I kind of agree, but given the propensity for the Steam forums to be a bitch-fest can't we just ignore them for the most part? Beyond that the few people that'll buy it on Steam then actively get involved (probably over here) can only add to the number of people feeding back, surely?

Kinda agree.

Though I'm betting if you put a stamp (noticeable) across the title screen/picture that people first see in the store that says something along the lines of "ALPHA, YOU IDIOTS" you'll both garner much goodwill and pre-emptively cut would-be complainers at the knees.

By the way, love the "this is an alpha" intro into the game.

Tough call. I hear and agree with almost every point being raised. I definitely know a few who have completely blacklisted Planetary Annihilation because of the price tag, and from what I've seen on their Steam forum, they acknowledge that they (the Dev's) would have done it differently a second time. Ultimately have to tend to agree with OP on this one.

problem Is I do not think the devs have much choice. I am not sure what steam policy is but I guess that once a game uses SteamWorks for DRM and distribution it is obligated to be available for Sale through Steam. That it be an ALPHA matters not.

I know. I wish there was such a thing.  The goal isn't to have zillions of early access users. Just hard core GalCiv users who understand that we're trying to appreciate their contributions by giving them everything we make for GalCiv III forever.

The important thing to remember is that it's not a very big thing.  That is, even Planetary Annihilation, which had a $99 price and didn't give extra goodies, had a backlash at first.  The people who complain loudly about these kinds of things are a very very tiny minority and they do it on multiple games.

With GalCiv3, I'm not paying for any of these alpha testing "privileges". I am paying to preorder the game and its expansions, knowing that I will help testing the alpha without having to pay for it. That's a huge difference.

The problem, however, is one of GUI . It is NOT immediatly obvious that those $99 are for the game and its expansions, and neither is the justification behind it. People usually don't dig deeper, because that would take a whole lot of time; first impressions matter and steam really isn't helping you here.

This was predictible, idiots going batshit in the community hub. The good news is that for 100$ they will not buy it hence they will be denied leaving a "This game is garbage" in the Steam user review section. 

Stardock made a good decision by not including the regular ( cheap ) founder edition on Steam.  HAd it been the case we would probably already be having the first " Don't buy this piece of garbage" reviews coming in by now.

Yes, but still, hidden would have been better until beta. cant wait until i get to try it later, after sleap and booring rutine thru day (called work)..

With PA i thought they said the reason for the $99 price tag was because that was how much the kickstarter backers had to pay for access to beta. Which is kind of what is happening here.  No big deal.  We knew what we were getting into.  The non-believers will break like waves upon the shoreline.  

A generous pledge that allowed the backer the full game when (if) completed and access to the beta before hand.  If PA came out on steam early access at $50, how would those Kickstarter backers feel after paying $99 for the same access?  Now imagine the GalCiv3 Steam early access founders program for $50.  They would get everything you paid $99 for.  That would suck.

With Stardock, I knew what I was paying for, I knew what I was getting,  and I know whats required of me as a founder.