Early Access Shouldn't be a Dirty Word for Gamers

[WhiplashVIII]

No more "early-access" for me.

Signed, DayZ veteran/victim.

[Nic]

my only issue with early access is devs calling it quits before the game is done because they already made a profit

[JackofTears]

But, of course, they're not paying customers to do the beta they should be doing in-house, instead, they require players to pay for the privilege of beta testing your game.

[JackofTears]

90% of my experiences with early access games have been bad. In most circumstances what I see is the developers taking money and then never finishing the game, or rushing the game to release when presales drop only for the game to be half-finished and full of bugs. Burn me once, okay shit happens - burn me 5-6 times and I start to learn my lesson.

[Lehran]

Why pay actual beta testers to make sure it works when they can pay you instead? Not to mention releasing the game when it's done means you can't hide behind the shield of "it's not finished yet" for years. How long were Dayz and Rust in early access for? The best example for me that other companies should follow would be Killing Floor 2 early access. That was fully playable, but it had classes weapons and enemies that were still being developed, and that developing content wasn't in the game for you to test for them, they tested it and released it in updates when it actually worked.

[isturbo1984]

When the game is being sold with no guarantee of proper support or even a proper release... and shill video game activist websites promoting them and reviewing them before they come out? Yes. Yes they should always be a dirty word.

[bunnypunisher]

"Early access" used to mean something. Their was a time when applying to a game Beta required a bio, a lengthy application process, and signing of an NDA. I have been in Early Access/Beta of several games over the years and if you go back just a little while ago, testers could submit bugs, get these fixed, and do significant testing to the game rather than just "load testing servers". These types of Early Access typically weren't for the faint of heart as your character would get wiped several times as they applied actual patches to the unreleased product. I don't think anyone is against this form of Early Access or Beta testing. Indy studios tend to use early access to help offset development costs, and people give them a much greater level of forgiveness because they tend to follow a more hybrid roll out of their games where bugs are found and fixed, and features are added. They generally also aren't the same price of a Triple-A studio release.

The problem we are seeing now is Triple-A game studios are using the bait of "early access" to entice gamers to spend money early, to commit to a game, and boost sales prior to launch. This type of Beta is purely load testing on the servers, if even that, and is more of a gimmick to score a guaranteed cash grab and build hype. Early Access is also used as an excuse to release unfinished games, and not bother with the typical bug stomping that a polished game should have prior to launch. While we can agree the "right type" of Early Access is good, the problem is the paradigm has shifted, and it is becoming a dirty word because major game studios have reduced it to a marketing gimmick, making it a dirty word, and it has been reduced to buyer beware. You can't really fault anyone for responding to that, or putting out a general warning, when it's becoming increasingly rare to have a true "Beta" or "Early Access" anymore.

[CuppaJoe]

I've got a car i'd like to sell, i can sell it to you cheaply for early access inside the vehicle.

It's got three wheels and no engine at the moment so it doesn't go anywhere.
In the future i plan to have a full working car assuming that i don't run out of money and can't fix it.
If i can't fix it, to bad, you still bought it. No refunds because you already rolled it down the driveway.