It does seem odd for people who provide no equivalent good in an exchange, nor have a legally binding guarantee, forcing the trading party to provide whatever was agreed upon, to feel entitled to receive any good.
If Mackenzie was fake, good for BD, it seemed to allow him to distance himself from a very hostile and unappreciative crowd, get back into his flow and recover.
If he chooses to pore over this exhibition game, so he may.
It's his work, he obviously has a vision of its development, and the uniqueness of it is a very nice thing.
Even his Patreons entered into a state of willing financial support.
If they deem the services he provides not worthy of the financial contribution they are making, they can unsubscribe.
Though, it most be said, we don't know how much he works, and measuring time of work is difficult anyhow, even in 9-5 professions, as concentration wavers, how much more in creative industries.
There are creators of similar products who have preconditioned access on a purchase.
We all seem to be, to differing degrees, invested in the continuation of this game, so why can't you people make what appears to be the entirely rational and strategic choice (based on the apparent impact on the creator*) of being supportive, or at the very least constructively critical?
*Making him unwilling to engage with the people to which he markets his product, most of which receive it free of charge, curtesy of his good-will, is concerning, and seems to hamper productivity.
One needs not boundless sympathy for one's compatriots, only so much a mind as to ascertain one's own best interest.