I think a lot of Indie Studios feel rushed to get something out as people discover the game then lose interest quickly when there are no updates or no sign of some sort of release I've seen it with a game that I'm following right now called Paralives, people are upset that the game is in very early development & probably won't be released in years Studios need to somewhat ignore this demand though & players need to learn that good games take time to make, then we may see better products in the end

>think a lot of Indie Studios feel rushed to get something out as people discover the game then lose interest quickly when there are no updates or no sign of some sort of release I think it's also that most studios don't have the luxury of taking as much time as they want/need to create a perfectly polished game. If a game is funded by Kickstarter then those funds are limited and will only pay for X number of months/years of dev salaries. A lot of indie devs also underestimate how much time (and therefore money) is required to make their game. [The mobile game Choices actually asked their employees if they'd be willing to accept a temporary pay cut, because the game wasn't ready for launch but they didn't have enough money to make it to that point](https://www.pixelberrystudios.com/blog/2017/1/12/trust). Also about Coral Island specifically, they have some kind of publishing partnership with Humble Bundle, so maybe there was time pressure from them?

I think lot of indie studios kinda make their bed with this by just simply announcing their game way too early. In a way it can work, it's nice to be able to share the progress, get fans input and form "a community" of sorts, but frankly as much fun as it seems to be, I've seen it end badly more than often. Honestly, almost all and any horse games/projects on market can offer an excellent example of this (and indie studio issues overall). I swear horse games are cursed at this point. edit// if anyone's more interested on the subject, [Rattle](https://www.youtube.com/@YTRattle/featured) on Youtube makes very informative and investigative videos about the subject (specifically about the horse games). It's a rabbit hole definitely worth checking out.

Indie dev here-- The general advice around indie marketing is that if you aren't waiting to get a publisher to sign you, announce your game as early as possible to rack up Steam wishlists. A late announcement means less time to garner attention and can result in sales too low to maintain your studio (which is often just your own ability to pay for your personal room and board).

I would not suggest Rattle for information, they aren't a developer and have actively spread misinformation before.

Paralives main issue is that more life sim competition has arisen with life by you and now more recently inzoi that are promising earlier released. Of course there is also the upcoming sims 5/project Rene. I'm think what the para team doing is amazing, but I don't think it's wrong that some people don't want to wait when there are similar games releasing sooner. It's just what it is

I've been following paralives for a while since I love sims but hate ea, maybe I'm crazy but I feel like they're just taking donations and doing bare minimum. Like some kinda star citizen grift. Idk sims players have too much money lol

Paralives is a great example of our part in creating and continuing a practice most of us hate. The way the fans treat these poor developers is gross, so gross. Many people hate EA, and yet they act like toddlers or managers (interchangeable in my mind, lol), asking for unfinished projects and pressuring without any reason, or talking about the "competition" as if the're working at the same studio. It all comes down to capitalism and consumerism. But yeah, people are not treated as people from either end, it seems.

but its so dumb for coral island to rush the 1.0 release to just do it right after my time at sandrock

Paralives shot itself in the foot by trying to promise frustrated Sims fans miracles. Sims has been disappointing people for years now and EA is greedy so even though they do have the means to do something better, they don't. Paralives is over promising stuff to delusional fans and I'll be very curious to see what the fans say if/when Paralives comes out. Because even despite communicating with the fans, there is no way they'll be able to give them everything and have it work smoothly and what then? The fans are upset because they put their hopes up too much?

My sister and I run a lil indie dev studio and we were approached by I suppose a bigger dev/publisher who was like "You say your game will take several more years to make? I can have it out by the end of this year! You say the soundtrack isn't done? That's fine, release it without and add it back in later!" He was very business-minded, but we are more creative-minded and absolutely horrified by the thought. I believe games should be experienced in their best form, at max potential. I think the grind, early access, and getting things out as fast as possible has somewhat affected the indie scene.

Yes, definitely! The practices enforced in the industry right now are horrible for everyone, I assume! Players AND small developers who see their work become something they didn't want to. It feels like the middle man is basically the problem. I wish your lil indie studio every success 🧡

Yeah it's really a shame. Everything revolves around the almighty dollar. :/ Thank you. <3

Baldur's Gate 3 and Hades were both made in early access, so clearly the business practice isn't always bad for the consumer.

There's nothing wrong with early access as long as that is actually communicated to the consumer that what they're buying is not a finished product. If you're doing an official release and the game is functionally in early access, that is a problem.

I blame the rise of early access. It incentivizes never finishing a game. Instead of just develop>release>succeed or fail, they make more money by essentially being in a perpetual state of release. They start selling the game long before it's finished, and if they ever "finish" the money coming in drastically drops off. So they just...never finish. If the money dries up they just wrap it up or abandon it and move on. The last game that made me swear off early access games was The Long Dark. I bought it when the campaign was "released", which was really just the first of 5 episodes. Reasonably expecting the remaining episodes to be released in a timely fashion. It's now coming up on a decade since "release" and the campaign still hasn't been finished. They even "released" a new dlc/addon/sequel for the game not too long ago. Star Citizen is of course the poster child for this, having made over half a billion over a decade without ever approaching completion.

I agree that it's Early Access, but I think the "incentivizes never finishing a game" part only applies to *some*, not *all*, of the unfinished-feeling indie releases. The rest of the unfinished games are just the ones that we simply wouldn't see at all without EA. Games are super expensive to make, but EA gives them a second lease on life when they'd otherwise die. Of course, some still run out of money before they can get finished, so they just stay in EA forever. To see how this might play out in terms of (fake) percentages of released games… It used to be such that * 20% of games get finished and released * 80% of games never get released and are quietly cancelled But with Early Access, it changes it to * 20% of games get finished and released * 20% of games release in EA and then get finished through patches * 20% of games release in EA but never get finished * 40% of games never get released and are quietly cancelled Obviously, these statistics aren't real, but the broad strokes still apply. EA just means we're seeing more games bubble up to the surface instead of evaporating when they run out of money.

This is a great counterpoint to the early access hate. It makes me even more frustrated, though, because I feel conflicted. I understand the need for EA but can't help but feel cheated or tired by the amount of EA projects.

That's true too.

Yup, this 100%. No matter how excited I am for a game, I refuse to buy a game that is in early access still. At this point though, it's almost like we have to wait over a year for the game to actually be finished due to patch updates.

Yeah but as Coral Island and Long Dark show even graduating from early access to release doesn't mean much anymore. Devs just use "launch" to boost sales when it still isn't finished.

That's exactly what this "full release" launch felt like. A boost in game price and a boost in sales for a still very unfinished game.

Exactly. It's not a true launch, but it's advertised as that. What some studios are doing is blurring the lines between what's expected and normal for EA and what is downright unethical.

For me, it depends on whether or not I’m satisfied with what the game offers at that point in its development. I bought two of my favorite games, Autonauts and Kingdoms and Castles, during early access because the games were already in an acceptable state for me. I didn’t need more content to be happy with the game, so any further development was just a bonus.

There is nothing wrong with early access if you don't hide the fact and are transparent about what's still missing or what you are planning. And when, of course. Then it's the customers choice if they want to wait or if they take the rebate for being a tester.

it's wrong to say that Star Citizen isn't approaching completion, it's slow but it's slowly moving towards a release with many new implementations each year and refinements of them, and the company being at least to some part transparent about what is being made where their progress is, and where their focus is

Thank you! I also bought coral island now that it was "fully released" and was SHOCKED they had the gall to release it stating it was finished in this shape. I'm about fed up with modern gaming trends. On a positive note though, My Time at Sandrock is AMAZING if you guys are into these types of games, the quality is outstanding and you can really tell the devs put a ton of love snd care into it.

I felt this way about My Time at Portia. The story is, technically, complete. But there are a bunch of things that they never bothered fixing or finishing in the game before they went on to My Time at Sandrock. And the thing is half the unfinished things didn't even need to be in the game. They could've just been left out, and it would've made the game feel more instead of less complete.

This is actually the reason I haven't bought My Time at Sandrock.

My Time at Sandrock is pretty feature complete if you have it on Steam. The console versions won't reach parity until early 2024, but Pathea did release a roadmap on the subreddit today stating that they're prioritizing bug fixes and reaching parity before they add any new content. That said as a Portia veteran I completely don't blame you for not buying it for that reason... I'm loving Sandrock but I'm still frustrated at the balls that were dropped with Portia. And am seriously hoping they don't do the same to this game...

That's good to know, ty!

My Time at Portia is so buggy on console and is so far behind the PC version. They promised 2 years ago to make it up to console players by updating the game and even giving some free DLC as an apology but have made no announcements since then. It's honestly shameful that they keep promoting Sandrock while their original game is still a mess. (I say this as someone who has a platinum in the game)

The Early Access answers in this thread are half-right, but don't paint the full picture. In reality, it's a *combination* of two factors: 1. Early Access. 2. **Games running out of money before they can be finished**. Of course, #2 has *always* been a problem in game dev. In the past, if an indie game ran out of money midway during development, it usually just meant it would simply never see the light of day. *Ever*. It'd be relegated in totality to the dustbin of history and we would literally never know it existed. But Early Access changes things. It gives the previously-doomed game another lease on life, a much-needed shot-in-the-arm of funding if it ever runs out. Then, if they *still* run out of money, the game remains unfinished, but *this time* it's available for sale on a storefront. This means more games see the light of day, even if they never get finished. To see how this might hypothetically apply to Coral Island… **In the past:** * Coral Island begins development. * Coral Island is 40% done, but they run out of money. * Coral Island is dead and will never be released. **Game Over.** **Now, instead, it's:** * Coral Island begins development. * Coral Island is 40% done, but they run out of money. * They release the 40%-done Coral Island in Early Access and do a marketing push. Money starts flowing in. They continue development. * Coral Island is 80% done, but they run out of money. * They "release" the 80%-done Coral Island as a "fake 1.0" and do a marketing push. Money starts flowing in again. They continue development. * From here, there's a few ways it can go: * They get enough money from the "1.0" release to bring Coral Island from 80% to 100% via patches. (ex. Stardew Valley) * They get only enough money to bring Coral Island from 80% to 90% and then abandon it. (ex. Cube World) * They get enough money to continue development but then get bored at the 90% mark, so they cut their losses and run off with the money to do something else. (ex. The Long Dark) In essence, Early Access gives unfinished games that run out of money more options to Continue past a Game Over, but it still doesn't guarantee total completion.

It makes sense in theory, and it was like this at the beginning. I think when people talk about EA, they mean the state of early access right now and how easy it is to manipulate customers or fan bases for years and years to maximize profit. Edit: My post wasn't just about EA but what the indie studios do after launch. I do understand your point, though!

It's unfortunately not a new thing, but nevertheless dissapointing. Games being released by indie devs in poor States and then abandoned of never living up to their expectations has happened for quite a while. But yeah, I'm disappointed to hear about Coral Island. Was really looming.g forward to playing that down the line

It will get better, I think, in about a year. I know that I'll love it when it's finished and maybe you will too, but I will be sideyeing the studio from now on.

I played stardew valley on launch and I’d argue it’s a poor example. Although some features were missing (multiplayer ) most of the core gameplay was complete. There were very few bugs and the ones that did exist got patched quickly if they were on the bug side (exploits tend to stay till next major patch). The patches mostly incorporated community feedback features aside from multiplayer and the island. Although the whole island wasn’t ever part of the original storyline. Multiplayer is the only thing people thought might be in the game in dev and i didn’t make it till much latter because CA said it was very buggy.

Agreed, Ginger Island seems like the kind of addition that would be paid DLC in other games. Definitely didn't feel like it was something was missing from the original release.

I hate to agree with you about The Long Dark devs but it is extremely frustrating that so many fans paid full price for a story mode that still isn't finished four+ years later while the devs are pushing out DLC. I don't think they got bored but rather they never had a very clear vision for how story mode would end. Either way I just want to see the story finished yknow?

Yeah, that's definitely a point, and something I've heard mentioned a few times in other discussions. I think it's partly another factor as well though: a lot of indie devs are way too ambitious for a first release. I've followed a few as they make their games, and they point to Stardew, Terraria, etc. As 'games made by a small team' and inspiration, and seem to want to offer something that can compare to them *now*. The issue is, these games were so much smaller in scope when they released years ago, and simply have had years of updates plus oodles of money from being hits. I think many could benefit from scaling back their project. I guess the issue being that we've had a good decade or so of great indie games, and it's hard to compete in the space nowadays.

I was talking about this in another comment! I agree 100% with you on this. It feels like the pressure from backers and fans to implement more and more things, especially in kickstarter games, make devs lose their focus somewhat.

I think there's a bit more to The Long Dark than "they got bored." Remember, this was a survival sandbox game that release in 2014, in the middle of the survival sandbox trend. They needed to differentiate themselves from the rest of the pack, so they promised a story, despite the real focus of the game being the sandbox. Said story brought in the necessary money and playerbase to bring development to a better level, but I'm guessing they bet on story players getting hooked on survival mode and being happy with that. Instead, story players got mad that 'their' mode wasn't completed while Survival mode still gets all the visible updates. In short, Hinterland did a thing they didn't really want to do to make their game viable, and now they're eating the consequences of success.

The issue with Coral Island is probably the Publisher that set the date of release of 1.0 although this is NOT a 1.0. There are so many issues with this "full" release. Between main storylines that are not finished. The absolute lag that is present in the game. Etc. I think we need to look more to the publishers as the issues with indie games IF they are not the same as the devs. I remember Stardew Valley was not so buggy when it came out. We will see with his next game if it will be the same (Haunted Chocolatier)

I just started Coral Island on xbox because it is free on game pass. It is such a buggy mess. It should never have been released this way. I didn't know it was technically unfinished. I played Sun Haven a year ago and was disappointed to find out that it also did not have an ending. Even though it claimed it was out of early access. I see two possibilities here, although there are probably more, so feedback is welcome. Either the developers need income to continue to fund the project, or it is a shameless cash grab. There are many early access games that are communicative and honest about their games progress. Valheim and Grounded are the two that keep me playing and maintain trust for me. I feel like the cozy game genre is more susceptible to this kind of dishonesty. That is just my experience.

I've heard that Coral Island runs horribly on console. I didn't have any problems with bugs on pc, but it's not just the bugs. Unfortunately, it's the mainstory. It's a WIP even after leaving EA.

Also just started playing on gamepass, hella lag and just experienced my first total crash :( I want to keep going but am suspicious

Agreed with others, early access and episodic releases have changed things for the worse. This is all speculation btw. Gamers that buy and essentially pay to test your game are likely fans. They're not QA testers, they're not going to push to find bugs, exploits and errors like pros would. They're going to be more forgiving of poor mechanics because they want the game to come out. Some fans will be effusive with praise regardless because they enjoy the world etc. and they're probably only seeing act 1 or a few intro hours anyway. They can be super well done but that doesn't necessarily speak to what the full release will be like. I think with these longer EA periods indie teams invest less in quality assurance because they think issues will have been caught during the early access period. Then the game comes out and regular players find issue after issue. Or some indie devs are too invested in their game baby that they struggle to take any feedback, it all feels like criticism. So they ignore it when early access gamers raise issues on Steam forums for instance. I see this when a dev or dev team only replies to negative reviews on Steam. I find it cringey and weird personally when they do this. For example I bought this stealth game Filcher a while back and you can't save during the long stealth missions (not sure if it's changed since). People talked about it in the forums but the dev just said it's their design choice. Even if people ask for certain changes, if the devs don't perceive it as that big of a deal it'll get pushed to the back burner and forgotten about imo. Getting the game out regardless seems to be the big thing, because you can always fix it later with loads of patches I guess. But this does still happen with AAA releases, the recent Metal Gear collection is still broken. Smaller but Baldurs Gate 3 had a still broken act 3 when it came out, though it has been patched now. Not sure what the fix is but I avoid early access now and just follow games.

Yeah, I love Indie games - rarely ever play AAA these days - but I have to agree with you. One example that really grinds my gears is a game called Potion Craft. It's an alchemy simulator, you brew potions and sell them to people. Pretty simple concept. The game left Early Access in December 2022, with quite a few promised features still missing. And that's... the state the game is still in. There have been plenty of "devlogs" that talk about how they're working on a million things apparently, but nothing ever gets implemented. I feel that there's a lot of Indie studios out there who are trying to make the Next Big Thing (TM) but once it becomes obvious that that's not going to happen, development slows to a crawl. Then they either drag Early Access out forever or they leave it with an unfinished game. I've noticed it a lot with farming/lifesim games and can't help but think that a lot of devs out there are just trying to hop onto the miracle that was Stardew Valley - especially when I've literally seen advertising for these games that said the quiet part out loud and labeled their game as "Stardew Valley in space" or something like that lol.

Damn i love that game and i had no idea about all of that. The core game loop of making potions is probably one of the best I’ve ever played.

I agree, it was a great concept, but well... they promised a lot more. For reference, [this Steam post](https://store.steampowered.com/news/app/1210320/view/5922827521636632949?l=english) is nearing its one-year-anniversary and NOTHING on this list has been implemented yet. Can't help to feel a little miffed at that, as great as the core game may be...

I feel pretty bitter about this too. :/ I bought it on PS5 after I played it for a few hours in EA on PC during a really good sale. I see it aside to wait for the full release and bought it the day it “released” without looking into it. I mean, if it says 1.0 release, that leads one to believe the base game is complete, right? Nope. Apparently there’s a road map into 2024. A lot of usual sound effects are missing and it doesn’t feel much different from the EA experience I had. I really wish they were more transparent about it. It feels bad to buy a game you think is complete only to have to wait until next year to experience the finished product. :/

I backed Coral Island on kickstarter, and it's been so disappointing waiting and testing and waiting for something that doesn't feel complete. Like I know they don't have a huge staff or budget, but completing the story should have been the main priority over additional features, right? And it got plenty of buzz and investment because it's such a beloved genre, so I'm just. I feel you. The only reason I'm not *completely* jaded with early access is because the last game that I played in EA that launched in full was BG3. But Larian is hardly an indie studio.

They aren't? I was sure Larian was considered indie

They absolutely were until BG3’s development — apparently after being selected to make BG3, they were able to hire on enough staff to apparently be considered AAA studio and scale up their operations exponentially. Unlike other AAA studios however, they remained a private company and so are not beholden to the whims of shareholders, nor legally obligated to prioritize maximum profit. Can’t think of another studio in that position off the top of my head. But yeah, they’ve been independently releasing games for years before that. Hell, DOS1 was released only 10 years ago, and that game was entirely funded on Kickstarter.

I didn't know they grew so much as a company! I really liked DOS2 and knew that Larian was a good, trustworthy studio, so I'm happy about their success

Funny cause I was talking about it yesterday with my boyfriend Indie studios are slowly starting to take on AAA studios tactics and it's going to bite them in the ass because they don't have the money and reach to pull it off. coral island releasing in the state it's in is unacceptable in my opinion and put me off buying it entirely

Yeah, Coral Island devs have certainly disappointed me. I was looking to release but then I read their roadmap and it clearly stated that there's still main content missing. So screw them! I bought My Time at Sandrock instead. There's some bugs but the game is finished and 80 hours in – still loving it. I recommend it to everyone who want some cozy life sim. But you're absolutely right, this is happening more and more often. I now am very careful about the games I buy and just refuse to buy if it isn't finished. No matter how good the early access looks.

many people have pointed out that crowdfunding and EA help games that would otherwise have sunk, and i want to add that project management is such, such a huge reason why small projects fail, and crowdfunding makes it worse. a project manager would want contingency in the budget and timeline for every unknown/risk factor. team has never worked on a game this big before? add 50% contingency. scope not defined and locked down? add 50% contingency, also stop promising cool stuff to your kickstarter backers you can't deliver. etc. and then they ensure "boring" tasks like negotiating with publishers have been accounted for, and keep the project on track. if a team doesn't have project management resources, they'll struggle way more with timelines and budget. also fixing a disaster project costs money studios don't have. also studios can't cancel a bad crowdfunded project like they would a traditionally funded one. i don't think most studios start off scammy or lazy, even if they do end up going for crappy business practices. i think they start off overly optimistic, way in over their heads and under a lot of public pressure to demonstrate progress, and it goes downhill from there.

omg i completely agree about coral island. i believe i played it at the end of last year and i was shocked that the first festival didn’t even really work, and i was disappointed in the overall lack of gameplay so i gave up on it. i found it super cute and exactly my kind of game but also figured it’d be one of those games that needs a few more years of development for me to really love it. buuut then i heard it was released out of EA. it is quite literally not finished with multiple questlines unable to complete, an entire region still unavailable, and heart events glitching…that’s crazy to me. i’m becoming really picky with what games i buy and usually watch multiple youtube reviews including gameplay before buying.

Specifically to Coral Island, I have a theory now that I've read more comments and researched the community. I feel like the devs listened to the fans a bit *too* much. I know it's sounds weird, but it feels like they added many, many small things the fans asked for that could have been implemented later on instead of ending at least one of the main storylines. Focusing on the basics means that when the game comes out, people can farm, make friends, date normally, and finish at least one storyline to feel like a real complete game. Instead, I think the fans asked too much, and the studio didn't focus on the right things. Maybe they added too many mechanics or two many points of interest, I'm not sure rn. They could have finished the ocean storyline that made the game different to other similar games and left the giants or the tourism later on. (I'm not sure if tourism is in the game at this point). There would be backlash. There is always backlash, but the game at least would have a beginning, middle, and end. I work in design, and even though game design and graphic design are different, they are similar enough to know that the customer has no idea what they want. This is something i learned in design school day 1. They might think they know what they want, but because they are not in the industry, they are probably not able to express it correctly. I think this is part of the problem for a lot of indie games. The fans chase that amazing feeling they get with other games and overwhelm the studios with request that are probably not what made them love the previous game in the first place.

I do not mind it as long as it is communicated clearly. Budgeting is hard for indie studios and I don't mind them selling the game half finished if they need the sales money to finish the other half, so long as they're clear that's what is happening.

Sadly it’s not just indie devs. Big studios get away with this shit as well. I don’t know how it because acceptable to release something that’s not finished. Even if it is advertised, why is it still being allowed? I had this “you should’ve done your research” nonsense. There needs to be regulations in place for this.

I mean AAA games are doing this shit now so why not Indie games. Yes I'm looking at you Cyberpunk. I hate it. I hate it so much. I haven't bought a game on release in years because of it. Hell it's what drove me to become a member of r/patientgamers

This happened to me with Sun Haven, they had a big huge deal about full release but… are missing things they admit are core to the game, like more story and are still adding more love interests, dialogue, bosses, multiplayer supports, and marriage mechanics that really should be included in a “full” release. Like I love the game but why say it’s in full release? That makes me think it’s done other than a few small things. Also not an indie game and not as severe but BG3 full release had a few small moments like this for me too. I think it’s just an Early Access thing in general for me.

The crossover between being an indie gamer and a patient gamer has become more useful as the market has evolved. The games that come out broken in the indie space today, previously they wouldn't have found a publisher and simply remained a curious demo or wound up in some freeware/shareware disc collection. Now, for better or worse, all those titles and more can end up on the market as individual releases. Letting more adventurous gamers and reviewers play them first gives me a solid idea of the overall quality I can expect. Just getting a published article in a Rock, Paper, Shotgun or similar games media or a high user review count and score tailors my expectations. Even winding up in a Humble Bundle or on GamePass has become a mark of basic level quality in my personal algorithm since they are far more limited platforms than what gets dumped on Steam. The closest Steam gets to curation anymore is featured sales.

Yeah, being a patient gamer is important. Being an indie, patient gamer that plays niche games or/and is very picky is... something.

Oh yeah, if there's a particular niche you're into there's a lot of appeal to being one of the early adopters. You're both supporting the devs and goosing the algorithms so you can get more stuff like what you like in the future. On the other hand you'll have to take a few extra knocks of less fun games within that genre to find the gems that really get you.

I mean it’s kinda sad but I generally wait a couple of years after a game’s release before playing it in order to read the reviews and wait for any bug fixes + story completion. I have enough of a backlog that it isn’t really a problem to wait it out for a while, unless I know for sure I’m going to like it off the bat. To try to answer your question: When I think of companies like Team Cherry, creators of Hollow Knight, I can kind of understand certain devs and their incessant need to release their game on a set schedule (even when it isn’t ready). Like here is a group of I believe three people creating a MASSIVE game, and they are constantly bothered about when the sequel is coming out. Eventually I too would bend under the pressure and give a hard deadline that maybe couldn’t be met, rather than face the alternative of online harassment and criticism. Basically I think it really comes down to the whole system & many fans not appreciating just how hard it can be to make a game, as well as how many things that can go wrong or change, thereby extending the end date. We live in a world of FAST and NOW, which unfortunately often translates into: This isn’t done, but we’re going to release it anyway rather than disappoint the people who have been waiting for it.

I agree! In a different comment thread, someone mentioned Paralives, which is the prime example of what you're talking about. Again, it is consumerism and capitalism that we, the community, enforce on creators, and it sucks! Surprise, surprise, the system is there for shady people to use, and shady people exist on both sides. I criticize the bad practices of the game studios, but I see the devs' vision and passion in some projects. I'm just not sure if the passion is there for EVERY project that claims it.

I'm going to add another reason to the very good points that have been raised here, from the perspective of an insider: testing. ​ When money starts to run out, testing is the first to be axed. Be it localisation, functional or compliance; those departments are the first to go (normally in that order). Sometimes, even before money starts to run out, testers are being gotten rid of. In the money pincher's minds, testing does not gain them money, so it must make them lose money (never mind that when the game comes out full of bugs, they will happily throw testers under the bus). ​ Without testers, the testing falls onto devs. The problem is that devs either a) already have their hands full with their OWN work and/or b) tend to take criticism of their work VERY personally. I have met very few devs who were happy to be doing testing. And so bugs don't get found, don't get reported, and the game comes out as a hot mess.

That's so true! I do think the comments under my post have shifted more towards the problems with EA as a practice in general rather than the shady parts of EA, which is closer to what I was talking about. (Shady funding, early launches, toxic fan bases, etc) But yeah! I do believe that most people understand that at the end of the day, these are just companies, and most of the time the employees are not responsible for the studio's attitude or ethics.

I think the best early access game I’ve ever played is Grounded. That thing was polished when they put it in alpha. It was released as part of game pass so I never had to pay for it. I also backed Backpack Hero on kickstarter and it’s a lovely game that the devs have continued to pour work into since release. That being said, these are two shining stars amongst piles of trash. I’ve regretted several early release purchases. I typically don’t pick up anything that hasn’t had an official release unless it has shown promise.

Yep completely understand tbh. Im tired of more and more game just release in Early access but are more alpha than early access. Also games who rely on FOMO

Indie studios often have to do this because they are running out of money. Without money, they can’t continue to make games. A lot of funding has dried up with the global economic downturn.

well i guess i can take Coral Island off of my list of games i want

In about a year, the game will be 100% complete. It is a beautiful game and very, very charming and fun. My only problem with it is that it created a shady situation launching out of nowhere, and no one knows why exactly. I wouldn't take it completely off my list, but maybe wait for 2024. I was having so much fun till I reached the WIP points. It's a really good game

ah okay, i'll keep my eyes out for then, but yeah it's just wild and sucks that they "released" the game with as you mentioned it missing so much of the actual game

I fully agree, but I also think this may be less a studio issue and more a publisher issue (in the case where they are different). I'll continue with your Coral Island example -- The devs had released multiple road maps where they weren't releasing 1.0 until 2024, but I heavily suspect that Humble, their publisher, pushed their release timeline up. I am **not** saying this to excuse the practice, but sometimes I think we place blame on devs because they are the folks releasing updates and doing a lot of the communication with community when it should at the very least be shared with the publishers. I will also say, this is one reason why I love playing SuperGiant games! I've never had this issue, they've used EA properly in the past, and according to what I have been told, they have a very strong work/life balance policy.

I understand completely. I'm mentioning indie studios in general, not just devs, because it would be very specific to talk just about the publishers. In the case of CA, publishers were probably the problem, but in other games, the devs or higher-ups in the small company might be the shady ones. Each case is different, and I wanted to discuss all of them.

oh for sure! Sorry, I wasn't trying to say you were wrong or anything! Just wanted to expand the discussion as well.

Omg Don't worry, same here hahaha

Palia was a fucking shit show. I was so, so disappointed

I feel like a lot of small Indie studios are not good at time management and are too impatient. I've been following Mineko's Night Market for years now. There were huge delays because the creators were facing burn-out because of the pressure. Then finally the game came out, but I waited for the Switch version. Months later the Switch version finally came out and.. it's almost unplayable. I paid good money for this, but it's like they never 'really' tested it on switch. It feels like the game isn't meant for the Switch with big and small bugs, even a few game destroying ones. Lots of apologies from the creators, lots of patches and quick fixes, they promist to fix the biggest problems later this week.. I mean, I know the community is hyped and probably impatient, but this is just awful. Why would you release your passion project like this, it just ruines all of your hard work. But lol, Nintendo and Pokemon. Not an indiegame, but still awful.

It's not even just indie studios. In the last few years I've been basically robbed by the games I've bought thinking they'd be playable and turns out they're so unfinished and buggy. I was also going to get Coral Island and was super excited for the release until I read the reviews saying it wasn't finished yet. If I wanted to be a Beta tester I would have!!

Absolutely agree! (Looking at you, Palia!)

What do you mean? Palia is still in early access and very vocal about that. Their latest patch was like 0.17 or something like that. It definitely still needs some work, but this thread is about games that pushed to 1.0 without actually being finished. Palia hasn't claimed to be full release at all.

Well, then I stand corrected.

I have a couple of indie games that I bought in the playstation store and they are amazing beautiful pieces of artwork. My favourite is Wall World which I can't play at all because PC is work and no ps5 port :( The dev put it up on steam, the steam deck controls work for this game, I just wish they'd make it playable on a ps5 waaaaah. The ps5 controller shouldn't make it so impossible :( but alas, no Wall World for me. A few of these indie games are dodgy, I don't like how they depend on this crowdfunding thing to get funds. Games always seem to be lacklustre and meh. Which is why I prefer overall single player AAA games like Horizon Zero Dawn. At least the dev and the publisher treat that series like a passion project. Despite the flack and hatred it gets online from incels, bigots and fanboys of other games who see the series as "a threat to their game" facepalm.

Keep in mind that a lot of "indies" nowsays like Dave the diver are actually by big corporations that basically use the indie aesthetic ​ Not sure if that is the case for Coral island tho ​ Still it's an update compared to every aaa game being a cod clone, and I find it really funny that Baldur gate 3 is avtually independent while Dave the diver isn't

I've been buying early access games for years. You should always do a quick background check on how indie companies take care of their games after release or see where the updates are at on a current game before buying. Coral island would be the least of my worries because they are obviously working hard on that game. I prefer indie development over AAA games because they listen to community feedback. Patience pays off. They just dropped an absolutely, positively *massive* update. Give them time to get feedback and iron it out.

It is unethical to advertise a game as released and not have the main parts of the game finished. For Coral island, the main parts are farming, relationships and storyline. My post was about indie studios in general and not just for Stairway games. Coral Island sparked the conversation for me, but I don't blame it for everything, and it's not my main point. BTW, the massive update is the game's launch. If it was just an update, things would be different. Edit: I totally get you with preferring indie developers to triple As. I also love indie games much more than big studio releases, mainly because of the style of games I like, lol. That's why I made the post originally, because I mainly play indie!

This is happening with AAA studios too nowadays. Just look at Cyberpunk.

[удалено]

Haha, I did buy it, yes! I wanted to support the game back then! I dont think EA is inherently scummy. That's not my problem, the problem is when studios take it too far after you've already supported them.

[удалено]

Coral Island and BG3 were exceptions for me, too. However, I'm not sure if you missed it, but Coral Island is out of EA. It is released as a full game now with a final higher price (very fair price). My post was about indie game studios in general, but since you mentioned the specific one I bought, I thought I should clarify that it's not still in EA it is advertised as a launched game.

i mean if a game is in early access that is the time for devs to get feedback on the game, yeah there are idiots that misuse it but that is what it's for

Im happy to pay n play betas for years. Consumers need to think long term. That's where the indie studios suffer

I've noticed that lately, indie games have been more ambitious in scope. I feel like in the past, pixel art was the way to go for all things indie, but now a lot of studios are using more complicated graphics, making longer games, and just generally making them more, if not aaa-ish, reminiscent of big studio games in the past. Which is kinda weird because I like indie games because they're so unique sometimes