot in the college, or a future job, that is considered value otherwise they wouldnt even need to put that stipulation in. There is definitely some value there otherwise they wouldnt need to come up with "package teirs".
I remember when I was pretty much forced to pay for 10k per plate tickets at a charity ball for my company or else I wouldnt be considered a preferred vendor.
If you truely were just donating for the cause, then why do you need something of value in return? Why not just donate the money.
They are comparing the value of this prealpha to a finished game with 4 years sub. No its not the same as a regular finished product.
So my thoughts are; 1) at $15USD a month that is about a 4 year subscription (if game was live) so if they test for the next 4 years+ before releasing. Win win.
Its not the same, this game is in pre-alpha, games at this level of garbage is generally free. I doubt this game will even be in a half way playable level at release, at this point it is absolute trash which is why they wont even let alpha player play.
You can try to justify this however you want. If you want to give them $750 dollars, go ahead. But this is not the same as a game that actually good and COMPLETE. There are plenty of games in a better state that cost much less.
If someone has low standards they can justify anything. There are so many games out there free that would love you to play their trash.
Yeah I'm not buying the low standards thing. I have friends who think if you play video games you have low standards. So do you have low standards? You probably, like myself, don't look at it that way.
All this discussion about paying 750 for alpha is not taking account you are donating money. If you donate large amounts of money should you not get some sort of perk? As I've already pointed out, other organizations do give perks for donating money.
They want large donors and they are offering perks for large donations. If people believe the game will launch and will be something they'd like and they have no issue giving such large donations then I don't see any issues.
There are people who pay $1000 for a Patriots ticket. Or a Taylor Swift concert.
Not really seeing why that's more worthy than donating to development of a game.
Your arguement kinda flops with this idea that nothing has comparative value. Hotdog on the street corner normally $3 why not pay $5000 for support, can of soda - hey donation $10k, girl scout cookies hey donate $5k.
If you want to compare the donation value, then do that. But when a donation nets someone something like a building name, or some reputation gain or some future contract or your kid a guaranteed spot in the college, or a future job, that is considered value otherwise they wouldnt even need to put that stipulation in. There is definitely some value there otherwise they wouldnt need to come up with "package teirs".
I remember when I was pretty much forced to pay for 10k per plate tickets at a charity ball for my company or else I wouldnt be considered a preferred vendor.
If you truely were just donating for the cause, then why do you need something of value in return? Why not just donate the money.
They are comparing the value of this prealpha to a finished game with 4 years sub. No its not the same as a regular finished product.
I already used the donation card and showed that if I give the Boston Symphony $3000 dollars I get to be part of a special concert and dinner with a musician from the Symphony.
Is that REALLY worth $3000 dollars?
"I remember when I was pretty much forced to pay for 10k per plate
tickets at a charity ball for my company or else I wouldnt be considered
a preferred vendor."
Ha! That must have been a while ago. I don't think that would fly now.
"If you truely were just donating for the cause, then why do you need
something of value in return? Why not just donate the money."
I believe people do. But that doesn't mean that organizations don't use perks as an incentive.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
So my thoughts are; 1) at $15USD a month that is about a 4 year subscription (if game was live) so if they test for the next 4 years+ before releasing. Win win.
Its not the same, this game is in pre-alpha, games at this level of garbage is generally free. I doubt this game will even be in a half way playable level at release, at this point it is absolute trash which is why they wont even let alpha player play.
You can try to justify this however you want. If you want to give them $750 dollars, go ahead. But this is not the same as a game that actually good and COMPLETE. There are plenty of games in a better state that cost much less.
If someone has low standards they can justify anything. There are so many games out there free that would love you to play their trash.
Yeah I'm not buying the low standards thing. I have friends who think if you play video games you have low standards. So do you have low standards? You probably, like myself, don't look at it that way.
All this discussion about paying 750 for alpha is not taking account you are donating money. If you donate large amounts of money should you not get some sort of perk? As I've already pointed out, other organizations do give perks for donating money.
They want large donors and they are offering perks for large donations. If people believe the game will launch and will be something they'd like and they have no issue giving such large donations then I don't see any issues.
There are people who pay $1000 for a Patriots ticket. Or a Taylor Swift concert.
Not really seeing why that's more worthy than donating to development of a game.
Your arguement kinda flops with this idea that nothing has comparative value. Hotdog on the street corner normally $3 why not pay $5000 for support, can of soda - hey donation $10k, girl scout cookies hey donate $5k.
If you want to compare the donation value, then do that. But when a donation nets someone something like a building name, or some reputation gain or some future contract or your kid a guaranteed spot in the college, or a future job, that is considered value otherwise they wouldnt even need to put that stipulation in. There is definitely some value there otherwise they wouldnt need to come up with "package teirs".
I remember when I was pretty much forced to pay for 10k per plate tickets at a charity ball for my company or else I wouldnt be considered a preferred vendor.
If you truely were just donating for the cause, then why do you need something of value in return? Why not just donate the money.
They are comparing the value of this prealpha to a finished game with 4 years sub. No its not the same as a regular finished product.
Few things Brainy, never said or even consider the pre-alpha to be a finished game. Just stating the monetary value based on a 15$usd sub, if the servers are permanently up for the duration of the testing process. Also, my post was more about the state of MMORPG's sure there are plenty of polished (turds) free games out there but I would rather roll the dice on a pre-alpha then waste my time with those. Finally, I compare it more to the example of paying $1000 or more for a Patriots game, than donating to an established street vendor?, not even following the logic on this one, I am considering paying because I am taking the off chance that I will be entertained, not to necessarily support the game. However, I 100% understand why someone would find this crazy, and am definitely not trying to claim this is a value at all, just explaining my reasoning. Happy gaming my friend!
So my thoughts are; 1) at $15USD a month that is about a 4 year subscription (if game was live) so if they test for the next 4 years+ before releasing. Win win.
Its not the same, this game is in pre-alpha, games at this level of garbage is generally free. I doubt this game will even be in a half way playable level at release, at this point it is absolute trash which is why they wont even let alpha player play.
You can try to justify this however you want. If you want to give them $750 dollars, go ahead. But this is not the same as a game that actually good and COMPLETE. There are plenty of games in a better state that cost much less.
If someone has low standards they can justify anything. There are so many games out there free that would love you to play their trash.
Yeah I'm not buying the low standards thing. I have friends who think if you play video games you have low standards. So do you have low standards? You probably, like myself, don't look at it that way.
All this discussion about paying 750 for alpha is not taking account you are donating money. If you donate large amounts of money should you not get some sort of perk? As I've already pointed out, other organizations do give perks for donating money.
They want large donors and they are offering perks for large donations. If people believe the game will launch and will be something they'd like and they have no issue giving such large donations then I don't see any issues.
There are people who pay $1000 for a Patriots ticket. Or a Taylor Swift concert.
Not really seeing why that's more worthy than donating to development of a game.
Your arguement kinda flops with this idea that nothing has comparative value. Hotdog on the street corner normally $3 why not pay $5000 for support, can of soda - hey donation $10k, girl scout cookies hey donate $5k.
If you want to compare the donation value, then do that. But when a donation nets someone something like a building name, or some reputation gain or some future contract or your kid a guaranteed spot in the college, or a future job, that is considered value otherwise they wouldnt even need to put that stipulation in. There is definitely some value there otherwise they wouldnt need to come up with "package teirs".
I remember when I was pretty much forced to pay for 10k per plate tickets at a charity ball for my company or else I wouldnt be considered a preferred vendor.
If you truely were just donating for the cause, then why do you need something of value in return? Why not just donate the money.
They are comparing the value of this prealpha to a finished game with 4 years sub. No its not the same as a regular finished product.
Few things Brainy, never said or even consider the pre-alpha to be a finished game. Just stating the monetary value based on a 15$usd sub, if the servers are permanently up for the duration of the testing process. Also, my post was more about the state of MMORPG's sure there are plenty of polished (turds) free games out there but I would rather roll the dice on a pre-alpha then waste my time with those. Finally, I compare it more to the example of paying $1000 or more for a Patriots game, than donating to an established street vendor?, not even following the logic on this one, I am considering paying because I am taking the off chance that I will be entertained, not to necessarily support the game. However, I 100% understand why someone would find this crazy, and am definitely not trying to claim this is a value at all, just explaining my reasoning. Happy gaming my friend!
Yeah I get this, thanks for the honest answer. Yep pretty much all the people doing kickstarters (including myself) for MMO's were looking at it the same way.
At the time I put money into pantheon, I actually thought at the time it was a low risk venture designed to put them over the top and get to play a game I would probably enjoy.
That was many years ago LOL, I have wisened up since then on these schemes expecially noticing that pretty much every one either "never releases" or is just utter trash. Pantheon keeps saying it will go into Alpha by the end of the year for many years now, I think they have stopped saying that now so who knows when it will go to alpha let alone release. If a game cant even move to alpha 6 years after they said they would, it must really be in a bad state.
When a game is run by incompetent people, it will infect everything. I have lost hope for this game at this point.
I already used the donation card and showed that if I give the Boston Symphony $3000 dollars I get to be part of a special concert and dinner with a musician from the Symphony.
Is that REALLY worth $3000 dollars?
It could be, especially when people do this for status. People spend similar money without a donation on dinners and concerts.
If this was really just some altruistic donation there wouldnt be a need for a return on investment. Its not like you going to San Franciso and eating a burger watching some homeless guy give a concert.
There is a value, and they are charging for it. The price can be measured against other similiar events. Its not like they are pulling numbers out of thin air here.
I am not saying nobody ever gives money out of kindness without some return. But this idea that all these gamers are just giving money away out of kindness as a donation is LOL to me. This is a calculated investment with an expectation of some return, when people dont get that, they are pissed off. If this game or any other of these Kickstarters took away those benefits the money would dry up immediately.
I already used the donation card and showed that if I give the Boston Symphony $3000 dollars I get to be part of a special concert and dinner with a musician from the Symphony.
Is that REALLY worth $3000 dollars?
It could be, especially when people do this for status. People spend similar money without a donation on dinners and concerts.
If this was really just some altruistic donation there wouldnt be a need for a return on investment. Its not like you going to San Franciso and eating a burger watching some homeless guy give a concert.
There is a value, and they are charging for it. The price can be measured against other similiar events. Its not like they are pulling numbers out of thin air here.
I am not saying nobody ever gives money out of kindness without some return. But this idea that all these gamers are just giving money away out of kindness as a donation is LOL to me. This is a calculated investment with an expectation of some return, when people dont get that, they are pissed off. If this game or any other of these Kickstarters took away those benefits the money would dry up immediately.
Well, I do think that people who are giving larger amounts of money do expect some return.
I mean, I gave $50 to Camelot Unchained all those years ago because people were bitching about not having a proper successor to Dark Age of Camelot and I thought I'd help out the project. If it was good I'd play it but I couldn't really care less about it.
So yeah, people give large amounts of money and they are getting these perks. It's pretty cut and dried. And for some they get the notoriety of being a big investor. Nothing really to see here and people can move along.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Comments
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
But we've come a long way in 20 years where a completed product was what earned money, and even at that you'd get complaints if the cost for the completed product crossed the $50 mark.
Compare with paying $750 to test an incomplete product that may never launch.
I think we understand each other. That said, Rise of the Fallen has crossed over into immoral territory - and if not that, then hoggish at the very least. They've taken it much too far.
So I have to ask: At what point would you consider it to be too far? Not the limit at which you wouldn't be willing to pay, but at what point should nobody being participating because it became obscene.
Paying 10K to view some alpha screenshot?
Paying 10K to view some concept notes scribbled on a cocktail napkin?
Paying 10K for a vial of the developer's blood?
At what point would you get squeamish and simply refuse to buy the product because they're pigs?
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
I am not a big fan of alpha access for big money, however personally I think games should be able to charge whatever they want.
I am actually waiting to see if there will be an AMAZING game that is just beyond my budget to afford. If anything the problem is paying big money for bad games.
In pretty much every sector higher price items usually give you better quality. For some reason MMO's have capped themselves and there isnt increase quality = more money equation.
It really seems weird in this industry where most of the time alot of money = a really bad game, and a really good game is relatively cheap. Upsidedown world in gaming.
One reason for this is probably that a really good game will get so many users that they can afford to lower the price because of volume. Where on the other side a bad game will have such a small audience they need to convince a few whales with "god tier access" to support the game.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
If you make a pitch that says you can do it for 1,000,000 and in 3-4 years... and you are now at 10,000,000 and 10 years and still in some kind of pre-alpha... yeah I think that's either total dishonestly ot total incompetence. Now I'm not calling out Pantheon directly because they obviously had a huge disruption for Brad's passing. But I think each case needs to be looked at individually and there should be no blanket absolutions nor condemnations on all Crowdfunding projects. Yes, it's called a donation, but the question is always whether the pitch was honest or not. And I for one am 100 percent confident that many, if not MOST of these projects are known by the developers to be setting false expectations.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
I'm wondering about the character of the developer.
This is an imperfect example but consider price gouging after a hurricane.
One could argue that if the gas station attendant is willing to sell for $15 a gallon and the customer is willing to pay $15 a gallon then there is nothing wrong with the transaction; however, this actually is considered criminal behavior. (price gouging)
Now yes, I know there are differences - the people contributing aren't in a desperate situation and so on. I'm not suggesting the makers of AoC are price gouging on a criminal level.
But what the example establishes is there is a point, even in a voluntary transaction and no matter how much the buyer believes in the transaction, where the seller can set a price that erodes one's estimation of the seller's character. When prices are unreasonable it is natural to doubt the character of the seller.
I don't know what the price point is for you; however, for me $750 with a "3 month subscription" perk is insulting. I can appreciate that you don't find it insulting but I most certainly do because I personally would be embarrassed to charge that for alpha anything.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Another example would be Ford dealerships marking up trucks by $10K during the pandemic. Some people still thought the truck was worth the price and bought them. In our affluent society, you'd be hard pressed to put a price tag on something, that with proper marketing, wouldn't sell. See NFTs. See Andy Worhol. See Star Citizen.
Now in the case of the trucks, even though everything was legal - and they sold - the 10K mark-up told me a little bit about the dealer. I made notes and I won't do business with them.
I'm sure they're terrified.
So when Pantheon has a 10K lifetime sub available (50 years), IMHO, it gives me insight into the character of the developer. Obviously, that isn't conclusive insight, and it may even be unfair. All I really need to know is they signaled early that they're not people I care to do business with - the buy in is too high...and in my opinion, hoggish.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
So my thoughts are;
1) at $15USD a month that is about a 4 year subscription (if game was live) so if they test for the next 4 years+ before releasing. Win win.
2) There is nothing (MMORPG persistent world, not isometric, etc.) on the market or releasing anytime soon that I want to play besides Ashes of Creation or Pantheon. If either of these release a permanent testing server, I will most likely fork over the cash.
3)I have spent much more for 'entertainment purposes' and received much less in return. Also, I can afford it so not really and issue of cost.
i would never pay that sort of money but that's because i won't play games without the polish.
But would you, if money was no object, donate to a game you thought could be good but required funding?
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
You can try to justify this however you want. If you want to give them $750 dollars, go ahead. But this is not the same as a game that actually good and COMPLETE. There are plenty of games in a better state that cost much less.
If someone has low standards they can justify anything. There are so many games out there free that would love you to play their trash.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
If you want to compare the donation value, then do that. But when a donation nets someone something like a building name, or some reputation gain or some future contract or your kid a guaranteed spot in the college, or a future job, that is considered value otherwise they wouldnt even need to put that stipulation in. There is definitely some value there otherwise they wouldnt need to come up with "package teirs".
I remember when I was pretty much forced to pay for 10k per plate tickets at a charity ball for my company or else I wouldnt be considered a preferred vendor.
If you truely were just donating for the cause, then why do you need something of value in return? Why not just donate the money.
They are comparing the value of this prealpha to a finished game with 4 years sub. No its not the same as a regular finished product.
I believe people do. But that doesn't mean that organizations don't use perks as an incentive.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
At the time I put money into pantheon, I actually thought at the time it was a low risk venture designed to put them over the top and get to play a game I would probably enjoy.
That was many years ago LOL, I have wisened up since then on these schemes expecially noticing that pretty much every one either "never releases" or is just utter trash. Pantheon keeps saying it will go into Alpha by the end of the year for many years now, I think they have stopped saying that now so who knows when it will go to alpha let alone release. If a game cant even move to alpha 6 years after they said they would, it must really be in a bad state.
When a game is run by incompetent people, it will infect everything. I have lost hope for this game at this point.
It could be, especially when people do this for status. People spend similar money without a donation on dinners and concerts.
If this was really just some altruistic donation there wouldnt be a need for a return on investment. Its not like you going to San Franciso and eating a burger watching some homeless guy give a concert.
There is a value, and they are charging for it. The price can be measured against other similiar events. Its not like they are pulling numbers out of thin air here.
I am not saying nobody ever gives money out of kindness without some return. But this idea that all these gamers are just giving money away out of kindness as a donation is LOL to me. This is a calculated investment with an expectation of some return, when people dont get that, they are pissed off. If this game or any other of these Kickstarters took away those benefits the money would dry up immediately.
I mean, I gave $50 to Camelot Unchained all those years ago because people were bitching about not having a proper successor to Dark Age of Camelot and I thought I'd help out the project. If it was good I'd play it but I couldn't really care less about it.
So yeah, people give large amounts of money and they are getting these perks. It's pretty cut and dried. And for some they get the notoriety of being a big investor. Nothing really to see here and people can move along.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo