How broken is too broken when you buy a game?

I have a question for you, Polygon commenters. How broken is too broken when you consider buying a game?

The question’s been top of mind for me this week. STALKER 2 was my most anticipated game of 2024. But now, with my finger hovering over the buy button on Steam, I’m having second thoughts. As my colleague Charlie Hall noted in his thoughtful review, the game simply needed more time to in the oven. And it will get that time, in the coming months, as its developers begin to release patches that stabilize their post-apocalyptic world.

To complicate the question, though, does our tolerance for a game’s rough shape depend on the circumstances of its creators? In the case of STALKER 2, developers GSC Game World have been producing the game amidst war. As the Kyiv Independent writes, “Originally set for a release in April 2022, the game experienced several delays when many of its staff were forced to flee Ukraine that February. Ahead of the release this week, presales of the game took it to the top spot for games sold on the popular video game platform Steam.” I understand why many reviewers have been factoring this in when critiquing the game, not just on traditional media sites but on user-submitted review platforms too.

So, back to the main question for the comments. How broken is too broken when you consider buying a game? Do you make exceptions for certain developers? Or circumstance? Or entire genres? Will I buy STALKER 2?

OK, I know the answer to that final question, because STALKER 2’s now in my Steam library. Now to discover if I made the right choice!