Is there an internal Testers / Beta Tester Group?

[MadTommy]

Originally Posted by SlipBall

We are all testers...just send crash reports, add suggestions, participate with the bug tracker.

I'm all too aware we are all testers. Personally i don't want to be a tester. Of course I will happily submit bug reports that i find that have not already been found, however i don't have the time to troll through 100s of posts to do this efficiently.

It seems to me to be a far from ideal situation not to have a dedicated test team that can give far more concise feedback and bug reports to the developers, rather than an open forum.

There are many dedicated members here who could be internal testers that would streamline this whole bug squashing process. After internal testing i'm all for beta patches to the masses to give a larger test to help locate harder to locate issues, but alpha patches to the public seems a odd way to do it.

[GraveyardJimmy]

Originally Posted by MadTommy

It seems to me to be a far from ideal situation not to have a dedicated test team that can give far more concise feedback and bug reports to the developers, rather than an open forum.

Developers have stated there are internal testing teams. Like other games (red Orchestra 2 for example) they need a larger sample size to reproduce bugs and find all of them, hence releasing patches for testing rather than general release. Testing is usually done in a similar manner in many studios (such as RO2): Internal testing (by team and smaller groups which can be costly) then after that move to a larger group (either under an NDA before release or by volunteers for new patches, like now) then rework patches or release.

Even hardware manufacturers like NVIDIA release public beta tests after internal testing.

[SEE]

I supose MP would be a bit of a problem too. A popular server such as ATAG when testing a beta version would only be accessible to the players approved for beta testing.

It could work for SP though and prevent some of the harsh negative feedback that follows when a beta doesn't quite match users expectations (at the end of the day - installing a beta is optional not mandatory).

[SiThSpAwN]

Originally Posted by MadTommy

I'm all too aware we are all testers. Personally i don't want to be a tester. Of course I will happily submit bug reports that i find that have not already been found, however i don't have the time to troll through 100s of posts to do this efficiently.

Testing is optional, if you dont want to be a tester then dont install the patches until they are official.

[MadTommy]

Originally Posted by SiThSpAwN

Testing is optional, if you dont want to be a tester then dont install the patches until they are official.

That's a little black & white and disingenuous to be honest.

We all want the game to be running as good as possible, hence we will all try any patches, especially after waiting for 7 months or so to have severe problems fixed. The track record shows no matter what a patch is call, alpha, beta or official we still are very much still testing. No patch to date has been release without a plethora of issues still being present, ironically enough the alpha patch has been the best yet. which is nice, progress is being made.

But that is all rather off topic. I'm surprised there is no test team, as it sounds like there isn't.

[GraveyardJimmy]

Originally Posted by MadTommy

But that is all rather off topic. I'm surprised there is no test team, as it sounds like there isn't.

Blacksix has stated there is. Here are some quotes (since you ignored the last post I made to suit your agenda):

The testing is going good.

responsible for the parts of the patch that are fully tested and working

the current beta version of the patch didn't pass internal test and was sent back for revision.

Test is going well. We don't have CTD on our PCs.

It's going into wide internal testing today, which will last through the weekend and probably a couple of days more.

There are just a few which show they have an internal testing team, even if it is the developers themselves. You can find these yourself if you search posts by blacksix, it took less than 5 minutes.

[Blackdog_kt]

Actually i'm with Sith on this one. What you say effectively translates to "i want only the final patch".

Sith says "you have the option to not install the intermediate testing patches and wait for the final".

It doesn't make any difference whether the alpha is public or not: in both cases you don't install the alpha patch.

The fact that you can doesn't mean you have to, if it contradicts your wish not to test it.

In fact, the main differences between the two approaches (what we have and what you suggest) are:

1) with the current approach you have an option, with the one you suggest you don't and
2) public testing = more testers = statistically more probable for issues to be encountered = bugs get discovered faster.

I really don't see how this is worse than internal testing only.

[MadTommy]

Originally Posted by GraveyardJimmy

Blacksix has stated there is. Here are some quotes (since you ignored the last post I made to suit your agenda):

Jeeze chill out. I read your post and understand your view. Sorry i didn't quote you and caress your forum ego. My only agenda is thinking that a dedicated team of testers would help fix and find issues, why you are so hostile to this only you know.

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

Actually i'm with Sith on this one. What you say effectively translates to "i want only the final patch".

Sith says "you have the option to not install the intermediate testing patches and wait for the final".

It doesn't make any difference whether the alpha is public or not: in both cases you don't install the alpha patch.

The fact that you can doesn't mean you have to, if it contradicts your wish not to test it.

In fact, the main differences between the two approaches (what we have and what you suggest) are:

1) with the current approach you have an option, with the one you suggest you don't and
2) public testing = more testers = statistically more probable for issues to be encountered = bugs get discovered faster.

I really don't see how this is worse than internal testing only.

I think public beta testing is a good thing, but what is better is to have closed testing as well. I've been around the block, been involved in internal testing and such like in the past, its far for productive and focused than an open forum beta test, which serves a different purpose.

Having a volunteer, i.e not paid, team, testing specific changes to the game not only improves efficiency but relieves the developers from this work. The devs & testers share info on a closed forum under a NDA.. this is the kind of setup that I think could only benefit CloD...BS like 'don't download the patch if you don't want to test'.. is well BS.

[GraveyardJimmy]

Originally Posted by MadTommy

My only agenda is thinking that a dedicated team of testers would help fix and find issues, why you are so hostile to this only you know.

The point is the devs have stated there are patch tests including online patch tests. If you dont want to test, don't download the patch. After internal tests there are public tests as you suggest you know. The devs have repeatedly stated the patch is going into internal testing and that they do testing online. What we have now comes after their internal testing.

BS like 'don't download the patch if you don't want to test'.. is well BS.

How is that bad advice? If you don't want to risk being affected by bugs, dont take part in what is clearly labelled alpha/beta patches.

Same way some people don't join the RO2 public beta tests that are happening now. They are not mandatory.

Also, its nothing to do with being quoted, it's that the devs have responded to questions over whether they test online, when this was brought to your attention you ignored it saying "I'm surprised there is no test team, as it sounds like there isn't. ". Nothing to do with "forum ego" just you ignoring things that don't suit you, hence why I showed you some quotes from the devs that show there is a "test team".

[pstyle]

Originally Posted by MadTommy

Having a volunteer, i.e not paid, team, testing specific changes to the game not only improves efficiency but relieves the developers from this work. .

I think the recent open testing and crash-log submissions, resulting in a less-than-1 week turnaround in a hot-fix that is widely regarded by the community as having fixed the main issues (issues that were hanging around for 12 months or more) demonstrates how amazingly efficient the open source testing is.

Originally Posted by MadTommy

BS like 'don't download the patch if you don't want to test'.. is well BS.

Why is it BS?
The open source testing has been amazing for this game. Once the devs decided to collect crash dump data from the community their knowledge base went through the roof - and so did their ability to respond. So it's obvious that providing the patch to everyone who want's to help out, is a good, good thing. So, therefore it's here to stay...

No-one is forced to adopt the alphas/ hot fixes. They're not automatic updates, but freely downloadable. There are still servers online running the pre-patch versions. You opt-in to test.

And if people are not interested in being part of that testing process, then they need not.