To explain it more simply, "blackmailing" implies that they were being forced to give you money for something, when that obviously wasn't the case. You (the buyer/investor/backer) are the one giving them (the game dev) money, not the other way around. Exchanging money for the expectation of a future good or service, and refusing to give said money when said good or service as advertised is not one that you want, is not "blackmail." And if they later change the terms of said good or service after you've paid them for it without offering a chance for you to get your money back because you no longer agree with the way they are doing business, they are the bad guys here, not you. Why is this so difficult for some people to understand? Why are people idiotically defending the indefensible? Oh, wait, answered my own question there: these people are idiots.

Also, on another note, I love (read: hate) all the dumbasses who say things like "Well, it's Kickstarter/crowd-funding/early access, anyway. You should know going in that they're probably going to change their plans and goals and whatever. That's part of the process of game design, and if you pay, you deserve what you end up with, even if it's something completely different from what was originally promised." In response to that, I say simply that, well, I suppose that just means then that I'll no longer be buying into the whole Kickstarter/crowd-funding/early access bullshit. I'll wait until a game is actually released (and then wait some more (http://kane-magus.livejournal.com/597285.html)) before I consider paying money for it, and if that means that said game doesn't get released because they didn't have the money to make it, then tough shit. Sucks for them, I guess.