the majority of the money comes from people that wouldn't care if the game is funded but are persuaded for an unfinished version (again, for almost $100) of it?

No, the majority of the money comes from people who support lower tiers, who wouldn't be terribly disappointed if the game was not funded. Between these people and the existing fanbase, there are people who can be convinced to move up to a higher tier for various rewards or to reach appealing stretch goals.

You claimed people would pay more for a kickstarter than the value of the game and rewards would be later (before release) to see it funded. Some people will do that, but that is not where most of the money comes from, so that is not "reason enough".

And you avoided my point that having alpha access cheaper after a kickstarter devalues that as a reward, and would mean less people pledge, and those who do would be less likely to choose higher tiers. Some of those people who stick with a low tier that wouldn't pay for alpha access, would wait for a cheap pre-order deal if alpha access was included, and even some fans might start looking at the before and after price. If it becomes commonplace, devaluing kickstarter rewards is self defeating in the long term.


Because the game was already founded?

How is that relevant?

Does any product or service ever drop in price just because the company made back their initial investment, etc?


let me turn that question back at you, what exactly would be the justification for charging ANYTHING for an alpha?

Because it was part of kickstarter tier rewards, and it takes time, effort and money to organize an alpha. Larian also isn't a small developer with no in-house QA and isn't trying to sell enough copies to get their game greenlit.


An alpha make sense as an incentive to get a higher tier (and again, only appeals to people that care) or an add-on in kickstarter because the nature of it...

But then suddenly when the kickstarter is over it has no value, and the developer can sell alpha/beta access for cheaper or give it away, and nobody that backed should be annoyed at all? And knowing in advance that some or all of the kickstarter rewards would be cheaper if they waited, everyone would still pledge?



The problem boils down to if kickstarter is a store where you can buy and sell stuff or a site to Crowdfund projects

No, it doesn't. It boils down to a developer placing a certain value on something during a kickstarter, and then before delivering that, setting another value for everyone else who didn't back the kickstarter (you know, when they most needed the money, and got from backers who they should at least pretend to be grateful to and not treat like suckers who paid for something worthless just to help them out).


Spoilers: is not a real problem, is the second one

Condescension is not a great debate tactic.