Originally posted by Paradigm68

Originally posted by pierth

Originally posted by EduardoASG

^this

Only people who dont know Failcom can be hyped by anything made by this bunch really.

Or, you know, people could just try the game out and form an opinion from the actual game rather than fight about assumptions.

Given the use of the word 'try' you're essentially arguing against pre-ordering, or even buying a game until you've gotten a free trial.

MMOs are diffrent you can try them and they may play fine but are lacking later on.   Like SWTOR is plays awesome when you play it from levels 1 to 10i but at 50 it changes and there are just bad ideas.  Tera playes awesome at the begining but at level 60 people are wondering what is next.   WoW and EQ1 were mediocre at trial levels but they both did very well due to being so involved later on.   Warhammer seemed pretty miss when I played in betta and the launch was just as bad as all of us wanted Doac 2 anyway they just failed to deliver and went another direction so a trial of warhammer would be the only one that you could tell it is bad.  AoC masked the trial in a diffrent game so people wouldn't see how broken core mechanics are.

Playing a demo of RPGs or MMOs doesn't give you much info on the game.  The community vibe does much better, even in warcraft the community is negative but you can tell how well a game is doing by the vibe and issues, not troll ones but if X is posted about 100 times it is an issue.  The easy part is that feedback is usually ignored so major game issues stay and people go due to a bad game.

Originally posted by Ir0nh34d

Originally posted by Paradigm68

Originally posted by pierth

Originally posted by EduardoASG

^this

Only people who dont know Failcom can be hyped by anything made by this bunch really.

Or, you know, people could just try the game out and form an opinion from the actual game rather than fight about assumptions.

Given the use of the word 'try' you're essentially arguing against pre-ordering, or even buying a game until you've gotten a free trial.

So not everyone who "tries" a game is a cheapskate who's not willing to invest on faith alone. I have bought many games upfront to be disapointed. It's just a bad track record that is multiple companies faults, and partly us a gaming audience's fault. I don't blame people for being overly cautious now. Sucks for the industry, but the industry created this monster. 

Its not about being a cheapskate. If you bought it, you're no longer 'trying' it.  Trying a game out and forming an opinion about it is a meaningless endevor if you've paid for the game because ypu've already voted with your wallet.

Originally posted by Paradigm68

Originally posted by Ir0nh34d

Originally posted by Paradigm68

Originally posted by pierth

Originally posted by EduardoASG

^this

Only people who dont know Failcom can be hyped by anything made by this bunch really.

Or, you know, people could just try the game out and form an opinion from the actual game rather than fight about assumptions.

Given the use of the word 'try' you're essentially arguing against pre-ordering, or even buying a game until you've gotten a free trial.

So not everyone who "tries" a game is a cheapskate who's not willing to invest on faith alone. I have bought many games upfront to be disapointed. It's just a bad track record that is multiple companies faults, and partly us a gaming audience's fault. I don't blame people for being overly cautious now. Sucks for the industry, but the industry created this monster. 

Its not about being a cheapskate. If you bought it, you're no longer 'trying' it.  Trying a game out and forming an opinion about it is a meaningless endevor if you've paid for the game because ypu've already voted with your wallet.

Ture with a fault. Sometimes trying things infact does have a premium to pay. You don't simply try a hamburger from McDonalds the same way you would test drive a car. 

While this isn't terribly surprising to me, given Funcom's record, I do have some questions for the OP:

1. Do you understand that a Beta is a test phase and will likely be buggy? Are bugs the issue?

2. Does it seem like Funcom is using the Beta as a "publicity test" and not for bug testing? My guess at this phase is no, because otherwise it would be an open beta, right? A closed beta with an NDA means they are relying on you and others for private and professional feedback to correct issues with the game. As such, I think you're sort of missing the point of your role in this.

On the other hand, if you played the beta and came away feeling like the game is missing too much content, or is thematically problematic (i.e. the gameplay is too much of the same-old-same-old or what-not), in other words "issues that a closed beta isn't going to fix" then I could see where you might have reason to bail on this game. It's just hard to tell, given that way too many gamers these days treat betas like a way to demo a game for free, then come away with bad attitudes because they see error and failed to recognize their part in the process. And of course that attitude is propogated by marketing depts. for these publishers that treat open betas like free publicity.

Descriptions of the beta are currently NDA violations, guys.

Please do not post opinions on the beta or descriptions as they will be deleted. The weekend beta content and ONLY that content may be posted once that begins.