Pax__

[ QUOTE ]
I'm just curious, but why get riled up about not getting into closed beta testing?

Sure, it sounds like fun. You also get to see some of the new stuff, and test it out before anyone else gets to see it.

[/ QUOTE ]
^_^ And risk damage to yoru OS, in the sense of "have to run some programs to fix it" ... evne possibly "have to uninstall the damaged drivers for my video crd and re-install them", or at the very outside of chance "I have to reinstall Windows from my original CDs!"

Betas are more about BUGS than PLAYING. ^_^

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


History indicates otherwise. Since they've begun using a closed re-beta, the test time for each issue has been MUCH shorter, and the issues have had FAR fewer bugs remaining once they do actually go live.

Be glad I'm not the one callig the shots: you'd be seeing your name pinned to the bottom of the list, for putting "the players and the community" above "the product being tested".

Then again, I'm just a to-the-point [censored] like that, I guess.



[/ QUOTE ]

Why do keep on insisting on this?

You have no concrete evidence that it is the testers themselves, rather than the process that is resulting in the smoother releases.

One thing does not prove the other.

[/ QUOTE ]

Pax_Arcana is right. Since they have started closed beta testing there have been far far fewer bugs in the game. As a college student of game software development you can not convince me that it is a coincidence.

[/ QUOTE ]

Absolute last response on this matter. Feel free to flame me and call me a 'whiner' as you wish afterwards. Funny isn't it though? Aside from my 'head in the sand' comment, I have not resulted to insults and namecalling, yet that is pretty much all that the opponents of my belief can reply with....


No, Pax_Arcana is not right.

Since the closed testing began, what has changed? It's not the testers, because they were here (for the most part) before the closed testing began. Chances are, they hopped on and beta'd the existing issues when they hit Test. The testers did not suddenly gain Ultimate Insight into the code of the game.

What did change? The process of beta testing.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, exactly right. The process of testing now includes a set of known-quantity, experienced CLOSED beta testers (occasionally leavened with some "fresh blood", but always with the "old hands" in the majority).

If you don't see how that very process relies upon stability in the Tester Pool, then ... I have nothing nice to say about you.

[ QUOTE ]
You see, I have more faith in the Devs (this is a first for me saying this) to develop a process that does not require specific people, especially in light that this is a pay-to-play environment where anyone could leave at any time, as a lynchpin of their construct. I have faith that they developed a process that means basically anyone (within logical limits) could be substituted for anyone else and achieve the same results.

[/ QUOTE ]
Then you have faith in the impossible. Granted, no one SPECIFIC person is required - but tossing them ALL out, means losing the "core of veterans" around which any replacement program must be built, if the program is to continue succeeding.

[ QUOTE ]
I'm willing to have my belief tested, if only for one Issue, and no hard feelings if I'm wrong. I even said I would recant if I was wrong. What's the worst that happens? A couple weeks extra on Test?

[/ QUOTE ]
A month or more, actually. And, based on history, still some major bugs despite the extra month or two of testing.

Time and bugs I am not willing to accept as an inevitable cost of your little experiment.

You want to run a closed beta differently? A whole MMO?

Pony up the fifty million plus dollars, and make your own MMO.

[ QUOTE ]
Duel blades = low damage slow activation junk.

[/ QUOTE ]
Unless you're in the beta - and just disclosed information you were sworn to secrecy over, in which case, kiss buh-bye to ever beta'ing again - you have no knowledge of the speed or damage levels associated with Dual Blades.

[ QUOTE ]
Indom Will is basically invul with quick recovery & fast healing which I like but no heal, youll need aidself.

[/ QUOTE ]
Super Reflexes has no self-heal, and my g/f does just fine on her claws/SR catgirl scrapper.

Further, will does have a self-heal. Sort of: RISE TO THE CHALLENGE, which provides +regeneration boosts per enemy, up to 10 of them, in melee range of you.

It also has Fast Healing, which is more +regen. Pick up Health and Stamina, and Will is going to be a seocnd "never worry about downtime" set. Just like I play my /Regen scrapper, actually ... I very rarely trigger Dull Pain or Reconstruction. Integration, Fast Healing, and Health are enough for most things. AVs, EBs, or multi-Boss fights warrant an IH click, but even then, I rarely need the self-heals.

Elijah, it comes down to this: if the fee is too high, vote with your wallet. If you must, politely voice your dislike for the fee. Don't, however, accuse the company of being greedy, unreasonable, or any number of other less than salutory epithets typically levelled over this issue.

EDIT: not that I'm suggesting that's what you've said - in retrospect, it might appear as such. But over the past few months, ever since we've known what the price was going to be, there are those who have said as much ... and said it in as many words. ^_^

[ QUOTE ]
The fact that the launches have been smooth is not indicitive of the overall skills of the group of players. You guys are trying to connect things that may in fact, not be connected at all.

[/ QUOTE ]
And you are trying to DISconnect things with no reason to do so, no reason to even ponder it, except to further your own selfish goals.

[ QUOTE ]
If I said that this rock I am holding keeps tigers away, and that there are no tigers around is proof that the rock works. Nevermind the fact that I live in the Midwest of the United States. One thing does not prove the other. This is the same.

[/ QUOTE ]
Better. Go somewhere there ARE tigers, and build a little treehouse next to a watering hole they're known to frequent. Build a fence around the watering hole, too; does the reduced incidence of tigers at the watering hole HAVE to be because of the fence?

No - could be becuse of the scent of man. OR the sound and noice of construction. Or the inevitable reduction of undergrowth due to same. Or, maybe you chased off all the GAME, and the tigers are hunting elsewhere.

Nonetheless, is it somehow unreasonable to point to the fence, and say "there's why I ain't got tigers on my front porch every morning" ...? No, I submit that it is in fact a very reasonable thing to say.

[ QUOTE ]
Edit - And you realize don't you, that by keeping the same people in there, the chances of you actually getting in are even slimmer right?

[/ QUOTE ]
So what? Y'see, I don't care - not truly care - wether I ever get into a closed beta for an Issue. BEcause, once again ... it's not about me ... it's about the product being tested.


[ QUOTE ]
I have not asked for anything extreme. Just two things: 1) A complete swappage of testers for 1 (one, single, uno, ichi, I would prefer for every Issue, but this can at least prove or disprove the theory) Issue [...]

[/ QUOTE ]
You contradict yourself. That is extreme, and as I have stated previously - for having proposed such a thing, you should consider myself in total, implacable opposition to the totality of your idea(s).

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

The very concept of "fair" never even enters into it; efficiency is the name of the game here. Because they hold a closed beta, and have a proven stable of testers to rely upon as a group, we get issues in amazingly short spans of time.


[/ QUOTE ]
No sir. You are wrong. Community is the name of the game here. That's what this short of thing should be about - getting people involved. However, it is not so.

[/ QUOTE ]
Absolutly and unequivocably wrong; community is the name of the game when you consider the live servers, and only them. For a Beta Test? the product wins, by default, because nothing else is even in the race.

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, I understand your oft-repeated point about it being a good idea to have the proven, veteran testers participate each time. However, if those people are as necessary as you make them out to be then put them on the payroll (as someone else suggested).

[/ QUOTE ]
Which costs money. Money that has to come from somewhere. That would mean either (a) less content for us all, or (b) higher monthly fees for us all.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Instead of being on test for 2-3 months, we're likely to see a 5-6 wqeek testing cycle.


[/ QUOTE ]
Again (as has been pointed out, I believe), you have no proof that this is the case. And no, your use of the term "likely" does not preclude my stating that you have no proof. Were you around for the release of Issue 2? Now there was an issue that could have benefited from a lot more testing. Every issue release since then has been a breeze by comparison.

[/ QUOTE ]
History indicates otherwise. Since they've begun using a closed re-beta, the test time for each issue has been MUCH shorter, and the issues have had FAR fewer bugs remaining once they do actually go live.

Be glad I'm not the one callig the shots: you'd be seeing your name pinned to the bottom of the list, for putting "the players and the community" above "the product being tested".

Then again, I'm just a to-the-point [censored] like that, I guess.

[ QUOTE ]
Selecting people who recently loged onto test is stupid.

How many people only go there to PVP?

[/ QUOTE ]
This, I can agree, is a flaw in their approach. A better approach would have been, as others suggested, a random drawing from the general playerbase-at-large, for those extra spaces ... simply because a wider range of opinions, viewpoints, and desires would be represented in that mix.

Alternately, some sort of contest, via the website and/or forums, might be a better approach.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

And because you obviously have the players' interests closest to yourheart ... you're not an optimal candidate for beta testing. This or, really, anything. No offense mind you; not everyone is cut out to be a beta tester. Not even me, necessarily ... although, when I'm in one, I do at least try to actively find bugs I can test, and report.

[/ QUOTE ]
i don't have the players' interest closest to my heart, i just value fairness.

[/ QUOTE ]
And you define "Fairness" in terms of "this player gets X, that player doesn't" - well, that's the players' interest. For a beta test, it doesn't matter who gets what, EXCEPT: the game gets tested well.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
but if we as players don't matter at all when it comes to beta testing, then the lack of fairness there isn't an issue at all. we could go on for each new beta and you and i will never be no-kidding-really-invited and that should not matter.

[/ QUOTE ]
There is no "lack of fairness", not in the sense of "being unfair" that you seem to imply.

The very concept of "fair" never even enters into it; efficiency is the name of the game here. Because they hold a closed beta, and have a proven stable of testers to rely upon as a group, we get issues in amazingly short spans of time.


[/ QUOTE ]
i think when it comes to equity/fairness we're just going to disagree. there is a difference between people continually being allowed into a closed door environment to help test new features in the software and people who are not. i see the difference as enough to create an unfairness.

[/ QUOTE ]
And because you obviously have the players' interests closest to yourheart ... you're not an optimal candidate for beta testing. This or, really, anything. No offense mind you; not everyone is cut out to be a beta tester. Not even me, necessarily ... although, when I'm in one, I do at least try to actively find bugs I can test, and report.

[ QUOTE ]
With that said, I'm going to add what I would suggest they do as a selection process.

- Include those who, in previous betas, gave feedback which in some what helped the development team. This can be bug reports, it can be good feature ideas, it can be encouraging testing. This way, you have a wide array of existing users that can reliably assist you. Those who give no helpful feedback should be removed from selection -- since this part is already selective, what does more selectiveness hurt?

- Select a random group across all servers. If you have 100 existing testers, choose an exponential amount from all servers. That way the existing base, while existing, is not the core of the beta. Fresh eyes, fresh ideas, possibly a better beta.

- Should Group B perform well enough, their inclusion in Group A is possible. Say Joe Bob reports a lot of aesthetic fixes and Bob Joe spots a lot of bugs. Both should be given that chance to be pre-selected.

This way, should a beta tester not perform well, they no longer take up a space that another tester could occupy. Test Server instructions, if they are not, should be included in every e-mail invite to the beta to ensure everyone has the ability to log in.

[/ QUOTE ]
This, I can get behind. It's not a purge (as in, "total emptying of the list"), it's a WINNOWING (as in, "culling the herd of the least-useful, leaving only the best behind").

I'm not going to say "the process is perfect and cannot be improved", I just won't participate in any effort to start "improving" things by chucking the baby with teh bathwater, just so that "more people get a turn".

The goal of the selection process should be "produce the best beta tester pool possible", not "give as many people a turn as possible". The two goals are not compatible, IMO.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

All that leaves for us to discuss, I must sadly agree, is the selection process. And I agree if could maybe be improved. But no act of tossing out the current, established pool of testers is an "improvement" IMO, so any idea that starts from there, I would have to oppose.


[/ QUOTE ]

Why?

What is so bloody special about these people that they need to be included in this and any future testing?

[/ QUOTE ]
Proven track record. I9-->I10-->i11 has been a faster process than ever before, and partof that is due to the greater intensity and focus of testing in the Closed Beta stage.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Say... Just a thought here, and not meant to be a negative comment... But can we get back to discussing I11 Closed Beta as opposed to discussing what people are grumping about CONCERNING I11 Closed Beta? Nothing constructive is happening here, and nothing is being gained. However, we ARE losing validity.

Just my two pfennigs.

And this is directed at both sides. not ANY individual.

[/ QUOTE ]
Given NDAs and such (can't ask who is in the Closed Beta, those in it can't say anything), what else is there to talk about?

[/ QUOTE ]
I'll go you one better on that front, and directly quote the "no telling" part of my invitation email - and before anyone squeaks about me being a tester, I subsequently got an email form Lighthouse rescinding that invitation, explaining it was sent in error, and apologising for the mistake.

"CONFIDENTIALITY

For this phase of testing, the Training Room server is only available to select accounts. Involvement with this testing is a privilege and we ask that you:

- Do not discuss details of this test to anyone not in the test
- Do not talk about who else is in the beta
- Don't tell others that you are in the beta or
- [Do not] discuss any other Issue 11 information that you learn about in this test with anyone outside of the test.

Thank you for keeping the details of this test confidential!"

So. Can't give any details of the test; can't talk about who else is in the beta; can't admit if you are yourself in the test; can't discuss any other i11 information with anyone who isn't part of the test.

...

All that leaves for us to discuss, I must sadly agree, is the selection process. And I agree if could maybe be improved. But no act of tossing out the current, established pool of testers is an "improvement" IMO, so any idea that starts from there, I would have to oppose.

[ QUOTE ]
I simply believe that a more optimal way of selection would be to change the criteria from the above to a random selection across all servers. A random selection of participants across all servers would allow everyone equal chance and could include great testers. There are many great testers who play on a specific server, know how to get on Test, but rarely log on to it.

[/ QUOTE ]
Oh, I can agree that there could be improvements. But my agreement stops cold at the point of "exclude prior beta testers, to give more people a chance".

I do think, instead of "logged on to Test recently", those slots could have been better used in a PlayNC-wide random selection. Or a CoH-related contest, even.

But to those who say "noone should be in two beta tests in a row", or whatever?

Grow up. Seriously. The more you make it about your chance, the more I become convinced that you would be the worst sort of "tester" any Beta could be saddled with.

[ QUOTE ]
you make it sound like players don't matter at all when it comes to closed beta testing.

[/ QUOTE ]
In terms of how it benefits them, beyond having a better game overall? It doesn't.

[ QUOTE ]
but if we as players don't matter at all when it comes to beta testing, then the lack of fairness there isn't an issue at all. we could go on for each new beta and you and i will never be no-kidding-really-invited and that should not matter.

[/ QUOTE ]
There is no "lack of fairness", not in the sense of "being unfair" that you seem to imply.

The very concept of "fair" never even enters into it; efficiency is the name of the game here. Because they hold a closed beta, and have a proven stable of testers to rely upon as a group, we get issues in amazingly short spans of time.

Instead of being on test for 2-3 months, we're likely to see a 5-6 wqeek testing cycle.

If that means someone else gets into the closed beta, and I don't? Hey - whatever it takes. I still remain hopeful that, eventually, I'll get into a closed beta and be able to contribute.

...

And now, I know how to increase those odds: as a new issue becomes imminent, START SPENDING TIME ON THE TEST SERVER. Then ... just cross my fingers.

[ QUOTE ]
If the same group of people get in each and every time, then it's obvious favoritism. Not to mention there may be others out there who are just as good, if not better, testers than the current crop, but will never get picked because to do so would upset the status quo. Sure, they can throw a bone to a random peep, but the core group remains pretty much the same.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are getting the question of "who matters" backwards. It's not us that matter for this process, it's Cryptic and PlayNC who matter. They will pick the group they KNOW to be effective testers. If you want to call that "favoritism", go right ahead ... but you're mischaracterising the situation, and if you have an ounce of sense in you ... you know it.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

What people have to remember is: the Closed Beta is not for the players' benefit, it is for the benefit of Cryptic and PlayNC. Period.

The "player benefit, too" stage is called Open Beta. Those of us, yours truly included, who didn't make the cut this time around ... will just have to wait our turn, to get a peek at the contents of i11.

Remember, everyone: this is a testing process, not a sneak peek preview.


[/ QUOTE ]

Except those same people who keep getting in, have a better than average chance at directing which direction the game goes as compared to the plebian crowds outside. Once it gets to Open Beta, the chances of any significant changes based on player feedback (not to mention the needle getting lost in a haystack) happening is slim to nil.

[/ QUOTE ]
Still.

Does.

Not.

Matter.

The benefit is not "for players", it is "for Cryptic". Lose out the things that benefit the testers from your consideration ... the fact that you WANT to have X or Y that comes from testing, enough to protest not being in the group doing the testing (which is what yourposts amount to) ... is proof enough to me, that you are indeed complaining about not being in the test group yourself.

It should never be about you, it should always be about the game. Otherwise, you're not a good candidate for the test.

I don't know, but I suspect it does indeed contribute towards being considered for other Beta Tests. No clue if that counts after-release betas like for i11, though.

[ QUOTE ]
Why not give blasters, defender, controllers a choice of colors for their powers?

[/ QUOTE ]
This has been addressed by the developers already; Weapon Customisation is the first step towards full power customisation.

You know what they said that full Power Customisation would take, if they made it Priority #1 ...? No new issues for at least 6-9 months. No new anything in that span of time, actually.

The reason is: unlike what 3D model appears attached to your character's hand(s) for a weapon-based attack, non-weapon power animations are external to the character's costume. So the way they are handled, and called out by the server and the client, is completely different.

The current animations for any one Blast set aren't done in a way that allows for coloring them differently; they would have to rebuild EVERY attack or other power animation from the ground up. Then, they would have to reprogram how the Server tells all onlookers (yourself included) what to do, and where, for EACH power you use.

That's a huge amount of work. The developers want to do it ... but they can't "just get it done, already" ... it will take, by their estimation, "at least two to three issues' worth of work".

Maybe more.

[ QUOTE ]
One issue not raised, the new IO sets.

Being in closed beta allows people the chnace to speculate by buying some rare underused salvage right now on live, assuming it wil spike in price as a lot of defenders try for buff or debuff sets.

There is a tangiable in-game advantage to being in beta.

For no other reason bar this, the Dev team should be very open about the selection process, to avoid allegations of favoritism.

[/ QUOTE ]
There's a fix for that: Be absolutely clear that the salvage listed for the Beta .... is NOT NECESSARILY the salvage that will be needed on Live!

So, there's nothing to speculate about, because noone really KNOWS what salvage will be needed.

[ QUOTE ]
Any guess for when it will be open testing.

[/ QUOTE ]
November 1st or 2nd. The Issue has to go live before the Winter Event, and that means, by the last day of November at the latest.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
No player should be in two closed betas in a row.


[/ QUOTE ]cant get behind this, if a bug tester is good, they should get in every closed beta, because they get the job done. they do these closed betas to get bugs fixed, not to give people a chance to play with new toys, [...]

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree.

What people have to remember is: the Closed Beta is not for the players' benefit, it is for the benefit of Cryptic and PlayNC. Period.

The "player benefit, too" stage is called Open Beta. Those of us, yours truly included, who didn't make the cut this time around ... will just have to wait our turn, to get a peek at the contents of i11.

Remember, everyone: this is a testing process, not a sneak peek preview.

Followup: I even got an email from Lighthouse, confirming that they sent out more "invitations" than they had intended to.

Well, as I said once before ... c'est la vie. At leats I have good reason to believe I was a maybe, yes?

Now too, I can openly say to Mantid: "Prepay X months" doesn't seem to be a criteria. I've never prepaid, other than the free months that come with buying full game serials (one CoH standard, one CoV preorder+Standard, and one recent CoV Collectors').

[ QUOTE ]
DUH!!!!!!

[/ QUOTE ]
Well, you're very welcome, even if your response disinclines me to repeat the act of digging up a URL for a link, and answering your questions. Next time I'll just sit back and let you shoot your beta access in the head by spilling the beans in public. *shrug*

[ QUOTE ]
Is this closed so we can talk about i11 if we are in???

[/ QUOTE ]
not this forum, no.

Ther eare two hidden forums way down below, intended solely for Beta testers. (Image captured from before Ex un-flagged me.)

[ QUOTE ]
I mean like gradius not being visible in creator or playable.
And not being able to change colors of right hand weapon.
Kinda stuff.

[/ QUOTE ]
Anything you can see or do without clicking the "enter paragon" or "enter rogue isles" buttons, you can talk about openly - it's "in plain view" and no NDA attaches.

Aught else ... scroll WAAAAAY down to the bottom, and get inside those two subforums, before you utter one single PEEP. ^_^

[ QUOTE ]
Pax, please don't explode! If you can see the boards, you're in. If you can't get into the Training Room, then you should contact Ex to let her know.

[/ QUOTE ]
No, it is confiremd, I am NOT in the Beta. Hopefully the PTB won't mind my sayign this, but:

I got an email, inviting me to the beta. That was an error. They currently, I have been told, have two lists - one list of people authorised to access Test. One list of people sent email invitations and flagged for Board access.

The two lists are not identical; the second has extra names on it. "Oops."

And yes, I've been in touch with Ex over it, and just tried to log all the way in; I'm not authorised to be on Test just now.

...

Honestly, the only reason I'm saying this much (as doing so probably locks me out of the i11 beta; testers aren't even allowed to admit they're part of it ... so I'm not breaking any rules, but ... *shrug*) is because someone ELSE might get that email, and be unable to log in.

Rather than panic, they should just PM Ex or Lighthouse, and ask for a check / confirmation of access. Ex has done that for my account already, and again - I'm noton the Authorised list.

I just gotta wait just like everyone else. ^_^

...

As for testing, well, I do have one hero (scrapper, 30) and one villain (mastermind, 41) in level range to test stuff. And I have truly "been helpful" in non-CoH-but-still-PlayNC closed betas before. But when push comes to shove, I'm still not on the proper Invite list.

Just ... noone blow a gasket for joy if you get the email, until you can verify you're able to log in. ^_^

Check out PlayNC's site, and the websites of upcoming games. They often give you opportunities to sign up for their betas through those two places.