Some games can take YEARS to developped. May it be because of the complexity of said game or the size of the development team.

All this suggestion will achieve is have developpers rush 1.0 to meet a deadline increasing the likelyhood of delivering a subpar product.

An easier solution would just be to not purchase EA if you have a problem with it.

Electronic Arts already has a deadline.

This is just going to lead to more games slapping 1.0 labels on even though they’re not done.

引用自 Slav Mcgopnik：

This is just going to lead to more games slapping 1.0 labels on even though they’re not done.

Exactly.

引用自 𐂃𐂃：

Early Access is currently plagued with lazy devs that roll out half baked games in "Early Access" and keep them there for 5+ years, doing minor changes (some even 10+ years).
There should be a clause for devs that put their "games" in Early Access, saying that it will be removed from Early Access after X amount of time (my suggestion is 3 years), if they don't complete the game and make a full release on Steam.
It's time for lazy devs to stop grifting money off of goodwill of Steam users.

Early Access is just the developers opinion about their game. There is no point in time where their opinion becomes invalid.

Early Access isn't some kind of protection or benefit that developers are "abusing". Whatever story you're telling yourself that languishing or failed projects need to be penalized and removed from under the umbrella of Early Access just means your imagination has run amok and you do not understand what you're talking about.

You.

Do.

Not.

Understand.

What.

You're.

Talking.

About.

And since there is no requirements or approval to move a game out of Early Access all stupid time limits will do is reduce transparency about the state of the game as many games will just be released as is, 1.0, which is always the developers prerogative anyway.

Valve knows what they're doing, and they're not likely to adopt every bit of silliness know nothings can imagine. Which is why in a decade of clueless Early Access fussing they haven't.

What is an Early Access game?

It does not get any CLEARER than:

"Get instant access and start playing; get involved with this game as it DEVELOPS".

"This Early Access game is NOT COMPLETE and MAY OR MAY NOT CHANGE FURTHER. If YOU are not excited to play this game in its CURRENT STATE, then YOU should WAIT to see IF the game progresses further in DEVELOPMENT".

So the question remains is waiting a problem?

FREE POINTS - Thank you.

引用自 𐂃𐂃：

Early Access is currently plagued with lazy devs that roll out half baked games in "Early Access" and keep them there for 5+ years, doing minor changes (some even 10+ years).
There should be a clause for devs that put their "games" in Early Access, saying that it will be removed from Early Access after X amount of time (my suggestion is 3 years), if they don't complete the game and make a full release on Steam.
It's time for lazy devs to stop grifting money off of goodwill of Steam users.

This would do nothing but increase the number of half finished games released. Because remember a game staying in early access is the dev admitting the game is unfinished and demonstrating intent to bring it to completion.

RThe other side of that coin is AAA that release blatantly buggy unfinished games as full releases without anysuch warning.

引用自 Thermal Lance：

All this suggestion will achieve is have developpers rush 1.0 to meet a deadline increasing the likelyhood of delivering a subpar product.

Apparently OP wasn't around when Steam required games to be released in order to sell on the store. Because that's exactly what happened then. And what made steam ultimately create the Early Access feature.

This makes just as little sense as screenshots forcibly having their spoiler tags removed after four weeks.

引用自 𐂃𐂃：

Early Access is currently plagued with lazy devs that roll out half baked games in "Early Access" and keep them there for 5+ years, doing minor changes (some even 10+ years).
There should be a clause for devs that put their "games" in Early Access, saying that it will be removed from Early Access after X amount of time (my suggestion is 3 years), if they don't complete the game and make a full release on Steam.
It's time for lazy devs to stop grifting money off of goodwill of Steam users.

Early access games are generally made by a very small dev team or even just 1 person, setting release dates with a small dev team or solo dev would be an impossible decision as anything can happen during the development of a game.

Just hide Early Access games from your store and you’ll never have to deal with this issue.

Thanks to whoever for the points. XD

.

EA is undeniably marketed toward (and then oh-so-cleverly eschewed in the fine print) early investment in developing games which quite understandably creates a certain degree of confusion in the customers (and said confusion confuses the fine print worshippers who lack a certain level of experience with the customer base to understand) but one size fits all deadlines just shift the problem in the other direction making the system totally useless.

You just described AAA releases, only difference is that they call it 1.0 instead of early access and then they release a 100 GB patch.