Comments on: Heroes of Open Betas http://www.aelon.net/2006/02/heroes-of-open-betas/ Random babblings from a few digitally inclined people Wed, 07 Jan 2009 00:43:13 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.2 by: Cyrris http://www.aelon.net/2006/02/heroes-of-open-betas/#comment-1789 Sun, 12 Feb 2006 00:34:20 +0000 http://www.aelon.net/2006/02/heroes-of-open-betas/#comment-1789 Well, the impression I get from Ubisoft's forum announcement there lends to the idea that the uproar from the fans was largely responsible for the delay. I know there is a lot of controversy surrounding it - some have even suggested the entire SaveHeroes.org movement was done by Ubisoft themselves as a PR move. I think that's a bit over the top, so I don't have a problem with taking Ubi's post at face value. Well, the impression I get from Ubisoft’s forum announcement there lends to the idea that the uproar from the fans was largely responsible for the delay. I know there is a lot of controversy surrounding it - some have even suggested the entire SaveHeroes.org movement was done by Ubisoft themselves as a PR move. I think that’s a bit over the top, so I don’t have a problem with taking Ubi’s post at face value.

]]> by: Holliday http://www.aelon.net/2006/02/heroes-of-open-betas/#comment-1788 Sat, 11 Feb 2006 20:23:59 +0000 http://www.aelon.net/2006/02/heroes-of-open-betas/#comment-1788 There is a lot of debate whether or not the fans were the end decision in the delay of the game. With the way things work in game development the fans might have been playing a beta build that was 6 months old. Full Auto's "new" demo on Xbox Live is actually the same one that was available at E3 2005 full of frame rate issues. And with the way things work Ubisoft could have been planning on delaying it all along. Publishers and developers are not exactly open. One odd note is that many of the fan sites "threatened" to no longer publish updates about the game unless it was delayed. That seems like an odd tactic. I personally don't care how a company refines its product, open beta, internal testers etc. As long as they release it in a solid state. I would think that a good team of internal testers is better than an open beta. I think open betas might mess up priorities for developers. The community does not always know what is "good for them". In a perfect development cycle a robust open and internal beta would be excellent. There is a lot of debate whether or not the fans were the end decision in the delay of the game. With the way things work in game development the fans might have been playing a beta build that was 6 months old. Full Auto’s “new” demo on Xbox Live is actually the same one that was available at E3 2005 full of frame rate issues.

And with the way things work Ubisoft could have been planning on delaying it all along. Publishers and developers are not exactly open. One odd note is that many of the fan sites “threatened” to no longer publish updates about the game unless it was delayed. That seems like an odd tactic.

I personally don’t care how a company refines its product, open beta, internal testers etc. As long as they release it in a solid state. I would think that a good team of internal testers is better than an open beta. I think open betas might mess up priorities for developers. The community does not always know what is “good for them”. In a perfect development cycle a robust open and internal beta would be excellent.

]]>