Meanwhile, ConcernedApe is out there quietly adding more and more free features to an eight year old game: Stardew Valley. All while working on a completely new title that will release… eh, eventually.
I have no issue with people shipping unfinished products, as long as they’re transparent about it. But using it as a way to lower expectations for a buggy “final” product, while charging more for the updates, is just crummy. At least bundle it in, turn off “early access”, and raise the price appropriately. If it has DLC, the core game is “done” in my book.
Edit: thanks for the robust conversation on this thread.
I’ll add this clarification: clearly there are outliers and exceptions to all this. It’s entirely possible to have something incomplete, and still be worth treating like a full release, DLC and all.
To me, I think the key dividing line is determined by the overall “buginess” or “playability” of the product. If something has broken mechanics or is full of game-destroying bugs, and it negatively impacts the overall fun factor, that’s the case I’m talking about here. As a game’s main job is to package joy for other people, it’s pretty easy to see how a developer or publisher is just seeking a payday at your expense.
I often play a game called Sailwind. Very relaxing, but impressively deep sailing sim. It’s been early access for a couple of years, but the (solo-)dev is active, new features are added all the time. If he would release a paid, cosmetic dlc: I’d buy it in a heartbeat. I think it would be nicer than to “get him a coffee” or sub to his patreon.
What I’m trying to say is: not all early access is bad, not all paid dlc is plain greed. And the combo is not necessarily toxic.
I’ll give you that. Someone up the thread mentioned Dead Cells, which is/was in the same category for a while. I’ll revise my premise a bit, thank you.
Motion Twin are finally wrapping up the updates of Dead Cells after the 35th (!) one. While they’re working on a board game and an animated series. Now, granted, they released several paid DLCs, but that didn’t stop them from pumping out free updates with content in between them
I’ll give them a pass. The game has been very playable at nearly every pre-release right up through the present. Granted, for a while there was no mid or late game, but what was on offer was relatively bug free and fun.
Terraria is a truly extreme case, the developers truly just can’t stop making updates.
Factorio isn’t amazing in this way, but the developers have a lot of integrity - they delivered their plans for 1.0, released some good extra updates, continue fixing bugs, and went to work developing paid DLC. I do suppose the DLC will come with a major update to the base game, but that’s also because they found they needed to make changes and additions for the expansion.
Meanwhile, ConcernedApe is out there quietly adding more and more free features to an eight year old game: Stardew Valley. All while working on a completely new title that will release… eh, eventually.
I have no issue with people shipping unfinished products, as long as they’re transparent about it. But using it as a way to lower expectations for a buggy “final” product, while charging more for the updates, is just crummy. At least bundle it in, turn off “early access”, and raise the price appropriately. If it has DLC, the core game is “done” in my book.
Edit: thanks for the robust conversation on this thread.
I’ll add this clarification: clearly there are outliers and exceptions to all this. It’s entirely possible to have something incomplete, and still be worth treating like a full release, DLC and all.
To me, I think the key dividing line is determined by the overall “buginess” or “playability” of the product. If something has broken mechanics or is full of game-destroying bugs, and it negatively impacts the overall fun factor, that’s the case I’m talking about here. As a game’s main job is to package joy for other people, it’s pretty easy to see how a developer or publisher is just seeking a payday at your expense.
I often play a game called Sailwind. Very relaxing, but impressively deep sailing sim. It’s been early access for a couple of years, but the (solo-)dev is active, new features are added all the time. If he would release a paid, cosmetic dlc: I’d buy it in a heartbeat. I think it would be nicer than to “get him a coffee” or sub to his patreon.
What I’m trying to say is: not all early access is bad, not all paid dlc is plain greed. And the combo is not necessarily toxic.
I’ll give you that. Someone up the thread mentioned Dead Cells, which is/was in the same category for a while. I’ll revise my premise a bit, thank you.
I’m so hyped for the new stardew valley update. I’ll absolutely be buying the haunted chocalatier as well.
Same for Wube and Factorio, and Re-Logic and Terraria. I think we’re on the 8th “final patch” for Terraria.
Minecraft has been going on this model for over a decade, too.
Motion Twin are finally wrapping up the updates of Dead Cells after the 35th (!) one. While they’re working on a board game and an animated series. Now, granted, they released several paid DLCs, but that didn’t stop them from pumping out free updates with content in between them
I’ll give them a pass. The game has been very playable at nearly every pre-release right up through the present. Granted, for a while there was no mid or late game, but what was on offer was relatively bug free and fun.
Terraria is a truly extreme case, the developers truly just can’t stop making updates.
Factorio isn’t amazing in this way, but the developers have a lot of integrity - they delivered their plans for 1.0, released some good extra updates, continue fixing bugs, and went to work developing paid DLC. I do suppose the DLC will come with a major update to the base game, but that’s also because they found they needed to make changes and additions for the expansion.