No one cares sadly
IMO Early Access should be totally removed from Steam.
Eg I bought The Long Dark. While the game is pretty much nice, I seriously doubt it will be ever finished. Sure - the devs are updating it...but it takes them too long
In other words - most of EA games are in state "So yeah, EA forever bcus u know, we feel like the game is not polished enuff so erm...here, have a small update"
Meh. I guess I'll never buy another EA
Comment has been collapsed.
sad to hear that about the long dark. :/ it looked pretty promising.
Comment has been collapsed.
One solution might be a system whereby people could pledge money to the devs, and the money (or a significant portion of it) could be held in escrow (by Valve, I guess), until such time as the game was released from early access, and on the condition that the game is "complete" (suppose you'd need someone independent from Valve to take a view on this), and all of the promises actioned.
That way, devs are incentivised to finish what they started in order to get the money. If they don't, it simply goes back to the customers.
There are clearly difficulties with this method (particularly in terms of deciding whether a released game is "complete", and what the criteria might be) but if there was a will to make it happen, it could be done.
Sadly Valve don't appear to care about making the Early Access system more robust, or protecting consumers against ballbag devs who lose very little by trousering users' money and riding off into the sunset.
Comment has been collapsed.
Another issue is that a lot of the EA "devs" just don't have the money for the game in the first place. If you hold tghe funds from the sales they'll just get even less done.
Comment has been collapsed.
While it's clear some/many/most devs doing EA games released them in EA to get the money to supposedly finish them, according to the rules, they're not suppose to.
Comment has been collapsed.
If you withhold SOME of the money, the risk is shared. That seems fair to me.
Withholding a significant portion of it would provide a cash injection to help the devs working the game, while incentivising completion, providing the balance was correct.
At present, the entire risk is with the customer, allowing no comeback.
Too many of these projects are abandoned, with the developers still making money by selling promises at the full retail price of a completed game, or close to it, regardless of whether they follow through on them. This clearly needs to change.
Comment has been collapsed.
One issue seems to be that EA encompasses a full range without easy to see disclosure: "We're trying to raise money but don't have a game yet", "We're barely in alpha", "We're in beta", or "We're not sure what alpha or beta means, and we're just going along until we get tired of it". There needs to be some kind of "scale" that says where the developers think they are when the game starts, and as things go along. Having milestones laid out in the game's EA description block would be good, too. Anything "promised" outside of the EA description block would be fluff and is only a bonus if it actually happens. It seems that there are a lot of things developers say "Yeah, that would be interesting" and then players say "ooo, that's a promise" when it is no such thing.
Studios doing work for larger companies work on milestones get paid with bonuses and penalties for making / not meeting them. I think any game going into EA should have to define milestones that are able to be objectively determined to have been met, and monies released based on milestones. Milestones would have to be defined based on which stage the game is in when it first becomes available for purchase, and current price of the game should reflect which phase of EA the game is in.
Early Access works better than nothing. Hopefully we'll see refinements so that people who are risk averse will stop buying in too early. A major downside to EA is that people that probably don't have any experience doing a major project but have a great idea, then getting paid up front, but have no idea how much work it actually takes to finish. Once they're done with the fun stuff, it's harder to push through to the end - especially when sales aren't as spectacular as they'd dreamed they would be and it turns out that it's really hard to pay for everything they want to do.
Comment has been collapsed.
I like this idea, like having a timeline of updates or the full support history on the gmaes main page so you can see the support
Comment has been collapsed.
In this case EA would be useless.
EA is supposed to help the poor indie dev, you know, you must pay your team, the stuff you need, licences etc...
Start your project in EA is not funny if you are a serious dev, you'll find a lot of kids that don't know what an EA is and will bitch "ZOMG this alpha is alpha !", but if you don't have money too start your business you have no choice. (Anyway agree, it's heavily abused too)
Comment has been collapsed.
If EA gave a portion to the devs at the beginning, then the rest upon [satisfactory] completion, I don't see a problem.
After all, how did games get made before early access? At least this method would be something for the devs, while sharing the risk instead of lumping it all on the consumer.
Comment has been collapsed.
After all, how did games get made before early access?
Crowdfunding or nothing I guess, anyway agree, atm consumers take all the risks
Comment has been collapsed.
Before crowdfunding, devs just took a punt and risked their own money.
It doesn't seem fair that all the risk is on consumers, but I guess if people are happy to continue handing over their money, fully aware of the risks, why change anything?
I just think it would be fairer if there was some sort of comeback, particularly against devs who walk away from their projects in favour of something else, but face zero consequences for doing so. Would be nice if Valve could find a way of incentivising the delivery of completed projects, and giving their customers a little more protection against fly-by-night companies...
Comment has been collapsed.
Well I don't think Valve will stop EA or do something about that, after all more stuff they sell, more money they gain.
I think people should do some research before throw money at EA, that would be a nice way to start :P
Comment has been collapsed.
" IMO Early Access should be totally removed from Steam. "
Agree with this, most EA are disappointments.
My huge disappointment is Fae Verse Alchemy, but there are many others probably.
(i have reported an abandoned early-access to support, they just don't care)
Comment has been collapsed.
Don't just forget the good games that came from EA like Kerbals space program,Plague Inc: Evolved,Darkest Dungeon,Prison Architect.
also we have some very interesting frequently updated EA games like ARK,7 days to die,the long dark and the forest
Comment has been collapsed.
The Forest is another one that is constantly updated. Every 14 days or something. The game is playable but there's no plot available yet. Even so you can spend hours in crafting and trying to survive those damn mutant-cannibal thingies.
Comment has been collapsed.
I didnt said its a failed project. I just said that I feel that it either wont get out of EA or it will take ages for them to finish it
EA should either be removed or there should be a strict rule - you can publish your game in EA as long as you will be able to make a full release in 5 months. If you wont - there will be some sort of punishment for that. Period. That would force the devs to think twice before releasing anything in EA
Comment has been collapsed.
Early Access as an idea is great. Allow developers to give players a taste of the game game in its current state and how it could turn out with a big suggestion box that are the steam forums. Sadly this is abused, projects abandoned or borderline abandoned with "developing is long and hard work" excuses. I don't doubt it is but it can't take months between updates that do shit for the game with non-existent communication in between. This could be so much better if Valve stepped up their game and started policing the system and holding the devs responsible for their failures.
Comment has been collapsed.
Completely agree. EA = paid closed beta access basically, which isn't uncommon these days. Good games do come out of it, just like bad. One of my favorites is Grim Dawn, a game I've had in EA for a year and am content that solid progress is being made. Prison Architect is another hit. I find it well worth my money to test and enjoy the game prior to full release, while also helping the development process by my feedback.
Comment has been collapsed.
I've been saying that EA, and Kickstarter were rubbish for some time now. They're as others have said, potentially good ideas, that get horribly abused.
There's also various online games that stay in "open beta" status for potentially years. Some, like Path of Exile see a defined release date, and are in good shape. Others like Warframe perpetually stay in open beta status, and anytime people complain about what a buggy mess it can be, or other issues, its defenders just say "what do you expect, it's in beta," or "don't you know what beta means?"
Comment has been collapsed.
well, kickstarter made some incredible games possible. FTL, Pillars of Eternity, The Banner Saga, Wasteland 2 - just to mention a few gems that might not exist, if it weren't for kickstarter. i am glad it exists.
Comment has been collapsed.
There's probably a ten to one ratio of crap failure to deliver on their promises crowd funding projects to the ones that do deliver. Something like FTL was already pretty much done by the time they did the Kickstarter, they just needed a bit more to cover the rest. Often enough they are asking for money very early on, at which point things could easily go bad before it could be released.
There is just so much unknown when dealing with these things that there is no way to make informed decisions. Also you can't say for certain that they all never would have been possible without crowd funding, crowdfunding just provided them with cheap funding. In an actual investment/loan, you'd need to return the entirety of the amount received, plus extra. With crowd funding they would provide nothing back, or something that costs them decidedly less than the amount received. That's why so many turn to Kickstarter, and the like, if they need extra funding, it's a far cheaper alternative than proper investors, a bank, or other lenders.
Comment has been collapsed.
^ This.
It's no one's fault but your own if you get screwed on an early access purchase.
(This comment brought to you by a StarForge buyer)
Comment has been collapsed.
Explain how one is suppose to know the future of a given game to be able to know which ones will be finished, and which ones won't. Safest method is to just avoid them all, as none of us can actually predict such things.
Take Spacebase DF-9 as an example. Here we have a game that was being made by a known, and established developer, Double Fine Productions. Should be a safe bet, right, "oops, ran out of money, oh well, let's just slap 1.0 on it, call it done, say that player modders will be able to finish things up, and move on to our next game." One of the rules of EA is that EA is not to be used as a means to fund development, they supposedly need to have that already, and are just using EA to help make it better. Of course as Valve can't know that either, and have this whole hands off approach to curating, don't expect them to enforce that rule.
Comment has been collapsed.
It says right on the early access pages: "Note: This Early Access game is not complete and may or may not change further. If you are not excited to play this game in its current state, then you should wait to see if the game progresses further in development."
So either you want to play what they currently have available, or you don't buy it. You do your research first and determine if the current build is going to be enjoyable for you, and if not, you don't buy it.
It's pretty simple, actually. You're in charge of your own money. Just because Valve lets them put the game on Early Access, doesn't mean you are required to buy it.
Comment has been collapsed.
Games need to be experienced, no matter how much info you read, or how many videos you watch, it isn't until you actually play it, till you really know what it's like. The new refund thing can help with that sometimes, but from there some games may take some playing to get a real feel for it, which could put you over the two hour mark where you're not suppose be able to get a refund anymore.
Then with games still in development, even if you do like the way it is now, future changes may not be agreeable to you, and make it into a game you loath, which you also have no way of predicting. Bottom line is the only safe way, is to avoid EA all together.
Comment has been collapsed.
Bottom line is that you're still responsible for every dollar you spend, and no one else should take the blame for your spending decisions.
Comment has been collapsed.
That's not the point. You're trying to make it out as if one can figure out the good ones, from the bad ones, and make good decisions regarding EA games. Although as I've been saying, there is no way to know that, meaning none of them are safe purchases, every last one could go sour, and the buyer has absolutely no way of knowing that. Which is why I, and others have been saying the only safe thing to do, is just avoid them altogether.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm just saying it's no one's fault but your own for choosing to spend your money in a way that turns out to have been foolish.
Comment has been collapsed.
Except that's not what started this conversation. You very firmly agreed with someone that said getting EA games was fine, you just need to be smart about the EA purchases you make. I've yet to see you answer how one could ever possibly know which ones are safe, since as I've shown, there is no way to know. If you can't show how one can supposedly know for sure, then you agreed with the wrong person, and should have agreed with the ones that say the safest/smartest thing to do is to avoid them, as buying them is a complete crap shoot.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's possible to know which ones are safe by deciding if the existing content is enough for you to justify paying the purchase price. Personal responsibility for your purchases, it's not hard.
Comment has been collapsed.
EA games are games still in development, and as I've already said, while in development, games can be changed from what they are, into something else that you may not like. That happens with games in development, it's just usually people can't play, or pay for games until after they are released, so it's not something you generally have to worry about. Although it is a real cause for concern in paid pre-release games. Why don't you take some personal responsibility for what you're written, and admit that there's far too much you can't know about what will happen to a pre-release game for a consumer to be able to make an informed decision.
Comment has been collapsed.
Their decision is informed by all of the things that you have said and that I have said, it's up to them to decide if the risk/benefit ratio works out in their own favor or not. They can't blame anyone else if they make a bad choice.
Comment has been collapsed.
EA is anti-consumer as with such a very real unknown factor involved (you don't know if will it be completed, you don't know if it will it be changed into something I don't like later on, etc.) you can't make informed decisions. As you have yet to show how one can avoid the problems I've listed, I'll just chalk this up as you being too stubborn to admit you were wrong. You just keep playing Russian roulette with your EA game purchases while telling yourself you are certain you know what the outcome will be. Although when you finally do hit the cylinder with a live round in it, you can't say you weren't warned.
Comment has been collapsed.
I have no idea what point you're even trying to prove, I'm saying that it's up to you as a consumer to choose if it's something you want to spend money on, and you keep trying to babble on about risk factors that should weigh into your initial purchase decision.
Comment has been collapsed.
Explain how one can "be smart about the early access games you buy." There is no way to know for certain if the company will finish it, or not. Just look at Double Fine Productions with Spacebase DF-9, that's a big enough company that it should have been a safe bet, but they failed. Then even if you like the version of the game now, there's no way to know if they will, or won't significantly alter it into a game you hate later on. Unless you have access to a time machine, or the like, I just can't see how it's even possible to "be smart about the early access games you buy." In the end, it's a complete gamble, which is why the smartest/safest thing is to avoid EA games..
Comment has been collapsed.
First off, most of what you wrote ended with "avoid it." From there, the consumer never knows any more than the company says, and they can spin, or hide things to their benefit. The business could be on the verge of bankruptcy, but are still putting out well written patch notes, as a private company, you wouldn't know of trouble until it's too late. They could say "we're nearing completion," then a year later the game is still in EA/open beta, and they are still saying "we're nearing completion." Double Fine Productions used to have a good rep, then as they went bonkers with crowd funding, and EA, it became quite apparent that they can't plan, manage money, or meet deadlines worth a damn. A company may opt to change significant aspects of a game during development if they feel the market will respond better to such changes, but they may be changes you detest.
There's always so many unknowns to the end consumer in these pre-release games, that there is no sure thing, or safe bets. It's possible to be an informed consumer when dealing with a game sold as a product that has already been released, as aside from DLC, there's usually not going to be much in the way of changes made yet, and those may even be optional. If you can't know, you can't make informed decisions, and if you can't do that, you can't blame the consumer for not knowing the future. That's why all these things are not done for the benefit of the consumer, and the only safe thing for a consumer to do, is avoid them all, as there is just no way to "be smart about the early access games you buy."
Comment has been collapsed.
Luck, if you keep trying your luck, eventually it'll run out, that or you've conveniently forgotten the times you were wrong. As there is an unknown factor that is completely out of the hands of the consumer, there is no sure way of being safe, outside of not buying them at all.
Comment has been collapsed.
Explain how one can "be careful" about the EA games people buy. There is no way to know for certain if the company will finish it, or not. Just look at Double Fine Productions with Spacebase DF-9, that's a big enough company that it should have been a safe bet, but they failed. Then even if you like the version of the game now, there's no way to know if they will, or won't significantly alter it into a game you hate later on. Unless you have access to a time machine, or the like, I just can't see how it's even possible to "be careful" about the EA games you buy. In the end, it's a complete gamble, which is why the smartest/safest thing is to avoid EA games.
Comment has been collapsed.
Nah. That would be the ethically sound thing to do, but you can't make money on unfinished games if you stop selling them. Valve is more likely to go "we want to put power in the hands of the developers so we leave the decision up to them". And so far Hidden Path has pretty much proven to be the only dev. who are putting honest business before maximum profits ( by pulling Windborne).
Comment has been collapsed.
Sadly I agree,the only game Steam actually pulled was The Stomping Land, I think.
Comment has been collapsed.
They knew months ago that Windborne was toast, if they actually cared about their buyers it would've been pulled sooner. The free copies thing is just an attempt to buy off those who easily forgive. Admittedly it was nice recovering all but about a dollar of what I wasted on Windborne by selling those copies, but that doesn't change the fact I'll tell everyone I know to avoid any products HPE has or ever plans to release.
Comment has been collapsed.
The List of currently completely dead(without any development) EAccess Games(24 of them)
TOTM, Dungeon of gain, Voice of Pripyat, Siege of Inaolia, Isomer, Steel Storm AMMO, Wild Warfare,
Epic Space: Online, Starwalker, Fancy Skulls, Dog Sled Saga, SuperBike TT, DubWars, Gravi, Claustrophobia: The Downward Struggle, Tail Drift, Montas, The Sandbox, 1953: NATO vs Warsaw Pact, Mission Control: NanoMech, Bot Colony, Victory: The Age of Racing, Battle Chess: Game of Kings™, and Ensign-1
Comment has been collapsed.
You can add 1... 2... 3... KICK IT! (Drop That Beat Like an Ugly Baby) to the list. The last update on that was over 2 years ago and the developers started making other games and gave up on that one.
Comment has been collapsed.
Developer said on discussions that its dead for now, until he gets some money from smaller project.
Comment has been collapsed.
Threads like these make me realize how prevalent Illiteracy really is... i mean, please, every EA game has a big sign on the page that pretty much screams "DON'T BUY THIS UNLESS YOU'RE EAGER TO PLAY THE GAME AS IT CURRENTLY IS". If you buy it and regret it, it's your fault, don't cry, just accept it. Learn to think before you buy. They should not remove Early Access or their games from Steam.
Comment has been collapsed.
I think that people know what state the game will be in when they buy it. I think the problem is when developers stop work on these titles and move on, the games stay in early access with no plan for a full release which leads to new buyers paying for something that wont ever be released fully. The whole point in early access it to get access to the game as it is being developed while giving feedback to developers about bugs, improvements that can be made and other things.
Developers should not be allowed to abandon a project knowing full well people have paid for it, these people buy the games off the basis that they will receive the full game on release and helping the game get developed along the way by giving feedback.
Early access can be a good thing if done properly, but most of the time it's not.
I don't think it's fair to say people are at fault for buying early access games when they get abandoned, that should not be happening in the first place and if it does, the games should be removed from Steam to stop other people from buying it. Developers shouldn't be allowed to do that.
Comment has been collapsed.
It'd be fair to either rebrand them as "Abandoned Early Access Title" or remove them from sale if they haven't had an update of substance in over a year.
And it is definitely fair to place the blame on the person making the purchasing decision for making a bad purchasing decision. It's like being an investor in a start-up company. When that company goes belly up, it's still your fault that you invested in them.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm pretty sure it also says in the EULA that Valve reserve the right to terminate your account or any of it's content at their sole discretion. If you got shut down on without a good, rational reason, should we then conclude that it's your fault and that any discussion should be met with a snark about your supposed illiteracy?
I'm sure you realise that it's a similar leap of logic. People who buy Early Access games realise there is a risk involved, but the number of projects that grind to a near-halt or are outright abandoned seems fairly high, and even once abandoned they remain in the same state in the store, not marked with any warning.
While I think that people gripe way too much / too deep on Early Access (and crowdfunding), I'm also confused at people fixating on the consumer responsibility in such a way as to imply they are absolving the seller and/or developer of responsibility. Giving a dismissive wave of "your fault" is just a pointless deflection that ignores the underlying problem.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, if I did something to Valve to make them decide to take action against me it WOULD be my fault, FYI, and the difference between what we're saying is that I wouldn't be complaining to everyone and begging people to take away Steam, soo you're kind of completely wrong.
Comment has been collapsed.
Except that they are very similar threads of logic. :V
Receiving any punitive measures doesn't automatically mean they were necessary or justified, FYI.
Just as deciding to take a risk on an Early Access game doesn't mean a person "deserves it" when the developers bail out.
Nor does it subtract from Steam's responsibility to track, moderate and convey information on such projects.
Focusing solely on the people who lost out is effectively absolving those with far more actual sway over the situation from responsibility, and that's just plain silly.
Comment has been collapsed.
Games in EA have been removed from steam due to a lack of updates (Windbourne being the most recent example) but it takes a very long time for them to do so. It will happen eventually to abandoned games, but you just have to wait it out.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes they should. If you buy an Early Access game wanting to play it in it's current state, good for you. If you buy an Early Access game wanting to play it's final release, what the heck were you thinking? If the consumers can't even read or think about what they're buying, they certainly aren't entitled to cry about what they do or don't receive.
Comment has been collapsed.
That's not what I was saying. There's always people who wont read past the shiny "ADD TO CART" -button and complain later when the game isn't as big as Skyrim, I'm not defending those kind of people. I'm saying that you shouldn't blame the customer when the developer packs his bags, takes the money and leaves without leaving a note on the night stand.
In those situations Valve should offer refunds at the expense of the developer. It'll cost some money from Valve to do it but buying good will is a good investment.
Comment has been collapsed.
The Early Access warning is above the "ADD TO CART" button, though... And anyways I don't think Valve should be blamed for the customers' mistake either.
I get what you're saying, but buying Early Access was never meant to be risk-free for customers... I don't think they should just get a full refund from Valve if the developers can't or don't finish it. They need to think about if they really want to own the game in it's current state and if not, wait for further updates.
I purchased Starbound before it was even available on Steam, because I wanted to play it during it's development. I've played it for over 100 hours before it even left Alpha, and was completely satisfied with my purchase even then. With it's updates since then of course I'm happy, but I know that if they hadn't kept updating it, I would have been fine with my purchase and even if I wasn't I wouldn't have anybody but myself to blame for spending my money on it.
Comment has been collapsed.
Being satisfied with what you paid for varies between people. You played a lot from the moment you got it and someone else played only 10 hours or so to prevent him from getting burned out before the release and then devs pull the plug and he gets burned while you were alright with it.
I don't think early access is meant to be an investment. It would imply that you gave money to make some but as you bought a product you were a customer that bought into it for a promise of finished game and gave your support to help it. To combat the pull-the-plug-and-run some are doing, Valve could simply add "you're obligated to finish your project or guarantee a refund" into the EA ToS when they go into it. Though this would make them just push out release patch with barely anything in it and making a run for it. It would still require investigation from Valve's side to find out if they're exploiting a loophole but the scum wouldn't be able to get away with it so easily.
Comment has been collapsed.
I believe that EA buyers don't think that thats just about a (sort of) privilege to play a game early as a unfinished prototype (thats just the benefit for risk funding) but do expect to be delivered a finished game in the end. And hence tthat said game is expected to mature until finished.
Every failure to deliver will gradually raise more questioning about early access in general.
Comment has been collapsed.
We are ignoring the fact that it's our fault too. One way to be a smart customer is to not but the games until later when it's out of early access. Don't blame the devs for being the main culprits. We are.
Comment has been collapsed.
You understand, I don't understand why it's so hard for other people to realize this... Either buy it because you like it as is, or wait if you don't...
Comment has been collapsed.
But I like mcdonalds every day :c
ALCOHOL DOESN*T GIVE YOU CANCER
Comment has been collapsed.
First of all, alcohol isn't carcinogenic, the human body metabolizes it into a carcinogenic compound
Estrogen is listed as well and pretty much everyone has it in their bodies...
Also, I tend to not take everything in studies as something solid, because most of it might be further studied to reveal the opposite effect (which has happened so many times, I've actually lost count)
Comment has been collapsed.
Nothing wrong with McDonalds. Keep under 2500 calories and leave out foods high in carbs you'll probably lose weight. See the documentary Fat Head (2009).
And about cigarettes, it took the government years of sticking labels on boxes and telling people to stop to make people change. Now it's common sense, 20 years ago, not so much. Like everything people do need guidance in their purchases.
Comment has been collapsed.
I think the only Early Access game that's really impressed me is Prison Architect. They update and do bug fixes at /least/ monthly, and even though it's not technically finished, it's one of the best PC games I have played.
Comment has been collapsed.
+1
Prison Architect is a great game, though 30$/20€ might be a bit too much...
It's nice that the developers make update videos that are somewhat funny ^_^
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't know, pulling them off Steam isn't so nice either...
I have an EA game that just disappeared from steam overnight, with no explanations whatsoever, the developers haven't said anything about it, except that they discontinued multiplayer servers :/
Yeah, I'm glad people can't accidentally buy it, but I still don't like it
Comment has been collapsed.
How about a longer period of refund for Early Access games? For other games it is 48 hours, but for early access it is 30 days or 14 days or something like that. Yes, there will be abusers (like always) but at the current state the abusers are the developers, who have free rein over our money and promises nothing in return.
Not all early access games are bad, few examples :
Comment has been collapsed.
A lot of good has come from EA
Why would you report them,do people not understand the risk of Early Access? How many more idiot proof warnings do they need to post.?
Buying EA is a risk as your investing in a product hoping the end result is a complete game and a good game.Nobody forces you to buy the games that are in EA,yet when someone buys it and the game is just abandoned they are up in arms.You took the risk now deal with it.
I never buy a EA and expect to always get a return on it,t i see it more as a investment as i know the game may never get finished or might not even be very good.Then again i have bought so called AAA games that where a lot worse then say Don't Starve,so i do not see how this is any more risky then buying a 60 dollar games that turns out to be shit.
The simple answer is no EA does not need to be removed,,people just have to use more common sense when spending there money.
Don't Starve was EA
Prison Architect
and many more that are good and have given back 10 fold in your investment as far as a working and good product.If anything needs to be removed it is the damn shit as Greenlight more then EA.
Comment has been collapsed.
I think people like these just seek out EA games that they can buy so they can complain about it later. I mean seriously, there's no way all the people complaining here can be so stupid as to buy these games thinking they come with a 100% satisfaction guarantee. If they would just read the warnings they wouldn't "waste their money" as they like to put it.
But you are completely right except it's not MORE common sense, they just need to use common sense period.
Comment has been collapsed.
No one buys a game just to complain about it.
Very few thought it came with satisfaction guarantee. (You can't even get that with non-EA games).
They do read the warning labels.
Does this mean they don't have the right to complain? Of course not. Everything that is being sold is open to criticism and a heck of a lot of things that aren't too. Yeah it's a dumb thing to do buying an EA game but the problem isn't them buying it, it's that EA games were allowed to be sold in the first place with very little moderation.
Devs without a history shouldn't be on EA, devs with a bad history shouldn't be on EA. There's plenty of good EA games but you're going to hear about the bad ones more because complaining serves as a warning for people not in the know.
Do you think everyone on steam is a frugal techno-savvy know-it-all because the majority are not and without people saying "don't buy this", they'll see an awesome game trailer in the middle of the steam store with a discount and think "I want this" only a few months down the line to find the game broken and abandoned. They should not be blamed for this horrible attitude of devs who just take the money and run.
There are still unfinished EA games being sold that will never be finished because of loopholes in the system. The worst ones from devs that simply moved onto other projects, these people should be banned from seeling EA in my opinion. If you can't finish a game why should they be allowed to sell another EA title in the store.
Thankfully most people know not to play with fire after they've been burnt however unfair it is on the decent devs.
Comment has been collapsed.
Sad fact is that Valve doesn't care that much if we're happy. As long as the money flows in on their direction.
Early access in its current form is cancer that should be removed completely.
If these games would have serious market potential, they'd get funding easily.
Naturally, we're not speaking of blockbuster games, so getting funding isn't easy.
Should the risk be completely shouldered by customers?
No. Absolutely not.
But I seriously don't see that most financial organizations, or Valve would be interested in taking the risk here either since it's very hard to predict sales amounts on most of early access games. Some sort of escrow system would be workable solution I assume. But fact is, if there's some 50/50 split the fraudulent developers will just price their games little bit higher and come up with even more unreal promises to justify the higher prices in order to keep going.
End solution -> BURN EARLY ACCESS, TODAY.
Comment has been collapsed.
Not all early access games are bad. Some, or maybe a majority of them are bad, but a lot of them are very good too, even in my opinion, surpassed "regular" games at some point. Take Prison Architect for example. That is a great tycoon game, where a lot of tycoon has failed or became a bad game. Prison Architect is better than Prison Tycoon, for example.
Or Space Engineers. The amount of freedom, modding, and physics make this game great since the beginning, not to mention the modding community and continuous update (nearly every week) that I have lose track of what has been updated because they update so much.
Burden with customer is "normal" in any kind of business. Just take a look at VAT taxes, the government rules is that the company is the one paying the tax, but the company "passes" the tax to the customers, that's why we are paying "service tax" and "value-added tax". Why the customer must be burdened? Because the customer is the one who is able to make choices, whether to buy the game or not. Not to mention that the customer himself could also be fraudulent.
Early Access and Greenlight is a good avenue for indie gamers and developers to begin their gaming career, since after all, Steam is the biggest platform.
Comment has been collapsed.
Don't buy a game unless you're happy with the product as is. There should be steps in place to prevent early access from being abused but it is also the consumer's job to watch what they are purchasing.
Comment has been collapsed.
I like to think I've been lucky with Early Access. I've only bought into a few games and haven't been burned (yet). Darkest Dungeon, Frozen Cortex, StarBound, Plauge Inc. Prison Architect, and Invisible Inc are the ones I've done and so far so good. Though I'm more laid back when it comes to me getting angry at game dev's...
Comment has been collapsed.
Why? They are still updating the game, albeit slowly. They are very active within the community, always listening to feedback and taking suggestions, and always posting to let people know what they are working on. The last update was in April.
Comment has been collapsed.
You're not paying for a finished product. If you purchase Early Access you should know full well that it is not and may never be completed (they have plenty of warnings about this). If you can't accept this fact than you are either ignorant or in denial about a bad purchase (stupid being the third option). No one is forcing you to buy the game. So, seriously, shut up and take some responsibility.
EDIT: Also, regarding the topic of the thread. I do believe there should be a way to remove clearly unfinished and clearly abandoned Early Access titles or at least have some sort of auto price drop.
Comment has been collapsed.
I agree whole heartedly here, there is no shortage of information telling everyone that Early Access is a risk. If it's something you believe is worth seeing come to fruition then invest to money, but like all investing, there's a risk that it will not pay out.
I do think they need to have some damn pricing guidelines though, nothing in early access should be over 20 bucks.
Comment has been collapsed.
Sure, but they could declare that the current version is out of EA tomorrow and nobody would object. I mean, some people might be sad if there are no more content updates, but it's clearly worth the price of admission right now, which is the important part. (And I think it even has all the features they originally advertised for it.)
Comment has been collapsed.
The most developers of EA games went to vacations and forget to return, easy money it is.
Comment has been collapsed.
not sure that they reportable, but there should be an option for whole refund if an early access game gets abandoned:-D Well, i dont buy early access game, i bought only 2 (might have more from bundles but not bought those for the early access only). Prison architect, which is fun to play even in early access, totally worth it and evolved a lot since its EA release and H1Z1 because its from a big studio and likely that it will hit release and if not, well, Everquest gave me lots of fun from 1999 until 2006 as it was the very first professional and popular MMO so then i just gave a bit extra money to SOE.
Comment has been collapsed.
1,038 Comments - Last post 34 minutes ago by sensualshakti
0 Comments - Created 35 minutes ago by sensualshakti
43 Comments - Last post 44 minutes ago by ZPE
9 Comments - Last post 47 minutes ago by Sh4dowKill
1,950 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by Lessmessino
6 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by quijote3000
710 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by xargu
536 Comments - Last post 2 seconds ago by BCGutsy
63 Comments - Last post 5 minutes ago by herbesdeprovence
9 Comments - Last post 13 minutes ago by Zahariy
1,848 Comments - Last post 23 minutes ago by lext
172 Comments - Last post 27 minutes ago by Shurraxxo
9 Comments - Last post 28 minutes ago by Sh4dowKill
29 Comments - Last post 29 minutes ago by xxxka
There are many games that are just left on Steam without any updates like Isomer, Siege of Inaolia, Steel Storm AMMO, Dungeon of Gain etc. Can Steam remove at least the buy option for them? They need to remove games like these, there are just more and more coming.
Comment has been collapsed.