Point conceded.
But I wouldn't have been happy to be one of the backers : Giving the money and the feedback, might as well make my dream game myself. (Edit: I'm ok with feedback it's great, but not at the earliest stage)

*Where did I put my "Heroes of Fallout and Tactics" folder ?*

This is why I didn't like the questions asked in the polls GOG gave... almost all of my answers were polar opposites pending details not provided in the questions.

Selling Alphas/betas are a strict no-go from me. I will, however, offer my services for a fee if a company wants an honest tester. Never, will I pay for this "opportunity"... that is quite backwards.

However, selling a full game and then offering alpha/beta as an incentive is not only agreeable, its a nice perk. A good example here is of Grim Dawn. Established developer. Detailed roadmap. Full game near completion. Cost of full game covered the Alpha/beta as bonuses. I would have liked to see GOG as a distributor here, rather than as a Steam exclusive.

Personally, I have stopped playing alphas/betas for fun. It tends to ruin the final game. I used to have the "can't wait" attitude, but that has changed in me. Even more of a reason I would never pay for one.

Yes it did. But with a significantly lower price tag to reflect the lack of content available at the time. I expect that had they charged $20 right from the start and had not provided the very sandbox that comprises the actual game, they would not have had the success that they did.

As I say, the Folk Tale devs claim to be doing this because they need the feedback. Surely then, they should be attracting as much feedback as possible with a price to reflect that. Not ask a small percentage of users on the Steam forum what price they would consider appropriate for the FINAL game and then use that as the price for the TUTORIAL. I really get the impression that they don't understand the Steam audience at all.

Well as I say, I won't be buying it now if they stick with the non-discounted $20 initial price tag. And it seems I'm not entirely alone in not really liking who devs are using alphas/betas now.

And yes, that Godus thing is a joke. That's another game I won't be buying.

That sounds to me like they don't have any confidence in their own product. Not reassuring at all.

Well, Alpha-releases are just pre-orders with (some) benefits. You get to see the game early and the illusion of being able to influence it's development. Some people happily pay for this (lots of people also pre-order games), I don't. For the developers it is convenient (perhaps too convenient and too easy to abuse). For the customer it's risky.
But for some game where you have high hopes on, it may be worth the risk. Just like Kickstarter. It can be a good thing, but it can also be abused. In the end it's everybodys own responsibility what one does with one's money. It's just important that you know your risks.

Developers should make alpha and beta games free for the testing period. They would get more testers that way. I remember AudioSurf's beta version being free.

Totally disagree. Thats how you get every Tom, Dick and Harry with nothing better to do make worthless suggestions if they make any at all. You know how you get quality people? You pay them.

Not really, because nobody else is benefiting from your leisure fishing (maybe the wife, who doesn't have to go and buy said fish for dinner... provided you don't let the fish go... mmm, fishing).

With alpha/beta the other side is the dev, who only sees benefits - money upfront, and possible bug reports (obviously you don't have the regime of actual testing, that's not what I was implying). Being a software engineer I do know a thing or two about testing, which is maybe why I have a hard time seeing the appeal of interacting with an unfinished piece of software, let alone paying for it.

Only if you want to. You do not need to report bugs, you do not need to give your wife the fish :)

Alphas / Betas are leasure in the same way

Yep, I got confused when the latest version was lower than what I had. Turns out I had "beta 1.8" and they reset it to 1.0 when it was "final", they're now up to 1.5.2 again.

Well, I do! I got it in Beta 1.2. I do play it less than I used to, but still play regularly.

Admittedly that has more to do with mods, which are another matter entirely (and, on occasion, another benefit of allowing beta access: there's already a modding community, wiki, etc, when the game comes out).

Minecraft did have a section in the FAQ explaining the 'paid beta' concept (which was fairly unknown then) saying that the price was less than the full version, because though they had no intention of leaving it part done, they couldn't guarantee that it would be finished. It also gave what they were expecting to charge for the game on release.

I played a few mmo's in closed beta, some were fun (WoT) others not so much but at least it didn't cost me anything and sometimes I got a reward for being a tester.

I'm ok if people want to pay for playing alpha/beta builds, personally I won't do it.
As for KS, again it is totally optional if you want it or not.