How many years a game can be in early access in steam ?

[Garuback]

I bought Mist survival many years ago. I saw it was released since 2018, so 6 years ago. Is it normal ? After 6 years early access, they only made half game with 0.6 version. Why do you allow that ?
Because we paid a game with a low price but with promise it will be over soon. But it's like a fraud. So if i want i can release a game with many bugs, no story, just a map and some characters and sell this to players and never come back. Why did you let this happen ?
6 years with a 0.6 version.....

[Pierce Dalton]

Infinite years lol.

[Cathulhu]

Technically, there is no time limit.
You were warned on the store page:

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.

[potato]

there's no limit

some ea games have been in ea for over a decade

[Chika Ogiue]

Originally posted by Garuback:

Because we paid a game with a low price but with promise it will be over soon.

Valve make no such promise with any Early Access game they sell. In fact, they warn you of the opposite.

[Spawn of Totoro]

Originally posted by Garuback:

I bought Mist survival many years ago. I saw it was released since 2018, so 6 years ago. Is it normal ? After 6 years early access, they only made half game with 0.6 version. Why do you allow that ?
Because we paid a game with a low price but with promise it will be over soon. But it's like a fraud. So if i want i can release a game with many bugs, no story, just a map and some characters and sell this to players and never come back. Why did you let this happen ?
6 years with a 0.6 version.....

There is no limit.

7 Days to Die has been an EAG for about 10 years.

Keep in mind that 0.6 doesn't mean how much a game is done, just the version number they gave the release. They could do 0.6a or 0.61 as well. Version numbers are, more or less, arbitrary.

[Brian9824]

Originally posted by Garuback:

Because we paid a game with a low price but with promise it will be over soon.

Where was that promised? EA can take as long as it takes. They could also "release" it whenever they want

There is a risk with EA titles that they might not finish, hence why your told to not buy it unless you happy with the content already in the game. If you don't like the risk then don't buy EA games.

Originally posted by Spawn of Totoro:

Originally posted by Garuback:

I bought Mist survival many years ago. I saw it was released since 2018, so 6 years ago. Is it normal ? After 6 years early access, they only made half game with 0.6 version. Why do you allow that ?
Because we paid a game with a low price but with promise it will be over soon. But it's like a fraud. So if i want i can release a game with many bugs, no story, just a map and some characters and sell this to players and never come back. Why did you let this happen ?
6 years with a 0.6 version.....

There is no limit.

7 Days to Die has been an EAG for about 10 years.

Keep in mind that 0.6 doesn't mean how much a game is done, just the version number they gave the release. They could do 0.6a or 0.61 as well. Version numbers are, more or less, arbitrary.

Yep, and if The Fun Pimps went out of business and 7 days to die never finished i'd still be ecstatic for what I got.

[Pscht]

Originally posted by Garuback:

Because we paid a game with a low price but with promise it will be over soon.

Your wishful thinking does not force developers to do what you want.

[Pierce Dalton]

Originally posted by Pscht:

Originally posted by Garuback:

Because we paid a game with a low price but with promise it will be over soon.

Your wishful thinking does not force developers to do what you want.

Exactly, nothing does. Makes you wonder what even is the point of EA, right?

It's like opening a restaurant and charging $10 for a possible meal

Have fun with your drink while you wait.

[Unicorn Slayer]

Originally posted by Pierce Dalton:

Exactly, nothing does. Makes you wonder what even is the point of EA, right?

It's like opening a restaurant and charging $10 for a possible meal :WH3_greasus_rofl:

I mean it tells you on the page, and its written pretty clearly you'd have to purposely ignore it to not know.

Its so you can help fund development and be involved with the game as it develops. Your given a functional product, not the promise of what might be functional as you falsely claim.

The only caveat is your specifically warned that the product you are buying might not receive any future updates and being told that if your not comfortable with the extra risk you shouldn't buy it.

Often the risk comes with a lower price on the game compared to when it launches. It sounds like if your confused on what the point of EA is that you should try reading the Early Access page where it tells you all this info

[Pierce Dalton]

Originally posted by Unicorn Hunter:

Originally posted by Pierce Dalton:

Exactly, nothing does. Makes you wonder what even is the point of EA, right?

It's like opening a restaurant and charging $10 for a possible meal

I mean it tells you on the page, and its written pretty clearly you'd have to purposely ignore it to not know.

Its so you can help fund development and be involved with the game as it develops. Your given a functional product, not the promise of what might be functional as you falsely claim.

The only caveat is your specifically warned that the product you are buying might not receive any future updates and being told that if your not comfortable with the extra risk you shouldn't buy it.

Often the risk comes with a lower price on the game compared to when it launches. It sounds like if your confused on what the point of EA is that you should try reading the Early Access page where it tells you all this info

Well, and why would the devs finish the game if they already got your money? You know that not every dev cares about their reputation, right?

[nullable]

Originally posted by Pierce Dalton:

Originally posted by Pscht:

Your wishful thinking does not force developers to do what you want.

Exactly, nothing does. Makes you wonder what even is the point of EA, right?

I don't wonder. Early Access is a public display of the developer's opinion about the state of the project they're working on. Some users want to get all twisted up because they don't agree with the developer? That's on them. There isn't a point in time where the developer's opinion about their own product isn't relevant. There is no time limit on the developer's opinion about their own product.

If you keep it simple it's not really complicated or confusing at all. And it certainly doesn't warrant user desires to meddle with things so they can see something else instead.

Originally posted by Pierce Dalton:

It's like opening a restaurant and charging $10 for a possible meal :WH3_greasus_rofl:

Have fun with your drink while you wait.

Good thing no one is forced to eat there. Just like no one is forced to purchase or play EA games.

[Unicorn Slayer]

Originally posted by Pierce Dalton:

Originally posted by Unicorn Hunter:

I mean it tells you on the page, and its written pretty clearly you'd have to purposely ignore it to not know.

Its so you can help fund development and be involved with the game as it develops. Your given a functional product, not the promise of what might be functional as you falsely claim.

The only caveat is your specifically warned that the product you are buying might not receive any future updates and being told that if your not comfortable with the extra risk you shouldn't buy it.

Often the risk comes with a lower price on the game compared to when it launches. It sounds like if your confused on what the point of EA is that you should try reading the Early Access page where it tells you all this info

Well, and why would the devs finish the game if they already got your money? You know that not every dev cares about their reputation, right?:WH3_greasus_rofl:

Surely you must be aware that any dev who did this would never be able to sell their products if they destroyed their reputation. This might come as a novel concept but businesses often have more then 1 product and like to KEEP making money.

Not to mention from what I understand of 7 days to die as an example it keeps selling and generating money. If they did what you suggest and stopped developing it years ago they'd have lost out on a lot on money because the game would have a bad reputation.

I mean are you also aware that if a developer didn't care about their reputation they could get MORE money by releasing a crappy game as a "finished" game instead and then just never fix all the issues with it.

Afterall the only difference between a finished game and an Early access game is when the developer says they consider it "finished"

[Crazy Tiger]

Originally posted by Garuback:

Because we paid a game with a low price but with promise it will be over soon.

Buy games for the content that is there at that time, not a promise for a future state. If you did the latter, that's a mistake on your end.

[Rin]

By most and my own EA definition most AAA or AAAA games are EA by design and only reach v1.0 (whatever that means)/Gold if even that to begin with. Many of these games come with day 1 patches because it's EA, and are still broken years later and reach abandonware status quite fast like Anthem or Redfall or the other heaps of trash GaaS we've had over the past decade or so.

Even old games like those made by Capcom can be considered EA since they had to patch in DRM for some "odd" reason or worse.... DOA abandonware like all the games reliant on GFWL which somehow couldn't be patched out. But then again I have seen other devs doing the same like Shiro Games who added a launcher for no reason to promote their other games while being badware due being reliant on outdated CEF like Steam is atm.

In other words, just because a game doesn't have the EA tag doesn't mean it isn't EA, like Payday 3 or BF2042. Ubisoft also took the semi-GaaS approach because that way they can just keep patching the game for years while those that still bother with their games post-steam get milked at their own expense. It's a win/win in their book because now a game take twice as long to develop meaning they can be even lazier while raking in twice as much due to inventing problems and selling the solution.

[Pierce Dalton]

Originally posted by nullable:

Originally posted by Pierce Dalton:

Exactly, nothing does. Makes you wonder what even is the point of EA, right?

I don't wonder. Early Access is a public display of the developer's opinion about the state of the project they're working on. Some users want to get all twisted up because they don't agree with the developer? That's on them. There isn't a point in time where the developer's opinion about their own product isn't relevant. There is no time limit on the developer's opinion about their own product.

If you keep it simple it's not really complicated or confusing at all. And it certainly doesn't warrant user desires to meddle with things so they can see something else instead.

Originally posted by Pierce Dalton:

It's like opening a restaurant and charging $10 for a possible meal

Have fun with your drink while you wait.

Good thing no one is forced to eat there. Just like no one is forced to purchase or play EA games.

Oh exactly, good thing no one is forced to buy unfinished houses too. Actually, no one would buy them with a warning like that...