I think scam is generally the wrong word, and people know it so they try to wiggle in and like to pretend they're smart when they pivot their own empty counter-argument on bad word choice(
cough @
adamrekkler cough).
The games are actual products with real teams and real development. They are just exploiting their fandom and hype maliciously and by intent through the means in which they are going through production.
Looking at both Wild Life and Star Citizen, there isn't a single case where I personally felt exploited in anyway. These games offered something I thought was interesting and so I play them.
I've said it a billion times already now, but I don't care if it's your money to do whatever with or if you somehow think you're a genius because you spent $300+ 'supporting' a game that's going to be $10 if it ever even releases that has spent 3 times as long in development and earned 10 times the budget of indie masterpieces like Terraria, Stardew Valley, Lethal League, Hollow Knight, all with a larger team in most cases, just to release at best a mediocre game. You're still being exploited and used like the sheep you are, and there's a reason why people intervene in unhealthy stockholme syndrome toxic relationships like this.
This is something you see especially with Star Citizen and surprisingly quite a bit here in this Wild Life thread. People that like to make victims out of a game's supporters. I'll never understand this take or why it's hard to accept the fact that people just enjoy the game without having been preyed on by developers. If you think (x) game is mediocre that's cool, but that does not mean people are somehow mentally stunted to where they can't use their better judgement to see whether developers are trying to take advantage of them, they simply like the game. Being an armchair Doctor/Psychologist diagnosing people with x,y,z won't change that no matter how strongly you feel on the subject.
Also annoys me that people act as if these games wouldn't exist without them (the sheer arrogance...) when 99% of the games in existence today, ero or otherwise, exist without exploitive crowdfunding.
Following the game and liking the idea or whatever incomplete chunklet is there is utterly irrelevant. 90% of the reason why it's even a problem is BECAUSE developers are holding something interesting ransom and forcing you to pay monthly if you don't want to see the puppy drown.
What do you think is being held ransom by developers of WL and Star Citizen?
Just to make it clear: Even if games like Star Citizen release and even if they are good, they will never, EVER, justify the exploitive things they've done to get there nor the people they leave behind as victims who aren't even socially intelligence enough to understand they're victims.
THAT is why people hate them.
This kind of take reads to me as, "I'm right and even if I'm wrong, I'm still right". Regardless of what a game does, people that view games with this mentality will always find issue with something, nothing will satisfy them. It reminds me of the situation with Cyberpunk. Everyone knows Cyberpunk had a rocky launch, and despite the game improving over the years you still have people swearing it's a horrible game and making callbacks to its launch to justify the hate. Nothing the developers do will ever make these people happy. It was interesting seeing how the overall outlook on Cyberpunk changed around the time Phantom Liberty dropped and all the comparisons between it and Starfield started happening as people began playing it themselves and discovering Cyberpunk is actually a good game rather than believing opinions from people that will never be happy.
I believe Squadron 42 and Star Citizen will be the same case.
You mentioned how you hate how some people believe they're geniuses for supporting (x), but have you considered the reverse with people taking annoyance by those acting like they're smarter for choosing
not to support? The idea that people who willing choose to support these games are victims is already demeaning and downplaying their intelligence. It's hypocritical. I do think there are issues with SC and definitely some things that can be seen as exploitive - the ship paints for example, although you can buy them in-game with in-game currency, they have shown off a more player controlled system years ago, but instead we still get sold basic ship paints for stupid prices - these kinds of things are called out repeatedly by the same community you're painting as victims. The same community that's being painted as victims are the same people to call out CIG and flood the forums with nothing but criticism when something iffy happens.
People just enjoy these games, people want to see them succeed. That doesn't make them blind to issues, that doesn't mean they have stockholm syndrome, it doesn't mean they suffer from sunk cost fallacy, it doesn't mean any of the things people try to prescribe. That
could be the case for some people, but not the majority of the playerbases. Be realistic.
