Are Alpha/Beta releases counterproductive?

One thing I've noticed is that good games are good whether or not they went through a purchasable alpha/beta phase so I deduce this Early Access fad is just another way to attract extra revenue, rather than a necessary step in the development of game.

I therefore do not touch these releases under any circumstances.
 
Zethor said:
One thing I've noticed is that good games are good whether or not they went through a purchasable alpha/beta phase so I deduce this Early Access fad is just another way to attract extra revenue, rather than a necessary step in the development of game.

I therefore do not touch these releases under any circumstances.
Click to expand...


Sir, I feel you are correct!! It's the whole "ohh... it's rubbish now... but it's alpha/beta.... so it's expected...." but then the main game hasn't really improved so well... what was the point :p


Saw that back in the '90s, OSI/EA put an advert up asking if people wanted to test a new online RPG (Ultima Online) and would cost $5. this back then can be justified I feel as there was no digital download really... or would take forever so things have to be sent out on hard copy, also this sort of online MMORPG hadn't been done before so needed a largeish test base to see if their concept would even actually work :p
 
I notice a lot of people using Day-Z as a reference for this alpha/beta gold rush that devs seem to be engaging in, its a game I have seen but never actually played for more than 5 minutes or so but from what I read you are all right that they seem to have taken the cash and then all went on vacation leaving the intern to fix the bugs.
I have been following SOE's H1Z1 for a while now and find it incredible that SOE have developed their game from scratch and almost have it ready for pre alpha while DAY-Z are still messing about doing almost nothing.
Yes I understand that SOE are a far larger company but really I feel it all comes down to commitment of these teams and how much they want to see an end product they can be proud of.
The only reason H1Z1 never released for pre alpha in early and late June was that the devs were not happy with the way the game played and looked at that point, there were still a couple of mechanics they wanted in at launch that were not available yet and they felt they would rather pull the launch than hand out what they classed as an inferior experience in game from the earliest stages.
They also include the community on reddit and allow them to suggest features etc they want to see in game and the ones with the highest number of votes from the community will make it in, reddit is checked daily by SOE devs and they are actively involved in most of the discussions there.
So in the case of SOE's gameplan I think they have it spot on for alpha/beta, dont release it till they are proud of it. They have also pulled a lot of mechanics, items etc and have them on hold while deciding if they should be implemented (like cannibalism, cooking food can be ruined/destroyed by overcooking) so the ability to update the game is far quicker since a lot of the content has already been tried in game but is sitting shelved at the moment.
 
At the end of the day it's your choice if you want to pay full price for an unfinished game.

I made the mistake of buying DayZ early access, thinking "how bad could it be if they are charging £20 for it?". Needless to say, my eyes were soon opened. Never again. If a developer wants me to playtest their game they're going to have to do a lot better than that.

If they want my money in good faith, they should offer it at a discount. In it's current state they are simply praying on impatient people or those who with cash to burn. An early access game is not a wise purchase.

I don't really care though, so long as they don't start becoming content with the early access revenue, and slack off on completing the final product as a result. Come to think of it, has any early access game on steam gone full release yet? There are a number of early access games I've been following... Rust, DayZ, 7 days to die, the forest, planetary annihilation. None have gone full release yet. I hope that the early access sales are not causing development to stagnate.
 
Last edited:
Yes. And seems its becoming more of a norm now, as opposed to limited closed betas before. Can't believe the amount of early access games that have popped on steam in the last year or so.
 
they should let us play the early versions and buy if we want to at a satisfactory stage to continue.

too many have jumped on the band wagon and are putting any **** out now.

some people are very rich off things that are literally nothing.

Rust for eg , Dayz SA hasnt advanced either since mod but atleast it seems to be progressing a little lately.

all you have to do now is stick simulator infront of any idea and get it kickstarted.
 
inb4 "Alpha Testing Simulator 2014"

a buggy game inwhich you play a buggy game, write and submit bug reports and then watch as nothing gets done about it
 
I miss the days when you were given a demo for free, used to get them on a disc from PC Gamer Magazine.
 
An example would be Archeage, a game that's been out for over 2 plus years in other regions but people are willing to pay £109 just to get access to the 'alpha' of this free to play game.

I can sort of understand why someone would do it, but it doesn't seem right. The more people throw money at such project's the more it will happen.
 
signed for kickstarter

La-Mulana 2
Kingdom Come: Deliverance
Novus AEterno: MMO 4X RTS The Largest Strategy Game Ever.
Neverending Nightmares
Armikrog.
Elite: Dangerous


All games I want to try and wont judge till they go Retail.
 
Elite: Dangerous - I am highly anticipating its full release, like waiting for a James Bond movie to hit the cinemas.
Other games, I have bought into alpha/beta release, based on user feedback and their record of updates to improve the game. Minecraft was the first for me, as Notch provided regular news and already built a massive following. I jumped on the Rust bandwagon, but after their recent lack of 'progress', I felt that the game had gone stale and needed more time away from it to mature. This has been the same feeling for many other games I have participated in. Starbound gave me great expectations, but sadly, has faded greatly, especially when their posts are about travelling here and there with the impression of no work getting done.
 
Some early access stuff is great such as planetary annihilation and kerbal SP because of their constant community interaction and regular updates.

I think the key is not to play an early access game much, just dip in for short bursts to see how it's progressing once in a while, otherwise you'll just get bored with it a long before it's feature complete.
 
I think im lucky to a certain extent, most of the games I am waiting to try or have tried early access I was given for free so I feel for the people paying for it to find out its just rushed out crap.
Last one I was given was a founders pack for Nether and after an hour I gave up on the game, it was designed in such a way that you had to leave the safe haven to quest and the other players just hid outside the gates and followed you till your noob protection ran out, it was almost impossible to do anything.
 
You get the chance to get a game you obviously like the look of, at a generously discounted price.

It is all entirely OPTIONAL, if you do not like Early Access, wait till the final release, lookup other player reviews and pay more money if you like it.

Or, just pay the money and do not touch it till the game is "gold".

Some "niche" games I like would never have saw light of day without such options of early/alpha access so I am happy.

ALSO...

A £40 game from a "AAA" publisher which has been internally "play tested" etc can sometimes be MUCH WORSE than an Early Access title by a small dev team.

The AAA publishers really have ****** up the public perception of what "Beta" actually is.

A "Beta" does not happen 4 weeks before release as an incentive to pre-order.

A Beta is generally feature complete but is not feature locked. Alpha, possibly unplayable at times.

In relation to Early Access specifically, the ones I have purchased state plain and simply "Game is playable but broken in certain parts" so I know what I am getting but I would rather have that choice than not at all.

Lets all go back to the publisher only route, that worked out really well (Sarcasm).

This route allows developers to develop independently using their own ideas without some idiot publisher/money man who knows nothing about games in a suit saying "can you add infinite respawns" etc etc.

Sure, some games may not turn out as the developer intended, maybe as a game nears completion, it is discovered the "game" does not work as intended when everything is fused together but that is not known till it is made. That is the gamble, if you do not like such things, YOU DO NOT HAVE TO SUPPORT THEM, WAIT TILL FINAL RELEASE.
 
Last edited:
kerbal space program: pre release games done right

kinetic void: pre release games done right in a business sense.

tbh unless like the former its something i know is good, i tend not to bother considering i jumped the gun on the latter and now i regret it.
 
MikeTheNative said:
You joke, but there is a game on steam green light called 'steam green light simulator'
Click to expand...

oh dear :(

yeah I keep popping back to day-z... but seems like nothing ever gets changed. I mean last noticeable changes were when it became stand alone, so a different title screen, inventory/game UI and you could punch..... that's about it. for how long in development :p

seems that most people enjoy playing the other combined mods that stemmed off from dayz, like epoch and such... kinda rendering SA a bit pointless and a waste of money :p

jumped on the rust bandwagon...and to be fair it was really fun and did enjoy it!was more the issue with a few hackers and servers becoming laggy as **** with more people joining and then fps dips as you instanced in stupidly huge structures :p then we dwindled in numbers and then no one bothered. :( (that and it suffers the pker plague mentality of KOS, everyone and everything). oh...that and the hit boxes! the amount of times my arrows went straight through animals that were chasing me... resulting in my death was just silly :( inb4 **** aim :p
 
http://www.ibtimes.com/dayz-standalone-updates-new-engine-new-server-more-1615812

Those are big changes in my opinion. Bohemia do not do "quick" though.

From the Steam page:

WARNING: THIS GAME IS EARLY ACCESS ALPHA. PLEASE DO NOT PURCHASE IT UNLESS YOU WANT TO ACTIVELY SUPPORT DEVELOPMENT OF THE GAME AND ARE PREPARED TO HANDLE WITH SERIOUS ISSUES AND POSSIBLE INTERRUPTIONS OF GAME FUNCTIONING.
Click to expand...

What the developers have to say:
“DayZ Early Access is your chance to experience DayZ as it evolves throughout its development process. Be aware that our Early Access offer is a representation of our core pillars, and the framework we have created around them.

It is a work in progress and therefore contains a variety of bugs. We strongly advise you not to buy and play the game at this stage unless you clearly understand what Early Access means and are interested in participating in the ongoing development cycle.”
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
The problem is these days a full release can never meet expectations so early access helps with the whole marketing so consumers can say "its in beta they can add/fix it" and generally be more accepting. Also it actually fund the development as making no money for 2+ years then releasing a game which will have interest for a month before being forgotten (or waiting for dirt cheap Steam sales) is very risky and almost impossible without a publisher.

So going early access means they can have a more invested/interested fan base, start making money within the first few months of development and hold continued interest due to updates/possibilities for the game. Then once the game is out they can charge full retail price and hopefully have a mini spike of sales.
 
Gimpymoo said:
http://www.ibtimes.com/dayz-standalone-updates-new-engine-new-server-more-1615812

Those are big changes in my opinion.

From the Steam page:
Click to expand...

but after how long? the game has been worked on for so long now on the arma2 engine with all it's bugs and issues... and now a new engine.... so how much of that work will need to be redone? :p

wondering if this is the new duke nukem forever.... in about 8 more years they'll finally release it and it'll be "meh" :rolleyes:

but at least it seems they do have plans... I want to see what

"But implementing DirectX 10 or 11 will have a dramatic, instant visual difference and quite a significant performance difference."
Click to expand...
will do to the performance... as for now it's a joke :(




(sorry getting a bit....semi off topic and just debating dayz :p )
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom