r/Steam • u/PrestigiousWhirlwind • 1d ago
Discussion Never seen this before. DLCs can be released as 'Early Access'?
A game I checked out before, Caves of Qud, is coming out with a DLC. But its a DLC that will launch as 'early access'.
The game itself (Caves of Qud) started in early access and it eventually reached 1.0. Now the Devs are creating a DLC for the game, but the DLC itself is launching in 'early access'.
Is that even a thing that can happen on steam? I've never seen that before and don't know how to feel about that.
31
u/Balthichou 22h ago
That’s actually not a first! Both Crypt of the Necrodancer released early access DLCs 7-10 years ago. I don’t know why news outlet are advertising it as the first ever EA DLC, but that’s just factually false…
5
u/PrestigiousWhirlwind 17h ago
I never heard anything about that. I never did play those games, so that's probably why. But if they were truly the first to do an Early Access style DLC, I feel like that should have made news of some kind. Just because of it being such a different concept lol
7
u/Balthichou 17h ago
Yeah it’s strange news outlets are attaching themselves to this notion when it’s factually not true… Just a weird situation altogether.
161
u/wordswillneverhurtme 1d ago
I've never seen an "early-access DLC". That's kind of crazy? But if the devs can't afford to develop the DLC fully without early funding, I guess I understand. I just wouldn't pay money for that.
74
u/Jhavul 1d ago
it's more about testing than funding. games like Qud (and especially Qud itself) have so many interacting elements and possibilities that it is truly not feasible to test everything in-house; letting players actually mess around in the world and discover all these interactions lets the devs address every issue, and this dlc is fucking huge in scope, so there's not really another option. they'd have to do all the fixes and changes regardless if they released it as non-early access, so this is really just a more accurate label for how the dlc will be updated over time.
25
35
u/Dehydrated-Onions 1d ago
Enter: Star Citizen
7
1
-2
u/BlueTemplar85 21h ago
A DLC doesn't have to be paid, or even have stuff that show ups in the game itself (think soundtrack, wallpapers...)
32
u/Mjdecker1234 22h ago
EA is a worthless term nowadays
6
u/Mottis86 21h ago
I think of them as paid demos.
-1
u/NoLimitRolling 20h ago
Exactly, EA just throws money at games that have any signal of being able to “blow up”.
I’d bet they’re the biggest polluter of online garbage lmao, probably worse than AI at this point, just based on the size of the games and amount they put out.
1
u/PrestigiousWhirlwind 17h ago
Its made finding stuff on youtube worse for me. There was someone I use to watch for Let's Plays. He'd play a game in its early access phase and then move on. When the game actually finished? He didn't go back to it, he was still playing the other stuff instead.
For example, I bet there is more content of Dead Cells on Youtube of its EA Phase than content of Dead Cells post its 1.0 release. Which is a shame, considering how drastically different the game is now.
This also applies to when people try to make guide videos of a game DURING its EA Phase. Now those guide videos are just there on youtube, even if they're no longer relevant due what changes the game underwent when reaching 1.0.
I imagine this applies to streaming too. I can see streamers covering a game in its EA phase and then not getting back to it for its 1.0 phase because of other on going games that have attention.
1
u/Mottis86 19h ago edited 16h ago
I think Steam should enforce a rule where an Early Access game cannot cost more than 10 or 15 bucks or something. That would make indie devs more hesitant about using it. If they really, genuinely need the money and feedback (at the cost of long term income) they can still use Early Access to achieve that if they so choose.
We are testing their product for them afterall, why are we paying a full or near full price for it?
2
u/NoLimitRolling 18h ago
Oh yeah, if I see an early access game for more than $20-$25, it’s out of my mind immediately unless I see some enticing gameplay, which is usually like 1% of the time lol.
They definitely need something because currently it’s abused, people know people are always looking for the new best thing, so they label their dogshit EA because they know no one will buy it if they call it a full game lol
2
u/PrestigiousWhirlwind 17h ago
At this point I'm starting to question what exactly Early Access is suppose to accomplish. If a game releases in Early Access and only like, 20 people buy it, is the game going to get cancelled because not enough people bought into it?
I use to think "Oh, EA is so customers can help guide the game's development', but I've seen many cases where feedback is largely ignored. The only thing that generally gets taken into consideration of the bugs people report. But at that point, you're paying to do a job rather than being paid to do a job.
I'm starting to very much sour on the concept of Early Access and I don't really want to see a future where DLCs are now just Early Access as well.
2
u/NoLimitRolling 12h ago
Most of the time it’s because they convince enough people that their vision of the perfect game is in the works to send them money but usually ends up being hated because the developers vision isn’t anything the player base has in mind.
That’s another reason I don’t like EA games, lots of times there’s a bait and switch of what the game even is
12
u/Cold-Engineering-960 1d ago
It’s amazing how much a qud expansion excites me despite having owned the game for two years and accumulating a grand total of 7 hours of play time…
7
u/faminoir 1d ago
was in the same boat. bought early access and would have enough early deaths to get the snapjaw achievement as my only one, until my 2nd or 3rd attempt into 1.0. now 2 greater victories and several hundred hours. that being said, its still okay to enjoy content for games you dont really play
3
u/Cold-Engineering-960 1d ago
I think the thing about it is it’s kinda a phd game and I am only capable of one of those at a time really… so I do enjoy it but the process of learning is too much.
Need to finish my phd in path of exile, zomboid, eu4, eu5, songs of Styx first
At least I have my rimworld phd
1
u/faminoir 18h ago
yeah, these games do be like that. hard to continue a save if you take a break as well because you have to keep at least some context in your memory, otherwise bam. run ended. good luck!
1
u/PrestigiousWhirlwind 17h ago
Regarding Rimworld, allegedly they had an engine update or something. You may want to check the game out again if you haven't recently.
3
u/WololoW 17h ago
I’ve been on the fence about getting Qud since finding out about it last year.
Any words of encouragement or dissuasion you could offer? \ I feel like you specifically could be helpful because your exact beginning experience is what worries me. (It’s what happened to me with Rimworld but then I ended up really liking it, though still never getting any of my colonies off world or anywhere near that tbh.)
1
u/fluxyggdrasil 7h ago
Do a run in "Roleplay Mode" It's not permadeath but instead has saves at settlements. It pretty much turns the game from a 'roguelike' into a CRPG. A *pretty fucking good* crpg at that. Qud is a massive game in its main questline, I cannot imagine doing it on permadeath mode by trial and error.
6
u/HeadhunterKev 23h ago
Just yesterday The Long Dark got an Early Access DLC (in the shop to wishlist for now, release later this month).
2
u/hellboytroy 14h ago
Tbh? I wouldn’t be surprised if the long dark is what inspired this.
To explain: long dark put out a dlc called the far territories, but they released it in parts. BUT, if you bought it early (say when it was only part 1 of 6) then it was only like, 10, 15 dollars? The price of it now I think is 30, so it’s a “do you wanna support this game and get this stuff cheaper or wait till it’s done and buy it full price” type of deal.
5
23
u/MetroSimulator 1d ago
Sure can, look at ark
12
u/PrestigiousWhirlwind 1d ago
I didn't like what ark did, but I will say that their DLC were not Early Access DLC. The DLC they made and sold were complete.
They just did it while their actual game was in Early Access, which was scummy of them to do.
The DLC Caves of Qud is planning to sell, will launch in an incomplete state and be finished over time.
5
u/Corronchilejano 1d ago
I don't understand the problem with it really. It's an extension of the model they've always used.
2
u/Jhavul 1d ago
it's not launching in an incomplete state, though. as described, at the minimum it doubles the playable races in the game, adds an entire new set of mutations and upgrades for your character, an entirely new weapon type that is VERY unique and will be super interesting to use, tons of new content to explore in the world, and very exciting reworks to existing important mechanics with roads and dromad caravans.
the fact it's early access really just means they are going to keep improving on it from its already incredible base state. they're committed to developing it beyond how it releases, which is invaluable because it's impossible to test and account for every interaction you can do in Qud.
0
28
u/satoru1111 https://steam.pm/5xb84 15h ago
The game released like 2 years ago
The DLC Is functionally an expansion to the game
So they’re doing Early Access for the single expansion pack they’re doing
People are screaming here like children don’t even understand what the dev is doing
9
u/onewilybobkat 14h ago
I mean any other game, I would see it, but Qud players should already know this is kinda their process. Not to mention the best play testing you can get is just releasing it. Then everyone is gonna be quick to tell you issues en masse
5
u/satoru1111 https://steam.pm/5xb84 14h ago
Qud is an incredibly thematically weird and systems based game. It makes sense they'd want to Early Access the expansion DLC because of the myraid of systems that can interact with each other, if you add more systems it will make the game even more weird in both intended ways, and extremely unintended ways.
3
u/onewilybobkat 13h ago
Oh no the cars are dying of alcohol poisoning again!
But the reality is every DLC is early access in the era of online patches anyways. Qud is just honest about it because, yeah, it can go wrong in funny ways haha
2
u/CrescendoFuri 3h ago
I…wha, this one sentence has me both curious and mortified all at the same time. I dunno much about this game I’m just here from a phone notification and the title of the post was interesting. lol
1
u/satoru1111 https://steam.pm/5xb84 3h ago
That is like a 5/10 on the weird scale in Caves of Qud. Bug reports in this game sound like a meth heads fever dream 🤣
1
u/onewilybobkat 21m ago
It's a reference to another game, Dwarf Fortress. The systems they have are also intricate and that sometimes means new systems interact in unexpected ways.
So, cats would actually lick themselves clean like real cats. Great, awesome, no notes. Well, cats can go into taverns, where dwarves are spilling booze everywhere, that the cat steps all in covering its paws. Oh no, dirty paws, better lick them clean, leading to cats ingesting so much booze off of their own fur that they die of alcohol poisoning.
1
u/Hairy_Curious 15h ago
Is not necessarily that "people don't understand" is just that breaking usual unspoken conventions for worse is never well received. People are accustomed to DLCs releasing in full since the entire base which was the difficult part is already done, so seeing someone breaking that convention to release an unfinished product is naturally not going to have an smooth landing. I would dare say is even a little naive or disconnected to expect a different reaction. Can an Early Access DLC still be perfectly logical and even proper? Yes, if the scope of the expansion is extremely big and said expansion is gonna have a focus on community interest, ie, it's development heavily depends on the input of it's players then it makes sense(and that seems to be the case here). Just don't expect people to receive it without reaction when you know you're doing something fairly odd
9
u/xXInfXx 14h ago
The problem is, a lot of Expansion DLCs don't release in full. They release as unfinished, buggy messes.
Qud just had the common decency to warn you that the DLC might be an unfinished, buggy mess so you know what you're signing up for on the store page.
2
u/Hairy_Curious 13h ago
Exactly the reason why I don't particularly shame this individual case myself. I trust the devs enough to say "meh, they probably know what they're doing". I'm merely pointing out the bad reactions are to be expected.
58
u/newier 1d ago
I don't see why you need to make a fuss if you're conflicted. What's the big deal?
Just don't buy it until it's finished or if you hear really good impressions from the early access product. How I treat all early access stuff.
16
u/Green_Bulldog 22h ago
I’m glad they posted it. Wasn’t aware this was possible / allowed. Now I know.
7
u/DaMadDogg-420 1d ago
Because that would be the logical, normal response, remember where you are....😜😅
-6
21h ago
[deleted]
4
1
u/Astrael00 21h ago
"Scummy" How? They're not pointing a gun at you to buy it or play it, you're not missing out anything. You still have the entire base game to play.
-2
u/newier 21h ago
I was mostly just commenting on OP's inability to make up their own mind. Their last paragraph seems more interested in what they're supposed to think rather than what they do think.
Look I ain't the biggest fan of early access either, but I hardly think of it as "scummy". What makes it any different to vanilla early access?
0
8
u/Easy_Pool4616 19h ago
Aside from all the other points people are bringing up here (i.e. the developers actually using EA to improve their product, the ludicrous amounts of content in the game already), it should be pointed out they're also planning to release a major content update that will be totally free for everyone. The DLC is just an expansion to character generation that a lot of people wanted, and all EA means in this context is that things are subject to change based on player feedback.
8
u/amazingmrbrock 23h ago
This is 2026 they can early access anything now even triple a games dlc and microtransactions
21
u/BraveNKobold 1d ago
Knowing the Qud devs I think it’s fine. The way the world generates and balances stuff I think early accessing the dlc is whatever. I’d rather it be a well polished expansion than get it 1.0 early
-5
u/PrestigiousWhirlwind 1d ago
I've seen games themselves release in an early access state. But I've never seen a DLC itself come out in an early access state.
Even back when Ark was in EA and did DLCs for its EA game, the DLCs themselves were complete.
2
u/AnyDiscipline3598 1d ago
Wow expansions may count? They have a few days or maybe a week early access to buy
5
u/supersadskinnyboi 19h ago
Caves of Qud turned out to be an amazing game after all of that time in early access, I see no reason to see this as a negative
4
2
u/Tangyhyperspace 20h ago
This isn't actually the first time a dlc itself has been early access. Also for a game like Qud, early access is less a sign that it's not complete and more a sign that they've not had to stop themselves adding new content to it, which is why Qud was "in early access" from like 2013 to 2024
2
2
u/hellboytroy 14h ago
It’s actually a new feature that STEAM itself is recommending a lot. The long dark is doing it for DLC 2 because it’s basically what they did for DLC 1, (it’s put out in parts, with buying it in the earliest stage being cheapest and upping the price slightly with each big addition) my only gripe with it is that it means on console the DLC probably won’t be hitting till it’s complete or fully stable, so console players can’t buy it for a while.
2
3
u/Aggravating_Hippo799 7h ago
Ya Early Access. Games go 'early access' while you pay for it and some games don't even go to fruition and I'd argue that 50% don't even make it to full supported release. It's a waste of money and basically they're taking your money as starting capital with no guarantee.
3
u/unfamous2423 6h ago
It's only a waste of you're expecting the guarantee of a fully realized and finished game. Going into it as is and understanding your money might make a promising game better is the proper mentality.
1
u/Aggravating_Hippo799 6h ago edited 6h ago
You're missing the point. You shouldn't be paying for a game that doesn't even go to full release.
"Going into it as is and undstanding your money might make a promising game better is the proper mentality"? These games are NOT GOING TO FULL RELEASE so where is or was 'the promise' when these games just fail or company divests in failure.
Prime example: KSP 2. So many people hyped about early access. Game was riddled with bugs as that can be expected in early access and not optimized but all the people that bought the $50 dollar game would be fine because "we know it's early access".
The game company abandoned ship, studio shut down. Your money gone and no game or support, gone.
2
u/unfamous2423 6h ago
If you need me to phrase it differently, it's a gamble, but sometimes the cost can be as low as $10 for a decent to great game. I purchased Abiotic Factor in EA and had a good but of fun. And then they fully released and it's genuinely one of the best games ever.
Of course the games that don't make it to full release aren't worth it, but how are you to know the difference?
1
u/Aggravating_Hippo799 6h ago
I did say probably 50% do make full release games to 1.0. Early Access should be free.
All these companies should be relying on their own investors for their starting capital as now they're making consumers the cannon fodder for starting capital with no responsibility whatsoever to consumers over investors.
2
u/RussianWasabi 3h ago
I bought Caves of Qud for like 3,5 bags of potato chips during EA when it had way less options. It released. I've got way more value out of this. Same with Stellaris. Same with Hades. Same with Subnautica.
Y'all have to learn how to pick games that are worth your investment.
7
u/JDM12983 23h ago
Imagine making that game and sounding like you are almost bragging how your game was in early access for 11 years ><
9
u/XanderNightmare 18h ago
Not necessarily a bad thing assuming the game continuesly evolves during that time and is in a playable, every expanding state
Dwarf Fortress has been in a state of "Early Access" for decades, still finds itself in such a state, has been perfectly playable for just as much time, has constantly evolved and it will keep evolving for decades and maybe centuries, should we find a necromancer to keep Tarn going (should he wish to)
3
11
u/Easy_Pool4616 20h ago
Beloved, incredible game that started as the passion project of a couple of people. In full release now and was able to come to fruition as it is today because EA allowed them to hire on people and allowed players to give feedback on all of the complex systems. People are judging this at surface value but it's not like this is Star Citizen, the base game is done now and it's fantastic.
Edit: Also a free to access, earlier build of the game existed for much of that development time
4
u/adrenozin 18h ago
You can find traditionnal roguelikes that have been in development for 20+ years
1
u/Healthy_Board_568 12h ago
It's a rogue like. You won't find any list of top rogue likes that aren't mostly games that have been continuously developed for a decade, often multiple. They're sort of og of early access long before that term existed.
4
1d ago
[deleted]
3
u/poprostumort 16h ago
This is facinating as DLC can only be refunded if you have 2 hoursor less in the game
Steams refund policy: DLC purchased from the Steam store is refundable within fourteen days of purchase, and if the underlying title has been played for less than two hours since the DLC was purchased
Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit, mate. It can be refunded if you have less than 2 hours of game time since you bought DLC, not since you bought the game.
1
1
1
2
2
u/Fart_Tounge_5609 21h ago
It makes sense. I give them a pass for this - the game has so much content already. The alternative I have seen other devs do is to release a "sequel" that gets all the future development. This is better. They're very transparent about needing money to continue development, which rings true for a game they've supported for so long.
2
u/TacoRalf 21h ago
i mean if they keep updating it with a solid roadmap then who cares? The core systems might work already and the rest could be added fluff that just takes time.
If they end up not finished it then yes, please complain about it
2
u/Probably_Fishing 19h ago
Caves Of Qud is a fantastic game and top of its genre. idk about early access DLC, but, I give benefit of the doubt to the dev from my experience playing the game. It has a lot of content.
3
u/deadering 1d ago
I've never seen it either but it's an easy concept to wrap your head around. Seems arbitrary to care about DLC in early access vs the full game, and knowing the CoQ devs they're going to use it as a strength.
DLC released while the game itself is still early access is a different story though and I don't support that.
2
u/Tpmyt 21h ago
I don't see the issue. Qud has so many interconnecting things, that they need people to test how it works, it's practically impossible to test for everything in house-if they didn't do this, they'd be releasing it broken and not knowing how to fix it because it could be one of countless things wrong, or they just wouldn't be able to release it in a playable state.
3
3
u/Lord_Ryu 1d ago
Pretty sure it's a first of it's kind
6
u/Cetais 40 1d ago
Happened with Crypt of the Necrodancer before.
2
1
u/PrestigiousWhirlwind 1d ago
I didn't hear about that. I also didn't play that game. Which DLC are you referring to, by chance?
8
u/Cetais 40 1d ago
https://store.steampowered.com/app/554000/Crypt_of_the_NecroDancer_AMPLIFIED/
https://store.steampowered.com/app/2094810/Crypt_of_the_NecroDancer_SYNCHRONY/
For amplified you can see Early Access reviews from 2017. Cave of Qud's EA dlc isn't first of its kind, AND it's also almost 10 years after this one.
1
u/PrestigiousWhirlwind 17h ago
I'm surprised people didn't talk about that more. Seems like it worked out for that game though, so hopefully it works out for CoQ. I imagine one annoyance people would have is some devs being scummy with the idea. Like how there's been abandoned EA games, there can be abandoned EA DLCs. That seems like a frustrating situation to come across.
1
u/Cetais 40 15h ago
What made it work with NecroDancer and might make it work with Caves of Qud is the fact that the game is a full game, played by thousands of players still. They didn't need to find a player base.
They seem to be doing it more for feedback than "early funding" which lots of those abandoned EA games did.
10
1
u/CrasherRuler 1d ago
Interestingly enough, Hinterland just announced an EA DLC for The Long Dark, which I was also a little surprised at. It makes sense though, all things considered.
1
u/Purple-Froyo5452 1d ago
Stationeers has done it a few times but they are called supporters packs. They are cosmetic and species packs. They also made it clear that the game doesn't make them money and that it's being made for the love of the game. Tbh it's to the degree that I shill their game every chance I get. I just think the passion is cool.
1
u/5h4d0w_Hunt3r 20h ago
Technically Deltarune, BATM, Satisfactory all did the early access during the game development process
Though deltarune and BATM did so on chapter per chapter release while satisfactory slowly worked the game in early access stages all during the time they were working out the stages, unlocks, etc.
So it wouldn't be a first, or a last for devs to do this, not to mention it allows them to listen to their playerbase during the early development process to know if new features should be kept/worked on/removed for valid reasons before they get coded far enough that it needs either a painful rewrite or simply leaving phantom code that was gutted to disable the specific functionality
1
1
u/Zerat_kj 14h ago
Have you heard thee tale of Ark Survival Evolved ?
The game was in EAA, and released DLC maps also in early access - as parts of the map could be edited later. Ascended is 3ven worse
1
1
u/gmb360 7h ago
Seems to be very new. The long dark (a survival game that has reached its 1.0 state and left early access) is now getting also a DLC that is in early access.
Though from my understanding previous dlc was labeled as an „expansion pass“ though it effective acted as an early access DLC
I will say it’s crazy to see this development but to be fair if it helps small indie developers then it might be good. Though again in general the gaming industry will respond how we as the consumers act.
1
u/Chimaerogriff 2h ago
I agree with the EA, though I didn't understand at first.
So just the DLC is EA, the core game is already released. That means the EA is really the public beta, and that is exactly what it should be. That seems like the right usage.
1
u/kerath1 41m ago
ARK did this a couple of times while it was under EA for however many years.
Steam should not allow a DLC to be allowed in EA unless it is for testing purposes and not paid. The moment a game company charges for a DLC it should be taken out of EA by Valve. If you have a paid DLC in an "EA" game you are clearly not in EA.
1
u/chrizbreck 1d ago
Is it really early access or like live service
-1
1d ago
[deleted]
0
u/chrizbreck 1d ago
No shit I’m arguing that the way this dev works is more like live access.
Continued development of an idea. They have. 1.0 release this is a build on that.
1
u/Taolan13 1d ago
Some game devs put out dlc in EA that are optional support packs.
Other game devs put out full on expansions and are abusing the 'early access' status
1
1
-2
u/RelentlessIVS 19h ago
It is disgusting that Early Access games can register DLCs when the game isn't even done yet. It is abusive as fuck.
2
1
1
u/billious_thy_third 5h ago
i worry you've misread the thing. this isn't an early access game with a dlc, this is a full game with an early access dlc
1
u/Key-Range8230 17h ago
What game are you talking about? Qud hit 1.0 almost 2 years ago...so it can't be the game mentioned in the OP
-3
0
u/The_Great_Sephiroth 1d ago
Welcome to Ark: Survival Evolved, circa 2016 or 2017. Look up Scorched Earth!
0
u/enerthoughts 12h ago
I simply ignore early access games, especially the really bad ones, no need for drama or talk to dev, wait for the game to exist early access hell then play it
-1
1d ago
[deleted]
2
1
u/Cruxin 1d ago
The game is fully released now, the DLC itself will also be early access
1
u/PrestigiousWhirlwind 17h ago
I can see why they were confused. I tried to specifically make this clear in the OP, but I won't blame anyone that still gets the wrong idea. A DLC itself being Early Access isn't common lol
-1
-1
u/Naive_Personality367 19h ago
might be a hot take but early access is fucking gross. Such an abused term.
1
u/Hexicube 17h ago
It's great in principle, you just need to heed the warning that games should be treated as-is and you shouldn't buy games if you don't like the state they're in right now.
If you buy a game in EA and don't like the state it's in, just refund it. The abuse is happening because people don't refund because of it being EA. This happened with KSP2 and it's insane to me that people didn't refund it immediately with how horrendously buggy it was.
-11
u/axelfirekirby 1d ago
CDDA:BN is better. imo. and free
2
u/Loudstorm 1d ago
What's exactly BN?
1
u/axelfirekirby 1d ago
bright nights is the more casual version of CDDA, sticking closer to sci fi and not being bogged down with "Realism"
2
985
u/zollipun steme 1d ago
Early Access is so misused nowadays that people forget it's actual purpose, to release something before it's done, specifically to let players help it fully come to fruition both through monetary support (for things like indies who may need the money to keep going) and through feedback on the game itself to help them playtest and patch and optimize the game, but now everything just releases in early access because people are impatient and will pay however much extra to play a game early.