Early Access games are turning into a scam

[Cdnmntman]

So I have been wondering about all these so called early access games and why their not being monitored by steam.
Having 12 early access games in my library that have literally gone nowhere towards advancement with a few exceptions like U-boat, Wolf-pack etc are on point and advancing but their are a ton of games still listed and supported by steam that haven't made any advancement or updated in 2 plus years but are still getting a spot on steam for example the game the Filth Day last update was back in 2018 over 4 years of no current updates or work being done still being sold to un-expecting buyers is nothing more then a money grab for the so called development staff and steam.

so here is my question why doesn't steam implement a rule set to rapidly enforce in active games instead of continuing to sell products that are obliviously going no where.
Think about the games in your library and if you had planned on waiting years for a game to finally release a stable version.
these games need some forum of a rule set to follow to satisfy customers in a timely fashion, I myself am no longer comfortable buying any early access game these days

[Crazy Tiger]

You might want to reread the big blue warning on the store pages of Early Access games. You're literally told to not purchase them unless you want them in the current state and that they may or may not change.

Being "active" also is subjective. A game dev that gives an update once every 6 months is an active dev, for example.

There are already rules set in, however the major issue is not the game devs or Valve, but the players. They somehow always miss that a finished version of the game is not part of the sale. Don't buy promises, they're worth nothing.

I don't buy Early Access games often, but the once I bought all have been to satisfaction.

[Nx Machina]

Simple solution - take the advice on the store page:

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.

Your buying decisions are not a failure of the system but of the choices you make.

[Cdnmntman]

I have read the warnings and am fully aware of the risks but like i said steam don't hold these early access designers to doing their part the filth day is a prime example over 4 years with no updates and steam allows it as they want to collect their 30 percent
I have been a part of allot of early access games that do evolve and update regularly i am more concerned about the games that just grab the money and run and countuine to do so under the guise of early access

[ุ]

引用自 Cdnmntman：

I have read the warnings and am fully aware of the risks but like i said steam don't hold these early access designers to doing their part the filth day is a prime example over 4 years with no updates and steam allows it as they want to collect their 30 percent

Steam does take action against bad devs, they clear out thousands of quick asset flip games on the regular.

[Nx Machina]

引用自 Cdnmntman：

I have read the warnings and am fully aware of the risks but like i said steam don't hold these early access designers to doing their part the filth day is a prime example over 4 years with no updates and steam allows it as they want to collect their 30 percent
I have been a part of allot of early access games that do evolve and update regularly i am more concerned about the games that just grab the money and run and countuine to do so under the guise of early access

Valve cannot force EAG developers to complete games.

Valve cannot force those browsing EAG titles to make a purchase.

It comes simply down to - "do you believe it is worth the money been asked and are you prepared to take a chance".

I recently purchased "Malus", which is been developed by a one man team who works full time and only has a few hours a day to program.

Does it have potential? Yes.

Will it ever release? Unknown.

Is the cost versus time played so far worth it? Yes.

Do I still play it? Yes.

If it never releases was I robbed of my money? No.

[nullable]

引用自 Cdnmntman：

I have read the warnings and am fully aware of the risks but like i said steam don't hold these early access designers to doing their part the filth day is a prime example over 4 years with no updates and steam allows it as they want to collect their 30 percent
I have been a part of allot of early access games that do evolve and update regularly i am more concerned about the games that just grab the money and run and countuine to do so under the guise of early access

A lot of people seem to imagine unfinished EAG's are so lucrative and immune to negative reviews. I'm not sure where people get this idea and why it's more appealing than struggling or failed development. But the EAG Scam is the fantasy do-gooders reach for automatically.

You know what a good reason to stop development is? Lack of money. Among the laundry list of other issues that can derail indie projects.

You're free to have your opinions about Early Access, and how game development ought to go. In my experience it's pretty easy to avoid bad games, even if they're Early Access.

And arguably a scammer would want to avoid Early Access because of all the negative connotations it has or just release a game as complete. A full release game would arguably have a wider appeal.

The sales buff you (apparently) imagine Early Access provides doesn't really exist. And nothing is stopping a developer from moving a game out of Early Access at any time. If they leave it in Early Access, maybe, just maybe it's an honest opinion about the state of the game. Whether you like it or not, or agree with it or not.

Frankly I'll trust a random developer with a failed project over you. And the same goes with Valve's implementation of Early Access, their opinions as developers weigh more than yours as a opinionated layman.

[Cdnmntman]

I did not at any time say i don't support early access but obviously some don't get the point, of a early access game that is still selling on steam that hasn't had any activity updates or progress for over 4 years let alone contact with steam still being sold via steam. I have many early access games that i enjoy and do support but if work had stopped on them i would expect sales to stop as well seeing as the developer hasn't logged any responses since 2014.
You still consider this an early access game that should be listed for sale on steam?

[✨Saint✨]

The Early Access, or Beta excuse as I call it, plenty of games follow this format.

Man, I have seen and invested plenty of money in those games, hoping devs would make something of it, but that money got up in smoke for some reason, so, a few years ago, I stopped supporting those games.

It is just like gambling, put your money in their pocket and hope for the best?!.

It is just too darn easy to make a game on Steam, fish out some money and run, this happens so many times, and it seems little is done to prevent this.

Now, there seems to be a new trend going on for a while now; make a game, hype it, deliver little to nothing what is said, or deliver it in such a state that a game is almost unplayable. And let the customer pay idiotic prices (DLC excluded).

[Nx Machina]

引用自 Cdnmntman：

I did not at any time say i don't support early access but obviously some don't get the point, of a early access game that is still selling on steam that hasn't had any activity updates or progress for over 4 years let alone contact with steam still being sold via steam. I have many early access games that i enjoy and do support but if work had stopped on them i would expect sales to stop as well seeing as the developer hasn't logged any responses since 2014.
You still consider this an early access game that should be listed for sale on steam?

And that is the part clearly covered by: 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.

It still comes down to: "Do you want to purchase" as it still is a working product.

People bought Anthem, Mass Effect Andromeda, neither are EAG, both abandoned, both still available for purchase and if someone wants to buy them why should they not?

[nullable]

引用自 Cdnmntman：

I did not at any time say i don't support early access but obviously some don't get the point, of a early access game that is still selling on steam that hasn't had any activity updates or progress for over 4 years let alone contact with steam still being sold via steam. I have many early access games that i enjoy and do support but if work had stopped on them i would expect sales to stop as well seeing as the developer hasn't logged any responses since 2014.
You still consider this an early access game that should be listed for sale on steam?

If the developers last opinion was that it is incomplete and it's still in Early Access that's good enough for me. I don't see the benefit of having Valve supersede that opinion because of some opinion on your part.

If people are still buying it and reviews still show it's a good game I don't have a problem with that either. Users aren't free to buy good games because you don't like how they're categorized?

And if the reviews are terrible because development ceased years ago, who's flocking to buy negative and mostly negative reviewed games? And who am I to worry over those users? Users aren't free to buy bad games because you know better than them?

I think there's plenty of safe guards already in place and you have to go out of your way to ignore those safeguards, or to imagine some sort of conspiracy to defraud users.

[Walach]

I don't believe most early access games are scams, not even some that doesn't get updated in years. But I would like some oversight or standard for it. There should be a maximum length a game can use the "early access" tag. If to much time pass it should show another banner that it hasn't been updated.

I would like it anyways. :)

[nullable]

The developer is free to move the game out of Early Access at any time. And bad games are allowed to exist on Steam. Early Access is just an opinion from the developer, to you, and a caution to manage your expectations. Nothing more. Saying the developer's opinion only matters for a year or two, or however long, might make you feel better. But it has no real purpose or value in software development.

Games will just move out of Early Access when they "age out" and people will complain about that. That's all. It won't speed up development. Or prevent projects from failing. Not much will change, accept it will be harder to tell games that the developer feels are ready to move out of Early Access from games that were pushed out for arbitrary reasons. No, there won't be special labeling to differentiate the two.

[Aachen]

引用自 Walach：

I don't believe most early access games are scams, not even some that doesn't get updated in years. But I would like some oversight or standard for it. There should be a maximum length a game can use the "early access" tag. If to much time pass it should show another banner that it hasn't been updated.

I would like it anyways. :)

Why would an arbitrary maximum length of time to be labeled “Early Access” improve the system?

Unlabeled incomplete games for sale seems far scammier than those clearly indicated to be in such a state.

[Start_Running]

引用自 Cdnmntman：

I did not at any time say i don't support early access but obviously some don't get the point, of a early access game that is still selling on steam that hasn't had any activity updates or progress for over 4 years let alone contact with steam still being sold via steam.

Welcome to Game development. YUou should look into the development time for DUke Nukem Forever.

You still consider this an early access game that should be listed for sale on steam?

The game is clearly labelled as unfinished. It clearly states it may or may not progress further. I wouldn't buy it... but someone else might still choose to buy it. WHy would I want to limit someone else's purchase options?

[Walach]

引用自 Aachen：

Why would an arbitrary maximum length of time to be labeled “Early Access” improve the system?

Unlabeled incomplete games for sale seems far scammier than those clearly indicated to be in such a state.

I guess the same way a game is "arbitrary" finished? :P
But maybe I just want Valve to be more hands on than they already are/aren't! Now that I think about it, I wonder if there are any data on this?

And there are a lot of things that people believe are scam'y (is that a word? now it is!), what would be your top scam'y practice? :P