Official Everybody Edits Forums

zioxei

Member

Joined: 2015-06-20

Posts: 847

Re: Have New Campaigns Be Beta Only For One Week

Maybe there is a way to make like copies of campaign worlds that only beta members can play?

---

( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

Creature

Member

From: The Dark Web

Joined: 2015-02-15

Posts: 9,658

Re: Have New Campaigns Be Beta Only For One Week

Beta people have enough features.

---

This is a false statement.

Anch

Member

Joined: 2015-02-16

Posts: 5,447

Re: Have New Campaigns Be Beta Only For One Week

Non beta members already had to wait long enough to play the campaigns, why should they have to wait even longer for individual ones to come out? Lag isn't a good reason for this.

Ok I'm getting this argument a lot. Let me make this clear. I PAID for beta. I PAID for early access. This is not be saying 'beta' is better, but rather why not let us have the early access to new features like we always have before? Pretty much every important update ever has always been beta first. Non-betas get it later after it's been tested for bugs.

This is not me trying to be 'selfish' or condemn non betas. This is me making a suggestion to a problem which I've been having.

Why should non-betas have to wait longer? Because beta people PAID to get access first.

Also, beta members can find bugs right? RIGHT?

Anak

Guest

Re: Have New Campaigns Be Beta Only For One Week

Isn't beta to have people test for bugs before public release anyways?
This is the same thing (not for the lag reason though)

Br0k3n

Member

From: Serbia

Joined: 2015-04-04

Posts: 1,451

Re: Have New Campaigns Be Beta Only For One Week

---

Spen(der)Boy

Banned

From: Diamond World

Joined: 2015-11-08

Posts: 216

Re: Have New Campaigns Be Beta Only For One Week

Offtopic:

You are asked for woots?
Ontopic: Beta is cool than non-beta but i am non-beta

---

The Spendy Player who have deluxe smileys. Totally not rudik3000. I am something or secretly so you can't guess my name.
I don't have .

tentacleTherapist

Member

Joined: 2015-02-15

Posts: 185

Re: Have New Campaigns Be Beta Only For One Week

Beta people have enough features.

That is kinda the point of Beta. This isn't a complaint I really don't care to be honest, but as an observation Beta members do get a lot less now than they did when with the original mods, so they are well within their rights to complain about not getting much as they did pay money in order to get most of the features first for testing.

---

This is hella gay

Schlog

Member

Joined: 2015-07-21

Posts: 1,957

Re: Have New Campaigns Be Beta Only For One Week

Non beta members already had to wait long enough to play the campaigns, why should they have to wait even longer for individual ones to come out? Lag isn't a good reason for this.

Ok I'm getting this argument a lot. Let me make this clear. I PAID for beta. I PAID for early access. This is not be saying 'beta' is better, but rather why not let us have the early access to new features like we always have before? Pretty much every important update ever has always been beta first. Non-betas get it later after it's been tested for bugs.

This is not me trying to be 'selfish' or condemn non betas. This is me making a suggestion to a problem which I've been having.

Why should non-betas have to wait longer? Because beta people PAID to get access first.

Yes, I get it. You gave them money so you could have access to certain aspects of the game before people who haven't, but the people who haven't shouldn't be punished with excessive patience for a week to play a series of difficult levels only to rage quit, since they don't have any money or something along those lines. Honestly, you're just making yourself seem more and more selfish the more you argue. I'm a beta member, too, but I don't really think it's necessary for literally everything to be released into the game to be exclusive to beta. I think it should be beta only for a while if it could be game-breaking, like half blocks for example.

So, really, the only issue with campaigns is the huge amount of lag upon release and joining, but making it beta exclusive for a week would anger non beta users. Additionally, there's also tons of beta members that actively play EE, so you'll still most likely get lots of lag.

I never get connection/frame rate lag on EE because my internet is awesome and usually that's the only tab I have open. If it ends up being the only viable solution to this problem, then at least just shorten the non-beta release time to like 2-3 days rather than a week. i just thought i might add, i'm mainly arguing so we can work out any logic flaws with this idea, not to diss it

Anak

Guest

Re: Have New Campaigns Be Beta Only For One Week

Non beta members already had to wait long enough to play the campaigns, why should they have to wait even longer for individual ones to come out? Lag isn't a good reason for this.

Ok I'm getting this argument a lot. Let me make this clear. I PAID for beta. I PAID for early access. This is not be saying 'beta' is better, but rather why not let us have the early access to new features like we always have before? Pretty much every important update ever has always been beta first. Non-betas get it later after it's been tested for bugs.

This is not me trying to be 'selfish' or condemn non betas. This is me making a suggestion to a problem which I've been having.

Why should non-betas have to wait longer? Because beta people PAID to get access first.

long?

I am non-beta and I don't mind waiting a week at all

Kirby

Member

Joined: 2015-04-04

Posts: 4,304

Re: Have New Campaigns Be Beta Only For One Week

Beta people have enough features.

I dunno about that. I payed 10 dollars for some smileys a block pack and to see a few features early.
That's a lot of money for those 3 things

Abelysk

Guest

Re: Have New Campaigns Be Beta Only For One Week

Beta people have enough features.

I dunno about that. I payed 10 dollars for some smileys a block pack and to see a few features early.
That's a lot of money for those 3 things

Agreed. What happened to "Beta testing"? Full agreement with this suggestion.

Schlog

Member

Joined: 2015-07-21

Posts: 1,957

Re: Have New Campaigns Be Beta Only For One Week

I guess I'll state my actual position here; I'm not completely against the idea, it just needs a few changes, rather than "k you'll play in a week non betas". I'll give +1 for some support on the idea of beta only for a while, but not a week. Maybe shorter.

Br0k3n

Member

From: Serbia

Joined: 2015-04-04

Posts: 1,451

Re: Have New Campaigns Be Beta Only For One Week

I'll give +1 for some support on the idea of beta only for a while, but not a week. Maybe shorter.

Yeah, maybe a day/two, you'd probably finish it before the one/two day(s) run(s) out.

---

Thomas

Member

From: Amsterdam

Joined: 2015-09-15

Posts: 80

Re: Have New Campaigns Be Beta Only For One Week

It does have the advantage of any possible exploits being fixed before being released to the majority of players and would also increase sales of beta, so even though it does kinda seem selfish I kinda agree with this.

This, worlds need to be tested too. The exploit in weird world is a good example, many people have completed it while skipping a lot of mini's. I think it's a good idea to make new campaigns beta-only for a week for this reason, not calicara's reason.

---

Please, call me Thomas.

eggplant

skullz17

Member

Joined: 2015-02-15

Posts: 6,699

Re: Have New Campaigns Be Beta Only For One Week

We had a year without updates and you're complaining about waiting for one week.

---

thx for sig bobithan

Kirby

Member

Joined: 2015-04-04

Posts: 4,304

Re: Have New Campaigns Be Beta Only For One Week

We had a year without updates and you're complaining about waiting for one week.

We're complaining about an online game and there are kids starving in Africa!

The Party Animal

Formerly TPA2

Joined: 2015-07-10

Posts: 484

Re: Have New Campaigns Be Beta Only For One Week

im a beta member but i say no to this cause some beta members wont even try to beat the campaign they would just be focusing on making their world

Stubby

Member

From: Maryland, U.S.A.

Joined: 2015-02-16

Posts: 1,721

Website

Re: Have New Campaigns Be Beta Only For One Week

I agree with the OP, but for a different purpose. The whole point of beta testing is to test features before they are actually released. Along with reduced lag for some, it also gives the developers a chance to fix bugs before the worlds are released to the majority of the players.

For example, my campaign world, The Tunnels, had a bug in it that made the anti-cheat kick people for no reason. The whole world had to be closed off for a while, effectively closing the entire campaign. If the campaign was released for betas first, this bug would have been caught and fixed. Giving the beta testers only a day or two to test would be perfect. Not that long of a wait for non-betas, but enough time for betas to test.

---

skullz17

Member

Joined: 2015-02-15

Posts: 6,699

Re: Have New Campaigns Be Beta Only For One Week

We had a year without updates and you're complaining about waiting for one week.

We're complaining about an online game and there are kids starving in Africa!

I just thought that after that drought (referring to the year without updates, not the kids in Africa), people would be a little more patient. Waiting for a week is not so bad.

---

thx for sig bobithan

Krosis

Formerly Arkonagames

Joined: 2015-06-17

Posts: 2,279

Website

Re: Have New Campaigns Be Beta Only For One Week

Non beta members already had to wait long enough to play the campaigns, why should they have to wait even longer for individual ones to come out? Lag isn't a good reason for this.

Ok I'm getting this argument a lot. Let me make this clear. I PAID for beta. I PAID for early access. This is not be saying 'beta' is better, but rather why not let us have the early access to new features like we always have before? Pretty much every important update ever has always been beta first. Non-betas get it later after it's been tested for bugs.

This is not me trying to be 'selfish' or condemn non betas. This is me making a suggestion to a problem which I've been having.

Why should non-betas have to wait longer? Because beta people PAID to get access first.

don't betas already have access to many things before avaliable to everyone?

▼Hidden text

half-blocks, domestic pack, campaign progress saver, etc

---

skullz17

Member

Joined: 2015-02-15

Posts: 6,699

Re: Have New Campaigns Be Beta Only For One Week

Non beta members already had to wait long enough to play the campaigns, why should they have to wait even longer for individual ones to come out? Lag isn't a good reason for this.

Ok I'm getting this argument a lot. Let me make this clear. I PAID for beta. I PAID for early access. This is not be saying 'beta' is better, but rather why not let us have the early access to new features like we always have before? Pretty much every important update ever has always been beta first. Non-betas get it later after it's been tested for bugs.

This is not me trying to be 'selfish' or condemn non betas. This is me making a suggestion to a problem which I've been having.

Why should non-betas have to wait longer? Because beta people PAID to get access first.

don't betas already have access to many things before avaliable to everyone?

▼Hidden text

half-blocks, domestic pack, campaign progress saver, etc

That's the point, that's why it's called beta, because you're paying to be a beta tester who tests the game before it's released to everyone else.

---

thx for sig bobithan

Creature

Member

From: The Dark Web

Joined: 2015-02-15

Posts: 9,658

Re: Have New Campaigns Be Beta Only For One Week

Non beta members already had to wait long enough to play the campaigns, why should they have to wait even longer for individual ones to come out? Lag isn't a good reason for this.

Ok I'm getting this argument a lot. Let me make this clear. I PAID for beta. I PAID for early access. This is not be saying 'beta' is better, but rather why not let us have the early access to new features like we always have before? Pretty much every important update ever has always been beta first. Non-betas get it later after it's been tested for bugs.

This is not me trying to be 'selfish' or condemn non betas. This is me making a suggestion to a problem which I've been having.

Why should non-betas have to wait longer? Because beta people PAID to get access first.

don't betas already have access to many things before avaliable to everyone?

▼Hidden text

half-blocks, domestic pack, campaign progress saver, etc

That's the point, that's why it's called beta, because you're paying to be a beta tester who tests the game before it's released to everyone else.

This doesn't mean beta members must have one week early access for every single update.

---

This is a false statement.

shadowda

Member

From: somewhere probably.

Joined: 2015-02-19

Posts: 1,015

Re: Have New Campaigns Be Beta Only For One Week

Non beta members already had to wait long enough to play the campaigns, why should they have to wait even longer for individual ones to come out? Lag isn't a good reason for this.

Ok I'm getting this argument a lot. Let me make this clear. I PAID for beta. I PAID for early access. This is not be saying 'beta' is better, but rather why not let us have the early access to new features like we always have before? Pretty much every important update ever has always been beta first. Non-betas get it later after it's been tested for bugs.

This is not me trying to be 'selfish' or condemn non betas. This is me making a suggestion to a problem which I've been having.

Why should non-betas have to wait longer? Because beta people PAID to get access first.

don't betas already have access to many things before avaliable to everyone?

▼Hidden text

half-blocks, domestic pack, campaign progress saver, etc

That's the point, that's why it's called beta, because you're paying to be a beta tester who tests the game before it's released to everyone else.

This doesn't mean beta members must have one week early access for every single update.

but the point IS that betas test things BEFORE they come to normal ee. so they are suppose to get everything early.

---

color = #1E1E1E       

Kirby

Member

Joined: 2015-04-04

Posts: 4,304

Re: Have New Campaigns Be Beta Only For One Week

Non beta members already had to wait long enough to play the campaigns, why should they have to wait even longer for individual ones to come out? Lag isn't a good reason for this.

Ok I'm getting this argument a lot. Let me make this clear. I PAID for beta. I PAID for early access. This is not be saying 'beta' is better, but rather why not let us have the early access to new features like we always have before? Pretty much every important update ever has always been beta first. Non-betas get it later after it's been tested for bugs.

This is not me trying to be 'selfish' or condemn non betas. This is me making a suggestion to a problem which I've been having.

Why should non-betas have to wait longer? Because beta people PAID to get access first.

don't betas already have access to many things before avaliable to everyone?

▼Hidden text

half-blocks, domestic pack, campaign progress saver, etc

That's the point, that's why it's called beta, because you're paying to be a beta tester who tests the game before it's released to everyone else.

This doesn't mean beta members must have one week early access for every single update.

But they dont

Schlog

Member

Joined: 2015-07-21

Posts: 1,957

Re: Have New Campaigns Be Beta Only For One Week

Ok I'm getting this argument a lot. Let me make this clear. I PAID for beta. I PAID for early access. This is not be saying 'beta' is better, but rather why not let us have the early access to new features like we always have before? Pretty much every important update ever has always been beta first. Non-betas get it later after it's been tested for bugs.

This is not me trying to be 'selfish' or condemn non betas. This is me making a suggestion to a problem which I've been having.

Why should non-betas have to wait longer? Because beta people PAID to get access first.

don't betas already have access to many things before avaliable to everyone?

▼Hidden text

half-blocks, domestic pack, campaign progress saver, etc

That's the point, that's why it's called beta, because you're paying to be a beta tester who tests the game before it's released to everyone else.

This doesn't mean beta members must have one week early access for every single update.

But they dont

Can we just come up with a reasonable solution instead of arguing about beta access?