Although I have been quite vocal about Pimax’ piss-poor performance on delivering certain owed commodities, I would want to qualify the items depending on where one could, and should expect a performance at an appropriate level and where it perhaps was rather a question of delivery “as is” - i.e. accept what-ever they give you.
For some of the stretch-goals, I can see your point, but I don’t share the view that one in general cannot rely on anything being said just because it is a Kickstarter. Being a Kickstarter campaign does not allow nor justify to over-promise wildly without any consequences.
On the software content stretch goal - I agree that this is probably the one stretch goal which I took with the greatest reservation about what it would turn out to be. It was not specified further at all, and it was clear to me that it would just be some kind of VR content, nothing specific or of a certain quality. To be honest, the stuff we received is pretty much what I would have guessed we would be getting.
So yes, I will not complain about the quality because it would have been naive to expect any triple or double A productions. The complaint, if any, would be about the huge delay.
However, for the deliverables, which were expressly paid for, so headsets, but also the accessoires like controllers, base stations, 10m cable, hand-tracking module, we absolutely can expect a proper performance with ETA’s being adhered to unless truly valid reasons demand a postponement, and I would never accept to make them a kind of a best efforts thing just because it is a Kickstarter.
The true risk of a Kickstarter is that the company may fail & fold and you’d end up with empty hands. But it is not a concept of let the company look & try, but if they feel it is too difficult after all, they get to keep the money nevertheless and just notify you that you are stuffed, bad luck while continuing to operate as a company.