sorry if i sound like a zoomer but at this point i just gotta point this out:
Inhouse development definition widely vary from consumer definitions and the consumer known alpha/beta/release/gold status isinsanely ambigous ,and just doesnt fit this definition.plus lets extrapolate
if alpha means proof of concept, then this is an alpha by the virtue ofbeing nothing more.
Years late, but just checking this game out now.
But alpha/beta status were and are clearly defined. They're just misused CONSTANTLY.
Working backwards:
A released game is 100% complete. It's done. If you play through the game, you don't ever reach some point where it's obvious that there's something missing. When expansions/etc get added, any additions are layer over the existing game, or new areas/zones/etc.
A beta game is feature complete, but still existing in the content development phase. That is, during beta, no new mechanics, gameplay loops, or major aspects of the game are going to be added.
An alpha game is feature incomplete. It doesn't matter whether it's in in-house testing, closed testing, open testing, or early access for sale. If there are features left to add/change, it's not complete.
A pre-alpha game is one that is not yet in the testing phases. So, as soon as a game is put on EA, it cannot be pre-alpha anymore, because you are allowing the public to test your game - and, presumably, you've done actual gameplay testing yourself to make sure the players aren't going to be paying you $$$ and crashing constantly due to bugs.
So you have a game, and you put in a temporary stat system until you get around to re-doing it, just so you can let people play the game. That game is in alpha. Once you re-do the stat system, it's in beta. You can rebalance the stats, but being in beta is a promise that you're not planning to add new stats, or re-do the entire system again.
-----
Anyways, semantics over, so far, I'm pleasantly impressed by the game - though EA ("Forever alpha") for over 3 years now doesn't make me too keen on actually buying it.
Very much looks like this is just going to be another slow-development game that gets strung along forever, with the devs doing the minimum amount of work to keep it looking "in progress". 2 months of work, with an update list that is basically "added 5 minutes of new content, 3 menu buttons, and fix a grass model" isn't the kind of EA I want to support with a purchase.
If you're going to make a game, and put a price tag on that game BEFORE the game is finished, to me, that means you should be working on the game full-time (at LEAST 30 hours/week), and cranking those updates out much faster - as well as hiring people to assist with getting the game out faster if it has the financial support to do so.
If you can't complete your game in 2-3 years of work, then you either need to hire more people, or delay asking/begging for money.
