Is the new trend of "pay to play early" a bad thing?
Why?
@Saber
@ItsSkyDragonz
@ChristiJunior
Weird. I see it as a GREAT thing.
Since it's not a locked beta or a demo, but a full access, it does allow ALL YOUTUBERS to give their honest opinion, instead of just the payed shills.
This move had already saved my money once. And I am sure it will do so again. And not only for me.
On the contrary, I am sure, that in the same way, as we do look at "late review embargo" as a clear sign, that the game is trash, a lack of at least 1 weak early access will soon be seen the same way. As nothing but a way to limit the ability of people to make informed purchuse.
@ChristiJunior @Saber @ItsSkyDragonz
I mean, I guess it would be worthless.... IF WE DIDN'T LIVE IN A SHITHOLE WORLD FULL OF PRE-ORDERS.
But now..... This is actually kinda amazing. Especially for people, who did pre-order a non-early edition, and get a last chance to change their minds.
@rher @Saber @LukeAlmighty Issue being, if they have your money before they develop the entire game, they can just cut and run once they get a funding goal that meets their avariciousness.
@Saber @LukeAlmighty @rher So funny story about Mighty No. 9, I sat through all the credits (after I stole the game). Just to really see if the meme was real.
So the meme was real by the way.
@LukeAlmighty @Saber @rher He’s not talking about Mega Man, Luke.
@LukeAlmighty @rher @Saber It is, but calling it Mega Man is a huge slap in the face. Four hours of the game’s length doesn’t even take place playing the game even.
@LukeAlmighty @rher @Saber Luke, are you a housecat?
Maybe because it allows a relatively small group of dedicated paypigs to act as hype men for AAA games and push certain Narratives early, before actual gamers get a chance to figure things out for themselves. Maybe I just dislike different tiers of game-ownership being normalized. Or maybe because I associate this shit with Starfield, and that's a really bad look.
Either way, I hate it.
I played Magic: the Gathering for years, which has a baked-in pay-to-win element, and the shit I see them doing to vidya is absolutely egregious. Just stop giving these people your money.
Devs sell a product they don't even pretend is finished and customers lower their standards and just hope it'll get better in the future (it usually gets worse). It is one of the worst things to happen to the industry, right up there with micro-transactions and patches.
@Reluctant_Weeb
That's early access.
Completely different thing.
ひげ
@LukeAlmighty it's bad for the people who buy it but good for the people who don't because they end up getting a better game
@beardalaxy
Are you talking about early access?
@LukeAlmighty I mean it kind of is early access, just a very short version of it. Every game releases with bugs, so the people who play it on the soft release date are going to have more bugs than the ones who play it on the actual release date. As long as the developer patches it in time, that is. These days, the longer you wait to play a game, the more stable it's going to be (typically).
@beardalaxy
Well, I love early access, but I see it as a deal with the devs, that as long as people pay, the game can be improved to infinity. (Kinda the oposite of what it's supposed to be)
But a pay to access is on such a short time frame, that I cannot see it as anything but a jurno oportunity.
@caekislove
I was not asking about the years long early access -_-
I say this as someone who loves 'library of ruina' which took a few years of early access before it was finished, I played after development was done and it's obvious the early game is gimped in comparsion to later game mechanics.
@udongle
I am literally not asking for years long early access.
@LukeAlmighty It was like that all the time. New games are expensive and get cheaper over time. So they're just hype it more.
Why do I even bother making polls, when I obviously lack the intelligence to phrase them properly.