I personally don't place much stock in the supposed iterative process developers get from EA and consider EA games to simply be unfinished games being dumped on me, the player. As such I will never ever play an EA game. Which then means I won't ever be providing feedback to the developer through their EA process. And I don't think very highly of the "player" feedback devs get from people playing their unfinished games. Ergo my opposition to EA. Btw, I also believe the model and process by which games are crowdfunded is also broken, and not a good way for a developer to create a game.
Fair enough. Personally, I still don't think RPGs are great fit for EA but more systemic titles can work really well - being enjoyable both for playerbase and giving valuable feedback to Devs.
Personal early access experiences that have been great from my personal experience were: Invisible Inc., Prison Architect, Hades. Those games, though had clear dialogue with their playerbase, resulting in tighter and tighter game with every patch. BG3 feels more like they are drip feeding us content every couple months with occasional responses here and there.
Oh yes, you are right. Sorry, my bad. I should've specified my views on EA are exclusively about RPGs and not other types of games. More than 90% of my gaming time is on playing RPGs and I very rarely play other types of video games. But I can see EA being useful for games in the base/city/empire building and managing genre.
More than 90% of my gaming time is on playing RPGs and I very rarely play other types of video games. But I can see EA being useful for games in the base/city/empire building and managing genre.
