Title says all. I’d be pretty disappointed.
If there is no public beta? I wouldn’t care really… they’d obviously know that it is perfect and there is no need for public testing if they don’t, which won’t happen, the beta will come out around a few weeks after they start marketing the game( about 4 months before release.) But it’s not the end of the world if there is none, just means good things ahead.
Agreed. no beta= missing out on a lot of player insight and community data which means that they won’t be able to improve the game or make changes for the better as well as they would have with a beta.
I’d feel a bit worried and nervous at the lack of 3rd party input.
Id also be extremely angry at this level of paranoia, risknig a glitchy game to save a few details.
Also if there is no beta, then we will get equally amount of info through vid docs, gameplay vids, ect.
> Also if there is no beta, then we will get equally amount of info through vid docs, gameplay vids, ect.
But lets not forget, they arent Bungie. Who’s to say they are going to provide these insights in the same way that Bungie did.
-points 9 mm at head-
Firstly: We’re talking about 343i, not Bungie, so we don’t know if we’d get a public beta.
Secondly: I wouldn’t shed one tear, personally I much rather see a pre-release demo that is release around the time the game goes gold, and lasts until Halo 4’s release.
> -points 9 mm at head-
Isnt that a bit extreme, even as a joke?
I seriously doubt 343 wouldn’t release a Beta. Hopefully it is a public beta like BF3
I wouldn’t mind much as I haven’t played any of the previous beta’s anyways.
Yoink! my pants.
I actually support there not being a beta. That way when everybody plays the full game, they will have a totally new experience and will probably like it more.
> > Also if there is no beta, then we will get equally amount of info through vid docs, gameplay vids, ect.
>
> But lets not forget, they arent Bungie. Who’s to say they are going to provide these insights in the same way that Bungie did.
I have a feeling they will cater to the community better then bungie, as they already have with Reach.
Not buy the game.
> > > Also if there is no beta, then we will get equally amount of info through vid docs, gameplay vids, ect.
> >
> > But lets not forget, they arent Bungie. Who’s to say they are going to provide these insights in the same way that Bungie did.
>
> I have a feeling they will cater to the community better then bungie, as they already have with Reach.
HA! Its like people forgot how to distinguish between Bungie and 343.
Oh well. Buy the game in the fall.
> > > > Also if there is no beta, then we will get equally amount of info through vid docs, gameplay vids, ect.
> > >
> > > But lets not forget, they arent Bungie. Who’s to say they are going to provide these insights in the same way that Bungie did.
> >
> > I have a feeling they will cater to the community better then bungie, as they already have with Reach.
>
> HA! Its like people forgot how to distinguish between Bungie and 343.
What do you mean? I’m simply pointing out they brought some classic feel back into multiplayer, the febuary update gave us the gift of no betraying on infection, and much more… to me that means 343 looked at these forums which have been complaining about the same things since the game was released, and they acted on it much faster then bungie did in their control of Reach.
> Not buy the game.
You best be kidding us right?
> I actually support there not being a beta. That way when everybody plays the full game, they will have a totally new experience and will probably like it more.
Not if there are a lot of glitches their internal testers missed this huge community of ours would’ve found.