[arien]

Betas (open, and closed too, to a degree) these days seem more like, "let's subtly have people try our product for free, get hooked and generate buzz while at it". It's the same as a free trial (although calling it like this has less positive response, it seems). Just another marketing stunt, long gone are the days where beta was used strictly for testing.

On the Web 2.0 environment, who started this? Was it Google with Gmail, or was there something else before?

Also, lately, at least in the MMO scene, going gold doesn't mean that the game is polished and ready for release, it just means that you're ready to charge customers.

[TheCapn]

You're right and you're wrong.

Blizzard DOES use the beta for hype. With SC2 they gave beta keys to preorders to help generate revenue and interest prior to launch. Not a lot of participants actually know the reason for a beta and actually use it as an excuse to play the game early but Blizzard already knows this.

Blizzard's job of releasing a public/invite beta is to test:

A) How the game functions on the boat-load of machine configurations available. When you sign up for beta invite on battle.net you need to create a "profile" of yourself by uploading your PC specs. Blizzard has always provided games that can run on a low end machine with features and graphical tweaks that still allow it to look good on a new machine. For me SC2 had to run on low/medium on my 2 year old laptop but with my new PC it runs on Ultra with great effects!

B) Network stability. B.net2.0 is rather new and they need to test the matching functionality as well as load test the servers for every reason under the sun. Having willing participants allows them to hit all these goals while still generating the hype.

[arien]

Again, it's not just Blizzard I'm talking about. Every single MMO company since a few years ago is going this way.

Network stability is mostly tested on specific moments like stress test weekends or at the end of a beta, when they let everyone in to see how far they can push their hardware.

Of couse this and general behaviour in various hardware configurations need to be tested. But it's not the ultimate point of a beta anymore, at least not in the later stages.

I can see it all the time, players just want to get into a beta to see if they like a game before they pay for it, rather than to help make it better.

[gte910h]

I have tried a Blizzard beta before, they have lots of nice error reporting functionality which I reported several bugs on

I don't know how you expect for them to get good data on what people do to accurately test unless they do a large scale beta to test it

[Darkstar]

While I would normally agree with you, Blizzard games have always had polish. They do continue to balance the game for years afterwards but you rarely find bugs that would make you say it wasn't ready for prime time.

[arien]

WoW had some glaring bugs when it came out. Of course, the start of the game is always better, because it has received a lot more attention (it's crucial to get players hooked in) and because it has received a lot more testing (how many testers are willing to go all the way to max level? Way less than the ones who just check out the first few). Starcraft II was better in that regard.

But I'm not targeting Blizzard specifically, just MMO companies in general. All the releases from the past few years all went the same way.