Linking Agile development framework in a discussion about Early Access games is a really weird thing to do. It's not technically irrelevant, but I think it misses on context in a way that nobody who actually works in or adjacent to software engineering would.
[It] wouldn't appropriate for a person to state that EA cannot be used to pivot a product.
I agree, I just don't think the article was a very good way for you to illustrate your point.
Also, logically speaking, the sooner you get a product out to others for testing and feedback before launch the more changes you can make.
Just as an aside, this has nothing to do with logic. It's not a valid or sound - speaking of the logical definitions, here - argument even if I generate the necessary premises.
EX: An unwritten premise necessary to create an inescapable condition for the conclusion (that which renders an argument valid) would have to be "software cannot be changed after launch," otherwise the simple counter-point that a game can be patched after launch would expose the invalidity of the argument. However, this premise would be obviously untrue, which would make the argument unsound.
