Early Access Games OR "Pay us to be an alpha tester"

[Wit For Brains]

Is it just me, or does anyone else see this as a cash grab?

The whole concept of buying a game that's still in development seems kind of fishy to me. Lets say you pay 20 bucks on (generating random game name) "Super Samurai Squad". You know that the game is not complete and more then likely buggy as all hell. Develpoers are laughing, since they have people PAYING THEM to play test their games.
Not only that, you could be out your 20 bucks if the developers decide to scrap the project (leaving you with an unfinished, buggy game), or they could completely retool it under your nose and instead of "Super Samurai Squad", you're stuck with "Kitty Krysis".

Personally, I'd much rather spend my 20 bucks on a game that's already finished then roll the dice on a half baked project.

What's your oppinion on Early Access Games? Is it a boon for indy developers as to give their projects a running start, or a way for valve to rake in a couple extra bucks?

[Felix]

I'd imagine that to be part of the scheme on Steam, the developers will have to enter some form of contractual agreement regarding the end product.

[Satoru]

It's not a 'cash grab'

They're clear as to what you're asked. If you don't want to then you're not forced into the program

For those users who feel that tehy want to support a particular developer or title, can choose to participate and participate in the process. This can be beneficial to everyone as more people can give input and find bugs as well.

I mean the concept isn't all that 'new'. Many devs haev given alpha/beta access in return for preordering. Fallen Enchantress is one such game.

It's not for everyone, but for indie devs who have NO MONEY at all it's a way for them to at least keep eating while making a game. and at the end your reputation is on the line. Which can equally make or break your company.

Are you paying to be an alpha tester? Yes. But in this case it's not in a facetious way teh phrase is normally used

[Wit For Brains]

Originally posted by Satoru:

For those users who feel that tehy want to support a particular developer or title, can choose to participate and participate in the process. This can be beneficial to everyone as more people can give input and find bugs as well.

Isn't it also true that when you purchase a completed game you are supporting both that developer and title. As to giving input and finding bugs, that happens all the time with fully released games. I can't count how many times i've fund bugs in games only to have them fixed in the next patch.

All i'm saying is this seems like a "Pig in a Poke" situation, and i personally dont want to be the one to let the cat out of the bag.

[Τhe Rolling Cheese Wheel]

I rather help the dev fix the game while it's in alpha/beta then buy the game at release to realize it's a turd.

[Spawn of Totoro]

Originally posted by The Rolling Cheese:

I rather help the dev fix the game while it's in alpha/beta then buy the game at release to realize it's a turd.

Agreed.
-----
Think of it as a simpler kickstarter. Though the game has already been started, maybe kickfinisher?

Atleast we know the game is in development and playable.

[Serell]

It's fun to test a game. Heck, Minecraft was huge before it was "official". If you trust the developer and are excited to play the game as early as possible, want to help find bugs, make suggestions, and watch the game as it grows, then Early Access is for you. If you like to play it safe, you can wait until the final product comes out to consider purchasing or not.

[Wit For Brains]

Originally posted by The Rolling Cheese:

I rather help the dev fix the game while it's in alpha/beta then buy the game at release to realize it's a turd.

ok, but what happens when you jump into a development based on the concept, and then find out that all your support is doing is polishing said turd?

[Spawn of Totoro]

Originally posted by Wit For Brains:

ok, but what happens when you jump into a development based on the concept, and then find out that all your support is doing is polishing said turd?

Not willing to take the chance, then don't buy it.

Otherwise educate your self. Read about it, watch video, ect.

[Serell]

Yup. What Spawn said. It's a risk and you don't have to take it if you don't want to. I got early access to Don't Starve because I trust the developers, but it's still a risk and the final product could change drastically and suck, but it's a risk I'm willing to take for Don't Starve.

[grafty9x]

Alpha games should have alpha prices.

[Tito Shivan]

Originally posted by The Rolling Cheese:

I rather help the dev fix the game while it's in alpha/beta then buy the game at release to realize it's a turd.

Indeed.
Besides, it's been proven that people is willing to pay quite some money to put their hands on a game before everyone else (firsts CS:GO/Dota2 invites went for quite some money... I got Torchlight2 out of a CS:GO invite) Inevitabily someone will want to take advantage of that.

At least for giving these games their own section, one cannot be deceived about what he's getting into (See: Cortex Command/Towns/WarZ)

I quite welcome this new section.

Originally posted by grafty9x:

Alpha games should have alpha prices.

And after it goes out of the alpha stage you pay the rest?
You are not paying for an 'alpha game', you are paying for a full game with access to the alpha/beta stage.

[grafty9x]

increase the price as it goes from different phases, full price at release.

[Spawn of Totoro]

Originally posted by grafty9x:

increase the price as it goes from different phases, full price at release.

The devloper can do it how ever they choose. You are under no obligation to buy it either way.

[MayhemMike]

I love the new section! I already owned some of the games there but now I don't need to visit every single website, forum and dev-blog anymore to find out if there is a new update available.

[Satoru]

Originally posted by Wit For Brains:

Originally posted by Satoru:

For those users who feel that tehy want to support a particular developer or title, can choose to participate and participate in the process. This can be beneficial to everyone as more people can give input and find bugs as well.

Isn't it also true that when you purchase a completed game you are supporting both that developer and title. As to giving input and finding bugs, that happens all the time with fully released games. I can't count how many times i've fund bugs in games only to have them fixed in the next patch.

All i'm saying is this seems like a "Pig in a Poke" situation, and i personally dont want to be the one to let the cat out of the bag.

Note that for small devs who dont' have a publisher they don't have any funding. This kind of model can allow small devs to fund their game on their own terms. You can support the dev either before or after release. You still have a choice.