Thunderbringerstormbrook.  

 I believe Game reviewers opinions should be voiced on early access as they are influential amongst the community in this area. It's relatively new and their opinions voice concern about them. Early access is relatively also very shady and in a grey zone right now. Minecraft was not a 'early' access it was a indy game released and as more people found it popular-it got more expensive. Mojang started the copy out free, and people gave feedback until the game grew to be a cult classic, to a fun classic, to a all time hit. Minecraft was never early access. Early access strictly talks about crowd funding and alpha funding in early game releases before they are considered 'finished' by the developers or the community. I added controversy arguments which should not be removed due to their signs of pointing out flaws in the article. They are indications of these are things that will be included, but cannot without opinion and no real history to back up. But they cannot not be included because they voice concerns people should be aware about before they purchase the games which many game reviewers, critics and even some developers.  Minecraft was more of a game which came to be and as time went on people bought it until it's at the price today. It's a misconception that people think it's a real early access game.