PeanutMonster Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 (edited) A game can't be always stuck in a stage of development. It follows the rule of Alpha>Beta> Released product. At this pace, Warframe will keep going Beta > Gamma > Delta > ... > Psi > Omega > Released product, all the way through the Greek alphabet. Edited September 9, 2014 by PeanutMonster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gelkor Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 Indeed. That and they can escape critics by bringing out the excuse "the games in beta, you can't criticize it until its finished" but one has to wonder if they will ever come out of beta. Except they've never "escaped" criticism by saying "the game is in beta." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vaugahn Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 Sure they do. They can ask for donations on their website. Unless they started with a lack of funds but that's their problem if they did. Beta = not feature complete Nowhere does it say they can't have a cash shop. Taken directly from the FAQ: "Why is Warframe still in Beta? Why are you selling Platinum for real money if it's in Beta? Warframe is relatively new and is still in development. Selling Platinum allows us to support Warframe and learn how to implement changes that players will love." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slamyourjam Posted September 9, 2014 Author Share Posted September 9, 2014 At this pace, Warframe will keep going Beta > Gamma > Delta > ... > Psi > Omega > Released product, all the way through the Greek alphabet. LOL! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kurrumitsumi Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 A game can't be always stuck in a stage of development. It follows the rule of Alpha>Beta> Released product. yes it can, any game can your not the god of game design and have no say over how a game progesses Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slamyourjam Posted September 9, 2014 Author Share Posted September 9, 2014 Except they've never "escaped" criticism by saying "the game is in beta." They didn't directly say it of course but its the excuse any person brings up whenever you identify the negatives about the game which frustrates me because then your review isn't taken seriously when its about an Alpha or Beta product. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PsychedelicSnake Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 Except they've never "escaped" criticism by saying "the game is in beta." This. The only people I've ever seen use Beta as an "excuse" in Warframe is the players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gelkor Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 They didn't directly say it of course but its the excuse any person brings up whenever you identify the negatives about the game which frustrates me because then your review isn't taken seriously when its about an Alpha or Beta product. As PsychedelicSnake said, players may say that, the Devs, when criticism is directed at them, all either say "That is out intention." or "That is something that we want to, and are working on changing." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slamyourjam Posted September 9, 2014 Author Share Posted September 9, 2014 yes it can, any game can your not the god of game design and have no say over how a game progesses You're right I'm not a god of game design and I have no power to say over how long a game progresses but when the games been in development for so long and with such good funding you would wander why it continues to be in the position it is. Look at my above post why criticism against Alpha or Beta games don't work and is for the most part void and invalid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slamyourjam Posted September 9, 2014 Author Share Posted September 9, 2014 This. The only people I've ever seen use Beta as an "excuse" in Warframe is the players. Yes, which is used against countless number of negative reviews. This should not be the case I think that if games should be criticized even if they are undergoing development phases but no reviewer for Warframe that says anything negative is taken seriously or given credibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vaugahn Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 Yes, which is used against countless number of negative reviews. This should not be the case I think that if games should be criticized even if they are undergoing development phases but no reviewer for Warframe that says anything negative is taken seriously or given credibility. Lots of criticism is taken seriously...what isn't taken seriously is complaining, which is sadly quite common and often gets confused with criticism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slamyourjam Posted September 9, 2014 Author Share Posted September 9, 2014 Beta = not feature complete Nowhere does it say they can't have a cash shop. Taken directly from the FAQ: "Why is Warframe still in Beta? Why are you selling Platinum for real money if it's in Beta? Warframe is relatively new and is still in development. Selling Platinum allows us to support Warframe and learn how to implement changes that players will love." From the definition of Beta in this website: http://www.bordercrossingmedia.com/2010/08/alpha-beta-official-releases-whats-the-difference/ I'd say that this game wouldn't apply as a Beta. "A beta release usually means that a website or application has had all of the major known issues fixed but has not been tested enough for an official release." this is simply not the case for Warframe as they have a large number of active players and they are continuing to increase in numbers. I think that the PS4 and Xbox One release was part of their plan to extend this "open beta" if you ask me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PsychedelicSnake Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 Yes, which is used against countless number of negative reviews. This should not be the case I think that if games should be criticized even if they are undergoing development phases but no reviewer for Warframe that says anything negative is taken seriously or given credibility. That's a rather broad statement. As is always the case, some reviewers are going to be taken more seriously than others, and some reviews are going to hold more weight than others. It depends on the content of the review and the character of the reviewer. Players can flash the "It's beta" saying all they want, but more often than not it holds no weight (sometimes it does, I admit). The game is in-development. Unfinished. A work in progress. Saying the game needs to be flawless right now, no excuses warrants an "It's beta" statement. However, a reviewer or player giving feedback or giving a statement on what they like or dislike does not. It depends on the content and context. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slamyourjam Posted September 9, 2014 Author Share Posted September 9, 2014 Lots of criticism is taken seriously...what isn't taken seriously is complaining, which is sadly quite common and often gets confused with criticism. A complaint is a statement that something is unsatisfactory or unacceptable. This very much applies to criticism Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PsychedelicSnake Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 A complaint is a statement that something is unsatisfactory or unacceptable. This very much applies to criticism What vaugahn is referring to is baseless and useless complaints. A complaint that is constructive and clear, such as "I don't like X. X is terrible. Here is what I would suggest to improve it". On the other hand, a complaint such as "X is bad. Fix it" is useless. It provides no constructive feedback. Telling the developers something isn't good is one thing. Giving actual reasons and examples as to why that is is another thing entirely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slamyourjam Posted September 9, 2014 Author Share Posted September 9, 2014 That's a rather broad statement. As is always the case, some reviewers are going to be taken more seriously than others, and some reviews are going to hold more weight than others. It depends on the content of the review and the character of the reviewer. Players can flash the "It's beta" saying all they want, but more often than not it holds no weight (sometimes it does, I admit). The game is in-development. Unfinished. A work in progress. Saying the game needs to be flawless right now, no excuses warrants an "It's beta" statement. However, a reviewer or player giving feedback or giving a statement on what they like or dislike does not. It depends on the content and context. Well if you take a look at the negative reviews on Steam, you will find that a lot of those reviews are valid in criticism yet they have tons of dislikes and comments from players that don't agree with the review because the game is still in Beta. As a reviewer myself I find that this ruins the credibility of your reviews when other people look at it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kurrumitsumi Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 Lord of the Rings Online, World of Warcraft, Guild Wars and a number of other games that have gone through development stages are now considered finished products but they receive updates, patches etc because exiting a beta doesn't mean your product can't continue to be supported. I do wonder how long Warframe developers want to keep this game under the "beta" title though, considering its development cycle. The problem with games under Alpha and Beta are that they can't be widely criticized by reviewers because A) the games still in development and B) its shunned upon. The point of this whole post is that if Warframe is indeed an open beta it should be noted on Steam and the main website. the reason its still considered a beta is because the devs aren't happy with core elements of the game, like the ui update/damage 2.0 and so on, you cant release a game with a certain look and way that damage is calculated and call it finished and then overhaul the whole thing, when those aspects are complete and the devs are happy with all of the core elements of the game and it reaches perfect imbalance, then it will be out of beta, and i dont think it matters that it isnt openly stated, there not gonna reset accounts and every game has bugs so i dont see what is so bad that the word beta needs to be everywhere Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PsychedelicSnake Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 Well if you take a look at the negative reviews on Steam, you will find that a lot of those reviews are valid in criticism yet they have tons of dislikes and comments from players that don't agree with the review because the game is still in Beta. As a reviewer myself I find that this ruins the credibility of your reviews when other people look at it. There are always going to be people like this. There will always be people that disagree. Sometimes the disagreements are well-founded, sometimes they are not. Likewise, sometimes the reviews are well-founded, sometimes they are not. Like I've said, it depends on the content and the context. It also depends on how said feedback and review is written. Inflammatory and angry feedback is bound to attractive negativity, whereas calm and clear feedback is less likely. Both can be negative, but it depends on content, context, and tone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slamyourjam Posted September 9, 2014 Author Share Posted September 9, 2014 What vaugahn is referring to is baseless and useless complaints. A complaint that is constructive and clear, such as "I don't like X. X is terrible. Here is what I would suggest to improve it". On the other hand, a complaint such as "X is bad. Fix it" is useless. It provides no constructive feedback. Telling the developers something isn't good is one thing. Giving actual reasons and examples as to why that is is another thing entirely. True. But noting the problems and not going about it with an aggressive manner can also be considered criticism as long as the criticism is valid. For example saying "the game suffers from a lot of low fps in some areas with a power GPU is unacceptable" can be taken as both a complaint and criticism. There is the occasional complaint where the person lacks depth and detail, that is what I would consider to be a bland complaint. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ndantony Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 (edited) ...this again. Ok. Here is my suggestion: DE can just take down the word "beta" altogether, say tomorrow. Of couse, no change to the game as it is. Then go to Devstream and announce that the game is not a "beta" anymore... ...then announce that there will be two options from here on: 1) Next update, like U15, will be sold $19.99 - $29.99 as a DLC; Or, 2) There will be a subscription plan $15. Those who's been on subscription at least 3 months, or purchase the complete last Prime Access, will get a DLC (update) for free. I think that will help DE a lot making more money, monetizing each update as DLC and also help eliminate these freeloaders and ignorant complainers. Edited September 9, 2014 by ndantony Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slamyourjam Posted September 9, 2014 Author Share Posted September 9, 2014 the reason its still considered a beta is because the devs aren't happy with core elements of the game, like the ui update/damage 2.0 and so on, you cant release a game with a certain look and way that damage is calculated and call it finished and then overhaul the whole thing, when those aspects are complete and the devs are happy with all of the core elements of the game and it reaches perfect imbalance, then it will be out of beta, and i dont think it matters that it isnt openly stated, there not gonna reset accounts and every game has bugs so i dont see what is so bad that the word beta needs to be everywhere I don't think the game will escape beta with the way developers are handling the feedback. For example the UI change in the opinion of a large number of users is that its terrible, I personally also don't agree with the UI change and I don't think that this change was due to the players choosing it this way. Some changes are in a way of shoot first, ask questions later which I don't think works very well for a beta. I feel that if they want the changes to be successful they have to make a better approach towards players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PsychedelicSnake Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 True. But noting the problems and not going about it with an aggressive manner can also be considered criticism as long as the criticism is valid. For example saying "the game suffers from a lot of low fps in some areas with a power GPU is unacceptable" can be taken as both a complaint and criticism. There is the occasional complaint where the person lacks depth and detail, that is what I would consider to be a bland complaint. This is exactly what I stated in multiple comments (not just in this thread). Aggression, anger, and inflammatory remarks hurt feedback. It doesn't make it valid or invalid, but it clouds the point of the feedback with a hostile tone. Calm and clear feedback, regardless of it is negative or positive, is less likely to attract hostile or aggressive behavior. And as I keep on saying, depth and detail, content and context, tone and attitude. These things are what make a review. These things are what make feedback. These things are what make comments. More often than not, I do encounter very valid negative feedback. However, any sort of civil discussion is rapidly turned into a scathing argument by either the reviewer, the person that commented, or both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slamyourjam Posted September 9, 2014 Author Share Posted September 9, 2014 ...this again. Ok. Here is my suggestion: DE can just take down the word "beta" altogether, say tomorrow. Of couse, no change to the game as it is. Then go to Devstream and announce that the game is not a "beta" anymore... ...then announce that there will be two options from here on: 1) Next update, like U15, will be sold $19.99 - $29.99 as a DLC; Or, 2) There will be a subscription plan $15. Those who's been on subscription at least 3 months, or purchase the complete last Prime Access, will get a DLC (update) for free. I think that will help DE a lot making more money, monetizing each update as DLC and also help eliminate these freeloaders and ignorant complainers. I don't think adding a paid service towards Warframe would help. That would severely cripple their audience since most people go about grinding their way through content and then there's a few that like paying for their stuff. I'm fine with the game being in Beta, I don't have an issue with that what I do have is an issue with them not stating that its a Beta on the Steam Page at the very least to inform newcomers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PsychedelicSnake Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 I don't think the game will escape beta with the way developers are handling the feedback. For example the UI change in the opinion of a large number of users is that its terrible, I personally also don't agree with the UI change and I don't think that this change was due to the players choosing it this way. Some changes are in a way of shoot first, ask questions later which I don't think works very well for a beta. I feel that if they want the changes to be successful they have to make a better approach towards players. In terms of feedback, there is also a split road. There are the people that like it, and the people that don't. Both parties have people that are vocal, and people that are not vocal. With the UI change, there are probably equal amounts of people that like it as those that dislike it. However, people that like it are less likely to make a thread or feedback on it, because they feel there is nothing wrong with it. On the other hand, people that dislike it are bound to make threads detailing why they do not like it. Because of this, it can seem that everyone thinks it is terrible, when that is really not the case. This same idea can be applied to virtually everything else in the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gelkor Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 I like the new UI. >.> I don't like semi-opaque boxes on my screen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now