.......But it would have to be "the GOG way".

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2014-05-15-gog-on-early-access-definitely-not-every-game-should-be-permitted?utm_source=eurogamer&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=net-daily


TL:DR

"If you're unhappy and they're constantly updating it, that's fine, but if you're unhappy and they just took your money and ran away like typical hit and run... There is somebody who has to be on the hook for it, and I really think this should be the case.

"Definitely not every game should be permitted," he added, "and consumers should have an option to opt out if they're really unhappy. It can be done better still. [Steam] were the first to do it so big kudos for this one; a lot of developers - I was talking to some and they're really happy with it. But the good ones! It's always the good ones.

"Ultimately the market will rule out the greedy thieving ones."

Should I go to the religion tolerance axe and get my 'tools'?

This seems more along the lines of making people investors instead of it being donations. I don't know if that's a good idea.

"Definitely not every game should be permitted," he added, "and consumers should have an option to opt out if they're really unhappy. It can be done better still. [Steam] were the first to do it so big kudos for this one; a lot of developers - I was talking to some and they're really happy with it. But the good ones! It's always the good ones."

*sigh*

As I said in the "News/Media" thread, I'm not sure I want to see them bother with this yet. I feel other stuff should take priority.

For every alpha sold, it is a purchase not happening on gog.

Not sure how many are willing to rebuy a game on gOg that they bought as an alpha.

Yeah that part struck me as well, that's quite the gaffe...

How bad is it if even developers think Steam is the first to do this stuff?

That said, can't say I'm surprised GOG would be looking into getting into this. Seeing how long Desura was doing this already I actually expected GOG to pick this up before Steam did. He's right that the system can use improvements though. Hopefully even Steam's EA requirements will improve over time.

If they're taking that step though, they really need to improve their updating system, perhaps even an optional client.

I wouldn't mind early access games on GOG, there are some really cool games currently in early access.

So what's the idea? Refund if the dev does a "hit and run"? How will that work with DRM-free games? I guess an over-30 day refund wouldn't hurt in this case because the game will be incomplete, more or less.

No gog.com please never introduce Early Access. It's a bad.

I guess I feel their time would be better spent elsewhere, perhaps best expressed as Pheace said, " If they're taking that step though, they really need to improve their updating system, perhaps even an optional client," which I suspect will probably happen at E3.

And of course I'm more interested in highly-desired classics, so unless this would somehow lead Capcom or Take 2 or ZeniMax to pay attention to GOG, meh from me.

Well, then it's not really Steam style, now is it?

In principle, early access makes sense. If I'm going to pre-order a game, then it seems only fair that I should be able to play the most recent builds. There are many issues with this approach demonstrated keenly by Steam's early access program, but I'm curious to see what GOG cooks up. A higher level of scrutiny and quality control could be early access done right.

I would also prefer it if gOg just focuses on the classics....

I don't care for it. I wouldn't actively oppose it, but it would get a resounding "meh" from me.

I'll apply the same tactic applied to the steam one - ignore it.

In the past there were "Early Access" versions of the games , and You didn't need to pay for them - they were called ... "demos"