Can we stop pretending that an open beta is anything but a free trial? This complaint ties in with a post I made last year where I complained about the practice of using an open beta as a marketing tool. Whether they openly admit it or not, many companies do exactly that. I don’t know how you could stand there with a straight face and call your open beta anything but a marketing tool to promote your game when you’re handing out keys as an incentive to subscribe to Fileplanet. If it’s not a marketing tool, why do you give keys out at conventions? Why do you trumpet the number of beta players you have? Why do you purposefully invite community bloggers and journalists if you’re not actually prepared for criticism and dissection of your product?

Whether or not you intend it to be, whether or not it should be, and whether or not you also have an actual free trial planned for your game, players will treat your open beta test as a free trial. They’re testing your game all right, but they’re testing it to see if it’s any good — not helping you test it for bugs. It’s partly the fault of the industry and partly changes in player attitudes towards “testing,” but no one does much to discourage the practices that reinforce these ideas (other than to complain about how a beta should be about bug-squashing).

The problem is that I think developers see the beta test one way and marketing people and players see it in the way I just described. Two things need to occur to fix this:

1) We need to do away with open betas. They’re pointless. Everyone uses them as free trials while the developers complain that the game isn’t done yet. If it’s not done, don’t prance it out like a show pony for the kids to pet. If you need a stress test, and you clearly do, fine — take an afternoon and do one.

2) Online games need to launch with a free trial. Not implement one when subscriptions start flagging. Not tack one on 6-12 months out. Not add one at the end of the game’s life cycle in a last ditch effort to bring new blood in. Launch with one. This becomes easier and easier as consumers get used to digital distribution as a delivery mechanism and saves companies the hassle of dealing with retail box sales. Conversion to a full customer requires a simple credit charge in this case.

Tricking customers into buying a bad game and then not delivering a minimum quality product is a bad business practice — one that’s far too common in this industry. I’m looking at you, Funcom. As this space becomes more and more competitive, games that stick to the subscription model are going to need to start proving that they’re worth our $50-$70. I’m getting either far too cynical or far too savvy (take your pick) to just accept that we’re getting quality software on faith anymore these days. With no free trial offered, what do you expect us to do with the open beta? As for claims that open beta is really a “testing period,” show me one game that improved significantly between open beta and release based on the open beta feedback.

Regarding the post which sparked this discussion, I agree that people should be more courteous to one another, anonymity or not — especially when it’s one-way anonymity. I always try to be courteous, honest, and open-minded here, even when I’m criticising something or someone. But still, it’s the internet. Do you really expect anything less? I think Sid67 and Cuppy hit the nail on the head with all this brouhaha.