安裝 Steam
登入
|
語言
簡體中文
日本語（日文）
한국어（韓文）
ไทย（泰文）
Български（保加利亞文）
Čeština（捷克文）
Dansk（丹麥文）
Deutsch（德文）
English（英文）
Español - España（西班牙文 - 西班牙）
Español - Latinoamérica（西班牙文 - 拉丁美洲）
Ελληνικά（希臘文）
Français（法文）
Italiano（義大利文）
Bahasa Indonesia（印尼語）
Magyar（匈牙利文）
Nederlands（荷蘭文）
Norsk（挪威文）
Polski（波蘭文）
Português（葡萄牙文 - 葡萄牙）
Português - Brasil（葡萄牙文 - 巴西）
Română（羅馬尼亞文）
Русский（俄文）
Suomi（芬蘭文）
Svenska（瑞典文）
Türkçe（土耳其文）
tiếng Việt（越南文）
Українська（烏克蘭文）
回報翻譯問題
此主題已被鎖定 
討論區規矩與守則
檢舉此篇文章
The problem is that the amount of drek getting through as a result of Early Access design means that people are losing faith in the projects as a whole. Much like the game crash in the 80's we're seeing an admittedly smaller version of that same scenario.
People are stepping out of Early Access as a whole (myself included) because I just can't be sure who's going to actually have the ability to deliver in the future and the deluge of people who wish to take advantage of the market makes it a chore to sift through what is available.
For each game I have to sift through and determine that it won't make the quality threshold I expect on Steam even if it's early access, I find that I distance myself further from the system. I'm tired of seeing game after game after game show up as Early Access, have severe flaws, or have the devleopers go dark for many months at a time. This is further impacted by a number of Kickstarter campaigns I'm still waiting on delivery for.
I haven't seen Next Car Game, so I can't say anything on it's quality or it's developer's dedication but with crap like Earth Year 2066 showing up and "Muxwell's" influence on the matter only exacerbates the issue of deminishing trust in the Steam platform.
You talk about devs who use Early Access going dark and not talking about anything, well, I know one large publisher who is great at doing that very thing and they too release buggy games as complete games. That publisher is Ubisoft. They may have a day one patch for a game, then they will tell people that they are working on the next one and shortly thereafter, say nothing more and drop support after 6 months.
There are also months, even years when they say nothing about a game that they first dribbled information about. When was the last time anyone heard about Rainbow Six Patriots? It has been at least a year if not longer.
Gamers need to realize that game development takes more than a year. Early Access has only been around for about a year. Have some devs released some games using Early Access already? Yes, but how long were those games in development before they were put on Early Access?
Game development has changed and so had the funding models. Large publishers no longer want to take chances with small or indie developers or the games they are trying to make. Large publishers want to ensure that they can make their money back as well as make a profit so they keep making the same tripe that they made some 11 years ago where nothing has changed outside of the game's settings. The basic premise of the game hasn't changed.
At least Early Access has the ability to get new IPs in front of prospective customers and have the ability to get funding. Also remember that those small devs need to work a "day" job to keep bills paid and a roof over the head, thus reducing the amount of time a day that they can spend working on said games. For those devs, real life comes first. If it takes a bit to get an update out, one needs to remember that real life should take the place of any other activity said person may be doing.
no one can blame you for that. if thats how you feel then yes, walk away from it.
i personally am more sick of AAA devs pumping out the same old crap for top notch prices. id rather take a risk and lose while showing the industry with my money i want the industry to evolve vs. being too afraid to try new things. speaking with your wallet works more than one way.
the finished games on Steam lately have been less than desirable as far as im concerned. but id still rather see them than nothing. im sure some people like them and buy them and im glad we have a choice.
Earth Year 2066 was a terrible game. Some devs throw out a crappy game trying to make a quick buck. Usually why I wait for reviews before infesting my money into an early access game. It's devs like that give early access devs a bad rep most are good but the ones that come out that are ungodly terrible make others look bad when they are actually good.
With Early Access, the devs can get away with just about anything. When you're buying an Early Access game, you're basically just pledging like you do with a kickstarter. Only difference is that you don't get your money back if the devs don't keep their promises.
The only thing you can really do is be a smart consumer and do your research before you click that buy button (but it was 80% off D:). I know that this sometimes is not enough to determine if a game is bad or not, but that's just the luck of the draw I guess :(
One, you pledge a certain amount to the devs in a promise for something to be delivered at a later date. If there are enough pledges, then you get charged for it, if not, you do not nor do you get anything in the end.
The other, you either buy at full price or even half price and get the game right then. The difference is, that you are funding the dev right away based on a promise that you will get updates as well as maybe the full game in the end without having to spend anymore. You also get to play those new updates as well as give input directly to the devs about any bugs you find so they can be removed long before a product is finished.
Can both systems be exploited? Sure, and I can think of one game that was on Kickstarter, got its funding and still turned out to be a game that no one ended up liking and still has bugs even after one patch and it is still missing features. At least with Early Access, you can suggest features that may or may not work and can try them out to see if they work or just impart more bugs or just not work at all with the other mechanics in the game.
Don't forget, large publishers are not immune from having games that are bug fests with the games they release and cannot fix or worse, will not fix.
No it does not. That is not an effective reason. You're making the mistake of thinking that all due diligence and research should be done for you and that is a complete falsehood (and impossible).
Think on this - when gaming first started out, we had VERY few tools available to us to find out if something was good or not. You'd often see a ziplocked bag with a piece of artwork, and maybe a hastily-scribbled piece of text. The few computer or gaming magazines at the time had VERY few reviews. There were no videos to watch, no "let's play" bumf, or anything else.
And yet one could still work out the wheat from the chaff. How? Diligence. You'd ofnte be hanging around in the shops for a while anyway, so you could easily get to know the usual customers. You'd ASK - the other customers, your friends, or try to wheedle a demo in the shop itself.
Nowadays there is NO excuse for not easily and quickly finding out whether a game is for you or not. You have excellent toosl available. You can Google the name of even an obscure game, and get results, videos, gameplay details, reviews.
So you're excuse is frankly nonsense. NO games by their inclusion here affect another.
And if you are thinking of using the excuse that "Steam searches are so bad I have to wade through them to find new games released" this is also nonsense.
I only look at what's out once a month, and it takes me about 20 minutes to research every game fully. You enter a null search in Steam, and click on the "release date" marker to sort into date released order. Just check every game since the last time you checked.
So, with respect the ONLY issue here is your own failings.
This is complete and utter rubbish and nothing short of scaremongering.
You have your consumer rights. NOTHING overrules that.
I'm actually a bit surprised why Earth Year 2066 get so much flak. Not sure why.
It's in Early Access.
It states that it's in EARLY ALPHA. No really, it says that on the store page when you read more about it.
They say they need like a year to finish it.
So why are people just buying this game up without even checking the video and pictures on the game?
If this game was released a full retail copy then I'd understand the whine but as it is now. You're whining about an early Alpha being in early Alpha. WHAT DO YOU EXPECT? Like come on, those guys actually say what state the game is in.
Sure it's not immune to criticism but most people just wail at it due to it being in a bloody alpha stage.
The games TotalBiscuit review are a bit different. They are full releases that mostly claim they are released this year but are actually way older. They also take up the release list of actual new titles. At least Early Access are new titles, the shovel ware that TB finds are not.
I honestly don't care that Early access feature half done games. I've bought a few of them and had several hours worth of fun and now I can wait for the final release of that title. I knew what I was getting into when I bought them.
So far though only one was kinda bad and it was the Interstellar Marines. But if the final version gets somewhere near to what it's supposed to be then it's fine for me.
But Early Access warns me that the game is not finished. Most titles on Steam do not.
A total of 4 users have been banned from that section. All of them are completely valid. Most users did troll the forum too btw.
If people are going in and complain about the state of the game when they had to see that big light blue banner with white lettering stating Early Access Game and still didn't read what was being sold at that time or what state the game was in, then it is their fault if they ignored it and still clicked on the ADD TO CART button and went ahead and clicked the Buy Now button in checkout after inputting their payment. They have no room to complain.
This is why several of us keep stating to research what one is looking at before clicking on those buttons. I too would be mad at those who complain about the shape of the game due to the stage of development the game is due to them being the one who clicked the BUY NOW button. No one forced them to buy said game.
I didn't mention anything about any other users or how they were acting. And regardless of how they are posting in that subforum, that developer is still out of line. For instance, because you misunderstood my post. as customers of that developer have misunderstood what they were purchasing. am I now OK to start a new thread and title it "Trolling Zefar"? Probably not, right? That's what he did, though.
At this point the game and developer are taking so much heat because of how the situation is being handled. It's bigger than any issues people might have with the game now.
Sorry, I know this is OT for this thread but I just wanted to clear that up.
Early Access is a risk across the board, but the risk is becoming too great across the whole.
Right, but if Early Access is to survive here, then things like Earth Year 2066 need to not even be presented until there's some more substance to show technical capability and dedication to the project. I can understand bugs, I can understand a lack of polish, but Earth Year 2066 contains zero game mechancis beyond constant circle-strafing here.
Does a game take time to make? Absolutely, but jumping on Early Access with public example assets, using artwork without rights to it to promote your game and not even have an idea for what mechanics you plan to have in your game (let alone be able to show them) is something ValvE really needs to stomp out.
I can't take Early Access seriously anymore. As I said before, for every game I have to sift through that is clearly not ready for presentation to the public, I find myself having my time wasted outside of having people like Muxwell ask for $20 for his product.
It isn't so much just Earth Year 2066, but the obvious result of having such a system in place. Earth Year 2066 may have a plan in the future, but the combination of it being FAAAAAAAR too early for it to be presented to the public with stolen art assets for promotion and the fact that it's developer has been practically insulting the Steam Community with his behavior is where the problem lies.
This developer is also suspected of abusing Kickstarter as well, which doesn't help either side.
I'd beleive that if the game wasn't as bad off as it is. Realistically, one year for this game to get where it's supposed to be is rediculous. It's not believable at all and what is shown is not indicative of an actual game.
It's post-apocalyptic? Great.. what mechanics is there supposed to be?
This is a similar problem with a Kickstarter called Cult County. There's not enough substance to warrant it's presence in a space that is asking for money. The difference here is that Kickstarter requires a certain threshold in order to hand over money whereas Earth Year 2066 is asking for money up front.
I expect a game to not be using base Unity assets. I expect a representation of technical competence that isn't present in this game. I expect there to be a layout (and an in-game example) of mechanics intended to be implemented for this game. I expect there to NOT be stolen assets used to promote the game. If he weren't asking for money at the present time, that'd be fine as then all that's used is time and wouldn't really damage the reputation of Steam's storefront.
This is compounded by "Muxwell's" behavior in his own forum too. You are a moderator and I understand the difficulty involved with trying to deal with things like this, but for Muxwell to give a digital middle finger to people who rightly ask "what the ***" in response to his asking for $20 for a game that has absolutely zero substance to it, then go on to harrass the community by making announcements such as a special "$100 Jim Sterling" version. While he may be trying to joke about it, he's already in the notorious bucket along with Surgey Titov.