That makes sense for small betas. It's akin to the agile coding process SCRUM where you roll out completed features every X weeks (usually 2-6 weeks) and those pieces are fully functional, but the product as a whole isn't. It's turning your beta users into an extension of the QA group, but focused more on usability/fun than whether a feature matches spec.

I'm all in favor of it personally. Many rounds of early feedback in small chunks is better than limited rounds of massive feedback (typical beta process).

OH MAN!   somebody said it!    SCRUM!   I never actually thought I would hear it outside EA or some other big company like that where they have consultants tell project leads how to manage their development processes

Not to nitpick, but the zoomed out view would be "strategic" and the zoomed in view would be "tactical". It's very clear what you are saying though. I play GC2 about 50% of the time zoomed out.

I have to concur. Each element should be tested as a stand alone system and then as a complete package.

I would be very happy if I could try the game mechanics. It is exactly what does the great game. We are trying to develop a RPG board game with a friend. We use similar approach for our betatests. Nice pictures are nice pictures, however if the gameplay is bad, no graphics can save that. If someone does not like it, no problem, there is no need to install the game unless it is complete with all features. I suggest however to add some warning dialog to the beta, because I have no doubts someone will install the game and will be disappointed because he will not bother his head with reading forums.

The place I work has 30 people, development team of 10 (total - includes testers, BA and a team lead) and they use Agile.

cheers,

Kul

From what I have understood through reading Blizzard and Valve interviews, a game which isn't featurecomplete is in alpha. Beta stage is when the design is done. (This is from what I have understood).

So does Stardock have different opinions on what beta and alpha stage mean or do you just think beta sounds better..?

There is no actual 'standards' for that kind of thing, no one has ever gotten around to writing one universal standard for everyone.  The general concensus is that alpha is incomplete, and beta feature-complete with bughunting the focus... and SD doesn't really care for general concensus, afterall the general concensus is that you need DRM to survive

yeah.  Logically alpha just means 1st attempt and beta means 2nd.  As our friend Ron L says, there really isn't any standard other than the definition of the word.

That also being said, yeah, beta generally means MOST of the game is complete.   I'd challange you to find a game that ever has its design 'complete' on all levels.   You can ask most game designers "if you could, would you change something?" and they likely would tell you yes.   Many games continue design after launch.  That is why patches come out that add new things, like new heroes for warcraft 3 or new units and traps for dungeon keeper.  So design is never "done"

However, that being said, a beta is expected to show something that is similar to the final product.   And it will be, since when the beta comes out we can assume that we are actually stress-testing a version of the final game.   Its an incomplete versino of the final game, but it is a VERSION of the final game.    An alpha could be who knows what.   Proven concept or something.   a beta is closer to finished than alpha...   as per definition

The only people who I would think would actually say design is done is either really arogant, or has a huge corporate stick up their bum.

I would prefer that the first few beta tests used nothing but programmer art.

I want 100% of the focus to be on whatever feedback you are looking for.

In the Demigod Beta I'm not sure what sort of feedback you are looking for right now.  There is so much discussion on ballance but I don't think that is what you want.

If in Beta 2.4 you only want feedback on the battle engine set it up so that when we load the game we start off in a battle with two random armies.  When the battle is over we get two options, quit or fight another battle.  That way you get the focused testing you want.

Sammual

I second the focused testing. Releasing things like the unit creation interface, battle engine and even packs of concept art allows us to zoom in and spot the little problems and improvements. Once people are familiar with each facet of gameplay you can stick them all together and look for any flaws that arise between them.

I agree that the basic game mechanics are the most important thing when starting.

However, I did think you would be able to order your troops around on the battlefield, not just clicking "attack"  on the cloth map. And this seems rather basic for the game experience.

I must also say that already games like Dom 3 and AoWSM are quite good (although far from perfect) if you forget about some bad graphics and movement problems. So, let's hope Elemental will be a step forward from that, also for the eye.

The problem with such a basic cloth map beta is not that it wouldnt be useful, its just that it wont give you the kind of kick you are waiting for after having paid the full retail price already some months ago (and we are still far from June indeed ...)

Reading through most posts above I must say that this forum is starting more and more to lack any real exchanges of views. But  why post and post and post if it's just to second anything and every detail proposed because SD is your preferred company? Although SD IS my preferred company I wont be that easy - you grow not only by praise but also (and often even more) by challenges...!

But as long as the final version looks great I wont complain.

What is there to argue about? Dev Journals are about letting the player know what is going on. We don't really have anything to add to these threads, we just comment on what they are about.

If Stardock were to annouce that Elemental would include Securom, you bet that people here won't agree with them...

Erm. Just because tactical combat what be present in the first betas doesn't mean it won't be present. Tactical combat will be in the game.

Even if you already preordered, you have not already paid. You will only be charged once the beta becomes available. And if you preordered so that you could "get a kick" out of the beta it gives you access to, your expectations are misguided. Stardock has no obligation to make betas fun, or comprehensive. In fact their preliminary betas tend to be bare-boned and somewhat frustrating. The point of the beta is not so that beta testers can have fun, but so that beta testers can provide feedback in order for Stardock to improve the game. That is the only reason.