Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General The Cost of Early Access

I am of the understanding, perhaps mistakenly (which would definitely change things if so) that we will not need to purchase 1.0 if we already paid for EA. If I am correct, then it is in Larian's best interest to list EA for the full price of $59.99, since as you said, a lot of people who would buy 1.0 will buy and play EA too, and would in effect end up getting the game for a cheaper price, thereby undercutting (perhaps severely) Larian's expected profits. For example, if they are hoping to have 1 million sales in the first year, that is 60 million in expected revenue. If 300k of those 1 million people bought the game via EA for $30, Larian would need to charge almost $73 for the remaining 700k people who buy 1.0 to make up the difference. If we will need to purchase 1.0 for another $59.99, then that is another matter entirely. We should get some official clarification on this.

I have no problem with paying full price for early access because Larian has earned my trust with their previous early access games with DOS and DOS2. They have a larger team for this game, got hit with the Wuhan Flu and had to work at reduced capacity. They have a proven track record and they have been very open and honest about where the game is.

Heck, I was practically convinced to pay full price back in February because they did a live playthrough of the game as it was then, bugs and all. We know exactly what we're getting and Larian isn't pulling a AAA big-name publisher stunt to try and elevate sales.

That kind of integrity deserves to be rewarded.

You are.

That's good to know. Thanks for clarifying.

Well, If comments like these are not childish, then we have different opinions on what childish comments are.
"Nebbit sounds like Panda with a different account."
"Also noting Nebbit ^ is setting out to be a one-trick pony of a forum troll"
"Shut up. Just don't buy it during EA. Buy it when if fully releases. And shut the hell up."

Yes I compared it to a tv, but it does not matter what I would compare it to, the point would still be the same, replace "tv" with anything else. I guess you just didn't get my point, and I might have written it poorly, English is not my main language.

I'm just saying that early access is early access, it is not a preorder. A preorder is a preorder. Yes, the price you pay will give you the full release at the end, but you are still not paying for the full release, you are paying for early access. Greedy might be a bad choice of words, I just don't know a better word for it.
Yes, this game will most likely be worth more than others, not saying it wouldn't. What I'm saying is that early access, is just that, early access. And should then have a early access price. If the game at full release is worth $60, then early access should be less. like $45 - $50.
I might be the only one to think this way though

Yes, I know I don't have to buy the game if I don't want to pay the $60. I will pay the $60, and I will probably love the game, but I feel like I'm still allowed to think the price is too high and that I'm allowed to put my thoughts into the discussion.

Some miscommunication here, I think.

What I meant was, if EA gives you 1/3 of the game's content to try and comment on, then one option might be to pay 1/3 of the price just for that content. When the full game comes out, you pay the remaining 2/3 of the price to "upgrade" EA to the 1.0 release. The cost for the full game is the same ( no-one gets the full game cheaper ); the only difference is that if the full game does not turn out to your liking after feedback from EA, you needn't purchase the "upgrade" to the full game.

As I said, I don't expect this to happen, and consequently their feedback may be limited to those people very enthusiastic for what they see already.

You know what's also childish?

Deleting every post in the Steam forums so the only chance anyone has to see what you said and the arguments you want to make are in the quote boxes of people responding to you on the Steam forums.

Here's the direct response from someone to "nebbit sounds like Panda with a different account."



That was a respectful response, because your determination about the price and not getting early access were very much like a user named pandariuskairos who made it very clear that they opposed early access and wanted it free because they didn't want to pay to be a beta tester.

"Also noting Nebbit ^ is setting out to be a one-trick pony of a forum troll."

You were making every single thread, even those not related to early access or pricing, all about pricing for early access and calling Larian greedy. I can't even quote your comments and name the threads they're in because all your posts mysteriously got deleted.

"Shut up. Just don't buy it during EA. Buy it when it fully releases. And shut the **** up."

You did make every thread about it and wouldn't stop talking about it, as previously stated.

Can't prove it or provide links, because all the posts were deleted.

Regardless, keep it nice and civil.

It's 60 bucks because it's D&D and they know very well they can get away with it. Larian would be stupid for selling it any cheaper. Even if it was 80 bucks people would still buy it and common sense be damned.

I don't think they have any incentive to do that. You would sell something for $20 if someone was willing to pay $60 for it, even if that 'something' was unfinished? It's not a trial offer; it basically a pre-order that you can playtest. As for the feedback, I don't see any reason to believe that the 'very enthusiastic' people (as a whole) won't be able to offer good constructive criticism. I also expect they are likely to put more time in testing the game than people who aren't so enthusiastic. On the flip side, a $20 EA could easily see an influx of nay-sayers. haters, trolls, etc. who will pass judgement on the game for ridiculous reasons (e.g bugs or lack of desired elements like RTwP).

Fine, I'll be happy to address each of those:

#1 is simply a statement of observation, nothing more, and one that was 100% on point/accurate. #2 was actually posted by me, and again, is simply a statement of observation that was 100% on point/accurate by all observable evidence (and, interesting that you conveniently omitted the rest of the statement of mine you're quoting that precisely showed why the half-quote you're pulling out was said). #3, If you wish to characterize that as supposedly childish, then fine, let's assume it was childish.

However, If you wish to make such claims then, you must also hold the mirror up to your own face and judge your own actions by the same standard you are holding others to. When we do that, the character and tone of your entire post was childish because, for starters, it was your first post in the forum (and thus no one had any prior interaction to go on to judge you otherwise), you attempted to use half-baked logic to try and present your flawed opinion as fact, you mischaracterized Larian's stance as 'greedy', which most of the more 'mature' of us completely understand and recognize Larian's intention having an EA period after preorders launch differently...and finally and most importantly, your posting history on Steam showed you to be a troll poster who's only other posts were in the forum of another game that none of the rest of us had ever heard of, and the post subject for those posts was the exact same trolling mantra there too: EA should be discounted or free.

So, you had no presence in nor engagement with the BG3 Steam community until you suddenly appeared with that post, and you characterized everyone who didn't agree with your flawed opinion as being delusional and wrong if they didn't agree with your flawed opinion. Additionally, you came around out of the woodwork at a time in which we'd already had several other troll posters (including one lingering guy in particular who interjected his skewed opinion of EA everytime it was mentioned in every thread ad nauseum who since got himself banned) trying to push the same agenda. But, bottom line, by your own standard you're judging others, you fall victim to the same classification yourself, and furthermore then a hypocrite in doing so.

So, let me make a suggestion on how to make a truly mature post in this context: Simply state: 'I can only speak for myself, but I was hoping that EA would be discounted, and I'm disappointed by that fact for (XYZ real world reasons that pertain to my financial circumstances or otherwise philosophical perspective, etc.)....but it is what it is. I'll continue to weigh what I see come out and determine if I'm willing to pay the price being asked for the game during EA phase, but otherwise, I'll wait and pay that same full price at launch.'



That is an opinion, but it is not factual. Let's analyze this with logic and reason, with the facts at hand, shall we?

1. If Larian opened up the ability to pay for the game on September 30th, and was not conducting any Early Access period, by very definition in actual fact - -that is exactly what a preorder is.

2. Even though EA *is* going to be conducted, you are paying for the fully released game ahead of time regardless. You don't pay one price for EA, and another price for full release. This has been confirmed multiple times, including by Raze, who is a Larian rep on this forum, just yesterday.

3. Taking facts #1 and #2 into account, that by process of extrapolation then means that, whether you (a) purchased the game on September 30th, but never fired up the game one single time to play before the eventual date of full release, or (b) you decided to play through any part of the EA period, which limits you to only content in the first segment of the game - you are preordering the full game either way.

So bringing it all back home and taking your post content here, if we're going to use the characterization of 'childish' in proper application, a child is usually the person who throws a tantrum because they didn't get exactly what they wanted, didn't get it when they wanted, or didn't get it how they wanted. Thus, your mischaracterization of Larian as being 'extremely greedy' for, heaven forbid, asking people to preorder a game for the same price they'll be asking for it at launch, in a scenario in which it is 100% optional whether you want to participate in the Early Access period - at the same time they've actively stated that, if you're expecting a fully polished game experience, please *do not* particpate - comes across to most of us as not a remotely mature reaction, and certainly not constructive feedback.

As to your last sentence: absolutely you are allowed to feel the price is too high on a personal level, and allowed to put your thoughts into the discussion. All of us have our own unique perspectives on things in the world, not just BG3. Just perhaps try to do so in a more mature manner that characterizes your opinion solely *as* your opinion/perspective and nothing else....and be willing to accept when people don't agree with you. I'd probably still have judged you as a forum troll based on your Steam posting history the same way regardless if I'm being honest about it, but I'd be much less critical of the Steam post being referenced if you had omitted the last few paragraphs and not tried to make commentary about others' perspectives going in.

Oh dang, Larian forums clap-back be like backstab crit. 😂😂😂

Valleys and trunks, I got the mack ten
We can hit the alley with iron and thumper
Take it to the hands like the brand new Leonard
N——z goin' no mas, when the bullets go in him
You dealing with a night stick toker
The ice pick poker, trust, you ain't like this joker
And the set, devoted to opening your neck
With the tech, as you sit in a Lex'
Your next move, is slipping, your last move is s——n
As your body gets soft, the shotty went off
Little soldiers, you're out of position

Ha! DM, i didn't see your response to him until after I'd posted my own, but I forgot to toss out that aspect as well - but you're exactly right there. I'm not sure if that actually *is* Panda on another account or not though - the writing style seems different for one thing, and if it were Panda again he/she would probably have been pushing 'Free' again instead of 'discounted'.

These are excellent points, and one other I'd interject is the added complexity (and potential cost) on Larian's part to have to break up and manage things that way. And if they did that, while Steam might or might not be able to support that approach somehow, I wouldn't even have a clue as it relates to Stadia.

I imagine already as it relates to Steam, if Larian does provide any semblance of a 'Collector's Edition' down the road, they already would have to determine a way to logistically do that too, such that Steam systemically validates each case, and only those that paid the base price game then has the ability to use an 'upgrade' purchase package button for a CE.

I want to preface this by saying I am intending to buy EA.

I think it's a bit dishonest to refer to buying Early Access as a 'pre-order'. A couple of problems come about with that line of thinking, and I'll do my best to sum them up.

1.) Early Access is a formative experience. It's not a demo, it is a release version of the game, unfinished or not. The reason this is important, though, is that if someone buys the game under the impression that the game will come out as it has currently be seen, they may end up disappointed with the purchase when the finished version of the game is patched in, or even just on one of the larger EA updates. This is a level of uncertainty that makes it a risky (even if only to a small degree) consumer decision.

2.) Early Access is both a funding source and a source of feedback and data collection from end-users. Many people understandably view it in the same light as paying to access a beta. Is it new? No, but for some it does come off as a greedy motion. A way to tease players with some early time with the game while Larian profits off of it, instead of spending time, money and other resources on getting playtesting done without EA. It's nice on the surface to feel like you have an impact on the game's development, but realistically it's hard to prove that your view for the game is any more (or less) represented in either scenario.

Again, I personally intend to invest in EA, and don't find the structure of the game's development cycle to be anything untoward. But I can understand those that do.

It certainly can be; and for that very reason, I think it is better to keep the price higher to keep out more of those who would unjustifiably pan the game.


You can't help stupid. If someone buys EA and doesn't know what that entails, then that's on them. That being said, however much the game might change between 9/30/2020 and release, I doubt it will be so substantially different so as to make someone do a 180 (or even a '90').


Larian will make no more or less of a profit this way. And I don't see how EA diminishes their use of time, money, etc. Seems like a win-win to me.


Not sure what you mean here. Are you saying that there is no good reason to think that our feedback in EA is going to have any real impact on the end result?

I understand you are on board and are just trying to illustrate a different viewpoint, and that's cool. Ultimately, all opinions on this are valid in the sense that we all have a voice/wallet to exercise. There's really no more to it than that.

DOS2 changed pretty radically in some ways. It had the benefit of a pretty unified community, though - BG3 is working with the 5e system, and marketing to D&D and BG fans directly as well, now.


You're right, profit's not quite the right word. Money up front, though, is.


Somewhat tied into the first quote I responded to. Nothing about the EA going out to players for playtesting as a purchased 'open' EA makes it any more likely to end up meeting one individual's expectations. Not inherently, you could make an argument that discussion/dialogue on things could change the community's mind on a subject.

I hope I cleared that last thing up, I'm not totally satisfied with how I worded it. I'm notoriously bad at conversing

So much text, and I see that you are using some words I don't even know as my english is limited (sorry about that). But If I understand this right, you are still hung up in what was said on steam, and even adding some stuff that simply is not true. And If you are so interested in a discussion on steam, why don't you bring that part of the discussion there?
But as you said, I have close to 0 posts on steam, and yet you assume that I would know what a Panda is, and why it would not be childish to call people that. And that I'm setting out to be a one-trick pony of a forum troll, what is so mature about that comment? We might have different opinions of what childish comments are I guess.


Yes, I know the early access gives you the game at the end, I even wrote that in the post you quoted.


I'm not good at editing in quotes or however you do that, but
But they are conducting early access, it is what you are paying for.
I never said that you would not get the full game, I even said that you would get the full game.
Since my english is limited, I even googled what a preorder and early access is, just to word it properly, here we go: "A pre-order is an order placed for an item that has not yet been released. The idea for pre-orders came because people found it hard to get popular items in stores because of their popularity. Companies then had the idea to allow customers to reserve their own personal copy before its release, which has been a huge success. Pre-orders allow consumers to guarantee immediate shipment on release, manufacturers can gauge how much demand there will be and thus the size of initial production runs, and sellers can be assured of minimum sales."

Early access: "Early access, also known as early funding, alpha-access, alpha founding, or paid-alpha, is a funding model in the video game industry by which consumers can purchase and play a game in the various pre-release development cycles, such as pre-alpha, alpha, and/or beta, while the developer is able to use those funds to continue further development on the game."

And just as you said to me, I say to you: "you attempted to use half-baked logic to try and present your flawed opinion as fact".

I don't know where you got your "facts" though, but early access is early access, and preorder is preorder. Now we got that out of the way

Yes, what I write in my posts are my opinions, it is not my intention to make it your opinion. If it looked like I did, I apologize. I strongly believe that the pricing is off when it is a price for Early Access (not a preorder or any other kind). And yes, this is my opinion.

I deleted my posts on steam because of the comments, and as I have stated a couple of times before, my english is not my main language, meaning my wording probably came out wrong, I was not trying to irritate people or look like a panda or troll or whatever. I was trying to discuss the early access pricing. When I went to discuss it here instead, I tried another approach, to see if that would become a discussion about the price for the early access. It is you who keep talking about steam posts and is angry or something about that and how I worded it. As I said before, if you are so bent on steam comments, go to steam and comment there.

I don't see the point trying all you can to dig up some dirt on me or whatever, and then attacking me here in this discussion. I really do not know why you are doing this, please stop.

There have been warnings, and will continue to be, that anyone wanting a polished experience should wait for the full release. The purpose of Early Access is to get feedback and test systems, and even excluding planed content that will not be ready for Early Access, there will be changes and adjustments made throughout. That has been described and will be again in more detail closer to release, when asking people to agree to provide anonymous gameplay data.




Good idea. Even better would be not arguing about the content of previous arguments, especially when an attempt was made here to be more constructive.


Who, not what. It was an observation that you were posting similar sentiments and/or style as another poster.

Nibbet,

I stand by my prior post. I analyzed and explained why the content of the Steam post you made & referenced was reacted to as it was, since you brought the comments made to you over here. As stated in that reply, no one knew of you until that point, all we had to go by was the tone and character of your post in addition to what your Steam history said for you, which was also a rant about EA for another game. And I suggested perhaps a healthier, more mature and constructive way to share your opinion(s) going forward. To turn your own phrase: if that's what you consider an 'attack', then you and I have very different views on what constitutes an 'attack'. If somehow you misunderstood something of it based on the language differential you brought forth, then I'll be happy to apologize in that instance.

As it relates to EA, different developers/game publishers have different approaches, goals, contexts and history involved in each case. In the specific case of Larian and BG3, EA vs pre-order is not an either/or proposition but rather one of conjunction of both. A random Google to a Wikipedia article or the like doesn't apply the same in every situation. Regardless if you choose to participate in EA or not, if you purchase BG3 before the official launch date, you are by very definition pre-ordering in this case. As Raze reminded as well, Larian has repeatedly warned the wrong minded sort of consumer away and advised they don't pre-order and play in EA, and instead pay for the game after release.

Essentially, it sounds as though waiting would be the best decision and approach for you, but whatever you decide, my hope is that you come to enjoy the game as much as the rest of us, and I wish you well sir.