Totally agree with that.
It wouldn't hurt, and nobody would feel "left behind" (don't know what would be the correct english expression).
I personally would have appreciated such warning, simply for not being "disappointed".

I just noticed that the version 0f 8 bit armies is 0.x , is it still in development? I do not see anything that indicates that.

Was mentioned in the other recent thread too, basically an in dev game not listed as such.

Ahhh ok. I got worried when I didn't see the DLC there.
Ok Monday it is then (Tuesday for me) :(
Totally. :( We have to wait a few days I fear.

Why not just make it available when everyone can get it :(

Ah, thanks for that!

:-)

Which is pretty shitty, regardless of how good the game (what there is of it) may already be. I don't have a problem with In Dev games in principle, but they need to be clearly labeled as such.

Thanks for bringing it here so fast, bought! :-)

No, its not an in dev game. It was supposed to be released with one faction, campaign and multiplayer. Devs were prepared to expand the game if there was enough players demand which is now happening. A lot of features currently in the game were added per player request and weren't planned. Don't forget that this is a very cheap c&c like game.

Agreed, I don't know why some GOGERS insist on calling it as in-dev, while the game is complete, it's just being expanded.

The game is building up! This is the stuff I want to see! I will give it 5 more months and I will purchase this, Hopefully they bring out some more factions or something within that time But this is what I will consider complete now we have a story and 2 factions MUCH MUCH BETTER! :D

Just bought it as loved the old V & C games ad loving it. Just going to go buy the dlc and oh yeah the soundtrack which is great.

The version number says differently. I know you and a few others are super-hyped for the game and sing its praises every chance you get, but it was clearly not considered complete even by the developers (hence the 0.[whatever] versioning, which almost always indicates pre-release status). I'm sure what was in the initial "release" was good, even polished, but the developers apparently planned from the beginning for there to be multiple factions and campaigns, and they put the game out containing only one playable faction and one campaign, at a low(ish) price, stating that improvements & new content would come later. That PLUS the version number is why we're calling it Early Access/In Development: because, in all but name, it is.

I don't think it's fair to say that because the developers have plans for future updates that a game isn't finished. Plenty of games get released with the intent of more content being added in the future.

I definitely should have watched some lets plays. I didn't realise there are so few units to construct and that it will probably be augmented with DLC (sigh). Oh well, it's fun but yes a cut down "Total Annihilation / C&C".

Serves me right for not watching some Let's Plays

Would be worth $7-$9 tops IMHO.

There is a review of it here but note the review does NOT include the DLC.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M41Jd9EG6H4

Yes, the line is pretty blurry these days, due to the presence of day-one DLC and expansions planned before release...but again, the version numbers that the devs themselves chose tell the tale pretty well in this case.

Also, some people seem to be under the impression that, because the game was fairly polished when it first became available, it's not In Dev. Depending on the developers, and on what stage the their game's development is in when they first offer it in "Early Access", such a game can absolutely be quite polished, and more or less feature-complete (i.e., all important gameplay mechanics in place), without being content-complete (i.e., having all campaigns, quests, game modes, etc. that the developers intend to include in the "finished" game).
TL;DR: Level of polish has nothing to do with whether a game should be considered "In Dev" or not.