I despise betas. I feel like they take away the “newness” factor of a new game. You play the beta so much the game is already sort of stale on release. Reach barely changed anything from the beta to the real game. Half of the maps on the game were on the beta (not counting forge maps). 343 has shown that they closely monitor and update their games. As long as they are willing to do quick updates I don’t want a beta. The time it takes to maintain a beta should be spent on fixing issues.
Okay well first if you don’t want it to not feel new for you there’s a very simple option: Don’t play it.
Secondly betas allow them to find issues and fix them. Ever played, let’s say any Bethesda game ever? Sure it won’t be quite like that but beta testing is actually used to gather data on bugs and not just for people to try out the game.
> I despise betas. I feel like they take away the “newness” factor of a new game. You play the beta so much the game is already sort of stale on release. Reach barely changed anything from the beta to the real game. Half of the maps on the game were on the beta (not counting forge maps). 343 has shown that they closely monitor and update their games. As long as they are willing to do quick updates I don’t want a beta. The time it takes to maintain a beta should be spent on fixing issues.
Then don’t play it, but I am willing to test it to help resolve bugs and issues, and they shouldn’t take away a feature for everyone for one guy that feels like this. Even then, even if the newness factor is taken away, so long as it’s a good game, it truly doesn’t matter to me whether it feels new or not. And isn’t that what is done during a beta? That is finding and fixing issues as they are found out about? Along with this, it’s somewhat annoying with games like CoD where there are constant updates balancing weapons leaving you to have to find out what is the new best thing before the next one comes and changes it yet again. I’d rather the game came with the weapon balance already figured out.
Betas only matter if the developer actually takes feedback. Bungie made some edits to the final game that were nice, but they didn’t address the biggest problems. If Halo 4 has a beta, we’ll have to see if 343 behaves any differently.
I bought Reach because of the Beta.
I feel a bit of pity for those that bought Reach hatting the Beta.
PS: Betas are primarily for stress testing codes and servers. Game-play tweaks only happen if a problem is found.
AL works as intended in Vanilla. Maybe not as preferred, but as intended.
The Beta had a broken AL and with TU-Reach, there is a population-preferred version now too.
The Beta was never to find out if we liked AL or not. The options are there to remove it for custom game-types.
You remind me of a friend I know. I asked him if he played the Battlefield 3 Beta, to which he replied: “No, what’s the point of getting the game if you’ve already played it?”. The BF3 Beta had ONE map.
Anyway, if you think it spoils the game, don’t play it. You are not REQUIRED to download it, are you?
However, the vast majority of us probably do want one, myself included. I cannot wait for Halo 4, and the betas often increase the amount of excitement I have for the game.
> I bought Reach because of the Beta.
> I feel a bit of pity for those that bought Reach hatting the Beta.
>
> PS: Betas are primarily for stress testing codes and servers. Game-play tweaks only happen if a problem is found.
> AL works as intended in Vanilla. Maybe not as preferred, but as intended.
> The Beta had a broken AL and with TU-Reach, there is a population-preferred version now too.
> The Beta was never to find out if we liked AL or not. The options are there to remove it for custom game-types.
Sorry, but could someone please explain to me what “Vanilla” means, in the term of a game?
Are you stupid? Beta’s are there to push the game to it’s limits, find bugs, glitches, and any other issues with the game that can make the launch “version of the game” more enjoyable. What you are proposing, is just like saying “I dont double check my answers on my math test and just turn it in the instant I finish and hope I do good.” Like, just no.
> Sorry, but could someone please explain to me what “Vanilla” means, in the term of a game?
Whenever someone says the “Vanilla” version of the game, they mean the original, unpatched version, as it was from initial retail.
Did you really need to YELL you’re point at us?
a
On topic of the beta, while I agree that some games don’t need a beta, for Halo 4 it would probably be preferred. For one, this is 343’s first game, opening it up to a public beta can allow them to catch bugs and test gameplay balance that they may look over if just left to an internal beta. Two, it allows a company to show off their work a little, it’s especially good for games that have large fan bases. Three, it’s used to build up excitement for the full release, which is why many betas are released a few months before the game comes out.
> > Sorry, but could someone please explain to me what “Vanilla” means, in the term of a game?
>
> Whenever someone says the “Vanilla” version of the game, they mean the original, unpatched version, as it was from initial retail.
Ohhh… Thank you.
Every game would benefit from having a beta. The developers have internal betas on almost every game they make, but having it released to the public allows more info to be gathered about the current state of the game and how to improve it.
IF you don’t want the game spoiled then don’t watch/play it but the reason betas are created is to see if the community like that style of gameplay and to fix glitches
without a beta halo 4 wont get better
beta builds hype
its like trying to make a log cabin without the logs
> I despise betas. I feel like they take away the “newness” factor of a new game. You play the beta so much the game is already sort of stale on release. Reach barely changed anything from the beta to the real game. Half of the maps on the game were on the beta (not counting forge maps). 343 has shown that they closely monitor and update their games. As long as they are willing to do quick updates I don’t want a beta. The time it takes to maintain a beta should be spent on fixing issues.
You’re not the one developing the game so how is it you seem to know that Halo 4 doesn’t need a BETA. Anyway all last Halo games have had one, it is thus likely Halo 4 will have one and the Beta doesn’t have to be played by you so it shouldn’t ruin the surprise.
Also sometimes quick updates can’t fix a massive issue in a game that could have been avoided by having a public Beta and so have the massive issue diagnosed and fixed internally early.
> I despise betas.
I stopped there.
You despise Betas.
You don’t want one.
You think it will be pointless.
But you forget, you do not speak for the rest of us. A large majority of the community would like a beta, and not having a beta is a rather silly idea.
Why hire a bunch of people to test the game out when they can just fire out an unfinished version to the whole of Xbox Live so we can test it for them.
Nothing wrong with not liking them.
Wanting the time to be spent on fixing issues when the whole idea of a Beta is to expose and fix issues before the Halo2/MW2 MP fiascos happen, that’s not knowing what a Beta is for.