Elite: Dangerous "Premium Beta" Access Costs $150

Merlark

New member
Dec 18, 2003
113
0
0
I was pretty happy to hear that they went to beta, but the price is pretty much stopping me from jumping in. If your a hard core elite fan I think it might be alright if you happened to miss the kick starter thing and what have you. It's not that I think it's "too much" I've sunk WAAAAAY more then that into Star citizen. but even star citizen has much smaller pledge packages to get involved and contribute to the game at the same time.

That's really the rub is that now they have proven that they have a game and its a pretty cool looking one i'd love to chip in, test it out and make it even better. but 150 bucks? I agree with the article, its just too steep to really get involved if your just a video game enthusiast.

but hey I guess if they are pretty sure they will fill those 10k slots at 150 bucks a pop then they probably have the money they need to finish the game so no harm no foul. still it is a shame, love to hit the space lanes but 150 bucks is almost 3 triple A tittle games worth and that's allot of gaming to give up for an "early access" type of game.
 

RoonMian

New member
Mar 5, 2011
524
0
0
I don't get likening this to Star Citizen. Star Citizen costs 35$ to access the upcoming dogfight alpha. That is a bit more than half of what it's going to cost when it's finished.
 

Serioli

New member
Mar 26, 2010
491
0
0
Richard Coghlan said:
MetalMagpie said:
likalaruku said:
evilnancyreagan said:
in this democracy you vote with your dollar. unfortunately, it seems there are a lot of fools with too many dollars. (User was suspended for: Elite: Dangerous "Premium Beta" Access Costs $150. (3 days))
This guy basically quoted an Aesop. Why was that a suspendable offence? Anyone?
He was suspended for a different comment further down (follow the link). Looks like a low-content post.
Yes he did.

He posted a link to the charity UNICEF as a reply to someone complaining about giving $200 in Alpha to this.

How could he drag The Escapist forums into such horrible and disgusting areas as considering giving money to poor/sick or underprivileged people.

We dont want any of that here do we.
Maybe it's because it was a disingenuous argument to make at the best of times?

The first guy chose to spend disposable income on something he believes in. Does that guy believe in charity? Does he give the same, more or less than that to charity?

Maybe because it's a cheap criticism to lay at just about anyone on here, a gaming forum? Look at your gaming system and library. Your hobby is not saving children. How dare you spend money on things that make you happy.
 

Andrew_C

New member
Mar 1, 2011
460
0
0
Serioli said:
Maybe it's because it was a disingenuous argument to make at the best of times?

The first guy chose to spend disposable income on something he believes in. Does that guy believe in charity? Does he give the same, more or less than that to charity?

Maybe because it's a cheap criticism to lay at just about anyone on here, a gaming forum? Look at your gaming system and library. Your hobby is not saving children. How dare you spend money on things that make you happy.
It's certainly a cheap argument, but not necessarily disingenuous.

How many of us have spent more on a new game then we really should have? How many of us have games we've never played, never mind completed because they were on sale in a bundle with something we wanted at a "too good to resist price".

Maybe we should all step back and reconsider how much we spend on gaming. If you find yourself uncomfortable with that amount, consider putting part of that towards a charity that means something to you, or just save it.
 

Serioli

New member
Mar 26, 2010
491
0
0
Well, one word sums up my problem with this type of criticism, shown without the word in that suspended post.

should

How much should I spend on a game? £100 or more to kickstart, knowing it might not exist if I don't? Give the difference to charity by spending £30 at release? Give the difference to charity by waiting until it is 25,50 or 75% off?

I have hundreds of games I haven't completed, just one example would be Skyrim. 229 hours played if you believe Steam. Should I not have bought it?

I house-share so I pay less rent, shared kitchen and bathroom, bedroom also contains my entertainment things. Should other people do the same and save or donate their difference in rents?
 

MeChaNiZ3D

New member
Aug 30, 2011
3,104
0
0
There are a whole lot of games that charge more for early access/beta testing, and it's always puzzled me as well, but I suppose the upside is that you don't get people who are bored of it by the time it comes out and the people who do test are guaranteed to be fans. Wouldn't buy it myself, but apparently enough people would that it's worth doing. Doesn't matter to me how the beta testing is done, I'm not interested in anything before the final product.
 

Quellist

Migratory coconut
Oct 7, 2010
1,443
0
0
What do i think? i think David Braben can stuff his paid beta up his arse as far as im concerned!

Charging people to test for you is pure genius and if anyone really wants to take him up on this (and i'm sure many, many will) more fool them.

Tip of the hat to Braben for his Magnificent Bastardry!
 

Dizzy High

New member
Sep 1, 2014
1
0
0
Payed betas seems to be the way forward for developers nowadays, it means they can get funding to make a game they otherwise might not have the funds to make.

I have seen some very good games that use this set-up.

In the case of elite dangerous, its the successor of a very old game, a classic, probably most of those on this forum were not even born then, (some not even conceived).

Most the people i know that have bought the beta have done so because they want to relive those days, and see what it has become, it has a VERY LARGE fanbase.

I suppose their is another reason why people get the beta, and thats to get a headstart on all the other players, if you start playing the game early it means when the rest of the populous start to play it, you already are quite far ahead in terms of how to play, you will have advanced further having better in game equipment and items, as you have had the chance to work towards them. so when the game goes on general release you will be much further ahead, this is quite useful in a massive multiplayer game.

There is obviously a market for it, as many people have invested in the pre release versions of game, as long as there are people willing to part with their cash it will happen, if you don't like it then don't get the beta, no ones forcing you too, i don't see the issue here, why do people get so upset about it.

Personally i think its a great idea, i get to see on youtube/twitch the game before i play it, which is much more beneficial than watching a carefully crafted video by the devs showing off the "best" bits. It gives me a much better perspective on gameplay, and the look and feel.

I will be buying the beta for elite dangerous this month, the £150 was too much for my pocket for the alpha and even £100 for the pre beta. £50 is still cheaper than COD GHOSTS on release, and it will give me a slight head start before all you other scrubs get your dirty little hands on it :)
 

Elijin

Elite Muppet
Legacy
Feb 15, 2009
2,047
1,007
118
I feel like these topics are dishonest. Its a backer level, which among its perks includes Beta access. But that information seems to be consistently missing, every time one of these games gets an article on the topic.

And of course with the context lacking, everyone throws up their hands and says 'This is ridiculous, what is the industry coming to!'

Yet when they see a list of kickstarter or crowdfunded milestones, people just go 'Oh okay, if you want to back the game significantly, you get to test it early among other things. Fair enough, not for me.'


So yeah, dishonest topics are dishonest.
 

Glaice

New member
Mar 18, 2013
577
0
0
$150 for beta access? No thank you, I will take my money elsewhere for things like food, hardware and other games that don't pull this charade.