Skip to main content
  1. Home
  2. Gaming

Charging players to access a game early is a dirty tactic

By

Gamers and the gaming industry are in a perpetual battle. The industry wants to make as much money off of players as it can, and players want as much high-quality content for as little money as possible. Every now and then, a publisher will test out some new way to make money, perhaps with DLC, paid cosmetics, or dreaded loot boxes. Generally, those moves are met with outrage — but not always.

One monetization attempt that we have been quick to slap down is anything that is seen as “pay-to-win.” Players can deal with paid cosmetics and DLC content, but the second there’s a whiff in the air that a game is selling some sort of advantage — it’s blood in the water. That’s why I find it so strange that a trend is coming back and, for whatever reason, it isn’t being lambasted as it was in the past. That would be requiring players to pay for early access to games.

Recommended Videos

Lame marketing ploy

Adam Jensen with his armblade out.
Image used with permission by copyright holder

Paying to get a game early is not a new trick for the gaming industry. I clearly remember the lead-up to Deus Ex: Human Revolution and the entire debacle surrounding its pre-order structure. This scheme, called “Augment your pre-order,” had multiple tiers of rewards that unlocked as more people pre-ordered the game, with the final level being the game releasing four days early.

Related

After a major outcry from, well, everyone, the stunt was shut down after just about a month. Aside from the “I never asked for this” memes, the biggest complaint was the early access being restricted to only those who pre-ordered — and only if enough people pre-ordered at that. Whether other companies took note of this massive marketing failure, or I’m giving the community too much credit, we haven’t had to deal with this marketing ploy for the last few years.

Same story, different ending

Forza Horizon 5 cars racing on dirt road.
Image used with permission by copyright holder

Two massive games just hit with an arguably worse form of this early access tactic: Forza Horizon 5 and Battlefield 2042. Let’s start with Forza. This is a Microsoft first-party game, meaning it would be free on Game Pass the day it comes out. However, there were also two ways to get the game four days early (sound familiar?). The first is to pre-order the Premium Edition, which costs $100, and the second is to pre-order the $50 Premium Add-Ons Bundle DLC. Hardly anyone batted an eye at these offerings. Perhaps it was because the game was also “free” with Game Pass, or because the game itself turned out great, but the public reaction was much more positive than what we saw with Deus Ex.

Now that the game is actually out, Microsoft is celebrating how many players the game has attracted. According to in-game metrics, around 800,000 people played the game in its early access period, meaning they spent either $50 or $100 for the privilege. That rubs me the wrong way. Forza Horizon 5 has a big multiplayer component, so isn’t it unfair to anyone not willing to shell out that extra cash to have to compete on “day one” against someone who already spent 20 hours learning the game?

Battlefield 2042 offers a much more obvious example. The game officially launched on November 19, but those with an EA Play Membership or Game Pass got a 10-hour trial as early as the 12th. Anyone with EA Play Pro or those who pre-ordered either the Gold or Ultimate Edition flat-out got the game on the 12thg. That’s a full week early for a multiplayer shooter! That means that some players got an entire week to not only learn the game, but level up and unlock new weapons and tools.

If that wasn’t shady enough, there’s also the fact that Battlefield 2042‘s other beta period didn’t exactly instill much confidence in anyone who tried it out. The game was criticized for how many bugs and technical issues it still had to work out. The incentive to pre-order an expensive special edition to play the game early feels like an attempt to lock down people’s money before they find out whether or not the game is good. You can bet plenty of people who gave EA their money to get the game early would have thought twice and waited for the game to get fixed if they had been able to see reviews and impressions.

A character in Starfield.
Image used with permission by copyright holder

This strategy of paid early access is most egregious for multiplayer games, but single-player games aren’t safe either. In fact, we have already seen it happen with the likes of Persona 5 Strikers. While it’s technically a spinoff, it’s a sequel to Persona 5, which is a very story-focused game. If you were worried about spoilers leaking, you were kind of forced to pay for early access, which doesn’t benefit anyone but the publisher. You can pay and risk spending a lot of money for a game sight unseen that may not be so great, or wait and either be at a competitive disadvantage, risk the game getting spoiled, or both.

Is this something we’re just OK with? Because now’s the time to speak out if that’s not the case. If this becomes normal now, there’s no going back.

Editors' Recommendations

Topics
Jesse Lennox
Jesse Lennox
Jesse Lennox loves writing, games, and complaining about not having time to write and play games. He knows the names of more…
Inside the long, emotional journey of an early access hit
A giant tree hangs in fog in Rogue Legacy 2.

Less than halfway into 2022, it’s already clear that this year is going down in gaming’s history books -- Elden Ring’s jaw-dropping success alone set that in stone. Though giant blockbusters have been the focal point of conversation this year, most of this year’s most impressive projects are much smaller in scale. It has quietly been a tremendous year for indie games exiting early access.

A concept that has become more popular over the past decade, the early access approach allows developers to release games well before they’re in a finished 1.0 state. That gives fans a chance to playtest games early and provide feedback to creators, having a direct impact on development. The strategy famously paid off for Hades in 2020, creating the decade’s first instant classic. Two years later, the approach continues to pay off for developers who are willing to let communities into their creative process.

Read more
Xbox Game Pass is killing pre-orders — and that’s a good thing
Games on Xbox Game Pass.

A recent survey on Windows Central polled readers on their pre-order plans for Halo Infinite. Out of nearly 300 responses, two-thirds said they didn't plan to pre-order the game. However, nearly half the respondents said that they planned to play the game on Xbox Game Pass, and multiple respondents who pre-ordered the game said they planned to play it on Game Pass, too.

Game Pass is helping lead the charge to kill pre-orders. Although that may not be a good thing for retailers and publishers, it's great for gamers -- especially as more titles ship in broken states after suffering delays. Although pre-orders will inevitably stick around for a while, they're becoming obsolete, and Game Pass is a driving force behind that.
Pre-orders are bad for the people who matter

Read more
Steam Deck brings gaming’s ongoing accessibility issues into focus
Steam Deck being held in two hands.

The newly announced Steam Deck is the next step in the portable revolution. Starting this December, players will be able to take their entire Steam library on the go thanks to the powerful, Switch-like device. With companies like Microsoft funneling more resources into cloud gaming, we’re inching toward a future where any game can be played anywhere.

That’s undeniably an exciting prospect. The Nintendo Switch is something of a revelation, offering players a level of gaming flexibility that we’d never seen prior to 2017, and the Steam Deck could take it even further. But the shift to full hybrid gaming isn’t quite as simple as cramming every big-budget video game onto a small screen.

Read more