Season 3 beta testing: summary of a decline

Beta testing for season 3 heroes is now closed.
I want to show some numbers of the actual involvement of the beta testers in something that suppose to be really engaging and reason of excitement:

Sumle topic: 6 total posts (5 different testers)

Heimdall topic: 22 total posts (15 different testers)

Tyr topic: 15 total posts (12 different testers)

Fura topic: 7 total posts (7 different testers)

Stonecleave topic: 15 total posts (10 different testers)

Ratatoskr topic: 16 total posts (11 different testers)

Bjorn topic: 9 total posts (4 different testers).

Must add that giving feedback are pretty much always the same people in all these topics.

Knowing how many beta testers there is in this forum, and knowing how it was the feedback 1 year ago is clear to me that something is wrong here.

I think we can summarize it in two points:

First, as in an eloquent post of @Dante2377 from sometime ago in beta, Small Giant is still very unclear on how and what we suppose to test and give feedback when they release a new beta version.

Second, but same important, they keep throwing at us new heroes when it’s obvious that our interest is direct on something else.

I post here because i think is everyone problem and not only a beta testing problem.

Food for our minds.

45 Likes

Can you elaborate? What is everybody interested in?

4 Likes

@Elpis, has efficacy been as issue in the Beta group? I have often worried that the feedback beta testers and non-Beta players give (hero is UP / OP / not balanced, AL costs are unreasonable and don’t work, paywalls, diminishing returns on summons, tournament matching problems, etc.) is essentially ignored.

6 Likes

Add me to beta, I’m happy to give feedback and actually test heroes. Obviously I know you can’t haha but, SG, if you’re listening, I have opinions, even if folks don’t like them all the time :slight_smile:

Oh and on topic, thanks for sharing this, it’s a bit sad that there is so little talk about the new heroes, but interesting none the less.

7 Likes

There’s several features in this game which wasn’t properly adressed by Small Giant and we still hope they get a fix.

Of course Alchemy lab is probably the first coming to my mind, but even Hunter Lodge and costumes are not exactly what we had in mind, and there was a ton of feedback suggesting it.

Obviously Small Giant have to get a profit, but it seems to me (and i’m not alone in this) those content is too much profit-inclined rather then a good balance between utility and cash.

Then we all want Hero Academy.
We really desire it. We need it.
And there’s no reasons other then business to postpone it again in favor of not-knowing-date release content.

Seriously, none.

I see in Hero Academy an opportunity both for us and for them, if build well.
The feeling is that is just a nuisance for Small Giant, or something that still goes in the way of other things for them.

And so we test whatever other they have, no matter how far in time from release.

24 Likes

Right now there are some beta testers (like @Gryphonknight, @DaveCozy, @madmarv, @FraVit93) that provide excelent feedback.

But it’s more like they avoid a complete disaster, keeping a boat gradually sinking go.

Several top players and excellent testers doesn’t simply post anymore, and that’s quite sad.

The reason for me is simple: they do not have any incentive to do so anymore.

What was really enjoyable some time ago is just a showcase right now, so many don’t even bother to give an opinion anymore.

22 Likes

If feedback from beta testers is continually ignored people will stop giving feedback. If issues that beta testers find in new features are not addressed then there’s no reason to even ask for feedback. If SGG only wants to know if there’s bugs in these features then they should be very clear about it. I say this because I’ve done beta testing for other games in the past.

25 Likes

This is an excellent conversation to have

Thanks for gettin it goin @Elpis

Hope things improve

17 Likes

I think it is this. I used to post more frequently in the beta forums when it comes to feedback, but when 9/10 times the feedback, often times multiple times from multiple people, doesn’t APPEAR (the other problem, more later on this) to be considered, it is hard to muster up the time to comment.

Now, I say appear because the staff DOES read our feedback, but we never hear one way or another why/why not (more often why not) it is/isn’t being considered and engage in a discussion with SGG. I suspect those that engage with us here are not the ultimate ‘Oz’ behind the curtain so maybe they don’t even have a view as to why decisions are made.

So when they release new builds we give feedback, rarely something changes in the next build (other than bug fixes), more feedback given, beta closes and the next version is released.

Let’s also be real here - there are also a contingent of beta testers who have NO intention of testing and just want to be ‘heroes’ on Line and other similar services by posting beta cards. You know who you are - you log in when it opens and then never log in again the rest of the time. So obvious and I am surprised SGG doesn’t clean house once in a while.

30 Likes

Has this been steadily declining? Given the time of year, people tend to have their time taken up with other things, so I guess I’m wondering if this is a trend or a seasonal thing.

5 Likes

That’s also true.
From the very first beta, there are who only want material to show in their site/chat/group and never considered to give something in return.

But i do think that Small Giant “don’t clean the house” is because the first target of beta is not testing but advertising.

In that, they are still useful.

What i really hope is that these few numbers can make them reflect on their conduct.

They want us interested, engaged, excited.

I don’t really see all this excitement now.
I’m not excited, to be frank.

4 Likes

Could it be, but i see a trend going on here.
And people at least would give some feedback even without testing.

There’s a general feeling of “who cares? They don’t listen to me the same” in the air.

6 Likes

When there’s no real communication between the company and the beta testers it can feel like you’re wasting your time. I believe that they should actively show more interest in what you all have to say. Let’s face it, beta testing rarely get paid, they provide a valuable free service to the company. It wouldn’t take them long to engage more and let it be known that what you all do is appreciated, even if they disagree with the feedback. Without you all they would need to pay someone to do it or take the time to do it themselves.

7 Likes

Information in general, provided by sgg is very limited.
This is a concern I voiced shortly after joining here (I think about a year and a half ago).
Sad to see this is the same case in bèta but also nothing new.
I remember there was a mistake in a special of a hero that got into live and was mentioned in beta (can’t find the thread right now my Google fu is failing me).
All the comments made on alchemy lab that is not changed and goes live.
Just 2 simple examples that show to me, a non bèta player, that players are voicing concerns but those are not picked up or acted on.

If they just want to see if new buildings, items or hero’s don’t mess up any code and breaks things, then mention that this is the reason why you are in bèta.
Just make clear what the purpose is for bèta, that might help.

6 Likes

I don’t have a horse in this race as I’m not a beta tester. But that being said, just reading through this, it appears communication (and lack thereof) is leading to some of this. It’s one of the things I’ve been vocal about and there does appear to be a shift on SG’s side where they’re starting to realize communication needs to be more frequent.

Hopefully they get their act in gear and start engaging the community as a whole…not the hit/miss stuff they’ve been doing.

We as a community also affect that communication path so…ummm…be a bit nicer in our replies to staff (myself included). Maybe, just maybe, that’ll get future adjustments to things we see need changing…cough cough abomination known as Alchemy Lab cough cough

6 Likes

I set up a post on the beta feedback thread, basically saying that it’d be nice to have some acknowledgement from staff of the discussions for each hero. Doesn’t have to be a back-and-forth, just a simple “thank you” or even a heart :heart: on the posts would be nice.

Considering that we are all doing Beta on our own time… I don’t think that is much to ask as it would help keep us engaged and excited.

20 Likes

Is it possible that beta testing in general is more about quantitative tests (running metrics on their own mechanics and numbers at scale) rather than qualitative feedback (taking the time to listen and adjust based on consensus of testers occasionally)…?

4 Likes

If this is what they are doing it is NOT how it is being presented to the testers. They ask us for specific feedback on each hero.

6 Likes

It was never spoken by Small Giant, but of course there’s an “unofficial” beta testing provided by professional people that probably take care of various stress tests.

This is easily deducible by various bugs/problems fixed that was not finded (and comunicated) in our beta testing.

And of course a multi-millionaire company such is Small Giant now doesn’t risk to leave this kind of work only to us.

Nope, if i have to say, our “feedback” is less about bugs and more about “feelings”.

4 Likes

I see a problem with beta testers. When new heroes are coming to production, almost no comments from beta testers. People are getting new heroes, asking questions but these people who tested them on max, almost not commenting them. Pluses, minuses, are they worth to max etc. Really annoying.

Cookie Settings