Just posted hopefully tomorrow?
I would have no problem with that at all.
So in my case, I pay 50% for my KISS LE and then I pay 10% each time they take steps to complete the code. Over time, Stern finishes my game, and I don't get angry waiting for the game to be completed. It also encourages Stern to work on the current games instead of adding code for toppers and other crap. If they don't finish the game, they don't maximize their return.
It's the only area in which they are essentially not only not making any money, but are losing money due to having to pay coders to make and distribute what is essentially free updates. Not surprised they drag their feet when they have a much more lucrative alternative to sell $400 novelty toppers.
Ultimately though, the market ends up suffering for it in the long run.
I really wouldn't be surprised if in the future they borrow a page from the billion dollar console market playbook and start charging customers to access updated code on a regular basis so that they have the "privilege" of playing the original intended game. With this pricing/distribution model, the consumer ends up paying over and above and well into the future for something that should have been essentially complete on release.
