Zainstaluj Steam
zaloguj się
|
język
简体中文 (chiński uproszczony)
繁體中文 (chiński tradycyjny)
日本語 (japoński)
한국어 (koreański)
ไทย (tajski)
български (bułgarski)
Čeština (czeski)
Dansk (duński)
Deutsch (niemiecki)
English (angielski)
Español – España (hiszpański)
Español – Latinoamérica (hiszpański latynoamerykański)
Ελληνικά (grecki)
Français (francuski)
Italiano (włoski)
Bahasa Indonesia (indonezyjski)
Magyar (węgierski)
Nederlands (niderlandzki)
Norsk (norweski)
Português (portugalski – Portugalia)
Português – Brasil (portugalski brazylijski)
Română (rumuński)
Русский (rosyjski)
Suomi (fiński)
Svenska (szwedzki)
Türkçe (turecki)
Tiếng Việt (wietnamski)
Українська (ukraiński)
Zgłoś problem z tłumaczeniem
Ten wątek został zamknięty 
Zasady dyskusji i wytyczne
Zgłoś ten post
Then don't buy the games you feel are trash. Cash grabs were made long before Early Access. They were made in the 90's too. They will continue to be made in the future. Great games are rare. All great things are rare. Early Access was not the beginning of that and it will not be the end of it. Coding a game is extremely complex and time consuming work and it simply cannot be done in a short amount of time.
how is it insulting to ask someone to name a game that they claim is buggy or bad?
we see these posts every day and nobody seems to have the .... to name a game that they have played that is buggy or bad that came from Early Access.
why is it unfair to ask for the name of a game?
I agree! Don't buy the trash ones. I was just saying thats why there are so many. And yes, cash grabs and trash have been around for a very long time. I remember standing at the local video store trying to pick between 100 different NES games judging only by the cover art because there was no other way to know if it would suck or not. There was no internet and Nintendo Power Magazine just sucked unless you wanted cheat codes. Trust me man, I've played all types for a long time. I completely understand that it takes a long time to code a game also, never said I didn't. Actually, if you can't see what I was suggesting then I don't think there is any point to us continuing our conversation as I feel that this is one sided..tell me if Im wrong but it seems like you are just looking for something to pick apart and spit back at me because you want to "defend EA games" like the other guy here. I tried to agree with your points and clarify mine but I don't think that is what you are looking for. My point has been made clear enough I think.
EA is a WAY for companies to take advantage of the gaming community by serving up half *** content with false promises to get cash fast. It is a POSSIBILITY and not the definition of it. It is a program being abused.
I don't want to ignore you like Tux who is obviously on a rampage across steam for weeks on end trying to fight, argue and defend Early Access like its his religion, so let me know if you have anything youd really like to converse about. I believe Im done for now though.
Buth the truth is the survival games not sell that well.For open world games there is much better sellers.
There is a lot of big budget games out there what could easly be twisted to survival.Like Dying Light,Dead Island series and many many more.The reason they not do it becouse they offer much more content then a pure survival-PVP-crafting game.And they sell much better.
Still and for many years to come Minecraft will lead the open world-survival-pvp games market and not even big budget games could chalange that.When the majority of the targeted playerbase can't afford to buy the game and they will just stick with minecraft it is understandable.And early access alpha games already burry six feet under the survival category reputation so it will be a piss against the wind to invest in survival category.
No offense. But I never saw a suggestion. I saw you said that early access is a method to push trash out to mouthbreathers. But that is not a suggestion. Early Access is not causing bad games....those come out anyway. They don't cause cash grabs...those come out anyway. But they did help a few choice developers put out a few great games. So I don't have any bad thoughts on it. Other than that...avoid it. It isn't like I play all of them. Only the ones that have the potential to be something great. Which happens to be the same thing i do with AAA games.
EA is a WAY for companies to take advantage of the gaming community by serving up half *** content with false promises to get cash fast. It is a POSSIBILITY and not the definition of it. It is a program being abused.
I feel like Im banging my head against the wall. I'd say give me some slack and try to actually talk about this with me, but I see thats not why youre here. Cheers. I'm out. You and Tux can have your thread. All hail EA!
/laugh
no its not.
First off outside of a few games most of them barely make enough money to keep things going.
more over, I think I have found just as many bugs in the AAA market as I have playing Early Access games and I actually play them like around 4 or 5 of them at the moment
I will add that you are missing out on some of the best games ever created in a very long time but if you are happy about your gaming experience then dont worry about it
Way or method it is all the same thing. I am not trying to insult you, I am just saying I don't agree. I actually prefer AAA gaming. But I can see the positives of this system as well. But people get so offended when I don't automatically say it is nothing but a delivery system for trash. There is nothing wrong with the consumer getting more choice and I am capable of making my own decisions. So let them release games. I will filter out the crappy ones myself and buy the great ones.
So like you said you prefer to wait 2-3 years for the game, and not get it on Early Access? well who said the game is not been made, and is just taking that time to make the game?
Or maybe the big guys think its not going to stay long around to really be worth the time to make, as in by the time they get done, no one almost will be interested any more
Also a game like you said will take more then 2-3 years i think to make, a huge map with some much as well as multiplayer, and changing ground is a huge work to do (also to point out, even in GTA Online you cant just walk into any building, and i assume that will be abut the size of the map you will want?)
Also is dying light not one?
The thing is, if the EAG system takes away all the cash grab from the market, i think that is better then having it all over, as with Early Access you know from the start to look over it before you buy it, more then what you really have to do with the "Finished" Games
I like Early Access over all, as a user, as it gives me a way to play the games that i miss on KickStarter, and i like to support the Dev of the game, not always as i really believe they will get a great game, sometimes simply as i think the idea is really awesome, and i hope supporting it will get it to be made better by someone else
There are many games out there i know that will never see the light of day sadly, for reasons like Funds or building a Team, and as a Dev i see that as a great way to help with the Funds
Can these be abused? Yes
Is it abused? Yes
Was the market abused before Early Access? Yes
And that is the thing, EAG is not more dangers then most ways abut been abused, there for i do not think one can really call it so bad or anything, and that is were i call the line
So first there are some Big Publishers that they risks, and as was said before, it cost them much more, and there for they do tend to do it less
I will have never expect to see a game like Minecraft, Papers, Please, come from AAA and the reason is that its a huge risk dropping the looks of the game, in a age that it seem to be something every one really likes
And that is one reason Indie is good, even that AAA do take the risk from time to time, in many cases if they do well, they get some positive points, but if they do bad.... Well they get slaughtered for it
And as there name is not something they can just wake up and change one day, they have to make sure to keep it up.. what makes it harder for them to really take out a game changing game
And as someone on YouTube show (cant remember what channel it was) these games do not sell all that good, Portal with all the things people say abut it sold very little copies, compere to something like CoD, that as many say take the same thing over and over again (even that i do not 100% agree with that, as they do try new things in each of the games, even if many do not seem to like it much)
So putting it to the end, i think it is likely will see that game come out, some day, but it will take time
Also like to point out one more thing, a huge game like that will need a crazy powered up server, what likely mean the Publisher will have to pay for it, so failing to get that game starting well, can mean a huge lose for the publisher
If it was a Single player, its only the cost of the game making
IF its going to be a MMO you need to also pay for servers (and power full for these) and network and so on, that in the end can make a really nice bill
Few videos on the Subject:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FS1p7W5dmBE
And these is the video i was refering to in the post:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cxhs-GLE29Q
I have said it before and will say it again, gamers are their worse enemy when it comes to games. They want games to have the same features found in a different game, even if said game is not is said mold. This was seen with Ghost Recon and the wants of stuff for Ghost Recon 2. As such, it became a CoD clone except in 3rd person. Sad.
It will have zombies, be open world, have 40+ NPC's you can add to your group, a non linear storyline, an upgradable shelter, voiced dialogue, customizable PC, crafting, graphics that will blow you away, and more weapons than you can shake a stick at.
You haven't yet. That's why.
I suspect it is because you don't have fifty million dollars. Neither does any little indie developer that has an idea for such a game and puts together an Alpha of it and sticks it in early access.
Once there they get some support for their game - and just as much grief for raising money to fund their dream game. None of these games get their fifty million dollars in game sales, nor would they even if the game stayed in EA for many years.
Eventually the complaining from those that paid for EA gets loud enough, the "your game is crap" people beat them down enough, and the dream is realized to be *just* a dream - one that is making them not nearly enough money.
They finish the game with whatever budget is left and then everyone complains what "an awful game this is - it will only ever be worth five bucks" so there's never enough profit to make revisiting it, beyond patching the worst of the bugs or adding the little bits that were almost finished, worthwhile.
Rinse and repeat.