Beta Testing?

(Slade05) #21

“Well in their defense, ETQW was the worst BF game ever.”

:slight_smile:
made my lonely new year night

(halex) #22

I’m also pretty sure this is probably what’s most likely going to happen.
Well, the closed beta mightn’t necessarily be hand picked by SD individually, but yeah, I certainly expect it to be quite exclusive.

If there is an open ‘beta’ closer to release, it’ll probably be more of a demo and to get the word out than anything else.

(Albatrossy) #23

I wouldn’t be surprised if they decided to release a public multiplayer beta like they did with Halo 3. For those of you who don’t know, they released Crackdown with a beta multiplayer of Halo 3. With Call of Duty: World at War, they released a large closed beta where anybody could sign up for it. Both of which, are big names and sold a lot of copies.

My only concern would be time constrictions. Obviously, they would need to finish it on, or ahead of, schedule. It would definitely get a fanbase quicker that way.

(DoubleDigit) #24

I’d say, give beta invitations to all who still play Quake Wars and work from there. Some people might buy Quake wars just to play Brink beta…

(Floris) #25

For what’s it worth, I wouldn’t have considered buying ET:QW if the only map I’d played was Valley. So the open beta saved the game for me.

(tokamak) #26

Plus not all ETQW players are that bright to begin with

(kamikazee) #27

[QUOTE=tokamak;205425]Well in their defense, ETQW was the worst BF game ever.[/QUOTE]Hah!
Love the perspective in that one. The best part is that they fooled themselves.

Closed beta testing has one golden rule though: tell, don’t ask.

(stealth6) #28

I’d say no beta or very very small beta (select group)
As for a demo that can go both ways imo, like with L4D I loved the demo bought the game and then ever played it.
Also using steam and offering the demo for a limited period is the way to go imo.

but some games you play the demo then go blah, and then don’t buy the game at all, so could be a disadvantage aswell.

(signofzeta) #29

if there was a beta test, it definitely should be for the PS3, or any system that is much harder to develop for.

(aimology) #30

That is a stupid idea. Let us give invites to people who play a bad game, that is also nothing like brink. Makes alot of sense.

(SockDog) #31

For L4D I have to say you MUST play it online. I get great enjoyment from playing through campaigns, even on pubs with random players.

Can’t stand playing on my own more than a few minutes.

Guess to bring this on topic a little. If you release a demo make sure it emphasises the experience you’re selling.

IMO the beta test should tackle more balance, bugs and exploit issues. I’d hope FPS drops and server lag would be address before any near to final beta.

(Slade05) #32

aimology

“people who play a bad game”
How nice of you.

“nothing like brink”
Classes? Objective/mission structure?
Or am I talking to a tree here?

(SockDog) #33

Bit more off topic but no $4.99 ETQW love in the Steam Sales? Activision and id be damned.

(DoubleDigit) #34

Exactly how is Quake wars a bad game and nothing like Brink?

(Shiv) #35

+1 to this

(murka) #36

Can you be more wrong?

Over the long time of playing etqw i’ve discovered numerous bugs and have a feel for the game.

People to beta test should be familiar with the engine, should be thinking outside the box and find ways to get the advantage in a game, usually finding exploits this way.
In the other hand, people with no experience of the engine and those who follow exp tasks will surely be of very little help in finding bugs. I mean, how can you if you don’t know if something is at the edge of having a bug and you play the same way every time?

(stealth6) #37

[QUOTE=murka10;205651]
People to beta test should be familiar with the engine, should be thinking outside the box and find ways to get the advantage in a game, usually finding exploits this way.
In the other hand, people with no experience of the engine and those who follow exp tasks will surely be of very little help in finding bugs. I mean, how can you if you don’t know if something is at the edge of having a bug and you play the same way every time?[/QUOTE]

great point mostly when i test stuff I find lots of bugs since I really look for them, try every route etc… most players just stick to what they know.

Also a reason why i don’t support the idea of an open beta.

(hozz) #38

wrong thread sorry

(Metal-Geo) #39

[QUOTE=murka10;205651]Can you be more wrong?

Over the long time of playing etqw i’ve discovered numerous bugs and have a feel for the game.

People to beta test should be familiar with the engine, should be thinking outside the box and find ways to get the advantage in a game, usually finding exploits this way.
In the other hand, people with no experience of the engine and those who follow exp tasks will surely be of very little help in finding bugs. I mean, how can you if you don’t know if something is at the edge of having a bug and you play the same way every time?[/QUOTE]
You say it as if beta testing is there just for finding bugs and glitches.

Testing the balance of weapons and classes is just, if not more, important. And even someone who never played ET:QW can give useful feedback on weapon and class balance.

(DoubleDigit) #40

[QUOTE=Metal-Geo;205720]You say it as if beta testing is there just for finding bugs and glitches.

Testing the balance of weapons and classes is just, if not more, important. And even someone who never played ET:QW can give useful feedback on weapon and class balance.[/QUOTE]

And one player already used with the enemy territory game style won’t be able to find balance issues?

On the other hand, a new player who never played objective based games, may give hints as to how intuitive the whole experience is. Here Quake wars was a disaster, way too much information for a new player and no clear hints as to what he has to do, especially if he’s not that interested in the game.