A persistent game world and an active in-game shop for an unfinished game? Apparently, more and more developers are reluctant to label their games as “released.”
A traditional release is difficult for an online game because this type of game usually evolves over years. Therefore, more and more development studios are opting for a so-called soft launch or setting the game world to a persistent status before the game officially starts.
What does “soft launch” mean for MMOs?
“Persistent status,” “no-wipe status,” or “soft launch” means here: the progress that players make in the game is preserved. There will be no more wipes.
This has happened, for example, with Skyforge or Revelation Online. The selective multiplayer RPG Shroud of the Avatar also achieved a persistent status since July last year, but the official launch is not expected until at least the end of 2017.
A typical example is the military MMO War Thunder. It started in November 2012 in an open beta. War Thunder celebrated its release only in December 2016. For 4 years, War Thunder remained in an “open beta,” even though it was playable, no more wipes occurred, and the cash shop was running.
Everything has advantages and disadvantages
The soft launch brings both advantages and disadvantages.The advantage is that fans are not kept waiting any longer before they can “properly” start playing without constantly fearing that a wipe will reset the game world and characters.
Especially in an MMORPG, it is important that the achievements gained through hard work are preserved and not reset due to frequent wipes. Another advantage is that players can already play actively, but the game is still considered unfinished, which should help protect against negative reviews.
Some are waiting for a release that never comes
A disadvantage is that some players only join after the official launch has occurred. Many do not want to enter an unfinished game but wait until at least the base product is “finished.” Therefore, player numbers during a soft launch are often lower than during the official release.
Moreover, a soft launch that occurs a long time before the actual start gives the impression that the developers are starting the game but do not dare to call it an official release because they are dissatisfied with their own product but need money now.
Since the soft launch usually also comes with the in-game shop going live. This means that, although the game has not yet officially started, the developers want players to spend money. In principle, it is an unfinished product that should not be rated yet, but for which players are already being asked to pay.
Unfair criticism?
This may sound somewhat unfair. Smaller development studios that set big goals often struggle with financial problems. Developing an MMORPG costs a lot of money, often more than small development studios can envision at the beginning. Therefore, it is important to secure additional revenue early on. And that’s why it is also understandable if these developers want to make their game accessible as early as possible and to launch an in-game shop. But is that okay? Is it acceptable to charge money for an unfinished product while trying to evade reviews?
Anyone who is asked to spend money would want to know if the product is worth the price, regardless of its condition. Of course, one must be aware during a soft launch that it is not yet the finished product. But the question is: Is it already fun in its unfinished state? Is it worth it for me to invest money?
Those who want money should also accept being rated and tested
These are questions that everyone must answer for themselves. But it would be fair only if a product is rated at the time when money is being asked for it (and this without developer complaints). If a developer studio does not want this out of fear that the unfinished state will lead to a bad rating, then it should simply wait to sell it or to launch a cash shop.
As one can also see from Steam’s Early Access program, it often seems to be exploited to sell completely unfinished products and then hide behind early access to avoid negative reviews in the press.
What do you think? Should unfinished games, for which money is already being asked through early access or a soft launch with an in-game shop, be evaluated harshly but fairly? Or do these products still enjoy a “puppy protection”?
A game that celebrated an early “release” and had to endure a lot of criticism and negative reviews was Marvel Heroes. They used a trick to get rid of this problem:
