Clearly, this is not a new concern, but let me provide some context:
I play Escape From Tarkov. Recently, there was an uproar when the developers charged an additional $100 on top of a $150 package (or $250 if bought standalone) for content that was originally promised within the $150 package. The community was understandably upset. This reminded me of the pitfalls of investing in games that are labeled "early access," "beta," or any other term for an unreleased state. Typically, you buy a product once it exists. In rare cases, like fast food, you might pay for it to be prepared in a specific way immediately. You wouldn’t pay Taco Bell $50 now for a burrito you’ll get in eight years.
Yet, as Escape From Tarkov demonstrates the risks of paying for games long before they're released, another early access game, Gray Zone Warfare, is about to launch. Many from the same community, freshly reminded of the dangers, are rushing to purchase this new game. Despite its first alpha test a week ago revealing significant incompleteness, there’s a $100 version already on offer.
Historically, alpha and beta testing were paid positions. Pre-orders existed to secure a physical copy. Public beta testing or early access should be free, limited to invited testers to manage server load, or open to all for large-scale feedback pre-launch.
I’m not immune to falling for the hype again, but it baffles me to see people leap from one early access debacle to another. The next game might eventually fulfill its promises and turn out great, but it's wise to wait until it's fully released before spending any money. We need to stop encouraging and rewarding companies that exploit "beta" and "early access" statuses to justify prolonged development and persistent issues.
*Edit* Wow, I struck a nerve with some of you upset about buying disappointing games. I’m not saying YOU’RE bad. Just take it easy.
I play Escape From Tarkov. Recently, there was an uproar when the developers charged an additional $100 on top of a $150 package (or $250 if bought standalone) for content that was originally promised within the $150 package. The community was understandably upset. This reminded me of the pitfalls of investing in games that are labeled "early access," "beta," or any other term for an unreleased state. Typically, you buy a product once it exists. In rare cases, like fast food, you might pay for it to be prepared in a specific way immediately. You wouldn’t pay Taco Bell $50 now for a burrito you’ll get in eight years.
Yet, as Escape From Tarkov demonstrates the risks of paying for games long before they're released, another early access game, Gray Zone Warfare, is about to launch. Many from the same community, freshly reminded of the dangers, are rushing to purchase this new game. Despite its first alpha test a week ago revealing significant incompleteness, there’s a $100 version already on offer.
Historically, alpha and beta testing were paid positions. Pre-orders existed to secure a physical copy. Public beta testing or early access should be free, limited to invited testers to manage server load, or open to all for large-scale feedback pre-launch.
I’m not immune to falling for the hype again, but it baffles me to see people leap from one early access debacle to another. The next game might eventually fulfill its promises and turn out great, but it's wise to wait until it's fully released before spending any money. We need to stop encouraging and rewarding companies that exploit "beta" and "early access" statuses to justify prolonged development and persistent issues.
*Edit* Wow, I struck a nerve with some of you upset about buying disappointing games. I’m not saying YOU’RE bad. Just take it easy.
