SimCity Beta.

[macvirt 361]

Wake up, this has been a trend in the industry for quite a bit now. This is the new demo construct, it serves that and marketing and sales this way.

It is not a beta. It is not even a stress test. If it even were just that, these things would not be allocated resources on a basis of zero sum planning. Last year there was a fun bit of research on that presented in GDMag on the correlation between how hard people whine and shout when servers go down during such marketing stages and the actual increases in sales on mass consumption markets.

Any other notion is understandable, but it is part of a "I want to believe and buy to believe" symptom. Not reality.

That does not diminish the game by the way. I just wish would approach SC2013 more with a fresh mind, and not one coming from SC4. Times have changed, core users are commercially uninteresting, casual gaming is the trend, this is not the next version of SC4 and it was designed not to be that. Deliberately, because this is business.

[Gurning_Chimp 398]

It's a beta, not a demo.

It's a marketing stunt not a beta.

[macvirt 361]

It's a beta, not a demo.

No, this is the new format of demo constructs. Integral part of marketing planning. It is just called a "beta" to make potential customers scrounge for access and create buzz while doing so.

It's a demo. It is not even a stress test As posted elsewhere, there is a growing interest in our industry for this remarkable correlation between assigning limited resources for demo rounds and increase of sales in mass consumption markets of leisure and casual play categories - because people follow the buzz. Regardless of whether the buzz is positive or negative.

[RRtexasranger 45]

Marketing. Let's just be honest. This is a demo construct element part of the product marketing. A beta is something completely different. Calling a mosquito an elephant and making a powerpoint presentation about it along with posters and stickers everywhere still does not make it an elephant.

It is not like this is new. This has been a growing development in our industry. Think about it, it makes perfect commercial sense. Less pesky customer interactions in private rounds, cheaper costs for the planning and resources allocation for such demo ventures (not to mention you do not have to release packaged code which people could use to reconstruct missing parts of the full release) and so forth. And as a bonus, everybody talks about it everywhere and hunts for keys and shouts on social media. This is marketing.

Difference between a Beta and a demo?

In a demo, the company releases a portion of the final product and they just forget about it. The game is already complete, they are not looking for customer feedback at the moment, they will wait until after the game is released to make any adjustments.

In a Beta, they entire idea surrounding it is that we are supposed to help diagnose bugs and issues, give the developers an idea of server load, bring any strange graphics problems to their attention, ect. By definition, a Beta is buggy and does not represent the final product.

If you still insist that the Beta is just another name for a demo, then you really shouldn't even be playing the beta as you are completely missing the point and is the reason why some companies are so reluctant to have betas, because people think that beta = demo, and whine in complain when the game is buggy or have issues.

Last year there was a fun bit of research on that presented in GDMag on the correlation between how hard people whine and shout when servers go down during such marketing stages and the actual increases in sales on mass consumption markets.

Correlation/Causation fail.

[macvirt 361]

Sorry, but that is obsolete thinking these days.

Think about it, games are on purpose not releases as full games. More revenue can be achieved by means of stripping elements from a release with the focus on revenue streams following up after release. Does the word DLC ring a bell?

Consider even just the practical case of "we have a design specification for features and content, we would love to do X and Y, we wanted to do X and Y, but we ran out of resources allocated (which includes the factor time)". A few months later that shows up for a price. This is the discrepancy between the marketing and the economics, but it is the reality.

Definitions have changed, because the industry has changed, because the economics have changed. It is that simple.

Whether that is a bad thing is completely subjective. I work in this industry, for me it is not a bad thing at all. Cheaper development, less hassle, more revenue streams.

[Notdowninit 0]

Now it's down, and has no time listed to reopen

"Play Is blocked at this time."

[macvirt 361]

2PM EST, if I caught that correctly, for reopening.

[RRtexasranger 45]

Uh, no. The definition has actually not changed, there are very distinct differences in the essence of the two words, only someone who thinks they are entitled to some magical, perfect product when development isn't even finished would think that. And why are you comparing a beta to DLC? Seriously!? Even before DLC was a thing, betas were popular, Betas in computer software have existed even before the internet.

[macvirt 361]

Don't put words in my mouth. I am not comparing a beta to DLC. Please read more carefully than that.

What used to be the concept of beta testing has changed in our industry. We have seen the use and benefit of using the concept as part of our marketing. This should not come as a suprise, this has been a growing trend for years. It allows us to use our customers for purpose of marketing and sales. It is immensely beneficial, lowers costs and gives us a reach which we ourselves would have certain issues with in terms of cost but also timing.

So, we call a demo round a beta. It lets people think it is a beta, but it is not. It is fine, because this rests on utilising behavioral stimuli as part of marketing and sales. People for example want to contribute something, they feel valued when they have a "report". People scrounge for access, because a selective means of access ties in with making people feel special. And so forth. Anyone with a modicum of schooling in business management, advertising, marketing can explain how these things have evolved. This is not excempt even to the games industry. The telecom markets for example with fiber initiatives for consumption markets use the same methods.

Similarly, we have learned that it is less interesting financially to release a complete product. It is more rewarding to, from design specifications and targets, release a working but shell product to which we add services and integrated followup products that fill in that discrepancy between design and target specs and the created packaged release. This is where DLC comes in. This is what increasingly is more rewarding even than just the revenue cycle of the main release.

Look, I realise you want to see it as a beta. That is fine. Honestly, just please don't expect others to not simply accept marketing as reality.

[ItsShane 18]

I just got online and it's working fine for me I've had no issues with it being down or anything. I'm from Ireland if that makes a difference, which I doubt it does.

[USA_Pride 49]

Here you have it folks, this is "always online" gaming.

Internet goes out - NO GAME FOR YOU

Servers go down - NO GAME FOR YOU

This is not a beta. It's a demo. They can't even handle the demo traffic.

I'm becoming more satisfied with my decision to cancel my pre-order.

I suppose you'd don't see the giant "CLOSED BETA" sticker on Sim City's picture on Origin?

Yes, I did see it.

My point is, it's happening now, and I predict it will happen in the future when the game is no longer in demo, oops, I mean "closed beta".

[RRtexasranger 45]

Don't put words in my mouth. I am not comparing a beta to DLC. Please read more carefully than that.

What used to be the concept of beta testing has changed in our industry. We have seen the use and benefit of using the concept as part of our marketing. This should not come as a suprise, this has been a growing trend for years. It allows us to use our customers for purpose of marketing and sales. It is immensely beneficial, lowers costs and gives us a reach which we ourselves would have certain issues with in terms of cost but also timing.

So, we call a demo round a beta. It lets people think it is a beta, but it is not. It is fine, because this rests on utilising behavioral stimuli as part of marketing and sales. People for example want to contribute something, they feel valued when they have a "report". People scrounge for access, because a selective means of access ties in with making people feel special. And so forth. Anyone with a modicum of schooling in business management, advertising, marketing can explain how these things have evolved. This is not excempt even to the games industry. The telecom markets for example with fiber initiatives for consumption markets use the same methods.

Similarly, we have learned that it is less interesting financially to release a complete product. It is more rewarding to, from design specifications and targets, release a working but shell product to which we add services and integrated followup products that fill in that discrepancy between design and target specs and the created packaged release. This is where DLC comes in. This is what increasingly is more rewarding even than just the revenue cycle of the main release.

Look, I realise you want to see it as a beta. That is fine. Honestly, just please don't expect others to not simply accept marketing as reality.

Any marketing effects is a positive leakage for the developer. The main purpose is for it to be a beta. It is absolutely impossible to have a large, internet-based game without first testing it on a very large audience first. For the developer, it is clearly a beta first, demo second. However consumers ignore this, and assume it is demo first, beta second, but that really isn't the mindset the developers want consumers to be in when they first test out the game. Mainly because they don't want people to make judgements on an incomplete and buggy game, and because they want to make sure the testers are willing to submit appropriate feedback tickets instead of go off and complain on a message board or forum.

My point is, it's happening now, and I predict it will happen in the future when the game is no longer in demo, oops, I mean "closed beta".

• 
  
  

You mean servers occasionally can't handle their load and go down? Welcome to the internet.

[maddogmark25 58]

Don't put words in my mouth. I am not comparing a beta to DLC. Please read more carefully than that.

What used to be the concept of beta testing has changed in our industry. We have seen the use and benefit of using the concept as part of our marketing. This should not come as a suprise, this has been a growing trend for years. It allows us to use our customers for purpose of marketing and sales. It is immensely beneficial, lowers costs and gives us a reach which we ourselves would have certain issues with in terms of cost but also timing.

So, we call a demo round a beta. It lets people think it is a beta, but it is not. It is fine, because this rests on utilising behavioral stimuli as part of marketing and sales. People for example want to contribute something, they feel valued when they have a "report". People scrounge for access, because a selective means of access ties in with making people feel special. And so forth. Anyone with a modicum of schooling in business management, advertising, marketing can explain how these things have evolved. This is not excempt even to the games industry. The telecom markets for example with fiber initiatives for consumption markets use the same methods.

Similarly, we have learned that it is less interesting financially to release a complete product. It is more rewarding to, from design specifications and targets, release a working but shell product to which we add services and integrated followup products that fill in that discrepancy between design and target specs and the created packaged release. This is where DLC comes in. This is what increasingly is more rewarding even than just the revenue cycle of the main release.

Look, I realise you want to see it as a beta. That is fine. Honestly, just please don't expect others to not simply accept marketing as reality.

Any marketing effects is a positive leakage for the developer. The main purpose is for it to be a beta. It is absolutely impossible to have a large, internet-based game without first testing it on a very large audience first. For the developer, it is clearly a beta first, demo second. However consumers ignore this, and assume it is demo first, beta second, but that really isn't the mindset the developers want consumers to be in when they first test out the game. Mainly because they don't want people to make judgements on an incomplete and buggy game, and because they want to make sure the testers are willing to submit appropriate feedback tickets instead of go off and complain on a message board or forum.

My point is, it's happening now, and I predict it will happen in the future when the game is no longer in demo, oops, I mean "closed beta".

• 
  
  

You mean servers occasionally can't handle their load and go down? Welcome to the internet.

Which is the whole argument for why this game shouldn't be online-only in the first place. And this is a closed "beta" with limited participation; if the servers can't even handle this, I shudder to think what the first month will look like. Diablo 3 problems x2

[efgrib 45]

that EXAVTLY is the sense of a beta stress test.

[Apokalupsis 5]

Any company worth it's weight would have invested in planning and resources for stress testing prior to releasing a demo and calling it a "beta".

Yes, truly...because any game developer/publisher that makes $4+ billion annually clearly has no idea what it's doing...and is definitely not "worth its weight"....

[RRtexasranger 45]

Which is the whole argument for why this game shouldn't be online-only in the first place. And this is a closed "beta" with limited participation; if the servers can't even handle this, I shudder to think what the first month will look like. Diablo 3 problems x2

Eh, servers going down is only a minor argument to the online-only thing. The lack of a single-player mode is a bigger one to many people and it also means you can't play it in areas that you don't have internet access. They scale server capacity. It's not like they are going to use the same amount of server for the beta as they are at launch. One of the reasons for the beta is so they can test to see how what kind of stress the servers will face on launch day. You really can't draw any conclusions on launch from the beta.

[simmerboy 19]

This is NOT a demo. This is a beta. Repeat: This is a BETA. a one-hour beta. Not a demo. It's a BETA. It's to test the servers when come day-one for Simcity.

Enough rant...

[Servan 5]

They are probably not just testing capacity and network load, but also authentication, perhaps different methods to see which are more efficient.

[CaptCity 4,753]

Again, several more general "beta" topics merged here to keep the repetitive comments at a minimum. Some "mixing" of comments is likely.

[guitarmatt99 27]

Spare Beta Key: CC7P-XH93-GEXM-N26M-CBJH

[cyruskafaiwu 29]

Anyone who needs access to beta? Private Message me. (First come, first serve)

Edit: 16 minutes later and its gone!

[Urban Cartographer 601]

Wow. EA is copying what Bli$$ard did with the third devil last year, when it comes to buggy servers.

The devil is forced online with stressed-out servers.

Sorry, but I will wait at least one year for SimCity to be released with a 100% offline single player mode.

[alaorneto 1]

I'm really, really upset. I'm a long time SimCity fan, I've pre ordered the game as soon as it got avaiable here in Origin Brazil, registered for the beta, but... I didn't get the $50 bonus and neither got access to the closed beta.

I feel so stupid.

[anandus 15]

Wow. EA is copying what Bli$$ard did with the third devil last year, when it comes to buggy servers.

The devil is forced online with stressed-out servers.

Well, that's the whole point of this beta, isn't it?

To stress-test the servers and see how the load is so they do not make the same mistake as Diablo 3

[macvirt 361]

If only it were a beta

But no, the point here is not stress testing. There's a bit of that, because practical scenario testing is always slightly different than the network level testing. But really this is just marketing, it's packaged and presented with the "beta" flag with a variety of popular terms so people are less inclined to punch through the realities of this industry as customers.

[Cob92 360]

Well I do hope that EA is taking very good notes from the beta test, because this kind of downtime will not be acceptable for the finished game. If I spend more time staring at a screen waiting than I actually do playing a game, then what is the point in buying the game?

[anandus 15]

Whatever the reason, they do have additional data to improve their servers for launch

[Cob92 360]

.

[SirChick 184]

I'm really, really upset. I'm a long time SimCity fan, I've pre ordered the game as soon as it got avaiable here in Origin Brazil, registered for the beta, but... I didn't get the $50 bonus and neither got access to the closed beta.

I feel so stupid.

Don't blame SImCity for that - blame EA and their crap lies. Thats why they were voted the worst company. Sadly it gives SC a bad rep because people will blame maxis rather than EA.

[RyanMorgan95 144]

You know this "Beta" is really for marketing when it takes you to SimCity in the Origin store once your hour is up.