Yeah, that checks out. There’s a number of early access release games that release to little fanfare or changes. If you’re going early access, use it as a prolonged testing period. Then release the full game.
GameDiscoverCo’s Simon Carless analyzed over 1,500 games released between 2015 and 2023, […] His results showed that the longer a game stayed in early access, the weaker its full-release sales tended to be.
Probably because most gamers at this point see EA release as just a release. It kinda begs the question of when it’s useful.
His results showed that the longer a game stayed in early access, the weaker its full-release sales tended to be.
I mean, this seems kinda inevitable, no? The longer you’re in early access, the larger the portion of your target audience has likely already bought your game.
Yeah. IMO the research has taken a wrong metric and come to kind of a useless conclusion. If your goal is to have a lot of new players at launch then of course a short early access is better. Theoretically even better would be to skip early access and go straight to 1.0 because then you have less people who picked up the game during early access.
There are tons of scenarios where I can see it being useful, and I can often see a clear difference between it and release, but the problem I’ve got now is that there are so many finished games I could be spending my time and money on right now that it’s hard to justify buying an early access game. I think the last one I bought was Palworld, which I played for about 20 hours right when it came out, and now I’m waiting for 1.0 rather than the iterative feedback that early access thrives on. They’ve still got plenty of people to get that feedback from, but that’s the biggest early access release since Minecraft, so it’s an outlier.
Yeah that’s about right I could see a little bit longer depending on the game and the Developers but two years or three years tops is probably my limit on a game. After that point I don’t really pay attention to it anymore.
I’ll allow it for smaller studios that have a big, offbeat idea. Games like Factorio, Satisfactory, Kerbal Space Program and Subnautica. All of these games had multi-year early access campaigns that were very successful, Satisfactory in particular. I think it’s appropriate for weird games like these that have uncommon mechanics like factory building, space flight or scuba diving.
Thinking about Satisfactory, I imagine their sales weren’t spectacular on launch day last year, but a lot of their customer base had already bought the game, so they got their $30. Maybe another way to phrase it is, who cares if it sells before or after launch?
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.
Rules
1. Submissions have to be related to games
Video games, tabletop, or otherwise. Posts not related to games will be deleted.
This community is focused on games, of all kinds. Any news item or discussion should be related to gaming in some way.
2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil
No bigotry, hardline stance. Try not to get too heated when entering into a discussion or debate.
We are here to talk and discuss about one of our passions, not fight or be exposed to hate. Posts or responses that are hateful will be deleted to keep the atmosphere good. If repeatedly violated, not only will the comment be deleted but a ban will be handed out as well. We judge each case individually.
3. No excessive self-promotion
Try to keep it to 10% self-promotion / 90% other stuff in your post history.
This is to prevent people from posting for the sole purpose of promoting their own website or social media account.
4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts
This community is mostly for discussion and news. Remember to search for the thing you’re submitting before posting to see if it’s already been posted.
We want to keep the quality of posts high. Therefore, memes, funny videos, low-effort posts and reposts are not allowed. We prohibit giveaways because we cannot be sure that the person holding the giveaway will actually do what they promise.
5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW
Make sure to mark your stuff or it may be removed.
No one wants to be spoiled. Therefore, always mark spoilers. Similarly mark NSFW, in case anyone is browsing in a public space or at work.
6. No linking to piracy
Don’t share it here, there are other places to find it. Discussion of piracy is fine.
We don’t want us moderators or the admins of lemmy.world to get in trouble for linking to piracy. Therefore, any link to piracy will be removed. Discussion of it is of course allowed.
Yeah, that checks out. There’s a number of early access release games that release to little fanfare or changes. If you’re going early access, use it as a prolonged testing period. Then release the full game.
Probably because most gamers at this point see EA release as just a release. It kinda begs the question of when it’s useful.
I mean, this seems kinda inevitable, no? The longer you’re in early access, the larger the portion of your target audience has likely already bought your game.
Yeah. IMO the research has taken a wrong metric and come to kind of a useless conclusion. If your goal is to have a lot of new players at launch then of course a short early access is better. Theoretically even better would be to skip early access and go straight to 1.0 because then you have less people who picked up the game during early access.
There are tons of scenarios where I can see it being useful, and I can often see a clear difference between it and release, but the problem I’ve got now is that there are so many finished games I could be spending my time and money on right now that it’s hard to justify buying an early access game. I think the last one I bought was Palworld, which I played for about 20 hours right when it came out, and now I’m waiting for 1.0 rather than the iterative feedback that early access thrives on. They’ve still got plenty of people to get that feedback from, but that’s the biggest early access release since Minecraft, so it’s an outlier.
Yeah that’s about right I could see a little bit longer depending on the game and the Developers but two years or three years tops is probably my limit on a game. After that point I don’t really pay attention to it anymore.
How about just not releasing via early access at all?
I’ll allow it for smaller studios that have a big, offbeat idea. Games like Factorio, Satisfactory, Kerbal Space Program and Subnautica. All of these games had multi-year early access campaigns that were very successful, Satisfactory in particular. I think it’s appropriate for weird games like these that have uncommon mechanics like factory building, space flight or scuba diving.
Thinking about Satisfactory, I imagine their sales weren’t spectacular on launch day last year, but a lot of their customer base had already bought the game, so they got their $30. Maybe another way to phrase it is, who cares if it sells before or after launch?
Looking at you, beamNG.drive