Beta Testing: What makes a good beta tester?

[natasha]

Hey all! Have seen lots of fervor about WHEN beta testing will be opened up. I am wondering what makes a good beta tester. This is my first MMO and have never done beta testing, so not sure if it's something that would be right for me or not. Any opinions?

[iceriven2]

 A Good one is one that has the time to play and puts in an effort to do /bug and /feedback.  But you can be a good tester and still not get invited to be in beta. 

[Dragowulf]

Well I'm not sure I'm the one to answer but... You should be doing /bug, or /feedback and report all the bugs and problems you see. as well as post on the forums and yes you can be a good beta tester and not get any invite. but... i think the more games/software you beta test, the more likely you get into beta. because your name is "sold" to the industry. ever since i did WoW beta ive gotten in beta for everything ive signed up for, usually in the early stages. including vanguard, and lotro. that's just me though drago

[dieschatten]

i played wow, wowbc and Vanguard beta. Some offline Games beta and i never become an betakey to any EQ2 Game or exp. Maybe this time I can test something.

[Freliant]

<p>Getting into beta, and being a good beta tester are 2 different things.</p><p> With that said, to be an efficient beta tester, you just have to do what is needed at the moment. Sometimes, just logging in is enough to be a good beta tester, if what they are testing is server load, and lag related issues. However, if the feedback they need is related to specific zones, quests and arts, then it really depends on the eye and mind of the beta tester.</p><p>2 types are needed, the ones that play the game normally, and the same way that 90% of the world population does, and gives feedback as to what they find enjoyable and not enjoyable, and then the "off-player". That player that goes out of his way to find every type of exploit, glitch or bug possible in the game while they are playing. </p><p>You can't have all of a single type, or you will get a bug free game that is not as fun as it could be, or a really fun game that just has too many bugs to even be worthwhile. So like someone said: The best beta tester is the one that signs in and dedicates time to play and feedback/bug the game when appropriete.</p><p>As a side note: its impossible to pick up all the possible bugs of an MMO, since its always dinamic and everchanging, which is why even after beta, there is still a "test" server where players can constantly feedback and bug issues that come up from the different updates and such.</p>

[Skua]

<cite>Dragowulf2 wrote:</cite><blockquote>Well I'm not sure I'm the one to answer but... You should be doing /bug, or /feedback and report all the bugs and problems you see. as well as post on the forums and yes you can be a good beta tester and not get any invite. but... i think the more games/software you beta test, the more likely you get into beta. because your name is "sold" to the industry. ever since i did WoW beta ive gotten in beta for everything ive signed up for, usually in the early stages. including vanguard, and lotro. that's just me though drago </blockquote> Yeah same here i starte betatesting years ago now i dont miss any betatest (well still waiting for Warhammer =/ ) I betatested Coh / Cov , Eq2 (DOF, kos , eof) , WoW ,Guild Wars, LOTRO , Vanguard, and now waiting to betatest , Aion and w arhammer =/

[steelblueangel]

<p>LOL the live servers in eq2 are the beta testers!! So you are one now lol.</p><p>Lets see, on live servers we have seen complete revamping of all combat arts and spell lines which forced those affected to relearn their toons all over again all in the name of balance. Now if that is not a beta tester sever what is?</p><p>It's one thing to improve this or tweak that but when a game is completely revamped on a live server,  then it becomes a beta tester server not a live sever. So in point we pay to be beta testers on a live server. </p><p>Eq's problem is they do NOT listen to the tester's feedback on beta so it goes live filled with problems, glitches, bugs etc. leaving the live server community to play through it and send feedback over and over to endless problems.</p><p>The test server's on eq are meant to do just that, test new content etc before it goes to the live server; however, that is rarely how it happens. Feeback in game is sent and yet it goes live without a fix to the live servers. </p>

[Freliant]

<cite>steelblueangel wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>LOL the live servers in eq2 are the beta testers!! So you are one now lol.</p><p>Lets see, on live servers we have seen complete revamping of all combat arts and spell lines which forced those affected to relearn their toons all over again all in the name of balance. Now if that is not a beta tester sever what is?</p><p>It's one thing to improve this or tweak that but when a game is completely revamped on a live server,  then it becomes a beta tester server not a live sever. So in point we pay to be beta testers on a live server. </p><p>Eq's problem is they do NOT listen to the tester's feedback on beta so it goes live filled with problems, glitches, bugs etc. leaving the live server community to play through it and send feedback over and over to endless problems.</p><p>The test server's on eq are meant to do just that, test new content etc before it goes to the live server; however, that is rarely how it happens. Feeback in game is sent and yet it goes live without a fix to the live servers. </p></blockquote><p>I am not sure where you are getting your information from, but I know without a doubt that they do listen. In every beta I have been in, whenever I have done a /bug report on an actual bug it gets changed. However, if you mean that they don't compromise their vision of the game with the ideas that get /feedback from every Tom Dick and Harry, then yes, you are absolutely correct.</p><p> Countless people have said, "I want armor dyes", or "change my AA so I can do xyz", and it hasn't been implemented. Does that mean they are not listening? No, it just means that they are not going to change the game from their primary goal.</p><p>If you are referring to LU 13 and LU 24 where the combat changes went live, then that is a completely different story. There is a post by the EQ2 producer stating that the game was not going in the dirrection they wanted and that even their own devs were not playing the game, and hence they needed to redo the game to make it fun again. I don't know about you, but I am certainly having tons more fun now with the way the game is, and the way that the new zones are over how the game was at launch time. I must admit though, the game seems a lil more watered down now... not as intense, but I think it is a good thing. </p>

[steelblueangel]

<p>Lu13 and lu24 should have never taken place in the live game. Those updates while you may have found them great many found them to be a handicap. My inquisitor became a toon that was shelved until the aa system was created and is still not my favorite to play any more since it still lacks dps, slow heals, shared timers, gets interrupted and resisted, and prior to Lu13 she was my main toon that I enjoyed playing.</p><p>Lu13 and Lu24 did not make just changes it was a complete game revamp and that should have been done in beta not in live content that causes confusion and removes satisfaction from players that liked the toon the way it was. These updates were massive changes to combat and should have taken place in beta where massive changes are expected. Massive changes that remove abilities from a character is never good a business practice. Eq2 lost alot of players as a result of those changes and have yet to regain the population it once had. In fact it is hard to find enough players to form quick groups on my server now due to low population number of players. They do mass nerfages and then turn around and give some of the abilities back to the players in the form of AA's. The AA's make the toon choose paths of either, solo or group abilities as well as limit the choice of weapons 1 hand vs 2, shield vs empty hand, dagger vs 1 or 2 hand weapon. In other words the AA's are filled with limitations. </p><p>A massive revamp should not depend on whether the devs want to play or even have time to play it; rather, it should depend on the player community and their feedback. Massive revamps should never take place in a live game but in beta ONLY to allow the PLAYERS to give feedback both good/bad before it hits the live servers; thus, to allow for changes or tweaks to create an enjoyable game for everyone when it arrives on the live servers. </p>

[Winter]

<p><span style="font-size: medium; color: #ff66ff; font-family: comic sans ms,sand">This may make it sound as if I've no life, but I have beta tested most of the mmorpg's and major expansions that have come out... ranging from Shadows of Yserbius (back in the days of TSN/INN) to AO, Asheron's Call, AC2, etc and so on and so forth up to EQ2. (And now I'm beta testing a couple other games on the side as well)...</p><p><span style="font-size: medium"><span style="color: #ff66ff; font-family: Comic Sans MS">You can be an effective beta tester without spending your entire days in the game. lol. You just have to actively seek out bugs and things that need improvement.</span></span></p>

[Tearltwo]

<p>BETA tests are to check the application on a variety of platforms/hardware/etc. as well as content. A good BETA tester knows the game genre and a decent bit about their hardware (mostly for initial testing). Since EQ2 is pretty established, I'm sure the RoK BETA will focus much more on game content than your computer...HOWEVER, with all the newer hardware out there, I'm sure the devs will want feedback on OS/Hardware issues too....</p><p>dress accordingly<img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></p>