162 replies to this topic

[OneEyed Jack]

It beta because they say it is. If you don't want to accept that, then don't ******* play and quit your ******* whining.

[Roadbeer]

The answer is: No

And it's been tested in court for longer than there has been video games.

You were given a pitch, you invested in said company, company failed, your investment is lost.

The story is as old as: Boy meets girl. Boy looses girl, Boy is killed when the Sun suddenly explodes for no apparent reason.

I've seen it a thousand times.

[sarkun]

This thread again? Wow, it must really be a huge difference whether the 4 blue letters near the logo will stay or disappear...

[Mercules]

Tennex, on 26 March 2013 - 09:20 AM, said:

i didn't know those games held weekend events.
heck i didn't know it was normal to hold regular events and tornaments for your beta testers.

I think people like you need to stop cutting PGI slack. all your doing is validating slow/poor game development. And thats not doing PGI nor us players any favors.

http://www.pathofexile.com/seasons

Oh, and what is that?

Quote

Path of Exile is completely free to download and play. We never intend to charge for content or access to the released game. In order to fund the development and continued expansion of Path of Exile, we offer a range of ethical microtransactions that allow you to distinguish yourself in the world of Wraeclast without receiving any gameplay advantage. We are completely opposed to the concept of “pay-to-win”.

Look at all those micro-transactions and it is in Beta and states Beta.

PANZERBUNNY, on 26 March 2013 - 09:33 AM, said:

They said they woulld launch the game with a minimum viable product. This is a minimum viable product. With all the people dumping money into the game, we should be able to agree that it's past beta and is release.

This product is NOT viable. If this is all there was in the game aside from a few new mechs and maps this game would not be "viable".

[Chazer]

It's an interesting semantic debate. Either they are monetizing an open beta(which is business genius) or they are in a released state and missing what some would consider a core feature (CW). Which do you think PGI would prefer to be seen as doing?

[sarkun]

OneEyed Jack, on 26 March 2013 - 09:39 AM, said:

It beta because they say it is. If you don't want to accept that, then don't ******* play and quit your ******* whining.

+1

[DragonsFire]

Tennex, on 26 March 2013 - 09:35 AM, said:

Just because its a released game, doesn't mean there won't be a constant flow of content and fixes. Thats the whole idea of F2P. Is that they sustain themselves by constantly releasing content and having people pay them. Its exactly what is happening right now.

This isn't a box game, where after release from beta, no more work is done on it.

By calling it a Beta you are giving the Devs an excuse to release beta level material. Ever since going "open beta" the content patches and releases have gotten much much better. less buggy higher quality etc etc. and that is because even the Devs themselves don't use the "its beta" excuse.

I would like to see patches be of higher quality. At release level quality. not beta level quality.

The reason the quality has gotten better since open beta is the process has become more streamlined and they have been able to account for more variables. This is part and parcel of any software development process. It is exceedingly rare to get the process completely right straight out of the gate, regardless of the type of software you're dealing with.

I have seen progress here, but I also am a developer as well and temper my expectations as such.

Vasces Diablo, on 26 March 2013 - 09:31 AM, said:

The issue is that we are trying to apply a development term from a development methodology that we're not using. In the old model it was: initial build, alpha, beta, publish.

As crowd find and free to play become the norm, development becomes more of an Agile methodology as opposed to Waterfall (even calling it Agile methodology isn't exactly accurate). The public is given access to a game that is in a playable build state, but not conceptually complete. It's had aspects of beta, but in some ways is still in an initial design phase.

This is going to take the gaming community a little time to get used to.

So I agree, we are not in "Beta" (a term I feel has little meaning here). We are in some as of yet un-named phase.

This post bears repeating and might help at least some of the people here struggling with the semantic side of this.

[Khell DarkWolf]

We're not in a Beta game.

We're in this weird quasi Alpha-Beta stage.

So yes, were not in beta. Because on definition a Beta is a product with finished software and features being tweaked and tuned.

Alpha is where some or alot of the features have not been implemented or added yet.

http://www.webopedia...ha_version.html

EDIT:

Ninja'd!

Edited by Khell DarkWolf, 26 March 2013 - 09:46 AM.

[Pando]

Syllogy, on 26 March 2013 - 08:37 AM, said:

Actually, it is a Beta.

Here is the Official Milestone Designation of Beta:

The Beta Development Phase generally begins when the software is feature complete. Software in the beta phase will generally have many more bugs in it than completed software, as well as speed/performance issues and may still cause crashes or data loss. The focus of beta testing is reducing impacts to users, often incorporating usability testing. The process of delivering a beta version to the users is called beta release and this is typically the first time that the software is available outside of the organization that developed it.

The users of a beta version are called beta testers. They are usually customers or prospective customers of the organization that develops the software, willing to test the software without charge, often receiving the final software free of charge or for a reduced price. Beta version software is often useful for demonstrations and previews within an organization and to prospective customers. Some developers refer to this stage as a preview, prototype, technical preview (TP), or early access. Some software is kept in perpetual beta—where new features and functionality are continually added to the software without establishing a firm "final" release.

As far as your "Ability to Reset MC" gripe... you knew that purchases were permanent. If you want to test stuff out for free, grind out some C-Bills and purchase it that way instead of with real money.

^ good example of what beta is.

PANZERBUNNY, on 26 March 2013 - 09:37 AM, said:

Another person who believes what they are told without question.

Not surprising.

"But the SIGN and insignia for MWO SAYS BETA! It must be TRUE!"

I go by the definition of beta. You should too.

Edited by Pando, 26 March 2013 - 09:46 AM.

[mania3c]

Jetfire, on 26 March 2013 - 09:39 AM, said:

Not even remotely viable, if production stopped today the game would be dead in a few months. Everyone who is paying is paying on the promise of what is to come, not what is in it now.

Maybe..but game has already a value.. I played hundreds of matches and had fun.. So I invested money for fun I already had..what about you..you are funder.. so you think you money wasn't worth it already ? If now..so just wait..I don't know if they ever promised exact date, when game will be complete as they promised..but anyway..every crowd funding system works on promises..PGI went a bit further and allowed everyone to try it, check it and play it..and give something for money invested.. they are really evil..

[Roadbeer]

Khell DarkWolf, on 26 March 2013 - 09:44 AM, said:

We're not in a Beta game.

We're in this weird quasi Alpha-Beta stage.

So yes, were not in beta. Because on definition a Beta is a product with finished software and features being tweaked and tuned.

Alpha is where some or alot of the features have not been implemented or added yet.

http://www.webopedia...ha_version.html

This

You're right OP, we're not in BETA, we're in Open ALPETA

[Aesthetech]

Lukoi, on 26 March 2013 - 09:38 AM, said:

Doesn't change anything however. Splitting hairs wins you nothing at this stage really. Just what it is. PGI isn't going to waste time debating the finer points or semantics with folks such as yourself and enough of the playerbase isn't concerned enough to rise up in some form of revolt, so........appreciate the article mate. See you on the battlefield.

The current core playerbase? Perhaps not. The future playerbase? Herein lies the difficulty. I do not know the extent to which you have attempted to market the game to others, so I will not comment in that regard. I have been quite avid in trying to 'sell' this game to others and have met with very little success, even among those with whom I play Battletech.. hell, some of them even play the Mechwarrior/CBT RPG. The most common reservations I see/hear? The fact that you have to slowly grind into the game via a trial because the developer (or perhaps more accurately the publisher) would much rather you give up and pay them, and that if you do give up and pay them to more adequately enjoy the game the game itself is flawed in numerous ways and the attitude towards such is "It's a beta, you knew that when you paid."

If nothing else, as both a beta and a niche game trying to find more customers, you'd think they'd at least make the product a bit easier to get into (and dare I say more beta-like?) and be less obviously focused on trying to sell testers a product with obvious issues the moment they hit the door.

Me: "If nothing else if the grind bothers you, you can buy premium time to speed it up or outright buy a mech you like for a few bucks. Hell, I'll chip in a mech buy for you if you want to give it a try."

Various acquaintances: "To play something where the forums undergo armageddon every other patch due to how many issues there are? Pass." (Not the exact response, mind you, but that's the general attitude)

Edited by Aposiopesis, 26 March 2013 - 09:51 AM.

[Mercules]

DragonsFire, on 26 March 2013 - 09:42 AM, said:

I have seen progress here, but I also am a developer as well and temper my expectations as such.

I work with Developers and QA, my expectations are colored by that. I've been on the, "But when is this feature going to be released?" train with customers and me in the middle. I've been on the, "I can't believe I pay money and this thing has bugs." train as well. In fact a product we rolled out for some beta testing among some specific users ended up with one of them threatening to sue us over lost productivity time they had while using our beta product they signed an agreement to get access to. It was hilarious.

[MrPenguin]

Roadbeer, on 26 March 2013 - 09:45 AM, said:

ALPETA

Sounds delicious.

[Mackman]

PANZERBUNNY, on 26 March 2013 - 09:37 AM, said:

Another person who believes what they are told without question.

Not surprising.

"But the SIGN and insignia for MWO SAYS BETA! It must be TRUE!"

Why in the world would you disbelieve that it's a Beta? What possible reason could you have for choosing to expect a full game when it's marketed as a Beta? There's a little thing called Personal Responsibility, and it kicks in right around the time when you're wondering whether you should shell out money for a product that's plainly advertised as incomplete and buggy.

[Roadbeer]

MrPenguin, on 26 March 2013 - 09:46 AM, said:

Sounds delicious.

It is, some toast points and a nice chardonnay... yummy

[Tennex]

lol look.

what it comes down to.
is that its much easier to say "this game is bad right now, but that's okay its a Beta change will come"
instead of saying "wow this game needs work, its released. And change NEEDS to happen"

I think what it comes down to is just the viewer's personality. There are the proactive people who want to influence their surroundings, and then the people who just go with the flow.

[PANZERBUNNY]

Mackman, on 26 March 2013 - 09:48 AM, said:

Why in the world would you disbelieve that it's a Beta? What possible reason could you have for choosing to expect a full game when it's marketed as a Beta? There's a little thing called Personal Responsibility, and it kicks in right around the time when you're wondering whether you should shell out money for a product that's plainly advertised as incomplete and buggy.

Did I say I expect a full game for it not to be Beta?

Why do you expect a full game for it to be economically viable?

Just going on their words mandingo.

Also, one of my posts is gone that didn't infringe on forums rules.

Certain NKVD must be awake and feasting on cheetos.

I wish there would be information in your profile detailing which mod has been deleting your posts. Would promote some accountability.

Edited by PANZERBUNNY, 26 March 2013 - 09:52 AM.

[Aesthetech]

MrPenguin, on 26 March 2013 - 09:46 AM, said:

Sounds delicious.

Sounds like a variety of cheese.

[Karl Split]

Does it really matter as long as they keep fixing bugs and adding new content OP? It's just a name, even if the name doesnt make as much sense anymore