4237
Every game developer company should be like this
(lemmy.world)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 04 Aug 2023
4237 points (98.6% liked)
Games
32002 readers
1917 users here now
Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.
Weekly Threads:
Rules:
-
Submissions have to be related to games
-
No bigotry or harassment, be civil
-
No excessive self-promotion
-
Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts
-
Mark Spoilers and NSFW
-
No linking to piracy
More information about the community rules can be found here.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
They said the game were incomplete and it will be in (truly) in early access. This was written even in the games description back then. What did you expect from an early access game ?
It's the precedent they set for the gaming industry that is appalling. This time it was "only" 3 years but what if it becomes the norm for games to be unfinished after 10+ years? Sure Larion Studios is a darling in everyone's eyes because the game turned out well, but others will see this enormous positivety and think "hey as long as we finish it 'eventually', then it's ok to do this." This is bad for gaming in general.
Steam is riddled with Early Access games that were abandoned before ever reaching a final release. If you reach your financial goals before finishing the game, you'll get a bigger payout by moving on to another project than by keeping your promises. Users are outraged at first, but their memories are short-lived. Lather, rinse, repeat.
There are some notable exceptions, though. Kerbal Space Program comes to mind.
My argument is that companies shouldn't charge full price for an unfinished game. Your argument is that the funding from early access could help the company develop the game. I believe a compromise would be to lower the price of the unfinished hand. It could be actual price=completion percent * full price. If they can't do anything as fluid as that then at the very least there should be a significant flat reduction.
What I don't like is the implication you made that since everyone is doing it, then it's ok.
Teardown is a great example, can't remember what I paid but it was cheap when the game only had half a dozen levels - it felt like a full game but s small one, then they added part two and a million mods got made and I think the price went up though it's still reasonable
I was actually agreeing with you and in no way do I think it's ok because everyone does it. Rather, I'm very dismayed that everyone does it. Yes, it seems like a good idea on paper to use paid alpha and beta releases to fund development but the system has been shot to hell by the fact that the overwhelming majority of publishers who do this abuse it.