Devs should not be "forced to run on a treadmill until their mental or physical health breaks", says publisher of Manor Lords, citing how gamers seem to be trained to expect endless content work now - eviltoast
Devs should not be "forced to run on a treadmill until their mental or physical health breaks", says publisher
www.eurogamer.net
Manor Lords' publisher has hit back at claims the game is an "interesting case study in the pitfalls of early access", …

This really does not sound healthy. The game is released, for a certain amount of money. If people don’t like what they get for their money, they simply should not buy it.

But by now gamers have been so trained to expect to endless content treadmills and all their ilk like mtx and battle passes that publishers/developers get egged on if they don’t work on their game 24/7 and forever.

  • Grofit@lemmy.worldEnglish
    48·
    6 months ago

    I think part of the problem is down to how a lot of games come out as “Early Access” which implies it’s more bare bones and will get fleshed out over time.

    If a game releases as EA then the expectation is you will get more content until release, if a game just comes out without EA then it’s assumed it has all content and anything new is dlc/mtx/expansions.

    I’m not gonna bother addressing Live Service games, wish they would go in the bin with most other MTX.

    • DigitalDilemma@lemmy.mlEnglish
      31·
      6 months ago

      Absolutely. I will never buy another Early Access game - it’s buying something that is clearly unfinished, and you the player never get a second chance at the first impression. There’s too many other games to expect us to come back and try it again once there’s more content and the bugs are ironed out.

      • bigmclargehuge@lemmy.worldEnglish
        5·
        6 months ago

        Early access definitely has its place. I’ve bought several EA games I really enjoy, and it’s kind of rewarding seeing something go from basic and threadbare to a more complete picture, and knowing I was a part of that is satisfying. I’ve also been burned by EA too, so it’s a double sided coin.

        • samus12345@lemmy.worldEnglish
          2·
          6 months ago

          Rogue Legacy 2 was a standout example for me. I was happy to support the developer while they worked on the game, and all progress carried over to the finished product. Granted, roguelikes in particular are really well suited for EA because they’re meant to be played over and over with no real end.

          • bigmclargehuge@lemmy.worldEnglish
            3·
            6 months ago

            Ground Branch for me. Love the old Rainbow Six games, and I find that newer tactical shooters in general just don’t hit the mark for me. GB still has a long way to go but actually has some original R6 devs at the helm and has an excellent core experience so far, and it’s only getting better.

      • Grofit@lemmy.worldEnglish
        4·
        6 months ago

        I’m not against early access as a whole, if devs want to get player feedback earlier on in the life cycle and players are happy to be pseudo testers then it’s fine.

        I get some people would rather wait and buy when it’s finished, and some studiosd/devs would rather bypass EA and just release the game outright, but I feel both paradigms can exist as long as both parties (devs/consumers) continue to benefit.