After reading the interview from warcry that was posted in this tread, it seems to me that there is a an open beta. Only not a traditional open beta. What I mean is they've had sign-ups for beta. All those that signed up for that will be let in during "open beta". Its just not a free-for-all "open beta". Now why they are doing this, I don't know I would think that an open beta of even just a week before release can only help them. Some of my theories are:
1. By letting in those that previously signed up for beta, they are essentially letting in those that want to be there rather than x amount of children who furiously scour the net looking for the next 'open beta' with no intention of ever paying for one of these games. Also preventing fanbois from clogging up forums with "I'm in open beta and it sucks" posts.
2. SOE is indeed the evil, greedy corporation that most would have you believe, and they are forcing many to buy the game so they can try it, only to quit playing in a month for what ever reason. (I don't believe this)
3. They understand that open beta's are essentially useless only to provide an idea of how many plan on playing and to stress the servers neither of which detrimental for release.
One thing I've never heard a single person say on this subject, in any forum. Is that SOE has 4 current mmo's in the market right now. So, why stress test a server base which you know works and can sustain a mass rush of people? Since that is the reason for open beta, to let a large number of people who may or may not actually buy the game, do everything they possibly can to crash the server by simply being online. I mean, they know none of the people who 'sign-up' for open beta have any intention of giving real feedback, so why bother with all the hassle?
This place is full of tree-huggers and tofu fartn' faeries...
Originally posted by Drega One thing I've never heard a single person say on this subject, in any forum. Is that SOE has 4 current mmo's in the market right now. So, why stress test a server base which you know works and can sustain a mass rush of people? Since that is the reason for open beta, to let a large number of people who may or may not actually buy the game, do everything they possibly can to crash the server by simply being online. I mean, they know none of the people who 'sign-up' for open beta have any intention of giving real feedback, so why bother with all the hassle?
This is what I meant by my 3rd theory in my previous post.
I agree with Tombs and the others who posted here. EQ2 doesn't need an open beta, it has a large enough following in name only that it doesn't need the marketing hype that open betas are used for these days. That's really all open betas are now. Beyond perhaps some server load capacity testing, they only serve to let people play the game for free, post on message boards and hype the product. Its just a marketing scam. Hence why EQ2 is having a (mostl) closed beta by invite only. Perhaps they are like, actually testing the game.
Originally posted by Xblade724 but isn't that why we have patches? ----------------------- Xblade "Never underestimate the platinum dragon"
You can't handle patching persistent world games the same way as you would say a Battlefield 1942, there needs to be a certain amount of content available so it can at least ship out. With a game like Battlefield the code is done, at this point it would be bug fixes, added content, and game balancing etc. Most of the time actually closer to 90% of the time, when a game ships, there is already a patch waiting that was worked on during the manufacturing phase. In persistant world games, the code is never done, sure the basic engine and AI scripts are there but they are always improving and re-writing the engine (ex. DAoC). Every MMO that ships is usually just the skeleton with it's fully realized ideas to be added during it's lifecycle.
Sure they can ship eq2 now and patch it in the afterwards, but you might end up in a SWG situation of being in a gameworld with very little content, poor balance (just an example you SWG players no hate from me ) and in your first year of release every message board, magazine and chat room is rife with statements of how bad the game is. Therefore turning off even more potential customers. Not very good for business.
Originally posted by Xblade724 if they don't want to have an open beta because they are "balanced enough" then why do they constantly delay the game release date and not put an official release date for it? It was supposed to be released in summer, then end of summer, then september and now mid october. this is reminding me of half-life 2... ----------------------- Xblade "Never underestimate the platinum dragon"
The only official release date ever given has been... 2004. That's it. It'll be out sometime in 2004.
One thing I've never heard a single person say on this subject, in any forum. Is that SOE has 4 current mmo's in the market right now.So, why stress test a server base which you know works and can sustain a mass rush of people? Since that is the reason for open beta, to let a large number of people who may or may not actually buy the game, do everything they possibly can to crash the server by simply being online. I mean, they know none of the people who 'sign-up' for open beta have any intention of giving real feedback, so why bother with all the hassle?
You see, it's not lag. It's a new feature they added. It's like bullet time, they just haven't added the zany effects yet. Amazing amounts of bullet time for everyone. Which is good, because people can only take so much bullet time, I guess freeing up all the good farming spots for me.
I fully expect to be accused of bashing the game for that post. Followed by someone wishing me death, or grievous bodily harm for daring to question their own personal Jesus
Very well written pros and cons provided by JBo1 - This person - Assuming not a reflection of a young lady has been to point out that while open beta is something from a wish-list, Sony really doesnt need to do it. NDA has been partially lifted for some fan sights and reporting areas which shows there is some bias in what Sony is willing to let out of the door but that wont stop people who really want the game from observing the right to at least try it. I personally have 3 copies of the game on order atm - and did play EQ1 for almost 4 years - was a shame at the end that they started flaming the market with alot of content that wasnt playable - but i'm not here to at fuel to the fire on that. Personally I'm looking forward to EQ2 - hopefully they will be able to keep me around for some time down the road. Yes for those who may want to flame me - i am more of a solo type player, but plans are a bunch of use will be getting together to do more in EQ2 than we were able to accomplish in EQ1. Sony is at least getting some smarts about the fact of instancing some of the content, even on my son's computer - which was not that bad there was a lot of lag trying to do the game even with all stuff turned off. Sony is taking something of a chance in avenuing this type of content, but in the longrun it appears they will have a good shot at controlling the features of the game that will make it fun for all - i hope. In the final run it will depend alot on what happens after the game is released. Good contact with the support people will make all the difference in how many people stay with the game. They do a good job, don't lambast the population with alot of updates that cut off people in the game, and update the low level content along with the high end stuff so they dont depopulate the entrance (low-level) areas, and actually take time to show an interest in their customers will all lead to a very sucessful game. There are alot of games, i.e. Saga of Ryzom for instance (already live) that will provide people interested in the genre of online games alot of opportunity to filter bad and good with their own interests.
I wish everyone looking foward to release of this and other online games the greatest success possible - JBo1 - you have an intuitive sense about how u handle things - this is gonna make u one of super players down the road - congrats on your level headed objective post - hope I get the chance to meet u online down the road.
there's no well in hell I'm going to buy this game if I can't try it out first...
The purpose of an Open Beta isn't to give you the opportunity to decide whether you like the game. Statements like this reinforce the fact that not everyone can be a good beta tester.
Sorry, but I disagree with this statement completely. Is there some magic rule sayings if you are playing and basing are purchase judgement on it. That in some way you aren't testing or being a good tester?
As things stand now. I have a new MMO policy. If I can't get into a closed beta, open beta, or stress testing of a game. I won't be even looking at it as a possible purchase till 6 months AFTER it's release. After getting burnt by Shadowbane and Horizons. I absolutely REFUSE to buy any MMO at release that I haven't beta tested.
Dark and Light, World of Warcraft, Everquest 2, Guild Wars, Mourning, and Wish are all MMO's I am highly excited about. As it stands now though. Only Guilds Wars and World of Warcraft I will be buying at release. As I had my chance to test both. I'm happy with their progress. As well as have faith that the companies developing them. Are making good strides to hammer out any bugs. Be they client/server/gameplay ones.
In War - Victory. In Peace - Vigilance. In Death - Sacrifice.
Is there some magic rule sayings if you are playing and basing are purchase judgement on it. That in some way you aren't testing or being a good tester?
Yes, if you agree to be an Open or Closed Beta tester and the only reason you are there is to decide if you want to buy it at retail you are not a good tester.
My suggestion for you is that you wait three years and sometime in 2007 you take advantage of the EQ2 14-Day Free Trial.
I just don't want to spend my hard earned money on something I may or may not like.
Another reason open beta's are good. I'm not going to whin if I don't get in, but that's just going to be one less person shelling out $20? a month for a game that's going to run like sh*t on any decent system.
I want to play a game where I don't have to put the settings on super uber low to enjoy getting a decent FPS.
Funny the betas I have had the pleasure of testing, always said the purpose of us being there was to test, the game play, and functions as well as stress the system, report bugs. Don't recall ever seeing "we invite you to this beta to try our game before you buy it"
Most games after they gone gold have a demo you can try, thats the "here try us and buy us if you like us" Not Beta. To admit you only beta to see if you will buy it just shows imho your depth of selfishness.
If you people grocery shop like you play beta to see if you will buy it, would most likely starve. I don't see grocery stores handing out steaks, and such for you to take it home cook it, an come back to buy their meats. Its a you buy it, then try it philosphy out there get use to it.
There you go again Thoom, comparing computer games to food... You sure like that analogy don't you!
Interesting way to try and steer away from the discussion at hand though.... "Developers don't say you can use an open beta to try a game before you buy, therefore it logically follows that you are selfish. Oh, and something about food. Yeah... Food."
I find myself compelled to agree that all the children whining and crying about, "Oh poor me. If I dont get into BETA I wont play the game..boo-hoo..because I wont know if it is fun or not.". Nary a mention about your wanting to ensure the quality, enjoyment or performance of the game.Well you know what? Life sucks!...Get a helmet! You sniveling little bitches make me sick to my very core. And you sit and wonder, "Why oh why havent I got that magical e-mail that will let me share ME with the EQ2 world?". Guess what? SOE can smell shit from miles away children. From what I see of all your petty arguments and lack of any tangible intelligence and If I were SOE I wouldnt let you fools BETA test a sandwich. So, leave the TESTING to the people that want to do just that, test the damn thing. Now, go tell your mommy that you need your snotty little noses whiped and take a nap.
No-one's complaining about not being accepted into beta. The discussion is about the fact that based on SOE's history it's reasonable to assume that the reason they won't do an open beta is because they're about to release an inferior product.
(1) Download the client and play no matter who you are? (2) Download the client and play if you signed up back in July? (3) Member of Fileplanet?
How do we really know none of these will happen?
How many games before EQ2 and WoW have had open betas like we are defining here?
As for the free trial idea: Don't expect it. SOE is pretty arrogantly thinking people will like their game, so there is no need for a free trial.
As for the stress test: Don't expect it. SOE has EQ1, Planetside, and SWG to pull proven network code from. Besides, they already have enough beta testers to stress test a server shard. The bandwidth for 20 more of those is already proven.
Originally posted by eeargy No-one's complaining about not being accepted into beta. The discussion is about the fact that based on SOE's history it's reasonable to assume that the reason they won't do an open beta is because they're about to release an inferior product.Try to pay attention.
Making this argument would then apply to countless other games whose development cycles didn't include open betas. It's just a bad argument altogether.
Originally posted by Thoom Funny the betas I have had the pleasure of testing, always said the purpose of us being there was to test, the game play, and functions as well as stress the system, report bugs. Don't recall ever seeing "we invite you to this beta to try our game before you buy it" Most games after they gone gold have a demo you can try, thats the "here try us and buy us if you like us" Not Beta. To admit you only beta to see if you will buy it just shows imho your depth of selfishness. If you people grocery shop like you play beta to see if you will buy it, would most likely starve. I don't see grocery stores handing out steaks, and such for you to take it home cook it, an come back to buy their meats. Its a you buy it, then try it philosphy out there get use to it.
Buying food and entertainment aren't even close to the same. I see where you're goign with this... but playing MMORPGs for 10 years... I'm sick of spending my fu*king money on every game that comes out to see if I like it or not... so yes, you can call me selfish... I deserve to be!
Originally posted by aeric67 Originally posted by eeargy No-one's complaining about not being accepted into beta. The discussion is about the fact that based on SOE's history it's reasonable to assume that the reason they won't do an open beta is because they're about to release an inferior product.Try to pay attention.
Making this argument would then apply to countless other games whose development cycles didn't include open betas. It's just a bad argument altogether.
You CAN make this argument though.
Why would a company have an Open Beta? A) They can't get enough closed testers without one. They get a chance to show off their excllent game to the public, increaseing the amount of people who will buy the game.
If A is not true, as it obviously isn't with EQ2, then B must be the reason for not haveing an open beta. What reason could they have for not haveing an Open Beta because they don't want to or can't show off their excllent product?
Possibilities are three. A) Not enough money to hold the open beta. The open beta would decrease their profits. C) They are inexperianced or naive and idealistic and wish to suprise the public.
A is obviously not true. This is _SONY_ for Xists sake. C is obviously not true....See EQ1. The only reason left that they could have for not haveing an open beta would be that they would make less money because of it.
Why would they make less money by haveing an open beta than by not? Obviously because the Hype for the game will sell them more copies than the reality. Furthermore the NEGATIVE HYPE generated by not haveing an open beta will lose them LESS customers than them haveing an open beta would....
Now why would that be? Could it be because the game is unfinished or unfun? That is the most likely explination in EQ2's case.
There are PLENTY of reasons not to have an open beta. Not a dam one of them applies to SOE except "game sucks".
Originally posted by aeric67 Originally posted by eeargy No-one's complaining about not being accepted into beta. The discussion is about the fact that based on SOE's history it's reasonable to assume that the reason they won't do an open beta is because they're about to release an inferior product.Try to pay attention.
Making this argument would then apply to countless other games whose development cycles didn't include open betas. It's just a bad argument altogether.
Wrong.
Here is the argument: "Based on SOE's history it's reasonable to assume that the reason they won't do an open beta is because they're about to release an inferior product."
So you see the argument couldn't be applied to any other company, because the argument is about SOE exclusively.
If I'd said "It's reasonable to assume that the reason game developers don't do an open beta is because they're about to release an inferior product.", then yes, that would be a bad argument, but that's not what I said and that's not what I meant.
Comments
After reading the interview from warcry that was posted in this tread, it seems to me that there is a an open beta. Only not a traditional open beta. What I mean is they've had sign-ups for beta. All those that signed up for that will be let in during "open beta". Its just not a free-for-all "open beta". Now why they are doing this, I don't know I would think that an open beta of even just a week before release can only help them. Some of my theories are:
1. By letting in those that previously signed up for beta, they are essentially letting in those that want to be there rather than x amount of children who furiously scour the net looking for the next 'open beta' with no intention of ever paying for one of these games. Also preventing fanbois from clogging up forums with "I'm in open beta and it sucks" posts.
2. SOE is indeed the evil, greedy corporation that most would have you believe, and they are forcing many to buy the game so they can try it, only to quit playing in a month for what ever reason. (I don't believe this)
3. They understand that open beta's are essentially useless only to provide an idea of how many plan on playing and to stress the servers neither of which detrimental for release.
One thing I've never heard a single person say on this subject, in any forum. Is that SOE has 4 current mmo's in the market right now. So, why stress test a server base which you know works and can sustain a mass rush of people? Since that is the reason for open beta, to let a large number of people who may or may not actually buy the game, do everything they possibly can to crash the server by simply being online. I mean, they know none of the people who 'sign-up' for open beta have any intention of giving real feedback, so why bother with all the hassle?
This place is full of tree-huggers and tofu fartn' faeries...
I agree with Tombs and the others who posted here. EQ2 doesn't need an open beta, it has a large enough following in name only that it doesn't need the marketing hype that open betas are used for these days. That's really all open betas are now. Beyond perhaps some server load capacity testing, they only serve to let people play the game for free, post on message boards and hype the product. Its just a marketing scam. Hence why EQ2 is having a (mostl) closed beta by invite only. Perhaps they are like, actually testing the game.
You can't handle patching persistent world games the same way as you would say a Battlefield 1942, there needs to be a certain amount of content available so it can at least ship out. With a game like Battlefield the code is done, at this point it would be bug fixes, added content, and game balancing etc. Most of the time actually closer to 90% of the time, when a game ships, there is already a patch waiting that was worked on during the manufacturing phase. In persistant world games, the code is never done, sure the basic engine and AI scripts are there but they are always improving and re-writing the engine (ex. DAoC). Every MMO that ships is usually just the skeleton with it's fully realized ideas to be added during it's lifecycle.
Sure they can ship eq2 now and patch it in the afterwards, but you might end up in a SWG situation of being in a gameworld with very little content, poor balance (just an example you SWG players no hate from me
) and in your first year of release every message board, magazine and chat room is rife with statements of how bad the game is. Therefore turning off even more potential customers. Not very good for business.
----------------
Current:
Planetside
-----------------
Past:
Neocron,EQ,EQOA,AO,CoH,FFXI,Outpost Beta,EVE,DAoC,AC2,SWG
Current Games:
Its their choice, they can do what they want, and they dont need to compete with WoW, they will do much better in the long run.
-------------------------
Azzazzimon
-------------------------
Azzazzimon
You see, it's not lag. It's a new feature they added. It's like bullet time, they just haven't added the zany effects yet. Amazing amounts of bullet time for everyone. Which is good, because people can only take so much bullet time, I guess freeing up all the good farming spots for me.
I fully expect to be accused of bashing the game for that post. Followed by someone wishing me death, or grievous bodily harm for daring to question their own personal Jesus
No open beta? who cares...the best part of the article is the quote - "we will be shipping in 2004"
As for those who say they wont play if they dont get to try it first...their loss
less whiners in the game is always a good thing!!!
The purpose of an Open Beta isn't to give you the opportunity to decide whether you like the game. Statements like this reinforce the fact that not everyone can be a good beta tester.
Sorry, but I disagree with this statement completely. Is there some magic rule sayings if you are playing and basing are purchase judgement on it. That in some way you aren't testing or being a good tester?
As things stand now. I have a new MMO policy. If I can't get into a closed beta, open beta, or stress testing of a game. I won't be even looking at it as a possible purchase till 6 months AFTER it's release. After getting burnt by Shadowbane and Horizons. I absolutely REFUSE to buy any MMO at release that I haven't beta tested.
Dark and Light, World of Warcraft, Everquest 2, Guild Wars, Mourning, and Wish are all MMO's I am highly excited about. As it stands now though. Only Guilds Wars and World of Warcraft I will be buying at release. As I had my chance to test both. I'm happy with their progress. As well as have faith that the companies developing them. Are making good strides to hammer out any bugs. Be they client/server/gameplay ones.
In War - Victory.
In Peace - Vigilance.
In Death - Sacrifice.
Is there some magic rule sayings if you are playing and basing are purchase judgement on it. That in some way you aren't testing or being a good tester?
Yes, if you agree to be an Open or Closed Beta tester and the only reason you are there is to decide if you want to buy it at retail you are not a good tester.
My suggestion for you is that you wait three years and sometime in 2007 you take advantage of the EQ2 14-Day Free Trial.
I just don't want to spend my hard earned money on something I may or may not like.
Another reason open beta's are good. I'm not going to whin if I don't get in, but that's just going to be one less person shelling out $20? a month for a game that's going to run like sh*t on any decent system.
I want to play a game where I don't have to put the settings on super uber low to enjoy getting a decent FPS.
What will he do next?
Funny the betas I have had the pleasure of testing, always said the purpose of us being there was to test, the game play, and functions as well as stress the system, report bugs. Don't recall ever seeing "we invite you to this beta to try our game before you buy it"
Most games after they gone gold have a demo you can try, thats the "here try us and buy us if you like us" Not Beta. To admit you only beta to see if you will buy it just shows imho your depth of selfishness.
If you people grocery shop like you play beta to see if you will buy it, would most likely starve. I don't see grocery stores handing out steaks, and such for you to take it home cook it, an come back to buy their meats. Its a you buy it, then try it philosphy out there get use to it.
There you go again Thoom, comparing computer games to food...
You sure like that analogy don't you!
Interesting way to try and steer away from the discussion at hand though.... "Developers don't say you can use an open beta to try a game before you buy, therefore it logically follows that you are selfish. Oh, and something about food. Yeah... Food."
Sheesh...
No-one's complaining about not being accepted into beta. The discussion is about the fact that based on SOE's history it's reasonable to assume that the reason they won't do an open beta is because they're about to release an inferior product.
Try to pay attention.
You have to first answer what Open Beta is:
(1) Download the client and play no matter who you are?
(2) Download the client and play if you signed up back in July?
(3) Member of Fileplanet?
How do we really know none of these will happen?
How many games before EQ2 and WoW have had open betas like we are defining here?
As for the free trial idea: Don't expect it. SOE is pretty arrogantly thinking people will like their game, so there is no need for a free trial.
As for the stress test: Don't expect it. SOE has EQ1, Planetside, and SWG to pull proven network code from. Besides, they already have enough beta testers to stress test a server shard. The bandwidth for 20 more of those is already proven.
Making this argument would then apply to countless other games whose development cycles didn't include open betas. It's just a bad argument altogether.
What will he do next?
Making this argument would then apply to countless other games whose development cycles didn't include open betas. It's just a bad argument altogether.
You CAN make this argument though.
Why would a company have an Open Beta? A) They can't get enough closed testers without one.
They get a chance to show off their excllent game to the public, increaseing the amount of people who will buy the game.
If A is not true, as it obviously isn't with EQ2, then B must be the reason for not haveing an open beta. What reason could they have for not haveing an Open Beta because they don't want to or can't show off their excllent product?
Possibilities are three. A) Not enough money to hold the open beta.
The open beta would decrease their profits. C) They are inexperianced or naive and idealistic and wish to suprise the public.
A is obviously not true. This is _SONY_ for Xists sake. C is obviously not true....See EQ1. The only reason left that they could have for not haveing an open beta would be that they would make less money because of it.
Why would they make less money by haveing an open beta than by not? Obviously because the Hype for the game will sell them more copies than the reality. Furthermore the NEGATIVE HYPE generated by not haveing an open beta will lose them LESS customers than them haveing an open beta would....
Now why would that be? Could it be because the game is unfinished or unfun? That is the most likely explination in EQ2's case.
There are PLENTY of reasons not to have an open beta. Not a dam one of them applies to SOE except "game sucks".
Making this argument would then apply to countless other games whose development cycles didn't include open betas. It's just a bad argument altogether.
Wrong.
Here is the argument: "Based on SOE's history it's reasonable to assume that the reason they won't do an open beta is because they're about to release an inferior product."
So you see the argument couldn't be applied to any other company, because the argument is about SOE exclusively.
If I'd said "It's reasonable to assume that the reason game developers don't do an open beta is because they're about to release an inferior product.", then yes, that would be a bad argument, but that's not what I said and that's not what I meant.