- Dec 1, 2019
- 8,464
- 14,350
It surely isn't a wrong position to take to want something back for your money. I take it on a daily basis. And I don't do Patreon (or Subscribestar) at all, albeit for different reasons.While I agree about the guy being uninformed, we all know that this is how Patreon or Subscribestar work on paper/theoretically, but in reality most people "supporting" a dev do see it as a quid pro quo, they pay, they get the update earlier or exclusively.
You can spin it how you want it, but that is how people really see patreon.
And it's really not a wrong position to take, to want to get something for your money.
However, I will still argue that "coming in on Patreon and expecting a quid pro quo" is the supporter's fault alone. Sure, it is an unusual model, but if a dev wants to try for something unusual to finance him, what else should he do? In no contract do I have the right to one-sidedly change the contents just because "other contracts do it that way" or similar. If somebody doesn't want to give me stuff for my money, that's on them and they won't get my money then. But I can't go "now I gave you money and can decide what you have to do". You can accept or decline an offer or try to negotiate beforehand, but you cannot accept and then say "but your part must look completely different now". That would actually be "spinning it" in my book.