Early Access Has Ruined Indie Development

[RandV80]

I disagree. I feel early access is a combination of Fools gold and in this case misguided gamers looking to combat real business practice problems like AAA early access or mobile FTP schemes.

Why 'fools gold'? Because for all the fuss about early access titles cluttering up steam... is anyone actually playing them? I don't know if this is a feature that a developer can choose to turn off, but if you look at a games community page it tells you how many people are currently playing it. Making a similar point on here the other week I took a look at the early access page on Steam (notice Valve has put them in their own section now), and clicking through a number of them... you could see the tumble weeds blowing by. Went through about a dozen and couldn't find a single active player. Unlike pre order or FTP crumby developers aren't raking in fistfulls of cash with this business practice.

And really this is an area where some common sense and consumer awareness goes a long way. Not sure about an early access game is a scam? Then don't buy it. The game actually interests you but you don't feel a need to support the developers and/or beta test a game? Then wait for the full launch to buy it. If someone wants to throw away their money, or are actually interested in supporting the developers/beta testing, then let them spend their money. Acting like a self entitled brat and telling the developers to go back to their room and don't come out until the game is ready for me to play doesn't help anything.

I mean on PC gaming even with properly developed & published games it's usually a good idea to wait a few weeks, as there's always bugs at launch that need to be patched out. This isn't a recent trend that scummy developers/publishers are pushing, but rather PC gaming has always been like this. The negative aspect is how the practice is creeping into console, where a stable at release game used to be one of its prime selling points.

 

[Shamanic Rhythm]

...and it started with Minecraft. Didn't it?

When Minecraft was first released it was full and complete. Mojang basically feature creeped for several years after the initial release.

It was in Alpha when I got it.

Yes it was basic but it was solid. It wasn't broken and what was there was finished.

It was playable but it was still in development. Early Access is just that.

It's difficult to directly compare Minecraft's development with more recent 'early access', because the core of Minecraft was always the world generation and the player's ability to destroy, craft and place blocks. Once those systems were in the game, Notch/Mojang were just adding extra features. It's something only a procedural game could get away with.

But you're correct in that the financial success of Minecraft made everyone else think getting people to pay for a game that was still in development was socially acceptable now.

 

[WeepingAngels]

I personally am avoiding early access titles since the cycle for me has always been to: play the broken or limited game, use up all my desire to play the game then ignore the title when it's complete.

For developers though, if it's the only way for them to get the cash needed complete their game it can be justified. The feedback from people can also improve the game as much or more than detracting.

I just think consumers need to be discerning over what they sink money into in terms of early access. Don't support an unknown or unreliable developer just because they say they have a good idea.

Alot of those unknown and unreliable developers are the same ones who need the Early Access cash to complete their game.

But you're correct in that the financial success of Minecraft made everyone else think getting people to pay for a game that was still in development was socially acceptable now.

You can't be successful without a bunch of people trying to clone what you are doing.

 

[NuclearKangaroo]

And here's why:

1) Developers can use it as an excuse to release unfinished, broken products.
2) It can create an entitled fanbase composed of people who think they're venture capitalists.
3) It can use up all the publicity on an early alpha or unfinished beta so that when the game is actually done everyone has already moved on to the new shiny.
4) There's little to no certainty the game will ever be properly "finished"

Now tell me I'm wrong. Or add points if by some flux of reality you agree with me.

You're correct but those only apply where Early Access is used incorrectly by the developers. Much like a spoon can cause life threatening injury if used improperly.

There are many games where it has been used properly and the games and dev have benefited...

It is, like most other things.. a tool.

dis right here

early access can be used to improve the final state of the game as well as provide the game early to impatient people, can it be used to make a quick cash out of fools? yeah sure that too, if you want to ruin your reputation and never work as an independent developer ever again

 

[Gennadios]

Since I'm allergic to creating my own topics, I'll use this one to vent about one thing I've noticed on greenlight that really bothers me.

8 out of 10 games on there are halfbaked shit with a barely defined description, yet the unwashed masses don't really stand to lose anything from thumbing said shit up, so literally everything gets greenlit if it's on there long enough, it just takes enough people to display interest with no critical though.

I almost think that Greenlight should be a forced pre-buy like Kickstarter, you commit money and only if a title is greenlit does the player get charged.

This will solve most of the garbage early access games, people tend to think more when they stand to lose something.

 

[NuclearKangaroo]

dis right here

early access can be used to improve the final state of the game as well as provide the game early to impatient people, can it be used to make a quick cash out of fools? yeah sure that too, if you want to ruin your reputation and never work as an
independent developer ever again

Two problems though...only the cheats and failures get press coverage... I.e you only really hear about the bad ones.. while the good ones... unless you were there you'd never know they were Earlky Access..

Secondly, The average consumer has no clue how involved the game development process is or how much time it takes. They also regularly overlook that the game development work many indie devs do... is in addition to their normal 8-6 job. I.e what they do when they gfet off work and on their weekends.

well i dont think early access is meant for the average consumer, they are for people who know what they are getting into

 

[NuclearKangaroo]

Since I'm allergic to creating my own topics, I'll use this one to vent about one thing I've noticed on greenlight that really bothers me.

8 out of 10 games on there are halfbaked shit with a barely defined description, yet the unwashed masses don't really stand to lose anything from thumbing said shit up, so literally everything gets greenlit if it's on there long enough, it just takes enough people to display interest with no critical though.

I almost think that Greenlight should be a forced pre-buy like Kickstarter, you commit money and only if a title is greenlit does the player get charged.

This will solve most of the garbage early access games, people tend to think more when they stand to lose something.

i honestly think people should stop caring about what kind of garbage makes it into steam (as long as its not MALICIOUS garbage, like games from devs that lie to their customers), Valve has been very clear they want to open up further, and more products, both good and bad are to be expected

what i think is that Valve should focus their efforts on HIDING the shit stuff and making the good stuff easier to find, the game tags and user reviews seem to be smaller parts of a whole we have yet to see, atleast i hope so, a system that recommends games to people based on the tags of games they enjoy and the amount of positive user reviews those recommendations get

 

[Something Amyss]

And here's why:

1) Developers can use it as an excuse to release unfinished, broken products.
2) It can create an entitled fanbase composed of people who think they're venture capitalists.
3) It can use up all the publicity on an early alpha or unfinished beta so that when the game is actually done everyone has already moved on to the new shiny.
4) There's little to no certainty the game will ever be properly "finished"

Now tell me I'm wrong. Or add points if by some flux of reality you agree with me.

I accept premises 1, 3 and 4, though I'm not sure that equates to "ruining" indie gaming. 3 confuses me. I'm not sure what the issue here is, in terms of its impact on indie gaming. I'm also not sure it generates entitlement.

I think Early Access is detrimental, so I'm not entirely disagreeing. I think "ruining" may be too strong a phrase. Although, as an additional point:

Developers don't need excuses to release bad, broken or unfinished products. One can look at anything from Towns up to the Gearbox fiasco of Aliens: Colony of Mulch. I suppose you could argue that Early Access makes it worse, but I'm not sure that's true. A lot of the games Jim Sterling has brought up are not Early Access titles, but are still bad and still on the market (either through Greenlight or publishers).

I'm not sure the numbers are worse with Early Access, but perhaps I do not have all the data.

Speaking of....

Divinity Original Sin, DayZ, Rust, Kerbal Space Program, Insurgency, Starbound and Dont Starve beg to differ

A handful of examples neither proves nor disproves an overall trend. You can usually find a few positives in all but the most absolutely toxic policies.

 

[ThatQuietGuy]

It's a double edged sword for sure, I think it's worth existing though, the handful of gems that would have never made it otherwise are worth all the crap games twice over. Also I don't feel early access itself perpetuates the problem, puts a magnifying glass to it yes but the indie market was already getting over saturated with crap games trying to make a quick buck, early access and kickstarter are just the platforms they're using to do it,

 

[Michael Lubker]

1) All products are unfinished and broken. Seriously. As a QA person I know this. Most games ship with 1000-5000 known bugs that aren't fixed. (Indie or AAA, doesn't matter)
2) Like self-identified gamers aren't entitled already?
3) The same thing happens when we see the same game over and over for years at E3
4) This is completely the fault of the audience, not the developers (unless the developers are an already established company, which is really only maybe 20% at most of those doing Kickstarter or Early Access, even if its the same 20% that makes 80% of the money)
5) At this point independent developers need less incentive to make their own games, and more incentive to work together on quality games.
6) Most developers still want to make quality games, but quantity provides a more stable paycheck. Again, not the fault of the developers.
7) What is up with the letters EA?

 

[Zontar]

1) All products are unfinished and broken. Seriously. As a QA person I know this. Most games ship with 1000-5000 known bugs that aren't fixed. (Indie or AAA, doesn't matter)
2) Like self-identified gamers aren't entitled already?
3) The same thing happens when we see the same game over and over for years at E3
4) This is completely the fault of the audience, not the developers (unless the developers are an already established company, which is really only maybe 20% at most of those doing Kickstarter or Early Access, even if its the same 20% that makes 80% of the money)
5) At this point independent developers need less incentive to make their own games, and more incentive to work together on quality games.
6) Most developers still want to make quality games, but quantity provides a more stable paycheck. Again, not the fault of the developers.
7) What is up with the letters EA?

So what you're saying is, we shouldn't treat the unfinished game (unfinished seems to be when the developer pulls the term "beta" or "alpha" away from it these days) even though it's asking for money?

Look, Early Access works in some cases, but almost all examples of it are bad ones.

 

[NuclearKangaroo]

Divinity Original Sin, DayZ, Rust, Kerbal Space Program, Insurgency, Starbound and Dont Starve beg to differ

A handful of examples neither proves nor disproves an overall trend. You can usually find a few positives in all but the most absolutely toxic policies.

probably but those games either exist thanks to early access or are better thanks to early access, and the bottom line is, early access doesnt really affect you negatively if you choose not to participate

you dont like playing broken games? then dont do it, just wait until it gets released

compare it to something like say, pre-orders, other people participating in stuff like that actually affects us all, because it has now become a common practice to cut parts of the game and sell em as pre-order bonuses

but early access? i dont see how it can negatively affect the people that dont participate, the game might release at a later date with more features and/or more stable, which isnt really a bad thing

 

[Michael Lubker]

Most gamers would benefit from a year in QA to better understand this issue. I am basically saying "can you do better?"

Nearly every MMO has some form of Early Access. That big a game isn't finished in "beta".

Agree with waiting on release (even if that really helps neither side - feedback from players is great when it isn't toxic)

Anyone here play Mount and Blade? (Early Access before Minecraft)

 

[G00N3R7883]

I'm not a fan of Early Access and I'm concerned about the number of games that are going down that route, but I wouldn't go so far as to say its ruined indie development.

I will never buy an Early Access game. I don't even preorder AAA's anymore because I got burned too many times by games that were broken, buggy or just not as good as advertised. I wait for reviews and forum comments - so there's no way I'll buy a game I know is unfinished by definition. I paid for MechWarrior Online's founders package in closed beta which I guess is the same as Early Access ... still waiting for that to be finished more than 2 years later. Never again.

However, I have bought some games that have come out of Early Access and I've enjoyed them (State of Decay, Sir You Are Being Hunted, plus I own Divinity, not started playing it yet but its got some positive feedback). I think the players who do buy during the Early Access stage and report bugs are helping me to get a better experience with the finished product.

In the meantime whenever I see an Early Access game that looks interesting, I just add it to my wishlist. The only things I'd personally change is to get a better system in place to announce when a game has reached full release status, and to not include Early Access games in the Steam sales - those places should go to finished games as a reward for being a finished game.

 

[lacktheknack]

I wonder when people will stop complaining about optional options.

No one is forcing you to buy it with a gun to your head. There's literally no reason to get upset about it. If you want the game but it's in early access, then behave like you would for literally every other game and buy it on release.

If it's never released, then it was never meant to be, like The Last Guardian. It happens.

 

[lord.jeff]

Early access can be a good thing but it has gone the way of DLC, that is a good idea that is getting used way to much so some greedy assholes can make money.

 

[William Fleming]

Here's one I want to add to the list: the hardest thing about making your first game is finishing it (especially for a deadline)... yes, I'm serious. People get side tracked or other things more important comes up. And multiple developers start making their games can't finish their games and just leave them. Remember a certain game called "Towns"?

http://store.steampowered.com/app/221020/

If it was just small free games there would be no problem but EVERYONE wants a slice of that pie. So they start, put the game up on Early Access for prices as ridiculous as £15 that has nothing functional and barely update it or not even try for months when it gets hard or they steal assets from other games. It gets abandoned unfinished and runaway with everyone's money though thankfully I hear that Early Access and Kickstarter severely declining. I don't hate it but they are being so abused by people who have no idea how to make games.

Edit: I may have been a bit harsh actually but you really have no idea how hard it is to actually finish your first few games before deadlines. When you finish more games you start to learn how to effectively plan out your schedule that will let you finish a game for a deadline.