Steam, time to start time limiting Early Access

[Lobo (AW)]

I'm guessing lots of people have noticed how long some games remain on "Early Access" status. It appears some, including members of the zombie apocalypse survival genre, have shown little sign of finally reaching a point where they can become a "real" game. So I have a suggestion for Steam/Valve.
No game taking money from consumers in "Early Access" status can be posted on Steam without an expected publication date, with the publication date being no more than eight months from initial posting. A game not published on time, at the publisher's choice, may remain on Early Access status but its price drops to zero. A game listed as "Early Access" can only do so once - no on, then off, then re-entered back on.
"Eight months" was arbitrary, of course. An end date had to be set - Steam might be able to tell us what the average length of time of an Early Access game is to getting to publication and some use of that data might be made. Steam might also tell us how many games have been on E-A status more than 8 months.
Dropping the price to zero for continued posting as an E-A game encourages publishers to finish but still provides them with field testing by consumers if they still need it.

[Albcatmastercat]

Though, they'd start to lose money after the deadline.
Cue rushed, 100% glitched products.

[StickyPawz]

"A game not published on time, at the publisher's choice, may remain on Early Access status but its price drops to zero."

Pffft … No developer would agree to those terms.

[Washell]

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.

[Excitable Boy]

The early access model has turned into just another way for both Steam & unscrupulous devs to rip people off. Steam wrote "guidelines" with no teeth in the first place so the devs pretty much get away with anything they desire. It needed to be addressed a long time ago. I was scammed quite some time ago by Godus & it is still being sold today. It's a big black mark for the legitimate devs who have no intent to take advantage of the system.

[Satoru]

So should people get their money back for Nuclear Throne a game that was "late" by 1.5 years?

[Albcatmastercat]

Originally posted by Excitable Boy:

The early access model has turned into just another way for both Steam & unscrupulous devs to rip people off. Steam wrote "guidelines" with no teeth in the first place so the devs pretty much get away with anything they desire. It needed to be addressed a long time ago. I was scammed quite some time ago by Godus & it is still being sold today. It's a big black mark for the legitimate devs who have no intent to take advantage of the system.

And why have you bought it?
Were you held at gunpoint?
EA means early access, not necessarily "This will be a complete game". Nobody forced you to buy it...

[Excitable Boy]

The store page was full of bold faced lies. It was supposed to be a PC game but money was being used to create a phone app version of the game. the PC version never amounted to jack. It's still in early access & has been going on for nigh on 3 years now. 22Cans have all but admitted that the game will no longer be worked on & it's been abandoned,it is the perfect example of vaporware. It should be removed from sale.

[Mr Sinister]

To learn and to adapt is supposed to be one of humans strongest points.

I tend to research as best as possible on Early access games nowadays and "look out for the warning signs". (such as going to a 75% sale whithin 2 month of releasing, change of "scope", things like that).

Should the dodgey developers get too much, eventually sales will completely slump. Besides, no mans sky was put out and look at the mess that has been (in a none monetary sense, money wise it was of course "amazing" to some people).

Harsher penalties (or any penalties at all) for false advertising and misleading statements is the way to go.
In my opinion.

And i truly dont see how that can be argued against, unless some people want scams to continue ?.

I have to say there is some great early access games and developers though.

[The Rock God]

I have exactly eight months to finish the game, or Steam will give it to everyone for free?
Seven months and twenty-nine days later my game, no matter what state it's in, is now finished.

[cinedine]

You know, if you want to be constructive and taken serious, maybe don't make a suggestion as ridiculous as "give away games for free".

Also, did we really need another one of those?

[Lobo (AW)]

Rock God - I think a lot of developers would do as you say, with the result their trash would get low ratings and end up being ignored. The current loophole is that most reviewers don't review Early Access games, so a source of warnings is avoided. So "put up or drop out" would help the scene.
Albcatmastercat - (Great handle) One of the problems with E-A games is that they are exactly that, "rushed and glitched." How many E-A games actually turn into something worth waiting for? I have no idea - that data is not available. Whether that's a function of a Valve-developer conspiracy or just a symptom of incompentence or indifference, I don't know. I think the current situation is poor for consumers and I would like to see something done to improve things. I like the idea of time limits for E-A status but there may be solutions I have not considered.
Mittenz - I hope a lot of so-called publishers would not agree to those terms and take their trash off Steam. We win. I think serious publishers would use E-A for final testing instead of a revenue stream and wouldn't have much of a problem with scheduling an end date to E-A.

[Lobo (AW)]

http://www.pcgamer.com/early-access-rules/

http://www.pcgamer.com/valve-must-take-greater-ownership-of-steams-early-access-program/

Obviously, others have concerns about Steam's policies. There is a Steam group you might consider joining if this issue is one you are concerned about: Early Access.

[76561198337373302]

Originally posted by Mittenz:

"A game not published on time, at the publisher's choice, may remain on Early Access status but its price drops to zero."

Pffft … No developer would agree to those terms.

No wannabe armchair basement dwelling delevoper daydreaming of being able to develop a video game would agree to it. A real developer not only would agree to it, they are most likely developing a game right now without being paid a cent for it.

See... a real developer doesn't depend on scamming people for money while he tries to figure out how to tinker with a dev kit. A real developer is probably making enough money from THE LAST 5 GAMES HE ACTUALLY FINISHED DEVELOPING! So that he does not depend on Early Access pity party to fund his project.

^^^^ See how that works?

As far as daydreaming indie wannabe's, they need to get paid for the next 5 years while they practice learning to make video games.

[Lobo (AW)]

cinedine - Open to other suggestions. Obviously, only publishers who have posted games on E-A that they are no longer paying any attention would find them being given away for free. So the effect would be the games would be withdrawn. That would reduce the total number of games Steam lists. I see that as having some advantages over the current system.

[Albcatmastercat]

Originally posted by Lobo(AW):

cinedine - Open to other suggestions. Obviously, only publishers who have posted games on E-A that they are no longer paying any attention would find them being given away for free. So the effect would be the games would be withdrawn. That would reduce the total number of games Steam lists. I see that as having some advantages over the current system.

It would generate more problems, though, I'd think. People would release a no-effort game as "Complete" instead.
For instance, the recent "Digital Homicide" incidents.
Sorry for sounding triggered on my previous post. I saw, too late, how dumb and childish it sounded.