By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony - Sony is considering bringing early access/paid alphas to PSN.

 

What are your thoughts on early access/paid alphas coming to PSN?

Good idea 19 38.78%
 
Bad idea 16 32.65%
 
Don't care 6 12.24%
 
50/50 5 10.20%
 
See Results 2 4.08%
 
Total:48
fighter said:
think-man said:
I hate steam because you have to sift to shit to find anything decent, I hope PSN doesn't take that path.

Interesting about the Vita though I didn't know they had dev kits, I'm going to look into that this weekend. Id love to fiddie around with the Vita.


Funny because the way you "sift" through the catalog on Steam is so much more efficient than on consoles :

many more filters

detailed user reviews/advice and display of their actual usage in number of hours

links to metacritics

links to the afferent community forums

etc.

 

I hope consoles follow Steam's way of "sifting" through catalogs, but instead it seems they prefer the "know less" approach to compulsive purchasing.

I know all this, I say sift through shit because 90% of the games on stream are utter crap. You end up having to read all the user reviews to find anything decent. Least at the moment the QC is good on consoles so I don't have to rummage through Tim and Jeffs game they made over a weekend that somehow got greenlit. If I wanted that I would still be playing games on GameJolt.



Around the Network

I don't see it as a bad idea. If the implement decent quality control, it could actually be a good thing for PSN. But QC is a sketchy business.



If they are more strict and have better QC than Steam, then why not. But if it's like Steam Early Access then please keep that away from consoles.



I never even play free demos or betas, so I'm ceraintly not paying for alpha.
To each his own, they can do it, but they're not getting my money.



Richard_Feynman said:
Just because YOU aren't interested in an entirely OPTIONAL service doesn't mean OTHERS aren't.

Just because YOU don't want something doesn't make it a bad idea.

Maybe you should give others more credit and consider that disagreeing with a new system is not merely based on personal taste.

 

The only thing until today that has ever made the video game market crash was "too much content / not enough control". So there is obviously a deeper reasoning than just "eeewww, alpha builds, no thanks".



Around the Network

Depends on its implementation. who am I kidding, this is just a bad idea.

Devs are already selling us unoptimized games or cutting out parts of the game to sell back to us as DLC all cause they want money fast or more money from us. This literally gives them permission to sell incomplete games.



Kind of meh on this one.



This is the Game of Thrones

Where you either win

or you DIE

Honestly if they market it as users having a role in the game development it could work.

Imagine a separate tab on the PSN for this. Users "buy" the alpha version but with it either comes bonus content upon release, perks upon release, or even that money going toward the finished game purchase. In a way like a kickstarter. Obviously this isnt for big AAA games but could be for upstarts to stress test and also support them with increased cash.

This could generate extra money for devs if someone plops $5 on an alpha even if they never buy the game that still will help the dev, and it is a way to market and generate some buzz.

I think buying an alpha as a standalone is pretty ridiculous but the idea of paid alpha access with perks or bonuses upon final release to help stress test and mold a game is something that has potential, imo.



Nuuuu, dont flood psn with shit "early access" games that seem to appear like flies on steam these days



                  

PC Specs: CPU: 7800X3D || GPU: Strix 4090 || RAM: 32GB DDR5 6000 || Main SSD: WD 2TB SN850