> Too bad it has been "in development" for like three years and is probably not even halfway done.
It's still in active development but has probable been put on hold because the devs are currently working on the next big update for garry's mod and are also working on making a new version of the facepunch forums.
Meowth joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 15 hours later, 20 hours after the original post[^][v]#689,126
Yeah I love playing 1v1 quickscopes on m dub two with my friends derp.
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 10 years ago, 3 hours later, 23 hours after the original post[^][v]#689,217
@688,842 (Nexi !tRAnsGiRLo)
The whole point of an alpha is that it isn't finished... @688,846 (Catherine !TGirlYJKXM)
Yes I played "legacy" rust and the new one. It has only recently caught up with the functionality that was present a year and a half ago. @688,861 (!Yushedo.Rw)
Sure whatever, the point is I spent $20 in 2013 and I am still at least a year and a half away from anything resembling a finished game. And this isn't a huge game. It's basically minecraft on a limited world map with guns. Day Z with no zombies and buildable houses. There are like six people working full time to make it at least. Early access is shit and should be banned from steam IMO.
Catherine !TGirlYJKXM (OP) replied with this 10 years ago, 2 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#689,238
@previous (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
By "limited world map", do you mean "non-voxel less manipulable"?
RWBY Rhunarb? !!iNo3FkiZx joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 3 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#689,272
@689,217 (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
I don't know, man, I think that early access can work. A game just needs a dedicated and communicative dev team behind it.
I have purchased RWBY: Grimm Eclipse in early access. I enjoy seeing the game develop, and get to play through these changes first-hand. Also, I don't know if all early access games do this, but it was cheaper than it's going to be when it properly comes out.
Metæ replied with this 10 years ago, 5 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#689,273
@689,217 (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU) @previous (RWBY Rhunarb? !!iNo3FkiZx)
Early Access means "games that aren't quite done yet", right?
RWBY Rhunarb? !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 10 years ago, 8 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#689,274
@previous (Metæ)
You got it. The idea is that users can purchase and play the game as the developer is still making it. So, for example, an early access game might come with the first few levels, and the developer adds the rest over time.
It's gotten kind of a bad reputation with some gamers. Early access games can be very bare-bones or glitchy, so people feel cheated. And you're at the mercy of the game developers being dedicated enough to finish the job and not drag their feet.
(Edited 58 seconds later.)
Anonymous H joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 24 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#689,276
devs should never release games as early access because they almost always end up dead before being done.
Metæ replied with this 10 years ago, 18 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#689,282
@689,274 (RWBY Rhunarb? !!iNo3FkiZx) > And you're at the mercy of the game developers being dedicated enough to finish the job and not drag their feet.
Yeah, that seems kinda risky. Maybe from a developer with track record of quality games but not from an unknown developer. Whats to stop them from taking the money and just leaving you with a half-baked game?
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 10 years ago, 3 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#689,304
@previous (Metæ)
Nothing. Once the money is gone you are at the mercy of the game devs. I get that making game is inherently risky. You aren't guaranteed good sales numbers even if it is good. Passing this risk onto the consumer is not really a good idea. Especially when there are few if any legal protections for consumers who buy into a game made by a studio that closes/gives up on the game before it is done. I think steam needs a policy that forces game devs to be on a timeline, even if it says like 2 years from the point of first release, by which point the game has to be released as a finished product or they refund everyone who bought into it. Just force some accountability for game devs. Of course you would need some kind of way to assess whether a game is "finished" so a dev can't just slap a "final build" sticker on something that is clearly unfinished or nonfunctional. If the effect of this is that game devs are more choosey with what games they release early access, or they release early access games that are further along (i.e. alpha instead of pre-alpha, or beta instead of alpha) then I view that as a win for consumers.
Metæ replied with this 10 years ago, 30 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#689,307
@previous (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
This seems like a bad idea. I think getting paid halfway through the development process would be a demotivator. You release the work-in-progress on Steam, then everyone (or at least like half the people) who will buy the game buys it, but then you know there won't be a big payday at the end because everyone who is interested already bought it so you know you won't be paid for the rest of the game, whether it's good or bad.
Maybe Steam could hold the money in escrow, and dole it out in chunks as milestones are hit?
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 10 years ago, 10 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#689,309
@previous (Metæ)
Yes that's true, but right now there is no incentive to make anything past the rudimentary stages because there is no check at all. Put up a semi playable demo, write glowing depictions of what will be included in future releases, and then bail out when sales level off. This is moving the needle halfway as it were. Holding money in escrow and periodically checking progress is not feasible for steam. They run a skeleton crew and they simply do not want the headache of holding money in hundreds of escrow accounts for developers who may or may not end up earning the money and must be evaluated on a case by case basis multiple times per year. Steam can barely even handle rudimentary customer support services like steam account issues.
(Edited 30 seconds later.)
RWBY Rhunarb? !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 10 years ago, 46 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#689,311
When will these games release?
Its up to the developer to determine when they are ready to 'release'. Some developers have a concrete deadline in mind, while others will get a better sense as the development of the game progresses. You should be aware that some teams will be unable to 'finish' their game. So you should only buy an Early Access game if you are excited about playing it in its current state.
So it might be that they have no intention to overhaul the system to reduce the risks. At least not at the moment. Otherwise, they're shifting responsibility to the buyer.
I still don't think it's always a bad idea... But at least a few people are inevitably going to be let down by Early Access in its current form.
Metæ replied with this 10 years ago, 40 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#689,312
@previous (RWBY Rhunarb? !!iNo3FkiZx)
Even with that caveat it's still going to damage Steam's reputation if too many of these games don't deliver.
@689,309 (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
I was about to say they could invest it and get that sweet passive income but you're right.
Metæ double-posted this 10 years ago, 7 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#689,314
@Fake anon and Cathy
Actually another question. I know games are inherently subjective but how could Cathy think Rust is an amazing game while you don't think it even resembles a finished game?
(Edited 36 seconds later.)
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 10 years ago, 6 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#689,315
@previous (Metæ)
Rust is kind of a strange case. The adrenaline rush you get when you play it and meet someone else, and have to decide if you engage or ignore is crazy. Unmatched by any other game I've ever played. That being said, the rest of it is so unpolished and underdeveloped I have a hard time calling it a "game". I think in like two years it will be a legitimately great actual game, but as of right now it is closer to a tech demo with some gameplay features than anything resembling a complete experience.
RWBY Rhunarb? !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 10 years ago, 46 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#689,320
@689,312 (Metæ)
In theory, but Steam Early Access has been going on for years, now. Distrust of it isn't uncommon, but Early Access is still there.
Catherine !TGirlYJKXM (OP) replied with this 10 years ago, 25 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#689,321
@689,314 (Metæ)
I found a group of players who I bunk with. One, our leader, is afraid that the future addition of cars might ruin everything, but looks forward to horse mounts and rafts.
Anonymous I joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 29 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#689,325
@previous (Catherine !TGirlYJKXM)
Kill him in his sleep.
brie !uXWPG0MygI joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#689,351
@689,320 (RWBY Rhunarb? !!iNo3FkiZx)
I don't know why people don't understand one simple thing about Early Access; you are buying early access.
You did not buy a game. You bought a ticket to ride the roller-coaster that is a game's development.
You might even hate the game you are given at the end... so you better enjoy the ride.
Catherine !TGirlYJKXM (OP) replied with this 10 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#689,375
@previous (brie !uXWPG0MygI)
I messaged you with important info. ;-)