Steam Early Access' new policy change: Game gets ditched? Tough shit.

[Infernal Lawyer]

I'm rather surprised that there isn't a discussion about this already, let alone an official news report (unless I've missed something in which case I apologize), so here you go, the new "improved" Early Access FAQ: http://store.steampowered.com/earlyaccessfaq/?snr=1_200_200_Early+Access

"You should be aware that some teams will be unable to 'finish' their game. So you should only buy an Early Access game if you are excited about playing it in its current state."

So, in other words, an Early Access game could very well end up being the "final product" if the developers die off (which happens) or simply bail with the cash. You are NOT guaranteed to a finished product, and while it's generally accepted that EA games are, by nature, incomplete, most people naturally expected that they were going to get a finished product in the future, and this WAS implied heavily in the old FAQ.

So, thoughts, people? It just seems to me that Valve is more interested in dodging responsibility than making sure it's customers don't get burned.

 

[Keoul]

Wasn't this obvious?
Seriously does this even need saying? They can 'finish' it whenever they want, if people are happy with it in the Early Access state then the devs can just go "GOOD ENOUGH" and declare it finished. I'm not surprised at all, in fact I thought this was a given.

 

[Infernal Lawyer]

Wasn't this obvious?
Seriously does this even need saying? They can 'finish' it whenever they want, if people are happy with it in the Early Access state then the devs can just go "GOOD ENOUGH" and declare it finished. I'm not surprised at all, in fact I thought this was a given.

Missing the point. Monsters and Munitions (http://store.steampowered.com/app/256440/) was ditched by the developers. It was never declared finished or taken out of Early Access. It is no longer able to be purchased, however noone who has bought it has gotten refunds.

 

[The Lunatic]

They should definitely refund anyone whom purchased any game before this notice was added.


However, steam has awful customer support, so, Ehh...

 

[Gethsemani_v1legacy]

Wasn't this obvious?
Seriously does this even need saying? They can 'finish' it whenever they want, if people are happy with it in the Early Access state then the devs can just go "GOOD ENOUGH" and declare it finished. I'm not surprised at all, in fact I thought this was a given.

+1, as the cool kids say. I always thought it was pretty given that buying early access games was a chance to buy the game "as is", with only a vague promise that it might one day be a better product. It is the first law of investment: "Always be prepared that you will not see a return on your money".

 

[Barbas]

Steam staff do what they can to refund as many people as possible, I imagine, but they can only do so much after, as they say, the Greenlight floodgates have opened.

(Snip).

*Gestures with pipe*. Eeyup. There are some important lessons the wise customer should know and that's one of 'em.

EDIT: Look, I don't like it, in fact I think it sucks. It's just a risk you take - money down, sight-unseen and all that.

 

[Smooth Operator]

Well this is business 101, ditch any and all legal responsibility when possible so no one can come after you.
Now Valve might still be the gaming industry darling but they have grown far too big to be concerned with the smaller parts of their business, now they are putting down anti-lawsuit clauses and lobbying for games to not be considered software because that are their concerns as a worldwide conglomerate, and if you get fucked by this process... well that part if your concern.

 

[Infernal Lawyer]

Wasn't this obvious?
Seriously does this even need saying? They can 'finish' it whenever they want, if people are happy with it in the Early Access state then the devs can just go "GOOD ENOUGH" and declare it finished. I'm not surprised at all, in fact I thought this was a given.

+1, as the cool kids say. I always thought it was pretty given that buying early access games was a chance to buy the game "as is", with only a vague promise that it might one day be a better product. It is the first law of investment: "Always be prepared that you will not see a return on your money".

Perhaps, though I think that this logic will mix badly with the "Early Access is a blanket armor against criticism" crowd that you find in every EA game. I mean, if there's a chance that you'll end up with the product "as is", does that mean that when reviewing them we have to treat them as such? Or do we have to have two seperate scores for these games? (e.g. a "as-is" score and a "potential" score, the latter being when, at the very least, the more obvious bugs are ironed out)?

 

[Fat Hippo]

Wasn't this obvious?
Seriously does this even need saying? They can 'finish' it whenever they want, if people are happy with it in the Early Access state then the devs can just go "GOOD ENOUGH" and declare it finished. I'm not surprised at all, in fact I thought this was a given.

+1, as the cool kids say. I always thought it was pretty given that buying early access games was a chance to buy the game "as is", with only a vague promise that it might one day be a better product. It is the first law of investment: "Always be prepared that you will not see a return on your money".

Perhaps, though I think that this logic will mix badly with the "Early Access is a blanket armor against criticism" crowd that you find in every EA game. I mean, if there's a chance that you'll end up with the product "as is", does that mean that when reviewing them we have to treat them as such? Or do we have to have two seperate scores for these games? (e.g. a "as-is" score and a "potential" score, the latter being when, at the very least, the more obvious bugs are ironed out)?

Most reviewers who do a review of an early access game very clearly state that they are reviewing it in its current state, indicated by the date of review or the name of the build, something like "Indie Game Build 0.22a") , and not what it might potentially become. Later they might revise that review for the release version, or they might not. If you want a review of the game in its current state, look for a recent review. Most reviews will probably appear whenever the developers deem to finalize a "release build" although this decision is more or less arbitrary and many games continue to receive updates even after release.

Personally, I fall on the "tough luck" end of this argument. Steam has long been transitioning from curated store to open market, early access is just another part of that. And if you're not willing to take the risk associated with early access, just don't buy it. I know I don't. It's not as if I'm obligated to support every indie developer, they'll get my money when they've made a product worth that money.

So basically, there are 3 times when you should, in my opinion, spend money on an early access game:

1. You think the game is, in its current state, worth the price
2. You wish to support the developers, whether the game is ever completed or not
3. You are willing to take the risk that you will never receive the product that you imagine this game will eventually turn into

Otherwise, you got burnt, and have no right to take an indignant attitude with Steam, as every early access game is very clearly labeled as such. If you're gonna get pissy, do so with the developers on the grounds of their incompetence, but even then, accept that you shouldn't take a risk if you won't accept a negative outcome.

 

[Infernal Lawyer]

Why should Valve take financial responsibility for every "developer" that bails on a project? They CAN'T, it's not feasible. The disclaimer is there. You shouldn't be buying Early Access anyway, if you do, you're just ASKING for this type of thing to happen.

That's the thing, and perhaps my main point: I WON'T be getting any more EA games, though if enough people share that attitude, well... let's just say Valve will end up using their "not our fault if the studio dies" clause a lot more.

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

I don't see how this is controversial now. That's always been one of the main risks. It is also why I will never buy into the Early Access scheme. To me, Early Access means that you forfeit the right to demand a refund and to complain because you knowingly payed for an unfinished product.

 

[Savagezion]

Wasn't this obvious?
Seriously does this even need saying? They can 'finish' it whenever they want, if people are happy with it in the Early Access state then the devs can just go "GOOD ENOUGH" and declare it finished. I'm not surprised at all, in fact I thought this was a given.

Missing the point. Monsters and Munitions (http://store.steampowered.com/app/256440/) was ditched by the developers. It was never declared finished or taken out of Early Access. It is no longer able to be purchased, however noone who has bought it has gotten refunds.

This is just the danger of Early Access and Kickstarter. It was only a matter of time before they started getting compared to pre-orders and it really isn't the same thing. Early Access and Kickstarter is more of a pledge. That is two different business models and the consumer should consider stuff like that before going in. Valve really doesn't owe indie devs anything. They're indie, not even related subsidiaries or anything. Just individuals trying to make a buck on a promise. It's the reason why you can refund a pre-order, so long as the game hasn't been claimed. Pre-orders aren't actually a sale until release day. Which has a different idea behind it. Early Access and Kickstarter is an "as-is" purchase. If you have nothing when you give up the money, you could get nothing 'as is'.

Kickstarter and Early Access is an actual sale before you get to put your hands on anything. I don't advise it but I do it and like doing it sometimes. I know its a gamble when I do it. That's probably even part of the reason I do it. Sometimes its fun to put your money where your mouth is for the sake of it. I don't understand the spamming of it. I don't think its a good agreement for customers if they don't at least actually follow its development.

 

[spartandude]

I really do think Early Access should be treated as a preorder, that could actually deter some bad indie devs from making a game on there then just abandoning it, and with some curating of the store they could force unfinished products into EA. But that wont happen because Valve is taking a step back at the moment.

 

[NuclearKangaroo]

i read that a few days ago, its bullshit, and honestly, very anti-customer in my opinion, early access desperately need some form of developer accountability, if the dev isnt going to finish his game, ok, i should have a refund atleast

 

[Canadamus Prime]

I don't understand why people buy into Early Access for this very reason, among others. I'd rather feel secure in the knowledge that I'm buying a (more or less) final product.

 

[StriderShinryu]

This sort of thing makes me wonder if more games will essentially lock themselves into permanent Early Access. I mean, they already don't get any less promotion on Steam than fully finished games and now they're kept relatively safe from financial repercussions as well. This just adds to them often being generally given the benefit of the doubt in critical review with the harshest criticism often being "it's not good now, but it might be at some point."

 

[spartandude]

This sort of thing makes me wonder if more games will essentially lock themselves into permanent Early Access. I mean, they already don't get any less promotion on Steam than fully finished games and now they're kept relatively safe from financial repercussions as well. This just adds to them often being generally given the benefit of the doubt in critical review with the harshest criticism often being "it's not good now, but it might be at some point."

This is why i think it should considered a preorder by steam. It would encourage devs to actually finish off a game but also to release it in Alphas/betas which are actually playable and get it sorted out in a speedy fashion.
Personally the moment im charged i am going to critique it as a if a finished product.

 

[Allspice]

And this is the reason I don't buy games in Early Access, it's a gamble I'm not willing to take. Now there is even less accountability on the part of devs and Valve.

There are some I like the look of, but I won't buy them unless they are finished. The only problem with that is it doesn't seem like those games will be because there is no incentive to finish them. Not to mention there is no guarantee when the game is "finished" you will get what you were promised anyway.

I hope enough people see this and decide it's not the worth the risk. That way maybe something will change...but I doubt it.

 

[Eve Charm]

Ya so end of the day, We know something is wrong with early access, but it's the consumer's fault, How promising Steam to your customers your acts of being anti consumer as all hell.

What needs to happen is this BS "Barely a game is early access. Steam early access shouldn't be pre alpha, alpha, IT should be beta or demo at least, if you aren't there go fund your game somewhere else like kickstarter or indie gogo or your own website.

2. only one early access per dev at a time probably like 2 or so max at life time.

3. The Dev only receiving half of the value of the sale until the game leaves early access so if the game dies in early access a partial refund can be given.