Early Access and cancelled games

[Suicide machine 53]

OK, since I'm hesitant to tinker with stuff on my own, I'd like to bring this subject to attention.

We all know, how big of a sea of unfinished trash Early Access is and while it isn't all bad, because from time to time, we get a solid game coming from it, it's pretty obvious that Early Access combined with Greenlight, gave us planty of titles, which most likely we'll never see being finished. But it's not only that. Sometimes fully professional games have like a limited demo or public beta and after that they get cancelled - it happens. And because of that, I'd like to get some rules on how to deal with these examples.

 

First of all, I was thinking about adding new property (is it property?) to Infobox game/row/date. It would be simply Cancelled and it could be used for these few singleplayer games that got cancelled, but can still be played (for games that were either made available publicly or for games where participants of beta/alpha phase or people who were unfortune to pre-order etc. can still play it). Obviously there wouldn't be many games that'd use it, but I bet we could find like 2 or 3 on PCGW already (although, I guess we should make a rule to keep it only if it has some actual information on it).

 

Secondly, I think we should add new State property, which would be {{State|state=unknown}} and that could be used for games which haven't been updated in last 6 months and are still advertised as Early Access (see, recent example of 1... 2... 3... KICK IT! (Drop That Beat Like an Ugly Baby).

 

Finally, would be nice to agree what do we do with games that got cancelled, but were available publicly (either for pre-orders / Early Access participants or for beta testers [public]) and can no longer be played (Dead Island Episodic, Ridge Racer Driftopia etc.). Do we keep the information (if the page is filled) or do you just get rid of it?

[Marioysikax 89]

That would be useful information. With some cases information why there aren't updates or if the game is cancelled isn't visible on store page, but game itself can be playable and do have players to some degree. 

 

Finally, would be nice to agree what do we do with games that got cancelled, but were available publicly (either for pre-orders / Early Access participants or for beta testers [public]) and can no longer be played (Dead Island Episodic, Ridge Racer Driftopia etc.). Do we keep the information (if the page is filled) or do you just get rid of it?

Well, my opinion on this was to keep them, was it for historical value, for informing users that the game is no longer (if user tries to boot the game way after games closure, missed the news and can't get in), in case someone crafts up custom server software or if miracle happens and game gets up again. 

...and then the Epidemic article got removed. 

[Suicide machine 53]

...and then the Epidemic article got removed. 

It's still on the servers, so it can be reverted :P

[Mirh 103]

I'm wondering if there couldn't be a shared "naming" between canceled and "terminated", which in the end seems the same concept to me.

I mean.. those online games that are now no more. Like battlefield heroes for example.

[Guest]

Firstly, no, you're not seeing things - Expack3 is, in fact, back. Not sure it'll be permanent, but while I'm here I figured I might as well contribute some constructive opinions....

 

I'm wondering if there couldn't be a shared "naming" between canceled and "terminated", which in the end seems the same concept to me.

I mean.. those online games that are now no more. Like battlefield heroes for example.

I could see a shared naming convention being used for these games. The fact they have release dates and not "Early Access" dates would be sufficient differentiation.

[ThatOneReaper 51]

Having a specialized date for cancelled games is a great idea. But I'm not sure what would be the best way to highlight this detail. Would just having "Cancelled" along with the date of the last functioning version be enough? Or should we also have a "Cancelled" state tag added in?

 

Example format:

Date: Cancelled (<DATE OF LAST FUNCTIONING RELEASE>, <VERSION NUMBER>)
State tag: "This article documents a game that has been officially cancelled as of <DATE OF CANCELLATION> - information here is in context to the last functioning release of the game."

I'm also liking having an "Unknown" state tag. However, an issue I see with it is with older articles. If there is a new development in the game's production and no one modifies the article to match this, it would look very inaccurate on our end. The only way I see it working is to add into the tag the date it was added in.

 

Example format:

"Although this game is under development, no new updates or releases have been made in over six months (as of <DATE OF ADDING TAG>) - information may change frequently and could be outdated or irrelevant."

As for cancelled or discontinued games that are impossible to play, the Editing guide talks about this detail.

[Mirh 103]

Having a specialized date for cancelled games is a great idea. But I'm not sure what would be the best way to highlight this detail. Would just having "Cancelled" along with the date of the last functioning version be enough? Or should we also have a "Cancelled" state tag added in?

I start to wonder if {{ii}} in key points can't just be enough.

Or perhaps having availability table showing the note when there's not even "retail" entry.

 

As for cancelled or discontinued games that are impossible to play, the Editing guide talks about this detail.

I'm pretty against that point.

You mark a page for deletion because it's "old" as in surpassed.

Not "old" as in.. just ancient.

 

Even with no way to play the game, it doesn't hurt to have a reference for what it has been. You never know.

On the other hand, with a game which has never even been released.. I can't see what that has to do with us, given the concept of "fixing" couldn't even apply.

[Guest]

Wouldn't it be better to just add a note under the availability table and be done with this. I really feel as if all these solutions are overly complicated.

 

I start to wonder if {{ii}} in key points can't just be enough.

Or perhaps having availability table showing the note when there's not even "retail" entry.

Ninja

[Marioysikax 89]

Would it be more viable to simply alter EA and TBA to allow inputting of date? At that point if game has been on early access, alpha, beta, etc. it would still be possible to see when game was made available and user themselves to determine is the game dead or not. 

 

After that we can do whatever with either state, keypoint or availability noting, probably with latest version, release of that version and last time updates were checked. Though I guess state tag would make things bit easier to have in one category if someones looking for these games as list and also is bit better indication as it's big bar on top of the page. 

 

I'm also still bit againts of removing zero funcioning games. I do understand idea behind that as if the game can't be played, then there's nothing to fix with it, but they most likely do not take that much resources, may be useful for some (if nothing else then at least to inform that game is unplayable) and some games could even be resurrected by modders or official party.