Uh-Oh Q1 03

[CICSMaster]

Originally posted by DATarbell
I would posit that two of the "early warning signs" of known, significant problems in the production version of the game (be they a lack of fun, ineffective AI, or whatever) will be 1) the absence of a beta test, and 2) the absence of a playable demo.

Well, since the developers said at the beginning of the design process - 2 and half years ago - that there would be neither a Public Beta Program, nor a Demo. I guess you will just have to write this game off as a pipe dream.

[Hagbart]

I think there is a big risk that Moo3 will disapoint alot of people.

[DATarbell]

Well, the developers said a lot of things two and a half years ago that has changed since then.

If I was a developer--and I am--and I had a software release that had a very high visibility (kudos here to the QuickSilver developers for being as open and interactive as they have been!) and had attracted a high degree of concerns from its adoring, awaiting public (US ), then I would be looking for any and every PR opportunity that would enable me to emphatically underline all of the good things about my deliverable and, by doing so, boost sales.

While I recognize that a beta test (public or otherwise) and a demo were not planned, they both represent opportunities for the Developer and/or Publisher to generate significant, positive word-of-mouth, which they badly need to do! (To counteract a string of 'negatives': cut lists, repeated delays, the departure of Alan, et cetera.)

[vmxa1]

They could come to this board and select a few of the die hards here to do some outside testing and there by keep strong control of it. Announce the selection here and calm fears.

[Spaced Cowboy]

Originally posted by vmxa1
They could come to this board and select a few of the die hards here to do some outside testing and there by keep strong control of it. Announce the selection here and calm fears.

Although that would be great for the game, it would be more likey that they'll hire testers to play it since that is the norm.

[vmxa1]

I was speculating that the reason they do not want to use beta test is the fear that some of the people involved would leak or give away things, that they would not have control in spite of non disclosure. I bet that some people here would be more reliable in that vein as they love the game and do not want it to fail. Maybe not.

[David Floyd]

www.gonegold.com lists MOO3's release date as 9/25/02. One month from yesterday, if all goes well, although I bet it gets released MUCH later. Oh well.

[vmxa1]

Yeah, Rich is good about the dates, but not perfect. That is the long standing date from the the Publisher and Rich mention he was not confident. One can only hope it is right and the game is good.

[Spaced Cowboy]

Originally posted by David Floyd
www.gonegold.com lists MOO3's release date as 9/25/02. One month from yesterday, if all goes well, although I bet it gets released MUCH later. Oh well.

You'll also notice that they say that this is not likely.

They were also the source of the 1st post in this thread.

[moomin]

Usenet rumor has it they're shooting for an X-mas release now. Personally, I would rather have it Q2 next year then next month. I don't think Moo3 will be a good game if it comes out in September.

But QS has to put food on their employee's tables too.

[vmxa1]

When Rich talked to them they would not change the stance that it is Sept......... OK we believe that.

[Garth Vader]

I was speculating that the reason they do not want to use beta test is the fear that some of the people involved would leak or give away things, that they would not have control in spite of non disclosure. I bet that some people here would be more reliable in that vein as they love the game and do not want it to fail. Maybe not.


That's probably true, but it's a poor decision. For the cost of a game and the time to read my comments they could get 25-30 hours a week of play testing out of someone like me.

I am sure I and others here have played the Moo games far more than anyone involved in the project, and fresh eyes expierenced with the genre could only help improve the final product.

[moomin]

Yup. I can't imagine RFTS(2) being so horrible had they actually had anyone - whoever - playtesting the game before release.

"Oh? You don't find random planetary wipeouts you can't defend again fun?"

[Spaced Cowboy]

I tend to agree with you guys. The longer we have to wait for this one the better it just might be.

Secondly, the "in-house" beta testers will add nothing to the game besides finding a few obvious bugs.

I imagine, without some of the heavy hitters here having their hand, the game will be full of holes very soon.

[vmxa1]

Just look at the input they get/got from Civ players here. Too bad it was after the fact (of release).