Re: EA wants your input re: open beta patch
The thing that disturbs me the most is that EA decides to do something such as an open beta test, submits it to the public by announcement that such is about to happen. Then suddenly they retract that by asking a silly question in the regards it may appear to facilitate all the complaining morons on these forums.
If your going to do something and make a wide public announcement but later retract that movement by asking the whiners and complainers of any EA work what they think is best.. I mean come on.. get some balls EA.
I say do the public beta.. I work with a Dev team and have since the start of BF1942 and worked closely with EA in the process. WE too had a public beta testing program. Yes you get some who think that reporting bugs and exploits means explaing how they thought it hard to fly a craft or learn new improvements or they would make nothing but suggestions on what they felt was a better implementation of a new object or code and how they would go about enforcing it. But for the most part they understood the true meaning of BETA testing.. they would report bugs and issues with the product and in return many may have already been comon knowledge among the Devs but at least they were confirmed and marked as top priority.
Many of the bugs reported would be minute in size of causing any delay in development or effect it had on public play, but none the less there were some that were very useful and could not have been found even with exhaustive testing within the developement team. However with all that said and with a public release with thought finished and complete release, there were still issues that arose beyond the testing of a closed beta system.
So in regards to opening a public beta release.. it is a good thing.. it opens a wide variety of cirumstances that can not be obtained in a closed environment.
I say at least if not a wide public beta, then allow experienced testers, developers in a test format that enables progressive test reporting and developement such as a CVS system which is even used by EA in the infamous closed beta tests.
The mod teams devoted to creating good content and meaningful gameplay while maintaining a fun factor and being experienced in what to look for should be top prioroty as a basis of a open beta program. The reports should be in an open obtainable format that all can access and resource such as a wiki and files should be in process versions to keep everything in a flow-chart situation whereas reported bugs/issues/exploits are converted repaired or redone before release to the next version. All remaining issues would be top priority in the next version, etc. etc. Until an open beta could then be released for even wider testing.
Overall the more people testing and those with exact emphasis on reporting only the issues at hand should result in a better more complete playable version for all.
The thing that disturbs me the most is that EA decides to do something such as an open beta test, submits it to the public by announcement that such is about to happen. Then suddenly they retract that by asking a silly question in the regards it may appear to facilitate all the complaining morons on these forums.
If your going to do something and make a wide public announcement but later retract that movement by asking the whiners and complainers of any EA work what they think is best.. I mean come on.. get some balls EA.
I say do the public beta.. I work with a Dev team and have since the start of BF1942 and worked closely with EA in the process. WE too had a public beta testing program. Yes you get some who think that reporting bugs and exploits means explaing how they thought it hard to fly a craft or learn new improvements or they would make nothing but suggestions on what they felt was a better implementation of a new object or code and how they would go about enforcing it. But for the most part they understood the true meaning of BETA testing.. they would report bugs and issues with the product and in return many may have already been comon knowledge among the Devs but at least they were confirmed and marked as top priority.
Many of the bugs reported would be minute in size of causing any delay in development or effect it had on public play, but none the less there were some that were very useful and could not have been found even with exhaustive testing within the developement team. However with all that said and with a public release with thought finished and complete release, there were still issues that arose beyond the testing of a closed beta system.
So in regards to opening a public beta release.. it is a good thing.. it opens a wide variety of cirumstances that can not be obtained in a closed environment.
I say at least if not a wide public beta, then allow experienced testers, developers in a test format that enables progressive test reporting and developement such as a CVS system which is even used by EA in the infamous closed beta tests.
The mod teams devoted to creating good content and meaningful gameplay while maintaining a fun factor and being experienced in what to look for should be top prioroty as a basis of a open beta program. The reports should be in an open obtainable format that all can access and resource such as a wiki and files should be in process versions to keep everything in a flow-chart situation whereas reported bugs/issues/exploits are converted repaired or redone before release to the next version. All remaining issues would be top priority in the next version, etc. etc. Until an open beta could then be released for even wider testing.
Overall the more people testing and those with exact emphasis on reporting only the issues at hand should result in a better more complete playable version for all.
Comment