Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Beta testing. [mod edit]
Waterlily
Member UncommonPosts: 3,105
If a company asks you to test a game for them, using your connection, your time, your PC, ... they should be paying you.
Paying to beta test a game is one more of these ridiculous F2P concepts that creeped into this genre.
"But I like doing it"...many people like their job too, that doesn't mean they don't want to get paid.
[mod edit]
Comments
Beta testing is either glorified marketing or it is paying for an unfinished game (AKA early access).
In the first case I think I do get something out of it in that it functions as a demo for the game in question and might save me from wasting my money on mediocre games (admittedly didn't work on GW2 which I loved in the beta for some reason). I don't mind giving my time for a free beta but I do think there is something wrong with paying for beta access.
Early Access seems like a magnet for scams to me and a waste of money even at the best of times. I don't like or approve of it.
I see paid Beta access as a kind of deliberate vetting thing, especially if it's pre-Open Beta.
Everyone gets in for Open Beta and, so, there's no purchase required. They get to kick the tires, check it out and voice their opinions of it without spending a dime.
For the earlier Beta, and even Alpha stages, I don't think it's a bad thing. Someone who's invested actual money in a product before it's released is much more likely to have an interest in seeing it launch with as much polish and as few probems as possible. They're more likely to take it seriously, to submit bugs, give constructive feedback and such that can help the product improve.
People who get into a Beta for free, with no barrier other than having to fill out an application and give all the "right" answers, has nothing but the time they're willing to spend on it. This, unfortunately, means that people who have no interest in seeing the game succeed, or worse, actively want to see it fail can get in as well.
I'm sure everyone here has seen and dealt with those people in Betas where applying and being accepted were the only qualifications. They run around, spamming chat with "lol this game sucks", "just another WoW clone", "-insert game here- destroys this game", "F2P in 2 months, this game is fail", and on and on. I'm sure we've all seen those same people infest Beta forums, spreading their nonsense there as well. And I'm not tlaking about "people with a negative opinion". I'm talking about people who are clearly only interested in trolling and flaming everyone and everything about the game.
Every Beta I've ever been in that's allowed limited public access has been plagued by these people. They're not helping the game. They're not contributing. They're being nothing more than a pain in the ass to everyone - the other testers, and the developers.
Outside the game, the shenanigans continues. They post spoiler info on various sources. They take screenshots or videos of content that is - by definition of being in Beta - is not 100% bug-free yet, and represent it as "the finished product". They do reviews of the game in Beta... sometimes as early as Alpha from other MMOs I've seen and followed... deliberately misrepresenting it as "the finished product".
Then there's the types who will openly say - in shout, in the Beta test - "I'm not testing this for them. That's their job. If they want me to do their work for them, they can pay me". How these people aren't kicked from the beta is beyond me.
In ARR's beta, there was a person in their forums who stated, quite openly, he wasn't there to test, and he wasn't going to. He was there to play. He insisted that he deserved it, because SE owed him that for having bought the game at 1.0.
So, let's face it... While it's nice to think everyone who applies for a MMO's beta is genuinely invested and interested in contributing... Reality paints a much different and far uglier picture.
I often see claims of how "Betas are nothing more than marketing or free trials", but that's nonsense. That's a classic case of people projecting their own behavior on to the developers. The developers invite testers into the game to test the game to gather data on things that need to be fixed, tweaked, etc. It's the players who, in their entitled minds, treat it as a free trial or early preview; an opportunity to learn the game, discover any possible advantages/exploits, and get a jump on those who didn't get in.
Does Beta Testing act as a source of marketing and hype generation? Sure. But that's a two-edged sword. The hype could be negative just as much as it could be positive.
As for people claiming a developer is "hiding" behind the NDA to "hide the true state of the game from the players"? That's another thing people twist around to make it seem like some devious thing to "silence criticism". Again, that's a disingenuous position. It prevents people from sharing any information or opinions on it... positive or negative. How many times do people respond to forum posts, wanting to defend the game or correct some baseless or otherwise dubious claim, but have to stop short of doing so due to NDA restrictions? That's something that would be positive for the game... but they can't say it... because they've agreed to abide the NDA, and if they haven't, the site moderators have.
NDA's and Beta Tests are an integral part of software development and protection of IP and proprietary info/tech, etc. It didn't come about with MMOs. I've gotten jobs at companies before that required me to sign an NDA to work there, because they developed a proprietary software that another company could benefit from if they got their hands on it. And I *worked* there. I wasn't just "some customer wanting to preview the product". It's standard practice.
And really, let's face it... Considering how willingly people break NDA to bash a MMO even when one is in place... Can you imagine what they'd do if one weren't?
So really, people are going to keep redefining what a NDA is, or what Betas are for. They'll continue imposing their own self-serving "theories" as to what they are and why they exist, for no other reason than to justify their attitude toward the game, statements about it, or their behavior within it. At the end of the day, though... most of the complaints and conspiracy theories people spin about Betas and NDAs are just pure, uneducated and willfully ignorant nonsense.
Annnnnnnd... I rest my case.
There is some indie games this actually does work well for but the companys have to also be honest from the get go. Games like 7 days to die and the dead linger have preorder which includes all alpha and beta access and you can immediately download the games so they are basically paid beta,alpha. But the devs in both of those games take feedback seriously and implement things asked for by the community into their games and change things accordingly. Some games would have very slow development or not be here at all if it wasnt for the paid beta/alpha and kickstarter games. My favorite all around game right now is 7 days to die and I can tell you they couldnt get funded but as soon as it hit kickstarter it was a instant success and continues to drive in profit growing a large community. So its really up to the player to research before they invest in games that offer early access.
If that's what closed/open betas are, what does that make Early Access? Consumers pay to test games, many times in pre-alpha state. Pay what is often the full retail price for a frustrating headache - makes my skin crawl.
Someone takes the 'fun' too seriously.
"The problem is that the hardcore folks always want the same thing: 'We want exactly what you gave us before, but it has to be completely different.'
-Jesse Schell
"Online gamers are the most ludicrously entitled beings since Caligula made his horse a senator, and at least the horse never said anything stupid."
-Luke McKinney
I should add that when I'm in open beta I do fill out the surveys thoughtfully and report any bugs I find. I consider this part of it and kind of interesting. I just have no illusions that they picked me because of any special qualification I have. They're trying to sell me the game and I'm test driving it. Any testing or feedback that occurs seems incidental and beside the point.
b.s.
They present their options and you can say no (precisely because you are not getting paid or because you don't agree with the terms of service) or you can accept the offer because of your own reasons.
This shouldn't be hard. But apparently it is.
My guess for the EQ Next landmark deal is that people feel their money is well spent for an early access alpha as well as a chance to influence the game at this stage. It is my understanding that they can get their money back if they don't like the game or for "whatever reason they have".
As someone else pointed out elsewhere , it seems to be a barrier to entry so that only those who are serious participate. It's sad that it has come to that but given some of the stellar participants in the Elder Scrolls beta, I can see the reasoning.
(I'll remove this or snarkiness)
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Yeah.... sure..... "beta". If you'd ever participated in an "actual" beta test, you'd know the difference.
What's better is "Alpha" access. Oooooo, it's even earlier! Yet, weird, it seems awfully complete too. Huh.
There are many reasons for it, though.
1) People have become highly ineffective as beta testers. They simply say, "Awww, this is so buggy, I'm outta here!". So, not only do you lose a potential customer, but you also get back press and you never hear about the issues they found because they don't want to take the time to write a bug report.
2) Traditionally, it's been difficult to get into a beta, so based on that exclusivity, yes, you can buy it. Plus, maybe they can squeeze one or two defects out of you. Plus, if they make you buy in, then they at least convert you as a customer. You might have buyers remorse, but you'll grow to love it because you own it. Just ask anyone who bought a Magic Bullet or a Slap Chop. How can you fault them for converting a sale? Promises are made by retail boxed games every day. They're selling you an illusion, no different than this.
3) Some countries actually PAY the developer while it's in beta. There are many subsidies in place to support technology companies. However, once a game actually releases, that subsidy also disappears. So through the magic of creative marketing, we have games which seem to be in "Open Beta" for years. In reality, that's just their new fandangled way of saying, "Yes, it's released" and still cash in on any funding they might be able to get.
4) Since people have become, largely, inept at performing "beta" testing, they're really not doing any testing at all, you're just playing a game, so why would anyone pay you for that?
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------
I'm old-school so alpha and beta mean testing phases to me. That some companies use them as marketing ploys seems extraordinarily risky, as we've seen with a lot of games that get terribad beta reviews and launch with crappy sales.
In the olden days, being invited to beta was a privilege and it was almost unheard of for someone to break an NDA because of it. Today, NDAs are worthless if you have the public able to access your testing phases.
Like the OP, I do think this is the developer's area of responsibility. Unlike the OP, I do not expect to be paid for the privilege of testing. But I would recommend that developers and publishers really weigh the risks of public access before a game is ready, no matter how much money you might get from it. Some things just might not be worth it in the longer run.
I respectfully disagree with the OP.
I think its a Great idea to get players invested in the game as early as possible. Definitely don't pay testers, that will divest them which is the opposite of what you want.
Take it one step further and charge them for Alpha access. Yes! for Alpha..
Then when beta comes, charge them for that as well (if not already paid into Alpha).
Investing players into your game by making them spend time, money, and effort is a sold way to build what sales call Customer Buy-In.
Why? It is much harder to leave or burn down a house that you helped build.
If you pay 500$ for a game, you will talk it up on the internet better then that bearded guy selling towels.
-WL
P.S. I encourage you to Google 'Ben Franklin Effect'. Brilliant man who convinced France to bankrupt itself for our country's independence.
Werewolf Online(R) - Lead Developer
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
-------------------------
"Searchers after horror haunt strange, far places..." ~ H.P.Lovecraft, "From Beyond"
Member Since March 2004
A sure sign that you are in an old, dying paradigm/mindset, is when you are scared of new ideas and new technology. Don't feel bad. The world is moving on without you, and you are welcome to yell "Get Off My Lawn!" all you want while it happens. You cannot, however, stop an idea whose time has come.
Sorry, addendum; With the exception of Sony Online Entertainment products now...
-------------------------
"Searchers after horror haunt strange, far places..." ~ H.P.Lovecraft, "From Beyond"
Member Since March 2004
Well, let's read between the lines here. There has been a group of "testers" that have been playing alpha and betas for a long time now for free. They are losing test slots to paid testers and they're losing the special snowflake status they had. I think for a long time now some problems with game design and demographics have been because of this somewhat stagnant pool of testers.
Maybe the OP fits in that or maybe they just liked to get free testing and now they don't get it as much so they're mad. Free testing is still out there if you look, but not as much as it was before.
If someone wants to test Project Gorgon for free they can. Lego Minifigures Online is accepting beta test applications, according to their Facebook page, with very minimal requirements.
I still test stuff for free, just not the AAA cool kid hipster game of the month. That is becoming harder to get free access to. That is what I think the OP is complaining about.
That's an interesting perspective. I am wholly ignorant of this section of the game industry and the very few paid testers I know work for large AAA developers where part of their job is to test the competition.
LOL! You realize beta testing is not actually beta testing. It's been through internal testing, alpha testing, friends and family etc… by the time it gets to beta it's because they are ready to test concepts that need population. At that point the game is usually very near completion and is nearly as enjoyable as it's going to be on release date. Not sure what your rant is about, playing a 90% finished game before it comes out is 90% as fun as it would be on release
Not only that but it gives hardcore gamers all the information they need to power game to the top come release.
Main Game: Eldevin (Plat0nic)
2nd Game: Path of Exile (Platonic Hate)
You aren't paid as a beta tester because the company doesn't require you to meet deliverables. You don't have to parse logs, test X,Y,Z content, and produce daily or weekly reports on your progress. You aren't required to play 30 hours a week and then spend another 15-20 hours doing reports and updating code. You aren't on their payroll.
If you paid for early alpha/beta access, then you get the "privilege" of seeing the game before it is released. If you are lucky the devs have special forums for you to voice your input and you may actually get to see changes made to the game based on your input. You should expect tons bugs and avoid reporting on duplicate findings, which wastes the devs times. You are basically an early version of a stress tester that gets a little extra input into final gameplay.
Other than the paid betas or family/friend betas, just about everything else that is considered beta is basically publicity, aka a free trial. The game is almost in the finished stages and you are expected to spread word of mouth. Even though there is an NDA restricting your online posts, the companies know you will tell your friends all about it and try to convince them to play. If it is 6 months before launch you can expect very little changes. The core combat, animations, quest systems, etc are all finished. Those last few months are just tidying up UI, artwork, and adding "end game" content which is now the main focus...keeping the players in the game. They might be finalizing extra systems that they didn't have time to fully vet, i.e. crafting or guild functions. Otherwise don't expect major changes in those last 6 months. What you see is what you get. Hopefully the major bugs are being cleaned up that affect questing or combat. However, the core gameplay isn't going to change.
Minor example. ESO, people complaining about only 5 slots on the hotbar and trying to request more through feedback. That's the core gameplay. It's not going to change. You should know how many skills you get from all the reviews.
No doubt.
You're not trying to end world hunger....you're playing a game. If you don't want to pay for beta's or early access.....don't. Telling others how to enjoy their time is a far bigger issue in this genre than paid betas are.
Wait so people who pay for a beta-test have no self respect for themselves? Don't you think you're just being a little bit too melodramatic?
I'd say OP takes his opinion to seriously.