What is the actual problem? Someone feels less valued than people who paid more? Like, in a perfect world everyone is equally valued, but there's deadlines and you need to focus on one aspect at a time and that might not be the content other people like. Not a single update would satisfy EVERYONE. MingTzu You're 'valued' less than people who paid more than you and valued more than people who paid less. They're running a business, bigger clients get more say, that's the real world.
Others Goodbye Eternity [v0.11.0] [RNGeusEX]
You’re mixing two separate concepts and treating them as if they were the same. Purchasing the game and supporting ongoing development are not equivalent actions. Buying the game gives permanent access to the product and all future updates. That part is equal for everyone, and nothing about it depends on Patreon.
Crowdfunding is different by design. People who fund ongoing development month after month are not buying extra content; they are financing its creation. Their feedback is weighted more heavily only in the context of development priorities, because they are the ones enabling that extra development to exist in the first place. That’s how every crowdfunded project works, whether on Patreon, Kickstarter, or anywhere else.
This is not “preferential treatment” regarding the game itself. Everyone receives the same content, the same updates, at the same time, regardless of how much they paid. No one is downgraded, and no one loses access to anything.
What differs is the influence on the roadmap. Not the product.
There is no contradiction there. Two forms of support, two forms of involvement, one identical product for all.
itch.io or GoG is where you buy the game. Patreon is where you participate in its ongoing development. Confusing these two roles is the source of the misunderstanding.
StonR
Newbie
- May 3, 2025
- 31
- 43
- 37
Put it like this instead. Bob buys the game on GOG, he plays it a bit and enjoys it. Then he moves on to play other things. Perhaps he keeps track on on this game once in a while, but he's not really that devoted. Then there's Billy, now Billy is super devoted. He loves the game and what it's gonna become. Billy is excited to see more and he wants to help to make sure it reaches 1.0. Billy decides to support the game on Patreon every single month for 10, 15, 20, 25 bucks or whatever it is. Billy constantly provides feedback and opinions on the game and all it's aspects.
Now isn't it more important to listen to Billy over Bob? Billy puts himself out there. He makes an effort. Now I'm not saying that Bob isn't, but Bob exists out there somewhere. But all of a sudden, Emma discovers the game. But she isn't economically stable, so she just buys the game on GOG. Then she finds out that there is a Discord server. Now Emma is very vocal, she likes to write a ton. So Emma does that. She goes into the #suggestions channel and points out all the things she wanna see and have changed. RNG sees that and replies, quite optimistically. Now all of a sudden Emma is part of the community that supports the game. Is her voice less valuable than a Patreon supporter? Yes, absolutely. She just came there, while Billy has supported the game for several months on Patreon. He's seen the changes and additions over time. But all this doesn't mean that Emma is being ignored at all. It just means that there's an hierarchy, which Patreon probably has too since I assume there's different tiers.
I've never said those two are equivalent actions. Quite the opposite. I've only objected to your attempt to try to present different treatments as the same based on the treatments being in part the same.
I simply disagree. Extra ability to influence "roadmap, not the product" is de facto influence on the final shape of the product, when the roadmap in question determines what the complete product is like. Trying to present these as if there's no connection between the two is simply disingenuous, because i don't believe you aren't intelligent enough to recognize this connection yourself.
While "everyone receives the same content" a subset of the customers has more influence over the actual nature of that content. People who paid less are paid less attention to in return, and their ability to determine what game they get is relatively limited. My only real point was, i think you're much better off simply acknowledging that different tiers of your customers do get different treatment and leave it at that. Because they are also smart enough to recognize it, and trying to gaslight them into thinking otherwise is only going to produce extra resentment on their part.
Last edited: