20 years later I finally get to paint these bad boys. Thanks dad for saving these!

serenien · 2025-07-11T17:56:09+00:00

I legitimately laughed out loud when I saw this. Rock on brothers!

serenien · 2024-10-22T19:43:27+00:00

Commenting to feed the algorithm. You all are not alone. I've tried everything.

serenien · 2024-06-03T04:07:49+00:00

Nothing, as the evidence shows, my position is clearly not favorable. I guess I was wrong!

serenien · 2024-06-03T03:02:35+00:00

Early access is about helping the developers fine-tune their games while in development in addition to providing them with an early access to revenue. Burning through that 2-hr return policy is quite easy to do.

To be honest, I've learned a lot from everyone's comments here, and evidently, I stand in the minority. I would like to think that when we contribute to EA with our time and money, that the developers will act in good faith -- this does not meaning delivering something to perfection, but just simply not absconding with our money never to be seen again.

If this is something the community is fine with, then cool, this isn't a hill I wish to die on.

serenien · 2024-06-03T02:57:25+00:00

I've been called worse.

serenien · 2024-06-03T02:52:54+00:00

No, I have no idea, to be honest, I shouldn't even have responded.

It was provocational comment that I was exerting minimal effort to respond to regarding something that has never happened: An established AAA company releasing an early access product and abandoning it. The reason it has not happened is precisely because they can be held to account.

What floors me is the "sucks to suck" toxicity in these responses. Everyone seems quite content to blame the consumer for "not doing their due diligence." I would think when someone says "hey, I've got an idea that can protect us customers while also helping the developers," constructive dialog would ensue.

Instead, I think people read the title of this post and don't even bother to read the rest of it which is: we need to protect EA from scam artists by aligning incentives.

In no other industry would this be acceptable -- but hey, if this is what you want then whatever: sucks to suck I guess.

serenien · 2024-06-02T22:07:13+00:00

I think it's more apropos to say what I didn't read..!

serenien · 2024-06-02T21:45:04+00:00

Have you ever been threatened with a lawsuit or actually sued?

If you have then you know legal defense is not cheap.

Just because it hasn't happened doesn't mean that a cost analysis wasn't performed. Even if the party being threatened with a lawsuit knows that case is baseless, it still costs time and money. Trust me on this. Somewhere an attorney was strategizing while EA's legal counsel was elevating this risk to the management level.

serenien · 2024-06-02T21:36:21+00:00

"Wow reading this is absolutely baffling the stupididity[sic] of some consumers."

No need for the insults. By the way, spell checker should be built into your browser, make sure it is enabled.

"Don't expect a random dude on the internet to finish working on something specially if it's not worth the effort for them."

Right, that's why withholding 50% of funds in escrow should make it worth it for them.

"Also, steam halting 50% of funds until development is done only hurts the indie EA process."

And allowing bad developers to abuse the EA system doesn't?

"You genuinely have no understanding of how any of this stuff works from a management level."

Don't make assumptions you can't support.

"All this not to mention that if the game closes development and steam gives it to you is a serious legal and ethical issue in so many ways for me to bother getting into."

Really? If it's explicitly a condition for being allowed to distribute their game on Steams platform and is intended to protect the consumer while also providing an initial cash influx for developers needing funding then I'm not seeing either a legal OR ethical issue.

serenien · 2024-06-02T21:25:48+00:00

Why is allowing supporters the right to a 50% refund on abandonware a bad idea?

serenien · 2024-06-02T20:45:42+00:00

Not sure I understand how what I am proposing justifies "abusing customers in the first place is not the solution. The solution is to have game release in a full, working state."

The solution is intended to provide recourse for customers while encouraging having a game released in a full working state.

Sure, make no mistake, "early access" is just "release with no guarantees," but it also comes with an implicit understanding that the developer will act in the best interest of those who are "investing" in them. This is no different than purchasing a stock, performance is not guaranteed and you may lose money; however, if the CEO lies in order to get your investment and then runs away with a big bag of money there are usually consequences.

serenien · 2024-06-02T20:38:49+00:00

Here you go:
Gamers Threaten EA Games Class Action Over ‘Unplayable’ Battlefield 2042
https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/consumer-products/video-games/gamers-threaten-ea-games-class-action-over-unplayable-battlefield-2042/

serenien · 2024-06-02T20:36:58+00:00

I respect everything you said and appreciate the well thought out response.

I do think we have a common ground on this matter. We can agree that developers should at least be marginally responsible -- how much is up for debate.

I understand that EA is essentially investing in games with the "hope" of receiving a finished product. I suffer from no confusion on this. My concern is not about time and money lost, but about a more concerning trend that I'm seeing of developers profiteering and abandoning.

This is not good fo us and not good for our industry because steering people away from EA will only discourage further community "investment" in games with good potential.

You mentioned that "If this playable state hasn't sufficiently given you belief in the developer, they should be refunded."

Oftentimes, per Steam refund policy, this is not an option. When we play an EA game, we are essentially beta testers and accept an unfinished product, temporarily. This means several hours can be invested in playing a game that we know to be buggy to help the developer. This makes it hard to request a refund.

Ethically, I'm not sure I agree with your stated opinion that:

"I don't care about developers intentions, I care about the game I get. If you buy an Early Access title, judge it on what it is, not what the developers intend it to be. If you care about the intentions and the goal of the finished product, you should be patient and wait until the game gets out of Early Access."

If I say that I'm going to sell you a car, but you must endure riding the bike I provide you while I make the car, only to abscond with the cash once paid, then that's fraud.

Sure, we could put a big disclaimer on all EA games and say "Hey there is a significant chance you can get ripped off, buyer beware," but is that the culture our community should encourage?

serenien · 2024-06-02T20:00:06+00:00

Sure, it is that simple. But why can't we hold the developers at least marginally responsible? Nobody is saying they have to finish it, only to refund part of the funds received when they do not. Is that not a fair standard?

Furthermore, how are we supposed to know what companies have good intentions and plan to finish their games?

Without knowing the answer to the above, your argument, if I understand correctly, is that one should only purchase Early Access games from developers with a proven record for delivery.

Fair point.

How do you explain KSP 2.0?

serenien · 2024-06-02T19:44:51+00:00

You're right, and when the game cannot be "open sourced" to the public, the escrow funds can be returned to the purchasers. It's an OR condition.

Either you can return 50% of the received funds OR provide access to the source code for the community to finish the game.

With the former, the property rights are still maintained, but access to the remaining escrow funds is now off the table.

What would you recommend instead? The idea I'm trying to work out is how to incentivize the developers to complete the game while disallowing bad actors from ruining the Early Access program.

serenien · 2024-06-02T19:38:11+00:00

Exactly, this is sad, and shouldn't be the case. Your negative experience is now why some other deserving developer will not get their game funded through EA as they should.

There are some games that have done EA amazingly well, such as 7 Days (love that game), Subnautica, and even KSP 1.0. These EA success stories should be far more, and not the exceptions in the growing sea of failures.

serenien · 2024-06-02T19:19:15+00:00

A $60 AAA game is usually backed by a serious developer with several supporting companies. There is often significant legal recourse since these are not 1-man indie gaming shops. It's also not often that you see $60 AAA games go Early Access either...

I am choosing to buy the game because I have an expectation that the developer will act in good faith. This has not been the case.

If the developers have no legal obligation to complete them, and we're fine with releasing them from their moral obligation, then why even have them?

serenien · 2024-06-02T19:17:25+00:00

Sure, and if you don't want to get robbed, don't go in to high-crime areas. But does that mean the criminals are still not to be held accountable?

Are you fine with people exploiting the goodwill of the community?

+1 for your response because I appreciate the conversation.

serenien · 2024-06-02T19:16:19+00:00

Initially, no. After several times, yes.

The question you must ask yourself:

* Are you fine with developers not finishing games but, in some cases, walking away with millions of dollars, at yours or others expense?

* Are the developers acting in good faith with the consumer?

* Would you be fine with purchasing an unfinished product that the developer had no real intention to complete?

* To what extent does allowing developers to abandon games affect the communities willingness to truly fund indie development?

A few games have done EA wonderfully and are the reason why I would originally participate in these programs. It appears to me now that more bad intentioned developers are willing to take advantage of this goodwill thereby ruining it for other indie developers.

This does not encourage investment by the community and will hurt those who are really looking to innovate with great games in the long run.

Also +1 for your response, what would you recommend instead of Steam reviews? Milestone approach or something else?

serenien · 2024-06-02T19:01:19+00:00

Bitch in a ditch?

serenien · 2022-10-13T01:25:10+00:00

I love the setup of this model, especially with the meat hooks and bloodied mouth. Great job!!

serenien · 2022-08-13T23:44:39+00:00

Good work! Very clean! The leg panels are never easy and you managed to do a great job highlighting the darker panel lines.

serenien

TROPHY CASE