I for one think EA is great and allows to me get in early to test games that i am looking forward to. Its not something you are forced to do.. you can either do it or not they are not holding a gun to your head.
I think the option of being able to get into the game early is a lot better than not having that option at all.. people just need to realise early access is not a finished game and game development takes a very long time.
If you do not want to get involved with the game development then wait until its released its as simple as that. I would also not expect every gamer to want to do this kind of thing anyway so i am not surprised at the poll results so far.
Problem with that mentality is that games have always had early access/testing, but it was free. If you all stopped paying them to test their games it would go back to being free. You're just encouraging them to find more ways to take your money without actually offering you anything new. But gamers have always been easy to rip off. We make it easy for them.
Originally posted by Nanfoodle Who would not mind paying a few bucks to not wait in line? I would pay 3 bucks extra on a movie ticket to have the seat I wanted saved and I could show up just a few min before my movie started. Me first is something we all want, some are just willing to pay for it.
The issue at hand is that is ALL people are now paying for. Do you want to be the first to find out you payed for a game that is horrible even after release?
And were not talking about 3$ here, were talking 50$+ for a product thats supposed to be free is how bad it is getting.
I have been MMOing for 16 years, most MMOs are messed up at release and it stays that way for 3-6 months. Head start often is the best play time you get for a few months. I think people are forgetting how bad most MMO launches are. As I stated in this thread even WoW still holds as being one of the worse launches to date I can remember. I only remember one really good launch and that was Rift.
after release
What are you trying to nitpick about or can you not get the gist of my post?
I'm pointing out that your post doesn't address anything relevant, I was talking about early access games that are terrible even AFTER release, where you focused entirely on its launch. You skipped the word afterleading you to a discussion about game launches which doesn't support anything.
I thought I was very clear but I will spell it out for you. Most games bad from launch and after launch missing many things from server stability to content not being fully ready. After launch most games take a few months to get servers running smooth and content added to keep player happy. My point you skipping over, head start is normally the smoothest time to play till things are fixed 3-6 month later. Yes head start is worth paying for to be first in line and to enjoy smooth content for 2-7 days of play time. Release and after release, I normally stop playing till the hell time has slowed down. 200% Yes its worth spending my money on. To people who dont want to spend that money I thank you for not getting in my way of gaming. I hope you hold your stand firm and stay the heck out of my way. Thanks!!!
Drinks Iselin beer!!!!
Seems you are still missing the point. I'm talking AFTER Release again, you say after release yourself, but you are still supporting the pre-launch/launch benefits with no added argument of the game being any good after. Do you have anything to support that early access games are any good 3-6 months after, or even 2 years after launch?
So far it sounds like you only play games before launch which is odd.
Are you new to MMOing? If the game is no good, because I bought it before release, I get a refund. Thats what most MMOers do that know how things work. If I see the game is messed up but has potential I will stick it out and see how things turn out over the next few months and I work my way to max level. SWToR was a game like that. Hot mess to start but still glad I pre-ordered. All you need to get from my post is this...
Yes its worth spending my money on if you really like the idea of the game. To people who dont want to spend that money I thank you for not getting in my way of gaming. I hope you hold your stand firm and stay the heck out of my way. Thanks!!!
If the game is no good, because I bought it before release, I get a refund
I honestly doubt that the majority of people actually get a refund simply because they don't like a game, some companies may offer it, but I doubt its that easy. I would be interested to see if any Archeage players got a refund for their founder packs.
To people who dont want to spend that money I thank you for not getting in my way of gaming
I really don't see your logic, you do realize if people dont buy early access there is a good possibility of it going away right? and if you don't want people to get in your way wouldn't a single player game be more suited for you? Not telling you what to do, just saying that this statement doesn't really fit in with supporting early access or MMOs.
Lastly, ideas of a game can be great, but if the game is actually good are two different things, I would rather pay for a game that is actually good rather than an idea that has potential to be good with no product to support it.
I work in customer service, I can say the right words every time to get a refund. One time I was told I would not get a refund and made a claim with the BBB and got my refund that way.
EDIT: To the 2nd 1/2 of your reply. I can tell most dont by the server loads when you play and server loads launch day. Running around in game the volume of players for most tripple A games is very noticeable, often slowing down questing to a craw as you wait for spawns and nodes. Its why people who like head starts, love them. If I can get ahead of the curve often launch day and on is still smooth sailing other then server Qs. So even then, it still worth it.
If people don't buy into early access, companies will stop spending resources on enabling people to play early.
Thus the people voted "No" and it goes the way of the Dodo.
So according to your logic, we can only vote NO with our wallet if EVERYONE votes NO, which supports why this is an issue for people who do not support early access.
So you are out-voted. If you cannot get others to vote your way, it is your problem, not theirs.
No one is obligated to see things as you do. Plus, how would early access even affect you if you are not buying it?
1st, the point was if a small number of people do buy into early access as opposed to the people who don't the game company will see the market strategy as profitable despite many people who don't approve of the early access model. Therefore the problem is not being out-voted, but that Yes votes have a landslide more effect than No votes, and the concept of voting with your wallet being un-balanced in favor of yes.
2nd, if continuation of early access is a success, that means that the game development business can assume that they can make a profit from unfinished products with minimal effort so long as they use tactics such as NDAs and good advertising. This supports games being very popular from information control and advertising before launch, and then after launch only then do negative reviews come out after NDAs are lifted and actual gameplay serves as advertising, not fancy CGIs.
After early access though, as long as the company has provided the bare minimum of what they are required to by law and advertising they are free to put the game in minimal development and minimal effort, thus becoming a cash grab.
Why are people not paying for early access upset? Simply because we are tired of seeing cash grab games being the majority of what is released recently.
In my personal opinion this will continue until people either stop paying for early access, or are more educated about the games they support early access for, the model used to work, but not as intended as of late.
You do realise that you can only vote "Yes" with your wallet in this kind of scenario ?
If you simply don't buy something, the seller has no idea WHY you didn't buy it.
The seller doesn't know if you're aware of what is being offered for sale.
In fact, the seller doesn't even know that you exist !
The only effective way to "vote with your wallet" is to stop spending money on a product that the seller knows you are already buying, e.g. cancelling a game subscription.
If people don't buy into early access, companies will stop spending resources on enabling people to play early.
Thus the people voted "No" and it goes the way of the Dodo.
So according to your logic, we can only vote NO with our wallet if EVERYONE votes NO, which supports why this is an issue for people who do not support early access.
No, you are misinterpreting. One could argue you are using false dichotomy.
Anyway, I'll break it down:
- The more people buy in, the more incentive for companies to offer it.
- The less people buy in, the less incentive for companies to offer it.
- There are considerable costs involved with offering it.
Originally posted by Nanfoodle Who would not mind paying a few bucks to not wait in line? I would pay 3 bucks extra on a movie ticket to have the seat I wanted saved and I could show up just a few min before my movie started. Me first is something we all want, some are just willing to pay for it.
The issue at hand is that is ALL people are now paying for. Do you want to be the first to find out you payed for a game that is horrible even after release?
And were not talking about 3$ here, were talking 50$+ for a product thats supposed to be free is how bad it is getting.
I have been MMOing for 16 years, most MMOs are messed up at release and it stays that way for 3-6 months. Head start often is the best play time you get for a few months. I think people are forgetting how bad most MMO launches are. As I stated in this thread even WoW still holds as being one of the worse launches to date I can remember. I only remember one really good launch and that was Rift.
after release
What are you trying to nitpick about or can you not get the gist of my post?
I'm pointing out that your post doesn't address anything relevant, I was talking about early access games that are terrible even AFTER release, where you focused entirely on its launch. You skipped the word afterleading you to a discussion about game launches which doesn't support anything.
I thought I was very clear but I will spell it out for you. Most games bad from launch and after launch missing many things from server stability to content not being fully ready. After launch most games take a few months to get servers running smooth and content added to keep player happy. My point you skipping over, head start is normally the smoothest time to play till things are fixed 3-6 month later. Yes head start is worth paying for to be first in line and to enjoy smooth content for 2-7 days of play time. Release and after release, I normally stop playing till the hell time has slowed down. 200% Yes its worth spending my money on. To people who dont want to spend that money I thank you for not getting in my way of gaming. I hope you hold your stand firm and stay the heck out of my way. Thanks!!!
Drinks Iselin beer!!!!
Seems you are still missing the point. I'm talking AFTER Release again, you say after release yourself, but you are still supporting the pre-launch/launch benefits with no added argument of the game being any good after. Do you have anything to support that early access games are any good 3-6 months after, or even 2 years after launch?
So far it sounds like you only play games before launch which is odd.
Are you new to MMOing? If the game is no good, because I bought it before release, I get a refund. Thats what most MMOers do that know how things work. If I see the game is messed up but has potential I will stick it out and see how things turn out over the next few months and I work my way to max level. SWToR was a game like that. Hot mess to start but still glad I pre-ordered. All you need to get from my post is this...
Yes its worth spending my money on if you really like the idea of the game. To people who dont want to spend that money I thank you for not getting in my way of gaming. I hope you hold your stand firm and stay the heck out of my way. Thanks!!!
If the game is no good, because I bought it before release, I get a refund
I honestly doubt that the majority of people actually get a refund simply because they don't like a game, some companies may offer it, but I doubt its that easy. I would be interested to see if any Archeage players got a refund for their founder packs.
To people who dont want to spend that money I thank you for not getting in my way of gaming
I really don't see your logic, you do realize if people dont buy early access there is a good possibility of it going away right? and if you don't want people to get in your way wouldn't a single player game be more suited for you? Not telling you what to do, just saying that this statement doesn't really fit in with supporting early access or MMOs.
Lastly, ideas of a game can be great, but if the game is actually good are two different things, I would rather pay for a game that is actually good rather than an idea that has potential to be good with no product to support it.
I work in customer service, I can say the right words every time to get a refund. One time I was told I would not get a refund and made a claim with the BBB and got my refund that way.
Just read that post, did you? Maybe you could point out one person that actually got a refund on that post, because I just saw many who wanted a refund, none that actually got one.
As it stands your link supports very few people getting a refund on a case-by-case basis, rather than it being a simple thing to do and "most MMOers" can do, also not everyone knows exactly what to say and shouldn't be a requirement to get a refund, unless you are dealing with a cash grab company who runs early access campaigns.
Congrats on your job, I'm technical support myself.
If people don't buy into early access, companies will stop spending resources on enabling people to play early.
Thus the people voted "No" and it goes the way of the Dodo.
So according to your logic, we can only vote NO with our wallet if EVERYONE votes NO, which supports why this is an issue for people who do not support early access.
So you are out-voted. If you cannot get others to vote your way, it is your problem, not theirs.
No one is obligated to see things as you do. Plus, how would early access even affect you if you are not buying it?
1st, the point was if a small number of people do buy into early access as opposed to the people who don't the game company will see the market strategy as profitable despite many people who don't approve of the early access model. Therefore the problem is not being out-voted, but that Yes votes have a landslide more effect than No votes, and the concept of voting with your wallet being un-balanced in favor of yes.
2nd, if continuation of early access is a success, that means that the game development business can assume that they can make a profit from unfinished products with minimal effort so long as they use tactics such as NDAs and good advertising. This supports games being very popular from information control and advertising before launch, and then after launch only then do negative reviews come out after NDAs are lifted and actual gameplay serves as advertising, not fancy CGIs.
After early access though, as long as the company has provided the bare minimum of what they are required to by law and advertising they are free to put the game in minimal development and minimal effort, thus becoming a cash grab.
Why are people not paying for early access upset? Simply because we are tired of seeing cash grab games being the majority of what is released recently.
In my personal opinion this will continue until people either stop paying for early access, or are more educated about the games they support early access for, the model used to work, but not as intended as of late.
1st point: No, there are costs involved. A small number buying in won't do anything. Not worth it for the companies.
2nd point: Early access actually goes against "information control" and NDAs won't change that. If a game is bad and they let people play it early, the word will get out. (and that is a good thing)
As I said in an earlier post, your point about the effects of early access on the game's dev cycle and lifespan are worth discussing.
As to being upset: I see your viewpoint, but in the end the majority will get what they want, even if you disagree.
Your only hope is to educate people. With solid arguments. (better chance without words like suckers, cash grab, fools, stupid)
I agree to saturation setting in at a certain point. People will get tired of basically never playing a polished, finished game (if they hop from ea to ea.)
I work in customer service, I can say the right words every time to get a refund. One time I was told I would not get a refund and made a claim with the BBB and got my refund that way.
Just read that post, did you? Maybe you could point out one person that actually got a refund on that post, because I just saw many who wanted a refund, none that actually got one.
As it stands your link supports very few people getting a refund on a case-by-case basis, rather than it being a simple thing to do and "most MMOers" can do, also not everyone knows exactly what to say and shouldn't be a requirement to get a refund, unless you are dealing with a cash grab company who runs early access campaigns.
Congrats on your job, I'm technical support myself.
All refunds are a case by case basis. The post was saying they were handing them out. That was one thread in many, here read this one...
I actually had a great deal of trouble getting a refund, I sent in 3 tickets, 1 chat support which took me 13 hours to get in to before they finally said I could have a refund. (Which is still "processing")
So I am unsure if I should still send them a e-mail or not. If I don't get the refund within 5 days, I guess I will.
Most forums here on mmorpg.com after a game release get refund threads on how they got their refund. Like I said before, you must be new to here or MMOing as this is common.
You do realise that you can only vote "Yes" with your wallet in this kind of scenario ?
If you simply don't buy something, the seller has no idea WHY you didn't buy it.
The seller doesn't know if you're aware of what is being offered for sale.
In fact, the seller doesn't even know that you exist !
The only effective way to "vote with your wallet" is to stop spending money on a product that the seller knows you are already buying, e.g. cancelling a game subscription.
If people don't buy into early access, companies will stop spending resources on enabling people to play early.
Thus the people voted "No" and it goes the way of the Dodo.
So according to your logic, we can only vote NO with our wallet if EVERYONE votes NO, which supports why this is an issue for people who do not support early access.
No, you are misinterpreting. One could argue you are using false dichotomy.
Anyway, I'll break it down:
- The more people buy in, the more incentive for companies to offer it.
- The less people buy in, the less incentive for companies to offer it.
- There are considerable costs involved with offering it.
Compute!
Ok, maybe i was twisting it a bit based on your clarification. Still all they have to do is break the profit margin.
The costs to offer it cannot be that large seeing as long open betas used to be normal, and after that early access with a copy of the game at a discounted price (if the game wasn't free.). But for many games you pay more for early access than you do the cost of the retail game after release.
Point being, voting with your wallet doesn't matter so long as profit is made by the company.
There shouldn't be "considerable" costs for providing early access compared to open betas.
I don't get why people would be pissed with Early Access....you know its an unfinished product, so why get annoyed at what you have been told will be the case.
Its like ordering chocolate icecream and then getting pissed because you got chocolate icecream
Its almost like people are pissed that they have to acquire the willpower not to buy the game, and then are pissed at everyone else who is getting it....just because they decided not to...bizzzzzzare
No, my friend, it's like ordering chocolate flavored shit and hoping it turns into chocolate ice cream eventually but the guy who sold you the shit has no intention in ever turning it into chocolate ice cream.
The ones with the chocolate flavored shit are desperately trying to convince everyone that it's just a sample and eventually they get real chocolate ice cream.
After some time it turns into free chocolate flavored shit but it's still shit.
Just read that post, did you? Maybe you could point out one person that actually got a refund on that post, because I just saw many who wanted a refund, none that actually got one.As it stands your link supports very few people getting a refund on a case-by-case basis, rather than it being a simple thing to do and "most MMOers" can do, also not everyone knows exactly what to say and shouldn't be a requirement to get a refund, unless you are dealing with a cash grab company who runs early access campaigns.Congrats on your job, I'm technical support myself.
"Trion Issuing Refunds but removing threads on forums which inform users how to get them."
So, you have proven that refunds are possible with the correct method form this example.
But its a wonderful example of how companies/games who run early access games are cash grabs that only want your money and don't want to give it back, and I can only assume they don't care much for quality customer service, or a quality product.
As I said before:
not everyone knows exactly what to say and shouldn't be a requirement to get a refund, unless you are dealing with a cash grab company who runs early access campaigns.
I am so glad I have so many on this site willing to speak for me. Guess I am not a "people". Maybe I am a goat or a rooster. Maybe part of the insect world, but that is not the point. The point is I spend my money where I want to spend my money.
Originally posted by JemAs666 I am so glad I have so many on this site willing to speak for me. Guess I am not a "people". Maybe I am a goat or a rooster. Maybe part of the insect world, but that is not the point. The point is I spend my money where I want to spend my money.
No one is denying you the right to do so and no one even suggest something as ridiculous as that. I am not sure why you felt the need to say that because it's a really weird thing to say. Besides the fact that no one cares what you do with your money it also has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at all.
I don't get why people would be pissed with Early Access....you know its an unfinished product, so why get annoyed at what you have been told will be the case.
Its like ordering chocolate icecream and then getting pissed because you got chocolate icecream
Its almost like people are pissed that they have to acquire the willpower not to buy the game, and then are pissed at everyone else who is getting it....just because they decided not to...bizzzzzzare
No, my friend, it's like ordering chocolate flavored shit and hoping it turns into chocolate ice cream eventually but the guy who sold you the shit has no intention in ever turning it into chocolate ice cream.
The ones with the chocolate flavored shit are desperately trying to convince everyone that it's just a sample and eventually they get real chocolate ice cream.
After some time it turns into free chocolate flavored shit but it's still shit.
As opposed to what? Someone marketing some chocolate flavoured shit as ice cream, paying the price for ice cream and then realizing it's actually just chocolate flavoured shit? I fail to see the difference.
Honestly, the biggest difference in my opinion is that consumers are being allowed to help very small companies succeed in an industry where even giants have been falling like flies for the past 10 years. You can support ideas and concepts that you want to see come to life. Otherwise, you know what? I'm sure EA or Ubisoft or Activision will have something coming out next month for you.
Just read that post, did you? Maybe you could point out one person that actually got a refund on that post, because I just saw many who wanted a refund, none that actually got one.As it stands your link supports very few people getting a refund on a case-by-case basis, rather than it being a simple thing to do and "most MMOers" can do, also not everyone knows exactly what to say and shouldn't be a requirement to get a refund, unless you are dealing with a cash grab company who runs early access campaigns.Congrats on your job, I'm technical support myself.
"Trion Issuing Refunds but removing threads on forums which inform users how to get them."
So, you have proven that refunds are possible with the correct method form this example.
As I said before:
not everyone knows exactly what to say and shouldn't be a requirement to get a refund, unless you are dealing with a cash grab company who runs early access campaigns.
Yes because Reddit is such a hidden secret. Common or not my point stands. 200% yes head starts are worth it. If you dont think so, awesome for the crowd that thinks it is. For people that do awesome for them as they get quality time with less people in the way to find out if they really want to pay for the game. If they do, they are ahead of the curve and out of the hornets mess that comes with launch. How can this be a bad thing?
- The more people buy in, the more incentive for companies to offer it.
- The less people buy in, the less incentive for companies to offer it.
- There are considerable costs involved with offering it.
...
...
The costs to offer it cannot be that large seeing as long open betas used to be normal, and after that early access with a copy of the game at a discounted price (if the game wasn't free.). But for many games you pay more for early access than you do the cost of the retail game after release.
Point being, voting with your wallet doesn't matter so long as profit is made by the company.
There shouldn't be "considerable" costs for providing early access compared to open betas.
Fair enough, that's certainly a point we can discuss.
Here is why I said it:
Open betas used to be a week or two right before launch, with basically the version that was already finished up for launch.
Early access is usually many months. If not years (EQNL for instance). And it brings a huge user base into the equation very early in the dev cycle. (way higher scope than oldschool betas, where user flow was strictly controlled and much later in the cycle.)
If you let people in really early, you have to polish up every early version (usability, UI, etc). Inhouse/closed testing builds wouldn't be polished to that level. There is also servers to be run, support to be provided, paying testers to be entertained with constant updates, communication, etc. It all adds up, especially with these very long timeframes.
I don't get why people would be pissed with Early Access....you know its an unfinished product, so why get annoyed at what you have been told will be the case.
Its like ordering chocolate icecream and then getting pissed because you got chocolate icecream
Its almost like people are pissed that they have to acquire the willpower not to buy the game, and then are pissed at everyone else who is getting it....just because they decided not to...bizzzzzzare
No, my friend, it's like ordering chocolate flavored shit and hoping it turns into chocolate ice cream eventually but the guy who sold you the shit has no intention in ever turning it into chocolate ice cream.
The ones with the chocolate flavored shit are desperately trying to convince everyone that it's just a sample and eventually they get real chocolate ice cream.
After some time it turns into free chocolate flavored shit but it's still shit.
As opposed to what? Someone marketing some chocolate flavoured shit as ice cream, paying the price for ice cream and then realizing it's actually just chocolate flavoured shit? I fail to see the difference.
The particular flavor of ice cream we are talking about here is going to be free. They are asking you to pay for the chocolate flavored shit that will eventually be free chocolate flavored shit. That is the difference.
Honestly, the biggest difference in my opinion is that consumers are being allowed to help very small companies succeed in an industry where even giants have been falling like flies for the past 10 years. You can support ideas and concepts that you want to see come to life. Otherwise, you know what? I'm sure EA or Ubisoft or Activision will have something coming out next month for you.
There is nothing wrong in supporting very small companies to succeed. No one ever said that. There is something wrong if the billion dollar companies like SOE, EA, Ubisoft or Activision try to do the same and still delivering worse games than the small companies.
If you can't see the difference then i am not sure what else to say.
Just read that post, did you? Maybe you could point out one person that actually got a refund on that post, because I just saw many who wanted a refund, none that actually got one.As it stands your link supports very few people getting a refund on a case-by-case basis, rather than it being a simple thing to do and "most MMOers" can do, also not everyone knows exactly what to say and shouldn't be a requirement to get a refund, unless you are dealing with a cash grab company who runs early access campaigns.Congrats on your job, I'm technical support myself.
"Trion Issuing Refunds but removing threads on forums which inform users how to get them."
So, you have proven that refunds are possible with the correct method form this example.
As I said before:
not everyone knows exactly what to say and shouldn't be a requirement to get a refund, unless you are dealing with a cash grab company who runs early access campaigns.
Yes because Reddit is such a hidden secret. Common or not my point stands. 200% yes head starts are worth it. If you dont think so, awesome for the crowd that thinks it is. For people that do awesome for them as they get quality time with less people in the way to find out if they really want to pay for the game. If they do, they are ahead of the curve and out of the hornets mess that comes with launch. How can this be a bad thing?
Again in the Archeage example, how can you not see a potential for early access being a bad thing? If so many people wanted a refund as you pointed out for me, then obviously it wasn't good. People don't refund something that is good.
It's bad because bad games are making money which leads to more bad games being made, I've already explained that if you missed it.
I'm so sick of EA that I came home for lunch so I could pay for H1Z1's EA and start downloading it for when I get off work. Unfortunately it doesn't unlock for another hour, I have been foiled.
There is nothing wrong in supporting very small companies to succeed. No one ever said that. There is something wrong if the billion dollar companies like SOE, EA, Ubisoft or Activision try to do the same and still delivering worse games than the small companies.
If you can't see the difference then i am not sure what else to say.
The quality of games is a different topic though.
Unless you are saying early access causes the games to be bad, in which case you should explain why.
Just read that post, did you? Maybe you could point out one person that actually got a refund on that post, because I just saw many who wanted a refund, none that actually got one.As it stands your link supports very few people getting a refund on a case-by-case basis, rather than it being a simple thing to do and "most MMOers" can do, also not everyone knows exactly what to say and shouldn't be a requirement to get a refund, unless you are dealing with a cash grab company who runs early access campaigns.Congrats on your job, I'm technical support myself.
"Trion Issuing Refunds but removing threads on forums which inform users how to get them."
So, you have proven that refunds are possible with the correct method form this example.
As I said before:
not everyone knows exactly what to say and shouldn't be a requirement to get a refund, unless you are dealing with a cash grab company who runs early access campaigns.
Yes because Reddit is such a hidden secret. Common or not my point stands. 200% yes head starts are worth it. If you dont think so, awesome for the crowd that thinks it is. For people that do awesome for them as they get quality time with less people in the way to find out if they really want to pay for the game. If they do, they are ahead of the curve and out of the hornets mess that comes with launch. How can this be a bad thing?
Again in the Archeage example, how can you not see a potential for early access being a bad thing? If so many people wanted a refund as you pointed out for me, then obviously it wasn't good. People don't refund something that is good.
It's bad because bad games are making money which leads to more bad games being made, I've already explained that if you missed it.
There is nothing wrong in supporting very small companies to succeed. No one ever said that. There is something wrong if the billion dollar companies like SOE, EA, Ubisoft or Activision try to do the same and still delivering worse games than the small companies.
If you can't see the difference then i am not sure what else to say.
The quality of games is a different topic though.
Unless you are saying early access causes the games to be bad, in which case you should explain why.
Name just one EA game by a big company in recent history that was a good game. I mean really good and delivered all their promises they used to sucker people into paying for an Alpha/Beta. I honestly can't remember a single one.
Now indie games, there are plenty that turned out pretty good or are still improving.
Big corporation ones though have all been nothing but scams to make the most money as soon as possible wile the hype is fresh and then delivering a half baked product that goes F2P within a year or worse is F2P with a ridiculous cash shop.
I even give you a reason why: Because they already made their money and are not the slightest interested in improving the games, they are already busy making the next EA scam and hyping it. Dean Hall and DayZ SA is a prime example of take the money and run. The game is broken and in a worse state than the MOD and i bet you an indie bundle that DayZ SA will NEVER be a good game.
Take AgeOfConan, a game that perfected the EA bait and switch hype. The starting area was fantastic but the rest of the game was broken, boring and did not have HALF the features they promised. The company went on and produced more EA scams while the AOC team got cut down. They are now starting to fix the crafting after how many years?
There is nothing wrong in supporting very small companies to succeed. No one ever said that. There is something wrong if the billion dollar companies like SOE, EA, Ubisoft or Activision try to do the same and still delivering worse games than the small companies.
If you can't see the difference then i am not sure what else to say.
The quality of games is a different topic though.
Unless you are saying early access causes the games to be bad, in which case you should explain why.
Name just one EA game by a big company in recent history that was a good game. I mean really good and delivered all their promises they used to sucker people into paying for an Alpha/Beta. I honestly can't remember a single one.
Now indie games, there are plenty that turned out pretty good or are still improving.
Big corporation ones though have all been nothing but scams to make the most money as soon as possible wile the hype is fresh and then delivering a half baked product that goes F2P within a year or worse is F2P with a ridiculous cash shop.
Thats the thing, good is subjective at best. I point at TSW as a bad game because I hate swearing and horror. But its fan talk of one of the best quest systems out there. Are they making money? Not as much as WoW but enough they keep new content rolling. In response to your post, I say TSW is that good game as many here would say so. Even Wildstar thats hated by many is still loved by a following. Heck the game that makes the most money WoW is pointed at all the time as a bad game. Fact is, if you like head starts a post like this wont stop you from forking out cash. If you hate them, good for you, dont pay that money. See you in a week when the game releases.
Originally posted by Albatroes I miss lengthy alphas/betas being free and a privilege to get into, remember those days?
Grass is greener? Remember the MMO you waited years to play and the one you really wanted to test but that was the one game you didnt get invited for? So you had to wait an extra year to try it for the first time. Or that game you didnt really care about was the one that sent you 14 beta invites and after 10 min of play you knew it was not worth your time? Ahhh the good old days!!!!!
Comments
Problem with that mentality is that games have always had early access/testing, but it was free. If you all stopped paying them to test their games it would go back to being free. You're just encouraging them to find more ways to take your money without actually offering you anything new. But gamers have always been easy to rip off. We make it easy for them.
http://www.reddit.com/r/archeage/comments/2g8zbk/trion_offering_refunds_on_a_case_by_case_basis/
I work in customer service, I can say the right words every time to get a refund. One time I was told I would not get a refund and made a claim with the BBB and got my refund that way.
EDIT: To the 2nd 1/2 of your reply. I can tell most dont by the server loads when you play and server loads launch day. Running around in game the volume of players for most tripple A games is very noticeable, often slowing down questing to a craw as you wait for spawns and nodes. Its why people who like head starts, love them. If I can get ahead of the curve often launch day and on is still smooth sailing other then server Qs. So even then, it still worth it.
1st, the point was if a small number of people do buy into early access as opposed to the people who don't the game company will see the market strategy as profitable despite many people who don't approve of the early access model. Therefore the problem is not being out-voted, but that Yes votes have a landslide more effect than No votes, and the concept of voting with your wallet being un-balanced in favor of yes.
2nd, if continuation of early access is a success, that means that the game development business can assume that they can make a profit from unfinished products with minimal effort so long as they use tactics such as NDAs and good advertising. This supports games being very popular from information control and advertising before launch, and then after launch only then do negative reviews come out after NDAs are lifted and actual gameplay serves as advertising, not fancy CGIs.
After early access though, as long as the company has provided the bare minimum of what they are required to by law and advertising they are free to put the game in minimal development and minimal effort, thus becoming a cash grab.
Why are people not paying for early access upset? Simply because we are tired of seeing cash grab games being the majority of what is released recently.
In my personal opinion this will continue until people either stop paying for early access, or are more educated about the games they support early access for, the model used to work, but not as intended as of late.
No, you are misinterpreting. One could argue you are using false dichotomy.
Anyway, I'll break it down:
- The more people buy in, the more incentive for companies to offer it.
- The less people buy in, the less incentive for companies to offer it.
- There are considerable costs involved with offering it.
Compute!
Just read that post, did you? Maybe you could point out one person that actually got a refund on that post, because I just saw many who wanted a refund, none that actually got one.
As it stands your link supports very few people getting a refund on a case-by-case basis, rather than it being a simple thing to do and "most MMOers" can do, also not everyone knows exactly what to say and shouldn't be a requirement to get a refund, unless you are dealing with a cash grab company who runs early access campaigns.
Congrats on your job, I'm technical support myself.
1st point: No, there are costs involved. A small number buying in won't do anything. Not worth it for the companies.
2nd point: Early access actually goes against "information control" and NDAs won't change that. If a game is bad and they let people play it early, the word will get out. (and that is a good thing)
As I said in an earlier post, your point about the effects of early access on the game's dev cycle and lifespan are worth discussing.
As to being upset: I see your viewpoint, but in the end the majority will get what they want, even if you disagree.
Your only hope is to educate people. With solid arguments. (better chance without words like suckers, cash grab, fools, stupid)
I agree to saturation setting in at a certain point. People will get tired of basically never playing a polished, finished game (if they hop from ea to ea.)
All refunds are a case by case basis. The post was saying they were handing them out. That was one thread in many, here read this one...
http://www.reddit.com/r/archeage/comments/2hda5m/trion_issuing_refunds_but_removing_threads_on/
"
I actually had a great deal of trouble getting a refund, I sent in 3 tickets, 1 chat support which took me 13 hours to get in to before they finally said I could have a refund. (Which is still "processing")
So I am unsure if I should still send them a e-mail or not. If I don't get the refund within 5 days, I guess I will.
Thanks for this.
Or look here and search refund.
http://www.mmorpg.com/search.cfm
Most forums here on mmorpg.com after a game release get refund threads on how they got their refund. Like I said before, you must be new to here or MMOing as this is common.
Ok, maybe i was twisting it a bit based on your clarification. Still all they have to do is break the profit margin.
The costs to offer it cannot be that large seeing as long open betas used to be normal, and after that early access with a copy of the game at a discounted price (if the game wasn't free.). But for many games you pay more for early access than you do the cost of the retail game after release.
Point being, voting with your wallet doesn't matter so long as profit is made by the company.
There shouldn't be "considerable" costs for providing early access compared to open betas.
No, my friend, it's like ordering chocolate flavored shit and hoping it turns into chocolate ice cream eventually but the guy who sold you the shit has no intention in ever turning it into chocolate ice cream.
The ones with the chocolate flavored shit are desperately trying to convince everyone that it's just a sample and eventually they get real chocolate ice cream.
After some time it turns into free chocolate flavored shit but it's still shit.
"Trion Issuing Refunds but removing threads on forums which inform users how to get them."So, you have proven that refunds are possible with the correct method form this example.
But its a wonderful example of how companies/games who run early access games are cash grabs that only want your money and don't want to give it back, and I can only assume they don't care much for quality customer service, or a quality product.
As I said before:
not everyone knows exactly what to say and shouldn't be a requirement to get a refund, unless you are dealing with a cash grab company who runs early access campaigns.
No one is denying you the right to do so and no one even suggest something as ridiculous as that. I am not sure why you felt the need to say that because it's a really weird thing to say. Besides the fact that no one cares what you do with your money it also has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at all.
As opposed to what? Someone marketing some chocolate flavoured shit as ice cream, paying the price for ice cream and then realizing it's actually just chocolate flavoured shit? I fail to see the difference.
Honestly, the biggest difference in my opinion is that consumers are being allowed to help very small companies succeed in an industry where even giants have been falling like flies for the past 10 years. You can support ideas and concepts that you want to see come to life. Otherwise, you know what? I'm sure EA or Ubisoft or Activision will have something coming out next month for you.
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------
Yes because Reddit is such a hidden secret. Common or not my point stands. 200% yes head starts are worth it. If you dont think so, awesome for the crowd that thinks it is. For people that do awesome for them as they get quality time with less people in the way to find out if they really want to pay for the game. If they do, they are ahead of the curve and out of the hornets mess that comes with launch. How can this be a bad thing?
Fair enough, that's certainly a point we can discuss.
Here is why I said it:
Open betas used to be a week or two right before launch, with basically the version that was already finished up for launch.
Early access is usually many months. If not years (EQNL for instance). And it brings a huge user base into the equation very early in the dev cycle. (way higher scope than oldschool betas, where user flow was strictly controlled and much later in the cycle.)
If you let people in really early, you have to polish up every early version (usability, UI, etc). Inhouse/closed testing builds wouldn't be polished to that level. There is also servers to be run, support to be provided, paying testers to be entertained with constant updates, communication, etc. It all adds up, especially with these very long timeframes.
There is nothing wrong in supporting very small companies to succeed. No one ever said that. There is something wrong if the billion dollar companies like SOE, EA, Ubisoft or Activision try to do the same and still delivering worse games than the small companies.
If you can't see the difference then i am not sure what else to say.
Again in the Archeage example, how can you not see a potential for early access being a bad thing? If so many people wanted a refund as you pointed out for me, then obviously it wasn't good. People don't refund something that is good.
It's bad because bad games are making money which leads to more bad games being made, I've already explained that if you missed it.
The quality of games is a different topic though.
Unless you are saying early access causes the games to be bad, in which case you should explain why.
I will bite, what bad games?
Name just one EA game by a big company in recent history that was a good game. I mean really good and delivered all their promises they used to sucker people into paying for an Alpha/Beta. I honestly can't remember a single one.
Now indie games, there are plenty that turned out pretty good or are still improving.
Big corporation ones though have all been nothing but scams to make the most money as soon as possible wile the hype is fresh and then delivering a half baked product that goes F2P within a year or worse is F2P with a ridiculous cash shop.
I even give you a reason why: Because they already made their money and are not the slightest interested in improving the games, they are already busy making the next EA scam and hyping it. Dean Hall and DayZ SA is a prime example of take the money and run. The game is broken and in a worse state than the MOD and i bet you an indie bundle that DayZ SA will NEVER be a good game.
Take AgeOfConan, a game that perfected the EA bait and switch hype. The starting area was fantastic but the rest of the game was broken, boring and did not have HALF the features they promised. The company went on and produced more EA scams while the AOC team got cut down. They are now starting to fix the crafting after how many years?
Thats the thing, good is subjective at best. I point at TSW as a bad game because I hate swearing and horror. But its fan talk of one of the best quest systems out there. Are they making money? Not as much as WoW but enough they keep new content rolling. In response to your post, I say TSW is that good game as many here would say so. Even Wildstar thats hated by many is still loved by a following. Heck the game that makes the most money WoW is pointed at all the time as a bad game. Fact is, if you like head starts a post like this wont stop you from forking out cash. If you hate them, good for you, dont pay that money. See you in a week when the game releases.
Grass is greener? Remember the MMO you waited years to play and the one you really wanted to test but that was the one game you didnt get invited for? So you had to wait an extra year to try it for the first time. Or that game you didnt really care about was the one that sent you 14 beta invites and after 10 min of play you knew it was not worth your time? Ahhh the good old days!!!!!