How long should in-game backer perks remain exclusive?

[Pandamaniac]

I personally am bothered that PE is including an in-game achievement, item, and in-game pet that nobody is able to obtain now that the Kickstarter is over. I understand that these items were an incentive to back the game, but locking people out of content perpetually because they didn't back the game early enough smacks of the pre-order exclusives that make waiting for a review to buy a game preclude the gamer from ever playing the "full" game. 

I think that a few months after release, the in-game benefits should be made available to everyone who purchased the game. BG2 did this with the pre-order shopkeepers, and I don't see how it would negatively effect anyone who backed the game from the beginning to allow them to eventually have the pet, the achievement, and the item. 

What I really want to know, however, is what do you guys/gals think about this?

(Full disclosure: I backed far more than necessary to get all the in-game items).

 

[Elerond]

Indefinitely if all of the backers don't unanimously decide that Obsidian don't need to keep their promises, because kickstarter backing is considered as binding contract.

[Pipyui]

Quoting myself here.  Relevant, though not perfectly:

 

...

Though I'm not against it myself, I think that providing these goodies to late backers who have had the privilege of being further informed about the project breaks the unwritten agreement of, and undermines, [the kickstarter] model.  Backers only fund these early promises in exchange for extra benefits.  If there are no particular incentives to backing earlier rather than later, people will back later, and the project will never get funded in the first place.

 

I think this puts it in the realm of somewhere between >6 months and perpetually.

[Labadal]

I know the pet is only.a cosmetic reward.

[Jarmo]

Almost nobody experiences the full game anyway.

Visiting every location, talking every dialogue option with every character, peeping in every barrel.

No big deal.

 

If something was promised as a backer only reward, then immediately offering it to everybody else kind of rubs the wrong way.

No big deal, but something I'd rather not see happening.

 

Though. If in... say 8 years from now, when eternity trilogy is finished, there is an anniversary complete collection package,

I'd be just fine and even expect such to include everything, including the backer exclusive rewards.

[SupidSeep]

The achievement should be for early backers only, no exceptions IMAO.

 

As for in-game items/pets, let them be at least exclusive for an appropriate time frame - minimum 6 months though I would like to see it remain so for at least a full calendar year.  Keeping it exclusive for more than a couple of years is debatable.

[Malekith]

The exclusive bits are all completelly cosmetic and useless so there is no problem having them perpetually exclusive. Why should a non-backer care to have an ingame backer amulet that offers no bonuses and in the item description reads "Thanks for backing us"? Or have their character have the Backer perk that does absolutelly nothing?

These things will mean something only to people who trusted Obsidian with their money and made this game a reality. For the others it would be completelly superfluous and even immersion breaking.

[Ulquiorra]

How long ?

 

FOR ETERNITY !!!!

[marelooke]

Indefinitely if all of the backers don't unanimously decide that Obsidian don't need to keep their promises, because kickstarter backing is considered as binding contract.

 

Hmm, I backed after the KS was over (because I only heard of it that late... ), during the "extension period", wouldn't that be a legally dubious situation as well then?

[Pandamaniac]

I personally believe, after listening to the responses on the topic, that a year would probably make a good period of exclusivity for the in-game content, (never on the achievement if it is not referenced in game). As to Elerond's argument that it's a binding contract and thus must be perpetual, I don't think so. Fallout: New Vegas had four "exclusive" gear packs for pre-ordering, which were made available (for a nominal 0.99) slightly under a year after release.

Rewarding backers is the reason this content is in the game, but at some point it has served it's purpose and should be made available to everyone.

 

[rjshae]

I personally am bothered that PE is including an in-game achievement, item, and in-game pet that nobody is able to obtain now that the Kickstarter is over.

 

Some perspective might help you. Try taking a long walk.

[Elerond]

I personally believe, after listening to the responses on the topic, that a year would probably make a good period of exclusivity for the in-game content, (never on the achievement if it is not referenced in game). As to Elerond's argument that it's a binding contract and thus must be perpetual, I don't think so. Fallout: New Vegas had four "exclusive" gear packs for pre-ordering, which were made available (for a nominal 0.99) slightly under a year after release.

 

Rewarding backers is the reason this content is in the game, but at some point it has served it's purpose and should be made available to everyone.

 

 

 

FO:NV exclusive packs were timed exclusives from start. So after that time limit was over bethesda was free to publish them to other platforms.

 

But such time limit is not metioned in kickstarter page, so obsidian has made binding contract with backers that it will not give those items/etc. to other people and so if they want to do that any way they must get agreement from all parties whom they made that contract (which is all the backers).  Although that contract gives them right to pay money back to backer and doing so they get rid of that contract between them.

 

I personally don't care in one way or other, but I don't want to see any legal hassle surrounding PE because of cosmetic items that don't have any effect in game. So I would say that this matter is somewhat "don't cry over spilt milk", as Obsidian decided to do backer only stuff and we just have to live with it.

[Elerond]

 

Indefinitely if all of the backers don't unanimously decide that Obsidian don't need to keep their promises, because kickstarter backing is considered as binding contract.

 

Hmm, I backed after the KS was over (because I only heard of it that late... ), during the "extension period", wouldn't that be a legally dubious situation as well then?

 

I think not as it was same fundraising, but only paypal option's period was exteded because of technical matters.

[Pandamaniac]

 

I personally believe, after listening to the responses on the topic, that a year would probably make a good period of exclusivity for the in-game content, (never on the achievement if it is not referenced in game). As to Elerond's argument that it's a binding contract and thus must be perpetual, I don't think so. Fallout: New Vegas had four "exclusive" gear packs for pre-ordering, which were made available (for a nominal 0.99) slightly under a year after release.

 

Rewarding backers is the reason this content is in the game, but at some point it has served it's purpose and should be made available to everyone.

 

 

 

FO:NV exclusive packs were timed exclusives from start. So after that time limit was over bethesda was free to publish them to other platforms.

 

But such time limit is not metioned in kickstarter page, so obsidian has made binding contract with backers that it will not give those items/etc. to other people and so if they want to do that any way they must get agreement from all parties whom they made that contract (which is all the backers).  Although that contract gives them right to pay money back to backer and doing so they get rid of that contract between them.

 

I personally don't care in one way or other, but I don't want to see any legal hassle surrounding PE because of cosmetic items that don't have any effect in game. So I would say that this matter is somewhat "don't cry over spilt milk", as Obsidian decided to do backer only stuff and we just have to live with it.

 

Could you please find any reference to them explicitly arguing it was a "timed" exclusive in any of the advertising? It was a timed exclusive, but the argumentI am making is that exclusive can mean timed exclusive, and you are arguing that it isn't a valid interpretation. So if you have any proof of where they clarified that it was a timed exclusive before release then I can't be right, and this entire topic is pointless. I'm not trying to be difficult, I just want to know if this is even in the realm of possibility (which I believe it is, although IANAL).

[Elerond]

 

 

I personally believe, after listening to the responses on the topic, that a year would probably make a good period of exclusivity for the in-game content, (never on the achievement if it is not referenced in game). As to Elerond's argument that it's a binding contract and thus must be perpetual, I don't think so. Fallout: New Vegas had four "exclusive" gear packs for pre-ordering, which were made available (for a nominal 0.99) slightly under a year after release.

 

Rewarding backers is the reason this content is in the game, but at some point it has served it's purpose and should be made available to everyone.

 

 

 

FO:NV exclusive packs were timed exclusives from start. So after that time limit was over bethesda was free to publish them to other platforms.

 

But such time limit is not metioned in kickstarter page, so obsidian has made binding contract with backers that it will not give those items/etc. to other people and so if they want to do that any way they must get agreement from all parties whom they made that contract (which is all the backers).  Although that contract gives them right to pay money back to backer and doing so they get rid of that contract between them.

 

I personally don't care in one way or other, but I don't want to see any legal hassle surrounding PE because of cosmetic items that don't have any effect in game. So I would say that this matter is somewhat "don't cry over spilt milk", as Obsidian decided to do backer only stuff and we just have to live with it.

 

Could you please find any reference to them explicitly arguing it was a "timed" exclusive in any of the advertising? It was a timed exclusive, but the argumentI am making is that exclusive can mean timed exclusive, and you are arguing that it isn't a valid interpretation. So if you have any proof of where they clarified that it was a timed exclusive before release then I can't be right, and this entire topic is pointless. I'm not trying to be difficult, I just want to know if this is even in the realm of possibility (which I believe it is, although IANAL).

http://www.joystiq.com/2010/10/18/first-fallout-new-vegas-dlc-exclusive-to-xbox-360/

 

Bethesda's contract was with Microsoft and not with public so they didn't have any obligation disclose that contract was only timed, but they usually are in contracts between large companies, as companies don't want their content to be tied on other companies whims indefinitely as it is usually bad for their bussiness.

[Lephys]

Bethesda's contract was with Microsoft and not with public so they didn't have any obligation disclose that contract was only timed, but they usually are in contracts between large companies, as companies don't want their content to be tied on other companies whims indefinitely as it is usually bad for their bussiness.

That makes sense. Kinda like how they do the whole "THIS TITLE IS EXCLUSIVE TO THIS CONSOLE, AND WE WILL NEVER, EVER MAKE IT FOR ANY OTHER CONSOLE!"

 

Then, 2 years down the road, "ANNOUNCING THAT ONCE-EXCLUSIVE GAME FOR THIS OTHER CONSOLE/PLATFORM! 8D!"

[Pandamaniac]

But the point remains that they advertised them as exclusive, then made them available to other consoles. This actually supports the argument that I was trying to make, that calling something "exclusive" doesn't mean you can't make it available more broadly later on. But the example I was trying to use was not their DLC, but the pre-order bonuses (which is kind of what the backer bonuses are to PE), which were advertised as exclusive, and then made available to everyone else less than a year later. 

This isn't to say that Obsidian must release this content to the general public after a period of time, only that they can choose to do so.

[LadyCrimson]

Though. If in... say 8 years from now, when eternity trilogy is finished, there is an anniversary complete collection package,

I'd be just fine and even expect such to include everything, including the backer exclusive rewards.

This.

This isn't to say that Obsidian must release this content to the general public after a period of time, only that they can choose to do so.

Blizzard could choose at some point to make all those exclusive "pets" in WoW available to everyone, too, but I doubt that'll ever happen. Or countless other examples of silly little content/rewards/preorder/contest type exclusives from all genres.

 

Whether Obsidian chooses to do so remains to be seen. I personally don't really care, since they're not gameplay affecting. Would I have liked a mini-Diablo pet in WoW if I'd known about it in time? Maybe, they're cute/funny. Do I care that I can't get one? No. But if you're lucky, Obsidian may make such available in some future package deal.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

How long ?

 

FOR ETERNITY !!!!

[Elerond]

But the point remains that they advertised them as exclusive, then made them available to other consoles. This actually supports the argument that I was trying to make, that calling something "exclusive" doesn't mean you can't make it available more broadly later on. But the example I was trying to use was not their DLC, but the pre-order bonuses (which is kind of what the backer bonuses are to PE), which were advertised as exclusive, and then made available to everyone else less than a year later. 

 

This isn't to say that Obsidian must release this content to the general public after a period of time, only that they can choose to do so.

 

But this is not same actually as they have made contract with every backer that they will have exclusive stuff, which is different thing that advertise that we will give excusive stuff for certain console owners or those who have pre-ordered stuff. As misleading advertaisment is cheap business practise, but contract break is always cause for legal actions if 'hurt' party so wants.

[Pandamaniac]

 

Though. If in... say 8 years from now, when eternity trilogy is finished, there is an anniversary complete collection package,

I'd be just fine and even expect such to include everything, including the backer exclusive rewards.

This.

>This isn't to say that Obsidian must release this content to the general public after a period of time, only that they can choose to do so.

Blizzard could choose at some point to make all those exclusive "pets" in WoW available to everyone, too, but I doubt that'll ever happen. Or countless other examples of silly little content/rewards/preorder/contest type exclusives from all genres.

 

Whether Obsidian chooses to do so remains to be seen. I personally don't really care, since they're not gameplay affecting. Would I have liked a mini-Diablo pet in WoW if I'd known about it in time? Maybe, they're cute/funny. Do I care that I can't get one? No. But if you're lucky, Obsidian may make such available in some future package deal.

 

 

I actually would be upset if blizzard chose to do that in WoW, because the situations are different. In the case of WoW, making those pets non-exclusive would actually harm those who have the exclusive pets, since it is a multiplayer game and they benefit from the exclusivity. Give everyone a Spectral Tiger, and you have just cost anyone with an unredeemed spectral tiger code $600. 

 

PE is different. As a singleplayer game, I don't lose anything from someone else being able to eventually gain access to the pet and the item. And Elerond, the point you are missing is that there is no guarantee of a perpetual exclusive, only that it will be exclusive. And in the video game industry, as we all know, exclusive usually means timed exclusive. Unless they stipulated that they would never re-release the exclusive content, then you would be having an uphill argument to prove that the exclusivity was perpetual. And even if you proved it, since PE is singleplayer you would not be able to prove any injury or financial loss, meaning you would only be able to obtain nominal damages. (IANAL)

[Sensuki]

"For what the regiment did in Normandy ..."

[Elerond]

 

PE is different. As a singleplayer game, I don't lose anything from someone else being able to eventually gain access to the pet and the item. And Elerond, the point you are missing is that there is no guarantee of a perpetual exclusive, only that it will be exclusive. And in the video game industry, as we all know, exclusive usually means timed exclusive. Unless they stipulated that they would never re-release the exclusive content, then you would be having an uphill argument to prove that the exclusivity was perpetual. And even if you proved it, since PE is singleplayer you would not be able to prove any injury or financial loss, meaning you would only be able to obtain nominal damages. (IANAL)

 

Yes there is gurantee of a perpetual exclusive if that is what contract says (if there is writen contract as it is in case of PE), promises in advertaisments can be broken in some extent, but legal contract are binding to what is writen them (if it is not against law, when contract is null and void at least for that part of it).

 

Pledging in KS project is not typical pre-order, but legally binding funding contract where you give your money to company to make some product and they will give you what they promised in their reward which you have choosen. If KS project creator don't want to fullfil that contract they can withdraw from it by returning your money to you or otherwise you have right to sue them from breaking contract (what is something that people can't do with normal pre-orders, if product is not what promised).  And in contracts are tedious for that reason that all what is writen them is bindig by how it is writen, so if you want time-excusive you need to metion that in contract, if you only write excusive then it will be read as perpetually exclusive contract as there is not metioned when exclusiveness ceased to exist in the contract.

[Pandamaniac]

 

 

PE is different. As a singleplayer game, I don't lose anything from someone else being able to eventually gain access to the pet and the item. And Elerond, the point you are missing is that there is no guarantee of a perpetual exclusive, only that it will be exclusive. And in the video game industry, as we all know, exclusive usually means timed exclusive. Unless they stipulated that they would never re-release the exclusive content, then you would be having an uphill argument to prove that the exclusivity was perpetual. And even if you proved it, since PE is singleplayer you would not be able to prove any injury or financial loss, meaning you would only be able to obtain nominal damages. (IANAL)

 

Yes there is gurantee of a perpetual exclusive if that is what contract says (if there is writen contract as it is in case of PE), promises in advertaisments can be broken in some extent, but legal contract are binding to what is writen them (if it is not against law, when contract is null and void at least for that part of it).

 

Pledging in KS project is not typical pre-order, but legally binding funding contract where you give your money to company to make some product and they will give you what they promised in their reward which you have choosen. If KS project creator don't want to fullfil that contract they can withdraw from it by returning your money to you or otherwise you have right to sue them from breaking contract (what is something that people can't do with normal pre-orders, if product is not what promised).  And in contracts are tedious for that reason that all what is writen them is bindig by how it is writen, so if you want time-excusive you need to metion that in contract, if you only write excusive then it will be read as perpetually exclusive contract as there is not metioned when exclusiveness ceased to exist in the contract.

 

Well, I learn something new every day. 

 

Since this question/topic is now moot, since they can't ever make them available to the public, I guess the mods can go ahead and close it now.

[LadyCrimson]

I actually would be upset if blizzard chose to do that in WoW, because the situations are different. In the case of WoW, making those pets non-exclusive would actually harm those who have the exclusive pets, since it is a multiplayer game and they benefit from the exclusivity. Give everyone a Spectral Tiger, and you have just cost anyone with an unredeemed spectral tiger code $600.

What? I'm not talking about gameplay pets (like the Hunter's pets) or mounts, I'm talking about the silly useless decorative pets that follow you around doing nothing but look cute. How does a player benefit from their exclusivity even in a MP game, outside of "bragging" rights?

 

The Diablo "pet" in WoW was a Collector's Edition perk.