Your link is broken.
Using my Google-fu, I found the website doesn't have the necessary information anyway, but taking an educated guess based on a
screenshot, it's obvious you haven't looked at minecraft's actual system. Which I would detail, but there's youtube. And the wiki.
But I'm glad you like Vantage. World needs more good games, no?
There is more than one way to make money, and grifting your potential market is generally the worst way to go about it.
Yes, I'm sure Notch sits in his room and cackles about how well his evil plan is working. There's also the possibility that Notch hasn't thought about it, as he wanted to get to the coding part.
Often it is only the features that aren't in yet that would be worth paying as much is asked for
Technically speaking there's a risk it will never be finished.
So...should nobody be allowed to take risks with their money, or only gamers?
Is it everyone who can't tell how much the things they buy are worth, or only gamers?
If you pay for a feature that doesn't exist, and it fails to ever exist, it's not the developer's fault. You took their promises seriously, you were wrong.
Economically, a 50% discount exactly corresponds to a 50% risk it will never be finished. Based on reading
Notch's tumblr (which I read because it's interesting), and based on the things that Notch has delivered in the past, I would say the risk is considerably lower. If I'm right, if you want minecraft, it's statistically a good buy. A great buy, actually, since it also gets you into alpha testing, if you're into that sort of thing.
Look, if you can't tell there's a risk the alpha will never be finished, and buy as if it's zero risk, you're just a fool. Someone that foolish can't realistically be protected, in general, without treating them like a child. Because, functionally, they
are a child.
I wonder how many people I've fooled into thinking I spent the $10 on minecraft. But, I personally appreciate Notch giving me the opportunity to take that risk, if I wanted to. Perhaps there are better revenue models, that would make similar or more money for Notch, and allow minecraft to be free. I won't dispute that. However, there is a cost associated with finding and implementing that model, and I can't judge whether it would be worthwhile, sight unseen.
In other words, Loloklam, if you think Vantage's model is entirely superior, then tell Notch about it, as that cuts the finding cost. The more description you add, the more it cuts the assessment cost as well. I would suggest you be less rude to him if you do so, however, assuming you want him to actually listen to you. (Clearly I have no problem with you not listening to me.
)
Although, the other problem is that Minecraft's development has already been entirely funded, assuming Notch knows what he's talking about. But he could change in time for the next project.
There also seems to be a misconception that you can't play minecraft at all without paying.
If you're feeling brave, and promise not to complain about the bugs, you can try the latest unstable development version.
This is the description of the pay version. I really can't take any charges of nefariousness seriously.