I agree whole-heartedly EXCEPT for the part about alpha and beta testers doing someone's job for them. No.... just no. Alphas and Betas are basically the equivalent of distributed computing. There REALLY is very little meaningful "work" that goes on by these so-called alpha and beta "testers". The fact of the matters is that, the majority of the time, the alpha and beta crowd end up CREATING more work for the actual testers, because incoming bugs need to be manually verified internally. Many of these issues are difficult, or impossible, to reproduce and, since the average alpha/beta tester is your average user these days, you'll be lucky to be able to get them to copy/paste something for you, let alone get them to run any sort of diagnostics, tell you what they've got under the hood, etc.
The rest of the post is great, just thought I'd chime in about that bit. Sorry, but the alpha/beta crowd is about as useful these days as sitting a monkey infront of a computer and having him bash on the keyboard.
Oh I definitely agree that it's not "work" for the vast majority of testers. It's simply a tried and true way of testing on a much larger scale than the Internal Testing team is capable of. It IS a form of Quality Control, which can be considered 'work', but it's something players have HAPPILY volunteered to do forever.
Even if I were to view it as "work" and doing a "job", I'd also consider that I'm being paid with effectively free game time, and an advance look at the product, which caries some level of value to me. So even at its worst (a job) I still feel compensated.
The fact that I am willing to pay X amount for what I consider the privilege of performing this task only further goes to show that it's not "work" or a "job", as you generally don't PAY to go to work (expenses related to travel/prep not withstanding).
Ultimately, we agree, I was just echoing the previously made statements about Alpha/Beta testers "doing their job" for them.
I think the whole lot of y'all dun went an' forgot how t' just have fun.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
There seems to be a pretty big misconception in this thread that backers are somehow 'duped' into "paying to do their job" for them.
As someone who has backed CF, as well as other games, it has nothing at all to do with being fooled by some shinies leading to my paying to do their job. It's really quite simple. I want the game to be made. Thus, I pledge some money to help make that a reality.
In many cases, it's a simple as effectively buying the game before it comes out (i.e. the lower tiers of backing). Sure, if the game fails to ever be released, I'm out the $40 or whatever it was. So long as the game is released, I'm getting my monies worth of value. The producing company simply got the money for the sale ahead of time and was able to use it during development.
As you get higher in the tiers, the value becomes significantly more subjective.
While you get the game, and usually X months of free game time (or free 'premium subscription' time) which has a direct monetary value associated with it (i.e. cost per month), you also start getting into things that are more subjective, i.e. badges, titles, in-game rewards, stickers, statues figurines, etc. To some people, those things are worth the money. To others, they are not.
Then you get into the REAL intangibles, i.e. Alpha and Beta access. Yes, theoretically you are paying to do someone's job for them. Except, many people consider Alpha/Beta access a privilege and enjoy it immensely. Some consider it an opportunity to help shape the game. Some simply consider it a tactical advantage to have early access, giving them a head start on the competition by gaining experience with the game prior to it's release. Some probably have other reasons I am not considering at present for why they want the access bad enough to pay for it.
Some people also just have more cash to throw around and things they want.
I backed CU at an Alpha Level because I believed the game was worth backing, and I wanted to get my hands on it at an early level and watch the growth of the game through the process.
CF requires a $500 pledge for Alpha Access which is simply outside of my price range of what I consider worth it. Apparently a number of people have a higher value associated with it than I do. That's fine. It's their money.
Simply put, I highly doubt many, if any AT ALL of the $500 backers were "fooled" or scammed into anything. They simply placed a value on a package that was higher than what you feel it was worth. That's why they backed it, and you didn't.
Oh, and to one of the original points of the thread, backer dollars used for advertising... Crowfall secured private investments and began development a year before opening the Kickstarter. They already had money on the books to advertise.
I agree whole-heartedly EXCEPT for the part about alpha and beta testers doing someone's job for them. No.... just no. Alphas and Betas are basically the equivalent of distributed computing. There REALLY is very little meaningful "work" that goes on by these so-called alpha and beta "testers". The fact of the matters is that, the majority of the time, the alpha and beta crowd end up CREATING more work for the actual testers, because incoming bugs need to be manually verified internally. Many of these issues are difficult, or impossible, to reproduce and, since the average alpha/beta tester is your average user these days, you'll be lucky to be able to get them to copy/paste something for you, let alone get them to run any sort of diagnostics, tell you what they've got under the hood, etc.
The rest of the post is great, just thought I'd chime in about that bit. Sorry, but the alpha/beta crowd is about as useful these days as sitting a monkey infront of a computer and having him bash on the keyboard.
Not a single alpha/beta i've been in has given directions to:
Which bugs are known
What to look out for
Which part of game programmer is focussing on
What is tried and tested
No, everything has to be discovered yourself and when you do give legitimate feedback they don't respond to forumposts months on end. A simple "noted" or a button they can click which informs me that they've read it would be sufficient.
There you are, giving feedback, endlessly. Do you think that's rewarding?
When they ignore the bug and just release game?
I guess doing whatever action it is i'm testing over and over doesn't constitute work for you and that's fine but as aspiring programmer I feel differently. I want to LEARN
but I get it, it's their child, god forbid we may have an inside look.
There seems to be a pretty big misconception in this thread that backers are somehow 'duped' into "paying to do their job" for them.
As someone who has backed CF, as well as other games, it has nothing at all to do with being fooled by some shinies leading to my paying to do their job. It's really quite simple. I want the game to be made. Thus, I pledge some money to help make that a reality.
In many cases, it's a simple as effectively buying the game before it comes out (i.e. the lower tiers of backing). Sure, if the game fails to ever be released, I'm out the $40 or whatever it was. So long as the game is released, I'm getting my monies worth of value. The producing company simply got the money for the sale ahead of time and was able to use it during development.
As you get higher in the tiers, the value becomes significantly more subjective.
While you get the game, and usually X months of free game time (or free 'premium subscription' time) which has a direct monetary value associated with it (i.e. cost per month), you also start getting into things that are more subjective, i.e. badges, titles, in-game rewards, stickers, statues figurines, etc. To some people, those things are worth the money. To others, they are not.
Then you get into the REAL intangibles, i.e. Alpha and Beta access. Yes, theoretically you are paying to do someone's job for them. Except, many people consider Alpha/Beta access a privilege and enjoy it immensely. Some consider it an opportunity to help shape the game. Some simply consider it a tactical advantage to have early access, giving them a head start on the competition by gaining experience with the game prior to it's release. Some probably have other reasons I am not considering at present for why they want the access bad enough to pay for it.
Some people also just have more cash to throw around and things they want.
I backed CU at an Alpha Level because I believed the game was worth backing, and I wanted to get my hands on it at an early level and watch the growth of the game through the process.
CF requires a $500 pledge for Alpha Access which is simply outside of my price range of what I consider worth it. Apparently a number of people have a higher value associated with it than I do. That's fine. It's their money.
Simply put, I highly doubt many, if any AT ALL of the $500 backers were "fooled" or scammed into anything. They simply placed a value on a package that was higher than what you feel it was worth. That's why they backed it, and you didn't.
Oh, and to one of the original points of the thread, backer dollars used for advertising... Crowfall secured private investments and began development a year before opening the Kickstarter. They already had money on the books to advertise.
I agree whole-heartedly EXCEPT for the part about alpha and beta testers doing someone's job for them. No.... just no. Alphas and Betas are basically the equivalent of distributed computing. There REALLY is very little meaningful "work" that goes on by these so-called alpha and beta "testers". The fact of the matters is that, the majority of the time, the alpha and beta crowd end up CREATING more work for the actual testers, because incoming bugs need to be manually verified internally. Many of these issues are difficult, or impossible, to reproduce and, since the average alpha/beta tester is your average user these days, you'll be lucky to be able to get them to copy/paste something for you, let alone get them to run any sort of diagnostics, tell you what they've got under the hood, etc.
The rest of the post is great, just thought I'd chime in about that bit. Sorry, but the alpha/beta crowd is about as useful these days as sitting a monkey infront of a computer and having him bash on the keyboard.
Not a single alpha/beta i've been in has given directions to:
Which bugs are known
What to look out for
Which part of game programmer is focussing on
What is tried and tested
No, everything has to be discovered yourself and when you do give legitimate feedback they don't respond to forumposts months on end. A simple "noted" or a button they can click which informs me that they've read it would be sufficient.
There you are, giving feedback, endlessly. Do you think that's rewarding?
When they ignore the bug and just release game?
I guess doing whatever action it is i'm testing over and over doesn't constitute work for you and that's fine but as aspiring programmer I feel differently. I want to LEARN
but I get it, it's their child, god forbid we may have an inside look.
Notable game developers who aren't like this:
Fortnite, friendliest people i've met in awhile.
I've definitely seen both sides. Some developers absolutely have Alpha tests with little to no direction, interaction etc.
That's not always the case. CU Alpha is very clear on what is being tested, what the focus is every time they open the servers, and they have been really good about responding to things that are reported.
Matrix Online (lol) was actually one of the most responsive Beta's I've been in, and I had multiple back and forth conversation with Devs regarding bugs that were discovered. Mind you... the game crashed and burned, but not because of a lack of interactive testing.
Beta tests in general are much less structured than Alphas, and are more free roaming, see what you find and let us know. Some companies do a better job of communicating back to the testers than others.
Then there's the harsh reality that maybe your (not you personally) feedback isn't all that useful. Maybe you're the 20th person to send in the exact same bug, and they aren't focused on a personal response to every submission. I do like the "noted" button type idea, as I totally get that having your feedback ACKNOWLEDGED certainly makes you more likely to provide the feedback.
Some companies simply do a better job of Alpha/Beta tests, and understand how to get the most value out of the people who volunteer their time. To say that it's NEVER the case, simply tells me you've either not been a part of many, or you've had some pretty bad luck in the ones you took part in.
As far as entering an Alpha/Beta to learn skills for Programming, I'm not sure that's the best avenue. They're not going to let you into the code, or break down the details of how the engine functions. I guess I'm not understanding what it is you are trying to learn in Alpha/Beta tests from a programming perspective.
There seems to be a pretty big misconception in this thread that backers are somehow 'duped' into "paying to do their job" for them.
As someone who has backed CF, as well as other games, it has nothing at all to do with being fooled by some shinies leading to my paying to do their job. It's really quite simple. I want the game to be made. Thus, I pledge some money to help make that a reality.
In many cases, it's a simple as effectively buying the game before it comes out (i.e. the lower tiers of backing). Sure, if the game fails to ever be released, I'm out the $40 or whatever it was. So long as the game is released, I'm getting my monies worth of value. The producing company simply got the money for the sale ahead of time and was able to use it during development.
As you get higher in the tiers, the value becomes significantly more subjective.
While you get the game, and usually X months of free game time (or free 'premium subscription' time) which has a direct monetary value associated with it (i.e. cost per month), you also start getting into things that are more subjective, i.e. badges, titles, in-game rewards, stickers, statues figurines, etc. To some people, those things are worth the money. To others, they are not.
Then you get into the REAL intangibles, i.e. Alpha and Beta access. Yes, theoretically you are paying to do someone's job for them. Except, many people consider Alpha/Beta access a privilege and enjoy it immensely. Some consider it an opportunity to help shape the game. Some simply consider it a tactical advantage to have early access, giving them a head start on the competition by gaining experience with the game prior to it's release. Some probably have other reasons I am not considering at present for why they want the access bad enough to pay for it.
Some people also just have more cash to throw around and things they want.
I backed CU at an Alpha Level because I believed the game was worth backing, and I wanted to get my hands on it at an early level and watch the growth of the game through the process.
CF requires a $500 pledge for Alpha Access which is simply outside of my price range of what I consider worth it. Apparently a number of people have a higher value associated with it than I do. That's fine. It's their money.
Simply put, I highly doubt many, if any AT ALL of the $500 backers were "fooled" or scammed into anything. They simply placed a value on a package that was higher than what you feel it was worth. That's why they backed it, and you didn't.
Oh, and to one of the original points of the thread, backer dollars used for advertising... Crowfall secured private investments and began development a year before opening the Kickstarter. They already had money on the books to advertise.
I agree whole-heartedly EXCEPT for the part about alpha and beta testers doing someone's job for them. No.... just no. Alphas and Betas are basically the equivalent of distributed computing. There REALLY is very little meaningful "work" that goes on by these so-called alpha and beta "testers". The fact of the matters is that, the majority of the time, the alpha and beta crowd end up CREATING more work for the actual testers, because incoming bugs need to be manually verified internally. Many of these issues are difficult, or impossible, to reproduce and, since the average alpha/beta tester is your average user these days, you'll be lucky to be able to get them to copy/paste something for you, let alone get them to run any sort of diagnostics, tell you what they've got under the hood, etc.
The rest of the post is great, just thought I'd chime in about that bit. Sorry, but the alpha/beta crowd is about as useful these days as sitting a monkey infront of a computer and having him bash on the keyboard.
Not a single alpha/beta i've been in has given directions to:
Which bugs are known
What to look out for
Which part of game programmer is focussing on
What is tried and tested
No, everything has to be discovered yourself and when you do give legitimate feedback they don't respond to forumposts months on end. A simple "noted" or a button they can click which informs me that they've read it would be sufficient.
There you are, giving feedback, endlessly. Do you think that's rewarding?
When they ignore the bug and just release game?
I guess doing whatever action it is i'm testing over and over doesn't constitute work for you and that's fine but as aspiring programmer I feel differently. I want to LEARN
but I get it, it's their child, god forbid we may have an inside look.
Notable game developers who aren't like this:
Fortnite, friendliest people i've met in awhile.
Bingo!!! Honestly, the way you know when you're in a "real" alpha or beta is when:
1) You haven't paid to get into it
2) Devs are responsive and actually communicate with their community directly
3) They request more information!!!
Many times, now, they don't have a standard form or best practices. Also, since you're paying, they don't generally kick people out of betas. Used to be that if you weren't contributing, you'd be replaced. THAT is when people were doing a "job" for a company. It was also more exclusive, though.
Honestly, though, if you want to be a programmer, then take notes on things that piss you off in these current betas and re-fix them. It really doesn't need to be this way. At some point you'll get sick of hearing the same bug over and over, though
I can't see the point, why would they pay hype? I don't think that's true they are just making conclusion. I know they are just excited to start their clan and conquer
$500 for early alpha access to a game that doesn't exist yet and isn't even backed up my a major studio.
That's not paid hype, that's pure greed.
I've given to some early access games, and I actually didn't regret it yet, but there was a game to play.
This sounds like a ripoff.
I couldn't agree more with this statement. $500 dollars is beyond ridiculous and a pure travesty. Who in their right mind would do this? I make good money and can afford to buy things but seriously? $500 dollars for a game that's not done and for all intensive purposes might be a bust? I wouldn't give this company a penny for even attempting this stupidity.
Comments
Oh I definitely agree that it's not "work" for the vast majority of testers. It's simply a tried and true way of testing on a much larger scale than the Internal Testing team is capable of. It IS a form of Quality Control, which can be considered 'work', but it's something players have HAPPILY volunteered to do forever.
Even if I were to view it as "work" and doing a "job", I'd also consider that I'm being paid with effectively free game time, and an advance look at the product, which caries some level of value to me. So even at its worst (a job) I still feel compensated.
The fact that I am willing to pay X amount for what I consider the privilege of performing this task only further goes to show that it's not "work" or a "job", as you generally don't PAY to go to work (expenses related to travel/prep not withstanding).
Ultimately, we agree, I was just echoing the previously made statements about Alpha/Beta testers "doing their job" for them.
I think the whole lot of y'all dun went an' forgot how t' just have fun.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Not a single alpha/beta i've been in has given directions to:
Which bugs are known
What to look out for
Which part of game programmer is focussing on
What is tried and tested
No, everything has to be discovered yourself and when you do give legitimate feedback they don't respond to forumposts months on end. A simple "noted" or a button they can click which informs me that they've read it would be sufficient.
There you are, giving feedback, endlessly. Do you think that's rewarding?
When they ignore the bug and just release game?
I guess doing whatever action it is i'm testing over and over doesn't constitute work for you and that's fine but as aspiring programmer I feel differently. I want to LEARN
but I get it, it's their child, god forbid we may have an inside look.
Notable game developers who aren't like this:
Fortnite, friendliest people i've met in awhile.
Sway all day, butterfly flaps all the way!
Crowfall created a mega hype , with the scam of the account to record before the kickstarter , you said you were in that band beta .
Then start the kickstarter to end countdown .
With the video looked like a game , however, it was a cinematic video .
According to me , they were very unfair in the way we manage this kickstarter , but then people gave money to their will .
So in the end is not the fault of Crowfall but the people who paid .
I hope for them that the game comes out , or at least it's nice to play. ( If it is I will try it as well )
Prefer the Kickstarter where the staff is sincere with what is and what they are doing even before the
I've definitely seen both sides. Some developers absolutely have Alpha tests with little to no direction, interaction etc.
That's not always the case. CU Alpha is very clear on what is being tested, what the focus is every time they open the servers, and they have been really good about responding to things that are reported.
Matrix Online (lol) was actually one of the most responsive Beta's I've been in, and I had multiple back and forth conversation with Devs regarding bugs that were discovered. Mind you... the game crashed and burned, but not because of a lack of interactive testing.
Beta tests in general are much less structured than Alphas, and are more free roaming, see what you find and let us know. Some companies do a better job of communicating back to the testers than others.
Then there's the harsh reality that maybe your (not you personally) feedback isn't all that useful. Maybe you're the 20th person to send in the exact same bug, and they aren't focused on a personal response to every submission. I do like the "noted" button type idea, as I totally get that having your feedback ACKNOWLEDGED certainly makes you more likely to provide the feedback.
Some companies simply do a better job of Alpha/Beta tests, and understand how to get the most value out of the people who volunteer their time. To say that it's NEVER the case, simply tells me you've either not been a part of many, or you've had some pretty bad luck in the ones you took part in.
As far as entering an Alpha/Beta to learn skills for Programming, I'm not sure that's the best avenue. They're not going to let you into the code, or break down the details of how the engine functions. I guess I'm not understanding what it is you are trying to learn in Alpha/Beta tests from a programming perspective.
Bingo!!! Honestly, the way you know when you're in a "real" alpha or beta is when:
1) You haven't paid to get into it
2) Devs are responsive and actually communicate with their community directly
3) They request more information!!!
Many times, now, they don't have a standard form or best practices. Also, since you're paying, they don't generally kick people out of betas. Used to be that if you weren't contributing, you'd be replaced. THAT is when people were doing a "job" for a company. It was also more exclusive, though.
Honestly, though, if you want to be a programmer, then take notes on things that piss you off in these current betas and re-fix them. It really doesn't need to be this way. At some point you'll get sick of hearing the same bug over and over, though
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------
I couldn't agree more with this statement. $500 dollars is beyond ridiculous and a pure travesty. Who in their right mind would do this? I make good money and can afford to buy things but seriously? $500 dollars for a game that's not done and for all intensive purposes might be a bust? I wouldn't give this company a penny for even attempting this stupidity.