this post was submitted on 01 Jul 2024
94 points (98.0% liked)

Games

30613 readers
1085 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Weekly Threads:

What Are You Playing?

The Weekly Discussion Topic

Rules:

  1. Submissions have to be related to games

  2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

  3. No excessive self-promotion

  4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

  5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

  6. No linking to piracy

More information about the community rules can be found here.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] MeaanBeaan 16 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Is that not the purpose of a beta? That doesn't seem like a good sign.

[–] ChicoSuave 26 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Traditional, pre-2006, beta tests were bug hunts in feature complete software. Then public beta tests became a thing that rapidly evolved into marketing for a finished game. Most public betas don't see any bugs fixed on launch.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 week ago

Not just marketing, they're often also a load test for the networking infrastructure. Not much change to actual gameplay though.

[–] Katana314 3 points 1 week ago

Generally, devs have felt very pressured when given multiple release date goals. By that I mean getting out a playable E3 demo, a “beta”, a demo, an early access for preorders…

It means if, say, the character has always had a clipping issue with their holster but it’s not a priority, the team can focus on important work/bugs first and their QA just kind of acknowledges the weird holster. But anytime they’re releasing, every detail like that has to be trimmed up for however many levels are coming out.

So yeah, I’m in favor of them avoiding any marketing betas if it helps them.