Support NeoGAF

[BGBW]

There was an episode of Community where six members of the study group voted on whether or not to kick a seventh member out of the group.

They didn't say that a 4-to-2 majority would be enough to kick him out, they said that it must be unanimous. They'll only throw him out if it's 6-to-0 in favor of throwing him out. If even one group member said that he deserved to stay, then the rest would have to go back to tolerating him, because that one person's opinion matters, and the group didn't want to take anything away from anyone.

That's not a failure of democracy, it's just something that should have been explained before or after the poll.

In that instance that one person would be losing out on something. In this instance the original kickstarters don't lose anything.

 

[Wallach]

I'll just quickly call out anyone who voted no to the poll as being really selfish.

It looks terrible to deny your fellow fans the same cool rewards just because of your selfishness.

Shit's pathetic honestly.

 

[MaulerX]

The majority is saying "I'm fine either way" (not counting the massive majority that didn't even bother to say that they don't care). They could just as easily be lumped in with the "No, this plan is useless" side (which is to say, they shouldn't be included with either side).

People signed up and put their money down and helped make Shenmue 3 possible, on the promise of exclusive trinkets. 4700 people would like to abolish that "exclusive" part (in the hopes of attracting new supporters), while 4000 people think that detail was important. It seems ridiculous to shame the latter group for that when this is what the Shenmue 3 Kickstarter offered those people. You can't sell things to people and then ask for them back, and then call them selfish when they don't willfully consent to that.

People should respect those that voted to keep the agreement the way it was. Awesome Japan should probably have done a better job explaining that their sacrifice (don't just take these things for granted) could lead to more supporters and a better game. That tiny bit of info could have changed a lot of those 4000 minds. Awesome Japan should also have better explained the goals of the poll before it started. Awesome Japan should also have better explained their response to the poll after it concluded ("51% yay, 49% nay, motion denied!" is naturally very confusing).

What? They weren't asked to give anything back. They were asked if other people could have the chance at getting what they themselves were able to get. If it were to attract more backers why not? At this point voting no would indicate you're more worried about your self than the game you're backing. But that's just my opinion.

 

[Cheerilee]

In that instance that one person would be losing out on something. In this instance the original kickstarters don't lose anything.

They wouldn't lose anything material, but they would lose "exclusivity" on some of their trinkets, a thing which was promised to them when they signed up for the Kickstarter.

4,700 people said "Exclusivity is trash, get rid of it."
6,500-60,000 people said "What are you all going on about? I don't care."
4,000 people said "I care about exclusivity."

Since this change would take something away from all of the Kickstarter backers, it needed to be unanimous (or close to it). Simple majority was not enough. And your opinion that the promised thing has no value is just an opinion. That's why there was a poll. The are almost as many people who say that it does have value (and obviously it does, otherwise why was it ever offered?).

 

[El-Suave]

Since this change would take something away from all of the Kickstarter backers, it needed to be unanimous (or close to it). Simple majority was not enough. And your opinion that the promised thing has no value is just an opinion. That's why there was a poll. The are almost as many people who say that it does have value (and obviously it does, otherwise why was it ever offered?).

The requirements of the vote are just some arbitrary bs the people who run the campaign came up with though. Another unfortunate decision in a series of those. How many people who voted it doesn't matter to them either way would have voted "yes" if the importance of the clarity of the vote would have been more clear? I voted yes but I didn't know the stipulations of the poll, because it's quite unusual to have them on such a meaningless topic - this isn't exactly the constitution they were about to change. And the items would still have been exclusive once the Paypal option ended. The campaign for once deserved the bad press they have been getting on this, and I don't even care about inaccurate reporting in this case. Either Awesome Japan or the backers look stupid depending on how you report it and both outcomes make the project look bad - so it doesn't even matter in my opinion.

 

[Cheerilee]

The requirements of the vote are just some arbitrary bs the people who run the campaign came up with though.

It's arbitrary, but people seemed to be baffled by the concept of a unanimous poll.

Another unfortunate decision in a series of those. How many people who voted it doesn't matter to them either way would have voted "yes" if the importance of the clarity of the vote would have been more clear?

No argument there. On top of being arbitrary, I don't think Awesome Japan communicated very well.

Although I would say that it would be better to try and convince the opposed side to "give up" their exclusivity, rather than trying to sway the undecided and beat the opposition with greater force.

 

[R_thanatos]

Physical goodies like the capsule toys are one thing. But exclusive stuff thats gonna amount to Day 1 Disc-Locked Content? Not cool. Ideally everyone should get the exact same complete game package. But peeps who wanna an can afford to should be able to get that stuff regardless of which "retailer" they "order" the game from.

And that's not how things works in the current market.
It's cool to think of an "ideal" setting , but we're clearely not in one.

It's selfish, sorry. I don't get why so many gamers have this mentality. I guess I'm just part of the older gaming generation that doesn't care.

You're essentially getting a preorder bonus. Paypal backers are also preordering. Anyone who buys retail, like myself, will miss out because we didn't back during the preorder time. to deny someone a simple ingame bonus who is giving money to a project that is only going to help achieve finishing it and making it bigger in scale is ridiculous. I still have yet to see anyone making a valid argument as to why they should be denied such. This is not a physical item. If it were a statue or say a Figma (which would be amazing), I would userstand. But it's a digital item.

The poll was tacky and so is the way this whole thing is being run.

Why does the fact that it's physical or not matter.
What matters is that it was presented as an exclusive/limited/special thing and it would not be afterwards.

Sure you'll miss out , but that's how it is.. The main dish is still there, "untouched" still cooking but on rails

The requirements of the vote are just some arbitrary bs the people who run the campaign came up with though. Another unfortunate decision in a series of those. How many people who voted it doesn't matter to them either way would have voted "yes" if the importance of the clarity of the vote would have been more clear? I voted yes but I didn't know the stipulations of the poll, because it's quite unusual to have them on such a meaningless topic - this isn't exactly the constitution they were about to change. And the items would still have been exclusive once the Paypal option ended. The campaign for once deserved the bad press they have been getting on this, and I don't even care about inaccurate reporting in this case. Either Awesome Japan or the backers look stupid depending on how you report it and both outcomes make the project look bad - so it doesn't even matter in my opinion.

Perfect exemple of anger making people speak nonsense.
How am i not surprised ?

 

[AtomskEater]

I can understand that "exclusive to Kickstarter" would press people to try to buy during the kickstarter period. If you had to delay another purchase or something in order to get in on it, finding out later the same exclusive rewards were available after the campaign might be disappointing and leave some backers with negative feelings. So in that respect I can see where some people are coming from (even if I personally don't agree). But if they were going to look at a minority of responses and go with those, they might as well have just said "no" when the question first came up. Just feels like they wanted an excuse to say no, but the poll didn't quite turn out as they wanted/expected (and it was pretty close when all's said and done). A misstep, but the poorly researched articles that have been written about it are both sad and funny. It's a shame this campaign gets spat on at every opportunity.

Why? Why should the paypal backers get more rewards than those who backed the original kickstarter? Can you articulate a bit more so I can understand why you would wish for a project that many people who have done nothing to you care enough about to donate historically large amounts of income to crash and burn?

It's not more rewards, it's the same (actually still less because there are likely some sold-out or limited tiers that would not have been included either way).

Seems kinda silly to expect them to shell out all that extra money when most people voted for not caring one way or the other, and only ~600 votes separated yes and no. Technically they chose the majority vote and made the decision themselves, after all.

It's my understanding a lot of the rewards that would have been added would be in-game things, thus something that they could produce without a particularly large amount of money outside of generating codes and such, maybe. I could stand to be corrected on this, though.