Steam'i Yükleyin
giriş
|
dil
简体中文 (Basitleştirilmiş Çince)
繁體中文 (Geleneksel Çince)
日本語 (Japonca)
한국어 (Korece)
ไทย (Tayca)
Български (Bulgarca)
Čeština (Çekçe)
Dansk (Danca)
Deutsch (Almanca)
English (İngilizce)
Español - España (İspanyolca - İspanya)
Español - Latinoamérica (İspanyolca - Latin Amerika)
Ελληνικά (Yunanca)
Français (Fransızca)
Italiano (İtalyanca)
Bahasa Indonesia (Endonezce)
Magyar (Macarca)
Nederlands (Hollandaca)
Norsk (Norveççe)
Polski (Lehçe)
Português (Portekizce - Portekiz)
Português - Brasil (Portekizce - Brezilya)
Română (Rumence)
Русский (Rusça)
Suomi (Fince)
Svenska (İsveççe)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamca)
Українська (Ukraynaca)
Bir çeviri sorunu bildirin
Tartışma Kuralları ve Yönergeleri
Bu iletiyi bildir
Please show me any indie developer that didnt done a paid alpha/beta. Even minecraft done that, every indie company do that because they dont have tons of money to develop a game for free until its released. You may think developing a game its free but it isnt, like everthing in life you need money.
And really dont buy games marked as Early Acess if you are going to cry because you paid for it. LOL
I understand all that and I support the notion but not unless it is free. That honestly is my biggest issue with it. Start a kickstarter, do a fund raiser whatever but I think it is premature and , well, unprofessional to ask me to purchase an "alpha" . There are better ways of doing it if money is what they need. And quite frankly, most of these, not all but most of these devs are not broke college kids with nothing but a linux based pc in a dorm room. I understand what you are saying and I really do support the notion, but I think it should be free OR funds raised with something better in mind.
Oh totally. I have never bought one and do not intend too. I think the whole concept of charging for something that is broken and incomplete is stupid. IMHO
These are indie developers "indie", what you didn't think about except them being just a few guys trying to make their ideas reality (AKA taking years of development to get everything they dream of on "paper") is that through this new practice of alpha access they literally build the game "consumers want". Nobody can think of everything, even if the developers have some brilliant ideas they will never see all the flaws and missing features of certain aspects and such flaws have already been fixed/improved with feedback from the community (I've been keeping my eyes on it for quite some time, waiting for the right moment which was this latest alpha build).
I personally just bought it a few days ago, didn't really have time to get into it, but it was love at first sight, there's just something that draws you in and makes you feel excited for the next time you enter the game like few games still manage to achieve these days, it didn't feel lacking and it's still in alpha.
Beta is something entirely different from the concept of alpha and you seem to not get it, it's not catchy and developers assume their consumers will be smart enough to understand what it means but this is "pay to get early access and help make our game the game you want to play".
Alpha access gives developers some of the most critical feedback in what is the most important phase of the game.
What is FUN
Note you can think and plan that all day long. But at the end of the day it's impossible to tell what is actually 'fun'. What you see even in a late stage beta, is NEVER what is thought up in a designers head at the beginning of the development.
Look at Xcom:EU. GOTY, multiple awards, accolades from critics and gamers. You'd think Jake Solomon was a damn genius bridging Xcom to both PC and consoles. What you didn't see were the two OTHER Xcom games he made that were trashed in the process. Games that were very far into post production.
http://www.polygon.com/features/2013/1/31/3928710/making-of-xcoms-jake-solomon-firaxis-sid-meier
Once you're in beta, generally you're feature locked and gameplay locked. You can't change major mechanics. You can't add major features. You're 'stuck' with the scaffolding you built in the alpha, and if you built that scaffolding on mud ground and using toothpicks, then no matter how much beta testing you do, you can't really 'fix' it.
Alpha access allows devs to get ideas and feedback at a time when things are more flexible. Entire system can be rebuild or trashed. Starbound has already obliterated their leveling system in their alpha from user feedback. Something that would have been almost impossible if you were too far down the production process, once you build so many systems around it.
Just because somethign is 'new' doesn't mean it's 'bad'. Most devs assumed useres didn't want to be part of the process. Most devs assumed no one would want to pay to play a broken game. While said process is not for everyone, it's obvious that thinking was incorrect. There are a SUBSET of users who want to be part of the process. And they're willing to pay for it.
Those kinds beta was used to solve a different problem than Early Access is solving. Early Access in addition to the 'traditional' beta process, can also be used to solve problems like:
1) Assist in the funding efforts for games which has traditionally been difficult for many indie devs. Note that before you'd be STARVING for potentially years while making your game. Borrowing money from friends and family to do your passion project. You can see this struggle in the Indie Game Movie, where the Super Meat Boy dev/designer duo show how pretty awful things were before they broke out with SMB. It was a labor of love, but it wasn't easy and involved a lot of sacrifice. Crowdsourcing is a new method for devs to reach out to users directly. Similar to how musicians and videos are reaching users directly rather than using producers as middlemen.
2) As noted above allowing feedback from users early in the process, CAN allow for more dynamic game development and incorporation of different ideas at a time when doing so is easier. Rather than a late 'bug test' beta where if you heard some kind of awesome idea your response woudl be "Uh... hold that though until we make the sequel"
Kickstarter.
Not every kickstarter is successful. And Early Access is actually better than Kickstarter in that at last you have SOMETHING to play right from the outset.
And you haven't even played Prison Architect, who are you to call it completely broken? Even in early access, early alpha this game is more than playable. It's actually better then many full fledged sims. You're entitled to your opinion, even though it's biased and unfounded. Unfortunately, unlike the good old days video games aren't exactly cheap to make... many cost millions of dollars just to develop, and you can't even guarantee any return.
That's why small time developers have to resort to early access or kickstarter to get their ideas out there. Most big time producers, developers won't make anything that can't guarantee some sort of profit margin - that's why you see so many sequels and clones of successful products. Big time developers can't be bothered to take a risk.
Early access and kickstarter are good things, even if you don't think so. Too bad you can't see it that way. Comparing the development of a modern game to something out of the 90's is just stupid. No offence. With people supporting this kind of thing we see more original and fun games hit the market that would never exist otherwise.
Also, no one is twisting your arm. If you're in this forum in particular trying to pick apart the concept of early access it's obvious you actually WANT this game, but are chapped that it costs money... lol
You've said several times how they could use sites like Kickstarter to fund their creation (which I believe they did run a kickstarter, i might be thinking of another game though >_> ). I love this game. I've been with it since alpha....?....since bout apirl XD, bought it in july. I'd buy it all over again and for more money, infact I'm going name in the game this week :D. but anyhoo...I never would have known about it if it wasn't for Steam's Early Access. I'm glad their here, I'm glad Early access is here, and will continue to support this game, this community, and the indie community in general.
And maybe you're against funding for a game before it's finished, but what's the difference in that and buying DLC? You could say that the standalone game is incomplete until the GOTY edition comes out with all of the DLC, right? I mean, at that point the game has all of it's content completely finished, right? Same logic.