discussion Do you think the era of early access games will ever end, or will it get worse?

[bobforleweds]

Why would it ever change? They make more money this way anyway.

 

[goons]

Unless Valve cracks down on it its not changing, early access isn't really a thing on consoles

 

[miniYoumu]

Valve at least seems to be doing a bit to help. As of a few days ago, they're automatically tagging games that haven't been updated in over a year. So it's sort of easier to tell if a game is dead or not.

Then again, that might just push the dev to shove their game out the door with a "1.0" release.

 

[rocketsheep]

As with all such trends: Initially it was a good think. Now it has become a bad thing and will get worse until customers get so unhappy that it will ruin companies. At that point, some kind of equilibrium will develop, much matter than what we have now. And a new trend will become prominent.

 

[Freyr]

I think you do need to differentiate here.

"Early access" porn games, like 99% of all these AVN's monetized through Patreon or SubscribeStar, I am perfectly fine with those.
They are feature complete (meaning there aren't any features beyond basic Ren'py) and the story gets added on monthly/quarterly/yearly or whenever the dev feels like it.
I see those games as a kind of soap opera. Their stories could go on indefinely but at some point they do get the axe after season X or whenever the dev gets ill / mother dies / gets arrested.
But that's kind of fine, I mean, it is what it is.

Real games, which are released as "early access" but which are not feature complete, that's annoying as fuck. And (in my opinion) hurting the devs because quite a few of those games are a buggy, unplayable, mess. And I won't be likely to touch their stuff again.

 

[Franzfernseher]

For me the "lifelong service games" are way worse than early access, because early access games have the possibility to be done at some point.
Lifelong service games feel unfinished till the end.

 

[Magooo]

Considering the games on here and their respective tags I truly hope the era of "early access" will never end. Regarding regular games I handle early access more like a paid demo: buy and test it, afterwards either refund it if it was bad or keep it and enjoy the full version later.

 

[DiaperLove]

In my opinion there will be Early Access in the future. But you will see the quality of an Studio based on their Early Access usage.
For Example, Subnautica was a perfect example of how EA can work
On the other hand 7D2D was ... well ... special

I think in future the "big" studios will use EA to earn more money and deliver unfinished Games

 

[famkam1111]

It will become more souless because of use of AI but generaly it will stay the same..

 

[Redditer2024]

It won't change.

 

[grimsbysteve]

It'll not change while there's money to be made.

For the smaller/independent/single person developers, I can see the appeal, if you don't already have the capital, or a track record to lean on, you can't access the funding stream you need to feed, clothe and house yourself or your staff. Staff goodwill only goes so far, and at some point those people need to take paying jobs to pay their bills, so will either quit altogether or only give a handful of hours per week around their main job (if it's a passion project for them).

Once you've got a semi-usable feature set, getting it into early access and seeing either purchases or subs a) helps pay the bills and pay for more dev time, and b) can be used to say to potential investors "look, there is this level of interest already, can I have some money please?", both of which should *in a perfect world* enable you to get the game to v1.0.0, and out of early access.

The overuse of early access by larger, better funded publishing houses is what's killed it, when the publisher gets to a certain size, it's less about the game, the art, the community and more about the next quarterly report. How do you make the quarterly report look better? More money in, less money out. This leads to the proceeds of early access going into shareholder pockets instead of funding the completion of the project.

That's not to say that there aren't solo devs out there who lose passion for the project, or have some sort of personal issue and then can't complete the project, nor is it to say that there aren't scammy devs who do the bare minimum then coast on the passive income.

 

[entry1]

Real games, which are released as "early access" but which are not feature complete, that's annoying as fuck. And (in my opinion) hurting the devs because quite a few of those games are a buggy, unplayable, mess. And I won't be likely to touch their stuff again.

what are indie devs supposed to do? Most can't fund years of development and letting people play the game is pretty much free QA and feedback.

 

[Freyr]

what are indie devs supposed to do? Most can't fund years of development and letting people play the game is pretty much free QA and feedback.

Yes, that is a very good point.

I was thinking more about AAA game studios.

Still, early access games which are missing key functions *are* annoying, regardless of who or what the dev is. But you are right, I would give indie devs some slack.

 

[PepperLSD]

nothing will change until there is a reason

 

[entry1]

Yes, that is a very good point.

I was thinking more about AAA game studios.

Still, early access games which are missing key functions *are* annoying, regardless of who or what the dev is. But you are right, I would give indie devs some slack.

Even for big studios can make sense to go early access, at least in online games. Path of exile 2 just released like this and it was clear the game needed work and if they released in this state it would be a disappointment. Being able to get feedback from the players is invaluable, and changing gradually the game is much easier than having to scramble after a bad release.

 

[lanny]

I think it is here to stay and only will get worse. The only thing to stop it is to try to regulate it somehow. How is that supposed to be done? That's above my paygrade! And I am not saying it should be regulated either. But without it, I can't see it go anywhere but up in regards to the amount of early access games to come.

 

[Vidilo]

As everything, as long as it can be abused, it will be. In other words, as long as people are stupid enough to pay real money for empty promises, there will be other people cashing in on that stupidity. So no, early access isn't going anywhere. It's too easy money.

Just like kickstarter it can be used for good purposes, but there is no regulation. So the cases where it's just used as easy money grab will always outnumber the cases where the early money is well spent.

 

[Lucifer423]

Will only get worse the way the market is going and gta 6 on the way with the scare of 100$ start price

 

[Lucifer423]

As everything, as long as it can be abused, it will be. In other words, as long as people are stupid enough to pay real money for empty promises, there will be other people cashing in on that stupidity. So no, early access isn't going anywhere. It's too easy money.

Just like kickstarter it can be used for good purposes, but there is no regulation. So the cases where it's just used as easy money grab will always outnumber the cases where the early money is well spent.

Yeah but dangling that 3 day early access over people's heads always works and they always cave just impatience

 

[NumberZZZ]

It will get worse unless people will start thinking and keeping their wallets closed. The whole problem would quickly solve itself if only people opposed the idea and stopped buying early-access games. We vote with our wallets after all