Brink beta and my pov

(BioSnark) #21

Given the context of the line, I’d assume he’s talking about screening out dummy accounts as opposed to rewarding heavy post whorage.

Regardless, closed testing / QA is less leaky while just as effective imo.

(BomBaKlaK) #22

Maybe a closed beta for people who preorder the game !? :rolleyes:
Where do I sign ? (presss F3 please !!! spec join or be kick !!) :stuck_out_tongue:

We are ready !! :wink:
http://brink.clan.aie.xooit.fr/index.php

(DarkangelUK) #23

They should do both, Tokamak has been here for 3 weeks and has 542,179 posts :smiley:

I jest… of course

(Szakalot) #24

i find it impossible for SD to decide to go with an open beta after the fiasco of ETQW open beta months before release. They got a lot of feedback, but not nearly as much as necessary at the time, particularly because 90% of the people playing simply enjoyed a free game.
Closed beta with a lot of restrictions - sure
Forum as a source - sure
But no open stuff.

And the ‘phase3’ is called a demo, just like someone stated, this soon to release, they will have GOLD ready…already.

(ehrw) #25

How long you’ve been a member and the amount of posts doesn’t really say much about how you will contribute to a beta. Just says you’ve been a hardcore fan of their previous games and been here for quite a while.
Which of course is important for splash damage to have their base but there’s still other people out there which have lured over here.

(Hansel) #26

I don’t think this or any other forum is a good source for beta testers, because the hardcore fans already know too much about the game, you probably get better feedback from people who jump into the game without knowing too much about it.

The best way to do it (from the developers point of view) is to give beta access to people who have pre-ordered the game, and no one else. Because it is the amount of pre-orders that ultimately decide the fate of the game. If there are lot of pre-orders for Brink, the retailers will increase their stock for the game, which means that in the end more games will be sold. So if you want Brink to be a successful game with a huge community, you need lot of pre-orders, and best way to encourage that is to make beta exclusive to the people who have already bought the game.

(ehrw) #27

[QUOTE=Hansel;231634]I don’t think this or any other forum is a good source for beta testers, because the hardcore fans already know too much about the game, you probably get better feedback from people who jump into the game without knowing too much about it.

The best way to do it (from the developers point of view) is to give beta access to people who have pre-ordered the game, and no one else. Because it is the amount of pre-orders that ultimately decide the fate of the game. If there are lot of pre-orders for Brink, the retailers will increase their stock for the game, which means that in the end more games will be sold. So if you want Brink to be a successful game with a huge community, you need lot of pre-orders, and best way to encourage that is to make beta exclusive to the people who have already bought the game.[/QUOTE]

Though it has become very common to preorder and then cancel the order again to just gain access to the beta. Which is very lame. Seen more and more of it lately

(tokamak) #28

Right so you just use the beta as promotional material rather than what it was intended for in the first place :rolleyes:

(Hansel) #29

I’m really skeptical when it comes to the quality of feedback provided by beta testers who have only spent a few months with the game. For games like these, many of the gameplay balance issues can be solved through internal testing. I guess that is exactly what they are doing now with the extended development time.

To me it seems that usually the only reason why a public beta is offered is because the developers want to find out if there are any computer hardware related problems before shipping out the game, and more importantly they want to promote their game. Sometimes, there is a company like Gamespy/Sony/Microsoft, which is willing to pay money for the exclusive beta test rights in order to promote their own products.

The method of selection of the beta testers is irrelevant, there is no difference between people who gained access to the beta test by pre-ordering the game, or signing up for it without purchasing it. As for the people canceling their pre-orders, stopping that that is entirely up to the developers themselves, if their game is as good as they claim, then people will happily buy the game to continue playing.

(Nail) #30

well, I’ve been a member for over 6 years, ran a highly rated W:ET site and server since 2003 and have second highest post count and the highest rep on the SD forum. That would make me a prime choice for testing if we go by some people’s ideas. Unfortunately, I’m terrible at finding game problems so I’d prefer the developers and publishers do any testing

(BomBaKlaK) #31

But all the Best games have Beta to fix some last issues for example StarCraft 2 !

(SockDog) #32

Now you’re paying to play demo’s on Xbox and PS3 I think we can drop the beta naming BS and just call them “Premium Demo’s” or some other slimy phrase to justify the fact you’re paying for something that was once free.

Actually, now I think back why the hell did reputable developers stop doing MP_TEST releases? I mean that is kinda what we want for Brink isn’t it? Near final code but a stress test to crush a few bugs before the game goes gold rather than having a 0day patch.

(Hansel) #33

Starcraft 2 beta has a clear purpose, to make sure that the game balance is right (Starcraft is all about the balance between the three races), and to stress test the new battle.net. RTS-games are harder to balance than FPS-games with two similar sides.

And I’m not arguing against Brink beta test, I’m just saying that beta is not that important part of the development as gamers seem to believe. Modern Warfare 2 had no beta, and it did not hurt the success of the game at all, there were few nasty exploits left in the game, but those were fixed fairly quickly with a small patches.

In case Bring will have beta, they should stay away from Gamespy and other third-parties, and just distribute the beta themselves (preferably to the people with pre-orders). If I remember correctly, getting into ETQW beta required a paid subscription to Fileplanet/Gamespy, which sucked.

(H0RSE) #34

And I’m not arguing against Brink beta test, I’m just saying that beta is not that important part of the development as gamers seem to believe.

especially open betas, which I think is what the TC proposed.

(SockDog) #35

It required free membership although paid members go some priority over a percentage of the keys.

The logical and probably only place to test a near retail version of the game is going to be via Steam (for PC). Actually given the smaller playerbase the PC will have I’d prefer they release the game on consoles and at the same time do a Beta/Test on the PC with a view to refining the PC release and adding in PC specific features.

(tokamak) #36

[QUOTE=Hansel;231670]I’m really skeptical when it comes to the quality of feedback provided by beta testers who have only spent a few months with the game. For games like these, many of the gameplay balance issues can be solved through internal testing. I guess that is exactly what they are doing now with the extended development time.
[/QUOTE]

Shattered Horizon took huge cues from their Arconaut testers.

They already confirmed they wouldn’t have continued this part of a map if it weren’t for the beta testers being lyrical about it (during the beta it was just a simple carved out rock):

That’s a huge amount of resources spent on just the opinions of a few testers.

(AnthonyDa) #37

Why the pre orders should have access to an incomplete version of the game used for testing ? IMO they should be able to play the demo (which is representative of the full game they bought, not a broken & buggy beta) 1/2 week before the others, but nothing more.

(tokamak) #38

Indeed, if I was only interested in playing the game and not too involved about the development then I wouldn’t want to be bothered with testing versions, it would ruin the experience.

(DepressedOptimist) #39

What measures are you (Splash Damage) taking to ensure the game is released as stable and exploit/bug free as possible?
A: The release of a Beta for Brink is something that is still being discussed, but no decision has been made one way or the other at this stage. At the very least, we’ll be doing a ‘family and friends’ closed Beta with Bethesda and id.
However, exploits and bugs are potential problems we’re very conscious of, and we approach some of our in-house testing with this specifically in mind. Anything goes in our playtests, so if anything is a candidate for abuse, it gets noticed fairly quickly. We also have a full time production testing team here at the office, paying special attention to exploits and griefing opportunities.

From an interview between Brinkish and Richard Ham

My personal opinion is there won’t be an open beta. =[

(Hansel) #40

I would not say that beta is an incomplete version of the game. Starcraft 2 beta is more complete and polished game than most of the games in the stores today. If the game is still incomplete when beta comes out, then that is a good indicator that the final game will be released as a barely finished product.

The games like Brink - that have benefited from extended development time - are almost complete when they push the beta out from the door. It has to be, because, like it or not, the beta has a clear promotional purpose.

Since Brink is a mixture of singleplayer and multiplayer, maybe there won’t be beta at all (no spoilers).