There were complaints it simply was not enough and that it was a mixture of grants and loans. And countries were deeply annoyed by the way the wealthy waited until the last minute to reveal their hand.
“It’s a paltry sum,” India’s delegate Chandni Raina told other delegates, after the deal had been gavelled through.
“This document is little more than an optical illusion. This, in our opinion, will not address the enormity of the challenge we all face.”
Ultimately, the developing world was compelled to accept it, with many rich countries pointing to next year’s arrival of President Donald Trump, a known climate sceptic, and arguing that they would not get a better deal.
But this package is also being criticised as short-sighted from the richer world’s perspective.
The argument runs that if you want to keep the world safe from rising temperatures, then wealthier nations need to help emerging economies cut their emissions, because that is where 75% of the growth in emissions has occurred in the past decade.
New national plans are due to be published next spring to outline how every country will limit their planet warming gases over the next 10 years.
A more generous cash settlement at COP29 would undoubtedly have had a positive knock-on effect on those efforts.
And at a time of geopolitical uncertainty and distraction, keeping countries united on climate should be critical. The big fight over money re-opened old divisions between rich and poor, with an anger and bitterness I have not seen in years.