Originally posted by jusomdude

Oh brother, pleaaase. You know how many MMOs have been released in a real final state?

0

Any MMO that has fixed at least one bug, you could say they released it in a beta state, since really, the definition of a game ready for release is void of bugs.

I'll just say simply that, I don't agree with your post at all.

It is impossible to release any piece of software which is void of bugs. Any experienced software tester will tell you that.

So what is counted is rather how many bugs are fixed and how many are found and when the devs are pleased with those numbers they release the software. However a software without any bugs at all is unheard of.

Originally posted by Yamota

Originally posted by DAS1337

Actually, I know one person (not myself) that actively patrols certain forums as an moderator..  deleting, locking.. suspending.. whatever he has to do to keep the boards clean.  He also writes for a gaming magazine company.  Guess what, he hasn't been paid for it.  Maybe people like you don't care, but there are plenty of people out there who live and breathe games.  They do it because they love it.  Imagine that.

 

For me personally, I have been dying for a game like Ultima Online for a decade.  Now I finally have the chance to play in the near future... and I'm not going to screw off and not beta test this properly.  There are going to be a lot of people just like me, who actually want this game to succeed.  And the only way to do that is to put forth our best effort to help SV make this what we've always been dreaming of.  We have a vested interest in this game, why in the world would I pre-order and then screw off while beta testing?  I'd be wasting my own money.  Maybe all the little kids could care less, but when it comes to my money.. I'd much rather not give it away by not helping SV make it worth the cash.

 

You understand now?

 

Oh by the way, I hate my job and I do just enough to not get fired... so your theory is way off for me.

Problem is that you are too much of vested interest in the game which makes it impossible for you to be an objective tester. A tester must be a very critical person and look out for flaws but since you, as you say, is already convinced that this game will be the second coming of UO (even though you, probably, havent even played the game) are clearly incapable to be objective as you are far to emotionally invested in the game.

That is why companies need PROFESSIONAL testers, or if they can't get that, atleast testers that are not so into the game, without even playing it, that they are ready to pay $100 to test it. You will swallow everything you see because you are already convinced that the game is great and that is a terrible mindset to have as a tester.

Because if it is so great then it can't possibly have any flaws right?

On the same note, someone who is extremely interested in the game doesnt need to be extremely cynical to know what is right and wrong with the game.

I can see why you would think that a cynical view is a good thing but in some ways it can be very bad. For instance, many players are just bitter by nature or past experience and those people will attempt to find something wrong with everything without offering constructive criticism.

Bottom line mate, and I think you would agree, is that testers need to understand that beta testing is about finding what's wrong with the game and telling the Devs whats right with the game equally.

Originally posted by Yamota

Originally posted by DAS1337

Actually, I know one person (not myself) that actively patrols certain forums as an moderator..  deleting, locking.. suspending.. whatever he has to do to keep the boards clean.  He also writes for a gaming magazine company.  Guess what, he hasn't been paid for it.  Maybe people like you don't care, but there are plenty of people out there who live and breathe games.  They do it because they love it.  Imagine that.

 

For me personally, I have been dying for a game like Ultima Online for a decade.  Now I finally have the chance to play in the near future... and I'm not going to screw off and not beta test this properly.  There are going to be a lot of people just like me, who actually want this game to succeed.  And the only way to do that is to put forth our best effort to help SV make this what we've always been dreaming of.  We have a vested interest in this game, why in the world would I pre-order and then screw off while beta testing?  I'd be wasting my own money.  Maybe all the little kids could care less, but when it comes to my money.. I'd much rather not give it away by not helping SV make it worth the cash.

 

You understand now?

 

Oh by the way, I hate my job and I do just enough to not get fired... so your theory is way off for me.

Problem is that you are too much of vested interest in the game which makes it impossible for you to be an objective tester. A tester must be a very critical person and look out for flaws but since you, as you say, is already convinced that this game will be the second coming of UO (even though you, probably, havent even played the game) are clearly incapable to be objective as you are far to emotionally invested in the game.

That is why companies need PROFESSIONAL testers, or if they can't get that, atleast testers that are not so into the game, without even playing it, that they are ready to pay $100 to test it. You will swallow everything you see because you are already convinced that the game is great and that is a terrible mindset to have as a tester.

Because if it is so great then it can't possibly have any flaws right?

My life long friend is a a proffesional QA specialist for a software firm.

You're just making arguements for the sake of arguing on the side of being right.
Nothing you wrote has any correlation to the ability of an individual to find bugs and broken aspects of a product and report it.
The fact that some of us want the game to be good means we'll be much more critical.

My best friend would also say you have no idea what your talking about.  He doesn't particularly like what he tests; so he's doesn't really care if the product is perfect or not, he just wants his check.

Anyhow, this post is like declaring war an a nation because someone looked at you funny, which isn't real surprising, since that's pretty much every post here.

The problem I have is if the developers promise something and don't deliver. I have no problem if a developer tells me what they are aiming for, but then don't deliver.

Two very different things.

The devs have never promised anything and have stated several times that at release it's going to be nothing more than a core game and that's it.  They haven't promised 30 features or anything like that and everyone purchasing the game knows that.

QQing and don't buy the damn game if you don't want to, but do you really have to make a whole thread whining to a community that has bought the game and has no problems with it.

This thread should be moved to the pub or something and not in the MO section as he clearly points out it has to do with mmorpg's and not just MO. 

QQing and get over it, go play some themepark WoW clone or something.

Internetz iz srs busniz.

noone that posts on this website deserves to beta test a game. including myself.

Originally posted by Fariic

Originally posted by Yamota

Originally posted by DAS1337

Actually, I know one person (not myself) that actively patrols certain forums as an moderator..  deleting, locking.. suspending.. whatever he has to do to keep the boards clean.  He also writes for a gaming magazine company.  Guess what, he hasn't been paid for it.  Maybe people like you don't care, but there are plenty of people out there who live and breathe games.  They do it because they love it.  Imagine that.

 

For me personally, I have been dying for a game like Ultima Online for a decade.  Now I finally have the chance to play in the near future... and I'm not going to screw off and not beta test this properly.  There are going to be a lot of people just like me, who actually want this game to succeed.  And the only way to do that is to put forth our best effort to help SV make this what we've always been dreaming of.  We have a vested interest in this game, why in the world would I pre-order and then screw off while beta testing?  I'd be wasting my own money.  Maybe all the little kids could care less, but when it comes to my money.. I'd much rather not give it away by not helping SV make it worth the cash.

 

You understand now?

 

Oh by the way, I hate my job and I do just enough to not get fired... so your theory is way off for me.

Problem is that you are too much of vested interest in the game which makes it impossible for you to be an objective tester. A tester must be a very critical person and look out for flaws but since you, as you say, is already convinced that this game will be the second coming of UO (even though you, probably, havent even played the game) are clearly incapable to be objective as you are far to emotionally invested in the game.

That is why companies need PROFESSIONAL testers, or if they can't get that, atleast testers that are not so into the game, without even playing it, that they are ready to pay $100 to test it. You will swallow everything you see because you are already convinced that the game is great and that is a terrible mindset to have as a tester.

Because if it is so great then it can't possibly have any flaws right?

 

My life long friend is a a proffesional QA specialist for a software firm.

You're just making arguements for the sake of arguing on the side of being right.
Nothing you wrote has any correlation to the ability of an individual to find bugs and broken aspects of a product and report it.
The fact that some of us want the game to be good means we'll be much more critical.

My best friend would also say you have no idea what your talking about.  He doesn't particularly like what he tests; so he's doesn't really care if the product is perfect or not, he just wants his check.

This is completely non responsive. You didnt refute one of my points I made but just said "oh my friend is this and that and you are wrong". For your information I have 5 years experience in software developing and, even though I am not a primary SW tester myself, I have worked and attended classes of the best SW testers out there. So if you want to refute my points then please come up with rational reasons for it rather than nonsensical BS.

I want the game to be good as well but fanboys already have decided that the game is good so they will be much less likely to find bugs because in their mind the game is already great. A tester should not have that mindset, he must be critical of what he is testing and try to break it.

Also, what has your friends rotten work eithics got to do with anything? If a tester fails at this job then for sure he will, or should be, fired. So if your "friend" doesn't care if what he is doing results in the product becoming more stable and more bug free then he should lucky that he still has a job and whoeever is hiring him unlucky that they have a tester that doesnt care of he if is improving the product he is testing.

Btw you are contradicting yourself because I said you should not have too much invested interest when testing a game because that could cloud your judgement and that apparently is wrong according to you (no reasons given). Yet in your last paragraph you said your friend does not care about the product. So what is it? Should you or should you not care about it?

I have a positive suggestion to make.

I too am sick to death of games being released in a poor state due to 'Beta Testers' who do no actual testing.
In fact I have raised this issue with developers too:
http://www.raphkoster.com/2008/05/27/tuesday-mailbag-forum-posters-churn-betas/
http://www.burningsea.com/forums/showpost.php?p=362001&postcount=15

I am sick of it because paying customers deserve better.

My suggestion is this:

A Beta Tester's Association.

Simple idea really.  We set up a forum and people are invited to become members.
Developers can then contact the BeTA for "professional" Beta Testers.
How do they know that the members are professionals?
Because at the end of each test the Developers contact the BeTA and report on the testers.
Hours 'played'.
Reports submitted.
Comments made in forums (of substance - even if they do not agree with them)
Suggestions made (again, of substance - even if they do not agree with them)
*The last two could be done by BeTA members*

Then, those that do not contribute and just look like they are 'playing for free' rather than actually testing can lose membership.

Those that contribute can be promoted within the association.

It would take a couple of tests (and a couple of friendly developers) to get it started.
But after that, Developers could approach the BeTA and ask for people (that they know they can rely on).

For example - "Can you please supply 30 people to test an MMO based on the Ben 10 Series?"
The Association calls for people and the Developer gets 30 people they know will actually submit reliable reports and not just play for a week then vanish.

Sound workable?

Originally posted by Gyrus

Sound workable?

 

Hmm, not so sure. There will always be helpfull, great testers in the part of the fanbase of a game that gets beta access; even if it is only one in ten players. (But I think it is a bit more, myself). And there is only so much feedback you can handle. Better for a dev to pick out the cherries and pay attention to what those people say and write than to be drowned in an overload of mainly duplicate information.

And you DO need the fans. Personally I wouldn't be so happy to beta test a game which I am not specifically looking forward to. At least not for free.

Also, beta testing concerns a lot of server / clientside stress testing for which you need many people. Even if not everyone is fully cooperative, they do serve a purpose :)

Originally posted by DarkPony

Originally posted by Gyrus

Sound workable?

 

 

Hmm, not so sure. There will always be helpfull, great testers in the part of the fanbase of a game that gets beta access; even if it is only one in ten players. (But I think it is a bit more, myself). And there is only so much feedback you can handle. Better for a dev to pick out the cherries and pay attention to what those people say and write than to be drowned in an overload of mainly duplicate information.

And you DO need the fans. Personally I wouldn't be so happy to beta test a game which I am not specifically looking forward to. At least not for free.

Also, beta testing concerns a lot of server / clientside stress testing for which you need many people. Even if not everyone is fully cooperative, they do serve a purpose :)

I am not suggesting that an Association of this type would be the only source of testers. 
What I am suggesting is an Association of quality testers with a proven track record.  These are people you know will actually be testing (not just playing for a 'free game'), looking for bugs and reporting bugs when they find them.

Developers can choose who they like (which they will).

But what I am suggesting is that when Developers want some testers they know they can rely on for anything they have a group they can approach.

For example, they may find that people are not playing (or testing) certain parts of the game as much as they would like?
So, they contact the association and ask for people prepared to test those specific things and they know they can rely on those people to do that.
For example: My personal specialty is Tutorials.  I love to break them.  I get in there and do every dumb thing I can think of.
I typically repeat tutorials many times, trying all sorts of different things just to stop them working.  Then I report.
Then I rinse and repeat.

Originally posted by JuJutsu

I wish I were one of the 'perfosinals in the feild of computer gaming or being paied a fee'. On my 1 year 'anaversiery' I could ask for a 'refrence' . It would be 'enavitable' that I would get one since I would be 'basickly' a company man working for a 'finachly sound bussiness'. 'well to be brutealy blunt' I could go on and on but it would make no 'difrence'. 

Holly carp, JuJutsu, yooer hyerd!!

Jokes about bad spelling aside I can understand the Op's viewpoint. I feel the pay for beta, and in this games case maybe even pay for alpha to be not only controversial, but very risky for consumers and the MMORPG gaming industry alike. I feel there are better financial models to work with. And if some unforeseen problem arises, the company fails financially, and the game is never finished, this could have catastrophic ramifications for not only MOs creators but for any small indy MMORPG company.

@Gyrus

I see what you mean. But you'd have to know exactly how often a low average quality of normal beta testers actually constitutes a problem for a company.

Apart from that I think it could really shine in closed beta's where the dev's need controll (and someone responsible and standing up for the reliability of the testers) in order to minimize the risk on leaks. I guess there is a lot of testing going on before a beta goes 'open' and going 'open' = going public, whether there is an nda in effect or not.

Ofcourse there would be an apropriate payment involved in all this, of which the company, or supplier of testers (aka; you) could take a small cut. Really nice business model, come to think of it :)

---

Originally posted by MisterZebub

I feel the pay for beta, and in this games case maybe even pay for alpha to be not only controversial, but very risky for consumers and the MMORPG gaming industry alike. I feel there are better financial models to work with. And if some unforeseen problem arises, the company fails financially, and the game is never finished, this could have catastrophic ramifications for not only MOs creators but for any small indy MMORPG company.

---

I think that the developers are indeed taking quite a risk on this. Firstly, the funding you can get through this kind of means is relatively low in the end. Even if you sell 10,000 copies of the game there is no indication as of how much from that would end up on developer's account. Even if it would be half of the box-price (37,5$?) it still would not run the studio for long.

Second, if the game is at dismal state currently when the people are invited into the game there is a risk that they will drive their most loyal fan base away from the game as they base their opinion on the shell of the game they pay to see. Certainly, you get your free month of gaming once the game is released, but can you put the bad baggage aside would you confront even some of the issues you are about to face in early stages of beta.

Third, as Monsieur Zebub points out, if the attempt fails it will not only mean an end for this particular studio but most certainly for quite a few others desperate to find additional funding. Who on earth would trust an indie developer developing MMO if the track record is abysmal?

In the end, seeking outside funding through normal corporate ways is vastly better method than this paid-beta-test extravaganza. The people that give funding to games know the risks perfectly well, are more than willing to take them due to foreseeable revenues would the game be a success, AND, despite common belief, have in their best interest to actually have the studio release a quality game. The better the game, the more these outside investors will gain in the process. They hardly are in much of a rush either as normally industry funding for a new firm is for years, not for months.

Well the OP's rant is way off base.

1.  No one is forcing you to pre-order a game.

2.  Pre-order payment from Best Buy, Game Stop, or EBGames can always be refunded as long as you have not received the full version of the game yet.

3.  Developers do not see pre-order sales from retailers until the final game ships.

4.  The Mortal Online developers have been very forward with why the are offering pre-purchase of MO.  People are not paying to get into beta, they are paying for the final game, a spot on the live server, AND a spot in beta.

5.  No one is forcing you to pre-order or pre-purchase any games.

6.  There are many different types of beta tests.  The actual beta testing is usually done by an in-house staff.  Public betas are usually used to get mass feedback about the current state of the game, to get information about bugs on a mass scale, stress testing the servers, etc... (An example of this would be AoC.  At that time they didn't really seem to care if the game was bug free or fun, just that it was playable.). 

I find it funny that the OP mentioned WAR because Mythic actually had one of the best beta testing cycles that I have been a part of.  They really did listen to the testers and added things to the game that we wanted to see and fixed issues that we reported on the beta forums.  Unfortunately they added them in another way then we expected (We expected DAoC keeps.. they gave us.... well... crap). The developers also were stubborn in their vision of how they wanted the game and refused to listen to the testers on certain key points.

It wasn't that we weren't testing the game, or having a true beta.  It was just the fact that the developers did not listen.  So using WAR as an example of a bad beta test wasn't a very good decision.

This is completely non responsive. You didnt refute one of my points I made but just said "oh my friend is this and that and you are wrong". For your information I have 5 years experience in software developing and, even though I am not a primary SW tester myself, I have worked and attended classes of the best SW testers out there. So if you want to refute my points then please come up with rational reasons for it rather than nonsensical BS.

I want the game to be good as well but fanboys already have decided that the game is good so they will be much less likely to find bugs because in their mind the game is already great. A tester should not have that mindset, he must be critical of what he is testing and try to break it.

Also, what has your friends rotten work eithics got to do with anything? If a tester fails at this job then for sure he will, or should be, fired. So if your "friend" doesn't care if what he is doing results in the product becoming more stable and more bug free then he should lucky that he still has a job and whoeever is hiring him unlucky that they have a tester that doesnt care of he if is improving the product he is testing.

Btw you are contradicting yourself because I said you should not have too much invested interest when testing a game because that could cloud your judgement and that apparently is wrong according to you (no reasons given). Yet in your last paragraph you said your friend does not care about the product. So what is it? Should you or should you not care about it?

 You are making several assumptions here:

1. You  assume that the customers, paying from 100 to 50ish [the aim is for digitial download to be cheaper than DF], will forever love the game and not care if their quite considerable amount of money is wasted on a poor product. That is a giant leap of faith right there. There's a  lot of people very passionate about the game, but not because of some specific features, but rather because of the idea of it. Since this is likely to be the last shot at a true sandbox MMO for a while, you can be damn sure at least some of them will properly beta-test it.

2. You assume that a 'paid' beta like this will be inherently inferior, at the same time suggesting a classic beta that so many MMOs use. But just look at recent and not so recent releases. Vanguard, Age of Conan,  WAR, WoW [despite what some people think, damn near unplayable at launch, with servers constatly down the first weeks], Darkfall. In all those games, even DF with its horde of adolescent, rabid fans, bugs WERE reported, possible exploits WERE pointed out, the devs had plenty of feedback. They just chose to ignore it.  Is it so hard to believe that with this rather large number of beta-testers [out of which, as in EVERY beta test, most will of course be useless apart from stress-testing], with devs that genuinely seem to welcome feedback and interaction with their community, could actually bring a half-decent result?

3. You assume that a free beta test brings in people without a lot of interest in the said game, but willing to beta test it properly. I'm sorry but that seems like nonsense to me. Beta testing is not much fun, especially in early stages. Any testers without a strong interest in the game are likely to be just after a free try-out rather than opportunity to help the devs. While some of those freeloaders are sure to submit *some* meaningful feedback in a moment of weakness, I don't think that's a great loss in the grand scheme of things.

 In the end that's the model SV went for, and I think most of us realise that financial concerns were a good part of that decision. The beta invitation was likely what made a lot of people preorder this early. I would like to see more indie studios trying their luck with the MMO genre, and I'm willing to give them a bit of a benefit of a doubt as to how they get their funds to do that. That's of course irrelevant to the main point, the quality of the beta, but I still think it's a good point to touch on - would you rather that the beta was free, and the game had to be released early and unfinished [see DF]?

Originally posted by Yamota

This is completely non responsive. You didnt refute one of my points I made but just said "oh my friend is this and that and you are wrong". For your information I have 5 years experience in software developing and, even though I am not a primary SW tester myself, I have worked and attended classes of the best SW testers out there. So if you want to refute my points then please come up with rational reasons for it rather than nonsensical BS.

I want the game to be good as well but fanboys already have decided that the game is good so they will be much less likely to find bugs because in their mind the game is already great. A tester should not have that mindset, he must be critical of what he is testing and try to break it.

Also, what has your friends rotten work eithics got to do with anything? If a tester fails at this job then for sure he will, or should be, fired. So if your "friend" doesn't care if what he is doing results in the product becoming more stable and more bug free then he should lucky that he still has a job and whoeever is hiring him unlucky that they have a tester that doesnt care of he if is improving the product he is testing.

Btw you are contradicting yourself because I said you should not have too much invested interest when testing a game because that could cloud your judgement and that apparently is wrong according to you (no reasons given). Yet in your last paragraph you said your friend does not care about the product. So what is it? Should you or should you not care about it?

Its not non responsive at all. He responded to what you said and you did not succinctly phrase your rant for a point by point retort. To paraphrase you: "games are crap because beta testers are amateurs." He responded by saying "well at least an amateur is more likely to be motivated, otherwise they wouldn't be doing it". A good retort, and one you are yet to refute adequately.

aion isnt unfinished poc its actully a decent mmo

Indeed they are unfinnished , in some way or another.

But think of how much a game cost to devolope,

say 5 years  and 30 employed earning 3500 dollar a month

5 Years times 30 employed+ social expense + equipment , making a very raw calc

Raw calc = around 50 milion dollar

When money runs out , you need to release it.

Noone is forcing anyone to do anything.

I think its great for fans to be able to play as soon as possible. And if you are not interested, then dont pay any money.

Originally posted by rounner

Originally posted by Yamota

This is completely non responsive. You didnt refute one of my points I made but just said "oh my friend is this and that and you are wrong". For your information I have 5 years experience in software developing and, even though I am not a primary SW tester myself, I have worked and attended classes of the best SW testers out there. So if you want to refute my points then please come up with rational reasons for it rather than nonsensical BS.

I want the game to be good as well but fanboys already have decided that the game is good so they will be much less likely to find bugs because in their mind the game is already great. A tester should not have that mindset, he must be critical of what he is testing and try to break it.

Also, what has your friends rotten work eithics got to do with anything? If a tester fails at this job then for sure he will, or should be, fired. So if your "friend" doesn't care if what he is doing results in the product becoming more stable and more bug free then he should lucky that he still has a job and whoeever is hiring him unlucky that they have a tester that doesnt care of he if is improving the product he is testing.

Btw you are contradicting yourself because I said you should not have too much invested interest when testing a game because that could cloud your judgement and that apparently is wrong according to you (no reasons given). Yet in your last paragraph you said your friend does not care about the product. So what is it? Should you or should you not care about it?

Its not non responsive at all. He responded to what you said and you did not succinctly phrase your rant for a point by point retort. To paraphrase you: "games are crap because beta testers are amateurs." He responded by saying "well at least an amateur is more likely to be motivated, otherwise they wouldn't be doing it". A good retort, and one you are yet to refute adequately.

Haha, nice strawman argument there.

What I said and the the BS line "games are crap because beta testers are amateurs." is completely different. You must have serious reading acomprehesion issues if what I said is anything remotely similar to what you said, more likely you are just trying to (grossly) distort what I said.

I said that fanboys, that are typically, too much emotionally invested in a game would not be a suitable to test said game because they would be less likely to see flaws in the game because in their mind the game is already great. Nowhere in that statement did I said that amature testers are crap, that is entirely your construct.

Your, made up, argument is about amateurs vs professional and how an amateure is motivated because he likes the game(since he does it for free I assume?). This touches on something else I said where I claim that SW companies hire professional testers (which they do). That being said does not mean that amature testers are crap, fanboy testers are crap and that is the previous argument, not this one.

A classical strawman argument (by replacing one argument with a complete other one in a way to make it appear that you are right) and a good one because it touches on something else I said. But np, I can shoot down your strawman argument with the simple fact that professional testers get paid, usually alot, and that if any is a better motivation than "liking the game". And if they do not properly test the SW then that will, under most circumstances, be discovered and said tester will get fired or at the very least get the reputation of not being a good tester. That is a much heavier motivation then "liking the game".

Originally posted by daarco

Noone is forcing anyone to do anything.

I think its great for fans to be able to play as soon as possible. And if you are not interested, then dont pay any money.

 

you have completely missed the point as usual (although, i will grant you it was difficult to pinpoint it in the OP)

and WTH!!! - - - i could have sworn i had you blocked

Originally posted by BadMedicine

 You are making several assumptions here:

1. You  assume that the customers, paying from 100 to 50ish [the aim is for digitial download to be cheaper than DF], will forever love the game and not care if their quite considerable amount of money is wasted on a poor product. That is a giant leap of faith right there. There's a  lot of people very passionate about the game, but not because of some specific features, but rather because of the idea of it. Since this is likely to be the last shot at a true sandbox MMO for a while, you can be damn sure at least some of them will properly beta-test it.

Please dont confuse with me saying fanboys = customers. I am a Mortal Online customer but not a fanboy and I would wager most potential customers are noth fanboys either. However, I assume that alot (not all) of the ones paying 70-120 $/€ for a game not released for another 6 months and in early phase, will be fanboys.

So again make the distinction about people wanting it to suceed (like me) and the people that has already decided that this game is the best thing since sliced bread and will jump on anyone who is remotely criticizing the game. Those latter ones are abundant on the official forums, and some have even come here, will not be suitable testers because, in their mind, this game is so good that it cant possibly have any major flaws. Hence they may find and report minor bugs but other features like how PvP notoriety system, full loot, AI  and so on actually works in practice is nothing they will have negative opinions about since they have already decided that this game is great and hence could not possibly have any major flaws right?

This is evident with their posting where they always claim how great MO is, even though they have never actually played it.

2. You assume that a 'paid' beta like this will be inherently inferior, at the same time suggesting a classic beta that so many MMOs use. But just look at recent and not so recent releases. Vanguard, Age of Conan,  WAR, WoW [despite what some people think, damn near unplayable at launch, with servers constatly down the first weeks], Darkfall. In all those games, even DF with its horde of adolescent, rabid fans, bugs WERE reported, possible exploits WERE pointed out, the devs had plenty of feedback. They just chose to ignore it.  Is it so hard to believe that with this rather large number of beta-testers [out of which, as in EVERY beta test, most will of course be useless apart from stress-testing], with devs that genuinely seem to welcome feedback and interaction with their community, could actually bring a half-decent result?

I dont disagree with these statements, except that I do think a classical beta would be better because one would assume that for a classical beta they would chose the beta testers based on their merits and not the size of their wallets.

3. You assume that a free beta test brings in people without a lot of interest in the said game, but willing to beta test it properly. I'm sorry but that seems like nonsense to me. Beta testing is not much fun, especially in early stages. Any testers without a strong interest in the game are likely to be just after a free try-out rather than opportunity to help the devs. While some of those freeloaders are sure to submit *some* meaningful feedback in a moment of weakness, I don't think that's a great loss in the grand scheme of things.

 What? No, I dont think a free beta test brings in people with alot of interest in the said game but I do think that the beta testers that the devs choose, rather than beta tester that pay to get in, are more suitable to testing the game because they would be picked, as I said above, on their merits rather than their willingness to pay to be in beta.

 In the end that's the model SV went for, and I think most of us realise that financial concerns were a good part of that decision. The beta invitation was likely what made a lot of people preorder this early. I would like to see more indie studios trying their luck with the MMO genre, and I'm willing to give them a bit of a benefit of a doubt as to how they get their funds to do that. That's of course irrelevant to the main point, the quality of the beta, but I still think it's a good point to touch on - would you rather that the beta was free, and the game had to be released early and unfinished [see DF]?

No doubt fincancial concerns were the major part of their decision however, financial concerns aside, I do not think a paid beta is for the benefit of the game and I have explained why I think so.

As for your question, ofcourse not. And if the two only choices are an expensive beta with later release than a free beta with too early release then ofcourse the former would be better. However I do think there are other options, such as a properly done free beta test with a proper release. If Starvault dont have the finances for that then one would wonder if their product is good enough to attract enough good investers that believe in their product.

That being said I do know the SW industry is a hard one and it is dificult for indie companies to make it. However I am not sure that getting your potential customers to pay to beta test your game is the right way to go.

 Pardon me for not answering you point-by-point but frankly, we could go round and round in circles here. We just assume different things about people who bought the preorder and beta testers in general. Who is right will be shown in time, there's no way for either of us to actually prove his position.

 I'd just like to add, how closely do you think each potential beta tester would be scrutinised, anyway, was it a free beta? With a limited number of staff availible and 10k spots [so probably tens of thousands of beta requests at very very least]. Judging by the quality of your average MMO beta-tester, not very closely. They are mostly chosen on their system specs to get a range of technical feedback from low-end to high-end system - or that's my guess, at least.

OP:  Spell-check is your friend.

Originally posted by BadMedicine

 Pardon me for not answering you point-by-point but frankly, we could go round and round in circles here. We just assume different things about people who bought the preorder and beta testers in general. Who is right will be shown in time, there's no way for either of us to actually prove his position.

 I'd just like to add, how closely do you think each potential beta tester would be scrutinised, anyway, was it a free beta? With a limited number of staff availible and 10k spots [so probably tens of thousands of beta requests at very very least]. Judging by the quality of your average MMO beta-tester, not very closely. They are mostly chosen on their system specs to get a range of technical feedback from low-end to high-end system - or that's my guess, at least.

I don't think they would be closely scrutinised at all but the % of fanboys would be random which would not be the case for a paid beta that costs 70-120 $/€, which is my point rather than the high quality of free beta.

Flipside is ofcourse that the ones that paid would probably be more dedicated but still I think the cons outweigh the pros. It is never good to let fanboys shape a game because they have lost their sense of objectivity.