Exploring the Current State of Beta Testing
Karen Hertzberg writes "Since the earliest days of MMO gaming, beta testing has played a pivotal role in the success or failure of our persistent worlds. We've come a long way since the initial tests of Ultima Online and The Realm, but what role do our current beta tests play in the potential outcomes of unreleased titles? To answer this question, Ten Ton Hammer turned to current and former beta decision makers at Cryptic Studios, NetDevil, Sony Online Entertainment, Funcom, and Mythic Entertainment. Some of their answers — and the information they reveal — may surprise you."
[Beta] seems to be more about marketing the game and hyping it up.
So completely accurate.
Honestly I feel that nowadays the developers get confused and can not find a happy medium between listening to every single testers opinion and listening to nobody. In some beta tests I have felt the community was highly ignored while in other tests I have felt that the developers tried to cater to every single tester. Both are and were recipes for failure.
Beta tests now are glorified demos for the games. It used to be so much different. I really hate what's been done to them, and the only way to be a 'real' tester now is to get into the alpha's or in some rare cases early closed betas.
Backing up the first quote and pointing out what Betas have become.
I wish there were more people submitting bug reports, but that's the way it goes with beta, and weâ(TM)re still finding them regardless. Besides, I need all types [of players]. I need the exploits so we can find them ... I need the jerks.
At first I was shocked they would want the scripters and botmakers on so early but I soon understood that you want to catch these serious things as early as possible to fix them because:
By the time beta begins, you've made decision after decision that have compounded on each other. Your assumptions' assumptions' have assumptions about what your game is. The whole product, systems, content, operations, marketing, PR, community ramp, you name it -- is built upon them. Changing core assumptions about the product itself is unlikely to be possible without significant delays, costing progressively more money per month. (Remember, the months toward the end of the dev cycle are the most expensive ones by far.)
Ultimately, you need to believe in your product before you conduct any sort of open beta or release a demo. You can message to players all you want that the game is a "work in progress" and that many things will change before final release, but that wonâ(TM)t stop them from making judgments about the title based on their beta experiences.
I believe that's the fundamental reason behind Blizzard's horrid schedule slippages.
It is disappointing to say, but testing has become a bit of a joke, and I feel that the current crop of recent games are a reflection of that. So many games are being released incomplete (as far as hyped features go) and containing issues that should have been picked up and resolved during the closed beta phase at the latest, but this isn't happening.
It's the classic cash in while you still can mentality that has seen the release of so many unstable games only to have the servers shut off or merged down within a year.
... we're in a bad spot right now.
Here's to hoping the gaming industry finds and reads this article
My work here is dung.
but what role do our current beta tests play in the potential outcomes of unreleased titles?
Companies just release their products anyway. Nowdays beta-testers are referred to as "early adopters". Sadly, that extends to the hardware world as well, as this and this (the forum is riddled with those kinds of posts) demonstrate. At least Google are honest about their products being in permanent beta, but their stuff works unlike the others ;)
/rant, thanks for reading.
Disclaimer: I'm familiar with both items because my father purchased one of those laptops only to have it die within 1-2 months. I bought a Peavey Vypyr amp which was riddled with the bugs that you see in the forums, problems which firmware updates did not fix. I took it in to the repair shop three weeks ago and I just found out that the board my amp needs is backordered until mid-May!
After extensive beta testing, I decided to scrap my game tentatively titled "Kill Orcs Instead of Talking to Girls"... which, coincidentally, is the title of my autobiography.
Kudos for the mention of The Realm! I don't think there has been a purely stat-based graphical MMO since.
*nostalgia's out*
At least in the case of SOE, once a game is in Beta, it's basically done. They just want marketing and bug reporting. The devs are extremely reluctant to change anything once their product is in Beta, no matter how fundamentally flawed the product is in the first place.
We are really just at the beginning of the MMO genre.
The game companies are still trying to figure out how to produce, test, market, maintain these games.
Its a completely new model for them.
Its bound to be a bumpy ride for the next few years, maybe even a decade or so.
In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
By the time most of these games hit Public Beta it's really just stress testing the servers a bit (but never enough) and working on some tuning stuff. Mainly I've seen this by this stage it's really just about getting a solid buzz going around the game. Most users will have broken their NDAs by this point (as we saw happen recently in WotLK), but the entire point is just to get hype going for the game.
Until recently I was working for a game-industry related company, and we had a lot of close interaction with gamers and the game companies. I'm reading the article fully right now for some more of the developer/publisher-perspective details however.
Half the problem is that most of these gamers suck at betatesting. They don't want to file bug reports, they want to play the game free/early so that their guild can get a head start on others. the number of users that I've seen rant about a game having downtime turning beta, doing server wipes, etc... They weren't complaining because they couldn't get enough bug reports in, but because they couldn't get into their Raid.
Because of pressure on various fronts, most of these games are released with insufficient server architecture, horrid bugs, and critical balance issues. This is the stuff that should be stomped out during beta, but it isn't. Beta isn't about testing, its about PR and hype. Wish it was some other way. If i was developing an MMO I'd want to disable users accounts that didn't file bug reports properly, but I know that doesn't do well for the PR side.
People feel entitled to their games, and even more entitled to a chance to play for free. As expected, its not uncommon for some big players in the game industry to give beta accounts to people who run big guilds, but don't necessarily put in bug reports.
Tibbon
tibbon.com
So, they talked about "good" betas and betas that opened miserably and killed a somewhat polished game, (auto assault, IIRC) that was opened too early. What about a game that the beta is BETTER than the released game?
I was part of the open beta of guild wars(i.e. i pre-ordered and was part of the PR wave of beta). It was awesome, everything was fun, it was clear that it wasn't finished, but the missions were OK, the PvE was tolerable, but the PVP was phenomenal. When it was time to release, I fired up my copy and found like 2 skills at the first skill trainer. Approximately 750 in game hours later, it was possible to recreate the PVP experience I had during beta...
750 hours in missions that are only OK and tolerable PvE that turned to miserable at the snails pace that they made you try it. Guildwars isn't a monthly thing based fee, so they gained nothing, absolutely zero, by forcing you to put 750 hours into the original campaign to get back to the fun of the open betas. By then, they had lost a very large portion of their user base and the beta users were not the the majority of the major adopters. If they had released the game we "beta tested", it probably would have been a runaway success instead of the third rate game it is today. Also, because the PVP players left for greener pastures (battlefield 2 so you can have an idea of what that crowd was), current PVP metagame is a pale imitation of what it once was and could be.
For the record, about 2 years after release, they made enough changes so that a new player can jump into that old timey fun.
Is it sad that I am more likely to recognize you and your posts by your sig than your name or UID?
One Day, Beta Testing will be out of Beta.
that article repeated itself and did little to explore the current state of beta. it could have been one page of just the developer quotes and it would have made more sense.
Their comments in the article are completely at odds with my experience with CO, and the experience of several other former closed beta testers I've spoken with.
Their early closed beta was ugly. UGLY (Bolded, and blown up to 70 foot high glowing neon letters).
Stuff was just nonfunctional, or intermittently functional. The game was unstable, even on hardware of exactly (or above) recommended spec. They had a whopping one zone in a semi-finished state.
Bugs were ignored through repeated revisions. Stability issues were met with intimations that you shouldn't be on the beta and completely non-veiled threats to boot you off if you didn't just shut up, play, and give glowing feedback.
I played through several months of release before I finally gave it the middle finger.
It could be worlds better now. I don't care. I won't give them a dime.
This should have been (and was) obvious to most people who actually work in commercial software fields. By the time a company gets around to an open beta, they're maybe two weeks to a month from shipping the game. Chances are good that the master has already been sent off to manufacturing. They sure as hell aren't going to make functional gameplay changes at this point. The only thing that they can do now is test the network infrastructure over live conditions.
For that to be effective, though, they actually have to take action on what they learn. Here is where Blizzard had their epic fail. When they ran the open beta for WoW, there were problems with connectivity due to the huge amount of traffic. But instead of adding more servers to deal with it, Blizzard instead reassured people that it wouldn't be like that for the "real" launch, because all the freeloaders would disappear. Then came the real launch, and a few days in, every server had queues. So, to some degree, stress testing is still only a partial motive, because the company doesn't necessarily care about the results.
The only real motive is to drum up interest in the game.
There was a time when alpha meant "feature-complete, but broken." Beta meant "OK, let's get the last few bugs out before release."
Later, as code got more complex, beta usually went through a few phases. That was fine. Also, the beta testers were generally professionals, with some exceptions. (it's always a good plan to get real users who can break the unbreakable. Just make sure you don't count on them exclusively.)
Nowadays, what companies put through 'beta testing' is rarely alpha-code. Feature complete? Maybe, maybe not. Realistically, the second release candidate onwards through the first post-release patch should properly be considered beta, because the number of products that are even usable until after the first patch are minimal.
Ultimately, quality code doesn't pay in almost all commercial cases. Get enough untrained end-users to find the worst of the show-stopper bugs, and then release the code and start making money. Once in a long while, your product will be so bad that it falls on its face--but that's the exception, and will probably still cost less than professionally beta-testing all of your products to a high level of quality.
"People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
For those of you nodding your head in agreement - remember the bullshit that was Tribes2 development... endless patches and glitches, then finally after months of hell - a pretty darn fun game.
So many games out there aren't developed enough or are rushed to market so fast to feed the hyped up masses... that the end result is the first few months of actual 1.0 is the *real* beta testing.
I've beta tested plenty of games over the last ten years, but I didn't realize it until after I paid for them
I beta tested Anarchy Online, it was a fairly shitty experience over all. Lot's of bug reports filed. I figured I would give the GA a try... I honestly do not think that they changed anything from the 'Beta' version. To this day I have not bought another Funcom game.
EA Sports Madden franchise seems to be in beta for another 4 months after GA as well.
Just shows how clueless the developers are. They've forgotten that the purpose of Beta is to ferret out unforseen usability issues.
Known issues should not be released to the user base.
You've got no business putting a product into Beta unless you would be willing to ship it as-is if you received no bug reports.
Up to that point, all testing should be performed by paid testers under NDA.
Just thinking to the future; when we get games with direct neural interfaces or even decent force feedback systems who will want to the beta tester then?
One wrong function call and the word 'headache' could gain a whole new meaning...
--- Users are like bacteria -> Each one causing a thousand tiny crises until the host finally gives up and dies.
At least that is what I have learned from the way code has been rolled out untested around here. Besides who needs beta testing when you already have a large base of readers who will put up with shitty code as long as the information they seek is out there somewhere?
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
i've only beta tested one game so far, AdventureQuest Worlds; probably the only MMO (of any kind) made completly in Adobe Flash. its fun. and funny. but you could be in the (now long over) Alpha too! both are over, though.
http://aq.com/
I reserve the right to have a physical object so I can sell it later, and recover my money.