Well.. depends on the definition of beta

The two main areas being bugs and features

Some people define 'beta' as software released with a 'bug' in it.. Which is not only un-reasonable but flat out silly! Because by that definition most if not all software is beta, because most if not all software has bugs in the initial release. With that said not only is CoD excluded from being called beta for that reason, but all software is excluded from being called beta for that reason.

Some people define 'beta' as software not including all the features advertised on the box.. But in light of the fact that nothing was advertised that we did not receive also excludes CoD from being called beta.

Anyone that has had any experience with 1C previous flight sim, i.e. IL-2 knows that over the course of 10+ years 1C has provided several 'PAID' for 'upgrades' to IL-2 that include new features, maps, planes etc.. And during that same time 1C has provided 'FREE' updates that not only patched/fixed bugs but also added new features, maps, planes, etc.. Which is practically un-heard of in the PC gaming market!

Problem is a lot of people got 'use' to this 'GREAT' support (set the bar high) and receiving 'FREE' stuff such that now when 1C is struggling to tie up all the loose ends most of these spoiled people are now looking like the mob in an old Frankenstein movie and picking up torches and pitch forks and heading to 1C (virtually) to string Oleg up

So, in a weird sort of way, 1C caused this 'ungratefulness' problem by giving away what most flights sims (like RoF) charge $ for.

Sad but true

Agreed 100%!

We have all had our moments where we vent in frustration.. But identifying the problem should not be confused with an excuse for the problem.

Mhm...

Beta is needed to find hidden bugs that developer can't easily find.
For example my RL job is to follow the develpment of an application for an industry:
1- Developing: I write the code.
2- Alpha state: I test the application myself.
3- Beta state: I give the application to a industry's guy. He do his tests.
4- Releasing: If the guy say it's OK then the application is released.

Alpha is different from Beta because the develper usually "think" as a developer. He test the application by his logic. Instead the Beta is used by the real customers and a lot of time the customers are "stupid" (logically speaking).. for example they press a key that they don't have to press until something is inserted; the developer is aware of this logic and misses the bug that is going to be found by the customer.

Then it's a problem about resource: the application has a exception that it's thrown if the number of users is over 30 (for example, related to CloD, the bug appear during a multiplayer mission). How can the developer be aware of that bug during the Alpha state?

A) If a software has some hidden bugs inside it does not mean that it's an Beta. It's a bugged sofware.

B) If the software has A LOT of hidden bugs then it's a Beta.

C) If the software has A LOT of hidden bugs and CLEAR and VISIBLE bugs then it's an Alpha.

To which section does CloD belong?

Note I said..

Which is not to be confused with me saying that is the definition of 'beta'

To make it more clear I should have said..

Better?

No brainer: C

That is why this game is going to take a long, long time to fix.

Really?

So if it is that crystal clear.. Than it should be a simple case for you to list all the CLEAR/VISABLE bugs.. Right?

With that said.. Can you provide a few examples of CLEAR/VISABLE bugs that IYHO would qualify calling CoD 'alpha'

Just so I can see it from your point of view in the hopes we can all be on the same sheet of music here

Just for starters:

No functioning antialiasing alone is reason enough to call this software alpha quality. Terrible AI, rewriting the graphics engine and no DX 11 as promised also make this software alpha quality. It is promising alpha software, but that is all right now.

There are also too many bugs listed on this forum for me to bother to repeat.

Clear as crystal to me.

If a software is Beta, Alpha or Release code it is pretty well known there are still possible issues you will have using it.

Well.. not based on Maus's definition of beta.. If I am reading Maus's definition correctly, to qualify as 'alpha' the 'bug' would have to be CLEARLY a bug.. That is to say it does not work as 'expected' by the programers logic..

Correct me if I am wrong, but that 'feature' was disabled by 1C prior to release, thus the programer disabled it, thus the programer would expect it to be disabled. Thus it is working per the programers loigc and thus not a bug

No, that does not count as a bug.. Not only is this not CLEAR but it is very subjective! That is to say ask 10 people what they think about the AI in CoD and your likly to get 10 differnt ansiwers.. which is not CLEAR by any definition

No, that does not count as a bug.. Because the developer decided to 'upgrade' something does not mean it is a bug

DX 11 was never advertised (aka promised).. Only DX11 API support was advertised and CoD dose make use of the DX11 API, so the is not a bug

As I half expected.. You could provide no CLEAR/VISABLE bugs

And many like you.. Problem is upon closer inspection it is more myth than fact