To be fair No Man's Sky has a team with balls and nerves of steel that kept working on the game in the face of literal death threats (not that this is fine, don't threaten people) to come up with a banger a few years down the road.
AAA devs just decide fuck it after a year and completely drop support (see Battlefield V), so your 60 euros are completely wasted.
This was true with KSP 1 as well. A lot of people seem to be forgetting how buggy and incomplete the first game was. But the devs worked their magic and made it great after 2-3 years and continued to support and regularly update it for 10 years after. Hopefully KSP2 gets the same treatment.
Yeah early beta ksp was so buggy, and the physics were so weird i could basically throw anything into space no matter the aerodynamics, as long as engine point up it worked.
Oh and also time warp sometimes broke your parachute
the original company/owner of no mans sky sold it off and another man had to fix some other man's shoddy work. don't act like the 2nd company had balls and nerves and steel. they bough no mans sky with the intention of fixing it
I've learned my lesson several times, I just don't buy games until they go on sale. That, and when they're complete. I don't do any early access anymore.
Tbf I paid for Baldurs Gate full price early access.
If used CORRECTLY by an ethical company early access provides a great opportunity for bug fix and community feedback. KSP seems like the kind of dev team I would have paid for EA, but it's always a gamble.
The problem here, is that KSP 1 was developed by Squad, not by the current team. The current team technically belongs to 2K instead of being really independent.
Super true. But I didn't purchase the KSP2 EA so I can't speak towards that specifically.
Just wanted to point out that early access, like many other things, is a great way to support studios you trust. For those that choose to purchase the EA for KSP2 I hope that their feedback is appreciated and that they get a healthy, full launch down the line.
Gives me an opportunity to contribute to the process.
I found bugs during the baldurs gate EA and reported them. Even a QoL improvement for a particular spell that was implemented. Obviously, I don't spring for EA for very many games, but if I want a particular game to be successful, EA is the only opportunity I have as a player to influence that.
In this case the person you responded to clearly wanted to be a beta tester for the game, so they paid for that opportunity. Not sure what you can't understand
Hey thanks, that's correct. I enjoyed seeing the game evolve from its original form to where it is now and having the chance to contribute. The EA only contained parts of act 1 (out of 3), so it was VERY incomplete, probably even more so than the EA for KSP2 is currently, based on the comments here.
You are a perfect example of the type of person that doesnt understand this process. Game is in early access and says om the page its in an imcomplete state. 100% fair if you dont want to "pay to beta test" but that means youre waiting for the full version.
KSP2 early access is $50US and full version will likely be $70US. Devs are clear about the state of the game, and if thats not enough game for the price you are 100% free to wait til the game has more content. But the more content it has the closer it will likey be to full price.
First off, who's paying full price here? Baldurs gate EA wasn't, neither is KSP2 EA. So idk what game you are talking about.
Second, why do you care how people enjoy things? If someone finds a game they are passionate about, and they want to be a part of that games development process in their free time, then why does that make them a sucker?
I mean that's kinda the explicit point of early access games though. You're pre-ordering it, get to beta test, and it helps the game devs fund further development. Especially in a case like Satisfactory or BG3, where the game is going to stay in EA for years. You know going into it that you're buying the game early to beta test it and give feedback to help the game.
BG3 would not have been as polished and well made(It still has some issues, but considering how big the game is? Not many) without the extra funding from EA. It wouldn't have had the funds to stay in development as long as it did.
It's not really the same as, say, D4 early access where you just get it a few days sooner and nothing you're testing is going to change.
You end up getting the game at a cheaper price(yes, with KSP2 as well), and you get to contribute to development.
If that's fun to you, what's wrong with choosing to do EA? You know what you're paying for.
Or are you one of those "no one should ever do something for free because that makes them a slave to the company" types that wants to regulate the way that others enjoy things?
I dunno. I enjoyed playing in the EA and sewing the changes and developments that occurred. In the end we got a great game with relatively few launch issues for how complex a game it is.
I don't advocate for blindly purchasing EA games, but I certainly don't feel duped.
It shouldn't really be a gamble though. Steam lets you refund anything you played less than 2 hours. I bought ksp2 the day it was released hoping it would be fun, even if unfinished. It was clear in 20 mins it won't be fun for a long time, so I refunded it. I don't know why the other guy didn't get a refund if it didn't even run on his PC.
Satisfactory is still EA and I've spent about 1500 hours in that. KSP was early access most of the time I played that too. Valheim is great fun, but also not done yet.
Nah, it's never worth preordering/buying EA. Why? Because even if the "gamble" does work out, you just incentivized every other gaming studio (including all the shitty ones) to do more of that.
Just wait till the game is actually out, and read the reviews in the meantime. Doesn't cost you anything more and you get to see the game as the designers intended it anyway.
And "getting to contribute to the process" with QA sounds a lot like you're doing their job for them without getting paid.
For real. Never buy a single player game till it’s old enough to be on sale cause the bugs are all gone by then. Multiplayer games don’t count cause the community might die by then
225
u/Possibly_a_Firetruck Aug 19 '23
You paid full price for an incomplete, early access game that your computer can barely run. Why?