Should This Game Still Be Considered A Beta?

[Xriborg]

Not that I think it's a huge deal, but I wanted to invite discussion on this topic.

 

There are many arguments for both sides. After all, beta is just a label. However, it comes with certain expectations that the game you are playing is still not quite ready for prime time. Bugs are to be expected. New releases will be frequent. Big changes to core systems may occur. That's what we expect with a beta. That's fine. We accept these risks when playing a beta. After all, they let us play their game while we help test their work. Symbiotic relationship.

 

But, there's an active cash shop. Monetization is in full swing. Those of us that have spent real money are Warframe's customers as well as it's beta testers. Yes, we know it's labeled as a beta, but should we not get some additional benefit for spending our money on what, by DE's own label, is an unfinished product?

 

 

Those arguments aside, something struck me as odd. What kind of beta has one time events before it's released? It seems odd that a player who might have decided to wait until Warframe's "full release" would log in day 1 to discover that there's content they won't be able to experience.

 

Personally, I don't think DE should be calling this a beta anymore, but I wanted to hear what other people think.

 

tl;dr: Should this game still be considered a beta despite having a fully functional monetization system and one-time events?

 

[Fourdee]

This game is more Alpha than Beta.

[PsychedelicSnake]

 I wanted to invite discussion on this topic.

 

 You're gonna find more arguments than discussions about this.

 

EDIT: Thus far, I pleasantly stand corrected.

Edited September 5, 2013 by PsychedelicSnake

[Ced23Ric]

Warframe isn't feature-complete and under development. Make of it what you will. For all I care, you can call "rubberducky", if you ask me. The term is just discussing semantics to the point of someone crying/raging. The actual symptoms are way more interesting. We have all parts of Warframe under constant development, if the engine is set (EE2.5).

 

The rest is in flux.

[alchemistjkt]

tl;dr: Should this game still be considered a beta despite having a fully functional monetization system and one-time events?

should it be called beta if its getting money? no, it should not be.

is warframe functionally a beta game? yes, very much so.

will we ever get out of beta? at some point, but ill bet they will squeeze that title for every drop they can get.

[Silraed]

For all the bugs, unbalance and unfinished things it is still a beta.

For all the events and monetization it is not a beta.

It is a tricky little subject isn't it?

[Haldos]

For all the bugs, unbalance and unfinished things it is still a beta.

For all the events and monetization it is not a beta.

It is a tricky little subject isn't it?

It really is. One that I try not to get involved with.

[Xriborg]

For all the bugs, unbalance and unfinished things it is still a beta.

For all the events and monetization it is not a beta.

It is a tricky little subject isn't it?

 

Quite.

 

When you put it that way, the label "beta" is something the devs can actually hide behind. Why would they cast this label away when it would do nothing aside from increasing expectations?

[Lordmotav]

Its a free game and fun and they literally keep churning out content at a good rate, and when there isnt content actively churned out we get livestream updates on how it IS going.

 

Idc what it's called, I like it the way it is.

[Heroicleopard]

 

Not that I think it's a huge deal, but I wanted to invite discussion on this topic.

 

There are many arguments for both sides. After all, beta is just a label. However, it comes with certain expectations that the game you are playing is still not quite ready for prime time. Bugs are to be expected. New releases will be frequent. Big changes to core systems may occur. That's what we expect with a beta. That's fine. We accept these risks when playing a beta. After all, they let us play their game while we help test their work. Symbiotic relationship.

 

But, there's an active cash shop. Monetization is in full swing. Those of us that have spent real money are Warframe's customers as well as it's beta testers. Yes, we know it's labeled as a beta, but should we not get some additional benefit for spending our money on what, by DE's own label, is an unfinished product?

 

 

Those arguments aside, something struck me as odd. What kind of beta has one time events before it's released? It seems odd that a player who might have decided to wait until Warframe's "full release" would log in day 1 to discover that there's content they won't be able to experience.

 

Personally, I don't think DE should be calling this a beta anymore, but I wanted to hear what other people think.

 

tl;dr: Should this game still be considered a beta despite having a fully functional monetization system and one-time events?

 

>Firefall

 

They're in open beta and they have micro-transactions

 

I would also like to ask where it says that beta stage games can't have micro-transactions..

[Cpl_Facehugger]

This game is more Alpha than Beta.

Yes, primarily due to the fact that it's not yet feature complete.

Mind, I'm not sure whether the whole alpha -> beta -> release candidate -> release system works with something constantly under development like this.

[alchemistjkt]

When you put it that way, the label "beta" is something the devs can actually hide behind. Why would they cast this label away when it would do nothing aside from increasing expectations?

couple that with the "oh its in beta, so i can shape its future" idea that people get about the game and its even more a reason to keep beta tacked on.

[Dracosaber]

I think people have confused having a monetization system with the game being "released" or mostly done. That's not what it means. As a free to play game, Warframe needs a way of making money to continue development of the game. DE is a relatively small company, so they need continued funds to keep working on the game. Thus, the cash shop. There is almost nothing in the Market that can't be received while just playing the game, except colors and a couple other things. Yes, the game promotes spending money, but not in a bad way, or P2W. Also, where is there a rule that games can't be in beta AND have a monetization system? F2P is different from normal games, they can abide b different rules. This notion of "money shop=released" is outdated and quite naive to be honest. 

 

Also, systems in the game are still being actively worked on. Just look at the damage system. It's getting a complete overhaul in U10. Many other things are still actively being revised, balanced, added, etc. The game is no where near finished, DE has said so.

 

Thus, I would definitely say the game is still in beta, we're just testers for for very complex systems, including the structures of events (just think about the Fomarian event, lots of feedback from that, DE learned a lesson about timers, but people who participate still need rewards). So yeah, still beta. 

Edited September 5, 2013 by Dracosaber

[SabreUr]

 

But, there's an active cash shop. Monetization is in full swing. Those of us that have spent real money are Warframe's customers as well as it's beta testers. Yes, we know it's labeled as a beta, but should we not get some additional benefit for spending our money on what, by DE's own label, is an unfinished product?

 

 

Microtransactions have nothing to do with state of development. Warthunder is in Beta. So is World of Warplanes, Hawken (though I might be wrong). Early access games cost money, and they are, in most extreme cases, barely an alpha.

 

You can buy ships in Star Citizen, and I don't think there is a single playable build released to public.

 

For game without publisher that will give developer tons of money, there is not many options to get that cash.

Edited September 5, 2013 by SabreUr

[GottFaust]

Based on the original IBM definitions: this game is currently in a Public Alpha stage due to the joint facts that it is not feature complete and that it is available to the public.

That being said, the developer says that it is in BETA so it's in BETA. Argument over.

[Kielix7]

If anything, I would like to say this game is still beta.

Reasons being: 

-New weapons and warframes are constantly being developed, and a majority of weapons / frames are either broken or need constant reworking

-In-game monetization and one-time events are experimental, trying to work towards a better implementation of such when actual launch comes

-Bugs and glitches are rather common, and a great deal of them are game breaking

-Lore, backstory, and current story path is almost non-existent

-Gameplay has major structural flaws that need reworking

[Prosecute]

I enjoy the constant "beta". I think if this game ever stops coming out with more content and more progress and stops growing; warframe won't be the game I love. 

[Xriborg]

Good stuff.

 

Does anyone from the pro beta label side wish to address the one-time events? That's the one bit I really havent heard much about.

 

That being said, the developer says that it is in BETA so it's in BETA. Argument over.

 

That I don't agree with.

 

If the developer told me this game was an onion, they would be wrong. "Because they said so" is not a valid response.

[General_Krull]

If anything, I would like to say this game is still beta.

Reasons being: 

-New weapons and warframes are constantly being developed, and a majority of weapons / frames are either broken or need constant reworking

-In-game monetization and one-time events are experimental, trying to work towards a better implementation of such when actual launch comes

-Bugs and glitches are rather common, and a great deal of them are game breaking

-Lore, backstory, and current story path is almost non-existent

-Gameplay has major structural flaws that need reworking

It's ok they still have time to fix it! Release date is set to november! Oh wait it's 2 months away.

[Silraed]

It's ok they still have time to fix it! Release date is set to november! Oh wait it's 2 months away.

This is what kind of worries me, release date is so close, we still have so many bugs/issues and they are releasing scarves.

Maybe my concernes are unfounded, who knows.

[PsychedelicSnake]

This is what kind of worries me, release date is so close, we still have so many bugs/issues and they are releasing scarves.

Maybe my concernes are unfounded, who knows.

We actually have no proof or Developer statement that the PS4 release will be the official release. Hell, it could be in it's own little beta too, for all we know.

[Silraed]

We actually have no proof or Developer statement that the PS4 release will be the official release. Hell, it could be in it's own little beta too, for all we know.

That is true but one would think they would be aiming for a release title or soon after release, better chance to maximise profit off it.

[PsychedelicSnake]

That is true but one would think they would be aiming for a release title or soon after release, better chance to maximise profit off it.

Maybe, but I would rather it stay in beta for both systems so they have more time to improve and fix as necessary, rather than rush it all out. Of this, I think we can all agree.

[Silraed]

Maybe, but I would rather it stay in beta for both systems so they have more time to improve and fix as necessary, rather than rush it all out. Of this, I think we can all agree.

I do agree. But some of their recent decisions have not seemed....fantastic, maybe they are in preparation for armour 2.0 or something else up their sleeve but we don't know that yet.

[Karma_Ghost]

Good stuff.

 

Does anyone from the pro beta label side wish to address the one-time events? That's the one bit I really havent heard much about.

 

Considering most of the events thus far have introduced some type of new content (i.e. fusion moas) or concept (formorian consumable synergies). It could be argued that the purpose of events is for testing content that has a potentially significant effect on game play. So long as the game remains in beta, there is far less expectation from players for game play to remain consistent. This provides developers with the justification to make dramatic changes while minimizing any alienating effects on player/consumer base.Once a game is released, change carries more financial risk.

 

Short version:

You can say, "This game is still in beta, expect frequent changes." 

 

You can't say, "This is the fully released game, expect frequent changes." This would be bad for business

Edited September 5, 2013 by Karma_Ghost