I definitely agree with what you are saying. People should have enough sense to not buy said products.
But, the point still stands that is basically a loophole in the system that is encouraging poor standards. You can literally publish a barely functional product so long as you label it "Early Access" and then never touch it or patch it again. If you launch an incomplete product without that "Early Access" tag, it's taboo and Steam will take action and remove it if there's enough complaints. However, slap that EA ambassador tag on it and suddenly you have immunity.
TBH, alot of what's going on with Steam is marring their own image as much as it is the developers of said shoddy games. They really need to have some type of hard limits on Early Access and similar things. Steam has basically become the Slumlord of stores.
I can certainly agree with the premise you set forth, there are folks abusing this system for sure. I think that's an underlying point being set forth by steam itself though. When they say this game may never move forward, they're essentially laying that point out pretty plainly.
It's like telling a child they may get burned if they touch the burner... It's hard to feel sympathy when they do.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Eh..ready for what? To get a view of the game as it's being made?
its not even ready for EA ... they are doing themselves an injustice buy going EA this early .. They should of waited and put some work in .. Gets hard to recover community from dlelivering a mess and asking 30$ for it ...
When I bought the Early Access to Grim Dawn in 2014 it was a buggy mess. 2 years later it turned into one of the better ARPGs to be released in the past couple of years.
Right, there are some good games that benefit from having a system like this. The main point is that there's no bounds.
Your very post is the kind of thing I'm talking about. I mean, your story turned out well in the end. But, at the same time it also supports what I'm saying about the main problem. '2 years later'? I mean that's a pretty limitless timeframe.
I'm not arguing against having some type of system like EA, I'm just saying that it's a pure mess in its current state. There needs to be some type of vetting process taking place.
Ideally, one of two things should be done: 1) Steam needs to actually verify that the game is in a fairly release quality state, playable state. 2) If #1 is not true, then they should set a deadline of some type. 6 months or something similar would be my vote.
As is, the EA system is basically KS without any type of goals to meet before getting funding.
And, my main problem with it is that it's being done in a storefront as sales, which is why I feel it should have some higher standards set forth than say KS itself. Steam, as a full-on retailer, should enforce a higher quality of product, which is why I likened them to a slumlord to start with.
You and Distopia are correct. There's a disclaimer before purchasing, which people should heed. And, EA is a nifty concept to help support struggling Indie developers. But, don't you guys think that there should be a line drawn somewhere? I certainly do. The way these things are set up nowadays is the problem, not their existence.
Eh..ready for what? To get a view of the game as it's being made?
its not even ready for EA ... they are doing themselves an injustice buy going EA this early .. They should of waited and put some work in .. Gets hard to recover community from dlelivering a mess and asking 30$ for it ...
The only people who should be buying it are those who accept it's not in a good state, if you don't want to deal with that, wait until it releases, if it does... Why is this concept so hard to get?... It's not meant to be in a state where you start expecting quality, polish, or anything close to a finished fully playable product. It's meant as a means for super excited players to help the dev teams, mostly financially.
If you don't like that thought do not buy into Early Access titles.. It's a simple self explanatory concept, one that you're warned about...
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
When I bought the Early Access to Grim Dawn in 2014 it was a buggy mess. 2 years later it turned into one of the better ARPGs to be released in the past couple of years. There are bad developers and there are good ones. I actually know who many of the people on this development team are. They have a strong track record, so for me they earn the benefit of the doubt. I have been playing since Alpha so I already know what work they have done and how active they are. They are very clear about the state of the game in it's current state, as Distopia has pointed out. They do not want you to buy the game if you do not feel comfortable supporting it in the state it is in. I have seen so many great games start in early access and become great games. It is not all doom and gloom.
And this is the problem right here. Steam early access could easily be something that helps and improves the gaming industry. By having the consumer push a game forward to completion with the funding it needs to become a finished product. Unfortunately the 1% of game companies that actually intend to use this funding to follow through on their early access "promises" is completely overshadowed by the 99% that intend to do nothing more than grab as much cash as they can and abandon the games development entirely. Leaving the consumer with another unfinished piece of crap in their steam library. When these game companies make promises in their "early access" write up. They should be held accountable for those promises and should have to 100% deliver a finished product or the consumers money back. A scam is a scam and steam knows exactly what is going on. Unfortunately, the video game market feels like a barren waste land lately in terms of quality video games. So gamer's are willing to jump on any pipe dream early access crap fiesta they see potential in. Which in turn has now become a large source of revenue for Steam.
It is what it is. Until people stop buying into this crap things will never change. Steam will never change their attitude towards the people who they are happy to screw over for a quick buck. And game companies will continue to pump out unfinished sub par games.
When I bought the Early Access to Grim Dawn in 2014 it was a buggy mess. 2 years later it turned into one of the better ARPGs to be released in the past couple of years.
You and Distopia are correct. There's a disclaimer before purchasing, which people should heed. And, EA is a nifty concept to help support struggling Indie developers. But, don't you guys think that there should be a line drawn somewhere? I certainly do. The way these things are set up nowadays is the problem, not their existence.
I think there should certainly be a deadline, as well as products that go dark should be removed, at least until devs release a new build and lay out a sensible reason for the blackout in communication. Refunds should also be handled a lot differently than their standard system of a few hours played. There's no question the system could be better.
I think there should also be better ways for legitimate devs to combat unfair relation to those who are not. But that's a perfect world scenario more than any reality.
As for K&H...These devs seem legit to me, they don't seem to have plans that are out of their reach. They have a good concept, and have laid down what appears to be a decent foundation, that has normal issues games face at that stage. IE clunkiness, hang-ups, instability, etc...
It's also an online game that just released, there's always issues for full blown retail releases in that regard (even those with the most overall polish) , I can only imagine it's more likely with the state this game is in.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
To be fair, even AAA games developed by industry heavyweights, are often released in a buggy half finished or completely broken state. At least this way it is a system that allows you to be a part of the process. There is a ton of crap on Steam EA and KS and Greenlight but at the same time there are plenty of 'released' games that never took that route and still released crap titles, both in gameplay and in stability.
I think it should also be mentioned there is no NDA involved in these proceedings, giving everyone who questions intent on progress an ability to gauge that progress. Giving great insight into making an informed purchase or not in the future.. While there are certainly negatives to this system, there are plenty of positives.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Sounds like the usual early access release growing pains. But I find the the core concept of the game. which I see as a good throwback to simple dungeon crawling with some refinements (crafting, 1st person, etc.) as something to look forward to.
I'll wait a week or so for a few patches to settle things down but it's definitely on my list.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
What's the character system like? The loot? The secrets/puzzles/traps?
I can only speak for the *current* state of early access which is not a complete game, so what thus game ends up actually being, nobody knows.
You start the game at a Witches table she has stat cards (str, int, wis, dex, con etc...) in front of her and some dice.
First you select your class (fighter, cleric, mage,rogue,archer) and then race (human, orc,elf,goblin,halfling...) and then roll your stats (18 being the high roll)
Then you are dropped into the starting town - you have a letter in your inventory (and a few early access items) - you are asked to go see the inn owner up the street.
There are no quests other than this. From this poiNY on you can choose to sit at one of the chairs in the inn which brings up dungeon running UI - look for a group or start your own, select size of dungeon (even small ones are bigger than most mmo dungeons) and select difficulty (you can get killed easily on any difficulty).
Loot is similar to Diablo - random stats, white,green, blue purple rarity with magic effects on them. There's a TON of loot already.
You can also roam the open world , there are smell bandits and beasts to kill there but I found it largely barren - that part is nowhere finished yet.
Right now this is a group dungeon runner, what sets it apart IMO is that it brings awesome procedurally generated dungeon crawling experience to a first person perspective.
This is a *group* game, you will need s healer and tank and DPS, especially at higher difficulty.
I had a blast playing as a trio with my other 2 RL friends tonight - the gameplay and dungeons are already engrossing and I can see a ton of potential here.
Right now - in current state the game is totally worth 26 bucks I spent on Humble Bundle for it.
Two thumbs up from me even as an early access game.
Forgot to mention - crafting is in game but I haven't even touched it yet.
Thank you for the detailed answer, but I guess I should have been clearer in my question.
I'm asking about how satisfying the loot is - not how much is generated or how many colors there are. Most of these games have terrible loot systems, and I hate that.
Same goes for the character system - as in are the skills diverse and fun, or is it just a bunch of passive stats.
I really have no interest in mindless hacking away at monsters unless there's a deep and satisfying progression layer.
What's the character system like? The loot? The secrets/puzzles/traps?
I can only speak for the *current* state of early access which is not a complete game, so what thus game ends up actually being, nobody knows.
You start the game at a Witches table she has stat cards (str, int, wis, dex, con etc...) in front of her and some dice.
First you select your class (fighter, cleric, mage,rogue,archer) and then race (human, orc,elf,goblin,halfling...) and then roll your stats (18 being the high roll)
Then you are dropped into the starting town - you have a letter in your inventory (and a few early access items) - you are asked to go see the inn owner up the street.
There are no quests other than this. From this poiNY on you can choose to sit at one of the chairs in the inn which brings up dungeon running UI - look for a group or start your own, select size of dungeon (even small ones are bigger than most mmo dungeons) and select difficulty (you can get killed easily on any difficulty).
Loot is similar to Diablo - random stats, white,green, blue purple rarity with magic effects on them. There's a TON of loot already.
You can also roam the open world , there are smell bandits and beasts to kill there but I found it largely barren - that part is nowhere finished yet.
Right now this is a group dungeon runner, what sets it apart IMO is that it brings awesome procedurally generated dungeon crawling experience to a first person perspective.
This is a *group* game, you will need s healer and tank and DPS, especially at higher difficulty.
I had a blast playing as a trio with my other 2 RL friends tonight - the gameplay and dungeons are already engrossing and I can see a ton of potential here.
Right now - in current state the game is totally worth 26 bucks I spent on Humble Bundle for it.
Two thumbs up from me even as an early access game.
Forgot to mention - crafting is in game but I haven't even touched it yet.
Thank you for the detailed answer, but I guess I should have been clearer in my question.
I'm asking about how satisfying the loot is - not how much is generated or how many colors there are. Most of these games have terrible loot systems, and I hate that.
Same goes for the character system - as in are the skills diverse and fun, or is it just a bunch of passive stats.
I really have no interest in mindless hacking away at monsters unless there's a deep and satisfying progression layer.
For me the loot is very satisfying - it is directly impactful on how your character performs, akin to Diablo games.
Since this is a group game with defined roles to me it feels way more strategic in combat than mindless slashing I a typical arpg like Diablo.
Clerics heal, champion tanks, rogue picks locks, wizard sets things on fire and provides a light source in dark places - hard defined roles, like classic DnD.
The skills are all useful and varied - they unlock at certain levels and have a progression like EQ1 did - where you learn the basic fireball as level 1 wizard but every 10 levels or so you get a more powerful version. There are new abilities that also unlock at higher levels as you only start with 3-4 attacks. There are no passive skills unless you consider castable buffs passive.
Hmm, sounds pretty good.
I'll probably check it out at some point, later in its development.
When I bought the Early Access to Grim Dawn in 2014 it was a buggy mess. 2 years later it turned into one of the better ARPGs to be released in the past couple of years. There are bad developers and there are good ones. I actually know who many of the people on this development team are. They have a strong track record, so for me they earn the benefit of the doubt. I have been playing since Alpha so I already know what work they have done and how active they are. They are very clear about the state of the game in it's current state, as Distopia has pointed out. They do not want you to buy the game if you do not feel comfortable supporting it in the state it is in. I have seen so many great games start in early access and become great games. It is not all doom and gloom.
and I am not supporting any early access games.
Pure and simple. You are right .. it can become great. But why bet my money? Just wait until it becomes great, then I will buy. If not, no harm done.
Comments
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
It's like telling a child they may get burned if they touch the burner... It's hard to feel sympathy when they do.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Your very post is the kind of thing I'm talking about. I mean, your story turned out well in the end. But, at the same time it also supports what I'm saying about the main problem.
'2 years later'? I mean that's a pretty limitless timeframe.
I'm not arguing against having some type of system like EA, I'm just saying that it's a pure mess in its current state. There needs to be some type of vetting process taking place.
Ideally, one of two things should be done:
1) Steam needs to actually verify that the game is in a fairly release quality state, playable state.
2) If #1 is not true, then they should set a deadline of some type. 6 months or something similar would be my vote.
As is, the EA system is basically KS without any type of goals to meet before getting funding.
And, my main problem with it is that it's being done in a storefront as sales, which is why I feel it should have some higher standards set forth than say KS itself. Steam, as a full-on retailer, should enforce a higher quality of product, which is why I likened them to a slumlord to start with.
You and Distopia are correct. There's a disclaimer before purchasing, which people should heed. And, EA is a nifty concept to help support struggling Indie developers. But, don't you guys think that there should be a line drawn somewhere? I certainly do. The way these things are set up nowadays is the problem, not their existence.
If you don't like that thought do not buy into Early Access titles.. It's a simple self explanatory concept, one that you're warned about...
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
It is what it is. Until people stop buying into this crap things will never change. Steam will never change their attitude towards the people who they are happy to screw over for a quick buck. And game companies will continue to pump out unfinished sub par games.
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
I think there should also be better ways for legitimate devs to combat unfair relation to those who are not. But that's a perfect world scenario more than any reality.
As for K&H...These devs seem legit to me, they don't seem to have plans that are out of their reach. They have a good concept, and have laid down what appears to be a decent foundation, that has normal issues games face at that stage. IE clunkiness, hang-ups, instability, etc...
It's also an online game that just released, there's always issues for full blown retail releases in that regard (even those with the most overall polish) , I can only imagine it's more likely with the state this game is in.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Sounds like the usual early access release growing pains. But I find the the core concept of the game. which I see as a good throwback to simple dungeon crawling with some refinements (crafting, 1st person, etc.) as something to look forward to.
I'll wait a week or so for a few patches to settle things down but it's definitely on my list.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
What's the character system like? The loot? The secrets/puzzles/traps?
I'm asking about how satisfying the loot is - not how much is generated or how many colors there are. Most of these games have terrible loot systems, and I hate that.
Same goes for the character system - as in are the skills diverse and fun, or is it just a bunch of passive stats.
I really have no interest in mindless hacking away at monsters unless there's a deep and satisfying progression layer.
I'll probably check it out at some point, later in its development.
Thank you for the information
Pure and simple. You are right .. it can become great. But why bet my money? Just wait until it becomes great, then I will buy. If not, no harm done.