You’ve been there. It’s 11:00 PM on a Tuesday, and you just dropped $30 on a game that literally doesn't have an ending yet. The textures are popping in and out like a glitchy fever dream, the frame rate is chugging, and honestly, the UI looks like it was designed in Microsoft Paint circa 1998. But you’re hooked. You’re playing games with early access because there’s a specific kind of magic in seeing a digital world being built while you’re standing inside it.
It’s a weird gamble.
Back in the day, you bought a box, put the disc in, and that was that. If the game was broken, it stayed broken until a sequel came out. Now, we’re living in a timeline where the "alpha" tag is a badge of honor. But let's be real—the relationship between players and developers in the early access space has become incredibly complicated. It’s not just about getting a discount anymore. It’s about being part of a community, or sometimes, it’s about being a glorified QA tester who paid for the privilege of filing bug reports.
The messy reality of games with early access
When Steam launched the Early Access program in 2013, it changed everything. It wasn't the first time people played unfinished builds—Minecraft had already proven that you could fund a massive project by selling it while it was still just a pile of blocks—but Steam formalized it. Suddenly, indie devs didn't need a massive publisher like EA or Activision to breathe down their necks. They just needed a cool concept and a "Buy Now" button.
But here is the thing people get wrong: early access isn't a genre. It’s a funding model.
Take a look at Palworld. It exploded. It was the poster child for how this works when it hits the zeitgeist just right. Millions of players jumped in, fully aware that the AI was a bit wonky and the servers might melt at any second. They didn't care. The core loop was fun. On the flip side, you have the cautionary tales. Remember The Day Before? That was a disaster of such epic proportions it practically became a meme. It promised the world, took people's money, and then evaporated into thin air almost immediately after "launching." That's the risk. You’re buying a promise.
Sometimes that promise is kept by a team like Larian Studios. They used early access for Baldur’s Gate 3 in a way that should be taught in colleges. They kept players in the loop for years. They listened. They tweaked the mechanics based on how people actually played the first act. By the time the full version dropped, it was a masterpiece because it had been forged in the fire of player feedback. It wasn't just a marketing gimmick; it was a collaborative project between the devs and the fans.
✨ Don't miss: Mass Effect Andromeda Gameplay: Why It’s Actually the Best Combat in the Series
Why our brains love the "work in progress"
There is a psychological hook here. Humans love being "first." There is a certain social capital in saying, "I was playing Hades II when it was still in technical test." We like feeling like our input matters. When a developer actually implements a feature because of a Reddit thread you participated in, it creates a level of loyalty that a finished AAA game can rarely match. You aren't just a consumer; you're a stakeholder.
However, this has led to "Early Access Fatigue." You see a game on your wishlist and think, I’ll wait until it’s actually finished. Because sometimes, games stay in early access for a decade. 7 Days to Die spent so long in alpha that the kids who started playing it in middle school are now graduated from college with actual jobs. Is it even "early" at that point? Or is it just a live-service game with a safety net title so you can't complain about the bugs?
How to actually tell if an early access game is worth it
Don't just look at the trailer. Trailers are lies. Especially in the world of games with early access, where a cinematic can look like Cyberpunk 2077 but the actual gameplay feels like a slide show. You have to look at the "Recent Reviews" section on Steam. That is your crystal ball. If the recent reviews are "Mixed" while the overall reviews are "Positive," it means the developers have stopped updating or made a change that the community hates.
Check the update frequency. A game that hasn't seen a patch in six months is a red flag. A big one.
- Look for a public roadmap. If the devs can't tell you what they plan to do in the next three months, they probably don't know themselves.
- Join the Discord. Are the moderators active? Is the community toxic or helpful? A dead Discord usually means a dead game.
- Check the "Trello" board if they have one. Many indie devs use these to show exactly what bugs they are squashing in real-time.
Nuance matters here. A game like Project Zomboid has been in development forever, but it’s one of the most deep, complex survival sims ever made. It’s "unfinished" in the same way a garden is unfinished—it’s always growing. Contrast that with a "cash grab" asset flip that appears on the store, stays for three weeks, and then the developer disappears. You have to be a bit of a detective.
The survival genre's weird obsession with being unfinished
If you look at the top-selling games with early access, 80% of them seem to involve punching trees and building bases. Valheim, Rust, Ark: Survival Evolved, Sons of the Forest. Why? Because survival games are modular. You can add a new crafting recipe or a new monster without breaking the entire narrative. It’s the perfect playground for incremental updates.
🔗 Read more: Marvel Rivals Emma Frost X Revolution Skin: What Most People Get Wrong
Subnautica is a great example of this. It started as a relatively small underwater exploration game. But because the devs kept adding biomes and deepening the story based on what terrified players the most, it turned into one of the best horror-adjacent games of the decade. They didn't have the whole story written on day one. They found the story along with the players. That’s the dream scenario.
The dark side of the "Alpha" tag
We have to talk about the ethics. Is it okay for a multi-million dollar studio to use early access? When a tiny team of three people in a basement does it, we get it. They need the cash to keep the lights on and buy coffee. But when a massive entity does it, it starts to feel like they are just offloading the cost of testing onto the customer.
It’s a way to dodge criticism. "Oh, you found a game-breaking bug? Well, it’s Early Access, what did you expect?" It becomes a shield. This creates a weird standard where we’ve lowered our expectations for what a "product" should be. We’ve been conditioned to accept mediocrity on the promise of future greatness. And sometimes, that greatness never comes. The "Version 1.0" update happens, and it’s just a tiny patch that adds a credits screen, and the devs move on to their next project, leaving a trail of broken promises and "Mostly Negative" reviews behind them.
The industry calls this "abandonware." It’s the graveyard of Steam. Thousands of games that will never be finished, sitting in your library like ghosts of $20 you’ll never get back.
Actionable steps for the savvy player
If you're going to dive into the world of games with early access, you need a strategy so you don't get burned. It's not just about the money; it's about the time you invest in a world that might disappear.
First, never buy based on what the game might become. Buy it based on what it is right now. If the current version isn't worth the price tag, walk away. Don't tell yourself "it'll be great when they add the multiplayer," because they might never add the multiplayer.
💡 You might also like: Finding the Right Words That Start With Oc 5 Letters for Your Next Wordle Win
Second, use the two-hour refund window religiously. Set a timer. Play for 90 minutes. If the game crashes three times or the "coming soon" buttons outnumber the actual features, get your money back. Steam's refund policy is your best friend in the early access Wild West.
Third, follow the developers on social media. You can tell a lot about a project's health by how the devs talk to their fans. Are they transparent about delays? Do they admit when they've messed up? Genuine transparency is the most valuable currency in game development. Look at how the No Man's Sky team handled their post-launch (which was essentially an unintentional early access period). They went silent and worked. They delivered. That's rare.
Fourth, ignore the influencers. YouTubers and streamers get paid to make a game look fun. They can make a buggy mess look like a riot because they're playing with friends and hamming it up for the camera. Their experience is not your experience sitting alone in your room on a Sunday afternoon.
Finally, check the Steam DB (Database) for player counts. If a game is in early access and the player count is steadily dropping to double digits, the devs might lose the financial incentive to finish it. You want to see a "long tail"—a steady or growing player base that proves there is enough interest to keep the lights on at the studio.
Early access is a gamble, but when it works—when you find that Hades or that Slay the Spire before the rest of the world knows about it—it’s one of the most rewarding experiences in gaming. Just keep your eyes open and your wallet slightly more closed than the marketing teams want you to.