The 'This is Early Access' line needs to stop.

[Degrelecence]

People defending bad decisions or poor development use 'this is early access' as a catch all. In their minds it defends literally everything. There are three major problems with this mentality:

1. Things that are already made aren't victims of early access.
If people don't like the recipes you get too easily or that you didn't bring enough recipes on your intentionally planned trip (I've heard both arguements), that isn't an early access thing. They have already planned and implemented how many recipes you get. This is a design choice.

2. The purpose of early access is get community feedback.
If you look at implemented design choices like the ones listed above and see something you don't like, then you should be able to 'complain' about it. The entire stated purpose of early access is to get community feedback. Also, to be clear, the community isn't paid bug testers, so expecting everything to be presented in a professional, positive tone is unrealistic. The community is kind of the opposite of paid bug testers. They actually paid for the game rather then getting paid to test it. Complaints in almost any tone should be expected and listened to.

3. This actually isn't even early access. This is pre-early access.
Early access is a fully playable game. The rules, mechanics, and main story beats are complete. Early access is for games where they didn't know where the ending of the story would go, or where they wanted to fill some things in along the way.

For example, Minecraft was the first EA game (so early, it wasn't even called EA). It was released at $6 because they knew it wasn't finished. In that you could do everything you have probably ever done in Minecraft. During EA they added the Nether, The End, and eventually patched in stuff like water biomes, but the game was effectively complete before sales.

Maybe a better example is Subnautica, the original. Take a look at its day 1 release of EA: https://unknownworlds.com/subnautica/subnautica-early-access-released/ it was a fully complete game. I got it for $5 (on sale) during EA. Basically everything was the same as release. Some recipes changes, the icons changed, and they added the ghost river and lava area at the end. The story and mechanics and world were fully realized from day 1 of EA. The largest change I remember was adding the other lifepods to explore.

Subnautia: Below Zero has changed the entire story at least 4x that I can remember. The intro has changed, the personality of the main character has changed, the zones have changed, what can be built has changed repeatedly. We have had multiple entire patches dedicated to adding segments to the Sea Truck or to adding zones, and not end game zones. The only zone built at launch was the shallows. They had placeholders, but realistically patched in the Twisty Bridges, The Steam Vents, The Purple Vents, the Lillies, and the Jellies. They have even changed mechanics in patches.

This is an alpha test, not early access. It wasn't fair to sell it at full price, it was misrepresented, and the defense of games still in early access don't make sense. SN1 went from EA day 1 to release in 2 years. We are at 2 years with BZ, how close do you think release is?

[Demon Odie]

I have to agree, giving excuses for someones bad behaviour makes you an enabler.

[zOldBulldog]

I might make one correction to this... this was not even Alpha. It was crowdfunding.

Crowdfunding is not necessarily bad. Star Citizen did it to great success. I even suspect that Below Zero can be a success eventually too.

But I understand why people who bought it thinking that it was true early access like Minecraft, Factorio and many other similar games are mad. I had read enough about Below Zero and knew what I was getting into, but they didn't.

[...👑 JOST AMMAN 👑...]

Early Access Game

Get instant access and start playing; get involved with this game as it develops.

Note: This Early Access game is not complete and may or may not change further. If you are not excited to play this game in its current state, then you should wait to see if the game progresses further in development.

So, my question is... what y'all talking 'bout??
I don't think it can be any more clear than this.

Having said that, it doesn't mean one can't be disappointed with the way development is going, but you can't say "EA is not an excuse" for changing the game so much so many times, because that's exactly what EA is all about!

[Degrelecence]

@Jost Amman

Two things:

1. They added that after people complained. That was not there when I purchased the game.

2. That is super unclear. It doesn't say that the game is in the early alpha stages, has 2 hours of gameplay available, no voice acting, multiple areas with placeholder objects, placeholder textures, and has multiple gamebreaking bugs. It says it may or may not change. That implies it is nearly complete.

[Coops]

Originally posted by Degrelecence:

People defending bad decisions or poor development use 'this is early access' as a catch all. In their minds it defends literally everything. There are three major problems with this mentality:

1. Things that are already made aren't victims of early access.
If people don't like the recipes you get too easily or that you didn't bring enough recipes on your intentionally planned trip (I've heard both arguements), that isn't an early access thing. They have already planned and implemented how many recipes you get. This is a design choice.

The seatruck used to be 5 advanced wiring kits.

Originally posted by Degrelecence:

2. The purpose of early access is get community feedback.
If you look at implemented design choices like the ones listed above and see something you don't like, then you should be able to 'complain' about it. The entire stated purpose of early access is to get community feedback. Also, to be clear, the community isn't paid bug testers, so expecting everything to be presented in a professional, positive tone is unrealistic. The community is kind of the opposite of paid bug testers. They actually paid for the game rather then getting paid to test it. Complaints in almost any tone should be expected and listened to.

The complainers are mostly spoiled entitled brats that don't have the game played
for them. They did not read the warnings and expect to be treated to a completed
game. And the Devs did listen to complaints and changed the story multiple times
as you noted.

Originally posted by Degrelecence:

3. This actually isn't even early access. This is pre-early access.
Early access is a fully playable game. The rules, mechanics, and main story beats are complete. Early access is for games where they didn't know where the ending of the story would go, or where they wanted to fill some things in along the way.

Just wrong,

[Cougarific]

Thank you for sharing your ideas of what early access means to you.

We were all very confused but it makes perfect sense now.

[Degrelecence]

@Cougarific

Words have meanings. You can't re-define words based on your opinions.

[...👑 JOST AMMAN 👑...]

Originally posted by Degrelecence:

@Jost Amman

Two things:

1. They added that after people complained. That was not there when I purchased the game.

No, that warning has always been there on all Steam Early Access games since Steam started the EA program.

Originally posted by Degrelecence:

2. That is super unclear. It doesn't say that the game is in the early alpha stages, has 2 hours of gameplay available, no voice acting, multiple areas with placeholder objects, placeholder textures, and has multiple gamebreaking bugs. It says it may or may not change. That implies it is nearly complete.

Potato potato.

[Degrelecence]

Originally posted by ⚜ JOST AMMAN ⚜:

No, that warning has always been there on all Steam Early Access games since Steam started the EA program.

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2014-06-05-valve-issues-warning-about-steam-early-access-games#:~:text=Valve%20has%20issued%20a%20warning,may%20never%20finish%20their%20games.&text=You%20should%20be%20aware%20that,it%20in%20its%20current%20state.%22

No, Steam added that after people complained. They actually added it 5 months before I bought Subnautica, but it doesn't change that the warning doesn't begin to address the issues here. You say "potato potato," I say, "completely not the same thing at all and a completely stupid comparison."

[dragonbornzyra]

Sector Zero was intended to be a Biome in Subnautica. I think in their rush to "complete it" they forgot to treat it as its own game instead of a patch/DLC.

[regj708]

I gotta say this, the first subnautica took 4 years to make, the only biome in the game was the save shallows. There was only about 4 fish and the Aurora was just a 2d texture. Below Zero had more content when first released on early access than the first subnautica.

[redmetal]

i disagree with this post

[...👑 JOST AMMAN 👑...]

Originally posted by Degrelecence:

Originally posted by ⚜ JOST AMMAN ⚜:

No, that warning has always been there on all Steam Early Access games since Steam started the EA program.

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2014-06-05-valve-issues-warning-about-steam-early-access-games#:~:text=Valve%20has%20issued%20a%20warning,may%20never%20finish%20their%20games.&text=You%20should%20be%20aware%20that,it%20in%20its%20current%20state.%22

No, Steam added that after people complained. They actually added it 5 months before I bought Subnautica, but it doesn't change that the warning doesn't begin to address the issues here. You say "potato potato," I say, "completely not the same thing at all and a completely stupid comparison."

Anyway SN:BZ had this warning on their store page since day 1.

I'm not defending bad development practices in any way, mind you.

I'm just saying that NOW everyone is fully aware of what Early Access means, so complaining about what you're complaining at this point in time is useless and has no legal grounds.

I also disagree with your opinion on the project: in fact "stuff" happened during the development of SN:BZ (a change of writer, COVID-19) and hitting them while they're "on the ground" sounds very unfair to me.

[kevlar]

Originally posted by Coops:

[
The complainers are mostly spoiled entitled brats that don't have the game played
for them. They did not read the warnings and expect to be treated to a completed
game.

Coops you're pretty much damage control centrale in these threads but this is the most opinionated I've seen ya, and it is overreaching quite a bit. A good bit of the "complaints" / "feedback" do have some % of merit however big or small, and you have tactfully and respectfully, in most all threads I have seen you reply to, stayed the course with great explanations. Don't let them find your any key and start pressing your buttons now.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=st6-DgWeuos

Originally posted by ⚜ JOST AMMAN ⚜:

Having said that, it doesn't mean one can't be disappointed with the way development is going, but you can't say "EA is not an excuse" for changing the game so much so many times, because that's exactly what EA is all about!

I have to disagree with this, but I do see where you are coming from. When you are part of the process of what is EA and you see changes made where you didn't feel they were needed, or don't understand them, or etc., it is your own personal opinion and feeling invested in that and giving feedback is what this is all about. As a community we get to banter whether we agree or disagree and pillow fight all day / night, but in the end if whatever we offer strikes a chord with the devs than that is what it all about. We have to remember though a lot of the recent posts are from people who may have not been here from the get go and it can be very confusing of what exactly has transpired. Adapting to change has always been and will be a very personal/individual experience.

--------------

A lot of us that have been on this roller coaster since the beginning and have sometimes thoroughly enjoyed the ride, and other times got motion sickness along the way. I kind of have to agree with the premise with the original post in that the "this is EA stamp" to silence any post of what is thought is being done poorly is not enough and a cop out in a lot of cases. And remember a lot of posts may be from people coming into this recently and not from the beginning so there is going to be confusion about the status of the game especially since there was an original goal of completion (which is understood is no guarantee). I think a lot of us that have been invested in this from the beginning are fairly burnt out and don't want to hear anything negative and don't want any more changes made as we just want the game to finish asap and don't want any further set backs. But to go back to JA's post...this is EA and that is exactly what it is about! I can't even imagine coming into the forums new and giving input at this stage of the game. This has been such a crazy journey / experience :)

Lest we not forget:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QD8Xo8gNz8M 1.32.22 DK: "the community will let us know what we are doing well and what we are doing poorly, they are very good at that"

though I believe there have been more icebergs than expected ;)

[Degrelecence]

Originally posted by regj708:

I gotta say this, the first subnautica took 4 years to make, the only biome in the game was the save shallows. There was only about 4 fish and the Aurora was just a 2d texture. Below Zero had more content when first released on early access than the first subnautica.

None of that is true, not worth addressing.

Originally posted by redmetal:

i disagree with this post

Facts are facts, regardless of your opinions.

Originally posted by ⚜ JOST AMMAN ⚜:

Anyway SN:BZ had this warning on their store page since day 1.

It being inaccurate makes it irrelevant.

Originally posted by ⚜ JOST AMMAN ⚜:

I'm not defending bad development practices in any way, mind you.

Yes, you are.

Originally posted by ⚜ JOST AMMAN ⚜:

I'm just saying that NOW everyone is fully aware of what Early Access means, so complaining about what you're complaining at this point in time is useless and has no legal grounds.

Apparently Unknown Worlds Entertainment doesn't.

Originally posted by ⚜ JOST AMMAN ⚜:

I also disagree with your opinion on the project: in fact "stuff" happened during the development of SN:BZ (a change of writer, COVID-19) and hitting them while they're "on the ground" sounds very unfair to me.

The fact that everything I describe was before COVID-19 means that you are using a catastrophe to excuse bad practices that had nothing to do it, which is frankly disgusting.