I don't mind there being multiple (three) different paths, but:
1. Paths need better clarification, especially in game, especially this early in the game, and before any decision is being made.
2. Especially this early in a game, divergence between the paths should be minimal, and this includes divergence in "fun scenes". Either give each a cookie, or have them share the cookie. People will feel more inclined to try a path if there's a cookie, especially this early in development.
3. If there's anything that's a turn down to players, then it's underdeveloped paths. Releasing an update for one path but not the other, gives just that impression to players. I think it's a bad practice when a developer focusses on the different paths in alternative releases. People do not like waiting for 2-3 months to continue their game, even if there are several updates to a game in that timeframe, simply because their path doesn't get any update. At best, a developer will get donators who turn their donation status off and on, depending on whether their path is being updated. Which gets tiresome after a while, meaning they just won't bother reactivating at some point. In the long term, it will be better to update all paths at once, once every 2-3 months instead. Slightly lower some of the donation tiers if you feel like it, since more people will stay signed up because they know next update will include their path, and if it's small change, they won't even mind paying for a month without a release.