EAcc Developers need to be held responsible

[Scorcher24]

I am a fan of the idea of Early Access, but like many other ideas it fails at the most basic ingredient: Humans.

I understand that development is not always going how you want it, but I have not much of an understanding for some of the companies out there, that abuse the Early Access System in the way they do. Most recent examples for this would be Timber&Stone as well as Godus.
Both Games are in development limbo and nobody knows if they will ever continue. In case of T&S it is even a blatant Violation of the rules since the dev relied on EAcc sales to fund the game, despite having a successfull kickstarter over roughly 90k USD. Yet, both games are still being sold.

Valve, please put into action, what you laid out. Hold all funds from Early Access sales until the game is released in a working state, so people have the opportunity to refund if the development just ceases at some point or a broken Product gets released.

As it is right now, many developers are hiding behind the Early Access FAQ and the involved risk that is laid out there. But that is not very consumer friendly and it invites people to pull scams. T&S has never been updated since it hit EAcc. That should raise some red flags somewhere in your office. Yes, I know, over 4k Games on Steam and such, but still. And the worst: the game is still being sold.

I mean, what are we supposed to do? If you take Timber and Stone as an example, you do your research and you see a kickstarter for nearly 90k USD and you think "well, he got the funds, must be safe". And then he stops making it all out of a sudden. I also cannot just go on the forum and ask the dev for his account balance with his bank and a proof of such.

Yes, I do own Early Access Games, but I always have to do extensive internet searches about the game before I decide to buy it. There are also games that stand out, such as Empyrion (the recent weekend deal) or 7 Days to die, which are updated constantly and get better every month.

But the amount of failed games rises and it will get to a point where nobody can trust EAcc anymore and that cannot be what Valve wants.
Thanks for reading and have a nice day.

edit: a few typos

[username12121]

cinedine님이 먼저 게시:

NomNom님이 먼저 게시:

I don't really understand why people try to place all the blame on the consumer for purchasing an early access title.

As you put it: No one would buy an incomplete book, song or movie. So why do people buy incomplete games? I always think there is something magical on Steam that makes people thrwo common sense out of the window. Buying into promises and potential of EAGs is only one of many symptoms.

Could that magic be to do with how prominently these games are marketed on Steam? I mean, correct me if I'm wrong but I don't see many stores, online or otherwise, promoting the sale of unfinished books, movies etc. To give in to temptations like Early Access games is an inherently human thing to do. For some, to try to exploit this humanness is considered at the least to be morally questionable.

[Gus the Crocodile]

cinedine님이 먼저 게시:

As you put it: No one would buy an incomplete book, song or movie. So why do people buy incomplete games? I always think there is something magical on Steam that makes people thrwo common sense out of the window. Buying into promises and potential of EAGs is only one of many symptoms.

"Common sense", as ever, is really just a way for people to make "what I think" sound more notable than it is. People don't have to have thrown anything out the window, they might simply not be you.

I haven't bought many Early Access games; I'd say less than ten. Nuclear Throne, Assault Android Cactus, Grim Dawn, Distance, Mini Metro, Bearzerkers, Infinifactory...maybe something else I'm forgetting, but that's probably about it. I don't regret any of those decisions. Why did I buy these incomplete games? It's quite simple. A combination of wanting to play the games, thinking they seemed like a sound purchase, and wanting to support and encourage the people who were making them. I don't think there's anything all that hard to understand about any of that, nor anything remotely wrong with it.

[kaboomboom]

Early Access can produce some very cool games,

but

it is also a play ground for shady and incompetent developers who exploit consumers/gamers.

Until Steam changes the ealry access guidelines to make them more favorable to consumers, my advice is that the best defense is to never purchase early access. If you see something you like that is early access put it on your watch list, wait for full release plus3 months, and read a bunch of reviews. Then decide to buy or not buy. That is the smart way to do this. Don't be suckered by the early access scam system.

[Milf LOVER]

.

[Start_Running]

username12121님이 먼저 게시:

cinedine님이 먼저 게시:

As you put it: No one would buy an incomplete book, song or movie. So why do people buy incomplete games? I always think there is something magical on Steam that makes people thrwo common sense out of the window. Buying into promises and potential of EAGs is only one of many symptoms.

Could that magic be to do with how prominently these games are marketed on Steam? I mean, correct me if I'm wrong but I don't see many stores, online or otherwise, promoting the sale of unfinished books, movies etc.

15 years ago you also didn't see many stores, online or otherwise, selling digital games, movies and books; that's progress for you.

As for unfinished games. Well Steam Started it, now you've got GoG jumping on the band waggon and the episodic game is not much different from the EAcc model, plus you can bet money ElecArts is working out their own version.

To give in to temptations like Early Access games is an inherently human thing to do.

Temptations? Most people consider a game being in EAcc more of a discouragement than anything else. Though I gues as the saying is. THere are always going to be fools. Might as well profit off of them.

For some, to try to exploit this humanness is considered at the least to be morally questionable.

Zetikla님이 먼저 게시:

I dont understand why ppl buy into early acces if they cant acknowledge the risks.

Yje answer is simple Zetika. It's like how everyone acknowledges the risks of playing blackjack and are fine with it. Until they lose 40K, that's when they sudden;y have issues with the risk. As I have said. If you had a problem with the TOS you wouldn't be an EAcc customer since you would reject the TOS and avoid purchase, as many do. If you have no problem with it then you are likely to become an EAcc customer and purchase. Having a problem with the TOS after the fact those is more than a little shady. It's like wanting to renogotiate your loan payments after you realize that the interest is a real thing.

This smacks more of someone who is trying to shirk and evade their own personal respinsibility which is sort of making them the flipside of what they like to accuse EAcc devs of. The saying is, you see in others what you see in yourself. If you see this as a playing ground for devs to simply shrug off all responsibility.. then it's likely because you yourself would do the same given the power. Hearing their arguements that they suddenly take issue with the TOS when things go badly, is no different.

Barbie님이 먼저 게시:

As an owner of Starforge... heh.. yeah.. please don't call that game completed. All they did was rip the EAG tag off of it. Starforge is one of the best examples of Early Access gone wrong.

Just wanted to drop in to say that. I take responsbility for buying that pile of garbage.

I never said it was a good game, just that it was a completed game, in the same way Superman 64 was a completed game and Aquaman for the GC was a completed game. COmplete ♥♥♥♥♥, yes, but complete not the less and fit to be judged as such

[BlackSpawn]

Rushing an alpha to Full Release for whatever reason and calling it a complete game (without carrying to completion the marketed mechanics, features, concepts, etc on the Steam store) does not make it so. That is just ONE of the ways in which EAG is being abused.

The GOG version of games in development has several features that Steam sorely lacks:

-ALL games are curated by GOG
-2 week NO QUESTIONS ASKED refund policy
-Build rollback (You can choose from the released versions of the game, pick which one you want to play and assess the updates in this manner; or avoid updates that break the game for you and/or diminish your experience in any way.)

[kaboomboom]

BlackSpawn님이 먼저 게시:

Rushing an alpha to Full Release for whatever reason and calling it a complete game (without carrying to completion the marketed mechanics, features, concepts, etc on the Steam store) does not make it so. That is just ONE of the ways in which EAG is being abused.

AGREED.

[Finvana]

Zetikla님이 먼저 게시:

kholtby님이 먼저 게시:

Early Access is a bit of a scam. You are paying the company allegedly producing a game for the 'privilege' of testing their game.

Yes the funds in theory help the game get off the ground, but the company is convincing YOU to take that risk rather than taking risks themselves. The conventional route involves said company going to a bank and getting a loan. That means they actually need to repay the money to the lender later and thus have incentive to make sure they actually produce a product. No such incentive with Early Access.


(By the way EA might not be the best abbreviation, since that is also the name of a gaming company that has its own bad reputation issues completely independent of early access.... )

with this logic Kickstarter is also a scam

It would'nt be the first time a lot of people is scammed through Kickstarter.

[BlackSpawn]

Kick Starter = crowd funding. And yes, there are some legal obligations for the creators to deliver on the tiered promises.

EAG = Product. NOT a crowdfunding campaign, NOT charity.

Using EAG as a crowdfunding campaign = disaster and expressly goes against what Valve/Steam's documentation tells developers on the matter:

"Don’t launch in Early Access if you can’t afford to develop with very few or no sales."

[username12121]

Start_Running님이 먼저 게시:

Though I gues as the saying is. THere are always going to be fools. Might as well profit off of them.

That's far too clumsy to ever have been a saying, but it certainly sums up the sort of attitude that it's necessary to have in order to see Early Access as being ok as it stands.

[Start_Running]

BlackSpawn님이 먼저 게시:

Rushing an alpha to Full Release for whatever reason and calling it a complete game (without carrying to completion the marketed mechanics, features, concepts, etc on the Steam store) does not make it so. That is just ONE of the ways in which EAG is being abused.

Moot point is moot. In purchasing the buyer agrees that they are okay with the posibility of the game changing the significantly or the game not changing at all. It is also stated that some features may not materialize or may even be removed. YOu agree to this risk as a buyer when you purchase. Thusly this ppoint is moot. No one who has a problem will buy under the conditions and those that don't have accepted the risk willingly.

The GOG version of games in development has several features that Steam sorely lacks:
-ALL games are curated by GOG
-2 week NO QUESTIONS ASKED refund policy
-Build rocllback (You can choose from the released versions of the game, pick which one you want to play and assess the updates in this manner)

You do realize that letting everyone who wants in, is as much curation as letting only one or two in right? I wouldn't put much stock in that curation until they disclose the games that they did not allow. As it stands it seems more like a convenient excuse for not having the same variety or Developer support as Steam. Oh we could totally have as many, but we just you know choose not to let them in. Using the argument of beiung exclusive to disguise the lack of interest.

GoG's refund policy is interesting enough but as said, the ease at which GoG games are pirated simply means it's again a amarketing trick. They know that anyone who wanted to rip them off would just download from a torrent site. Also given what happens on STeam.. most people don't even get around to playing the games they purchase within 2 weeks anyway.

As for Build rollback.. that's interesting but I wonder how it will impact the final game since all that does is create a scenario where you eithe, have a game you can't play because the online servers only accept the latest version, or you have a game you can't play because the game's populace is fragmented between 7 different versions and thusly making it more troublesome to find good matches. Time will tell how this works.

[BlackSpawn]

Calling something moot does NOTHING to invalidate it.
Your singular opinion goes parallel to that of others and does not supercede anything here.

Just a few of the ways in which EAG is being misused/abused atm:

• Failure to deliver content that was promised
  
• (Potentially) Abandoned games: Update history, dev communication, content updates
  
• Games that transition from Early Access to Full Release with minimal to no updates from initial Alpha
  
• Games that transition to Full Release with game breaking bugs/unplayable condition
  
• Developers with abandoned games or documented dubious business practices that introduce new games into EAG
  
• Significant delay from proposed timeline/release date
  
• Transition of Sold game to episodic format or change in monetization (DLC, microtransactions, etc.) from that initially described during Early Access launch
  
• Misrepresentation of game content on Steam store page
  
• Misrepresentation of Early Access status

[Start_Running]

username12121님이 먼저 게시:

Start_Running님이 먼저 게시:

Though I gues as the saying is. THere are always going to be fools. Might as well profit off of them.

That's far too clumsy to ever have been a saying, but it certainly sums up the sort of attitude that it's necessary to have in order to see Early Access as being ok as it stands.

Hah, you need to get out into the world. That's the logic that runs the entire herbal supplement industry and the beuaty and skincare industry, and the diet industry. As long as you can make a fool believe you're selling magic, they will buy.

No seriously, pick up any bottle of multivitamins or herbal supplements and you'll see 'Claims have not been verified.' on that bottle, usually in significantly smaller print than the list of ailemnts the supplement is supposed to help.

Only a fool believes everything he is told. A wise person always asks themselves 'What's the catch?'

[BlackSpawn]

Start_Running님이 먼저 게시:

Hah, you need to get out into the world. That's the logic that runs the entire herbal supplement industry and the beuaty and skincare industry, and the diet industry. As long as you can make a fool believe you're selling magic, they will buy.

Yeah, thanks for mentioning other scams.
Proves the point.

[Start_Running]

BlackSpawn님이 먼저 게시:

Calling something moot does NOTHING to invalidate it.
Your singular opinion goes parallel to that of others and does not supercede anything here.

If you order the super spicy korean dish, and are warned that it is super peppery and still choose to order it, you have no right to complain when the food scorches everything from one pair of cheeks to another. That's a moot point.

• Failure to deliver content that was promised
  
  
• (Potentially) Abandoned games: Update history, dev communication, content updates
  
• Games that transition from Early Access to Full Release with minimal to no updates from initial Alpha
  
• Games that transition to Full Release with game breaking bugs/unplayable condition
  
• Developers with abandoned games or documented dubious business practices that introduce new games into EAG
  
• Significant delay from proposed timeline/release date

You are notified of these risks wbefore purchase. So the spicyu food scenario is effect. You are told that descriptions, features and timelines are subject to change and that it is soley up to the developer what the finished product will be. If you accept and purchase you cannot rightfully complain about abuse when it happens to go the way you would not like. That is, quite frankly, a childish mentality.

Transition of Sold game to episodic format or change in monetization (DLC, microtransactions, etc.) from that initially described during Early Access launch

[/quote]

DLC and episodes are considered to be seperate products from the game they are attached to. YOu bought the gun,. That the bullets cost more than you anticipated is not really the gun sellers problem. There is no business law anywhere that a seller cannot decide to change or alter the product he sells or the terms underwhich it is sold, or offer additional feature sto the product at an extra cost. I mean, your cable companies, ISPs and banks do this ALL THE TIME.

Misrepresentation of game content on Steam store page

[/quote] If you can show concrete proof of this and present such to steam for them to investigate, go ahead. The be aware if their investigations turn up something else. The caveat is of course that EAcc features change and so , as long as the dev keeps the store page updated in a reasonable timeframe, they are pretty much in the clear. At best you can request a full refund for your purchase if you purchased the game between the release and the store page update. Improper product discription was one of steam's original refund clauses before the new policuy and it still remains as such.

Misrepresentation of Early Access status

[/quote]
I don't even know how that would work. If the game is completed, there is little advantage to the developer not releasing it as a full game. And if it's unfinished and being developed, then it is clearly an EAcc