Kouji_SanSr. Hινε UÏкεεÏεг - EUPT DeputyThe NetherlandsJoin Date: 2003-05-13Member: 16271Members, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue
<!--quoteo(post=1803522:date=Oct 28 2010, 05:40 PM:name=Bacillus)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Bacillus @ Oct 28 2010, 05:40 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1803522"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Sarcasm is extremely tricky on forums with pure fanboyism, extreme whining, trolling, non-native speakers, smiley spamming and all that represented. I just avoid it in a topic that tends to have most of the aforementioned traits.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Ah but tricky or not, there are always these saying: "Think before posting!" or "If you're not certain, ask or move along" Yeah I made that last one up, but it still holds some truth.
If someone misinterprets sarcasm and then proceed to start flaming, I tend to not respond (oil on the flame and all). But in this case there was no flaming, just a simple misinterpretation...
<!--quoteo(post=1802309:date=Oct 22 2010, 07:29 AM:name=Insane)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Insane @ Oct 22 2010, 07:29 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1802309"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->We actually distribute internal builds using Dropbox, which I don't think lets you set things like read-only permissions (not yet anyway). It seemed to me like the OP was sort of saying 'give us access to your internal tools', but if he wasn't then fair enough. As you say, there are other sound reasons for not doing this.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Nah, I was hoping for automatically generated builds like what devicenull was proposing.
<!--quoteo(post=1802401:date=Oct 23 2010, 12:55 AM:name=Kouji_San)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kouji_San @ Oct 23 2010, 12:55 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1802401"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I never said it was playable, which would suggest it being a game. You seem to deliberately read past the obvious fact that is in fact an early Alpha version. Not pre-Alpha mind you, as that would fall into the conundrum of solving the lack of content or stability in an engine test with a few props.
Playing an Alpha does not mean playing a game. Your terminology is simply wrong! An early Alpha release, like we have right here, is inherently unstable when exposed to the various computer systems people have. It has probably only been tested on a few systems, most likely UWE's office computers and friends.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
With all due respect, you do seem to have contradicted yourself on your definition of Alpha - see your post #48 where you state "An Alpha can range from anything that is an buggy engine test to a seemingly complete or somewhat stable game that does not leave the Alpha status until it it is complete..." . Now you say "An early Alpha release, like we have right here, is inherently unstable when exposed to the various computer systems people have."
Even if you disagree with that, or think it's explainable, fair enough. I won't argue. I will instead point out that it is absolutely irrelevant as to what an Alpha is or isn't in the context of the point I'm making. And that point is very simple - that UWE used the words "Play the Alpha" and that inherently implies very strongly that the game should be in a "playable" state (which the developers themselves have said it isn't). UWE didn't target customers who specifically knew what an Alpha is, or isn't, so it's even worse if we were to accept your response as it's mis-selling to layman gamers (the vast, vast majority of us) who wouldn't know that an Alpha might be buggy/unplayable. Whichever way you choose to spin it, UWE should have chosen their words better when selling their product, because most gamers don't know what an Alpha is as they haven't experienced it, so stating "PLAY the Alpha on this date" <b>inherently</b> raises hopes and expectations for many customers.
If you want an analogy to understand where I'm coming from:
As part of a pre-order promotion for a new car they UWE are developing, they produced advertisements with the words "buy now and drive the prototype car on June 15th". At the moment, they've released a car that for most people involves having to get out and push for it to move forward. A few lucky peole have somehow gotten the car to drive in a poor but working state. But most haven't.
I shouldn't really need to explain that it doesn't matter whether a protototype is inherently flawed or has a high chance to fail or not. It's completely irrelevant. The sales pitch implies that that'll have a prototype car that can be driven. To most non-experts-on-industry-prototypes, that means having some form of a raw, unpolished car that they can functionally drive around.
Same with this Alpha. It doesn't matter that an Alpha <i>might</i> not be playable at all because of a number of issues. If UWE advertise an Alpha as being playable on a certain date, and haven't delivered for 3 months, it's neither good on their part for their own reputation, nor is it delivering what they've "promised" to customers in a bid to get extra sales. It's a poor show, and my overall point to all of this is that hopefully UWE will have learned a few lessons from this process and will improve in the future. The aim is not to criticise, rather it's to provide some feedback that doesn't involve all thumbs up because UWE are kind enough to let the community be involved in the development process. I've already given a real world example of a customer they've lost (probably permanently) because of this process, so the aim is that they also get the feedback outside of the hardcore, die-hard fans who'll be happy to wait years if need be for this game to be completed.
Why are you arguing this point? File a complaint with the Better Business Bureau or something if you're that upset about how things are going. Right now you can PLAY the Alpha. The term "unplayable" is often thrown around to denote a game that is incredibly difficult or near impossible to play. The Alpha, for many, is somewhat playable while for others joining a server is suicide due to the non-responsiveness and lag. Some other people cannot even run the client.
There are too many definitions for "play" in the context of a game that neither you nor Kouji can be wrong. You can stretch your internet intellect all you want, but your wall of text is still a wall of text arguing a point that doesn't need to be argued. We ALL know the Alpha sucks right now and we ALL know that UWE will make it work wonderfully very soon.
<!--quoteo(post=1803527:date=Oct 28 2010, 06:48 PM:name=chopper)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (chopper @ Oct 28 2010, 06:48 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1803527"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->You're making a good argument. Kudos to you for expressing a valid opinion in an articulate way, unlike most illiterate "fanbois" here. UWE should not fall into complacency with the praise of brownosers. They should first and foremost be self-critical about their performance but also take a good look at the discontent of their regular-joe customers (and not the fanbois). I realize they're going through some tough times now. I wish them luck and a much deserved break.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Thanks. Good to know at least someone understands where I'm coming from. I've already been labelled a "whiner" despite having stated that I'm playing devil's advocate here in order to represent the views of others who aren't delighted with the way this Alpha has panned out.
<!--quoteo(post=1803643:date=Oct 29 2010, 02:36 AM:name=Dalin Seivewright)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dalin Seivewright @ Oct 29 2010, 02:36 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1803643"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Why are you arguing this point? File a complaint with the Better Business Bureau or something if you're that upset about how things are going. Right now you can PLAY the Alpha. The term "unplayable" is often thrown around to denote a game that is incredibly difficult or near impossible to play. The Alpha, for many, is somewhat playable while for others joining a server is suicide due to the non-responsiveness and lag. Some other people cannot even run the client.
There are too many definitions for "play" in the context of a game that neither you nor Kouji can be wrong. You can stretch your internet intellect all you want, but your wall of text is still a wall of text arguing a point that doesn't need to be argued. We ALL know the Alpha sucks right now and we ALL know that UWE will make it work wonderfully very soon.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Sigh. What makes you think I'm upset? Because I can type a few paragraphs without dying?
I've stated a few times already why I'm arguing. Why does that bother a few on here, who are all too happy to jump to conclusions without actually reading the points being made? And more importantly, why the aggressive "put-down" attempts? "Whiner", "Forum Warrior", "Internet intellect", "wall of text" etc etc...it's kinda pathetic. Should I post one line responses in txt spk? Or is it that wrong to explain things in full English on this forum?
As for "why argue this", firstly I hope you see the irony in your own post (i.e. that yours wasn't needed either if we are to use the same reasoning). It should be pretty obvious "why". I'm giving reasons as to why some people (including an IRL friend) aren't happy with what they've been sold and delivered regarding this Alpha, something which seems to be a crime on a forum where only positive support shown towards UWE is deemed acceptable. I deem this to be important because imo UWE shouldn't have purely positive feedback to the Alpha process itself - as stated, they've lost a customer which I assume they would care about. I've also presented a different viewpoint to those stating an Alpha is meant to be unplayable, which imo isn't a fair response (but which has been made numerous times by various people on these forums).
But I guess I've gone about it the wrong way as too much text on here = illegible "wall of text" by "FORUM WARRIOR" who is "whining".
Kouji_SanSr. Hινε UÏкεεÏεг - EUPT DeputyThe NetherlandsJoin Date: 2003-05-13Member: 16271Members, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue
edited October 2010
<!--quoteo(post=1803635:date=Oct 29 2010, 01:16 AM:name=rofldinho)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (rofldinho @ Oct 29 2010, 01:16 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1803635"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->With all due respect, you do seem to have contradicted yourself on your definition of Alpha - see your post #48 where you state "An Alpha can range from anything that is an buggy engine test to a seemingly complete or somewhat stable game that does not leave the Alpha status until it it is complete..." . Now you say "An early Alpha release, like we have right here, is inherently unstable when exposed to the various computer systems people have."<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Indeed, we have an early alpha and the current issues were to be expected, what with the ongoing development on NS2 and the building an engine from scratch...
What I meant was that some developers keep calling their game and alpha version, even if the game is nearly complete... Isn't Dwarf Fortress still in alpha for example... They're kinda abusing the term...
Again, "Play the Alpha" means "play around with an early work in progress version that could be indeed very unstable..." Now if it would say Play the Game, you have a point...
<i>@ long texts, I dunno. Your point doesn't get any stronger with longer posts... Just get to the point, then more people will also read it... <- I'll just put this here: THIS IS NOT A FLAME JUST SOUND ADVICE!</i>
15000 bought into the alpha, but the thing is, pretty much none of us has ever actually participated in an alpha test. We KNOW that it's going to be buggy and unfinished, but we really don't have anything to compare it to. We look to UWE to tell us what to expect from each new build, and so far, we've been disappointed at every turn. We're not just frustrated because the Alpha is unplayable, we're frustrated because UWE keeps telling us the next build is going to be better and then pulling the rug out from under us.
Try not to be mad at us "whiners". Whining is actually a good sign - it means we still care about this game. As soon as people stop finding things to complain about, that's game over. They've given up.
<!--quoteo(post=1803667:date=Oct 29 2010, 04:11 AM:name=Brigadoon)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Brigadoon @ Oct 29 2010, 04:11 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1803667"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Try not to be mad at us "whiners". Whining is actually a good sign - it means we still care about this game. As soon as people stop finding things to complain about, that's game over. They've given up.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Well yeah, some groups of posters have practically dropped out. Hopefully the forums recover once there's a playable version out for most people. Right now only some people seem to have access for the actual progress happening somewhere behind the screen of bad performance.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->UWE didn't target customers who specifically knew what an Alpha is<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->I think you're playing (oh, another use of play) with the language to enforce your arguments.
If someone does not know what "alpha" means, It's that person's problem not to ask what does it means. Like with laws, ignore one law don't make if not applicable.
If someone ignored what alpha means and focuses in the "play" part of the sentence I think it's his problem.
IMO what was expectable from the SE was clear, "you will pay to have access to an unfinished product and a black armor".
<!--quoteo(post=1803707:date=Oct 29 2010, 05:40 AM:name=Theck)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Theck @ Oct 29 2010, 05:40 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1803707"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->IMO what was expectable from the SE was clear, "you will pay to have access to an unfinished product and a black armor".<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--quoteo(post=1803527:date=Oct 28 2010, 01:48 PM:name=chopper)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (chopper @ Oct 28 2010, 01:48 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1803527"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->You're making a good argument. Kudos to you for expressing a valid opinion in an articulate way, unlike most illiterate "fanbois" here. UWE should not fall into complacency with the praise of brownosers. They should first and foremost be self-critical about their performance but also take a good look at the discontent of their regular-joe customers (and not the fanbois). I realize they're going through some tough times now. I wish them luck and a much deserved break.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I'm a fanboy and I agree.
Hopefully Unknown Worlds Entertainment doesn't tank before their game is playable enough to generate more sales. I'm seeing their failure as more and more likely as time goes on. It's pretty sad.
Look I am a software developer. An alpha isnt "playable", in that not only are there bugs, large portions of the application are still incompleate. An alpha starts from the time you can "usualy" log into the server untill most of the features are finished (not all). They told you it was an alpha, dont expect it to work!
Now as to access to the "interal" build, I would LOVE access to this build. But dont expect it to work any better! Its likely a lot more "compleate" in that more features are meant to be done. But its also probably a lot more "unstable" in that its a lot more likely to crash or not work.
<!--quoteo(post=1804656:date=Nov 5 2010, 11:12 PM:name=obsid)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (obsid @ Nov 5 2010, 11:12 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1804656"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Look I am a software developer. An alpha isnt "playable", in that not only are there bugs, large portions of the application are still incompleate. An alpha starts from the time you can "usualy" log into the server untill most of the features are finished (not all). They told you it was an alpha, dont expect it to work!
Now as to access to the "interal" build, I would LOVE access to this build. But dont expect it to work any better! Its likely a lot more "compleate" in that more features are meant to be done. But its also probably a lot more "unstable" in that its a lot more likely to crash or not work.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
the argument isn't whether or not an alpha is playable. It's the fact that they said "PLAY the ALPHA..." bad word choice. simple PR mistake that has pissed a lot of people off. a simple "sorry, we didn't mean it to sound that way" would probably satisfy people. nothing else to be done really.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><b>Alpha</b> The alpha phase of the release life cycle is the first phase to begin Software testing. In this phase, developers generally test the software using white box techniques. Additional validation is then performed using black box or gray box techniques, by another testing team. Moving to black box testing inside the organization is known as alpha release.
<i>Alpha software can be unstable and could cause crashes or data loss.</i>
The alpha phase usually ends with a feature freeze, indicating that no more features will be added to the software. At this time, the software is said to be feature complete.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
As said above, if you don't understand what an alpha is and instead focused on the fact that the word PLAY was in the sentence, and bought the game purely on that understanding, you don't really have a leg to stand on. If you had read 'eat the asbestos' and didn't know what asbestos was, you probably would find out before you went and ate it...
An alpha is an understood concept across software development, it's never guaranteed to work but just to be available. Also, from what I can think of every other alpha I've seen has been offered as being able to 'play the alpha', but that doesn't constitute any kind of promise or guarantee that the game will function on all systems.
<!--quoteo(post=1804717:date=Nov 6 2010, 03:21 PM:name=AssassinTeddy)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (AssassinTeddy @ Nov 6 2010, 03:21 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1804717"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->As said above, if you don't understand what an alpha is and instead focused on the fact that the word PLAY was in the sentence, and bought the game purely on that understanding, you don't really have a leg to stand on. If you had read 'eat the asbestos' and didn't know what asbestos was, you probably would find out before you went and ate it...
An alpha is an understood concept across software development, it's never guaranteed to work but just to be available. Also, from what I can think of every other alpha I've seen has been offered as being able to 'play the alpha', but that doesn't constitute any kind of promise or guarantee that the game will function on all systems.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The text you quoted (from wikipedia?) stated that an Alpha <i>can be</i> unstable. Surely you understand the difference between "can" and "will"?
As stated earlier, an Alpha <i>can</i> be unstable, but then again it <i>can be</i> stable and "playable" (I used the examples of Minecraft and Shogun 2). It's entirely up to the developers, there's no hard and fast rule. Alpha is just a generic term used to describe the development stage of a product. The product can be fully functioning (just without all of the bells and whistles) if the developers are at this stage. Hence why I pointed out the sales banner of "play the Alpha on July 26th" - it implies that the Alpha will be in some form of playable state on that date, and creates the expectation of us being able to experience the core gameplay of NS2 prior to all the features/maps/balancing elements being added. This clearly hasn't been the case.
Comments
Ah but tricky or not, there are always these saying: "Think before posting!" or "If you're not certain, ask or move along" Yeah I made that last one up, but it still holds some truth.
If someone misinterprets sarcasm and then proceed to start flaming, I tend to not respond (oil on the flame and all). But in this case there was no flaming, just a simple misinterpretation...
Nah, I was hoping for automatically generated builds like what devicenull was proposing.
Playing an Alpha does not mean playing a game. Your terminology is simply wrong! An early Alpha release, like we have right here, is inherently unstable when exposed to the various computer systems people have. It has probably only been tested on a few systems, most likely UWE's office computers and friends.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
With all due respect, you do seem to have contradicted yourself on your definition of Alpha - see your post #48 where you state "An Alpha can range from anything that is an buggy engine test to a seemingly complete or somewhat stable game that does not leave the Alpha status until it it is complete..." . Now you say "An early Alpha release, like we have right here, is inherently unstable when exposed to the various computer systems people have."
Even if you disagree with that, or think it's explainable, fair enough. I won't argue. I will instead point out that it is absolutely irrelevant as to what an Alpha is or isn't in the context of the point I'm making. And that point is very simple - that UWE used the words "Play the Alpha" and that inherently implies very strongly that the game should be in a "playable" state (which the developers themselves have said it isn't). UWE didn't target customers who specifically knew what an Alpha is, or isn't, so it's even worse if we were to accept your response as it's mis-selling to layman gamers (the vast, vast majority of us) who wouldn't know that an Alpha might be buggy/unplayable. Whichever way you choose to spin it, UWE should have chosen their words better when selling their product, because most gamers don't know what an Alpha is as they haven't experienced it, so stating "PLAY the Alpha on this date" <b>inherently</b> raises hopes and expectations for many customers.
If you want an analogy to understand where I'm coming from:
As part of a pre-order promotion for a new car they UWE are developing, they produced advertisements with the words "buy now and drive the prototype car on June 15th". At the moment, they've released a car that for most people involves having to get out and push for it to move forward. A few lucky peole have somehow gotten the car to drive in a poor but working state. But most haven't.
I shouldn't really need to explain that it doesn't matter whether a protototype is inherently flawed or has a high chance to fail or not. It's completely irrelevant. The sales pitch implies that that'll have a prototype car that can be driven. To most non-experts-on-industry-prototypes, that means having some form of a raw, unpolished car that they can functionally drive around.
Same with this Alpha. It doesn't matter that an Alpha <i>might</i> not be playable at all because of a number of issues. If UWE advertise an Alpha as being playable on a certain date, and haven't delivered for 3 months, it's neither good on their part for their own reputation, nor is it delivering what they've "promised" to customers in a bid to get extra sales. It's a poor show, and my overall point to all of this is that hopefully UWE will have learned a few lessons from this process and will improve in the future. The aim is not to criticise, rather it's to provide some feedback that doesn't involve all thumbs up because UWE are kind enough to let the community be involved in the development process. I've already given a real world example of a customer they've lost (probably permanently) because of this process, so the aim is that they also get the feedback outside of the hardcore, die-hard fans who'll be happy to wait years if need be for this game to be completed.
Why are you arguing this point? File a complaint with the Better Business Bureau or something if you're that upset about how things are going. Right now you can PLAY the Alpha. The term "unplayable" is often thrown around to denote a game that is incredibly difficult or near impossible to play. The Alpha, for many, is somewhat playable while for others joining a server is suicide due to the non-responsiveness and lag. Some other people cannot even run the client.
There are too many definitions for "play" in the context of a game that neither you nor Kouji can be wrong. You can stretch your internet intellect all you want, but your wall of text is still a wall of text arguing a point that doesn't need to be argued. We ALL know the Alpha sucks right now and we ALL know that UWE will make it work wonderfully very soon.
UWE should not fall into complacency with the praise of brownosers. They should first and foremost be self-critical about their performance but also take a good look at the discontent of their regular-joe customers (and not the fanbois).
I realize they're going through some tough times now. I wish them luck and a much deserved break.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Thanks. Good to know at least someone understands where I'm coming from. I've already been labelled a "whiner" despite having stated that I'm playing devil's advocate here in order to represent the views of others who aren't delighted with the way this Alpha has panned out.
There are too many definitions for "play" in the context of a game that neither you nor Kouji can be wrong. You can stretch your internet intellect all you want, but your wall of text is still a wall of text arguing a point that doesn't need to be argued. We ALL know the Alpha sucks right now and we ALL know that UWE will make it work wonderfully very soon.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Sigh. What makes you think I'm upset? Because I can type a few paragraphs without dying?
I've stated a few times already why I'm arguing. Why does that bother a few on here, who are all too happy to jump to conclusions without actually reading the points being made? And more importantly, why the aggressive "put-down" attempts? "Whiner", "Forum Warrior", "Internet intellect", "wall of text" etc etc...it's kinda pathetic. Should I post one line responses in txt spk? Or is it that wrong to explain things in full English on this forum?
As for "why argue this", firstly I hope you see the irony in your own post (i.e. that yours wasn't needed either if we are to use the same reasoning). It should be pretty obvious "why". I'm giving reasons as to why some people (including an IRL friend) aren't happy with what they've been sold and delivered regarding this Alpha, something which seems to be a crime on a forum where only positive support shown towards UWE is deemed acceptable. I deem this to be important because imo UWE shouldn't have purely positive feedback to the Alpha process itself - as stated, they've lost a customer which I assume they would care about. I've also presented a different viewpoint to those stating an Alpha is meant to be unplayable, which imo isn't a fair response (but which has been made numerous times by various people on these forums).
But I guess I've gone about it the wrong way as too much text on here = illegible "wall of text" by "FORUM WARRIOR" who is "whining".
Indeed, we have an early alpha and the current issues were to be expected, what with the ongoing development on NS2 and the building an engine from scratch...
What I meant was that some developers keep calling their game and alpha version, even if the game is nearly complete... Isn't Dwarf Fortress still in alpha for example... They're kinda abusing the term...
Again, "Play the Alpha" means "play around with an early work in progress version that could be indeed very unstable..." Now if it would say Play the Game, you have a point...
<i>@ long texts, I dunno. Your point doesn't get any stronger with longer posts... Just get to the point, then more people will also read it... <- I'll just put this here: THIS IS NOT A FLAME JUST SOUND ADVICE!</i>
Try not to be mad at us "whiners". Whining is actually a good sign - it means we still care about this game. As soon as people stop finding things to complain about, that's game over. They've given up.
Well yeah, some groups of posters have practically dropped out. Hopefully the forums recover once there's a playable version out for most people. Right now only some people seem to have access for the actual progress happening somewhere behind the screen of bad performance.
If someone does not know what "alpha" means, It's that person's problem not to ask what does it means. Like with laws, ignore one law don't make if not applicable.
If someone ignored what alpha means and focuses in the "play" part of the sentence I think it's his problem.
IMO what was expectable from the SE was clear, "you will pay to have access to an unfinished product and a black armor".
My two cents,
Theck
^Enough said
UWE should not fall into complacency with the praise of brownosers. They should first and foremost be self-critical about their performance but also take a good look at the discontent of their regular-joe customers (and not the fanbois).
I realize they're going through some tough times now. I wish them luck and a much deserved break.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm a fanboy and I agree.
Hopefully Unknown Worlds Entertainment doesn't tank before their game is playable enough to generate more sales. I'm seeing their failure as more and more likely as time goes on. It's pretty sad.
Now as to access to the "interal" build, I would LOVE access to this build. But dont expect it to work any better! Its likely a lot more "compleate" in that more features are meant to be done. But its also probably a lot more "unstable" in that its a lot more likely to crash or not work.
Now as to access to the "interal" build, I would LOVE access to this build. But dont expect it to work any better! Its likely a lot more "compleate" in that more features are meant to be done. But its also probably a lot more "unstable" in that its a lot more likely to crash or not work.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
the argument isn't whether or not an alpha is playable. It's the fact that they said "PLAY the ALPHA..." bad word choice. simple PR mistake that has pissed a lot of people off. a simple "sorry, we didn't mean it to sound that way" would probably satisfy people. nothing else to be done really.
The alpha phase of the release life cycle is the first phase to begin Software testing. In this phase, developers generally test the software using white box techniques. Additional validation is then performed using black box or gray box techniques, by another testing team. Moving to black box testing inside the organization is known as alpha release.
<i>Alpha software can be unstable and could cause crashes or data loss.</i>
The alpha phase usually ends with a feature freeze, indicating that no more features will be added to the software. At this time, the software is said to be feature complete.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
As said above, if you don't understand what an alpha is and instead focused on the fact that the word PLAY was in the sentence, and bought the game purely on that understanding, you don't really have a leg to stand on. If you had read 'eat the asbestos' and didn't know what asbestos was, you probably would find out before you went and ate it...
An alpha is an understood concept across software development, it's never guaranteed to work but just to be available. Also, from what I can think of every other alpha I've seen has been offered as being able to 'play the alpha', but that doesn't constitute any kind of promise or guarantee that the game will function on all systems.
An alpha is an understood concept across software development, it's never guaranteed to work but just to be available. Also, from what I can think of every other alpha I've seen has been offered as being able to 'play the alpha', but that doesn't constitute any kind of promise or guarantee that the game will function on all systems.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The text you quoted (from wikipedia?) stated that an Alpha <i>can be</i> unstable. Surely you understand the difference between "can" and "will"?
As stated earlier, an Alpha <i>can</i> be unstable, but then again it <i>can be</i> stable and "playable" (I used the examples of Minecraft and Shogun 2). It's entirely up to the developers, there's no hard and fast rule. Alpha is just a generic term used to describe the development stage of a product. The product can be fully functioning (just without all of the bells and whistles) if the developers are at this stage. Hence why I pointed out the sales banner of "play the Alpha on July 26th" - it implies that the Alpha will be in some form of playable state on that date, and creates the expectation of us being able to experience the core gameplay of NS2 prior to all the features/maps/balancing elements being added. This clearly hasn't been the case.