Steam Early Access

[mdw1985]

I don't think this is a choice for the development team. Paradox as a company make this choice - as far as I know they have never released a game which had an open beta. And the indications are this is not going to change. Why should it? They have been very successful so far using that model.

Plus why do you suggest that a closed beta does not include people from "the community" to give feedback. Did you ever look at the list of beta testers from previous versions?

As I understand it, the company is too small to handle a formal open beta at an early stage. They feel that they would be drowned in feedback, and much of it would be misinformed and would be a waste of dev time sifting through it. Many of the people who will be chosen are well known to the developers, with contributions to the forum and previous beta testing going back years. People who understand the game mechanics and appreciate the underlying concepts of the game.

And given the commitment to day 1 and post-release patching by Paradox, you might argue that the "open" testing occurs at release. They have certainly always shown a willingness to embrace constructive feedback and fix problems for free well after a game is released. I seem to remember the stable vanilla version of HOI3 was not 1.0, but 1.3.

If other companies called the 1.0-1.3 phase as "early access" or "open beta" then the overall results are the same.

So we are looking -concerning 1.3.- at a time, that still has one year to go to be good? The game has been playable already, if you see the people at the press event. Where is the difference, when we would get the game in early access in some months? The beta testing includes 20 people, thats not really much...and drowning in information is better than having little information. Since money isn't an issue for pdx, they could hire one person only for this. Yeah, pdx had good experience with closed beta so far. But since they announced the ge so early, they could do an exception...it's not like we heard of HOI 4 one month ago. They game has been postponed twice - which is ok, since i understand the reasons - and for this many people are struggling with a release, that still is at least (!!!) six months away. People who want a polished game, could get it when it's released. The others should have the possibility, to participate in early access...

 

[Sandwchbull]

So we are looking -concerning 1.3.- at a time, that still has one year to go to be good? The game has been playable already, if you see the people at the press event. Where is the difference, when we would get the game in early access in some months? The beta testing includes 20 people, thats not really much...and drowning in information is better than having little information. Since money isn't an issue for pdx, they could hire one person only for this. Yeah, pdx had good experience with closed beta so far. But since they announced the ge so early, they could do an exception...it's not like we heard of HOI 4 one month ago. They game has been postponed twice - which is ok, since i understand the reasons - and for this many people are struggling with a release, that still is at least (!!!) six months away. People who want a polished game, could get it when it's released. The others should have the possibility, to participate in early access...

I agree with this as well. Dunno.... too bad Johan got out that battleaxe. Maybe after summer break he may reconsider.

 

[AppoX]

I disagree, Early Access is horrible, 99% of Early Access titles just end up being junk which never gets finished. Buying an early access game is almost always a waste of money. I would prefer for everyone to return to the past way to release games, ie when they are actually finished.

 

[MartinSWE]

As others have said HoI4 is much to complicated to work as an early access game. Also since the community is completely divided on what makes or doesn´t make HoI4 a 'great game' Paradox would take a HUGE risk by letting a minority of their player base esentially decide what to make of the game. If Paradox decides that the Early Access players are wrong and doesn´t follow their suggestions they will get bashed for it. If on the other hand paradox does follow the Early Access players they might find that the game those few players wanted is not the game the majority (who does not buy into the Early Access) wanted.

In short: Going Early Access with no real reason other then satisfying the 'need for a HOI-fix' that a minority on the forum craves would be a HUGE risk for Paradox with little or nothing to gain from it.

 

[Bhaal]

We currently have no urgent need of increasing cashflow, so no need because of that.

Early access is one of the worst concepts ever conceieved of in the industry, and I would never use it on one of the games I work on unless it was the only way we could go without going belly up.

- it forces you to make a cruder game, as you need to have shorter dev process before first time the customers plays the game.
- alpha and beta is not a finished game, nor even playable. This forces development to focus on the wrong thibgs at the wrong time.
- it creates worse first impressions, and makes for a worse gameexperience.

Happy about the stance on Early Access, patience is a virtue not many people seem to have any more.

 

[BurdenedWarrior]

I've bought one early access game. Worst experience of gaming I've had. Made me feel betrayed that they would even let me buy the game when it was at that stage. If they do end up releasing it I doubt ill even play it again.

 

[Sandwchbull]

I've bought several early access games. Really no complaints at all. The developers in all cases have been very good about finishing their work and updating the communities associated with info and patches. I would say the only fail is DayZ but that's only a fail because THEY NEVER FINISH IT. Really hope that paradox doesn't start turning into a Blizzard with their titles. The whole.... when its done line gets old. Why even bother posting about the game, dev diaries and so on without commitment to the communities hyping it up without a solid timeline. Dunno..... I still give them a pass as Paradox makes the most entertaining games I've ever played, just don't want to see us jerked around.

 

[Axe99]

How much has Star Citizen received so far? 84 million US Dollars? All before they've actually released anything that resembles an actual game?

In Star Citizen's defense, Arena Commander is actually good fun and well playable (and has been for ages), and the Star Citizen dev team do a really good job of involving backers in the development process (there's all sorts of weekly information, videos, interviews and whatnot - and most of them are very well done). I'd personally rate it as the best 'pay now, get your game later' approach done so far, and because the game is entirely funded by its backers (so unlike HoI4, where beta testers would be a minority, in the case of SC they've actually paid the entire costs of development), testers having an outsized influence on the game's direction isn't near as inappropriate.

That said, a space sim is quite a different beast to a WW2 GSG (or wargame, or grand strategy wargame, as per your personal preference ), in that the approach to these things has been fairly well honed over the years, so the forum battles tend to be over more detailed issues (such as whether the Sherman was actually a good tank, for example ), whereas I could see a lot of 'groupthink' difficulties designing a WW2 GSG using this approach, and think that a small team of experts is the way I'd like it. Too many backseat drivers is good for almost nothing except lots of arguments. I'm fully in agreement as to an open beta for HoI being a bad idea, and a paid open beta an even worse one.

 

[Gamer_1745]

An early access (with bugs) would just give HOI IV a bad rep!

Those who need a HoI fix just go check out some of the great mods of HoI3, with some mods it is almost a new game!

 

[potski]

too bad Johan got out that battleaxe. Maybe after summer break he may reconsider.

Yes, because he's never heard this argument before. No-one ever posted threads like this for HOI3, EU4, CK2, Vickie and all their expansion packs. So once he's had his Viking holiday, he's bound to change the way Paradox have done it for more than 10 years. Just for you.

 

[blue_yonder]

I am 13 years old and I wannit NAow. But because I appreciate this isn't a cogent argument in favour of early release, I'm going to disguise my NAowness with some drivel about Beta.

 

[Sandwchbull]

Yes, because he's never heard this argument before. No-one ever posted threads like this for HOI3, EU4, CK2, Vickie and all their expansion packs. So once he's had his Viking holiday, he's bound to change the way Paradox have done it for more than 10 years. Just for you.

Wouldn't be just for me, seems a lot of us want it. It's just a suggestion.....

 

[Hans_Schnitzel]

Ssshh, it'll be fine. Just play other games. There's many games out there. Not a HoI4, but there gotta be something to keep you busy.

 

[podcat]

We currently have no urgent need of increasing cashflow, so no need because of that.

Early access is one of the worst concepts ever conceieved of in the industry, and I would never use it on one of the games I work on unless it was the only way we could go without going belly up.

- it forces you to make a cruder game, as you need to have shorter dev process before first time the customers plays the game.
- alpha and beta is not a finished game, nor even playable. This forces development to focus on the wrong thibgs at the wrong time.
- it creates worse first impressions, and makes for a worse gameexperience.

What Johan said. I think early access is only good for indie devs that need the cashflow to complete their games. I often support games in early access I want to see done, but I never really play them until finished and consider it a donation/preorder.

Beta testers need to be selected, if you just allow anyone you end up with a situation where only the loudest get heard, or you ignore the whole thing and just consider it a publicity stunt. We keep our betas fairly small and prune people who arent constructive or participate.

 

[Sandwchbull]

What Johan said. I think early access is only good for indie devs that need the cashflow to complete their games. I often support games in early access I want to see done, but I never really play them until finished and consider it a donation/preorder.

Beta testers need to be selected, if you just allow anyone you end up with a situation where only the loudest get heard, or you ignore the whole thing and just consider it a publicity stunt. We keep our betas fairly small and prune people who arent constructive or participate.

Why do you guys always have to be so logical!? ;p

 

[Spekulatius]

Fairly small and prune betas, really better? I mean the Gaming crowd has changed alot and HoI 4 looking be also more for everyone than maybe HoI 3, just what I think from what I ahve seen. I can be wrong. I hope you also keep that in eye if it is the case, but with the rest Im 100% agree.

 

[yoloswag6969]

Since nobody already has,i'm gonna show this video,i think everyone should watch it,regardless of what you think about early acess

 

[Hans_Schnitzel]

Fairly small and prune betas, really better? I mean the Gaming crowd has changed alot and HoI 4 looking be also more for everyone than maybe HoI 3, just what I think from what I ahve seen. I can be wrong. I hope you also keep that in eye if it is the case, but with the rest Im 100% agree.

Yeah, they are better because they give quality feedback. Big betas just generate huge amounts of posts like "I WANT THIS CHANGED", "Or this is ugly, kthaxbai" or they don't give any feedback at all. So they simply pick some people they know, or who they noticed on the forums and trust them to give them quality feedback.

 

[Spekulatius]

Yeah, they are better because they give quality feedback. Big betas just generate huge amounts of posts like "I WANT THIS CHANGED", "Or this is ugly, kthaxbai" or they don't give any feedback at all. So they simply pick some people they know, or who they noticed on the forums and trust them to give them quality feedback.

Well that is true, I was just thinking of the variety of different players good & bad, fun & competetive and so on, but I think even with a small beta tester base you can have it.

 

[MartinSWE]

What Johan said. I think early access is only good for indie devs that need the cashflow to complete their games. I often support games in early access I want to see done, but I never really play them until finished and consider it a donation/preorder.

Beta testers need to be selected, if you just allow anyone you end up with a situation where only the loudest get heard, or you ignore the whole thing and just consider it a publicity stunt. We keep our betas fairly small and prune people who arent constructive or participate.

Cool to see that my reasoning behind why Early Access is not good for HoI4 is essentially the same reason Podcat gives for why Paradox says NO to the idea. It´s fun to be right once in a while.