Early access

Early access, alpha funding, or paid-alpha is a funding model in the video game industry by which consumers can pay for a game in the early stages of development and obtain access to incomplete, alpha or beta versions of the game, while the developer is able to use those funds to continue work on the game. Those that pay to participate typically help to debug game, provide feedback and suggestions, and may have access to special materials upon release of the game. The early access approach is a common way to obtain funding for indie games and may also be used along other funding mechanisms including crowdfunding.

History

Traditionally, game publishers do not release unfinished versions of their products to the public, instead relying on in-house testing non-disclosure agreements. This prevents such versions from becoming the target of software piracy, and limits what information can potentially be shared with competitors.^[1] As such, publishers will fund the full development of a game through its completion, but will be less willing to take risks on experimental titles. In some cases, publishers have found ways to allow players to win or buy into access into a game's beta state in a controlled environment. For example, an invitation to the beta version of the multiplayer portion of Halo 3 was bundled with the game Crackdown, attributing to that game's strong sales.^[2]

For indie games, which are typically distributed without a publisher, the source of funding for development is not as readily available. Many smaller indie companies use personal funds, while larger ones may get investments from other sources, and more recently crowdfunding programs like Kickstarter have proven viable for both. Another difficulty for indie developers is the means of testing their games prior to release, lacking the resources of a publisher and not obtaining enough feedback prior to release.^[1]

The concept of early access helps to alleviate both problems. Early access to a game is typically offered when the game is in a playable state but may not be feature-complete, or may still have several software bugs to be found. Often these games are considered at alpha or beta releases, and may be months or years from anticipated completion. Interested players are able to buy into the development of the game, gaining access to the software in the working state, and are encouraged to play and stress-test the software. Their feedback can help the developer tune the game's direction, art, and software mechanics in anticipation of a final release. Once the game is released, the player either continues to have access to the software or is rewarded with a means to obtain the final release of the title and other extras, such as sounds, their name in the game's credits, or other rewards. These players help fund the game to completion, but take a risk that the game may never reach a final release.^[2] A further benefit can come from preliminary word-of-mouth of a game in an early access state. As players are typically not limited by confidentiality agreements to participate in early access, these players can provide reviews on social media, or play the game on streaming broadcasts, which subsequently can stimulate interest in the title.

One of the earliest known examples of this model is Minecraft. The game was created in mid-2009 by Markus Persson initially as a browser-based game that he developed alongside his full-time job. The alpha-version game proved popular that within the month of release, Persson added a means by which players could pay 10 euros (approximately $15) to access the game, allowing him to continue its development. As sales of the game increased, he was able to quit his job about eight months later to work on the game full-time and founding Mojang to bring on a larger development team. Minecraft continued to offer early access throughout its development period, assuring those that bought into it would receive the final version for free. The game was considered complete and released as a full title in late 2011. Prior to this release, over 1.8 million players had purchased into the alpha- and beta-stage releases, with over $33 million raised from these early sales.^[3] Minecraft's success led to the early access approach becoming a popular way to publishing indie titles.

Approach

To help early access, some digital distribution storefronts have provided the sales and distribution mechanisms for developers to use to offer their titles under early access. While these stores take a small fraction of the sales for the service, they also handle complex issues with payments through credit card and services like PayPal, bandwidth for delivering software, redemption of keys for other digital storefronts, and promotion within the storefront. The digital storefront Desura launched an alphafunding initiative in 2011 to help indie developers promote upcoming titles.^[4] Valve Corporation added an early access to Steam in March 2013, allowing developers to take advantage of the Steam storefront and the Steamworks API.^[5] The storefront GOG.com began an early access program, "Games in Development" similar to Steam's in January 2016, but staying true to their storefront's philosophy, maintaining digital rights management-free titles and providing more curation to vet the titles using the service. GOG further implemented a 14-day no-questions-ask refund policy for early access titles, which removes some of the risk for the potential buyer.^[6][7]

The Humble Bundle group has created a Humble Store that also provides storefront and distribution methods for indie gamers that wish to sell early access to games, and for developers looking to get on Steam, offers the ability to provide Steam redemption keys once these titles are listed at the storefront, while also incorporating a method to allow players to pay or tip the developer in addition to the base cost.^[8]

Video game console makers have also looked to the success of early access and have created their own similar programs for their consoles' users. Sony Computer Entertainment stated in July 2014 that they considering creating an early access program for independent PlayStation 4 developers following the Steam model,^[9] and launched this approach in September 2015 with the game Dungeon Defenders II.^[10] Microsoft similarly started the Xbox Game Preview program in June 2015 for those users involved with the dashboard preview of the Xbox One console with plans to expand it fully to all users on both Xbox One and Windows 10; the Xbox Game Preview program differs from other approaches as the early access titles include a free game demo at the current state of development to give players a chance to test the game before buying. This service was launched with the early access titles The Long Dark and Elite: Dangerous.^[11] Google offers a similar Early Access program for the Google Play store for Android devices, starting in mid-2016.^[12]

Though most titles that use early access are from independent developers, some AAA developers have used an early access approach to augment their normal development cycles. Codemasters used Steam's Early Access to help develop Dirt Rally; at a point where they had to make a go or no-go decision on whether to proceed with full development of a niche racing title, the company opted to use early access to offer a polished version of the game still in development to meter interest and gain feedback from players, correcting issues that players had had with previous titles in their series. After about a year, Codemasters was confident to proceed to complete the game and producing console versions of it with their publisher alongside the personal computer version.^[13][14] Ubisoft used early access to help complete Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Phantoms (previously named Ghost Recon Online) after the primary development work was complete, incorporating player response to fine tune the final game.^[15]

Early access is often tied in with other means of funding. Games that have used Kickstarter or other crowdfunding mechanisms often include early access to backers, and later allow those that did not participate in the funding to buy into that early access, which helps to provide additional funds for further expansion.

Steam Early Access

The "Steam Early Access" release platform (run by the Valve Corporation), makes use of proprietary Steam software for sales and distribution.^[16] The program launched on March 20, 2013, and initially made 12 game titles available.^[17] Before the games are released, the developers solicit feedback from Steam Early Access purchasers (who have contributed funds to the game's creation), to provide the needed input.^[16] After its release, Valve planned to have titles taken from their Steam Greenlight program added to Steam Early Access, as well as adding titles which have already been accepted through Steam Greenlight.^[18] Many crowd-funding projects promise to offer access to alpha and/or beta versions of the game as development progresses; however, unlike some of these projects which solicit funds but do not yet have a playable game, all Steam Early Access games offer an immediately playable version of the unfinished game to customers.^[18]

Notable games using early access

The following is a partial list of video games that have been considered successful uses of the early access approach:

• Minecraft, as described above.
• Mount & Blade was released in an early form in 2004 by Armağan and İpek Yavuz, who used early-user funding to found TaleWorlds in 2005, finally completing the game for commercial release by Paradox Interactive in 2008.
• Kerbal Space Program followed a similar model to Minecraft and eventually moved onto the Steam Early Access program, where it has since sold millions of copies.^[19]
• Prison Architect which has been able to raise about $8 million in revenue from more than 250,000 sales of the game while still in early access.^[20]
• DayZ, a multiplayer zombie-based game, gained more than 400,000 sales within one week of being on Early Access.^[21]
• Don't Starve used both its own early access approach as well as Steam's version to incrementally add features and obtain feedback from its player base, treating each new release as a new expansion to the game to keep players engaged during this period.^[22]
• Subnautica was launched to lukewarm reception on early access in December 2014, but its developer, Unknown Worlds Entertainment, continued to push forward on a very open development process, allowing users to directly see some of their project planning documentation and providing the means to provide feedback directly from the game. This enabled the game to refined through the early access process and gain favorable reviews, leading towards further release on console systems.^[22]
• Besiege was launched on early access without a strong campaign for gameplay, but had a great deal of visual polish that attracted users to the game. According to SteamSpy, more than 1 million copies of the game were sold within the first year of it being on early access.^[22][23]
• The Long Dark, a wilderness survival game, has had its early access users sharing their own adventures in the game's current sandbox mode on the games' forums, from which its developer, Hinterland, has been quietly using to improve the game and crafting the game's planned story mode around some of this indirect feedback.^[22]
• Darkest Dungeon also used incremental updates during its early access, given the number of various gameplay mechanics systems it uses, and the developers, Red Hook Studios, had to handle a large volume of negative feedback upon the addition of one specific gameplay-changing mechanic they felt was critical to the game. The studio reported sales of over 650,000 across their early access period and a week after going live with their final version.^[22][24]
• Ark: Survival Evolved, a single-player and multiplayer survival action adventure game.

Reaction

Gamasutra considered the concept of early access, particularly Steam's approach, as one of the five trends in 2013 that defined the direction that the video game industry was headed.^[25]

The early access approach has been criticized by some; as noted by Ben Kurchera of Polygon stated that the early access model validates the use of unfinished games as a "valid business strategy".^[26] While those that buy into the early access do get an incomplete game to play, test out, and provide input to the developers, these people also run the risk that the game will never be completed or may be a sub-par product.^[27] A study using Steam's Early Access as of November 2014 found that only 25% of the titles submitted as early access had made it to a final release form.^[28] Sergey Galyonkin, the creator of the Steam Spy tool to estimate sales of games through Steam profiles, identified that contrary to popular belief, early access titles only gain one major sales boost - when the game is first released in early access on Steam - as opposed to having a second sales boost once the game leaves early access.^[29]

There have been some notable examples of failures of the early access approach. The game Earth: Year 2066 was placed on Steam's early access with numerous promised features, but found by those that purchased the title that the game has numerous programming bugs making it unplayable, that it failed to approach its promises on the product page and used a number of assets from the commercial game engine. Many users, including Jim Sterling of The Escapist,^[30] called out on both its developer Killing Day Studios for abusing the early access program and for Valve to remove the title for fraudulently representing gameplay. Valve subsequently removed the title and refunded money, noting that while developers using early access have the right to promote and set the pricing for their games, "Steam does require honesty from developers in the marketing of their games".^[31]

Another example is the forementioned Spacebase DF-9; while the development team from Double Fine had laid out plans for several features and gameplay improvements over time, Double Fine opted to end its full-time development, completing its early access and releasing a final product that while fully playable lacked many of the planned features; the company will continue to fix critical bugs with the game and will include support for user modifications via Steam's Workshop channel but will not create any new content for the game itself, disappointing many players of the game that were looking forwards to these planned features. Shortly after the release of 1.0 twelve employees were laid off including the programmer and project lead JP LeBreton.^[32] Later on the Double Fine forums it was announced that there were no further plans for patches and there was no team assigned to the project^[33] leaving Steam Workshop integration in limbo. Double Fine's Tim Schafer stated that they opted for this solution as while DF-9 represented their first experiment with the early access approach, they had reached a point where the amount of money earned from sales of the game in early access were not covering the production costs, and the timeline to reach the planned goals would have been several years down the road.^[34]

Due to some of these more notable failures, by 2014 early access has gained a negative connotation, as games do not have the quality assurances of complete titles, and in the case of Steam's Early Access, the lack of curating and testing by Steam to make sure the games are representative of the storefront's description.^[35] Some players also worry about the "double dip" effect, in which a game may be promoted twice, first through its introduction on early access, and then on its subsequent full release.^[35] In November 2014, Valve updated its early access rules for developers to address concerns that had been raised. Among these include the statement that games on early access should be in a playable alpha or beta state, there are clear expectations of what the final product of the game will be like, and that the developer intends to continue work on the game, and can be financial stable to ultimately release a finished product.^[36]

Other games have been considered by commentators to have used the early access approach well in light of the above concerns, typically bringing near-finished products with frequent and continual content updates and direct interaction between developer and players to improve the product before its final release. Games with roguelike features appear well suited to take advantage of early access, allowing the developers to tweak the procedural generation systems with player feedback. Several titles that have used Steam's Early Access in such a manner include Invisible, Inc., Nuclear Throne, Armello, Broforce, Prison Architect, Darkest Dungeon, Besiege, Infinifactory, Subnautica, Ark: Survival Evolved, and Cryptark.^[37][38][39]

Video game reviewers have generally developed policies to avoid doing final, scored reviews for games in early access, instead offering interim commentary on the game. Polygon states they feel that they should provide consumer commentary on any product that is being sold to consumers, but recognize that early access titles are still in-progress works and thus will handle these in a different manner than their normal product reviews.^[40] Eurogamer, as part of an updated review policy, will only formally review retail versions of games after their release, though may give initial impressions of games still in early access development.^[41]

See also

• Crowdfunding in video games
• List of video game crowdfunding projects
• List of Steam Early Access games

References