I've been a beta tester for quite a few things now. Shadowrun, Halo 3, Call of Duty 4. I think the best way to chill out the public about the Multiplayer matter, Release a public Beta test. Or simply a MP Demo like you did for Double Agent. Not to mention you would definantly get alot of bugs fixed early off. I've been Beta Testing COD4 for the last 2 weeks, you'd be surprised at the potential bugs that could have slipped through to the final version. Not to mention, I think the public would better appreciate your new style of multiplayer if you give them at least a first look or some hands on time. I know the game isn't due out for almost 5 months or so. But when the time comes, This would be the best thing you could do to try and win over the hardcore.

but if ubisoft releases a mp demo,lots of people will not buy the real game and just stick to the demo,if you seen the battlefield 2 demo,over 150 people stayed on the demo and not the real game,so its best for ubisoft not to release a demo unless its SP.

quote:

Originally posted by External_Light:
but if ubisoft releases a mp demo,lots of people will not buy the real game and just stick to the demo,if you seen the battlefield 2 demo,over 150 people stayed on the demo and not the real game,so its best for ubisoft not to release a demo unless its SP.

Well they can always delete their demo after a certain amount of time

Yeah I think a public beta would be a great idea, and that way we won't have glitches to complain about in the final version. It'll also help people reluctant about the new MP to decide whether or not they like it.

and if they send out a beta or demo, lets hope they release it at least a month before its release, and not a week like DA's demo was

Not to poke holes in your good idea but what did the last demo / beta fix?

Actually Sithduke, lets look into this in an intelligent way.

The last game where a beta/demo was present was on the pc. Im no pc gamer, so I cant comment on that. However, the last couple games were still Splinter Cell altogether. You can look at all 4 of the games and see the similarities in the engine.

Conviction is built from the ground up. This is completely new. Something like Infinity Ward has done with Call of Duty 4. And look what that fixed. The notorious "downloading game settings" was discovered when people joined the beta, and due to the beta, the problem was fixed on the release version. That is EXACTLY what a beta is for. The beta also is showing a severe problem with balancing out the kill rewards, at 3,5, and 7 kills. People realized that the 5 and 7 should be spaced out more, because the airstrike rewarded at 5 usually results in 2 more kills at least, almost automatically giving you 7, which is enough for a chopper. Also, there are problems with the m203 and how easy it is to use. The beta has been extremely helpful for IW.

Splinter cell is notorious for bugs and glitches. Especially now, when this game is being built from the ground up, we need to play the heck out of that engine until we get the bugs out. You can't simulate thousands of people playing at the same time. When theres that many people, bugs, glitches, and balancing issues become apparent and a dev team can ultimately fix a game.

Thats why we need a beta. NOT because we want to play it early, but to make sure this game is bug/glitch free.

This game's engine is similar to Assasins Creed. Take a look at how many glitches are present in it right now, or at least were recently. it only shows how risky this game is right now, and how much this engine needs work.

Yeah a beta would be awesome. The 360 has built in expiration controls for downloads but I don't think it could work on the PC because you could keep it (much easier to crack)

quote:

Yeah I think a public beta would be a great idea, and that way we won't have glitches to complain about in the final version.

HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHhahahahahahaha
Are you aware which company is even making this game?

You mis-understand, you're saying you need a beta to fix potential bugs but I'm saying what did the last beta and demo fix for the retail versions?

I will probably just end up renting this game and go back to playing CT. *shrugs*

I don't think this new spy vs spy in crowd and no L&S will ever get as good as classic Spy Vs Merc. Of course I will give it a try, buy I am highly doubting it will please me as much as CT did.

And only a beta would work anyways. The demo didn't fix **** for DA, let alone the patches. But do you really think that Ubi even cares enough to release a beta to make a good game? I personally think they are arrogant and greedy, the wrong kind of game company, too bad they have a lot of talent.

I wish some of their programmers and developers would go to EA/bungie/Epic and keep giving us good games w/ some damn support.

quote:

Originally posted by SITHDUKE:
You mis-understand, you're saying you need a beta to fix potential bugs but I'm saying what did the last beta and demo fix for the retail versions?

The last demo did very little for the retail version. but this is a different engine and a different studio. Montreal has alot of quality people and a demo or beta could only help, not hurt, the effort to keep this game sharp.

quote:

Originally posted by BBQ-Chicken:
I wish some of their programmers and developers would go to EA/bungie/Epic and keep giving us good games w/ some damn support.

Lol EA doesn't support their games. That's why so many people don't like them.

^No. They do.
Almost all games from ea on the xbox and pc have plenty of patches which all really help. They're dev teams for their rts's all ask for suggestions and then actually implement them at no cost!
The reason people dont like EA (well me at least) is because they're splurging so many games at the moment to fund spore, the most affected game is the sims but you can see it in their over games aswell, so many of their new titles are just the same or worse than their prequels.

quote:

Originally posted by deepego3:

quote:

Originally posted by SITHDUKE:
You mis-understand, you're saying you need a beta to fix potential bugs but I'm saying what did the last beta and demo fix for the retail versions?

The last demo did very little for the retail version. but this is a different engine and a different studio. Montreal has alot of quality people and a demo or beta could only help, not hurt, the effort to keep this game sharp.

Exactly. I didn't misunderstand. My point is that this gives the OPPORTUNITY to fix those issues, regardless if they took the time to do it in the past.

Um, you guys realize that the point of a demo is NOT to find glitches, right? That's what a beta's for.

I personally participated in the CT PC beta, and although I'm not sure exactly how much it helped, the concept is still excellent, because it helps both gamers and the developers. It helps developers make a better product with more balance and fewer glitches, and it lets gamers try a sample of the game. It's a great idea that I think should be used more often. Halo 3 and CoD 4 are leading the way for that; SCC should be next.

quote:

Originally posted by MadamTampini:

quote:

Originally posted by BBQ-Chicken:
I wish some of their programmers and developers would go to EA/bungie/Epic and keep giving us good games w/ some damn support.

Lol EA doesn't support their games. That's why so many people don't like them.

So wrong. And a lot of people don't like them because they don't like their games. THat is why I am saying send some Ubi Montreal devs over to EA or Epic and they will make some freaking awesome games that work.

quote:

Originally posted by legacyzero:
I've been a beta tester for quite a few things now. Shadowrun, Halo 3, Call of Duty 4. I think the best way to chill out the public about the Multiplayer matter, Release a public Beta test. Or simply a MP Demo like you did for Double Agent. Not to mention you would definantly get alot of bugs fixed early off. I've been Beta Testing COD4 for the last 2 weeks, you'd be surprised at the potential bugs that could have slipped through to the final version. Not to mention, I think the public would better appreciate your new style of multiplayer if you give them at least a first look or some hands on time. I know the game isn't due out for almost 5 months or so. But when the time comes, This would be the best thing you could do to try and win over the hardcore.

Beta testing. Everyone had codes for Halo 3. And while I respect your point of view, Ubisoft knows what they are doing.

Agreed. I am pretty sure, at some point, the issue of beta testing has been discussed and decided on.

quote:

Originally posted by Gypsy816:

quote:

Originally posted by legacyzero:
I've been a beta tester for quite a few things now. Shadowrun, Halo 3, Call of Duty 4. I think the best way to chill out the public about the Multiplayer matter, Release a public Beta test. Or simply a MP Demo like you did for Double Agent. Not to mention you would definantly get alot of bugs fixed early off. I've been Beta Testing COD4 for the last 2 weeks, you'd be surprised at the potential bugs that could have slipped through to the final version. Not to mention, I think the public would better appreciate your new style of multiplayer if you give them at least a first look or some hands on time. I know the game isn't due out for almost 5 months or so. But when the time comes, This would be the best thing you could do to try and win over the hardcore.

Beta testing. Everyone had codes for Halo 3. And while I respect your point of view, Ubisoft knows what they are doing.

Are you sure about that? DA was really buggy.. A bigger beta test would have been in order. The COD4 Beta is going on strong. Lots of bugs, lag, glitches and other tweaks are gonna be adressed. I think Ubi should follow suit, this would be a great way to earn back the respect of their community too.
Go over to Charlieoscardelta.com and just look at how much the ACTUALL developers of the game interacts with the COD4 community. EVERY DAY. Hell, i've even got two Infinity Ward Deveopers and staff on my Friend list. How did UBI opt out of this?

However the CoD developers chose to do thing is their business, and their right. The same can be said for Ubisoft.

I am sure that at some point between the beginning of the development of the game and now, someone at Ubisoft has talked about/mentioned/asked about/considered the idea of a beta. If they decide to do it, great. If they decide to not, it's their decision.