http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2016-01-05-shenmue-3-paypal-backers-denied-kickstarter-exclusive-rewards
C U C K E D
U
C
K
E
D
>>322897686
I would withdraw my support
I hope for this thing to crash and burn.
What sort of backwards company calls their own supporters "slacker backers", the fuck is that? Do they genuinely think they're entitled to this money?
>inb4 another 300+ post thread in which no one actually reads the article
FOR CLARIFICATION; if you backed the game on kickstarter, you're getting your rewards. If you backed on paypal these rewards were NEVER offered.
>>322899669
Upvoted for visibility :^)
>>322899669
No but honestly how hebrew do you have to be to deny people features in a single player game? To go as far as to poll the unaffected backers and go against the results of said poll?
they were "originally promised" but it seems this never actually went into effect, so there's really nothing to complain about.
>>322900301
they're not really denying anyone anything. back on kickstarter and you get the exclusive kickstarter awards. back through paypal and you don't, becasue they were exclusive to kickstarter. it's pretty simple.
>>322899669
You're not the one reading the article. Only certain rewards on Paypal will not be offered.
> It's worth noting that those who pledged on PayPal are still getting the rewards for whatever tier they paid for. It's merely the Kickstarter-exclusive rewards like getting your face put in the game, or receiving a voice message from Ryo voice-actor Corey Marshall staying in character, that aren't going to be offered to Slacker Backers.
But yes, everyone's already jumping the assumption bandwagon anyway.
>>322900660
Shit like the 39-tied digital wallpapers, paypal backers paying the same amount won't get this, in my book that's called denying people stuff
>>322901889
you can't deny someone something when it is not offered in the first place though.
>>322902243
If I only found out about the game today, the option of getting the papes is denied to me, for no reason other than an arbitrary restriction.
When did timed exclusives become an OK thing to do?
>>322902575
>arbitrary restriction.
kickstarter exclusive rewards being always exclusive to kickstarter is hardly arbitrary, and the game has been successfully backed. what do you mean by timed exclusive?
>>322900741
What a travesty
>>322902863
The kick starter options are unattainable now that the campaign is closed (that's the very definition of a timed exclusive), yet they're still asking for more backing.
It is an arbitrary restriction, I don't care whether it's exclusive to kickstarter or not, the matter of fact is that my dolla doesn't get me what someone else's did, for no reason other than a pointless label.
Honestly why did they go through kickstarter anyway, they could have easily raised that money off of the E3 hype alone via a dedicated website, and wouldn't have to shell out over half a million to those scammers.
>>322903335
if by timed you mean from day 1 until the end of the campaign, of course.
>yet they're still asking for more backing.
from paypal, which is not kickstarter, which will obviously not have kickstarter exclusive awards. it's not arbitrary at all.
> I don't care whether it's exclusive to kickstarter or not
that's a shame, since that's exactly what we're discussing here. you were too late, shit happens. don't act like you're entitled to these awards.
>>322900741
Is this a fucking joke? Is this seriously what everyone has had their panties in a bunch over? I mean yeah they really should have let them do these anyway but still this is so blown out of proportions.
>>322903827
If I pay good money for a product, there is no reason I shouldn't get the same treatment that someone else did, especially when it's a digital reward, this isn't a scarcity market. Nothing to do with entitlement, I'm paying the same money I expect the same treatment.
You're forgetting who's the customer here, and who provides the service, we're doing them a favor by backing early, on an allegedly already fully funded game, not the other way around.
>>322903964
>Is this seriously what everyone has had their panties in a bunch over?
Pretty much. The mere fact that this is all related to Kickstarter doesn't help it at all. I get that it is a dick move to deny some people certain rewards, but the rewards that got taken down are stuff in the thousands, and aren't actually obtainable objects like that phone call or simply getting an appearance in the game. However, a refund should be in order, or at least return back a certain amount of money until it meets a lowered goal entry in order to receive the rewards with proper payment.
>>322904809
It was clearly marked that all the top reward slots were taken. People weren't doing it out of ignorance. At least not that specific flavor of ignorance.
>>322904598
>If I pay good money for a product, there is no reason I shouldn't get the same treatment that someone else did
they paid through kickstarter = they get the exclusive kickstarter reward. you paid through paypal = you did not get the kickstarter exclusive award. i mean it's that simple.
>I'm paying the same money I expect the same treatment.
why expect the same treatment when it is clearly not the same at all, as they've clearly informed? they were exclusive to a service you did not use, and which is at this point not available. my guess is that they didn't want to go beyond their backing time on kickstarter, since that would basically be a lie to their backers.
>we're doing them a favor by backing early
actually you're backing late, which is the point. if you were early you could have gotten the exclusive rewards through the kickstarter.
