Change "Early Access" to "Co-Development"

[gorba]

I see many reviews on different Early Access games where people think "Early Access" means playing the finished game early. For example, "The price is way too high. Charging $33 for what is essentially a glorified tech demo is crazy" for Bloody Knuckles Street Boxing. Changing the designation to "Co-Development" makes it clear that people are helping the developer co-develop their game.

Update: Ignore the nitpicking comments about what "Early Access" means. They distract from the point of the suggestion, which is to move away from the "Early Access" label to something that big publishers haven't taken over.

[potato]

what...? that's not what early access means

[Aachen]

There is no implicit participation in development to EA.

[gorba]

引用自 potato：

what...? that's not what early access means

It's mentioned on every product's store page with Early Access:

"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."

Except people don't read that. They confuse "Early Access" with early access to the finished game. This confusion is partly due to publishers like Ubisoft changing the meaning of early access. Valve should then changed the label to "Co-Develop" or something similar that denotes helping the developer develop their game.

The request is prompted by people downvoting a EA title because of misunderstood expectations.

[76561198407601200]

引用自 gorba：

I see many reviews on different Early Access games where people think "Early Access" means playing the finished game early. For example, "The price is way too high. Charging $33 for what is essentially a glorified tech demo is crazy" for Bloody Knuckles Street Boxing. Changing the designation to "Co-Development" makes it clear that people are helping the developer co-develop their game.

Without a line of code written they would not be anything close to development.

[Aachen]

引用自 gorba：

It's mentioned on every product's store page with Early Access:

"Get instant access and start playing; get involved with this game as it develops ….”

“Involvement with the game as it develops” is not synonymous with “involvement in the game’s development as it progresses.”

[gorba]

引用自 The Living Tribunal：

引用自 gorba：

I see many reviews on different Early Access games where people think "Early Access" means playing the finished game early. For example, "The price is way too high. Charging $33 for what is essentially a glorified tech demo is crazy" for Bloody Knuckles Street Boxing. Changing the designation to "Co-Development" makes it clear that people are helping the developer co-develop their game.

Without a line of code written they would not be anything close to development.

Helping a developer develop their game has nothing to do with writing a line of code.

"Early Access is a unique development model that allows games to be played as they progress towards a full release. Early Access encourages ongoing updates from developers, while letting players participate in direct feedback through gameplay and community involvement."

[potato]

引用自 gorba：

It's mentioned on every product's store page with Early Access:

"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."

Except people don't read that. They confuse "Early Access" with early access to the finished game. This confusion is partly due to publishers like Ubisoft changing the meaning of early access. Valve should then changed the label to "Co-Develop" or something similar that denotes helping the developer develop their game.

The request is prompted by people downvoting a EA title because of misunderstood expectations.

buying an ea game doesn't make you a developer

[gorba]

引用自 Aachen：

引用自 gorba：

It's mentioned on every product's store page with Early Access:

"Get instant access and start playing; get involved with this game as it develops ….”

“Involvement with the game as it develops” is not synonymous with “involvement in the game’s development as it progresses.”

Semantics aside, people buy an Early Access game thinking they're getting a final product early when it is clear that it is works-in-progress (e.g., alpha versions and tech demos)). Then, they write negative reviews because the game is a "glorified tech demo." Big publishers have hijacked and altered the meaning of "Early Access" so much that the original meaning no longer applies to "Early Access" games on Steam. Valve needs to change "Early Access" to some other label.

[Aachen]

引用自 gorba：

Helping a developer develop their game has nothing to do with writing a line of code.

"Early Access is a unique development model that allows games to be played as they progress towards a full release. Early Access encourages ongoing updates from developers, while letting players participate in direct feedback through gameplay and community involvement."

The EA model does not compel a developer to accept or act on community feedback.

引用自 gorba：

Semantics aside, people buy an Early Access game thinking they're getting a final product early when it is clear that it is works-in-progress (e.g., alpha versions and tech demos)) ….

People who ignore the categorical disclaimer as well as, as you put it, clear indications of a work-in-progress don’t seem likely to understand “co-developer” better.

…. Then, they write negative reviews because the game is a "glorified tech demo ….”

And your issue with their self-expression is what? Its basis in misapprehensions?

…. Big publishers have hijacked and altered the meaning of "Early Access" so much that the original meaning no longer applies to "Early Access" games on Steam ….

Yes, there still are many EA games offered in the “original” sense.

[Satoru]

If people cannot already read the giant blue banner on every Early Access page, there is no amount of 're-branding' that will fix the problem you claim exists

The solution to this problem is "read the blue box and take responsibility for your own purchases"

[Tito Shivan]

A rose by any other name...

The 'problem' of Early access lies not in the name.

[Start_Running]

引用自 gorba：

I see many reviews on different Early Access games where people think "Early Access" means playing the finished game early. For example, "The price is way too high. Charging $33 for what is essentially a glorified tech demo is crazy" for Bloody Knuckles Street Boxing. Changing the designation to "Co-Development" makes it clear that people are helping the developer co-develop their game.

Update: Ignore the nitpicking comments about what "Early Access" means. They distract from the point of the suggestion, which is to move away from the "Early Access" label to something that big publishers haven't taken over.

and you think people would understand that anyyomre than Early Access.

M'dude the problem isn't the name. The problem is some people are incapable of reading and understanding what's in front of them. There's no fixing that.

At least until we get the Killbot Factory up and running. Stupid Emission standards slowing everything down.

[TGC> The Games Collector]

Nah.

It won't help against the complaining.
Some people simply do not care to read what it means when a game is in Early Access.
I doubt it would even help if they added "THIS GAME IS NOT FINISHED YET!!!!!" on the store pages in the largest possible fonts.

And describing it like "co-development" would probably just make ppl more annoying when demanding features in a game.

[76561198407601200]

引用自 gorba：

引用自 The Living Tribunal：

Without a line of code written they would not be anything close to development.

Helping a developer develop their game has nothing to do with writing a line of code.

"Early Access is a unique development model that allows games to be played as they progress towards a full release. Early Access encourages ongoing updates from developers, while letting players participate in direct feedback through gameplay and community involvement."

Feedback != development. This reminds me of the me "I'm something of a developer myself".

引用自 gorba：

引用自 Aachen：

“Involvement with the game as it develops” is not synonymous with “involvement in the game’s development as it progresses.”

Semantics aside, people buy an Early Access game thinking they're getting a final product early when it is clear that it is works-in-progress (e.g., alpha versions and tech demos)).

They are told the games may or may not progress. Reading comprehension lies on the user.

[Shinoskay]

引用自 gorba：

I see many reviews on different Early Access games where people think "Early Access" means playing the finished game early. For example, "The price is way too high. Charging $33 for what is essentially a glorified tech demo is crazy" for Bloody Knuckles Street Boxing. Changing the designation to "Co-Development" makes it clear that people are helping the developer co-develop their game.

Update: Ignore the nitpicking comments about what "Early Access" means. They distract from the point of the suggestion, which is to move away from the "Early Access" label to something that big publishers haven't taken over.

I actually really like this suggestion