While I won't lock the topic
Rather than locking the thread and in doing so suppressing this discussion, could you not hand out tempbans (And if necessary, delete offending posts so as to avoid diluting the actual discussion) instead?
outright instigating the other party
While I don't disagree:
Completely untrue, and because it is untrue all the other arguments fall away.
This is bait. I could retort by copy-pasting that same line in response and ignore the rest of the post; Dismissing an essay's worth of argumentation and opinion as objectively wrong so as to avoid having to address any other points, at which point you're well on your way down the slip-slide into shit-slinging.
While the saying goes you shouldn't attribute to malice that which can easily be attributed to ignorance, the possibility remains that this was done with the intent of provoking a negative response. Which it still has by the fact I'm now arguing about arguing instead of the discussion's topic its self.
As this quote relates to the point you were responding to:
Close your eyes, forget this discussion for a moment and think of your favorite scenario from your favorite full-release game.
Now imagine the same scene, but as part of a crowdfunded beta.
Now imagine the same scene, but it's from the demo hosted on the game's DLSite page
Is whether a game's
content appeals to you dependent on how it's funded?
Rhetorical question, but feel free to answer "Yes" and undermine your credibility.
If not, then in what way does having both crowdfunded and non-crowdfunded games split across two different sections makes it easier to find games that conform to your both your standards and tastes?
Crowdfunded projects give up-front cash for incomplete projects. Which attracts much more scammers and unserious authors.
Exaggerated but true; I agree that crowdfunded projects are inherently more exploitable because in paying towards them, you don't receive a complete product in return. However, crowdfunding is a means to the completion of a project, not an exchange of money for goods; any content offered as a
reward is just that. You are not buying the game its self, you are donating to the people making it, for which many give you access to in-dev versions of that project in return. People's lack of understanding in this fact is a large part of what enables such exploitation. Again, the platforms could do better in protecting people against their own ignorance.
I'd be happy if threads linking to the game's crowdfunding campaigns were required to contain a disclaimer explaining the above.
Sure, there are incomplete non-patreon projects... but the ratio isn't 0.01% worthwhile to 99.99% proof of concept like it is for patreon.
More hyperbole. "Worthwhile" is subjective. Go back to that scenario and imagine; You come across someone developing a game that's all about it. Are you going to ignore it because the developer's asking for money to help support them while they make it, or even better, hire some people so it's made to a higher standard, potentially finished quicker and/or with more content? I think I can answer that for you; no, you sit from afar checking its progress every now and then just like any other game in development, without spending a dollar yourself.
Granted - Crowdfunded games are
much more difficult to sort through in terms of 1: What appeals to you, 2: Which of them are progressing at a steady rate and/or have progressed beyond a playable state. This is because there's no index of crowdfunded adult games.
I also abhor the few devs that have come here, posted a blurb about their "game" and a link to their Patreon - neither of which has even screenshots - then disappear. THOSE threads should be deleted as they come up, with a grace period for the dev to post some kind of proof they've got something to show for it.
Finally, there are incentives for bad forum behavior: [...] Crap crowdfunded games get bumped by their authors because they want funding or at best, to promote their game. So crowdfunded games break the forum model that sweeps crap to the bottom.
Moderation. In terms of how it affects the forum, a crowdfunded developer posting in their game's thread with an update of some kind is no different from someone going to a non-crowdfunded game-in-dev's thread and relaying an approximated translation of the dev's latest blog post.
This is the part that you can't explain away by simply saying there are "good" crowdfunding sites that don't charge per month. Since fresh payers are even more necessary to the non-monthlies, then that's even more incentive for authors (or their friends) to keep bumping the topic. I certainly don't expect a mod to be able to tell between a buddy bumping a game and an actual fan bumping it.
The few CF threads I follow have only been bumped by the dev posting actual news about their games or the state of its development. Sometimes followed shortly by the odd question, suggestion or "Thumbs up good job sounds great" and it slides down until the next one. Can you point to any examples of behavior falling outside of that? Or do you see behavior that fits this pattern as problematic?
Worst case, the people offended by it can use the ignore function with those threads.
Failing moving CF'd games back where they belong, then the Under Construction subforum should not be exclusive to in-progress CF'd games, and any unfinished games should be moved to it.
Refer back to my post with the mock-up.
Games that are fully released and at most receiving bugfix patches and the odd expansion down the line get one subsection. Games that have playable demos but the full version is unreleased or still in development get another. Games in progress with no playable content publicly available go in "Under Construction". This would include crowdfunded games that do have playable builds, but none that can be accessed without supporting/pledging.
That's still not ideal to me though. Once again, I favor enforced thread tags based on release status (And for content as well, but that's secondary to this discussion). The section remains undivided, but users can choose to only see completed games.