Should video games that are in an Alpha/Beta state be nominated for awards like GOTY?

[Eleccybubb]

This thread basically stems from my other personal GOTY thread and what I was reading about the Game Awards for this year.

Now as you all know PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds which is in Beta is up for awards. (Not singling out PUBG but it's the only game I know of in this situation) Now this had me thinking.

Should a video game that is in an Alpha or Beta state be eligible for these kinds of award ceremonies? Because the product itself is not finished and a lot can change during the Alpha/Beta stages of a game. Going to add a simple Yes/No poll for this.

I think a game should be fully finished before it can be under consideration due to how much it can possibly change throughout development. Just my two cents on the matter.

Would love to get other peoples thoughts on this but keep it civil. And by civil I mean no devolving into specific games or game vs game stuff.

[Arrashi]

Nope. Final version or GTFO.

[Lotus Victoria]

No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no and no. And fucking no. A good idea that isn't finished it's still only good idea, it doesn't matter if you can play it for a bit or not. Finish the product and launch it.

OT: Fuck early access. Really, it's one of the worst aspects of Steam.

[Nutri]

No.

Let's take PUBG as the example. Early access for a while. What if, somehow, it gets pushed back into 2018/2019 due to some unforeseen thing?

How is the Game of the Year 2017 something that wasn't actually released in that year? It's going to be a mess if early access / alpha / beta games will be nominees.

edit: Even better example, Star Citizen. Alpha/beta for years. What if that game would have been GotY the past 4 years continuously? That would have been weird.

[dope_danny]

Should an unfinished game that might shut down before release, change target audience or even genre by the retail build or simply be another early access funpay minibuy skinner box disguised as a game be given an award given to the objective best games of the year, comparing it to finished retail releases?

Uh, no.

[Lotus Victoria]

Let's take PUBG as the example. Early access for a while.

This reminds me of Starbound. It's one of the worst cases of Early Access sickness - the game launched in E.A and got me really excited, but it felt really incomplete and I grew tired of it after some hours. That was in 2013. The game only got out of E.A in 2016, and man, let me say one thing: 3 years later and I was still tired of the game. First impressions count a lot to me, and Starbound will never get a second chance from me, no matter how good the game is nowadays. Same for No Man Sky.

The damage is already done.

That's why I say: Fuck early access. I understand that it's a system with good intentions, but people are people and they'll fuck your intentions on their first chance. And Valve is too occupied with the money from the summer sales to give a shit to whatever is happening with E.A.

[Jtbrig7390]

If it releases in a playable state then it can be a GOTY in that year.

Doesn't matter if its EA or Live.

[quras]

Nope. Final version or GTFO.

This ^

Anything before the final version isn't worth having in the GOTY list.

[Coldkil]

Nope. Final version or GTFO.

I don't need any more words.

[unholytestament]

Create a category called "demo of the year" or "most anticipated game in beta" or something along those lines and throw all the early access games in there. Keep them away from the actually released games.

Though, to be fair, a growing number of releases are calling into doubt whether released games can actually be considered finished or not.

[Jaylock]

This thread basically stems from my other personal GOTY thread and what I was reading about the Game Awards for this year.

Now as you all know PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds which is in Beta is up for awards. (Not singling out PUBG but it's the only game I know of in this situation) Now this had me thinking.

Should a video game that is in an Alpha or Beta state be eligible for these kinds of award ceremonies? Because the product itself is not finished and a lot can change during the Alpha/Beta stages of a game. Going to add a simple Yes/No poll for this.

I think a game should be fully finished before it can be under consideration due to how much it can possibly change throughout development. Just my two cents on the matter.

Would love to get other peoples thoughts on this but keep it civil. And by civil I mean no devolving into specific games or game vs game stuff.

Pretty much agree on all points. I think games in alpha/beta are not real games, they are just alpha/beta versions of a real game.

Games should not get awards when they are unfinished.

[Blueobelisk]

MMO's and MOBA's change all the fucking time and it's not because it's "still under development". Most devs call something alpha/beta just to get people hyped about a game by making them feel like they're in a secret club.

I vote no on the basis that that kind of behavior shouldn't be rewarded. My personal feeling is that a game, regardless of what it's subtitle is, should be judged based on the content and not what people call it.

[Aeluron Lightsong]

This reminds me of Starbound. It's one of the worst cases of Early Access sickness - the game launched in E.A and got me really excited, but it felt really incomplete and I grew tired of it after some hours. That was in 2013. The game only got out of E.A in 2016, and man, let me say one thing: 3 years later and I was still tired of the game. First impressions count a lot to me, and Starbound will never get a second chance from me, no matter how good the game is nowadays. Same for No Man Sky.

The damage is already done.

That's why I say: Fuck early access. I understand that it's a system with good intentions, but people are people and they'll fuck your intentions on their first chance. And Valve is too occupied with the money from the summer sales to give a shit to whatever is happening with E.A.

Thing is, that's more on you then anything else. First impressions are important but if you couldn't get passed it, it probably wasn't your kind of game. That said no game in early access/beta/alpha/not official launch should be considered Game of the year or any kind of award.

[Tech614]

Games should not get awards when they are unfinished.

By this logic what is a finished game?

Should games with DLC still planned but not out be DQed?

What about games still receiving regular patches to polish their performance but already had official releases?

What about on going games that constantly receive updates and might technically never be "finished"?

In reality it doesn't sound like BoTW, or AC:O, or Overwatch last year(which won it at the same show) are all that different then PUBG when you use logic.

[rayvio]

unless the award is of a category specifically for unfinished/unreleased games then no, they should not be nominated

[jellmoo]

I don't like the way that terms like Alpha and Beta get tossed around without meaning. They're software development terms that should mean something. Unfortunately the idea of Early Access has muddied the waters on these things.

My take has been that if you are selling the game, it by definition can't be in Alpha or Beta. You've more or less skipped the development lifecycle and gone straight to market, which means that it should be judged. If your game is so good even after skipping milestones that it warrants game of the year, then so be it. You've scrwed the pooch when it comes to your dev cycle, so you should still feel ashamed, but at least your game is being well received.

[Littleraven]

Nope. The fact that PUBG even got nominated reinforces how dumb these awards are for me. I don't care how popular or massive a game is. It isn't finished. It opens a can of worms IMO.

[zhero]

if any random person can pay for the game and can then download and play it, it should be considered released, unless it has some official release date in a few weeks where everything gets reset. games shouldn't be skirting around with beta flags on them forever.

[Slaughty8]

No, never. Any possible reward like that should be only given to a fully released titles.

[Jaylock]

By this logic what is a finished game?

Should games with DLC still planned but not out be DQed?

What about games still receiving regular patches to polish their performance but already had official releases?

What about on going games that constantly receive updates and might technically never be "finished"?

In reality it doesn't sound like BoTW, or AC:O, or Overwatch last year(which won it at the same show) are all that different then PUBG when you use logic.

do you not understand what the difference is between a released game, and a game still in alpha / beta?

For example:

Legion is a released, polished, AAA+ game.

Star Citizen is an unreleased, unpolished, B- game still in alpha / beta.

Legion should be and has received many awards, Star Citizen should not receive ANY until it is fully a published, released game. Got it now?