Negative Early Access reviews for Bugs

[Terminal Rex]

After seeing that another early access Dev is having to give up on a game due to negative reviews affecting their sales and therefore their regular income, I just thought I wanted to say something in support of these developers.

It is extremely frustrating as someone who actively seeks to follow and support early access games that EA games get negative reviews due to them having bugs or being "unfinished". Especially when this is affecting the sales that the game can make from potential buyers and therefore damaging the chances of the game making it out of EA complete.

People that buy early access games and make negative reviews for the reasons above, on games that are fully advertised as being unfinished and are upfront about the possibility of having both minor and major bugs are destroying the chances for indie devs.

Steam needs to do something about this problem because it would be a crying shame if there were no more indie games being made. Ideally people that do not wish to aid the development (through their purchase or support on forums/reviews) should not buy early access games.

I feel that when you do buy an EA game you are in agreement that the game will not be finished and will have bugs, this does not mean there are not reasons why you would give a negative review, but to agree to these terms and then start complaining about it afterwards is ludicrous.

Either these players need to be banned from buying early access game or reviews need to be monitored more closely so that we get a true reflection of the potential of an EA, rather than being told what we already know. It wouldn't matter so much but the fact that negative reviews are so damaging to games makes it really unfair and unbalanced for indie developers and especially those with games in active development via EA.

[Aachen]

Why are you so confident you can attribute a title’s failure to the mentioned reviews, and not other factors?

[Zekiran]

If people are complaining that much about a buggy game, and the developer isn't intending to fix said bugs, that game shouldn't be released... right? I mean, .... if they're not capable of fixing their broken mess? Maybe they really shouldn't be making it?

[Tolkien Book Fan]

So it's true, some people put up garbage in Early Access solely for money? I'm quite glad to hear it isn't proving viable.

[[N]ebsun]

Early Access reviews are noted as such in the review post.
If there are bugs in the game, I'd think that is a legit reason to leave a non-recommended review. If the developer fixed those bugs, they can post an update informing the players that they have done so, and those players can re-evaluate their review.

Why would people recommend a game that has bugs if those bugs clearly have an impact on the game?

People write reviews for the game in it's current state, not what they hope for in the future - if an Early Access game, in it's current state, is not good enough to recommend then users have every right to leave a non-recommended review.

[cinedine]

Early Access games are competing with "fully released" (whatever this means today) games, so developers should treat them like it. Bugs are excusable to some degree, but you should still make sure that what you release is free from major bugs affecting the enjoyment of your product.
Games are patched since the dawn of time and "we might fix it later" was never a valid excuse.

[Darren]

One your game is released in Early Access or fully it can be reviewed. It's up to the reviewers if they want to be more generous because of the fact the game is in Early Access. If your game isn't playable and enjoyable in it's current state it's not ready for Early Access (and it's likely going to attract negative reviews as a result to warn people off purchasing immediately).

There is no free pass for being an Early Access game the reviews are tagged so people know when they reviewed (so if at full release it's all fixed you can easily tell that review is out of date) and can take that into account themselves (maybe they are more generous than others).

I've probably purchased over 100 Early Access titles myself and am a supporter of the option being there but your game has to be playable and fun right from the start otherwise I might very well give you a negative review.

[ShelLuser]

Terminal Rex님이 먼저 게시:

People that buy early access games and make negative reviews for the reasons above, on games that are fully advertised as being unfinished and are upfront about the possibility of having both minor and major bugs are destroying the chances for indie devs.

Steam needs to do something about this problem because it would be a crying shame if there were no more indie games being made. Ideally people that do not wish to aid the development (through their purchase or support on forums/reviews) should not buy early access games.

Yah, blame Steam. Not the developers who tried to monetize on a buggy game and apparently lacked the skill or motivation to do something about it. Sorry but I think you're spouting a load of nonsense here.

Many players are very hesitant to pick up early access games because there are no guarantees what so ever, that has nothing to do with reviews. Heck, it is for that same reason why I never involve myself with fundraising projects, simply because most tend to fail (for the customers that is, the devs are usually happily cashing in).

If those devs don't want to risk negative reviews then, well, maybe they shouldn't present a buggy product or maybe a less buggy product. Fact of the matter is that many pre-release games have a rather heavy pricetag attached to them (within context). So obviously people will complain if stuff severely breaks.


Let's not forget that not every developer has good intentions, there are also plenty who release unfinished games yet seem unwilling to actually finish them. So you're saying that people should be denied their option to warn others about such controversies?

Sorry, but once again I think it's a stupid argument. If those developers can't handle the heat then, well, maybe they shouldn't play the game just yet.

Terminal Rex님이 먼저 게시:

I feel that when you do buy an EA game you are in agreement that the game will not be finished and will have bugs, this does not mean there are not reasons why you would give a negative review, but to agree to these terms and then start complaining about it afterwards is ludicrous.

People usually don't complain about the agreement but the game itself. Also: it is the developer who published the game in the first place.

If the devs can't handle the heat, well... maybe they should have had more patience before releasing the product. Or came up with a better release strategy.

Terminal Rex님이 먼저 게시:

Either these players need to be banned from buying early access game or reviews need to be monitored more closely so that we get a true reflection of the potential of an EA, rather than being told what we already know.

And so begins the age of oppression, where people would be denied to share their opinion because it doesn't sit well with those who know what's best for them. Hmm, there's another description for such an environment.

Oh right... dictatorship. Yah, that's really something Steam doesn't need IMO... People pay enough for games as it is.

[Start_Running]

Terminal Rex님이 먼저 게시:

After seeing that another early access Dev is having to give up on a game due to negative reviews affecting their sales and therefore their regular income, I just thought I wanted to say something in support of these developers.

They were demmoralized because people pointeed out the issues with their unfinished game. Good. It's unlikely that anything good would have come from such a fragile mindset if that was inded the rason they quit

It is extremely frustrating as someone who actively seeks to follow and support early access games that EA games get negative reviews due to them having bugs or being "unfinished". Especially when this is affecting the sales that the game can make from potential buyers and therefore damaging the chances of the game making it out of EA complete.

If its for sale, people have teh right to speak of how its current state is.

cinedine님이 먼저 게시:

Early Access games are competing with "fully released" (whatever this means today) games, so developers should treat them like it. Bugs are excusable to some degree, but you should still make sure that what you release is free from major bugs affecting the enjoyment of your product.
Games are patched since the dawn of time and "we might fix it later" was never a valid excuse.

Or as some developers do, address the bug and reply to such reviews. In addressing the bug and fixing it, it ensures that the more current reiews will be more favvvourable, and in directly replying shows the writer and anyone else who reads the revview that you're actiee, listening and working to squash the buigs which will raise confidence in your product.

[[N]ebsun]

Start_Running님이 먼저 게시:

cinedine님이 먼저 게시:

Early Access games are competing with "fully released" (whatever this means today) games, so developers should treat them like it. Bugs are excusable to some degree, but you should still make sure that what you release is free from major bugs affecting the enjoyment of your product.
Games are patched since the dawn of time and "we might fix it later" was never a valid excuse.

Or as some developers do, address the bug and reply to such reviews. In addressing the bug and fixing it, it ensures that the more current reiews will be more favvvourable, and in directly replying shows the writer and anyone else who reads the revview that you're actiee, listening and working to squash the buigs which will raise confidence in your product.

This - developers getting feedback, and acting on that feedback is a good thing. Imagine if no one told them the game had an issue - the game is still in development, so early feedback is one of the best things a developer can get.

[Dr.Shadowds 🐉]

Key things to note.
- Some devs won't / don't communicate as often, or won't / don't accept feedback from community as often, which can reflect on game reviews.

- Some devs won't make the better choices to fixing, or improving things in the game, which can reflect on game review

- Some devs can be toxic, or abusive to community members, which can reflect on game reviews.

- Some devs do the polar opposite of changes, or making the game worse, which can reflect on game reviews.

The problem is this, if there's a lack of communication, lack of progress update, and etc, then this basically doesn't work out well for them, leading to bad reviews if there's too many issues, and etc...

Yes some reviewers make bad reviews, and forgot what they bought is an unfinished game. They either thumb up, or down for either good, or bad games. Some reviews are good, and may hold information to give you heads up on the current state of the game, but some reviews may be out of date, or never gotten updated after changes in game update.



Here the bottom line, if dev is give up due to reviews for making the game, then maybe seek other professions instead. Devs should know it comes with the territory that people will have opinion, not mindless sheep's, and make reviews base on their opinions, may it be good, or bad, but if you just give up, then means either were not willing to take feedback, or just didn't want to bother with the game anymore and was going to drop the project regardless. Yes some devs do just drop games despite having positive, or negative reviews.

[Tito Shivan]

ElfSeeker님이 먼저 게시:

So it's true, some people put up garbage in Early Access solely for money? I'm quite glad to hear it isn't proving viable.

Quite the logic leap there.

Dr.Shadowds 🐉님이 먼저 게시:

Key things to note.
- Some devs won't / don't communicate as often, or won't / don't accept feedback from community as often, which can reflect on game reviews.

- Some devs won't make the better choices to fixing, or improving things in the game, which can reflect on game review

- Some devs can be toxic, or abusive to community members, which can reflect on game reviews.

- Some devs do the polar opposite of changes, or making the game worse, which can reflect on game reviews.

And all of this happens in and out of Early Access games.

[Crazy Tiger]

Terminal Rex님이 먼저 게시:

Either these players need to be banned from buying early access game or reviews need to be monitored more closely so that we get a true reflection of the potential of an EA, rather than being told what we already know.

So instead of motivating game devs to create better games and fix the bugs, you much rather want to limit the options paying customers have?

People who purchase the game have the right to review it. If the game didn't live up to expectations, they are allowed to voice that.

What makes you the authority to decide what other people can or cannot say?

[Avatar]

You have to look at it from both sides of the coin.

To a degree you are right, devs that release in early access shouldn't really have reviews based on bugs they will fix in the future, that comes with the setting.

But hang on, doesn't that mean devs could just release in early access and stay in early access to get around this requirement? And we know this happens all the time.

Are the bugs in the game trivial or do they matter enough to the player that the experience is ruined for them? Does it matter for them if it's early access or not? They paid for it, after all.

There is an assumption that players will change their reviews after it leaves early access, but also can consider this probably almost never happens. Are players really obliged to go back years later?

Steam does have "recent" reviews, which mostly covers these bases.

[crunchyfrog]

Sorry, but this is a ridiculous post.

EA games (and "regular" released games) all have their bugs, foibles and so on, and anyone making a review based on that is VALID, whether you like it or not. That's the whole point of reviews. If the point resonates with you, the review is effective. If it doesn't resonate with you, it's STILL effective.

But furthermore, you CANNOT POSSIBLY m,ake the claim that these games failed because of this reason. You'd need some detailed information, and a fair amount of mind reading too, and even the devs can't know that.

Sorry, but it's that illogical.

[Aachen]

crunchyfrog님이 먼저 게시:

....

But furthermore, you CANNOT POSSIBLY m,ake the claim that these games failed because of this reason. You'd need some detailed information, and a fair amount of mind reading too, and even the devs can't know that ....

.... are you saying I shan’t get an answer?