Something I want to add: I feel like beta testers for a game, that are NDA'd not to share the game should be paid, whereas things like early access, or feedback once a product is released publicly is different. At that point its sort of in the public domain and PDX can take any feedback they want. Private, NDA'd beta testers with access to a product before its been shown to the world is where I think the line should be between enthusiasts and professionals.
@mausklick1635
2 жыл бұрын
Yeah, I think those superfans are just an unpaid QA department.
@anon_234
2 жыл бұрын
I'm a beta tester for HOI3, Victoria 2, and HOI4. On the release of HOI4 we all were gifted a copy based on how many bug reports were filed. People who didn't participate got nothing, and the top reporters got the special edition (cadet?) version. We sometimes also get steam keys for DLC. We are not allowed to post anything that Paradox has not made public, and violating the NDA comes with a fine. The devs do interact with us and take action on our feedback, and we are expected to file bug reports in their internal reporting system so the devs can track closure status. Those of us who stick around after release to test DLC are often active modders who want access to the game devs to answer questions or request modding support. "Superfan" really only applies to the ones that stick around after release. His comment about most betas not doing anything is actually true, most people hop in to check out the game, see it isn't finished, then leave to play something else. Regarding the "Friends" remark, we spend sometimes up to 2 years chatting with the developers and giving feedback before a game release. It's more like coworkers you get along with and enjoy working with. Some of the betas are modders, as I mentioned, and there are cases where Paradox has taken our previous work and placed our mods into the base game. Some of my HOI3 mod's OOB files are in HOI4, for example.
@WmJared
2 жыл бұрын
@@anon_234 everything you said here just increases the case for being paid in accordance with work performed for pre-release testing. The amount of value each filed bug report has pre-release is worth far more than a single game, especially when actionable by PDX. PDX recognizes the worth, but is going with the industry standard of Most Exploitation, when giving pay rubrics and contractor pay would significantly widen the number of people who would be able to beta test AND set clear standards of effort AND probably increase launch date perception.
@Holypikemanz
2 жыл бұрын
I think you are living 10 years in the past where you think modern Paradox gives 2 fs about "feedback".
@QuantusZero
2 жыл бұрын
Once apon a time, in the beginning....all testers were paid. This was before the internet took hold in gaming, before corporate companies (publishers and some developers) saw the uses for the internet. Once it was thought of that a game could be released online and upload permitted for it (connection speeds etc) it was quickly learned that it didn't matter, especially to the publisher that a game was released unfinished because they could just throw updates at the customers (fixes, patches). This of course also meant that i was no longer necessary to release games on CD/DVDs in stores. It was no longer necessary to have paid testers as customers were going to do it for them. They have been laughing at customers for a long time now while they maximise their proifits. It was all about cost saving measures for the developers/publishers, especially publishers, while at the same time charging the customers even more. Of course later they realised they could offer "sales" at certain times through media like Steam, just to make the customer feel like they were getting a bargain once in a while. Before the internet we had quality games released, everything had to be well tested and as close to a perfect working game as possible, it was not easy to offer fixes afterwards. Now gamers buy what they think is a full working game, only to find they have to hang around waiting for updates that "might" fix the issues they are encountering. This will not change, testers won't be paid again unless customers change it, speak with your money and don't have them laugh at you any longer. Don't buy games that aren't complete, fully working and fully tested before sale!
@PotatoMcWhiskey
2 жыл бұрын
They have internal QA who are paid. These are volunteer testers who consider the experience of testing the game to be payment enough. Most people who test these games fart around for an hour or two and never open the beta build back up, you might only get a handful of passionate people in a test group
@RepublicOfPlay
2 жыл бұрын
Wouldn't it be better if they paid them on a contract, like say how a KZitemr does a sponsored video. You offer up a couple hundred dollars on condition you get a complete feedback form. If you get people who don't do it, you don't pay em, and don't invite them back. Why run a beta, to enthusiasts who may just leak the game and may not give feedback. What's the argument **for** keeping it that way?
@PotatoMcWhiskey
2 жыл бұрын
@@RepublicOfPlay It could be better. Could be. I'm speaking from experience being a non-paid early tester for many games over the years. But I think the developers (individual designers artists etc) enjoy the less formal relationship that is had between an extremely passionate playtester and the designer. Its a very rewarding and fun experience or hobby to test games akin to reading a pre-print book and giving your impressions of it. The problem of introducing money into the equation is that you complicate and formalize this relationship, and introduce potentially perverse incentives. By having some of the testers being passionate volunteers you can gather the kind of feedback you might not gather from someone with a financial incentive to test your game. I've had quite friendly relationships with the developers of games I've helped test, and had my changes and thoughts implemented many times
@Joehtosis
2 жыл бұрын
@@PotatoMcWhiskey Perverse incentives like paying bills and eating. Lol
@TheTestyDuck
2 жыл бұрын
@@Joehtosis “sorry kids, no Christmas. Daddy didn’t get into the Victoria 3 beta test” I’m sure no one would be living off of beta tests, it just adds more variations to the relationship that aren’t needed. At that point it’s probably better to get a job lmao (yes there are independent reasons that may prevent the job, yadda yadda. At that point Vicky 3 probably wouldn’t be a concern anyway). It can turn into toxic setups where the company is taking away from the player base
@mausklick1635
2 жыл бұрын
So they can just hire fewer QA people because others are stupid enough to provide free labour.
@sethyboy0
2 жыл бұрын
Interestingly enough I recently was part of a play testing group for a completely unannounced paradox game and was compensated for it with 4 steam keys of my choosing. Half the group didn’t show up so I presume those people didn’t get that. It’s a completely separate process from whatever this beta group is and it also had completely dedicated staff they were paying for that purpose.
@kostasbalaskas5731
2 жыл бұрын
I don't know if you can tellus but how long you think we will wait until it gets announced or released
@originalflow1825
2 жыл бұрын
This game about dark ages?(467-769)
@NefariousKoel
2 жыл бұрын
This was about 12 years ago, but the last closed beta I did for Paradox, the Steam keys were only for the Beta version. They didn't give us the release version when it came out, and the Beta version we were given stopped being updated after a short time. They had announced we'd have to buy the game at full price after release.
@sethyboy0
2 жыл бұрын
Obviously I can’t say anything about the actual game. I also don’t know enough about the game development process to know if/when they’d announce/release it, and even if I did I wouldn’t share that. Sucks to hear, I know, but there’s an NDA plus breaking that trust wouldn’t be cool. Especially if I want to ever do a play test again.
@jaqoobmar714
2 жыл бұрын
@@originalflow1825 no 1836-1901
@JakopDalunde
2 жыл бұрын
I was a beta tester for Victoria 2 and I think there is fundamental misunderstanding of what QA and beta testing is. Being a QA is actual full time work, and is therefore payed. Beta testing is something you do for fun on your spare time, as a hobby. There are no obligations, whatsoever. When I was a beta tester for V2, some in the group seemed to spend quite a lot of time on it and wrote very detailed reports on what happened in their games and what they thought of it. Some in the group seemed to just enjoy to test the game early and gave very basic feedback. I was maybe somewhere in the middle. Sure, I spent a lot of time playing the game - out of pure joy. But not more then maybe an hour per week was spent on the actual feedback. Not a minute of it felt like work, it was part of my hobby. I would never have expected payment and I’d actually pay money to get to do it again.
@olivierrodriguesneto5995
2 жыл бұрын
Hi there, just a stupid question, but how does one can become a QA tester or at least being invited or getting into those closed tests? I'm not asking this to seek for work or an way to make money, I always liked to give my impressions and a bit more technical and constructive feedback, so I wouldn't really care for any kind of reward other than getting my feedback listened.
@ikschrijflangenamen
2 жыл бұрын
Speaking as a beta for various Paradox games (not Imperator) since 2016; being a beta tester is a hobby. Sometimes I don't report anything for months because I am playing the Sims instead. Sometimes I have a very engaged discussion with one or more developers about some obscure historical event, that doesn't end up affecting the game in any way. And sometimes I report piles of bugs in a week because I'm the first one making a mod out of a new feature. As a whole, the beta testers report fewer bugs than internal QA. The best feedback the company gets is always after launch, when the are forty thousand players instead of a few dozen. I would not want to be paid for this because it would effectively promote me to QA, make the obligations stricter and turn my hobby into a job. I do not want a second job. I am happy where I am.
@RepublicOfPlay
2 жыл бұрын
What if it was a contract that said all we ask back is that you fill out the feedback survey by X deadline of the beta. Then, if they got nothing back from people, they wouldnt have to pay, and they probably wouldnt ask them again. Whereas if they did get feedback completed, they pay their small fee, and if they liked it they could choose you again in future.
@ikschrijflangenamen
2 жыл бұрын
@@RepublicOfPlay I understand how it can seem like very bad optics for a person with a very high salary to call his unpaid underlings his friends, but truthfully being a beta is more a social connection than an occupational one. I don't have a boss I need to keep happy, no colleagues depends on me, I can take holidays of many months without warning. I play the game when I want to. Introducing some minor obligation like survey forms, what would that add? The idea seems more a method to eliminate the non-productive betas than anything enhancing the agreement we have now. Being a beta is not as formal as a job, and that's why I consider it a fun way to spend my free time. And if you have signed NDA's before you know there's a clause where they state for exactly how much Paradox can sue any intentional leaker. Whoever did this got themselves in serious legal trouble. I don't see what a contract or small monthly salary would have changed here.
@bzoner16
2 жыл бұрын
@@RepublicOfPlay That sounds like an easy way for people to game the system. Play the game as much as they want, write up the bare minimum that helps nobody, get paid, and peace out. You'd quickly see Beta testing get even more closed off and essentially turned into freelance QA, which has a different mentality. The thing with a beta is that it's typically feature complete enough to potentially be its own game, just missing some tweaking and assets. You're getting free access to a game with no strings attached. You can play it for 30 minutes, get bored and quit (complaining optional), or you can play it for 200 hours and write a massive critique essay, or anything in between. I've done beta testing for a couple games, but only because A) I find it fun and B) because I care about the games enough to want to talk about them ahead of time in the hopes that it might make it more fun later. I don't expect payment because there's no expectations on me, which means I can have as much or as little fun with it as possible, and then yammer on the forums or reddit as much or more than I put into official feedback channels. The difference between Beta testing and QA doesn't isn't just the expectation of feedback, but the expectation of a complete testing regimen, hours put in regardless of fun, and professional bug reports. QA needs to spend their eight hours actually testing in the engineering sense, usually not really "playing" the game. Some people might find that fun, but usually its a lot of busywork and checking boxes on a sheet. A beta tester can just do something else if they're not enjoying themselves, and even if they do, they don't have to give good feedback, or feedback at all. To think of it another way, would you expect get paid for all the bug reports and feedback you put in *after* the game has launched and you bought it for full price? There's not a game in existence where there weren't bugs to fix and things that people wanted changed after launch. You're doing the exact same things, potentially contributing about the same amount with the same lack of expectations. Only in that case, the devs haven't given you it for free, you paid them *upfront*.
@makaramuss
2 жыл бұрын
@@sriharshagolla2054 you can compare feedbacks to each other and then cal that guy filled half assed survey and ask: "Hello Josh , wanted to ask someting if you got time... in your survey you said you focused on naval combat of game and played 10 hours and didn't encounter any bug... according every single other feedback there is a gamebreaking bug that happens if you go to naval combat with britain.... even if you are the britain. Would you like to tell us how you missed that one?" its easy to catch inconsistent feedback... moment you write someting random there is high chance of game dev realizing you didn't do your work.
@makaramuss
2 жыл бұрын
@@bzoner16 a lot of workers do this today yet people that work hard usually gets promotion. As example if you work hard paradox might come to you and say "hey you allways work hard you got thousand hours of gameplay at our beta tests and give us very nice feedback. We would like you to put you in charge of beta tests. You will decide who gets beta and also you got right to read beta feedbacks and put your own weight on them and everything else other than having access to tests itself for extra sum of income if you are interested. a lot of workers go to work, do absolute minimum, spend most of their time on twitter using company's internet and then leave :D
@NefariousKoel
2 жыл бұрын
I closed-beta tested numerous games from the early 2000s into early 10's. Including one Paradox game, CK2. The only big complaint I had was the changing trend of not giving active testers the game for free after release. Early on, the dev/publisher would give you the game for free but it eventually turned to providing a small discount or nothing at all. The last closed beta I did was for CK2 because they flat-out announced, partway through, that the final product wouldn't be given to the testers. Looked into some other betas after that but they offered, at best, a small discount. I decided it wasn't worth the time finding bugs and offering feedback when I could just wait a few months after release and get it on an even bigger discount sale. Especially when there are so many other games available which currently work as intended. That said, I don't think they need to pay volunteer testers. Because they volunteered to do it. If everyone decided they weren't getting out of it what they wanted, for their efforts, and decided to quit volunteering then the developers would have to start making reimbursement offers again, or risk putting out a bad buggy product. Until they lack volunteers, the current standard will continue. It's just a question of Supply & Demand, as with many things.
@qasemsoleimani9443
2 жыл бұрын
Jesus, they don't even give the game for free. That's outright exploitation actually.
@NefariousKoel
2 жыл бұрын
@@qasemsoleimani9443 - Don't think I'd personally call it exploitation, but not providing the end product for the efforts given probably isn't helping them get a large enough pool of dedicated volunteer testers. I mean.. I quit doing it after that trend began so I can only imagine I wasn't the only one to stop doing it. In every tester group there were only a small percentage of people who would put a lot of time into it. Smaller group would mean fewer dedicated testers. The devs/publishers get out what they put in. Nowadays, with higher internet speeds and distribution platforms making it easy, many devs just patch as they go, even after official release.. The customer ends up doing part of that testing after release because of it.
@Joostmhw
2 жыл бұрын
If you do a job you should be rewarded for it, that simple. When you take time out of your day to like you said play an unfinished project for the benefit of the creator and that creator is not just asking a close buddy but has multiple other people do the same. Then they should be paid, that is a business, this is unpaid labour. The arguments used for the defense of this practice are literally the same used back when slavery was a thing. Ow this black man isn't my slave, he is my friend...who does work for no compensation and my benefit. It's exploitation whether you want to see it or not. It just is.
@iopohable
2 жыл бұрын
ca should be paying everyone that owns total warhammer3
@RepublicOfPlay
2 жыл бұрын
Easy enough, nobody is playing it lol
@ForgottenArmy1944
2 жыл бұрын
It is a bit of a weird one. Paying beta testers without requiring anything in return is odd. Perhaps require written feedback in exchange for payment? But then is that feedback any good, or just someone wanting to get paid? I dunno. Maybe give em $200 and make feedback voluntary? It's a weird question. I don't think it's exploitative, I disagree with Len on that. It's possible to have a reasonable opinion on either side. But I guess they should be paid
@Softload3r
2 жыл бұрын
Can't just both sides sign a workers contract for the time being? You test game XYZ in return for delivered results you will get paid XX.XX amount? Or is this way too complicated? AFAIK there are a lot of temporary jobs around that only last for 3-4 months or maybe 6, but I don't know how long such a beta test lasts.
@emmish64
2 жыл бұрын
@@Softload3r the problem is that currently beta testers have no real obligation to actually test the game, making it a paid contract position would require way more vetting and way more responsibility on everyone's part. Beta testers currently also don't need actual QA experience to be a part of the test and actual QA positions are much much more involved when it comes to the writing of reports and some knowledge of how the game engine works to further help dev teams.
@Joostmhw
2 жыл бұрын
If you put time into something you should be paid for it, that's how businesses work unless it's slavery. The excuses used are the same used by slave holders a few hundred years ago. Especially the they are my friends line is eerily similar. It's absolutely disgusting how this is normalized. Just because you don't find something doesn't mean you didn't spend time you can now not spend on other ways of getting food
@MrHellknightimp
2 жыл бұрын
I think for me it would depend on if the feedback was required to retain access to the Game. Requirement, IE some from of work outside of just playing the game = get paid.
@XXveny
2 жыл бұрын
Pretty much this. If you dictate, you need to pay. If player can do whatever he/she wants (like open beta with voluntary bug report), unpaid is perfectly fine.
@CybranM
2 жыл бұрын
Its a tough one, I was part of the MCC beta "flights" and I gave a bit of feedback but for the most part just played the game early, do I feel like I should have been paid for it? Not really, I barely did anything other than install the game and play a few matches. I sort of agree with Arheo, if the company doesnt expect to receive feedback from each and every beta tester then would they only pay the ones that give feedback? Would they require the testers to play at least X amount of hours or give X amount of feedback? Would they just give people a cash sum without any requirements? If the testers were paid would that incentivise giving mostly positive feedback? "I got paid to play this and want to try their other games so I probably shouldnt be too negative" etc. Regarding the "they helped make the game better so they should be paid", imho its one thing to say something should work in a different way but its totally different to actually work on the game and make the feature work. Theres a reason why people mock all the internet "idea guys" that have great ideas and just need artists, programmers and funding to make the game (not that Id consider the beta testers to be "idea guys", its just an example) I dont know whats the right way to do it is but imho if the testers give feedback they should be given the game after release, thats the least Paradox could do and would at least incentivise the testers to help make the game better.
@utmbunderground
2 жыл бұрын
You don't understand (and perhaps Paradox doesn't either) the benefit of getting feedback that is not tied to any real expectation of return. If you contractually require feedback, then you will get feedback, be it positive or negative; however, you do not get a sense of how intense these feelings are since people always respond when they are paid and obligated to do so. If you give say 100 people early access and let's say you get 10 responses with 8 saying that the game is "unbalanced" or whatever, then you know that only 10% felt strongly enough about the game to respond at all (which is actually really valuable feedback in and of itself), and of those that did feel strongly enough to respond, X% felt it was unbalanced. Compare this to if you require feedback -- with the same ratio, you would get 80% of people saying its unbalanced, which would give you false sense of how "extreme" the problem is. The point being that "No Feedback" is actually good feedback. In the above example, Paradox might spend the remainder of its time on rebalancing when it might should have improved the overall experience since 90% of people would have found it too underwhelming to leave feedback at all. Paid feedback is also artificially high/favorable, which can give you a false sense of security during production. I suspect this is why Paradox is always blindsided by how negative the recent reviews have been -- as I doubt their internal QA testers are 1) Good at Gaming but also 2) Being Brutally Honest with Them for fear (fear not necessarily being reality) of retaliation. As a free tester, I wouldn't really care if Paradox is offended by what I say. The worse case scenario is that I wait like everyone else does next time, but my livelihood and professional reputation isn't on the line.
@autumnson
2 жыл бұрын
I'll be honest, I think we overvalue how useful average feedbacks usually are. The difference between an open beta and a team of QA is that the former's bug reports / feedbacks will usually be harder to decrypt, not detailed enough or won't contain the steps to reproduce it. Whereas QA will create issue reports and give feedbacks that will be a lot more actionable. The same way, once you have received feedbacks about something, it's usually harder to find a fix and implement it than simply noticing where the issue was to begin with.
@tjhc2397
2 жыл бұрын
It is like the people from Paradox are saying: from their QA they expect feedback, they must sit there 8h a day (or whatever the arrangement is), play the game and provide feedback. They are, so to say, the paid beta testers. If a game company forced its beta testers to play the game and give feedback, I would expect them to pay the testers. Keep in mind, that most people are not creators who's business is built on playing games, but for us it is a past time. If a restaurant handed out free food because they are trying a new recipe, you wouldn't expect them to pay you for eating it, unless you are a food influencer.
@anduin1
2 жыл бұрын
The industry has gone the opposite way in the past decade where you as a player are the beta testers but you get the benefit of paying for it. The whole patching cycle has made underdeveloped games being put out there in higher numbers. I was a tester at Bioware and I was paid for it (worked on the first Mass Effect) but it was not only hard to get that job but it was minimum wage. It was tedious work too and I'm sure the same can be said for Paradox titles.
@Lancor84
2 жыл бұрын
I think you missed two things about this. 1. We don't know know if they have paid beta testers next to the unpaid beta testers. 2. Every feedback is valuable and paid feedback is different from unpaid. Different motivations change things. Recalling some wise words from good old Totalbiscuit: All kind of feedback is different and matters. Back then he spoke more about gaming journalists: Wheny ou are interested in a game and see a review about it, you should always keep in mind the person that wrote the review. Is he/she getting paid for it? Does he/she do this for a living? Does he/she like these kind of games? etc. If you only employ paid beta testers, then you will get different results as if you have unpaid "superfans" as they call it. A paid betatester might have the obligation to write stuff, so it feels forced and he might even make things up just to get the money for free basically. Unpaid beta testers will sometimes don't give feedback or their feedback might be janky, but when they give feedback it usually comes from motivation to make the game better.
@Volound
2 жыл бұрын
"Exploitation of Free and Immaterial Labor: Currently, and probably even more in the future, the video game user's free and immaterial labor is being exploited on both an explicit and implicit level in multiple ways. Not only the use and exploitation of what is known as user-generated content in an increasing amount of video games, but also the literal exploitation of users free and immaterial labor to save money on the costly process of thoroughly testing games before their release. Both of these processes of free and immaterial labor are intrinsically related to the concept and implementation of the DLC model. As such, this video game industry trend rises at a time when the exploitation of the video game user reaches an all time high through the confluence of commodification and free labor. First, a definition of what constitutes free labor and immaterial labor in a political economic sense will obviously be helpful for this analysis. Free labor is a relatively easy concept to explain, as it is simply labor for which no payment is given. This is, however, separate from the concept of surplus value, which refers to the time labored after which a worker has produced enough value for their employer to pay for their days' wage (Marx 1978, 357). Free labor on the other hand refers to production where no monetary compensation is rendered whatsoever. Free labor differs slightly as well from the classic definition of immaterial labor, which has been defined as labor that "produces the informational and cultural content of the commodity" (Lazzarato 1996, 133). Immaterial labor refers mainly to that which does not have a material basis, also described as information as a commodity. Categories include "audiovisual production, advertising, fashion, the production of software, photography, cultural activities, and so forth", and most significant this concept forces "us to question the classic definitions of work and workforce" (Lazzarato 1996, 136). Looking at these two definitions, does immaterial labor correspond directly to free labor? Certainly not as one is inherently free and the other only tends to be so, but the two are often found together, especially when it comes to the production of value that users generate for the video game industry." "The second way in which game companies are using the free and immaterial labor of their consumers through DLC is in the implicit game testing that occurs in the first few weeks of a game's release. Before video game consoles were connected to the Internet with enough storage, a game needed to be thoroughly tested to the point of exhaustion as any kind of major error would be unable to be fixed in the copies shipped to stores. These overworked game testers might not be the highest paid employees at a video game developer, but this process can still be time-consuming and expensive. This overwork culture was shown jokingly in the popular film Grandma's Boy (2006) and explained thoroughly in the 2009 Dyer-Witheford and de Peuter book Games of Empire, which contained a chapter dedicated to "A Workers' History of Videogaming." What the DLC model provided to change this dynamic is that games can now be shipped with less testing and more critical playing issues that can simply be fixed by sending users what is known as a "patch," or a digital fix to the problem on the physical disc. Significantly, many times the problem is not discovered in a game until after the release when users devote their free and immaterial labor to discover the issues and complain about them to the company. Again, downloading the patch is free to users and they are usually quite effective at fixing most gaming issues, but the exploitation damage is done, as video game consumers have become implicit employees slowly replacing the previously more stringent, and expensive, testing process." - Lizardi: DLC: Perpetual Commodification of the Video Game there are even people in this comment section they "would pay to do it again". imagine people test driving cars for ford or vauxhall and paying to do it, as opposed to the reality - the complete opposite.
@ilaias_
2 жыл бұрын
I totally agree with you on this one, even more because I believe beta testing is unpaid labor and it's sad that's the industry standard
@sanserof7
2 жыл бұрын
There are interal testers who are being paid, beta testing by the public is just a way to gather feedback just like any software company does.
@ilaias_
2 жыл бұрын
@@sanserof7 except it's not by the public. check pinned comment, very good point
@ares106
2 жыл бұрын
Regarding the beta testers that work for free. I think it’s a supply and demand dynamic. So many paradox super fans really really want to play the game early and give feedback. So just by virtue of the demand for early access, Paradox holds all the cards in this relationship.
@lps2013
2 жыл бұрын
True, but that doesn't mean its a good thing.
@SNWWRNNG
2 жыл бұрын
Paying people (and expecting a certain amount of feedback in return) might easily lead to testers writing more or more positiviely than they otherwise would - for the money, and not because they feel strongly about an issue. If you want honest opinions, you don't ask people who are benefitting from having a good relationship with you. And if the beta testers volunteer to do this unpaid in their free time without being pressured into doing anything beyond playing, and they seem to think that it's worth their time to test the game, they're not being exploited as far as I'm concerned. There can be hired, professional testers and volunteer beta testers from among the fanbase, but trying to mix the two doesn't seem like a good idea to me.
@utmbunderground
2 жыл бұрын
What prevents shit games is vision. What has caused paradox games to take a tumble is lack of vision...and lack of bug testing.
@QuantusZero
2 жыл бұрын
If you buy a brand spanking new car from a dealer showroom and very soon find out it has many faults you contact the dealer you bought it from and the dealer says: that's ok, the manufacturer will try to fix the faults for you over time. would you keep the car? That's just what gamers do with games, keeping the games and wait for fixes. Not only that but some attempt to find the faults themselves, faults that shouldn't be there.
@SomeGuy-sd4kp
2 жыл бұрын
No, they should not be paid. Participation is entirely voluntary and its a give and take. Play the game early and (theoretically) make it better by providing feedback. There are paid QA testers in every company and they have to test the game 8 hours or more each day and get tracked. They earn their pay. People who occasionally play the game and give some feedback do not.
@Azu512
2 жыл бұрын
I think paying beta testers who have gave enough feed back (or simply number of bugs found depending on the criticalness of it) by giving the game for free when it is launched would be the best way.
@Lord_Lambert
2 жыл бұрын
Legend warned CA before the games release that there was problems with and it was ignored. While I do agree beta testers should be paid, they also should actually be listened to as well. What Arheo said was very telling... "many of them dont do much or anything" maybe they do do much, but are ignored.
@RepublicOfPlay
2 жыл бұрын
To be fair Legend warned them a month before of a mechanic fundamental to the game's campaign. It might have been a nice warning for them, but by that stage there's very little actionable feedback, really a beta at that stage is to find bugs I think, and he was sent the game to review it / make content, not necessarily for feedback. Victoria doesn't even have a release date, nor does it have any official gameplay out yet, just screenshots, so I think its so early that feedback is probably more actionable. But yeah, its strange... why run the beta if they don't do much... seems odd to me. Maybe its just incase everyone has a HORRID reaction, and then they would change something.
@Lord_Lambert
2 жыл бұрын
@@RepublicOfPlay I mean, the fix they ended up implementing with 1.1 was something that they should have done before the game came out based on that feedback, and Legend was not the only one to mention the arseness that is the chaos realms. Literally just having the building stop the spawn of the rifts, and the ability to prevent other lords from completing the rift doo-dad would have been enough and 1 month is plenty of time for that
@qasemsoleimani9443
2 жыл бұрын
@@RepublicOfPlay Legend is also not a beta-tester. As far as I know, beta-testers receive the game considerably earlier than content creators.
@Scottx125Productions
2 жыл бұрын
Yes, people do product surveys IRL and get paid for it. So definitely.
@caementicium284
2 жыл бұрын
Simply put, the best opinion that can be established on the subject relies on observing it as part of many issues. If everything else was equal, a company not paying some of its beta testers doesn't stand out as that bad. There aren't many of them, they volunteer their own time and they're likely quite excited to participate. They certainly could still stand to be paid but let's say one sin isn't that bad. But you have to look at broader industry practices. When we're seeing things like content creators providing incredible amounts of advertising for "free", when we're seeing games still shipping broken, and when we're seeing beta testers employed without compensation: Then you have a clearer picture. All of these issues at the very least bump elbows with one another, and the primary connection is that companies are saving considerable amounts of money. But this extra money isn't put towards good, functional games, it's clearly going somewhere else. That's the problem. If a company CAN'T pay you for beta testing but you're still excited to participate, have at it. But with companies like Paradox and CA we're talking about companies which certainly have the budget to pay beta testers, so when they won't it just stinks from a mile away.
@wesleyh7945
2 жыл бұрын
They could maybe give a performance-based compensation. This separates the superfan who just wants to play the game early, from the person who is actively involved and giving actionable, not-too-opinionated feedback. The latter can get a reward ranging from a free key upon launch, to a small paycheck. IIRC paradox does actually give you some keys for having participated, just not for any unreleased products.
@ICouldntThink0faName
2 жыл бұрын
Not being paid for your labour or time is exploitation and is never okay. Very interesting that Paradox, a Swedish corporation in Sweden, where there are extremely prominent unions and labour laws, would have the guts to pull something like this. The unpaid beta testers (sounds like QA to me) could put Paradox in some very rough waters if they took legal action. NDAs never apply when there is anything illegal involved.
@davidmurray3542
2 жыл бұрын
It really depends on what's expected of the testers, and the lack of pay actually undermines the case for it being employment. Ultimately if capable adults are willing to do something for free then it's difficult to argue that it's exploitative. Perhaps early access to the game could be considered payment, but again it depends on what is demanded of the testers in exchange for that access and whether that access can be considered as having meaningful value. An NDA is something that is often signed by parties that don't have a direct relationship (between companies and industry journalists, for example), so I don't know if that would be strong evidence of an exploitative relationship either.
@StrategyJoe
2 жыл бұрын
I think this person is completely misreading the situation by assuming the leak happens because beta testers are unpaid. The company has QA paid play tester and as far as I know do not ask anything to community beta testers but they accept feedback. We do not even know who leaked the game or why but seeing the feedback everywhere I don't think it will be so negative in the end for paradox, I think since HoI4 they have been building games for close knitted communities and it fails to deliver once it hit the public. HoI4, Stellaris, Imperator, Battletech, Empires of Sins, CK3 all had degrees of failures with Imperator being the most ominous example. At least now most dedicated and interested players can find and play the game and offer feedback no matter how positive or negative.
@Belkak021
2 жыл бұрын
Yeah, actually. Do we know it was an unpaid beta tester or is it just another game journalist making stuff up to make a statement?
@gamelandmaster3680
2 жыл бұрын
I have a friend who works at the only zoo near me and him. He volunteers his time to the zoo and doesn't get paid. He does however get a bonus for free tickets, discounts, etc. Why do I mention this? Because I get the impression from this video that you are thinking about how the company benefits, but really this is about whether or not the testers are getting enough for their time used. I have been debating for some time now whether to donate time (for lack of a better word) to test a game, and I know that you have. Surely though, CA and PDX do things differently, just like a store gives things differently to their employees. Someone commented that after they playtested a game they got steam keys, and others have said that they got the game they tested for free or at an insane discount. Clearly, these people decided that they would playtest, and with this, I agree with the directors, do I think testers should be paid? The answer is more complex than yes or no, but if the rewards for testing are less than the cost in time and effort then give them money, if not, then don't. Where they draw the line should really be up to the employer/company and not the labourer. I do believe, though, that if there isn't some kind of contract or paperwork showing the rewards, then they should, after all, this still is work and it should be treated as such.
@Nebelkorona
2 жыл бұрын
As usual, you are absolutely right. Maximizing profits by outsourcing beta testing to unpaid volunteers is exactly the kind of prestige abuse that's running rampant in game industry. Professional commercial work requires a professional commercial contract. Simple as that. It is however important to note, that nowadays companies mostly treat betas as an PR move for bug testing, while they don't really care for feedback.
@ben5056
2 жыл бұрын
They should definitely be compensated if they provide feedback. At a minimum give them the game at release.
@Lancor84
2 жыл бұрын
But what if they just make up their feedback and never touch the game? Or even write the wrong feedback because they want to hurt the game or devs?
@ben5056
2 жыл бұрын
@@Lancor84 then they lose their “job” and are blacklisted. Same as any job really
@lavabeard5939
2 жыл бұрын
"hopefully this is a learning moment!" paradox devs: "lol, no it isn't, and I bet u havent beta tested any of our games"
@tiredidealist
2 жыл бұрын
EU4 players paid Paradox to beta test Leviathan when it was released. :^)
@WortWortWortHog
2 жыл бұрын
I don't think paying them ensures in any way that stuff won't get leaked. I do, however, believe they deserve to be paid.
@erez87xp
2 жыл бұрын
I think there should be paid testers and fun testers and those are different groups.
@c.s.1421
2 жыл бұрын
I agree with your added comment. Beta testers that are grouped behind closed doors with NDA should be paid. The reason is the company is testing the product under stress (Stress test) by taking a subset of the population to make sure the product worked as intended. The reason why they should be paid is because the product has not been released to the public. You can delay the product through your beta testers as they will tell you if the product works as intended or breaks down. This can save a product ( an investment) for substantial amounts of profit. Quality assurance (QA) is extremely valuable to ensure profits for the company, is that not what an employee does? The companies seem to have a misconception on this. This is another version of field testing a product in actual environments rather than theoretical ones. QA is so valued that for physical products (games used to be physical) companies are willing to pay millions as this is a preventative measure to stop lawsuits and loss of revenue. Car companies, chemical companies, household product companies and etc. do QA with no exception. Game companies are no exceptions. They want to make money, than you need to invest in the people making the product better otherwise they will not do it or you get subpar feedback. Beta testers can make the argument of being exploited on this.
@bendkok
2 жыл бұрын
Seems a bit exploitative to me. It's work, and I believe you should be compensated for any work you do. Though I don't think the payment has to be that large, just getting the game for free or a big discount would probably be enough.
@TheArtie204
2 жыл бұрын
I presume it would be hard to evaluate and pay for such feedback in a fair way. If you employ a QA, you more or less control how many hours (effort etc) goes into testing. You know who you work with and what to expect. If you hire a group of freelancers to play a game for a bit and then complete a survey or sth, I imagine you encounter a wide spectrum of effort and value created through such feedback. Some can be very passionate, some can just treat it as easy money. That being said, small fee would probably be a really non-material cost for a company like PDX. Even if some of it is wasted on effort-less people, you could potentially get a lot more value through others, that are incentivised this way. When companies ask for feedback for free, it is not like they do you expect anything in return. But they also do not require anything and do not evaluate, weather the person did enough to fulfil the contract (=be paid). In a way it could be seen as a win-win, but perhaps it is also a lot less effective, than paid beta tests.
@Noremac023
2 жыл бұрын
I think feedback has commercial value for the game company and so those that provide it under NDAs should be recompensed in some way beyond “getting to play a game early”. It seems more like exploiting the willingness of superfans to do their work for them.
@Charlesbn88
2 жыл бұрын
A great metric, if I have to sign an NDA it would make sense to get compensated at the very least to follow the NDA.
@stefchemacrae5540
2 жыл бұрын
As far as I can tell, beta testers volunteer to do testing because they enjoy the game, like the developers, and enjoy having some input into the development process. They don’t ask for payment because they find this process enjoyable and rewarding. Some even actively don’t want to get paid because that would turn something casual and fun into work. Developers seem to genuinely appreciate and enjoy engagement with their fans, and find the process valuable because it gives them feedback from outside the company and from within the target audience of the game. They accept that testers will have widely variant levels of engagement with the process - the casual nature of the arrangement means that developers and testers alike are free to submit whatever level of feedback they are feel like without formal obligations and expectations. The disagreement about this hence seems to stem from an external misunderstanding surrounding what the relationship is, and what each party is looking to gain from the engagement. Beta testers don’t want to be paid mini-QA. They are happy to volunteer because like most volunteering, the reward they want comes from the process rather than payment.
@Bolteus
2 жыл бұрын
Personally I would rather devs did more unpaid betas than fewer because they can't afford it or don't want to fork out. I think it's fair to pay in something other than money. The lack of obligation to work means nothing is expected. I don't think an NDA means you ought to pay either. I could ask you sign an NDA before letting you into my house because I don't want you exposing my unhealthy NSDAP memorabilia obsession, and it's simply up to you whether to sign it. Now, maybe you could have some kind of bounty system that rewards specific actions, but honestly... we live in the age of early access, where people PAY to beta test so I don't know why they would.
@Alex-if1nf
2 жыл бұрын
I’ve been involved with such programmes, and most feedback (if they even gave any) was either incredibly vague or useless (disagreeing with a colour because it was ‘girly’). Why pay those people?
@RepublicOfPlay
2 жыл бұрын
The idea would be that if you paid, the quality of feedback would be better. If you got vague, useless feedback, then you dont invite them back. If you got none, then you dont pay.
@BigmanDogs
2 жыл бұрын
@@RepublicOfPlay But then you would complain that they arbitrarily decide that X feedback isnt valuable so that they dont have to pay the person.
@RepublicOfPlay
2 жыл бұрын
@@BigmanDogs nope, only if you got no feedback do you not pay. If you get minimal, useless feedback, pay, but dont invite back. This way you end up with a betas and alphas that recurringly give useful feedback. You’ll always get some each round that doesnt.
@BigmanDogs
2 жыл бұрын
@@RepublicOfPlay Okay yeah I got you now I think I misread. Regardless, my personal view is that they should only get paid if they are contracted to do it as a job for a set amount of hours and given specific tasks to fulfill. AKA a professional game tester and not just a random person who signed up for a beta and provides feedback if they want to. Getting beta access to a game is not the same as being a professional game tester. I also think that this logic you present can be used to argue that for example die hard football fans should be paid a wage by the club as they do in fact provide a material net benefit to the club. This logic follows the general trend of capitalism getting worse and worse to the point that the notion of a "hobby" is removed and everything becomes labour. Kpop stans should be paid too they literally dedicate their entire free time to obsessing about and promoting their favorite groups.
@Alex-if1nf
2 жыл бұрын
@@RepublicOfPlay They already pay QA testers.
@LaFonteCheVi
2 жыл бұрын
Paying beta testers isn't financially sustainable. If you are paying them, they are essentially Q&A, not beta testers and entirely defeats the purpose of a beta, which is to broaden the scope beyond team limitations to the general public. If you start paying testers, now you are going to be going from dozens/hundreds/thousands of testers, to just a handful. The entire purpose of a open/closed beta is to give access to people to let them play and hear their feedback, if any. Regular people. People with no financial motivation. That's it. It isn't a job. Do you expect the thousands/millions of players to take part in open betas to get checks in the mail? No. Closed beta is no different, it is just a smaller group.
@josephcourtright8071
2 жыл бұрын
The market does not demand that testers get paid. They are rewarded with the ability to play a game they've been eager for and an inside look at production.
@Blxz
2 жыл бұрын
I've b-tested for a number of games under an NDA and the concept of being paid money for it is ridiculous. I go out of my way to offer in-depth feedback and occasionally pages of summaries which is more than most. But I don't do the design heavy lifting nor any of that stuff. It's outside my 'job' description. The fact is, testers get paid in-kind. If they do not believe it is worth what they are receiving then they are completely free to duck out and quit their role. They get full access with no reciprocal requirements other than "give us your opinion if you get the chance".
@Steven-cf1ty
2 жыл бұрын
I saw a paradox forum post and under it the forum mods were just making fun of people who think beta testers should be paid. Whatever you think about unpaid beta testers, it's just pathetic that these are the people who represent paradox and manage the forums.
@dinoj2082
2 жыл бұрын
I've had the opportunity to beta test software (not games) and never did it because I didn't have the time to devote to it. It never occurred to me that such a role would be unpaid. I have been in groups who watch a television show in development and have gotten lunch and a small stipend, like $50 for the hour I spend watching, filling out a survey and answering some questions. If a television producer can pay for feedback, why shouldn't a game company or any software developer? After all, they all do the same thing, produce an entertainment product.
@nonebusiness2023
2 жыл бұрын
If leak is good game sales will skyrocket. If the game is bad they will get hurt. If what I've heard is half true this may be a beta tester trying to save it
@WuCSquad
2 жыл бұрын
For a company the size of Paradox; yes.
@Breakfast_of_Champions
2 жыл бұрын
They're really suffering under mismanagement though, doesn't look good for them.
@ragjr992
2 жыл бұрын
I think beta testers should be paid. you expect them to find bugs and exploits. Payment could be commission for bugs and exploits found and reported and you can give them idk 1000 or something for their time in doing it all under contract until the game is released or the NDA is dropped. ya sure you're losing revenue but it gives them a incentive to find tbose bugs, exploits and imbalances making it a much more polished game on release or day 1 patch edit: to clarify not a $1000 each bug but a upfront payment of $1000 and after that $50 for each bug, exploit or imbalance found and reported. (money values arent real numbers)
@sanserof7
2 жыл бұрын
So you get $1000 AND a chance to play a game you have been looking forward to months before release? Sign me up
@Imperium83
2 жыл бұрын
That's QA, not beta testing.
@STaRgaTeBG
2 жыл бұрын
IMO as long as it's this early in the development and it's till under heavy NDA it should be done by paid testers. When you reach the state when the game is a bit closer to release and/or public alphas beta test then it's fine, even if they are closed/invites only.
@shinobu2394
2 жыл бұрын
in the case for this game tbh considering who the person first leaked footage to before he/she outright leaked the game, it probably woudnt matter if said individual was a paid tester or not, most likely it was a disgruntled fan tester who is upset with the direction theyre taking the game and probably would have leaked it either way, at least thats how i feel this was in this particular case
@alexbog86
2 жыл бұрын
Over the years I took part in a few closed betas, most recent one was for Humankind. What annoyed me the most over there was the expectations of a written feedback and the questioner, which if you actually put the effort took quite some time I see quite a difference between simply trying out a new game of a franchise I like and the company collects some metrics (which I couldn't care less what they are) in the background. Or actually being expected, or even required, a written feedback. First, because that's a chore, and that's the moment you become an actual QA over someone enjoying a game before anyone else. If you want to put any kind of incentive on it is at least getting the game fore free.
@marblepony3772
2 жыл бұрын
the game crashes when you run the time in full speed
@nonebusiness2023
2 жыл бұрын
They're correct I've beta tested several of their games and given very little feedback I've given feedback but it's been very small amounts mainly around bugs and issues. I agree with the debts on this one
@thomasclements
2 жыл бұрын
the simple fact is that testers are rendering a service. you would pay a test pilot or a test driver. just becuase beta testers enjoy playing the game, if you don't pay them you are taking advantage of them.
@Nitroaereus
2 жыл бұрын
I think if companies were having trouble finding people to beta test their games for free, they would start paying people. Getting to play a game you're really interested in before anyone else does and have input on its development is more than sufficient for most people. It's not like you're paying for the beta version of the game when you're tester. It's a free (and exclusive) game, even if it is in a very rough early state.
@LordTyrion
2 жыл бұрын
I was originally recruited as a beta tester by Paradox for HoI4. I've played it on and off for more than half a year before release, made some reports when I bumped into bugs. The game was obviously still half baked, the tactical AI was basically non-existent but still I had a blast, especially the few times we did multiplayer games. Meanwhile I had a full-time job and a life which meant that there were weeks when I did not even touch the game. Yet later on I was given access to other projects too, meaning Paradox was probably satisfied my little crumbs of contribution. Now I'm no longer a beta cause I have children, etc but I think this is a perfectly fair contract between developer and tester.
@mykneegrows4sail366
2 жыл бұрын
Passionate gamers don't wanna get paid for beta testing because it's a privilege. Anyone who wants to be paid is a poser and would be a horrible beta tester.
@BigmanDogs
2 жыл бұрын
I don't think they should be paid if they are not held to a standard. Working X amount of hours dictated by an employee and specifically to find bugs as opposed to play for fun.
@Mykandera
2 жыл бұрын
Companies expecting valuable feedback from a beta tester should be paying for that service. You also need to do stress testing across a wide variety of hardware configurations and players doing random things people doing it for a job aren't going to think of or replicate naturally. And generally for that second group you just need a crash log and a short description of what they were doing when it crashed, not a detailed bug report. Trying to pay everyone you'd need in that second group would be incredibly costly and not really feasible. At best you could do something like a small bounty for finding a problem, but then you run into the age old problem of exploiting that kind of system and it would require a lot of resources to more thorough vet every single bug report.
@davidmurray3542
2 жыл бұрын
The thing is, companies have internal QA departments for the former and those should effectively be doing the hard work digging into crash reports provided by the latter: I don't know if detailed investigations are typically what they want or need from unpaid beta testers. There's evidently room for abuse, but I think the "above and beyond" approach to reports is often a choice that enthusiastic testers make rather than an expectation placed on them by the developer.
@noahprussia7622
2 жыл бұрын
If they don't expect anything from betas, then why are they upset that it was leaked? The fact they argue its an "industry standard" should be enough to dismiss their claims that its totally okay. Its up to them to do what is good, not what is normal. It was okay and standard to pay people pennies or less. It was standard to have your entire life managed by your boss. The Jungle depicts standard procedure, and it induced an entire movement for food and drug safety. Its even worse that they try to argue that Leana hasn't been in any of their beta tests and thus "doesn't get it". I think Leana, a reporter on this, somebody who's entire job is about this, "gets it" a lot better than they do. Its discomforting to know people like Dan and Arheo are the ones making decisions. Personally, I'm of the mind that beta testers should be paid, precisely because its about improving the game. It isn't about letting some small group of people "enjoy" the game. If it was, then they ought to release the game as it is right now, for free. The way to go about it: maybe have it so any substantial feedback is paid alongside a small amount for playing the game at all. So you play for 20 hours or so, you're expected to provide a rating of enjoyment or other small issues that they asked you to look out for, and thats $150 or more. If you provide a list of bugs you've noticed, frustrations with UI and include the why's and maybe how to fix, then that can be an extra $50 or $100. Its been over and over again now, where they release the game unfinished and only fix issues a week or two down the line, and it takes them even longer to fix issues that should have been addressed earlier.
@Sam_Kings
2 жыл бұрын
They should be offered some sort of compensation I think, not necessarily paid. Maybe they should be given a free copy of the game.
@exelenttee
2 жыл бұрын
Free beta testing is one of the biggest problems with gaming. It feels like it is the only testing some of the companies do. It if fine if someone wants to do it for fun. But in this case, I think the company should give game to literally anyone who wants to play it, to get final feedback and maybe make few last moment fixes. But only after the game has been fully tested by professionals and is ready for release.
@JonathanSaxon
2 жыл бұрын
No they shouldn't. They don't provide enough value to the company. Also its voluntary.
@archieladkrabang8639
2 жыл бұрын
which website do you get victoria 3 beta version.
@lonerangerv1224
2 жыл бұрын
getting unpaid beta testers helps get a larger mass of people who are playing. Some will give good feedback and some might not even say anything but just play it early. Having to pay them would then require some way of tracking how much they play, what they find and say, and the quality of that. Having the testers unpaid means you do not really have to care what every individual does in the beta. Usually the only requirement on the people in the beta is that they do not break the NDA. If you know a specific individual is going to give good feedback then probably they should be given some extra recompense as a direct employment rather than throwing a net over a large group of people in the hope that some give good responses. Basically unpaid tester: more people testing in return for no real expectation in quality or quantity of feedback while paid tester: recompensed in return for a certain level of expectation of quality and quantity of feedback
@DragonXD2
2 жыл бұрын
So the leak happened because of pay? Well that's a big reason to pay a tester, if it was from a volunteer that's a different can of worms. Of course that can of worms can be avoided if they just pay testers. lol
@Jaysofia
2 жыл бұрын
No they shouldn't. As a beta tester for overwatch I do not want to be an employee or contractor for a company. I want to play a game before others and make it better by the time it lunches. If my feed back helps then good if not then I get free fun.
@qasemsoleimani9443
2 жыл бұрын
They provide a service, so they must be paid. With money, not in kind, like giving them the product for free. That's the most essential principle of how labour relationships operate. Gaming companies get away with lots of shady stuff, some of them barely legal, because of the opportunities the digital market and the inexperience of the consumers provide them with. If a beta-tester refuses to give feedback back, then you simply stop cooperating with him in the future. Pretty simple and I am certain Paradox developers are perfectly aware of it, regardless of their clearly disingenuous excuses.
@funnyman4744
2 жыл бұрын
I feel like you should give them something, but not actual cash.
@Aussie.Owlcoholic
2 жыл бұрын
Active testers get to be included in the credits and get keys for the game and (someitmes) all DLC too.
@chnb517
2 жыл бұрын
If both sides are satisfied with the arrangement, who cares?
@JOZiable
2 жыл бұрын
Ok, I'm a bit curious. Are they simply not being paid, or are they receiving no compensation at all? If they receive game/dlc keys, special status at events, discounts, or merch then they've been compensated for their time and shouldn't need to be paid. Even if they simply responded to a marketing email that stated that they wouldn't be paid. I don't like the expectation of pay specifically for early testing because a significant amount of indies on a shoestring budget can't afford to pay 50+ people for the multiple tests they'll need to run to make the game as bugfree/fun as possible.
@Aussie.Owlcoholic
2 жыл бұрын
As long as they were somewhat active they get to be included in the credits of the game, as well as recieve copies of the game and (sometimes) DLC too.
@Krashnachen
2 жыл бұрын
Paradox devs aren't minimizing the value that beta-testing brings. No one is trying to argue that beta-testing isn't time and effort-consuming and doesn't benefit the companies. It's not because they don't think their work isn't valuable that devs don't pay beta-testers. It's because there are enough passionate fans that are willing to do unpaid labor. You may dislike that the contract between beta-testers and game devs doesn't involve tangible things like money, but that doesn't mean it's an unequal or unfair contract that doesn't benefit both sides. Companies get a cheap QA, beta-testers get to be involved in something they're passionate about. It's just where the market is at for the moment. While I empathize with professionals that are trying to make it in this difficult environment, you can't blame dev companies for trying to make the best game with limited means, nor beta-testers who don't mind working for free for something they're passionate about. So yeah, companies shouldn't be surprised when they get the downsides of having an unpaid workforce (e.g. leaked games, biased beta-testers,..), but if they keep doing it, it's probably because the upsides outweigh the downsides. I think the there can be a legitimate debate on whether a professional beta-testing model is more efficient than an unpaid one, but I'm really not convinced that the practice is unfair or unethical.
@omardaddy2218
2 жыл бұрын
Betatesters should be paid IF a contract says so
@RealPeoplePerson
2 жыл бұрын
Having unpaid testers who only play the early build for their own enjoyment and write a few lines on the forum is ok in my mind. It becomes a problem when a tester spends significant time providing feedback-which in effect amounts to unpaid work-when the beneficiary is a commercial enterprise. If this was in relation to a non-commercial project it would arguably be a different conversation. The tester may very well be enthusiastic about the game and enjoy the dialog (as-in they feel they are rewarded for their work) but I believe that's less relevant since, again, it's a commercial product. I would like to see some kind of compensation for this work. How to do that in a workable and fair way that doesn't reduce the quality of the feedback I have no idea.
@smultanius
2 жыл бұрын
I beta tested HoI4. Can confirm that some of the testers do almost nothing (for Paradox, at least). Can also confirm that they sometimes lose beta access because of this.
@lenyeto27
2 жыл бұрын
I agree with paying beta testers, but also with the new HOI4 game director. The difference is expectation, if you pay the beta testers you add more expectations on to them and what they should be doing, should it be an honor to be a beta tester? Yes. But you should be compensated for the service that you're providing, imo.
@raptorhacker599
2 жыл бұрын
what does payment have to do with this?
@EVOXSNES
2 жыл бұрын
Leana is the one assuming the motive, we don't even know if that's even the reason.
@RepublicOfPlay
2 жыл бұрын
True, I think its still an interesting idea. It could've leaked in any way possible, but the question of paying beta testers I thought was interesting.
@EVOXSNES
2 жыл бұрын
@@RepublicOfPlay Absolutely, people should be paid for work. If you go into a situation where you know you're not going to be paid, absent deception, then you have made a decision.
@TheRealXartaX
2 жыл бұрын
I think the word you're looking for is that they feel entitled to the testers.
@rumborabbit4532
2 жыл бұрын
maybe if they paid them.then they might get the respect they deserve the company might listen to all the problems ,bugs with the game and fix before launch.so me as a customer gets what hes paid for.
@Ramblemoe
2 жыл бұрын
Seems like PDX have two different programs. One for "beta testers" and one for focus groups. Focus groups, also under NDA, get paid in a handful of steam keys of their choosing depending on the length of the session, before the 'rona also food and snacks. The beta group seems like a worse deal and has the added effect of undercutting people that want to enter the business with a QA entry level job. The focus group set up seems fine to me.
@geoDB.
2 жыл бұрын
Your T levels hit the floor
@davideandreagalelli6175
2 жыл бұрын
The topic is interested. I personally would be more tied to the type of "beta Testing" they do. I will elaborate. Content creator that have a month prior the actual launch of the game AND can also showcase it I would say no, I feel that it is not necessary that they are paid, as they get revenue from the showcase of the game. (Also I would say that a month before the launch is not enough for a Compangy to fix a game with bad design as for instance TW3 campaign at the moment) On the contrary if I share the game way prior to the actual launch in something that is basically a close beta, first of all If I were the Company I will defenetely paid the persons involved and have them fill a mandatory report with close and open questions with the purpouse to make the game good. Otherwise there is no sence to have close beta testing in my view.
@inspector_beyond
2 жыл бұрын
I hope that the main leaker will have a very bad time nearest years in the future. Maybe even a jailtime for them. I've notcied that people encuorage this and happy for the leak. I hope these people will also have a bad time in near future.
@AngelicHunk
2 жыл бұрын
I don't think the leak was really relevant to whether or not beta testers get paid; either way, the leaker has risked losing trust and money (à la lawsuit) from Paradox by acting in bad faith. But to address the real question, I think Arheo has a point: it's not that they expect literally nothing from beta testers, but they don't expect anything in particular. If nothing in particular is expected (and, importantly, nothing necessarily in-depth) then why obligate yourself to provide monetary compensation. Anecdotally, I got access to one of the earlier betas of Humankind, but I ended up not able to play it much during the period, so I didn't give any feedback. It's a fine idea to provide payment per beta tester that actually gives feedback, but that complicates a relatively simple dev-fan relationship into a business one with multiple considerations: what if the feedback is useless (a bug that's been fixed in a newer beta); what if it's too ambitious (a suggestion that would introduce large feature-creep); etc. I think as long as they're volunteering and nothing is expected, then payment also shouldn't be expected.
@RepublicOfPlay
2 жыл бұрын
I guess the counter is; if you did pay, then you would expect feedback, and the betas may become *more* useful.
@Kristaliorn
2 жыл бұрын
Darren's finger is back on that pulse!
@ThePunisher0995
2 жыл бұрын
Many developers have fun creating games and they are paid. So why not pay beta testers as well?
@bartoszmarkiewicz6766
2 жыл бұрын
Hard disagree, benefits of being a beta tester outweigh the cons - assuming you care. They have no obligation but can play a game early - though likely a broken game but they can give feedback and make the end product they presumably care about better. Its voluntary work, nothing wrong with it being unpaid, especially when they are under no obligation to do any actual testing & reporting if you want to be paid for beta testing they should apply for working in QA. Nothing wrong with making them sign an NDA either, if they don't want to sign an NDA or adhere to it - they shouldn't apply to be a beta tester. Its VOLUNTARY work, people work volunteering jobs all the time when they want to get experience or want to help with something they are passionate about, same with this. But as with everything there are conditions to it, and the one and only condition is signing an NDA. Beta testing is great for getting a wide range of feedback from more ordinary players rather than your own professional QA department which has likely very different priorities to a typical player. I don't think payment would decrease the likelihood of leaks, unless the testers became actual PDX QA department members which is unrealistic and would make them QA rather than just beta testers. People who break NDA will break it anyway, either way they ruined their career in beta testing if caught. Also an average beta tester is just too useless to be worth paying for, its more of a quantity over quality, furthermore when you start paying them legality of the whole thing changes. PDX should be more rigorous with their selection of beta testers though, up the standards of who they are taking on and keep a unique identifier in their provided copies to be able to determine who leaked it when it does happen (I suspect they have something like that already but who knows).
@jamieburns7024
2 жыл бұрын
Your work should be paid.
@teemuleppa3347
2 жыл бұрын
i don't think beta testers should be paid....professional playtesting and quality control is whole different thing
@kev_sen
2 жыл бұрын
I don't see why the leak is a bad thing. They have a huge loyal playerbase that want to play the beta and could help them with bugfixes and ideas. I wish paradox would go the open beta route. I've been supporting them for 17 years now. Giving in game store credit for dlc would be a nice perk if they are too cheap to pay quality testers might also be a good idea.
@RepublicOfPlay
2 жыл бұрын
If Imperator Rome leaked before it came out, I don't think people would've bought it. I guess that's the fear.
@richardvlasek2445
2 жыл бұрын
because the game in its current state is really bad some things like the really bad placeholder UI and barely functional AI will presumably be replaced or more fleshed out by release but there are massive problems with core gameplay systems like the incredibly micro-intensive and hard to learn economy and the clunky as shit combat that have pretty much just been exposed
@kev_sen
2 жыл бұрын
@@richardvlasek2445 I'm glad the game is more complex than Vic 2. I think the benefits outweigh the negatives in having an open beta test. There are people who played Vic for thousands of hours who could give valuable feedback.
@MrTohawk
2 жыл бұрын
People should be paid for the work they do.
@marine76a
2 жыл бұрын
Well there is a job called play tester that were paid in the past within the game industry so yes normatively they should be paid. Playtesters and Betas signed NDAs I'm sure. If scoring reddit bux is that important to the betas then sure it's worth them being sued.
@fobosydeimosarg
2 жыл бұрын
Arheo is a troll, he came to class the game in 2 years to get into hoi v, witch need a new engine.
@petermenzies9193
2 жыл бұрын
Yeah I think that generally if you're signing an NDA or honestly any contract you should be paid for your time.
@Holypikemanz
2 жыл бұрын
Paradox became garbage and the least effort, left wing, and disappointing developer. Makes games for the trash of humanity.
@youtuberobbedmeofmyname
2 жыл бұрын
The left wing thing wouldn't even be a problem if they literally weren't re-writing history to confirm their bias. Plus PDX fans (especially Reddit) begs for and congratulates stuff like Women in History (which should just be there in the base game without it being a DLC), adding Africa Flavor to literally everything (when, again it should just be there and not be a DLC), and no one has a backbone for accurately portraying history because it is inherently controversial to do so. Surprise surprise, history doesn't always have a happy ending. This is why journalists got extremely mad at all PDX's games and now they're paying the price for listening to them.
@Holypikemanz
2 жыл бұрын
@@youtuberobbedmeofmyname Everything with the left is a lie. Look at "cancel culture". Its literally "lefties at the top" listening to "lefties at the bottom" and pretending they are reluctantly being forced to obey. Nothing about it is about culture. They are the least tolerant, least honest, least fair, least intelligent bunch of morons that the super rich can use to protect themselves. The Left hates the rich, unless they have the same politics, then they love the super rich.
@kamilolszewitz2935
2 жыл бұрын
if you do a work, you must get paid for it. if not, its called slavery. no exceptions of anykind.
@JohnDoe-bh2lp
2 жыл бұрын
Most people are volunteering lmao
@kamilolszewitz2935
2 жыл бұрын
@@JohnDoe-bh2lp volunteering for profit companies'd be banned.
@ArchMageRaven
2 жыл бұрын
yes
@aguy3664
2 жыл бұрын
ngl they should give them the game for free
@Aussie.Owlcoholic
2 жыл бұрын
They do get the game for free. They are also included in the credits and often get keys for all DLC too.
Пікірлер: 199