(PSN)s3d_sas Posted October 11, 2017 Share Posted October 11, 2017 Idk but I u harambe <3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OniDax Posted October 11, 2017 Share Posted October 11, 2017 7 hours ago, --Laughing-Soul-- said: didnt say f2p = mmo You said it was an MMO type game, so I assumed you were saying that because it is F2P. Regardless, it's not an MMO-type game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeadScream Posted October 11, 2017 Share Posted October 11, 2017 23 hours ago, MagPrime said: I am stealing this! Feel free to do so :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arniox Posted October 11, 2017 Share Posted October 11, 2017 On 10/11/2017 at 8:51 AM, HarambeForbidd-EN- said: well.... the title says it all, im kinda curious if the game is still in beta or something. 😀 does it actually mater when the game is this good with something even better around the corner? No. Stop asking this question. It doesn't matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaotyke Posted October 11, 2017 Share Posted October 11, 2017 On 10/10/2017 at 5:00 PM, --Laughing-Soul-- said: you never see mention of beta anywhere anymore Change the Launcher's language. You get the Open Beta Agreement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TwistedDee Posted October 11, 2017 Share Posted October 11, 2017 EvE Online receives frequent updates and upgrades and every now and then mechanics are completely changed, game is not "beta" it is 14 years old. World of Tanks receives frequent updates and upgrades including game mechanic changes, game is not "beta". The list goes on..... Chess receives some rule changes once in a blue moon, does it make the game "beta"? Beta these days is just a developer definition and can be extended eternally to provide an easy excuse and explanation for the simple minded concerning any possible screw up that might happen in the development process. Star Citizen now has Alpha 3.0 another developer definition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slaviar Posted October 11, 2017 Share Posted October 11, 2017 They can call it beta as much as they wish but by now it's just an excuse for bugs. This game is out for over 4 years, has cash shop and I can't imagine any account reset happening. If it means it's beta then pretty much every game which gets content post release is beta. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karaphael Posted October 11, 2017 Share Posted October 11, 2017 chiki chiki ta its a beta Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrazyCatLad Posted October 12, 2017 Share Posted October 12, 2017 New features are in open beta....the core game is not. My opinion and I won't be swayed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saltygr33n Posted October 12, 2017 Share Posted October 12, 2017 How many online games are out there, can change and evolve the game into something we thought wasn't possible; whilst adding and changing gameplay mechanics? For example, Parkour 2.0. As far as I'm aware (since I don't play a lot of online games) there are none, and mostly if not at all, they create new games, kind of like Destiny and Destiny 2; maybe I'm getting the wrong idea, but the way I see it, in warframes case, they could have done Warframe open world as a whole new game, but instead, they made it a part of warframe itself. The game is subject to change in so many ways, in which I don't see any beta games ever done. That's just my two cent, because I obviously don't know much at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkmatt3r Posted October 12, 2017 Share Posted October 12, 2017 nobody cares about a status. play the game & enjoy. stop wasting time/brain cells Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackCoMerc Posted October 12, 2017 Share Posted October 12, 2017 On 10/10/2017 at 4:20 PM, A1m3r said: Since this thread still persist : I'd say, yes. And I'd say No. Chiefly because: they added a Beta disclaimer BACK TO their TOS after it's not being there for years. It's not Early Access. No store page mention of Beta Live for 3 years Cash shop No. The game is long past the perpetual get out of criticism free stage people refer to as Beta these days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-AoN-CanoLathra- Posted October 12, 2017 Share Posted October 12, 2017 The best way I have heard it put is the the PC version is the perpetual beta for the Console version, and that the Console version is the actual release. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerdaro Posted October 12, 2017 Share Posted October 12, 2017 On 10/10/2017 at 9:10 PM, ShogunGunshow said: Warframe is part of a modern breed of game that is under constant active development. I don't think the traditional labels really apply. However, if I were pressed, I would say that you can only really judge such games by feature completeness, the presence of a cash shop, and whether or not wipes are over. Once a game is open to the public, is accepting MTs, will no longer wipe progress, and delivers on its basic concept (space ninjas flipping out shootin manz), I think it loses any right to shield itself with the protective title of 'beta.' You're indistinguishable from a released product at that point - there's no reason that it should be acceptable as a defense. This is my opinion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Icari Posted October 12, 2017 Share Posted October 12, 2017 And then every argument about not being in beta is ended by this forum section still existing. It really speaks for itself and makes any "opinion" irrelevant, because DE still says Warframe is in a beta stage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McAllister21 Posted October 12, 2017 Share Posted October 12, 2017 On 10/10/2017 at 11:18 PM, Carnage2K4 said: There is a good argument to say that it's not, but technically speaking yes it is in beta (actually in alpha), because they are still adding features. I'd say it will be in beta until we are able to reach MR30, the achievements exist but we cannot obtain them due to the game not actually being finished. The problem is that there is the actual meaning of alpha and beta: "Alpha is the stage when key gameplay functionality is implemented, and assets are partially finished" "Beta is feature and asset complete version of the game, when only bugs are being fixed." Is WF "asset complete"? not really, we still have a bunch of unfinished mechanics (like Arcanes and Focus). "You casuals don't know what beta REALLY means." I'm gonna stop you right there. If you think WF is in beta because Focus and Arcanes aren't complete, then any game that adds any subsystem to it has retroactively been in open beta the whole time. League of Legends wasn't in open beta until they implemented the quest system, and Warframe has been feature complete for years. Feature complete doesn't mean that every feature it will ever have is complete. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carnage2K4 Posted October 12, 2017 Share Posted October 12, 2017 1 hour ago, McAllister21 said: "You casuals don't know what beta REALLY means." I'm gonna stop you right there. If you think WF is in beta because Focus and Arcanes aren't complete, then any game that adds any subsystem to it has retroactively been in open beta the whole time. League of Legends wasn't in open beta until they implemented the quest system, and Warframe has been feature complete for years. Feature complete doesn't mean that every feature it will ever have is complete. I guess you didn't actually read my post did you? I'm just pointing out the technical term devs commonly use. Love the "casuals" slang btw, and how it's not even applicable to working professionally within an industry and therefore knowing the terms used... Kinda just proves my point that in general people just latch onto a word and the general meaning for them changes to something that the specific meaning lacks, which makes it pretty funny and ultimately ignorant to use said term in the context of the industry to which it originates with that meaning. It's a bit like when "casuals" start talking about science, then refer to basic ideas as theories when they actually mean hypothesis and to scientists "theory" means scientific theory which is far from a hypothesis... it happens in every industry, I was simply pointing it out for OP in this case, that's just how it is, I didn't intend to crank the gears of your salt train mate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGrimCorsair Posted October 12, 2017 Share Posted October 12, 2017 On 10/10/2017 at 8:18 PM, Carnage2K4 said: There is a good argument to say that it's not, but technically speaking yes it is in beta (actually in alpha), because they are still adding features. I'd say it will be in beta until we are able to reach MR30, the achievements exist but we cannot obtain them due to the game not actually being finished. The problem is that there is the actual meaning of alpha and beta: "Alpha is the stage when key gameplay functionality is implemented, and assets are partially finished" "Beta is feature and asset complete version of the game, when only bugs are being fixed." Is WF "asset complete"? not really, we still have a bunch of unfinished mechanics (like Arcanes and Focus). However there seem to be an "internet consensus" by people who chose not to use the actually meaning of alpha and beta, that when a game has been in development for a long time, or starts taking in money that that means the game is released, which means it's no longer in alpha/beta... But release and alpha/beta are not mutually exclusive. They are not directly related positions a game is in, one is a position of technical completion, the other I guess is when a publisher will charge full price and sell in the normal sales outlets... Sure in the most normal release scheduled a release is the outcome of a beta, but in modern gaming when we can all get access to unfinished software it's not so simple. Why ppl chose to think a release is absolutely the point after a beta ends without exception, I don't know... It seems to be an idea that has just manifested from terminology ignorance. I don't think 'beta' is used as a shield, or a way out if something goes wrong, or is nullified if the game has an in game currency, I just think that DE use the term 'beta' because they are engulfed in the technical side of development, and they use technical terms related to what they do, which means if you're part of that world, then in all meaning the game is in beta and it's not a discussion. But as the player base is not in the technical world, they use their own version of beta/release in a very general version. I personally chose to just use the term DE uses, they say it's beta, so I concur that it's beta. One could make the argument that each major release/patch represents a new beta state, and the bugfixes that follow are, well, the bugfixes. So put another way, there've been 20+ odd Warframes since the launch to open play, each feature complete at time of their launch. The update is released as a beta, while the dev version is perpetually the alpha version of the game, as that's the one being worked on and updated with features being added and removed in a fairly continuous fashion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EndermanBeast Posted October 12, 2017 Share Posted October 12, 2017 technically, yes it is, but really, its better than some AAA games with PoE coming in the next 24 hours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tsunero Posted October 12, 2017 Share Posted October 12, 2017 Technically, no, DE just intentionally keeps it in open beta so they have an excuse to nerf the S#&$ out of everything later even if you paid money for a certain weapon. It's the best excuse ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carnage2K4 Posted October 13, 2017 Share Posted October 13, 2017 (edited) 7 hours ago, Tsunero said: Technically, no, DE just intentionally keeps it in open beta so they have an excuse to nerf the S#&$ out of everything later even if you paid money for a certain weapon. It's the best excuse ever. Given your DP, you're suppose to bring the salt, not be the salt. And you mean "technically yes" and "practically no"... if that's your argument, using the term "technically" would refer to the technical development side, to which the specific definitions would be used... and given the definitions, it would technically be in beta. If you're going to say it's not in beta, then you'd being using the general opinion or in a practical sense, not a technical one... Ppl that can't use words... this is why this entire issue of "if in beta" even exists. Edited October 13, 2017 by Carnage2K4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carnage2K4 Posted October 13, 2017 Share Posted October 13, 2017 (edited) 9 hours ago, TheGrimCorsair said: One could make the argument that each major release/patch represents a new beta state, and the bugfixes that follow are, well, the bugfixes. So put another way, there've been 20+ odd Warframes since the launch to open play, each feature complete at time of their launch. The update is released as a beta, while the dev version is perpetually the alpha version of the game, as that's the one being worked on and updated with features being added and removed in a fairly continuous fashion. I guess you could say each major patch has it's own alpha/beta state, but in general the game as a whole is technically still beta. However another way to look at it from that perspective, is to say the game came out of beta and was "finished" with the original WF set, (Excal, mag, frost etc) and then every major patch release was actually an expansion and in that case it would have it's own alpha/beta state independent from the main release. My only issue with that view is that it's not how DE refer to their game, and seeing as they are the experts in the technical side of the game, I'll always just refer to their use of the terms. But I guess ppl are free to disagree with that analysis, but the information from the experts will always outweigh the opinions of the ummm... "casuals" as McAllister21 calls us... Edited October 13, 2017 by Carnage2K4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tsunero Posted October 13, 2017 Share Posted October 13, 2017 16 hours ago, Carnage2K4 said: Given your DP, you're suppose to bring the salt, not be the salt. And you mean "technically yes" and "practically no"... if that's your argument, using the term "technically" would refer to the technical development side, to which the specific definitions would be used... and given the definitions, it would technically be in beta. If you're going to say it's not in beta, then you'd being using the general opinion or in a practical sense, not a technical one... Ppl that can't use words... this is why this entire issue of "if in beta" even exists. I know what I said. Warframe is practically in beta and technically not in beta :P. Well, I got saltified through all these years but DE being able to keep their deadline yesterday with PoE caught me off guard lol so gotta give them props for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omnimorph Posted October 13, 2017 Share Posted October 13, 2017 Speculating:- To me it's always seemed like they've had a long-term plan to turn the game into something like a Guild Wars (1) type of MMO (multiplayer lobbies, large pseudo-persistent zones instanced for single teams or raids). The "endless" missions were clearly always just a placeholder to keep vets occupied while they worked on getting an endgame proper. I think they took a risk transitioning to the new system and getting rid of reason to do endless, because it slightly deflated the community feeling that the endless missions had created. But they seem to have squeaked through intact. I think they'll probably declare the game "released" at some point in the not too distant future, when they've got a few more massive zones and a fully fleshed-out endgame (of which I think the Eidolon gameplay is probably the first serious part, I suspect the final endgame will be the Sentients proper), plus a bit more lore (esp. in relation to the Warframes themselves - I suspect the final bit of lore will open up gameplay enabling Operators to have the option of controlling their Warframes like super pets, with a decent set of control options); and also when they're happy with the damage system in relation to that endgame. As developers that (AFAIK) work with an Agile/Scrum sort of development system, part of what they do has a basic plan, and part of it is improvisation and "winging it" depending on player feedback. So I think a lot of what's in the game now probably wasn't planned, but they meandered to it; but at the same time, they've probably had a long-term plan with massive zones and a fully fleshed-out Sentient endgame all along (although I doubt the Operator was initially part of that plan, I suspect that's something that came out of improvisation and garnering feedback from the playerbase over the years - we tend to forget that most players of the game are probably teens). I very much doubt that they'd wipe the servers on full release though - too much cash shoppery has been involved up till now for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts