In this age of games released too early ..... games that are buggy at release...games where promised features are not implemented at release.  Games that are theoretically still in beta.  Does this bother you or are you one of the "MMORPGs are never finished" kinda people?

I think Turbine is about the only company that has released a truly polished game at release in recent years.

What is your stance on paying to beta test?  Where is the line between beta and polished for you?

~Hairysun~

LOTRO is not without issues, so in the grander scene of things, no MMO is running perfectly.

It doesn't matter really what we think about paying a game that was released prematurely. Most of us will tolerate a lot more than the people that are the actual finance base will. If nothing else, Vanguard tried to complete the game with the help of their hardcore base but failed miserably exactly because the hardcore are not the ones keeping games afloat.

For me it all depends on whether I can access the activities that I consider fun and the speed that I see bugs getting corrected.

Originally posted by Hairysun

  In this age of games released too early ..... games that are buggy at release...games where promised features are not implemented at release.  Games that are theoretically still in beta.  Does this bother you or are you one of the "MMORPGs are never finished" kinda people?

I think Turbine is about the only company that has released a truly polished game at release in recent years.

What is your stance on paying to beta test?  Where is the line between beta and polished for you?

~Hairysun~

 

I have payed full price longer than I should have for games because when I could play I was having fun. Now I am not excusing development companies of putting crappy stuff on the shelves, but even if the game isn't 100% I can still have some fun, therefore I am getting some return on my money. I am not getting the FULL value true but thats when it's time for me to decide to weigh my FUN vs FRUSTRATION and see which side comes out on top.

I just don't think the industry is going to change this bad habit anytime soon. So that leaves gamers with 1 of 2 choices. Neither of them are appealing.

Choice 1. You can refuse to pay to play beta, every time no if ands or buts. You won't be playing many games though.

Choice 2. You can pay to play what they put out there, beta or in some cases alpha games. That reinforces their idea you will pay no matter what. So start the crapfest.

If people are so worried about wasting money on preordering a  game they have no idea how will turn out at release they could just wait for release reviews and save themselves some money.

A lot of people are only trying to get into the beta to get a sneak preview or to "play" a free game.I wish all betatesters did it to try and find as many bugs as possible and to help improve the game before release.

If people had to pay for a beta they would only start making demands.

No mmorpg is finish at release.It can be as bad as the worst release ever "Dark And Light" or it can be as good as one of the best "Lord of the rings online" but it's still not finished.

Funcom should imo instead take another route after release.

Sell a 7 day version for 10 bucks in a "cheap papercover" and let people see if they are interested and if so they can just start to subscribe without buying a gamebox that includes a free month.

If the game is good enough people will start to subscribe and the lost initial costs for the game is covered if the player keeps playing.

This is pretty similar to a thread to the effect of "will a suctackular launch kill an mmo".

I don't expect to pay for beta -- I did that when I pre-ordered SWG and wound up quitting 2 months later very bitter and resolving to never again buy/pre-order an mmo without adequate information.  With that said, there's a line between beta and being "unfinished".

When an mmo goes live, I expect there to be growing pains because limited testing can only take you so far.  Therefore I expect to see plenty of performance tuning, especially in the first few weeks, a myriad of minor bugs that can be quickly fixed, typos in quests and likely the need for reviewing higher level content/systems for balance purposes (because not as many people will probably test it compared to starting and mid-level zones.)  Heck, I don't even mind if they add "endgame" content a few weeks late simply because a large population won't be there yet.

What I don't expect though are lingering, game-breaking bugs, a sizeable number of missing/broken quests, and non-functional character systems (e.g. SWG).

Originally posted by therain93

What I don't expect though are lingering, game-breaking bugs, a sizeable number of missing/broken quests, and non-functional character systems (e.g. SWG).

And that was just before the first expansion, with people on the forums crying for a change to the combat system. (Yeah, that worked out well too).

I still think WoW was the last game that released smoothly. They had cut features, but it was still smooth. The queues on some servers were extremely long, but other than that it was not bad. That was more of a design philosophy error than hardware/code error. Rarther than putting a hard cap on servers, they allowed unlimited people to join a server... and my server was one of the most popular in the first couple months.

The true test of a game is where it's at 1 or 2 years down the road. Did they implement the features (or regions) they had promisted earlier, and like all MMOs had to cut? Did they stabilize servers, add content, etc, etc. And the biggest question of all, did gamers give them a chance?

Originally posted by Hairysun

  In this age of games released too early ..... games that are buggy at release...games where promised features are not implemented at release.  Games that are theoretically still in beta.  Does this bother you or are you one of the "MMORPGs are never finished" kinda people?

I think Turbine is about the only company that has released a truly polished game at release in recent years.

What is your stance on paying to beta test?  Where is the line between beta and polished for you?

~Hairysun~

 

To answer shortly - no.

Half baked and bug ridden release with the label "fixed sometimes at the later date" is a big minus for me.

I can live without the game beeing fully polished but I want minimum of functionality at the release. The worst thing for me as a consumer are the fanbois with the mantra of "wait xyz months for the game to be fixed". To summarize - basic playability at the release is a must and it still doesn't mean the game is good. It has to work and be at least somwhat captivating for me to play it.

Hype and potential mean jack squat.

PS

I also don't care how poorly game launched 3 - 10 years ago, what could be acceptable then isn't acceptable today. Quite simply time, technology, and competition raised the bar.

Originally posted by Hairysun

  In this age of games released too early ..... games that are buggy at release...games where promised features are not implemented at release.  Games that are theoretically still in beta.  Does this bother you or are you one of the "MMORPGs are never finished" kinda people?

I think Turbine is about the only company that has released a truly polished game at release in recent years.

What is your stance on paying to beta test?  Where is the line between beta and polished for you?

~Hairysun~

 

I dont preorder anymore. Usually i wait a few days and read boards. Lots of opinions, but one can see the truth between the opinions.

I dont give a crap about what others dislike and i dont give a crap if people report crashes. Vanguard for example was always quite stable on my hardware though all the patches. There are to many factors like overheating, weak PSU's and rotten WIndows installations. I am not a herd animal when it comes to MMOs.

I do watch things that might ruin my game experience. I dont care is a level 60 quests is broken 1 week after launch, because it will take me weeks to reach that level. Usually they are fixed by that time. If i see the company is working on broken things i dont care to much.

Usually its gameplay that makes me hit the cancel button. Not the bugs. Lotro was polished and well designed, a really gorgeous game. But i had nothing to do at some point. Not the games fault, its because i do not play while peak times. Vanguard was ok, but slow on my old PC but very playable. I havent found many bugs, i left because it turned into grind-o-rama after level 25.

AoC may have weaknesses, it may have a few bugs. What counts is how i can deal with it and how the gameplay is able to keep me busy and entertained :)

"Would you pay to beta test AoC .........?"

I think we all will .... come Late May :D     

No

All games (and software in general) goes out the door unfinished and with bugs in them.  Its all a matter of degree.  If the game delivers the primary goals (fun) without too much frustration, (from bugs) then its a good value.

VG is always pointed to as an example.  I have a high tolerance, but that game had bugs that cost me hard won experience, crashed my system completely on a regular basis, had me falling through the world regularly, and generally the frustration outweighed any fun I was having.

OP mentioned LotRO as a "finished' game, and I say while it was well done, it was far from finished and yes, it had bugs, but none that were anywhere near the severity/impact of VG.  Still turned out to not be very much fun though, (for game play reasons) so I stayed in that game just as along as VG, 2 months. 

Now I play EVE. a game that is 4+ years old.  Is it finished.  No where near.  Is it bug free?  As most EVE players would say, LOL, not even close.  Yet the fun factor outweighs the pain, so we soldier onward.

So will I buy AOC next month, probably, unless reports after the NDA comes off are absolutely atrocious.

Nah I can't think of a single game other than FFXI's American release that was smooth as butter.  They used existing servers though...

I can tell you one thing though:  I would never miss the first week of a MMO if I can help it.  The first week to first month of a new MMO is probably my favorite highlights of playing past games.  It only happens once, and to me it is amazing. 

I love to explore a World when almost everyone knows nothing about it, or what to expect.  It's just fun.  So if you are asking if I would pay to play a game at launch then the answer is 'YES' every time.

However, I know a lot of people who don't want to do such a thing.  They should just wait a few months to purchase any new MMO.  Most of my friends wait out the first few months to see if it is going to succeed and let them work out bugs.  It works well for them but they will never experience what I experience the first month of a game. 

Originally posted by ProfRed

Nah I can't think of a single game other than FFXI's American release that was smooth as butter.  They used existing servers though...

I can tell you one thing though:  I would never miss the first week of a MMO if I can help it.  The first week to first month of a new MMO is probably my favorite highlights of playing past games.  It only happens once, and to me it is amazing. 

I love to explore a World when almost everyone knows nothing about it, or what to expect.  It's just fun.  So if you are asking if I would pay to play a game at launch then the answer is 'YES' every time.

However, I know a lot of people who don't want to do such a thing.  They should just wait a few months to purchase any new MMO.  Most of my friends wait out the first few months to see if it is going to succeed and let them work out bugs.  It works well for them but they will never experience what I experience the first month of a game. 

Red, I can't say I disagree with you.

My problem is, it you didn't get a chance to beta test the game in one way or another, you are at a serious disadvantage.  Guilds that have an extended in beta will no doubt have a huge upper hand and will control the games economy from the start.   How many times did you see first week with an economy already stable and everything already had it's prices.  Why?  It gets that way because that was the price in beta.  Too me, there is too much power given to the people who open beta these games for months on end.

There will no doubt be a Thottbot AoC style up as soon as the NDA is lifted with everything pre-determined.  You know who owns Thottbot, right?

I don't think MMORPGs are ever finished...there is always something more to add...something new to fix. I will be in AoC from the first week. I have no problem if there are issues, bugs n things that need to be fixed up...as long as they get fixed.

Some ppl say "wait a few months b4 buying...then all bugs will be worked out." My comment to that is...if everyone waits a few months b4 trying...there will be nobody there to find the issues to be solved...=P So then in a few months when the population swells...then the issues come to rise.

How much longer would you want this game in beta? I bet if wanted it could be in beta for another couple years...but companies hafta release. Longer you wait to release something the less interest ppl will have.

Willing or not, if you insist on playing at launch, you're paying to test the game. What's worse, you're paying a premium price to do it. Buying a MMO is buying a subscription, a subscription with a very high initial cost. Unlike most other games (Valve products excluded), after you register the product code, the box and its contents are essentially worthless. You've just spent $50 (or $90) for one months playtime. If the game sucks, if it's buggy - too bad, you're stuck with it. At least with a normal game you can wait for a patch or sell it or even give it away. Is it any wonder players are so obsessive about the state of the game on release? Is it surprising the lengths some will go to get into beta? The real irony is that the more stable the game gets, after months subsidized testing and patching, the cheaper the client gets. Eventually, the retail price for the game client drops to about the cost of the media and one months subscription fee; which is the price it should have been all along.

Originally posted by Hairysun

  In this age of games released too early ..... games that are buggy at release...games where promised features are not implemented at release.  Games that are theoretically still in beta.  Does this bother you or are you one of the "MMORPGs are never finished" kinda people?

I think Turbine is about the only company that has released a truly polished game at release in recent years.

What is your stance on paying to beta test?  Where is the line between beta and polished for you?

~Hairysun~

 

Yes

Honestly who gives a fuck ?

A game atracts or it doesn't, and even though LOTRO was a finished product it did not atract the greater population and that is all what counts. Let us take a look at our WoW, the game was in a good state when it went live but still had fuckloads of bugs, did that make it fail ? no. That is because the gameplay was FUN. Just like Unreal Tournament players who always want there fast gameplay back in other games, AoC will atract people who like the new style of gameplay, and they will always come back.

And people who talk doomtalk are total retards, because after all we are waiting here for the next big thing, if you are one of the many who are bored with World of Warcraft. And people who think this game will crash and burn, i have no words for you guy's. This game is backed with the biggest amount of money ever invested in a game.

     No wouldnt pay for any beta, and wouldnt buy one without getting a free trial too see if i liked it.

pretty much once bitten and twice shy when it comes to new  mmorpgs now.

No, they should pay me for taking my time reporting bugs. not the way around.

&$#@  NO !