| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Joystiq, and more

Reader Comments (85)

Posted: Jan 23rd 2010 4:39AM eNTi said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
fallen earth was no better at launch than any other title and it still lacks descent fps mechanics.

you're just another apologist. if you don't believe me... just look at their patch notes. tons and tons of bugfixes and quite a few game mechanic changes. even exploits that were know throughout the beta (over a year) were only fixed two months after release and only because the exploits have been actively abused in game and were reported in depth in the forums.
Reply

Posted: Jan 23rd 2010 10:03AM Cendres said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Don't take out your frustrations on my comment.
Reply

Posted: Jan 26th 2010 5:19PM alucard3000 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
fallen earth is not getting smoother i stopped playing at the end of oct 09 and just got a 10 day come back and see what we fixed free card and sry the fps i get now in towns is alot worse than what it was when i left 3 months ago
Reply

Posted: Jan 23rd 2010 12:34AM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
anyone familiar with Champions knows they're willing to patch Launch Day and destroy the game or rather all the hard work that their Pre order Customers got do due during the Pre Order Launch window.

STO expect a nerf bat or worse coming your way for launch..and they will of course Ninja it onto you even though they claimed they learned their lesson.

Posted: Jan 26th 2010 4:43PM Saylah said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Lots of anger. Complain with your wallet. Don't buy games you don't like based on a beta. But you can't expect everyone else to agree with your assessment & expectations. If you've been burned by cryptic then behave accordingly. Believe it or not, not everyone has played champions and encountered those issues.
Reply

Posted: Jan 23rd 2010 12:49AM cdave said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
In defense of lifetime subs, they never really mention that it's your lifetime right? Just the lifetime of the game, which can either be -10 days or 200+ years.

Posted: Jan 23rd 2010 3:44AM Strabo said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
"as long as the game/item exists" is the definition of any lifetime subscription.
Reply

Posted: Jan 23rd 2010 1:01AM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
Are you saying that faeries and unicorns don't exist? :\
but..
but....
I don't believe you.


Plus, the beta is a bug testing time. They actually just fixed a ton of problems in STO with this latest patch...or were you not researching? Or maybe I'm not paying attention enough. Still seems like you're making overarching statements without any realism. Just like people who claim that just because it's a problem in beta, that everything will be ideal at launch.

I use the beta defense. Still, I really don't expect perfection at launch. I still expect a lot of problems left over. *shrug*

But maybe you're right.

Still...
I maintain my faith in faeries and unicorns.
Despite what you try to do to......KILL MY DREAMMMSSS

Posted: Jan 23rd 2010 2:29AM aurickle said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
I think that if you truly researched you would discover that every single thing in the patch notes for this big one that you're talking about was actually reported -- many times over -- a long time ago.

The vast majority of bug fixes take a long time between when they are reported and when they actually go live on the server. A fix must be found. That fix must be implemented. They must ensure that it doesn't create new bugs. It must then go through the Quality Assurance team. All before it ever makes it to the test server. (Which in the case of open beta is the live server.) Fixes never happen overnight.

This is just bug fixes, mind you. I have seen many, many closed beta tests where the testers complained that various systems weren't fun, were too cumbersome, etc. -- only to be flamed on the forums by people saying, "It's only beta." Vanguard was one such case. Four months before launch, testers were giving all sorts of feedback that consistently got hammered down with the "only beta" excuse. The game launched without those things having been addressed, and it just so happens that those very items were the biggest complaints in the fast-evaporating community of players.

There is really NEVER a good time for the "only beta" excuse. This is because early phases of closed beta is the ONLY time during which core systems have a real chance of being modified in any significant way. By late closed beta they need to be focusing on serious bug testing, balancing and leveling curves. It's way too late by this point to make system changes that are more major than tweaks. By the time the game reaches open beta, the vast majority of issues should be resolved so that they can focus on server and load testing. Any bugs found in open beta are not going to be able to be fixed until after launch. What's more, the vast majority of players in open beta are never going to report a single bug.

Finally, good devs listen to player feedback. They may not always agree with the players. They may sometimes know that what's being complained about will be resolved when more of the core features are added in. But they should always be listening. The problem with the "it's only beta" comeback is that this stifles feedback. That actually risks ruining the game for everyone, because the devs might never hear key feedback that could have turned a mediocre game into a gem. Put another way, as long as people use the "it's only beta" argument, they are giving developers permission to release unpolished products. This is something that Cryptic has now taken to the bank -- twice in a row!

As for STO, it had bar none the worst beta cycle I've ever seen for any MMO. For one thing, they developed the game in only 24 months. Remember: they got the rights from Perpetual after Perpetual declared bankruptcy in January 2008. This license only included the right to develop the game, and the art assets (which were mostly thrown out by Cryptic). The engine was not included, and although STO uses CO's engine it needed quite a bit of modification. Cryptic only announced the game 18 months ago. Second, closed beta only began three months ago, yesterday. THREE!!!!! Vanguard had over a year of closed beta, and still had a bad launch. WoW's Burning Crusade expansion had more closed beta time than that, and it was only an expansion rather than a full game. Third, the three months of closed beta for STO were actually much, much shorter due to the fact that servers were only up for a few hours twice a week. That comes to about 80 hours total of closed beta testing -- equal to only 1/2 week of 24/7 access.

Reply

Posted: Jan 23rd 2010 10:04AM Ayenn said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
So maika got grayed for correctly assessing the situation, for having a valid view that does not jive with the generally genitive view of MMORPGs? That is ridiculous.
Reply

Posted: Jan 23rd 2010 3:44AM Strabo said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
Considering how much the game improved with the last patch I'm quite confident that the game will be a lot better and more playable than the Beta version. Yes, "it's Beta" is a stupid excuse 2 weeks before launch, but it was an old client with STO and they do indeed work hard fixing things.

Posted: Jan 23rd 2010 8:01AM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
Beta is a valuable and important part of the launch of a game. Aside from the obvious stress testing it brings, there are also often times various logging services running on the servers, as well as the more broad opportunity to submit bugs that may have been missed through alpha. Also, as someone who's played in many MANY betas (and a few Alphas to beta to launch), I can say that I have seen many 'miracle patches' right before launch that either resolved the majority of game deficiencies or crippled a product that seemed ready to go. Some games change drastically in open beta, and you really get an opportunity to see how they polish, and often times in the polishing, the shiniest part is revealed.

TL:DR; Betas rule. Don't diss the Beta.

Posted: Jan 23rd 2010 3:00AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I think the problem lies with the LEVEL of hype a game recieves. If there is too much hype then expectations will be beyond what is reality. Their speculation drives what people expect to be in the game without really knowing because they can't be in game to say for sure.

Even if a company were to write a whole dev diary on the subject it won't matter until players get their hands on it and discover it is different than what they expected.

I noticed with both STO and TOR that the level of hype and speculation far exceeded what it should have been possible. People would delve into every word for clues as to what will be in the game and this has caused no end of problems for either game. Information is released either too early or too late and the speculation drives further irrational expectations leading to alot of broken hearted people.

I've learned to not speculate nor let my hopes get up so that when I finally get in-game I can look at each feature objectively, being either pleasantly surprised or annoyed by any one feature.

Posted: Jan 23rd 2010 3:15AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@aurickle

I think that the idea that developer's will simply ignore good feedback simply because posters respond with "it's only beta" is ludicrous. Isn't it more likely that the developer made a cost-benefit analysis of the constructive feedback weighing things like: does it break lore? what is the plausible server load of the new/changed feature? is it fun for players? does it break existing systems? etc.

While I agree that some betas will be too short I think that for the most part developers today have made some features nonremovable in their own eyes, develop those features, then make sure to test those features for bugs rather than scrap it or change its overall mechanic. TOR, for example, is only going to have a short beta cycle just like STO. There really is no difference anymore. A saturated market means more games for smaller communities (i.e. roleplayers, crafters, PvEers, PvPers, shooters, twitch gamers, etc...)

Posted: Jan 23rd 2010 11:18AM aurickle said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I didn't say that developers would ignore feedback because of the "it's only beta" retort. What I said is that such comments by fellow beta testers risk discouraging people from giving the feedback in the first place. As a result, the devs never get a chance to see it because it was never posted.

When you're trying to give good feedback on a game and your topic ends up mired down with people yelling, "it's only beta" over an over again, it becomes discouraging. Just once, I 'd like to see a developer make it clear that such comments are not welcome -- that ALL constructive feedback is welcome -- and then back that up by actively deleting any "it's only beta" comments as they crop up.

Regarding STO, how short do they consider short? Somehow, I think it will be considerably more than 80 hours of actual play time. What's more, they have decades of experience in the RPG genre, building titles that are extremely well polished. They have a huge budget compared to Cryptic, which when combined with their experience allows them to have a very solid in-house QA team. With STO, Cryptic has been introducing new systems right up to the start of open beta and rolled out all the end game content for the first time just a couple weeks before launch. STO isn't just being rushed; it's being swept out the door like a mistress who's just been caught in bed with the husband!
Reply

Posted: Jan 23rd 2010 4:04AM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Open beta is a very good thing. STO open beta gave me very good reason to cancel my preorder and never trust Cryptic anymore. Regarding the beta defenders, I think what they are doing is only justifying their expectations and this is only a slow way to realize that the product is for the trash can.

Posted: Jan 23rd 2010 4:41AM eNTi said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
sto certainly has potential...










yes i said it!

Posted: Jan 23rd 2010 4:49AM Graill440 said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
No, it doesnt.

It would make a great "hey i have twenty minutes to pvp" Free to play title but sadly that and the pew, pew sounds will wear quickly. Cryptic has done a great disservice to the Star Trek license all because they thought they had what it took to make a quick buck. Even as i type this it is probably tasting like ash in their mouths with all the negative press.

The article is type truly.
Reply

Posted: Jan 23rd 2010 9:54AM Ayenn said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
Actually it does have a LOT of potentual. It also has a lot to offer right out the gate. It's not perfect but it is far from truly flawed.







In my earlier reply, I mentioned the inverse of the "beta defense". This the type of hate I see illicit the "beta defense" response from younger posters on the STO forums
Reply

Posted: Jan 23rd 2010 5:06AM dudes said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Big gambles with Beta's. They could put buyers off simply because some players might think that they are getting what they are playing after launch. A good portion of the game will be done, but a lot more will have to patched and refined, i.e. CO & STO.

Featured Stories

Make My MMO: October 19 - 25, 2014

Posted on Oct 25th 2014 8:00PM

Perfect Ten: My World of Warcraft launch memories

Posted on Oct 25th 2014 12:00PM

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW