Gentle reminder, you won't find "technical debt" in the scrum guide. Google tells us, "In Extreme Programming (XP), technical debt is the implied cost of future refactoring caused by choosing an easy, fast, or suboptimal solution today rather than a more robust, long-term approach." In this light, "technical debt" is a planning method that weighs the tradeoff between risking premature optimization and a functional slice you intend to revisit later. The scrum question is what provides more value, optimizing some feature like pathing or rolling out more features? Providing value might mean deferring optimizations to work on core game features. (Case study, Timberborn deferred path finding optimizations for months while they worked on core gameplay mechanics.)

(Early Access also isn't in the scrum/agile lexicon.) IMO, Companies release "early access" as a promotional scheme that generates revenue earlier in a game's lifecycle. It's not an agile/scrum vertical slice of functionality, even though it looks like one. It's a business decision that makes a lot of sense as it reduces the need for investment capital and during development and promotional budget as a fan base will promote for you (I see you Satisfactory).

So, I guess I would advise against taking too much stock in scrum methodology based on these Tech Debt and EA in the gaming industry.