Do you think Premium Beta access should end?

[SnowyNI]

Paying $15 dollars doesn't make feedback better; it makes it more biased.

It's counterproductive in the long run; it directly contributes to these post patch explosions because the average gamer just ain't being heard before a patch rolls out.

Totally agree, in fact I'd bet more than half look at it as a "I'll get a leg up and know what to do come patch day... Hahaha! Non beta suckers!".

If anything it should be in-house tested by FD people who's job it is, that way there is nothing to gain (As long as the staff aren't also players ofc (bet they cheat if they do play! lol)).

 

[Engadine]

FD should run a closed Beta for X weeks followed by an Open Beta for Y. Possibly a total of 6 weeks split 4 & 2.

Considering the bugs that seem to get through with each update I feel Beta should run for longer than it currently does, especially on major updates/releases. Keep it shorter for just the testing of fixes etc.

The more testing, the increased likelihood of catching more bugs. I appreciate the hard work that FD put into Elite, but some that get through are jaw droppingly bad.

I still don't understand why there hasn't been just a "Fixes" major release for all those bugs that still need fixing or tweaking from the latest release and those still around from beyond that.

 

[Straha Yeagar]

FD should run a closed Beta for X weeks followed by an Open Beta for Y. Possibly a total of 6 weeks split 4 & 2.

Considering the bugs that seem to get through with each update I feel Beta should run for longer than it currently does, especially on major updates/releases. Keep it shorter for just the testing of fixes etc.

The more testing, the increased likelihood of catching more bugs. I appreciate the hard work that FD put into Elite, but some that get through are jaw droppingly bad.

I still don't understand why there hasn't been just a fixes major release for all those bugs that still need fixing or tweaking.

This is a little troubling to me as well. We are just hours under one full week since release right before a long weekend which was not a good idea. There have not been any noticeable updates or fixes. There are some glaring major bugs, along with some minor one, that are game breaking for many players. Some that existed and were reported during beta, some that were introduced between beta and release. The communication to players has been minimal.

 

[Javert]

I'm not fond of the beta process. Most of the time, the reported bugs are ignored and Frontier goes ahead by releasing a buggy build. Out of the 3 bugs I reported AND that were acknowledged by QA, none of them was fixed in the final release.

That's right. The pages and pages of patch notes and fixes that were released over 7 beta builds were all just a work of fiction and nothing was fixed

Joking aside, it's pretty normal for any software project to go live with known bugs still in the build. Fixing 100% of the bugs before go live would be way too expensive and the cost of the game would end up being hundreds of £ if they had to do that. Bugs will be prioritized and at some point, someone makes the decision to pull the trigger. You can argue that it was done too soon but the process will still be the same as it's impossible to get rid of 100% of bugs.

Apart from the many pages of fixes, FD also made some alterations to the engineers functionality as a result of feedback during beta, and they have announced some further changes to come.

This is a little troubling to me as well. We are just hours under one full week since release right before a long weekend which was not a good idea. There have not been any noticeable updates or fixes. There are some glaring major bugs, along with some minor one, that are game breaking for many players. Some that existed and were reported during beta, some that were introduced between beta and release. The communication to players has been minimal.

Statements were made by FD yesterday about the problems with the AI NPC ships (which admittedly were a significant problem judging by the forum feedback) yesterday and a server side update was issued. Past history shows that we will probably get a few bug fix builds over the next week or two. Horizons on Xbox is due out on Friday as well, so presumably that will be a chance to issues some bug fixes to 1.6 on the Xbox as well.

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=257892


Edit: As I remember, I can't remember exactly which update it was, but there was an update where FD did open up the last few days of the beta to all players. They probably will do this again in future if there is a specific reason to do so.

 

[Wylie28]

No having it paid means that most people will be more interested in actually beta testing, rather than just playing the update earlier.

 

[Oguska]

FD really needs a proper bug tracker, not a forum thread.

 

[who?]

FD really needs a proper bug tracker, not a forum thread.

They may well have one, but not publicly accessible. I reckon they use the bug forum as a "front end" for the submission of issues, and any issues the QA team can reproduce are then submitted into their own bug tracker.

If so, it'd add work for the QA team, but I'm not sure opening up a bug tracker to 1.5 million+ players would be better.

 

[kalniel]

They may well have one, but not publicly accessible. I reckon they use the bug forum as a "front end" for the submission of issues, and any issues the QA team can reproduce are then submitted into their own bug tracker. If so, it'd add work for the QA team, but I'm not sure opening up a bug tracker to 1.5 million+ players would be better.

Spot on.

 

[freedom4556]

Edit: As I remember, I can't remember exactly which update it was, but there was an update where FD did open up the last few days of the beta to all players. They probably will do this again in future if there is a specific reason to do so.

That was the CQC beta, and it was specifically touted as a server load stress test. It stands as the exception to the rule, currently.

 

[Varrag]

No one is forced to pay for Beta access and Frontier has put it on record that the pricing structure was set to discourage casual gamers from entering the beta process.

This is first time I hear that one gaming company wants to discourage casual gamers by setting the pricing structure. This doesn't make sense to me. Well... how it goes? You learn something new each day.

Anyway. What makes you think that only "pro gamers" are purchasing beta? In my experience, beta tests -be it payed or free- are, from the player's perspective, widely seen as mere preview of the upcoming new content and chance to carelessly play around with it. Just a small fraction of beta testers actually bother with bug reporting. It's a fact.

And then, as the casuals make up for majority of playerbase (as usual with all games, except perhaps hard core sims and grand strategies), what you get at the end is live version in which, just as an example (sic!), NPCs are too tough for average player. Followed by outrage on the forums, drama, hotfixes and generally a mess which probably costs them more than they might have made by selling beta access. I really can't see why more beta testers is bad thing, and I also don't believe that FDEV is actually making a lot of money by selling beta access.

After all, this should not be about money, but rather the quality of testing process; which, in my opinion, lacks quite a lot with ED: we all know that the patches, more often than not, are being regularily pushed out full of bugs and imbalances which then sometimes stay in game for months (or forever).

 

[Brimstone]

OP, your title should be "Do you think seasonal Beta access sales should end?" - Premium Beta was a thing sold in 2014 after Kickstarter and before the game launched.

What you're referring to is sales of seasonal Beta access post-launch.

I'll be voting No to this - as the game needs as many testers and sensible bug reports as possible.

There are two types of Beta customers:

1) "I'll test the new stuff and report back my findings"

2) "I wanna play the shinies! / Where's the new Meta!?"

We need more of type 1 than type 2.

IMO what is probably needed is for a Community guy from FDEV publishing a "So you want to be a Beta Tester" HOWTO - so that we can differentiate and root out the two types of Beta customers.

Yes, you're right. I should have clarified that bit more, and 'seasonal beta' would have been a better term to use rather than Premium Beta. Thanks

 

[EUS]

As a dinosaur, I find it amusing that people pay money to access beta.

 

[Brimstone]

Well blimey, having read this thread and seen the speed at which the trenches were dug, you'd think this was a done deal and implemented tomorrow.
Re-reading the OP, it seems he just wanted to explore opinions if perhaps there were better testing environments than the current one, which could be beneficial to the game.
Nobody is going to remove your privileges folks, don't worry.
If entry fee betas are the best solution for games though is another matter, but that discussion wasn't to be had here.

Thanks for actually reading my OP Exploring opinions is the entire point of this thread! Nowhere have I said that I want free beta access.

 

[CaptainKremmen]

FD really needs a proper bug tracker, not a forum thread.

In Alpha and Beta stages, FD used to use a ticketing system for all bug reports.

I submitted so many bug reports that I broke it. After 165 reports, all I got was a blank screen, as I'd used up my user's allotment of storage space. Nyuk, nyuk.

 

[freedom4556]

And then, as the casuals make up for majority of playerbase (as usual with all games, except perhaps hard core sims and grand strategies), what you get at the end is live version in which, just as an example (sic!), NPCs are too tough for average player. Followed by outrage on the forums, drama, hotfixes and generally a mess which probably costs them more than they might have made by selling beta access. I really can't see why more beta testers is bad thing, and I also don't believe that FDEV is actually making a lot of money by selling beta access.

After all, this should not be about money, but rather the quality of testing process; which, in my opinion, lacks quite a lot with ED: we all know that the patches, more often than not, are being regularily pushed out full of bugs and imbalances which then sometimes stay in game for months (or forever).

What's funny is they were making exactly ZERO money selling beta until a day or two after the 2.1 beta dropped as it was simply not for sale. So it was really just an issue of exclusivity, until the collective 'whining' of the community convinced them to relist beta access on the store.