Selling games is a lot more complicated than it used to be. A decade ago, games came in boxes on store shelves and cost $60 each. Now, some of the most popular games in the world are free to play. But perhaps the most important lesson developers have learned over the last 10 years is that you don’t need to finish a game to sell it. Over the last decade the advent of early access has given developers a way to fund their games while they’re still in development, and a way for players to keep up with the making of the game.
Early access, at least in the way we think of it now, started in 2009 with Minecraft. The first versions of the game were free, but creator Markus “Notch” Persson decided to create a paid version. That initial version of the game, which only let players fight, dig, and build, was an instant success. By 2010, just a year after Persson’s first put the game on sale, it made more than more than €600,000.
With Minecraft’s experiment a success, the path became a godsend for dozens of other small developers. Early access gave developers a way to make money while still finishing the game, rather than needing the money up front. For some developers, Persson included, early access was the difference between working on a game part-time and making development a full-time job.
Everybody loves getting something early
There are other advantages to early access as well, including some that aren’t quite so concrete. Early access acts as a kind of verbal padding and changes the expectations players have for a game. If things aren’t quite right players can just assume that it will get fixed in the future. In fact, there are plenty of triple A games that could have used that kind of benefit of the doubt.
Games like Rainbow Six: Siege, Mass Effect: Andromeda both got derisively labeled “early access” by players who felt they were incomplete, thanks to a lack of content or a wealth of bugs — and often both. Siege managed to turn itself around, transforming into one of the decade’s most interesting shooters. Andromeda didn’t.
The early access model can also help hold players’ attention. As anyone who’s spent time dabbling in this past decade’s most popular multiplayer games knows, the key to keeping players logging into your game is consistent updates. With early access, frequent updates are usually baked-in as part of the package.
In early access, single player games can keep players coming back just like multiplayer games. With constant updates, developers always have a hook to bring players back and players always have new content when they returned to a game.
How does early access end?
As early access has gotten more popular it’s also gotten more confusing. While some games, like PlayerUnknown’s Battlegrounds and Minecraft, had their official releases about a year after they were released into early access, other games didn’t move quite so quickly.
DayZ stayed in early access for about five years, releasing its first version through Steam in December of 2013 and its first full release in December of 2018. Kerbal Space Program, which first released just a year after Minecraft in 2011, didn’t officially come out until 2015. None of these were necessarily bad things, but it did cast some doubts on what early access meant. But at least those games actually came out. Some aren’t so lucky.
As more developers tried to test the early access waters, hundreds of games have come and gone without much notice. Even some games from bigger studios don’t make the cut. In 2016 Epic Games released a third-person MOBA called Paragon. Two years later, in April of 2018, Epic shut down Paragon’s servers, ending the game’s early access — or any access.
What does early access even mean anymore?
Certain other games, especially over the last few years, have made understanding early access even more confusing.
Fortnite: Save the World, the PVE cousin of Fortnite: Battle Royale, is technically a free-to-play game. Or it will be, when it’s actually released. The original idea behind Save the World’s release was that in 2017 it would have a paid early access option, which it did, and a free version later on. But it’s now 2019, the game is still in early access, it still costs at least $39.99, as opposed to Battle Royale, which is actually free, and there’s still no official release date in sight.
Speaking of Fortnite: Battle Royale, it’s been out for over two years now, and it’s also still in “early access,” though it isn’t clear what that means. Epic hasn’t given much indication of whether Battle Royale will ever get a full release, but unlike Save the World there aren’t any promises tied to release. Battle Royale could stay in early access forever and it wouldn’t make a bit of difference. Although it would be pretty confusing.
Even more confusing is Star Citizen, which is in a form of early access all its own. The game started life as a Kickstarter project in 2011 then quickly grew to accepting donations mostly on its own site. Star Citizen is designed as a multiplayer space trading and combat game. It’s ambitious even on paper, but in practice it’s even more complicated.
As a way of keeping players up to date on its progress, the developer releases builds for players to try. The first build let players modify spaceships, and see them inside a hangar, and it has slowly built up from there. There have been builds of the game’s first person shooter elements and builds of its space flight, but there’s still nothing that turns all of these things into one coherent game. And there’s no telling when it might actually be released.
While the lines around what early access really means may have started to blur recently, it’s been an important step forward in the last 10 years. With development costs rising, early access has provided a new path for certain developers. In the age of early access, fans have proven to developers that you don’t need a full game for players to buy it. All you have to start with is a few good ideas and people will be willing to pay for them.
Comments
I don’t really recall that for Seige at all? Sure it’s come a long way and needed work but it never launched with core content missing or totally broken.
By Aqua-Regis on 11.13.19 12:16pm
siege has a ton of fucking problems at launch on top of a full-on f2p micro transaction setup in a full-priced game and got dragged for it. polygon’s original review mentions a bunch of this
By Jigabachi on 11.13.19 12:23pm
oh yeah they monetised the fuck out of it, but considering they actually have supported it for 4 years I’m less salty about that (the price points themselves were and are still too high but the support was at least followed through on) but it was never just straight up missing core content.
If being buggy is Early Access then Bethesda invented that shit decades ago lol
By Aqua-Regis on 11.14.19 8:24am
The only place that I saw Andromeda called early access was here on Polygon in an opinion piece. There were definitely things people didn’t like about the game, but I don’t remember the game being considered unplayable aside from one of the patches that broke one area of one map.
So I am not really sure if calling games Early Access if there are problems with it something that really exists in the greater scheme of things.
By Sanunes on 11.14.19 2:20am
I think KSP is a pretty good example of the model and how it should work – it was a playable game at the start, but it remained under really heavy development with not just content being added (the sort of thing that you might expect for post-release support), but also things being removed or changed radically.
The changes that have been taking place since release do fit more into the categories of bug fixes, and content expansions – exactly the sort of stuff you might expect after release from a game that hadn’t gone through the early access process.
By The_Ewan on 11.13.19 1:22pm
mount and blade came out in 2008 as early access.
By thebhamster on 11.13.19 2:14pm
Was it actually announced as being early access? I seem to remember that while it may have been pretty rough-around-the-edges, it was marketed as a full release indie game. Particularly since Warband was a stand-alone expansion.
By ench on 11.13.19 4:13pm
It had a free early access release on ModDB. But didn’t get put on Steam till after they were happy with how the game played before working on Warband.
By Dr. Panda on 11.15.19 1:06pm
Fucking love the chance to pay for the opportunity to be an unpaid beta-tester
By Gnome de Plume on 11.13.19 7:45pm
Then don’t pay. Some people are interested enough in an incomplete project to be a part of its development and improvement.
By Hudelf on 11.14.19 4:59pm
It’s a shame Rust isn’t mentioned here. THAT game is an interesting early access case – From Rust Legacy which was a seemingly complete game at the time to the, what felt like starting over, current version of Rust we have today which went out of early access last winter and still gets big monthly content updates. It also remains pretty high up on the Steam most played game stats. I spent a lot of crazy hours in that game and revisit it every couple of months or so.
By MarcintheCloud on 11.13.19 7:55pm
Never played an early access game, never will.
By 2minutenoodles on 11.14.19 3:56am
"Godus" FU Peter Molyneux
By mattduck on 11.14.19 4:08am
I don’t get why R6 is mentioned as "incomplete". It’s been the best shooter experience this decade by far and I played it pretty religiously since launch for about a year – I still love it dearly, but just lack time. It’s still a game that’s incredible in many ways – how the match is shaped by the selection of units present, how the meta changes lightning fast during the match itself, how a proper prep can already tilt the match before it starts etc.
Sure, they’ve added more characters and levels, but it’s still the same Rainbow 6 from a core pillar perspective. It wasn’t incomplete, it was great!
By Onetwo3d on 11.14.19 10:01am