Doom and gloom in the media

[JohnStabler]

So there's an opinion piece on massively.joystiq.com which names Elite Dangerous as one of the current titles which are flaunting their alpha access in a way which the writer claims will "poison" the games industry:

http://massively.joystiq.com/2014/01/17/the-soapbox-enough-with-selling-alpha-tests-already/

What he doesn't realise is that his argument against giving players early access parallels telling people to save themselves for marriage...

 

[tagos]

Seems he raises some interesting questions, the answers to which are:

'It's too early to tell'.

I'd rather something leapt through all the alpha, beta and gamma hoops ED is than go the X Rebirth route of conning customers into paying a premium price to be unwitting alpha testers.

But there is certainly scope for abuse, scope for people to not understand what an alpha is etc etc.

 

[ZeeWolf]

I kind of agree with his sentiment, but you are right its hard to stop individuals from getting excited and wanting to follow a games progress. He only listed ED along with a few others and didn't gripe about it specifically. I do wonder at what point these developers should become accountable for providing a product that isn't fit for purpose as most of the risk is passed on to the consumer. I think Frontier were trying to offer a high value proposal as part of their kick-starter campaign and everyone assumed they were following some kind of early access strategy. I suppose they could have simply stopped alpha access all together but they might want more test players for the network tests.

I thought TotalBiscuit did a good video on this the other day:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CyGbbIB5eaM

 

[Cmdr Eagleboy]

I think it's cool to have ED mentioned, even if it's meant in little bit negative way. I think article is poorly done, and smells more like QQ about expensive alpha access than anything else. TotalBiscuit and others have done much better summaries on this.

 

[Dejay]

I paid 100 pounds for premium beta, but not only because I want access to beta, but also because I want frontier developer to have the money to create an awesome game.

Personally I think crowd funding a game should evolve more into an investment venture: You pay for preorder and maybe early access, and you can invest more on top of that. But if the game is an success, you get a ROI e.g. your investment + winnings from sales.

 

[JohnStabler]

I think article is poorly done, and smells more like QQ about expensive alpha access than anything else.

Agreed. As I may have intimated in my original post, it smacks of moral panic and fear of the unknown. I await some more convincing evidence that early access is damaging the consumer and not just the archaic publisher model.

 

[Faerie]

Doom & gloom ? It's just the time of year. And I expect the people who write this rubbish are affected by the approaching full moon.

 

[Gibbonici]

Agreed. As I may have intimated in my original post, it smacks of moral panic and fear of the unknown. I await some more convincing evidence that early access is damaging the consumer and not just the archaic publisher model.

I'm with you on that, more or less. One thing worth mentioning though, is that alpha access is such a new thing that many gamers haven't quite grasped what it means, hence all the rage about buying unfinished, buggy games when this is exactly what they were buying in the first place.

Total Biscuit addresses half of this when he talks about game companies (especially Steam) not being overbearingly clear on what buying alpha access means, but then he blows it by basically saying that it's not the gamer's fault if they bought something without finding out what it actually is. Caveat emptor always applies.

Still, calling alpha "Early Access" is a bit misleading when early access always meant getting a game a couple of extra weeks before release if you preorder it. I do think that the alpha access thing is still a bit Wild West at the moment, but over time it'll get more predictable and standardised as the pitfalls and advantages of it become clear for all parties.

 

[Darren Grey]

I think as in all things there are good and bad elements. Alpha as a reward in Kickstarters makes perfect sense - Kickstarters need interesting rewards to work, after all, and you're giving dedicated players something they want in return for generosity. On the other hand you have unfinished games dominating Steam charts, and even appearing in Steam sales (I'm looking at you Godus), which just smacks of greed and fake promises.

Of course "alpha" itself doesn't really mean anything any more. There no standard across games as to what you can expect from alpha/beta/etc. This becomes a problem when you start putting a price on them and customers expect different things.

 

[JohnStabler]

One thing worth mentioning though, is that alpha access is such a new thing that many gamers haven't quite grasped what it means, hence all the rage about buying unfinished, buggy games when this is exactly what they were buying in the first place.

I totally agree. But of course that's an argument *for* informing / educating the consumer and not *against* early access itself.

Still, calling alpha "Early Access" is a bit misleading when early access always meant getting a game a couple of extra weeks before release if you preorder it. I do think that the alpha access thing is still a bit Wild West at the moment, but over time it'll get more predictable and standardised as the pitfalls and advantages of it become clear for all parties.

I think the article was targeting both early access and alpha access. I agree that it's wrong to conflate them.

 

[Gibbonici]

Doom & gloom ? It's just the time of year. And I expect the people who write this rubbish are affected by the approaching full moon.

Spoken like a true Hebdenite

 

[Oddball]

If it wasn't for the backers who pledged to get the alpha, FD probably wouldn't have been successful in the kickstarter. And that would mean no game.

The game is coming, be grateful.

 

[FrodoHobbits]

The game is coming, be grateful.

I am... I am...

 

[withnail]

I think the complaint should be whether we did actually receive an Alpha test, or were Frontier so worried about asking players to play a bug ridden, filled with glitches, game that gets negative word of mouth feedback across the gaming community that they Alpha tested it to death before they released it.

The fact that it got such good reviews may be demonstrated by the surge in backers following it's release, proving that word of mouth is very important when the Devs release various builds.

It is arguable that what we got here was a playable demo, and that people pledging at Alpha level paid for the privilege of being the first to play the next release of the Elite franchise.

Not that I'm complaining, from my own POV I have really enjoyed it.

 

[Cmdr Eagleboy]

To be frank, Early Access is disputable. It can create wrong impression on game developers. And Steam could do more to give more indication if game is unfinished in front page (There's enough warnings in individual pages of the games). However there are some very positive examples, and as with everything in life, there's bad, there's good and there's gray area.

 

[roryscarlett]

Mmm the author of the article seems to be the kind of person who has seen a possible sea-change in the way games are funded and developed, and for his own reasons, doesn't like it!

Having Alpha access I for one feel a real sense of participation in the development of ED. I have never been as involved in the development of a game and FD's relationship with the community has been frankly awesome.

Maybe ED is unique. There's a solid fan base spanning a thirty year period. A significant proportion of the backers are comfortably off 30 or 40 something's. We may be more patient and forgiving than the average fan-base, but we will still shout if ED ends up being a giant turd. But purely from the Alpha, which currently has only shown us single player combat, only a small part of what makes up Elite, I am Uber happy at the moment!

I wonder if the author backed X-Rebirth?

 

[Stormprooter]

Hmmm,

Steam Early Access, while not perhaps strongly defined, is usually an early version of the game sold a bit cheaper than at full release date, along with some extras - so generally you pay a bit less, and get a bit more for taking a bit of a gamble - seems fine to me.

E : D Alpha/Beta access (and other reward tiers) - I personally think this was priced at the kickstarter to filter out the 'tyre-kickers' and potential professional nay-sayers and whingers (my opinion, not fact). To get Alpha/Beta access, you show your individual enthusiasm for the game by stumping up the cash for it. This ties you into investing in the game, and hopefully will help in making sure those who have invested focus on making contributions (however small) to improve the game, not diss it down. (Again, my opinion, not fact)
Again, makes perfect sense to me.(well it would, it's my opinion )

 

[ZeeWolf]

E : D Alpha/Beta access (and other reward tiers) - I personally think this was priced at the kickstarter to filter out the 'tyre-kickers' and potential professional nay-sayers and whingers (my opinion, not fact). To get Alpha/Beta access, you show your individual enthusiasm for the game by stumping up the cash for it. This ties you into investing in the game, and hopefully will help in making sure those who have invested focus on making contributions (however small) to improve the game, not diss it down. (Again, my opinion, not fact)
Again, makes perfect sense to me.(well it would, it's my opinion )

I think you are sort of correct. But I wonder if they even put that amount of thought into it. I reckon it was exactly innocent as it appears "What shall we give higher level backers?" "How about they get involved with the testing and we do some alpha builds and beta builds that they can download"...

Then they fell fowl to everyone assuming they were doing some cunning 'early access' strategy like every other game being developed.

I have a sneaking suspicion that Frontier aren't that devious, they are not really that experienced at marketing and are really finding their way around developing a game in this new-fangled indie style. They said that the alpha was expensive for people that pledged at a high amount. They can't really go back on that now just because every other developer is giving you some half-arsed concept game at a regular price.

 

[deMangler]

Thanks for the link - I actually thought it was a great article honestly written with clear observations, especially the extent to which Post-purchase rationalization plays, or can play, a huge part in how crowd-funded games are regarded, and especially the kind of games like MMO's which are to a large extent what we ourselves make them.
With E:⁠D I was "shut up and take my money" - I was not being carried along by promises. I understand Alpha testing and if anything consider that being part of that is another way I can give to the project, not something I am receiving myself.
I think the article is insightful when it warns about "The modular or episodic approach to creating MMOs is fascinating and could have potential if done carefully and done right. But I still maintain that as a whole, this use of alpha can be poison" Alpha is being sold now as something you get rather than an opportunity to give your time and effort.

From what I have seem FD are one of the few that are an example of how this potential poison does not need to happen.

 

[Jenner]

To be frank, Early Access is disputable. It can create wrong impression on game developers. And Steam could do more to give more indication if game is unfinished in front page (There's enough warnings in individual pages of the games). However there are some very positive examples, and as with everything in life, there's bad, there's good and there's gray area.

Agreed.

Paid early access/alphas/betas are a double-edged sword and can certainly be abused by developers and publishers. Oftentimes the abuse is not even intentional.

Total Biscuit did an interesting piece on the subject:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CyGbbIB5eaM

My own take is that consumers should not engage in early access without a great deal of research and forethought. It's not something that I think is indisputably in the industry's best interest across the board. For some games, it's fine.