Support NeoGAF

[Tieno]

You're really enjoying showing nothing at all, aren't you? It's like teasing a hungry man with fake food.

They even interviewed him on this on the MTV site.:lol He takes lots of pride in his l33t skillz!

 

[nubbe]

Ehhh... Such an early beta will just kill the hype... Well, my hype anyways...

Psychology 101

People want what they can't have

 

[GhaleonEB]

I'm curious about why the possibility of a fee for a beta test "worries" people? I can see a lot of reasons to have a fee, especially in the case of a high profile, high demand game like Halo 3. What is the pandora's box that is being opened in this case that "worries" people? I see no downside.

Here's my take. Looking at what EA is doing with Marketplace makes me think of worst-case scenarios for this kind of stuff.

What's the difference between a beta and a demo? Both are from early builds of a game, released to the public, so they can try out a portion of the game. In the case of a beta, the primary purpose is for testing and user feedback. In the case of a demo, it's usually to promote the game and build awareness.

Now think about what EA would do with it. Take, for example, the Lost Planet online MP demo coming up in a few days. What if instead of saying, "here's this free demo, we hope you like it," Capcom had said, "we're holding a public beta. Download the 3-map beta for 400 points." They setup a private message board to submit feedback, and whalla, instant cash. Kiss those free demos goodbye.

I can see companies (*EA*) doing this. Try out the new Madden six weeks before it comes out! Become part of the deveopment process! Work directly with the developers in the creation of their next blockbuster*.


*For $5.

 

[storybook77]

The amount of people willing to PAY in order to BETA TEST a game is disturbing. Do it the PC way -- application process, opening up slots as the testing progresses. Just about anyone who really wants in will make it, I'm sure. Otherwise, it's a pandora's box, asking players to pay in order to do something people would normally be paid for. Ridiculous.

The public beta test will be more open-ended than the internal beta test. Paid beta testers are given specific things to test and that is pretty much all that they get to do until another thing is appointed to them. It's my understanding that most QA guys aren't allowed to just freely play the game as is and report anything that they might see wrong, they are supposed to look for specific problems in specific areas thus the need for a lot of testers.

As long as the fee isn't too much, I don't have a problem with it.

 

[Confidence Man]

I'm curious about why the possibility of a fee for a beta test "worries" people? I can see a lot of reasons to have a fee, especially in the case of a high profile, high demand game like Halo 3. What is the pandora's box that is being opened in this case that "worries" people? I see no downside.

I imagine a scenario where I'm creating Halo 3 and I want to do a decent size, but limited entry, public beta. How do you keep people from taking slots in the beta who aren't really going to pound on the game? Charging a fee for the beta is certainly one way. If you charge, you'll only get either the hardcore, or those who will play occasionally and don't mind throwing money away. I would guess that you'd get more of the former. Though I would - and will if it comes to this - fall into the latter.

Imagine the Lost Planet multiplayer demo coming out this month. Now imagine instead of it being a demo, they call it a "beta" and charge for it. Not that that's going to happen to Lost Planet, but I could envision EA doing this for their next Battlefield.

Edit: Ghaleon and I think alike on this.

 

[Doogington]

I am against the idea but will not be resisting.

 

[storybook77]

Here's my take. Looking at what EA is doing with Marketplace makes me think of worst-case scenarios for this kind of stuff.

What's the difference between a beta and a demo? Both are from early builds of a game, released to the public, so they can try out a portion of the game. In the case of a beta, the primary purpose is for testing and user feedback. In the case of a demo, it's usually to promote the game and build awareness.

Now think about what EA would do with it. Take, for example, the Lost Planet online MP demo coming up in a few days. What if instead of saying, "here's this free demo, we hope you like it," Capcom had said, "we're holding a public beta. Download the 3-map beta for 400 points." They setup a private message board to submit feedback, and whalla, instant cash. Kiss those free demos goodbye.

I can see companies (*EA*) doing this. Try out the new Madden six weeks before it comes out! Become part of the deveopment process! Work directly with the developers in the creation of their next blockbuster*.


*For $5.

Companies have been releasing MP beta tests for years, just not charging for them (Blizzard being the most notable). If Blizzard was to announce StarCraft 2 and then say there would be a $5 fee to download the MP beta test; I honestly don't think there would be a big problem with that.

 

[GhaleonEB]

Companies have been releasing MP beta tests for years, just not charging for them (Blizzard being the most notable). If Blizzard was to announce StarCraft 2 and then say there would be a $5 fee to download the MP beta test; I honestly don't think there would be a big problem with that.

I agree, but that's not my point. I think there are legitimate situations where it's reasonable to ask players to pay for a beta. I'm saying that whenever there are legitimate reasons, there are companies who will abuse that and try to milk it for whatever it's worth. I can see EA execs eyeing a paid Halo 3 beta with envious eyes. (And I hope it's free.)

Imagine the Lost Planet multiplayer demo coming out this month. Now imagine instead of it being a demo, they call it a "beta" and charge for it. Not that that's going to happen to Lost Planet, but I could envision EA doing this for their next Battlefield.

Edit: Ghaleon and I think alike on this.

Wow, exactly alike. :lol

 

[Tieno]

Here's my take. Looking at what EA is doing with Marketplace makes me think of worst-case scenarios for this kind of stuff.

What's the difference between a beta and a demo? Both are from early builds of a game, released to the public, so they can try out a portion of the game. In the case of a beta, the primary purpose is for testing and user feedback. In the case of a demo, it's usually to promote the game and build awareness.

Now think about what EA would do with it. Take, for example, the Lost Planet online MP demo coming up in a few days. What if instead of saying, "here's this free demo, we hope you like it," Capcom had said, "we're holding a public beta. Download the 3-map beta for 400 points." They setup a private message board to submit feedback, and whalla, instant cash. Kiss those free demos goodbye.

I can see companies (*EA*) doing this. Try out the new Madden six weeks before it comes out! Become part of the deveopment process! Work directly with the developers in the creation of their next blockbuster*.


*For $5.

Totally agree. It sounds very UnBungie, but very Microsofty (like the exclusive to 360 Halo 2 maps). The fact that (along with no mention of 'free' in press release) Stinkles hasn't commented on this leads me to believe it's either 'pay to beta' OR it's still undecided wether or not it's 'pay to beta'

 

[storybook77]

I agree, but that's not my point. I think there are legitimate situations where it's reasonable to ask players to pay for a beta. I'm saying that whenever there are legitimate reasons, there are companies who will abuse that and try to milk it for whatever it's worth. I can see EA execs eyeing a paid Halo 3 beta with envious eyes.

EA might be envious of a Halo 3 beta but they have trouble enough getting a working FINAL copy out of the door, little less a playable beta for public consumption. :lol

 

[IJoel]

The problem with this is that it could very well mean the end to free downloadable demos. Once a publisher starts doing this, you can bet others will follow.

 

[GhaleonEB]

EA might be envious of a Halo 3 beta but they have trouble enough getting a working FINAL copy out of the door, little less a playable beta for public consumption. :lol

:rimshot

:lol

 

[disco]

bitchy stratagy, it'll work, just like the mtv unveiling worked

 

[tombur]

Aslong as this trailer shows a few new snippets of info and sends the same shivers down my spine the first trailer did (omg!) then im happy, sort of.

 

[GunFingers]

So I see that the worrisome part, to most people, about a potential for-fee beta is the possibility of others extending the concept to demos. There's a big difference here, though. The purpose of a demo - typically - is to expose as many people as possible to your game in an effort to drive sales. Charging for a demo is counter to that goal. There can be other purposes for demos, like to drive pre-orders of high demand games, but in general this is what we are talking about. Maybe a few games could get away with a for-fee demo, like the previously mentioned Madden or even a game like Halo 3 and a few other bigguns, but it would be wasteful for 99% of the games to have for-fee demos. So this is a non-issue to me.

And the discussion is a bit similar for betas. If you have a high demand game and can get the type of traffic you need to successfully test what needs to be tested, then slap a price tag on it. That's just good business. But if your game isn't one of those that will have people clamoring to pay $20 to be part of the beta, and you try to charge anyway, then you could be sabotaging the end product.

My point here is that a decision like this isn't made in a vaccuum. Charging for a beta or a demo wouldn't work for 99% of the games out there. But for the few that it would work for, I say go for it. I'll decide if I want to pay your door charge or not!

 

[GeneralIroh]

That new picture is really dissapointing. Even the teaser and multiplayer scans look better.....

 

[IJoel]

So I see that the worrisome part, to most people, about a potential for-fee beta is the possibility of others extending the concept to demos. There's a big difference here, though. The purpose of a demo - typically - is to expose as many people as possible to your game in an effort to drive sales. Charging for a demo is counter to that goal. There can be other purposes for demos, like to drive pre-orders of high demand games, but in general this is what we are talking about. Maybe a few games could get away with a for-fee demo, like the previously mentioned Madden or even a game like Halo 3 and a few other bigguns, but it would be wasteful for 99% of the games to have for-fee demos. So this is a non-issue to me.

And the discussion is a bit similar for betas. If you have a high demand game and can get the type of traffic you need to successfully test what needs to be tested, then slap a price tag on it. That's just good business. But if your game isn't one of those that will have people clamoring to pay $20 to be part of the beta, and you try to charge anyway, then you could be sabotaging the end product.

My point here is that a decision like this isn't made in a vaccuum. Charging for a beta or a demo wouldn't work for 99% of the games out there. But for the few that it would work for, I say go for it. I'll decide if I want to pay your door charge or not!

I thought about that too, but...

A year and a half or so ago, i would've been convinced your proposition was absolutely right, but publishers have definitely proven me wrong with regards to the extent they're willing to go to nickel and dime customers.

 

[urk]

The intent of a beta test is to work the kinks and bugs out of the experience before the final product ships. The developers get free play testing and the beta testers get to play a form of the game early at no charge. That's the relationship. I can't see Bungie wanting to charge for this.

 

[Tieno]

The intent of a beta test is to work the kinks and bugs out of the experience before the final product ships. The developers get free play testing and the beta testers get to play a form of the game early at no charge. That's the relationship. I can't see Bungie wanting to charge for this.

Me neither, but I can see MS wanting to do this. Just like how MS wants the new Halo 2 maps 360 exclusive.

 

[urk]

Me neither, but I can see MS wanting to do this. Just like how MS wants the new Halo 2 maps 360 exclusive.

MS doesn't charge for OS beta testing.

 

[Tieno]

MS doesn't charge for OS beta testing.

True, but that's on the PC side...On Marketplace they've been very, very eager to charge you.

 

[urk]

True, but that's on the PC side...On Marketplace they've been very, very eager to charge you.

Yeah, they don't have a stranglehold in the console space. Still, it would be pretty crappy for them to ask fans to buck up in order to play test for them. Frankie, relay the message. Also, you are bald.

 

[Shoho]

I dont understand why MS dont get some studio to update Halo and Halo 2, release them under one pack, in a 360 box with new features, like hi def textures, bug fixes, achivements, rankings and all the other flair.

it wouldnt be compatible with halo 2 on xbox right? but still... damn...


I need to get a 360. I dont think I can hold out for ps3 here in europe. Sony hates us over here aswell. I have to wait until march to get FF12. I really might aswell stick with the company that likes me...

im going 360.


sorry sony...

 

[Aisenherz]

So everyone sees the new screen.

Why does his "suit" look like crap?

 

[GhaleonEB]

Why does his "suit" look like crap?

I think it's too plastic-like for my tastes, especially the fingers. But the suit looks fine. It's a bit too zoomed in for its own good as a screenshot. The resized one is pretty compelling, IMO, especially when compared to Halo 2.

Snagged from the other thread:

The new texture work is pretty amazing. And the game is a year out, yet.

 

[RSLAEV]

I would have been a lot more stoked about that MC screenshot if I hadn't just had my mind blown by Gears Of War. The Cog and Locust Battlesuits make Master Chief's armor look a little plain. But I guess you can't have that level of detail on individual units with levels as big as Halo's

And as for the paying to beta thing, I don't mind it at all really. It keeps the server populations down and helps fund development. if you don't want to pay, then don't. I wouldn't pay to beta any other game on the 360 right now, but that doesn't mean other people shouldn't get to.

Besides it's not like public beta's will ever replace in house beta testing.

 

[Stinkles]

Why does his "suit" look like crap?

Because it hurts the Xbots so much.

 

[My Arms Your Hearse]

Looks pretty good, but a far far cry from the teaser trailer model.

 

[Joates]

Because it hurts the Xbots so much.

:lol

 

[mikeGFG]

Looks pretty good, but a far far cry from the teaser trailer model.

What strange wording you have there, friend.

Lighting conditions are crazy different, but the model is the same. The only execption being that the Chief's visor no longer has that mirror-like shine from the teaser.

 

[raYne]

Lighting conditions are crazy different, but the model is the same. The only execption being that the Chief's visor no longer has that mirror-like shine from the teaser.

Which can be attributed to a day shot(teaser) vs an indoor shot (pic). It's already been said that the visor reflects in realtime now.

 

[Dante]

Kinda odd to run a teaser a year b4 the game ships.....also they need to tone down that bump mapping.

 

[FiRez]

Halo 2 DLC just for the X360

WTF IS THAT????????????????????????????????????????
AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Pachinko]

I can easily see why they'd roll out a beta for the multiplayer , they could include 1 or 2 maps and let everyone try everything on them becuase beta testing with a group of 50 people for a year or so you might only try 98% of the possible things that could lead to bugs or cheating, given the HUGE problem with halo 2 cheaters it'd be great if this public beta could get that number up to 99.998% of all possible bugs. All it takes is one idiot discovering a way to cheat to ruing it for every single other gamer.

 

[op_ivy]

So who is Max and co. and what maps did he/they design for Halo and Halo 2?
These are important questions!!! need to find out if the new maps will be another warlock or another sanctuary.

i believe he was multiplayer lead for halo 2. hes one of the guys who demo'd the first look at halo 2's MP

 

[Wario64]

I have an even bigger screen

 

[HomerSimpson-Man]

^^^
WTF?!

 

[RSLAEV]

^^^
WTF?!

That's no moon...

 

[krypt0nian]

Halo 2 DLC just for the X360

WTF IS THAT????????????????????????????????????????
AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That would be a brilliant plan to get some of the xbox stragglers onto the next gen's 360 loving.

 

[∀ Narayan]

I really prefer the mirror sheen of his visor, as displayed in the X02 Halo 2 teaser, and E3 Halo 3 teaser.

This golden stuff. . . Meh.

Unless it's a polarity feature. That would be interesting.

 

[GhaleonEB]

great, now this thread needs a ****ing DSL warning. :lol

 

[nubbe]

omg 2880p confirmed!!!