need public test server

free labor.=)good feed back.your customers.

needs to happen

Test what? Why?

Oh, you mean the content that doesn't exist in this game according to some?

@Blocki.4931 said:Test what? Why?

Oh, you mean the content that doesn't exist in this game according to some?

alliances for one. =p and any future projects.

So a test server for something that isn't ready yet?And they've already said they will be testing it before hand.

Game doesn't have the population nor does Anet know how to run a proper test, see desert borderlands, which they had to send a message on the 2nd day of the second testing to get more people in it because they didn't bother to inform the people from the 1st test they were still included.

If they were to include players with any testing, it’d be better that only knowledgeable players who are willing to help test be included.

@Ayrilana.1396 said:If they were to include players with any testing, it’d be better that only knowledgeable players who are willing to help test be included.

GL recruiting.

@Ayrilana.1396 said:If they were to include players with any testing, it’d be better that only knowledgeable players who are willing to help test be included.

Define knowledgable

Because I know some really clueless vets...

@Strider Pj.2193 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:If they were to include players with any testing, it’d be better that only

knowledgeable

players who are

willing to help test

be included.

Depends on what’s being tested. If it’s balancing then it should be players that know all of the classes well. I excluded mentioning veteran players be wise that designation is meaningless as you hinted at.

@Offair.2563 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:If they were to include players with any testing, it’d be better that only

knowledgeable

players who are

willing to help test

be included.

Pretty much. Anything else would just be noise unless it were a stress test.

@Strider Pj.2193 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:If they were to include players with any testing, it’d be better that only

knowledgeable

players who are

willing to help test

be included.

I know people who know it all

@"Ayrilana.1396" said:If they were to include players with any testing, it’d be better that only knowledgeable players who are willing to help test be included.

This turns out to be trickier to achieve than most of us think. Typically, people flock to test servers for early access: those who are bored, looking for an edge, looking for economic opportunities. Those who actually are willing to document their experience and offer details to replicate bugs are rare.

Plus, just a brief look (or a deep dive) into Reddit and the forums and you'll find that there's a lot of the feedback in the form of "I don't like it" rather than "here's what I don't like."

In the end, there's a lot of words written by amateur testers; there's relatively little actionable feedback though.

Worse is that too many who provide any sort of comment end up expecting the studio to make changes as a result. And if it's not to their liking, after the changes go live, the complaints change from "didn't you test this" to "why don't you listen?" Players seem to do better with workarounds than they do with the impression that they weren't heard.

And none of that even begins to address the costs of maintaining yet another branch of the code, in a form that has to be "public ready" (even if it's not entirely public). If ANet does end up having resources to spare, I'd far prefer to see them spend it on more QA than public test servers.

Why invest in that when you can live test with no consequences?

its simple, you dont get results if its not tested. and feedback thru gamers is the only thing that matters. who spends money in these? devs make them but players are the ones need satisfying.

@Sovereign.1093 said:its simple, you dont get results if its not tested. and feedback thru gamers is the only thing that matters. who spends money in these? devs make them but players are the ones need satisfying.

I completely agree and have lobbied for a ptr a few times, but I believe the answer is in the sarcasm of my first comment. They don't have to. Everything gets live tested and fixed (or not) as we go and no response to that from the community has yet been sufficient to drive another model.

@Tinnel.4369 said:

@Sovereign.1093 said:its simple, you dont get results if its not tested. and feedback thru gamers is the only thing that matters. who spends money in these? devs make them but players are the ones need satisfying.

well they dont have to do anything. hence the every existing hacks that are still here.

its like sampling, you do a small piece as an investment before you commit all your resources on something.

a basic economic thing we were taught is demand and supply.

sure the devs can make the best etc etc. but if the players dont like it, and like another form, then tough. a simple analogy would be, some people prefer chicken and others beef. and lets say the population of chicken lovers is 3 x that of the beef. now beef is high quality meat and devs want to give that. but players want chicken. if devs force the beef, what happened years ago to desert map will repeat again.

years passed, i came to love it. i quit because of it. but i came back because alpine is back. in a way, we all change over time, and i do hope there is no generalization made to the wvw players.

so, its best to have a little feedback and keep up with the times x interest of the customer.

anet had test server before when added EOTM

EOTM should be used to test changes to WvW.

@Xanoris.2379 said:EOTM should be used to test changes to WvW.

yes, this actually could work