**Poll** Brink Beta ?

(.Chris.) #21

Just hire competent QA staff.

(Z0MBEA5T) #22

Yes I agree with Voxi some what , but dude this is BRINK you cant really compare this to quake at all very very different game and honestly this game was built for the masses if they could do a demo/beta of the final game like battlefield BC2 did a month before release that would be great for all .

(INF3RN0) #23

:):):):):):slight_smile:

(otakustar) #24

I offer some of my spare-time for linux alpha-testing :stuck_out_tongue:
:infiltrator:

(3Suns) #25

I just wrote an article on this subject. Please bear in mind, I am talking about betas for CONSOLE games, not for PC games. The needs and impact are different.

There are three reasons why now more than ever, developers need to engage in extensive, external beta testing of their console based MP games:

  1. games are becoming more and more complex, and proportionally fragile/vulnerable to breaks in code and even just gameplay.
  2. there is an unprecedented number of gamers playing their games. This includes a considerable number of gamers who are bent on discovering and abusing exploits and bugs in a grab for fame through almost instantaneous dissemination of such info via youtube etc.
  3. patches that could on PC be released within hours of the discovery of bugs or exploits now sometimes require console certification that can takes weeks if not months.

Now for some other random observations:

  1. Any game that offers innovative (new and untested) gameplay, should be tested by more than those involved in its development, just as writing should be proofread by those other than the author.

  2. In some ways, betas for new IPs are less critical than for sequels because no one has any expectations of how the game should play. While Gears of War 1 might have benefited greatly from a beta, many loved it as it was and were willing to put up with problems because it was so fresh. Not so for Gears 2. People expect the sequel to not only have new features, but to have all old exploits and bugs completely removed.

  3. Developers offering dedicated servers for their games, have a little more grace as regards betas and patching because some of it can be done server side, especially if they have planned for that functionality. Valve proved this with L4D original for the 360.

I have heard rumor that Splash Damage has no intentions of external beta testing. As a 360 gamer, this concerns me. Microsoft, for one, is apparently very demanding and restricting in permitting and certifying patches/updates, and if Brink has critical bugs and exploits (which it will) many gamers will sell it rather than wait months for the patch -again, this is a non-issue for PC gamers who often get patches within 24 hours. In turn, late adopters of the game, will then pick up used copies rather than new. Neither Bethesda nor Splash Damage makes any money on used games sales.

Please understand, I am not arguing for a beta to let people have a taste of the game (i.e., I am not asking for a ticket to play the game early). I am stating that, in the long run, I think it is in SD/Bethesda’s and the gamer’s best interest.

I wonder to what extent the sales resulting from meeting a rushed deadline outweigh the sales resulting from releasing a solid, beta-tested game. No doubt Bethesda and Splash Damage have talked about this.

(darthmob) #26

[QUOTE=3Suns;216998]I have heard rumor that Splash Damage has no intentions of external beta testing. As a 360 gamer, this concerns me.[/QUOTE]I’m pretty sure that every game gets tested externally.

(brbrbr) #27

Alpha ftw !!
then Omega version instead of poor beta ! :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:
and then [just before final launch]Gamma version[anybody remember Borland Delphi beta-testing ? :-] !

(3Suns) #28

Good point. What I mean by external is semi-public (even if just on a very small scale - hundreds of tickets, not millions), going beyond just the room of beta-testers available through MS quality assurance.

I don’t know what the MS beta-tester program consists of, but after the fiasco that was Gears 2 (which was basically handled as a first party title and as such should have been given considerable access to the best of beta-testing that Microsoft had to offer) I have no confidence at all in their quality assurance. The fact that they then make the developer jump through all sorts of hoops to put out a patch just makes the whole situation miserable.

In the BRINKISH interview coming up, I submitted the following question:

Triple A games are selling in numbers never experienced before. With the sheer number of gamers pushing these games to the limits, exploits and bugs, especially for the console versions (certification time required for patches), are becoming serious issues for the games’ after-sales success. I have read that Splash Damage does not at this time intend to release a beta. What measures is Splash Damage taking to ensure the game is released as stable and exploit/bug free as possible?

I am waiting patiently for that interview, and/or now, direct feedback here in this thread.

(spazski) #29

Respective console/PC betas would be nice and, to add to that, it would be even nicer if the console version was not exclusive to one of the two supported consoles.

(darthmob) #30

[QUOTE=3Suns;217213]Good point. What I mean by external is semi-public (even if just on a very small scale - hundreds of tickets, not millions), going beyond just the room of beta-testers available through MS quality assurance.

I don’t know what the MS beta-tester program consists of, but after the fiasco that was Gears 2 (which was basically handled as a first party title and as such should have been given considerable access to the best of beta-testing that Microsoft had to offer) I have no confidence at all in their quality assurance. The fact that they then make the developer jump through all sorts of hoops to put out a patch just makes the whole situation miserable.[/QUOTE]I think you have mentioned GoW2 a couple of times already. What was wrong with it? I would guess that MS quality assurance only tests functionality and not gameplay.

(Voxie) #31

3Suns will have to clarify, but if I remember correctly there was loads of problem with clipping, players turning invincible and the likes.

(Szakalot) #32

Closed beta;

no open-betas please, people don’t deserve them :slight_smile:

(Apples) #33

we need closed beta for hardcore player only

(tokamak) #34

Shattered Horizon throws it on the other extreme with highly exclusive beta testers, so you can only expect about 16 people to test for a few hours per day with. The benefits are that there are no leaks and people are highly motivated, but I’m not sure if they can get enough work done in time.

The worst example has to be UT3 with their ‘beta demo’. A demo is not a beta and a beta is not a demo. A demo is there to show off the best side of the game, a beta is there to expose the worst. You just can’t let people who have yet to make up their mind about whether they even want to play the game, test it as an unfinished product.

(brbrbr) #35

if both ZM/SD decide/feel thats beta cause more worst impact on gamedev, its [surely]their business.
but look at ETQW as example.
look at Alpha, Beta[any builds of each]and how gradully and fast, game improved.
not only because wide, beta-testing, but im sure, ETQW beta-testers contribution is significant enough, to remember it as good experience/feature/even.

[QUOTE=Szakalot;217260]Closed beta;

no open-betas please, people don’t deserve them :)[/QUOTE]

only Q-Bomb then ?
or at least we deserve attempt to ruuuuun under such ordnance, falling on little, blue planet, callied Earth ?

(AnthonyDa) #36

That would means that BRINK is for hardcore players only, which is false.

(tokamak) #37

Fully depends on how you define hardcore which is rather ambiguous.

(INF3RN0) #38

I would say that anyone who signs up for forums in the first place is pretty “hardcore” by today’s standards :).

(RoryGreen) #39

A Beta should only be put in place if it necessary. On a game like this, I would think that it should have a Beta to test how many glitches people can find which could be fixed for final release. eg. MW2 had NO beta and look at all the glitches… need I say more?

(alias) #40

Yes i would like too have:

a: Beta, only if its allows feedback and improvements.
b: Demo, Just because its an new IP/game, most of people I tell the goodness too, are going like whut… brink?
wusz that…? and i can show them only some good/yet vids.

So yes i would like too have at least one from the above.