Give beta access to all backers [less the 5$ ones]

[wbn]

The last thing I'd want with a single player title is to ruin an experience that'll only be extra double plus special once with a beta.

[Flouride]

Don't think everyone should get beta access, idiots will spoil the plot for sure

Wouldn't mind getting one myself though as I can't really afford to pay 160 dollars for the game right now (between jobs etc.). So hook me up, Alvin. You still owe me for something I said around DS3 DLC

Edited September 19, 2012 by Flouride

[Elerond]

You should also considere that it beta distribution will cost money for Obsidian especially if they try to distribute it safely to over 40k people.

 

And usually purpose for end user beta testing is user acceptance testing and to put it differently it is testing where one tries to find those features which causes problems for end users and causes for those problems. And public betas are usually only for promotial or/and stress test purposes. In software projects bug finding happens unit/integration/sytem testing. Of course in complex systems there is always situations/combinations which no one think to test or there is no time to test them and bugs get to be in final product, but often public beta testing don't prevent this due to that fact that you don't usually use newest version of the code in beta version as it is still in testing.

 

Or so things are in traditional software production where I work.

[Nivenus]

Eh, as a low-contribution donator (due in large part to my limited pocketbook), I'm okay with not getting beta access. It would be nice, sure, but there are management issues to consider and at this point the number of testers is already pretty high.

 

Really, I don't need a reward to contribute. I'm just happy to put some money - any money - forward to contribute towards seeing Obsidian succeed.

[Pidesco]

Limiting beta access to $140 is already including some 2500 potential beta testers, at this point. I don't think any more is necessary and it's a nice temptation for those that haven't pledge that much money yet..

[Wintersong]

Don't think everyone should get beta access, idiots will spoil the plot for sure

Unfortunately for you, no need to give beta to everyone as "idiots" only need to pledge for the collector's edition.

We can always hide under a rock until the game is released. XD

Edited September 19, 2012 by Wintersong

[Hornet85]

Do they really need 80 thousand beta testers? I get it that some people want early access, but something tells me that trying track that many people would be sort of counter-productive for the actual purpose of a beta test? Maybe I'm wrong.

That's my general opinion too. Certainly not for initial beta's .... perhaps when they're very close to finishing and want a much bigger beta pool, they could mail out invites to all backers at that time. But initially ... yeah, I'm going to agree with any of the others who don't want/don't think beta access for all backers is a good idea.

 

There are 2 things you test in QA. Game balance and technical issues. Game balance is a difficult subject so lets leave this out.

 

As for technical QA, yes, you want as many players to test them out because the best way to detect a bug is to brute force test it. Have many people put the game through its pace, and hope that the more obscure bug will rear its ugly head.

 

You have to remember that everyone plays the game in a different way and there are many ways to play a game. There's no way you can get even a small group to cover all possible permutation. No matter how you try to figure out how to do something, there will always be someone else who comes up with another way you didn't think of.

 

This is why we have open beta for many games out there.

[Auxilius]

Too many people would have an access to the beta anyway.

But maybe I'm biased since I planned to give 140 nerd bucks.

[C2B]

Yeah, but that's the point of "perhaps when they're very close to finishing and want a much bigger beta pool". They don't need to brute force it when bugs are pretty visible. And at that time, it's better to have something more organized than to throw as many people on it as you can.

[trulez]

No.

 

This is not MMO, there is absolutely no need to hold any kind of public open or closed beta.

[LadyCrimson]

You have to remember that everyone plays the game in a different way and there are many ways to play a game. There's no way you can get even a small group to cover all possible permutation. No matter how you try to figure out how to do something, there will always be someone else who comes up with another way you didn't think of.

 

This is why we have open beta for many games out there.

It's also why there are often multiple tiers of beta testing, with each tier having different types of beta goals/access. Which is why I said if there's a very late stage QA beta, that could be for "everyone" via email invites. I'm still of the opinion that for early or overall beta testing, it shouldn't be an en-masse pledge reward.

[General_Disarray]

Have no qualms with higher donators having guaranteed beta/'first' access. While some people may wish to give more money, the fact of the matter is you're showing what your 'dedication' to the game is with your wallet. Though you get the odd exception at both ends of the scale ($5, all someone has, $10,000; piss in the wind).

 

That said, I hope that once they're well into the beta they allow people to put themselves forward from all donation tiers. But they'd have to sell why they're suitable.

 

But they should definitely NOT allow everyone to beta right off the bat, just because they donated. It's a poor example to hold up here, but I remember seeing the SimCity Social forums shortly after the 'Open Beta' started. The game had finished it's private beta and had launched on facebook. The amount of angry players who would be demanding bugs be fix right that instance because it was 'such a disgrace' they were in the game was so depressing. In that case, I don't think the majority even knew what a beta was. But you still get people who fail to truly appreciate what they're doing, and expect the final game.

[Sylvius the Mad]

I think the $140 price point is perfect for this. For example, I'm seriously considering increasing my pledge so that I qualify.

[JFS]

What's the old-fashioned way? I will counter that raffles, lotteries, competitions, and other internal networking methods have NOTHING to do with beta testing abilities either, and yet those methods are certainly employed. None of that has to do with fairness. And pricing is completely subjective; if they put it at $65, a bunch of people would whine that is too high too. In fact, if we go by your logic, beta testers must have background in SDLC and prove it by resume; I guess I'm more qualified than most since I have QA/UAT experience.

You certainly are more qualified than others. The traditional way I meant and know (besides lotteries, those are nonsense as well) is having applicants fill out surveys on their testing experience, past projects, their machine configurations and other related background info, and then choosing those that fit the most. Choosing based on personal relations is also acceptable, at least in the case the people you know are also people who have QA skills. So, I guess we're on one wavelength

Edited September 19, 2012 by JFS

[KhaineGB]

I might be a little biased, since I did pledge $140 on the first day... but I personally think they should leave beta access as-is. Hell, I'm surprised they offered it to collectors edition backers at all!

 

Increasing the amount of beta testers won't actually get anything done. My prior experience in beta of other games (MMO's I'll admit) has shown most beta testers just want to use it as an excuse to play the game early, then complain it wasn't living up to their expectations rather than actually trying to find bugs.

 

Less testers may actually work better in this instance.

[LordCrash]

I think it would be a good idea to give people the opportunity to take part in the beta when they pledged a minimum of 80$. It would be quite an incentive for backers to raise their pledge to a minimum of 80$ (for digital-only users) or 100$ (for box-version users). 140$ is too much to be an incentive for many users I fear.

[Wombat]

I agree that beta testers should have experience in that area, which rules me out, and devotion to the project - money may show a certain dedication but it can backfire: some people may be disappointed especailly when they have "spent more" than the others. Internet and these "unsatisfied customers" are not good combination.

Edited September 19, 2012 by Wombat

[KenThomas]

Topics like this aren't going to be the last we'll see of the entitled whining. When you pledge to support this project you do so with the full understanding that you won't have access to the finished game for almost 2 years. They obviously believe they're going to get better quality feedback from the people who have invested more into the game. The people who have pledged 20 dollars aren't going to put a lot of effort into making sure that things work. They'll basically go "this sux fix it" (intentional improper spelling and punctuation) and the forums will be filled with negative diarrhea. Also, they want to reward the people who have given more to the project by allowing them to be part of the design process. Also, the number of backers at those tiers likely fits the size of beta testing pool they want to have. Those are just off the top of my head and they seem completely obvious.

[lolaldanee]

since we guys are the publishers here (and all of us are, the majority of the funding comes from the 35$ or smaller ones, don't forget this ) i think we all deserve to see the product in it's current status every once in a while

but thats just my very democratic view of it i guess

[Elerond]

since we guys are the publishers here (and all of us are, the majority of the funding comes from the 35$ or smaller ones, don't forget this ) i think we all deserve to see the product in it's current status every once in a while

but thats just my very democratic view of it i guess

 

Majority of the backers come from those tires, but only 49,45% of funding comes from those tiers. And to compare about 35% (shipping or add on not included) of the funding comes from funders who have selected reward tier $140 or higher.

Edited September 19, 2012 by Elerond

[MReed]

...and all of us are, the majority of the funding comes from the 35$ or smaller ones, don't forget this ...

 

I was curious, and checked this out -- this is correct, but only just. Currently, those contributing $35 or less constitutes 50.89 % of total funding (and 35,874 backers). This assumes that nobody contributer more than the bare minimum required to qualify for the reward tier, which is probably close enough to true to make the analysis correct.

 

If you were wondering, the top 25% starts at $140 (77.04 % -- 2361 backers), and the top 10% starts at $500 (91.82% -- 272 backers).

[Wintersong]

since we guys are the publishers here (and all of us are, the majority of the funding comes from the 35$ or smaller ones, don't forget this ) i think we all deserve to see the product in it's current status every once in a while

but thats just my very democratic view of it i guess

If we were the publishers, we would take care of al the QA and its expenses, and of promoting the game and all its expenses. Also of dealing with the digital platforms, funding patches for bug fixes and such.

 

We are just donating money fora project in which we believe. And in exchange we get some cool stuff.

[LordCrash]

since we guys are the publishers here (and all of us are, the majority of the funding comes from the 35$ or smaller ones, don't forget this ) i think we all deserve to see the product in it's current status every once in a while

but thats just my very democratic view of it i guess

 

Majority of the backers come from those tires, but only 49,45% of funding comes from those tiers. And to compare about 35% (shipping or add on not included) of the funding comes from funders who have selected reward tier $140 or higher.

Add-ons are included because Kickstarter shows the pledged money and not the rewarded money. If you pledge for example 80$ + 60$ for more keys the complete 140$ will be counted by Kickstarter.

[dlux]

Beta access should stay at $140+. Whoever contributes this much money to the project should be rewarded for doing so.

You should be thanking the people who contribute so much money to this awesome project, because WE ALL profit from it. Sadly some people are just so selfish and resort to whining instead...

Edited September 19, 2012 by dlux

[LadyCrimson]

since we guys are the publishers here

No, just no.

We're not the publishers. We're not even investors. We're donators (or "crowd funders" in today's seeming terms), currently with no actual legal rights over the product outside of them delivering a game that at least basically approximates what's in their pitch (fantasy rpg video game), versus, say, taking the money and running or sending us all a chiapet instead of a video game.

Edited September 19, 2012 by LadyCrimson