ShootMania: Storm demo?

[Lasseml95]

I think nadeo should give beta test of shootmania storm to peoples who buy /has trackmania 2 canyon.

[metoxys]

I think nadeo should give beta test of shootmania storm to peoples who buy /has trackmania 2 canyon.

over 60k betas?

[windows3.1]

I think nadeo should give beta test of shootmania storm to peoples who buy /has trackmania 2 canyon.

over 60k betas?

The larger the test group, the better. Then of course they can charge for it once it goes open beta.

Meh... It shouldn't be that big, maybe forum-exclusive to maniaexchange and maniapark since we tend to be a bit more serious about creating content for the game but not the entire playerbase.

[metoxys]

The larger the test group, the better.

You should watch this Interview of Hylis that I subtitled

[windows3.1]

The larger the test group, the better.

You should watch this Interview of Hylis that I subtitled

I watched the video. My respect for Nadeo just dropped a good 20%. That's not why companies are supposed to beta their programs.

If they want to advertise, they should buy TV ad segments and pages in gaming and racing magazines. The Beta TEST period is to TEST the program, not advertise it.

I withdraw my request for access to the closed beta. If all the beta is being used for is to publicize the game then refuse to take part in an advertising campaign disguised as a test period.

[banjee]

I think Hylis sayed exactly the opposite of what you think. when i watched the video i got that he said they want to keep the beta small because that is the only way for then to get the most comprehensive feedback.

[gaff3rp]

I think the open beta for all pre-orders that they did with tm2 was a great idea. You have already paid for the game so you would like it to get as many bugs ironed out as possible asap and are more likely to place appropriate comments as you have made a financial commitment to the product.
With a free demo it is a lot easier to just say "Meh, it has bugs, i just wont play it.

[eyebo]

Basically Hylis said in the video that having too many testers isn't good (as they've had experience with in the past). They try to get a cross-section of the TM community; experts in different parts of the game. They also used the "stupid games" to get new people into the beta because it's good to have an infusion of a new perspective.

Think about it. A new player approaches the game completely differently from someone who has played TM for a long time. For instance, in the beta... there were ways things were working in Canyon that I quickly accepted because it was the way I had got used to it working in TMF. When I read in the beta forums that some people were challenging the notion that it should work that way... it made me stop and think... wow! Maybe it shouldn't be that way. So I think new players can really bring a good perspective to the beta process. Hylis mentioned that one of the "stupid games" was a sort of riddle or puzzle. So this helped determine who would be good at beta testing, because much of beta testing is trying to figure out what's causing your problem and getting it so its reproducible before you ever report it.

The other thing Hylis mentioned is that they can't be perfect with the beta selection, but they do the best they can. I was part of Beta2 and I can't praise Nadeo enough for how much they listened to the users throughout the beta. I'm impressed that so much of what the game became is due to the devs listening to the testers. Surely there are also things that were suggested that didn't get changed, whether it was a conscious design choice or simply lack of time. But I think the game is far better than it would have been if there hadn't been a beta. It's not some promotional tool that they put out there and never listen to anyone. That couldn't be farther from the truth.

I feel very strongly that the essence of the beta I was in with Canyon was very focused on improving the game. If you think anything different, I have to sadly inform you that you don't really know Nadeo.

[Ripbox]

how can 13% say no?
must be nice being able to afford to waste your money if it turns out to be total poop....
TM was a hit TM is just scraping threw Virtual Skipper most of you probably wont have even heard of and your willing to spend anything up to £$40 on something that could be a huge flop?????
Ok support Nadeo n all but heck you wouldn't buy a car or house without checking it out 1st
Think b4 you click please!

[eyebo]

As you gain experience with certain brands, patterns emerge. You start to recognize brands that are known for consistent quality. You don't need to try something from them first... you know it'll be good because of who made it. I've bought many Sony products online without ever trying them first because I knew they would be made to a high standard. I also paid for that quality. Same can be said for Apple, at least the Apple we've come to know in recent years. I even bought my Honda CR-V without ever opening the bonnet. You're going to take this analogy and use it against me and ask if I did a test drive... and yes... yes I did. So yeah, that analogy sort of bombed. ^_^

Anyway, I believe the same is true for Nadeo as a brand. I haven't played a game from Nadeo that I disliked, so why would I dislike ShootMania or QuestMania, unless I just dislike the genre in general. But that's a separate issue. Of course I know about Virtual Skipper. No, I haven't played it. Sailing is only slightly interesting to me... and only if I were to do it in person. To play a game based on it doesn't sound interesting to me at all, so I've never tried Virtual Skipper. But that's more a problem of genre and style than being unwilling to try a game because it costs something.

I've bought a lot of games that didn't turn out to be fun at all, or had serious issues. Do I regret buying them? Not really. It was worth it to try them out. I've also went to a lot of movies in the theater that resulted in a dissatisfied experience. Do I regret seeing them? No. Such is life. If I couldn't afford to do it, I wouldn't. Yeah, it's nice to be able to pay for the ability to try things... restaurants, movies, sporting events, etc. If you can't, then don't.

But there's a more specific point about demos that I'd like to address. Most demos I've tried fall into one of two categories.

1. Limited features

2. Time trial

So, with the first model... you get a demo in which the game has been severely crippled. You might get a slight idea for how the game feels to play... maybe if it runs okay on your system... but it's otherwise quite useless.

The second model isn't quite so bad. You have a limited time to play the game and then your game is disabled unless you buy. That's not a bad model at all and I'd fully support it if Nadeo decided to do it.

The problem is, we have this community of players who pay once and then play for 5 years the same game and expect Nadeo to support us while we haven't paid them a dime for years. To offset that, you really need the game to cost initially for everyone so that the players who don't stay around and aren't expecting support are making up for that difference. It all balances out. Nadeo wants to support the community as much as possible with updates and the like, but they can't if they don't get paid. That's just how the world works. There's no way around it.

Initially I think a demo would do more harm than good. Maybe sometime down the road one could be used to boost sales if things have flatlined. But I don't think they should do one at the start.

I don't expect people to agree with me, but I thought I'd try to explain in more detail why I voted no.

Edit: I'm gonna eat my words about Virtual Skipper. I just downloaded it. Playing it right now. ^_^