Backer Exclusive Content?

XombieMike I was thinking a link (or even the patchfile) could be sent via a backers email rather than something physical but realistically i dont think either way would happen, besides thats not the real issue here.  The real question is what makes the $60 tier kickstarter version of the game different to any retail version of the game (Standard or Deluxe, excluding anything physical like booklets)? If you can get the same content by just buying a copy then I think this is going to make a lot of people unhappy.    Reading between the lines I have a hunch that this will happen and it's more a question of whether to implement it this way: backer-exclusive content available in a "deluxe" edition, you can pretty much expect that deluxe edition to still cost 60$, but not have the other goodies. Or this way: releasing the backer exclusive content to everyone (via deluxe edition or not) but backers get special skins/cosmetics for those items.
  Which suggests we're not gonna get any unique content in our version of the game if we backed at the $60 level it's a real shame as i think this promise is one of the reasons the kickstarter was so successful. 

If we're getting a copy thats going to be the same as at least some retail versions of the game then perhaps some extra skins/outfits for Miriam wouldn't hurt, one's that aren't available to the general public. That would soften the blow more than a booklet and soundtrack, some in-game unique content to distinguish it from a store bought copy.

The problem with having it "in the game," so to speak, is that modders/hackers will be able access it without a backer code anyways if they can crack the game itself, isn't that the case? ;_; Personally, I like Mike's suggestion--offer a small physical goodie to backers to "make up" for not having the IGA boss be exclusive. You can't hack physical goods, after all XD

Anyone interested should probably direct your eyeballs over here if you havent already

Personally physical stuff doesn't really interest me, i've got enough physical stuff, (tons of vintage cartridges SNES and Sega and the original hardware to play it on, 100's of PS1 and PS2 games + hardware and peripherals) so i dont really need anything Physical and i've mentioned physical items tend to be a liability in my house due to little kids thats why i backed for digital copy because little buggers scratch disks!

They don't have to block off content on the disk "on-disk-dlc" style like the bad old days, theres no reason why they couldn't just patch stuff into the appropriate versions and make sure patches only work with certain versions (so it's harder to bootleg). If they want to sell the "backer exclusive" content  as a Deluxe Edition or whatever then i understand it even if i'm not ok with it. I can see that doing things as promised would effectively be losing them money (as i've said above) and they've worked hard on things so sure they can profit from it (even if it is at our expense so to speak). Sure i'll accept digital content as a compromise, this is me compromising:- 

Mar 9, 2018 10:04:52 GMT m0nkf15h said:

If we can't have the Boss and Weapon as unique content i'd still argue we should get some kind of unique content to distinguish between a retail version of the game and the Backer Edition. Doesn't have to be something big, extra costumes or something, anything really even if it's delivered a long way down the line. Just something to acknowledge that we supported this from the beginning something more than a "strategy booklet".


If they can do a digital art-book or novel or something they can also do (actually) backer exclusive DLC as i've mentioned in previous posts, as both a thankyou to us and an apology for this, so we do actually get some unique content that isn't in a retail copy of the game.

How about Angel's suggestion upthread of backer-exclusive skins/cosmetics? People might want to bootleg a special boss and weapon, but most would accept a backer-only costume or graphical perk to be acceptable and not too reminiscent of the unpleasant practices of "Big Publishers." A lot of games do this, and I think it would work for Bloodstained since there will be online play. Like, you could have a little sign over your head that said "Backer # (XXXX)" everyone would see in online challenge mode or whatnot. I think that might be an even nicer treat than an extra boss. While with the extra boss, only you would be the one fighting it (so to speak), but with a backer cosmetic, the whole world would know you were an early backer

gunlord500 said:

How about Angel's suggestion upthread of backer-exclusive skins/cosmetics? People might want to bootleg a special boss and weapon, but most would accept a backer-only costume or graphical perk to be acceptable and not too reminiscent of the unpleasant practices of "Big Publishers." A lot of games do this, and I think it would work for Bloodstained since there will be online play. Like, you could have a little sign over your head that said "Backer # (XXXX)" everyone would see in online challenge mode or whatnot. I think that might be an even nicer treat than an extra boss. While with the extra boss, only you would be the one fighting it (so to speak), but with a backer cosmetic, the whole world would know you were an early backer

When this was discussed by Angel before it was in relation to reskinning only the boss and the swordwhip, and not really what you're talking about here ^^,  but yes i think some skins for Miriam that others don't have access to would be one way for this issue to be a lot less "thorny" and would go a long way to keeping disgruntled people happy or at the very least less unhappy, we'd still be getting something that makes our edition of the game a unique experience (and thats the big deal for me personally, I backed that tier because i didn't want an "off-the-shelf" experience - i'm sure i'm not alone in that logic either). 

Angel-Corlux 's Statement on the issue is quite interesting and i think warrants closer examination:

Unfortunately, any course of action I choose will make some people unhappy

Not neccessarily so (see above, we're just hurt that we've been lied to - there are ways to make it up to us)

the 'x' amount of $60 and above backers are happy and have no complaints [if promises are kept]


Pretty sure the majority of backers backed at this level or above and were incentivised to do so not only on the strength of IGA's previous work but also by the promise of some exclusive content not available to non-backers. IGA needed our investment to prove to other investors that this kind of game is still viable in a modern gaming environment, so it's quite possible that had this promise not been made you may not even be working on Bloodstained right now.
 
a vastly larger amount of fans, everyone from the moment we close slacker backer to the far future, will not be able to enjoy the content and therefore be upset

Yes I appreciate this but from the word go this was considered a thank you to us for showing faith in IGA and his ideas when the mainstream videogames industry would not.  So it could be argued that there's no point getting upset about it now because if they REALLY wanted to enjoy the content they would have backed when they were given the chance to, the campaign was pretty high profile so ignorance is no excuse.  The only reason how upset they are matters now is because they represent considerable future sales. This is fine I get that you're in buisness to make profit and you've worked hard to make the content and you own it so sell it.  But the message this really gives is "Whine about not having something that  you are not entitled to have for long enough and if there's profit in it you just might get it."

some people who would not pirate the game, will now have a "justification" to do so in their mind

I don't think this is really true; anyone who's going to pirate the game because it doesn't have 1 item and 1 monster in it was going to pirate the game anyway, this is in no way denying them the "full experience".  Pirates will pirate whatever and require no "justification" for doing so, if anything i'd say including content not really intended for wider consumption in a general release will give them greater reason to pirate the software because it will be easier to find a cracked version of the game with the sought after content in.  In my experience though piracy is in decline, because as long as stuff is reasonably priced it's so much easier to get hold of legit copies these days. Pirated software is often a ball-ache to get running for various reason so most people wont bother unless they were inclined to pirate in the first place.

Iga's brand is just as important as the Bloodstained brand, and the two are inexorably linked. Not changing anything would mean that Iga's brand would be impacted by less than 60k players worldwide officially being able to experience the boss vs. million+ players.


I agree both these brands are important and both are important for the success of the Bloodstained project, i disagree with the assertion that IGA's brand would be impacted by people not being able to directly experience the Superboss.  IGA's brand stands alone whether he features in the game itself or not, i'm sure i dont need to point you in the direction of his portfolio regarding Castlevania titles, he doesn't feature as an entity in any of these games but all of them stand above the Castlevainia titles he has not worked on, because of what he brings to the titles not because they have his face in. That's what his brand is.  The whole title should be a work of art whether the Boss is in the game or not.  Its the quality of things that will grow the brand not the existence (or otherwise) of one monster. Even if this content got a limited release as originally intended it would still grow the brand of both IGA & Bloodstained, thats what Youtube let's plays are for.  But i suspect this isn't the real issue and higher-up's are chewing your ass to chase the bottom line.

Well more feedback is more valuable, perhaps others have suggestions that might be workable in this unfortunate situation that Angel hasn't thought of so i'm going to invite further discussion in a new thread as we've not heard many different voices on the subject. I'd hate for this to slip under people's radar if they have a valuable opinion to share but i'm pretty much done talking about it personally. It's the least I can do as i think it affects the majority of people who use these boards in some way.

Just think about it: what about the people, some days after this game's release or even some years in the future, that sees this game and decides to buy it? And then he realizes, he won't be able to access some features by any means... Do you guys want people to be unable to have just as much fun as you do? Why want a part of the content to be impossible to get for those who didn 't back? I mean, as long as they pay as much as you do, I don't see what anyone is losing from this.

It's like wanting to feel special (receiving a special thanks from IGA), after all, a lot of you backed bloodstained in it's time of need. I can understand this point of view (but certainly don't agree with it), but when I think a part of the game will be pretty much dead for everyone that didn't back, the decision is clear to me. Though I haven't backed, I don't consider having a version of the game that others don't AND can't have to be an important thing, I would rather everyone be able to enjoy it, even a year from now, and that's how I hope it happens.

However, I do agree that they shouldn't have called it backer exclusive if they planned on releasing to others, this much I can get behind, and I think they should have been transparent about what they planned on doing from the start. Though I think changing from backer exclusive to accessible to everyone (for the right price) is the right thing to do (generally speaking), I also think people should do as they say they are going to (I don't know how it's worded though, so maybe they didn't actually mean that)... It's too bad that some of the backers aren't ok with the change.

I haven't backed yet, I'm hoping that when the game comes out on steam, the price will be adjusted regionally.


Yes it is true, I would probably pirate it if I couldn't enjoy the full experience otherwise (even if I had bought the imcomplete version, not sure if I would have with these terms), but I plan to buy it if I can, once it comes to steam. By not allowing buyers to have the full experience, pirates would have access to a better version of the game compared to those that didn't buy it, and I don't think a lot of buyers would be ok with that. Also, there are a lot of completionists out there.

I get annoyed seeing this sort of attitude of yours, wanting to be one of the selected people that can enjoy the full game, and nevermind those who can't. If 1 monster and 1 item is not that important to make someone pirate it, why are you wanting it so much to be backer exclusive? After all, it's just 1 monster and 1 item... Don't you see that if it's important to you, it could be important to future players as well?