Guild Wars 2

Edit:
As I have written several long posts beside the 2 OPs since opening this discussion, I wrote a summary later on. So if you dont care to read through the whole thread, please check it out, after you read the first 2 OPs (second one is the third post of this thread).
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/hot/Would-a-Veteran-BWE-make-sense/page/2#post5387440

Hi.

I am a Veteran GW2 player with over 8k hours since head start.

Even though I didnt purchase HoT yet, I am quite looking forward to it and probably will purchase it before launch. But I didnt participate in any beta events for it yet. In fact, i never participated in any beta testing for software before.

So apart from the official info about HoT that Anet releases over time, i get most of my feedback about it from beta testers on these forums, reddit, twitch, fansites etc.

Just like Anet itself.

For many years I have been professionally involved in vocational, postgraduate, informal, educational and experiental training all around the world, so I wasnt only reading all the feedback from the beta testers and communication from the devs from the point of view of a veteran player, looking for the info on the new content of my favourite game modes but was also closely monitoring the communication between Anet and the player base during the last week.

From an educational point of view its a very interesting community (Anet+players) because the roles of educators and students arent clearly defined or switch constantly.

The players learn when Anet releases new info or they are able to beta test the new content, Anet learns through feedback, written by the player base.

In the last couple of days, plenty of Devs, again, stated how valuable the feedback is.

And I completely agree. But the problem is that the feedback is too much. Many feedback threads get watered down by off topic, uninformative posts or are simply unconstructive feedback in the first place because many players dont know how to give contructive feedback.
Of course I dont have exact numbers but I would assume that a good chunk of the player base is still in primary, secondary or postgraduate training and below the age of 23. Most of those people have primarily assumed a student role their whole life and have little experience in teaching or giving valuable feedback.

2 decades ago, if you wanted to know something, you had to go to the library to read about something specific, watch tv at predetermined schedules, read daily papers or other magazines, talk to people in person or on a land line on a predetermined location.
You had to source your information.
These days, with the internet, information is widely available, on the go and 24/7. The problem shifted from finding information to finding the right information.

Giving good feedback isnt easy, its something you have to learn and its something I observed young people struggling with more and more during the last couple years.

So I was wondering, how you could improve the general feedback from the player base.
If we take the last BWE for an example, i guess the mayority of players have been Pre-Purchasers of HoT. I guess that that group of players is a good average of the player base, veterans, new players and players playing specific game modes.

I am no game developer but i think that they actually need feedback from the general player base because they want to attract new players and retain veterans as well.
So giving pre-purchasers the priority to participate in beta tests makes sense, not only because they represent the average player base but also because they stated their intent of interest in HoT (with an investment), so in general those players and Anet have a common goal, an awesome expac and last but not least for cash flow reasons as an incentive to PP.

Edit: Message cut due to body length. I will post the 2nd part in 300 seconds

Don’t really need to see the second part of this dissertation to give my answer: Nope.

But it still isnt the best group to receive feedback from, I think Veterans are more suited for that. First of all, many of those have been playing this game for thousands of hours and established themselves as community leaders of some sort, be it as guild leaders, organizers of social events, longtime contributors on the forums and other social media, wvw and pve commanders, wvw community leads or pvp leaders.
I also got the impression that veteran players also tend to be a little older than the average player with many of them past the age of 30. Those are usually people that have an established professional life or their own kids and have more experience in a teaching role, giving more constructive feedback in general.

Thats why I am wondering, if it wouldnt be beneficial to make a Beta WeekEnd just for veteran players to improve the quality of the feedback given. As I said, I am not familiar with beta testing video games and I dont know what the timeline for Hot is and how many more betas we will see. But I would assume that such a Veteran BWE should be fairly early in the beta testing phase, when there are still lots of bugs and imbalances present. I realized while reading the forums that the more severe a bug or imbalance gets, the lower the quality of the feedback gets and its usually veterans that give the most valuable feedback to the solution. So i guess it makes sense to do this quite early.

Another point of discussion would be NDA´s. Right now there are none, which is great as it presents people like me with lots of info through secondary sources.

But if a veteran BWE should happen, I am wondering, if it wouldnt be beneficial to at least restrict access to the (temporary) subforum to veteran beta besters in order to provide a place for high quality feedback for the devs and constructive discussion.
In that case there also shouldnt be a general NDA in place, to allow those veteran players to publish and discuss info on social media and discussion boards with the general player base. So the limited access to the BWE subforum wouldnt be in place to keep a certain kind of players out of info or discussion but to streamline general and high quality feedback back towards Anet.

I would like to read some other opinions about this, as due to my lack of experience in beta testing and online gaming my point of view is pretty narrow. I dont expect this to happen before HoT releases and my interest in this is more of personal or professional nature rather than a player.

Oh yeah, vote for Evon

niea.7504:

Don’t really need to see the second part of this dissertation to give my answer: Nope.

Thanks for proving my point and a TL/DR in 16 words.

For your info:

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/How-to-Give-Good-Feedback/first#post3383470

Yay, vote for Evon!

Unfortunately, unless ANet is feeling exceedingly generous…

If you want the thing, you have to pay the price for the thing. If you can’t afford the price for the thing, save up and play the stock market until you can afford the thing.

Conversely, if unpaid-HoT veterans get free looky-loos on the beta, I deserve a free Legendary of my choice.

The problem is what would determine a veteran and not. Time-span? Hours played? When first character was created? People who have played since headstart, yet have taken a two year break?
Also to point out, what is good is subjective. You’ll have elite players that want dps buffs to be more and more for the sake of facerolling more content, casuals to want more “natural” rewards that just happen, people who want a challenge as solo and as group bigger than 5 players.

So what is a Veteran player? I’ve seen people with 20k AP play like they only bought the game 24hrs prior. And I’ve seen people with 1k ap that enjoyed every part of the dynamics of game play, they might not play min/max best, but they understand the content.

Tl;dr- ALL feedback is good feedback, so Anet can replicate it and adjust what’s needed. Just because you’re a “veteran” does not make you any better or more priviledged in game.
Side note- I’ve been playing for nearly 3years, I guess I’m just more realistic. If you want to beta-test, then pre-purchase for the priviledge, like everyone else.

I still see people on here, that I’ve seen on here since launch, making some of the most incredibly un-thought out posts.

Basically, just because someone has played the game for 3 years, doesn’t automatically mean they’re going to have any more idea how to give proper feedback than someone who joined recently.
They may have more experience in game, but that doesn’t make them better at giving feedback, and it doesn’t mean their feedback is automatically good ideas.

So I honestly don’t think that would provide what you suggest it might.

It makes no sense.
First of all, as Haleydawn said, how you’ll determine who is a veteran?
Also, there are “veterans” that can’t give a good feed back even if their life depended on that, while if someone with experience with testing (game or even commercial software) can give better feed backs even if this is the 1st time they are touching the game.

Okay, teasing aside:

All feedback is valuable. It will take some people experienced in assessment on the back end (ANet’s side) to really get good metrics out of it, but it’s all valuable. Because gaming isn’t just about numbers and digital bits. It’s about how players feel during the experience. Even a six-year-old can say he doesn’t like something, even if he doesn’t understand why. But losing that six-year-old is still a lost sale. (No, I’m not comparing some of the forum feedback to six-year-olds, even though I should. :P)

When it comes to assessment, you want good raters. That means people experienced in assessment. Yes, you want people who are also experienced in the specific thing being measured (in this case, GW2), but opening the doors to “all vets” just means you get a slimmer subsection, and that actually puts a bias on feedback. New players still matter, and those new players turn into veterans, eventually.

I’ve been in betas for other games that basically required an application (almost an interview) just to get in. They wanted to know your experience with other games and general playing habits, so they could gather suitable feedback. Not a bad strategy when it comes to limited resources, but again, it puts a bias toward experienced players.

What experienced players are good at is having words and terms that can describe their judgments and motivations. So you’re not entirely wrong on that, but it’s like comparing Achievement Points to International Baccalaureate: Composition scores. The correlation may exist, but it’s not a good one.

What we can hope for are those who expressed the most interest by buying into the game early are also able to relay their feedback competently. I think your idea of having a sort of CDI-type space exclusively for beta feedback is a good one. It puts the feedback in a solid place, and with strong monitoring, hedges out whiners, trolls, and baseless complaints in favor of keeping the conversation going.

Bah. The forum ate my post. >.> /sigh (retypes)

I can see some problems with it

1) it assumes that vets naturally give better feedback than non vets. I doubt this is true and it makes the basic mistake of lumping people together and assuming they are the same.
2) ANet has already said all beta weekends are open to all prepurchasers. To then close it to some, even if they change the rules to a weekday event, would lose them more in goodwill than what they could theoretically gain in good feedback.
3) new players will be playing the new content after release also. They should have the ability to also check it out in each beta to report on what they find.

As someone else has stated, how do you determine who a veteran is?

To answer your question OP, No. Excluding people from giving feedback because they haven’t played as long as someone else is not a good reason to invalidate their feedback.

Like you, I’ve been here since headstart as well. Having said that, my opinion weighs no more heavily than someone who has played this game for a month. You have no idea what type of background and experience that the “new” person can provide. Someone who has only played this game for a month could have a 10-year background in MMO development. This person could have specialized in balancing different classes from other MMOs. To reiterate, you don’t know what new people can bring to the table.

On a side note, I’m afraid I just can not take your suggestion seriously after the line about veterans players being older/more mature. That is just ludicrous.

For a TL/DR version, the opinions of ALL customers, regardless of time invested, matter.

The ability to write clearly/concisely and GW2 hour’s played are two totally unrelated things.

Having run testing programs, I’ll give you three guesses and the first two don’t count which quality provides more actionable data in my experience.

Haleydawn.3764:

The problem is what would determine a veteran and not. Time-span? Hours played? When first character was created? People who have played since headstart, yet have taken a two year break?
Also to point out, what is good is subjective. You’ll have elite players that want dps buffs to be more and more for the sake of facerolling more content, casuals to want more “natural” rewards that just happen, people who want a challenge as solo and as group bigger than 5 players.

So what is a Veteran player? I’ve seen people with 20k AP play like they only bought the game 24hrs prior. And I’ve seen people with 1k ap that enjoyed every part of the dynamics of game play, they might not play min/max best, but they understand the content.

Tl;dr- ALL feedback is good feedback, so Anet can replicate it and adjust what’s needed. Just because you’re a “veteran” does not make you any better or more priviledged in game.
Side note- I’ve been playing for nearly 3years, I guess I’m just more realistic. If you want to beta-test, then pre-purchase for the priviledge, like everyone else.

You make some valid points, some I already thought about but didnt want to write about due to my post limitations and message body length.

The parameters of being a veteran have to be determined by Anet, I guess first of all they have to determine, how much beta testers they want to have in the first place during a BWE. Right now, they pretty much know how much possible beta testers will log during the BWE because they know how much PPed HoT.
By now, that number I would assume to be way past 100k. While its great at some parts of the game to have huge numbers during events for simple stress tests and mass balance, maybe half of those 100k players wont give any feedback at all and another 40% dont give high quality feedback. So they have to read through feedback of which 90% will be discarded. Thats alot of wasted time and in my opinion a good reasoning for the fact that a big portion of the forum users feel neglected in terms of forum communication by Anet devs.

As I mentioned, I would incorporate Veteran BWE in the early stage of beta testing, as they are more valuable in giving feedback to basic and severe bugs. A veteran BWE would probably involve far less beta testers (maybe 10k in my example)and focus on early adjustments in terms of bugs and balance. The main BWE´s should still be conducted by the general player base as the closer we get to release, the more important stress tests become and the business point of view cant be disregarded at any stage.

I dont want veteran players to have more influence on the future of gw2 I am more looking for a solution to streamline quality information.

Maybe I wasnt clear enough in one of my OP´s, I dont expect any of this to happen during beta testing of HoT but maybe we all learn something for future releases. I just thought, it might be worth discussing.

Thanks first of all for all the feedback, even though most of it is rather controversial to my suggestion.
I will try to respond to most of the posters as fast as i can. Right now, you are responding faster than I am typing so it might take a while.
It seems the thread got reported and moved by someone to HoT discussions. Just like some other poster, I lost my last post. Thats ok, i think its way better suited here, so thanks for that.

Other thing about letting tons of people to play as they want, is to to be able to simply get information and then using analysis tools to find patterns of the gameplay, like time most people played, time spent on each class created, events done by most players and so on, for that all Anet wants is just as many players as possible and for that 100% of information will be useful.

No simple as that you want into the beta weekend pre order like everyone else.

As an example a new players feedback can be just as good and if not better than a so called “Veteran” players perspective in some case because of “fresh eyes” as the saying goes.

A company can’t really ignore any ones feedback and if they do they are shooting themselfs in the foot.

Using myself as an example, I easily qualify as a vet. Since beta. Loads of hours. Gobs of achieve points. I’m highly verbal, but I’m not particularly analytical and when I give feedback it’s going to be more about how I feel. I feel the Revenant was better this time. I feel like the Shiro set of skills was useful and I would use them. I feel like there were too many hard mobs in the new maps. Is this useful for ANet? More useful than a new, but analytical person who can give concise point by point feedback that I never could?

I can’t imagine that separating the player base by hours played is meaningful in terms of quality of feedback unless you are talking about people who are really new to the game, with no level 80s and playing a level 80 area for the first time.

So you want Anet to cut sample sizes down to a certain % of the player base because age = wisdom? Still doesn’t work that way.

You can wall of text all you like, ALL feedback is good feedback, the bigger the sample size the better. Anyone in marketing can tell you this.
We are not Alpha testers, we’re the final testers, to spot mechanical bugs/flaws detrimental to gameplay, all that is needed once that is squared off is to build more content and it’s done

Although, it would not surprise me at all if they’re pulling the “Join the beta but really we’re nearly done” Betas, a la Blizzard. But maybe that’s my tinfoil hat slipping.

As a few above have stated, there could be new players that wouldn’t qualify for the “Veteran Beta whatever” that could be programmers/game analysts etc etc that would spot more things than a Veteran player that just happens to only have more hours spent on the game

Rauderi.8706:

Okay, teasing aside:

All feedback is valuable. It will take some people experienced in assessment on the back end (ANet’s side) to really get good metrics out of it, but it’s all valuable. Because gaming isn’t just about numbers and digital bits. It’s about how players feel during the experience. Even a six-year-old can say he doesn’t like something, even if he doesn’t understand why. But losing that six-year-old is still a lost sale. (No, I’m not comparing some of the forum feedback to six-year-olds, even though I should. :P)

When it comes to assessment, you want good raters. That means people experienced in assessment. Yes, you want people who are also experienced in the specific thing being measured (in this case, GW2), but opening the doors to “all vets” just means you get a slimmer subsection, and that actually puts a bias on feedback. New players still matter, and those new players turn into veterans, eventually.

I’ve been in betas for other games that basically required an application (almost an interview) just to get in. They wanted to know your experience with other games and general playing habits, so they could gather suitable feedback. Not a bad strategy when it comes to limited resources, but again, it puts a bias toward experienced players.

What experienced players are good at is having words and terms that can describe their judgments and motivations. So you’re not entirely wrong on that, but it’s like comparing Achievement Points to International Baccalaureate: Composition scores. The correlation may exist, but it’s not a good one.

What we can hope for are those who expressed the most interest by buying into the game early are also able to relay their feedback competently. I think your idea of having a sort of CDI-type space exclusively for beta feedback is a good one. It puts the feedback in a solid place, and with strong monitoring, hedges out whiners, trolls, and baseless complaints in favor of keeping the conversation going.

Thanks for great feedback, especially from a point of view of someone who has beta axperience.
I really liked the bit about assessment you talked about because it was kinda my ignition to write this post.

The bias of veteran feedback is a valid concern. But thats why i would schedule it at the early stages of beta testing and rely on more basic feedback of the general player base during later stress tests.

In recognition of some other posts that popped up and i dont care to quote atm about the determination of veteran status:

This isnt the prime issue of this thread but i will give my personal view on estimated numbers:

If 100k beta testers partipicated in BWE1 last weekend, i would schedule Veteran BWE a couple of weeks or months before that and would aim for 10k participants, mostly containing veterans.
Plenty of parameters for determining veteran status have already been tossed around here in previous posts, game hours, AP, forum posts etc.

And this is basically an open discussion, I would like to learn about plenty of different opinions about the definition of a veteran player, from veterans and new players alike.
I will state my opinion about veteran status in more detail in the coming days.

JoshuaRAWR.4653:

As someone else has stated, how do you determine who a veteran is?

Ask to see a certified true copy of his/her DD214.

Just a flesh wound.3589:

Using myself as an example, I easily qualify as a vet. Since beta. Loads of hours. Gobs of achieve points. I’m highly verbal, but I’m not particularly analytical and when I give feedback it’s going to be more about how I feel. I feel the Revenant was better this time. I feel like the Shiro set of skills was useful and I would use them. I feel like there were too many hard mobs in the new maps. Is this useful for ANet? More useful than a new, but analytical person who can give concise point by point feedback that I never could?

I can’t imagine that separating the player base by hours played is meaningful in terms of quality of feedback unless you are talking about people who are really new to the game, with no level 80s and playing a level 80 area for the first time.

I agree, you are a good example of a vet. I cant remember ever talking to you in game and I just know you from the forums but I have known you for a long time. Just because of your posting history I respect you as a veteran player and value your opinion more than someone else´s whose name I just read for the first time on the forums.

So how do I rate veteran players?

Like I said, veteran players excell in many different kinds content, pve, pvp, wvw etc., or the forums.

Relating veteran status to hours played would be the most obvious solution because you know that you will have feedback from players that have extensive knowledge of the game. Of course there will be some black sheep, who get entrance to a closed beta but would it be as much as during a beta that is open for the general public?

I don’t know if what you are suggesting is the answer but I also don’t see how Anet can effectively glean the useful feedback from the forum out of what is 99% rants and thoughtless diatribes so I do think there should be some better way to get feedback.

Wanze.8410:

Just a flesh wound.3589:

Using myself as an example, I easily qualify as a vet. Since beta. Loads of hours. Gobs of achieve points. I’m highly verbal, but I’m not particularly analytical and when I give feedback it’s going to be more about how I feel. I feel the Revenant was better this time. I feel like the Shiro set of skills was useful and I would use them. I feel like there were too many hard mobs in the new maps. Is this useful for ANet? More useful than a new, but analytical person who can give concise point by point feedback that I never could?

I can’t imagine that separating the player base by hours played is meaningful in terms of quality of feedback unless you are talking about people who are really new to the game, with no level 80s and playing a level 80 area for the first time.

I agree, you are a good example of a vet. I cant remember ever talking to you in game and I just know you from the forums but I have known you for a long time. Just because of your posting history I respect you as a veteran player and value your opinion more than someone else´s whose name I just read for the first time on the forums.

That persons post history is only 5 months. If that is how you mean by knowing some person a long time then there are a lot of veterans.

Wanze.8410:

Plenty of parameters for determining veteran status have already been tossed around here in previous posts, game hours, AP, forum posts etc.

Full stop right here!

The sad reality is no matter what so called requirements defines “veteran status” that doesn’t automatically proves or mean they are fully qualified to give good feedback or know what they are doing.

Plenty of proof on the news to back that up!

Belzebu.3912:

Other thing about letting tons of people to play as they want, is to to be able to simply get information and then using analysis tools to find patterns of the gameplay, like time most people played, time spent on each class created, events done by most players and so on, for that all Anet wants is just as many players as possible and for that 100% of information will be useful.

There’s something of a point to that. Veterans have heuristics that guide them to making faster decisions. They already know what builds they want and what traits to take/ignore.

Newer players will poke, prod, and explore the entirety of the content, and the perceptive ones will figure out if something’s working or broken, and they’ll have as much valuable perspective as the veteran who digs into endgame while ignoring ‘worthless’ options and unintended side effects new systems have on older content.

But new players’ feedback is just as useful as veteran players’ feedback.

They give different types of feedback, which is why betas for expansion packs should include veterans and new players. So that companies can get both kinds of feedback.

If I remember correctly the first time we were able to DEMO Heart of thorns in our homes it was a veteran player invitation only, or in their words was something like “we would like to invite our most loyal players to the upcoming beta event” , I forget the exact wording but it was based on loyalty, anyway, this didn’t go over to well and a lot of veteran players who didn’t get invited got annoyed. So the point I’m trying to make here is that they already tried the invite veteran players approach.
Since that wasn’t received to greatly they then offered invites based on luck and grinding for the heart of magumma portal, people also complained for various reasons about that, and lastly they just went with the easiest approach, let everyone into beta that pre purchases.
So the moral of this story in my mind at least is that arenanet have once again tryed every approach they can think of to find the right one, as they have a history of doing that since release, they try something if it doesn’t work they try something else, they are not affraid to get things wrong in the process.
Finally I just want to say that as a vet with almost 10k hours played and having been in every beta event I don’t think it really matters who gets in or not, as these betas are just glorified demo’s anyway, I don’t believe arenanet are taking much feedback into account with them, they are mostly for marketing purposes and to keep the hype levels up, but that’s just my opinion ofc.

What’s flawed in your approach OP is that there are “Vets” in the Beta-have bought HoT crowd.

How Anet might vet Beta comments is their call – they’ll have data on who folks are if they care to differentiate between groups within the HoT prepurchasers commenting on the beta. Who started the game in head start, who plays regularly, who ranks how in this and that, who played through all of the GW1 game/expansions, who spends money in the gem store, etc. They can sort it however they wish if they wish to do so.

It sounds to me like a long tirade to get what others have paid for without ponying up! If you want to participate it’s easy, buy in.

I think if ArenaNet wanted a Closed Beta Event using only ‘Veteran’ players, they have the metrics to choose exactly the subset of players they would want to invite, and, considering your proposal included an NDA, they may have already done so. Who knows? The only difference would be that the forum (or whatever platform they chose) was not public.

My only question is…why do you have such severe Flood Control? ; )

Good luck.

Inculpatus cedo.9234:

I think if ArenaNet wanted a Closed Beta Event using only ‘Veteran’ players, they have the metrics to choose exactly the subset of players they would want to invite, and, considering your proposal included an NDA, they may have already done so. Who knows? The only difference would be that the forum (or whatever platform they chose) was not public.

My only question is…why do you have such severe Flood Control? ; )

Good luck.

Wanze.8410:

Inculpatus cedo.9234:

I think if ArenaNet wanted a Closed Beta Event using only ‘Veteran’ players, they have the metrics to choose exactly the subset of players they would want to invite, and, considering your proposal included an NDA, they may have already done so. Who knows? The only difference would be that the forum (or whatever platform they chose) was not public.

My only question is…why do you have such severe Flood Control? ; )

Good luck.

The mystery deepens!

Beta tests used to be just about feedback and bug reports. Now, they’re about feedback and bug reports in the wider context of rewarding those who threw money at the developer. If there was any intent to have a not-paid-for beta, that stage is past. I doubt that the feedback from non-payers would be valuable enough to offset the storm of abuse from those who’ve paid, should ANet remove that restriction.

Wanze.8410:

My only question is…why do you have such severe Flood Control? ; )
Good luck.

The simple answer is that I post too much. As you know, I am a very vocal veteran on the forums. While I try to give constructive feedback most of the time, I sometimes slip and post something that shouldnt have been posted and is against the CoC. I usually accept the ban of posting on the forums but i generally disagree on the flood control coming with it.
Many people reading this will know me from open discussions about the game exonomy as I have been active in econimical discussions for several years. I usually get alot of flak for my opinion and thats ok for me. Many people see me as a rich guy that tries to make their game experience as horrible as possible. While I am certainly not scraping for riches, I am just the vocal part of the rich comunity, I just talk more than other rich players.

I just checked and I have accumulated over 130 pages of forum posts. Many of those include quotes and arent my own doing but overall I would say that I contributed quite alot to these forums.
Bottom line is that i post alot and sometimes cross a line. Thats ok and I appreciate some kind of reminder where the line is but i dont know, if posting restrictions are the right way to go. Because i post so much, I have a hard time losing infractions points and will only lose some over a period of several weeks or months. While I know that those infraction penalties serve a great way for newer players, I am not sure, if its still suitable for feteran forum users like me. I accept every ban of a couple of days using the forums, if I post something inappropriate but the posting limit afterwards is in my opinion unleasonable. Because in general, it doesnt stop me from posting unconstructive feed back, troll posts or anything else that might considered unessential feedback by Anet, It stops me from posting informative posts in general, and i dont know if that should be the bottom line.

The OP’s long post basically says, “some people give better feedback than others; ANet should only listen to those people, at least for a short period of time.”

While it’s true that some people are better able to express their feedback, it’s hard to know if the feedback is more valuable to ANet or not. I’ve posted my share of terrible ideas using powerful rhetoric and I’ve seen some great concepts written in barely understandable language.

Further, veterans have all sorts of great ideas based on what they enjoy/find boring, but a game that caters too much to vets won’t last very long.

In other words, ANet needs feedback from everyone. The only way to know if the feedback is any good is to read it, respond to it, discuss it. The only people we don’t need to hear from are trolls and posts that just shoot other people’s ideas down (or make personal attacks) — fortunately, there are moderators who deal with that already.

tl;dr The current system works well enough. No reason to complicate it.

Lol..I guess you missed the wink. I’m well aware of how and why Flood Control works.

But, thanks for the detailed response. ; )

This is a bad concept that could not accomplish it’s stated goals.

First, as others have pointed out, what is a veteran? That in itself is a question without a valid answer and attempting to answer it would only alienate people and bring a lot of grief to Anets’ door. But for the sake of argument lets say Anet comes up with a definition everyone agrees with…

You make the assumption that vets are better at giving good feedback than new players; just reading these forums kinda proves that to be false.

You also make the implication that there is a different demographic between new players and veteran players which would lead to better feedback. Without evidence to the contrary it is more likely that new players have a similar, or more likely larger, demographic to veterans. Neither a similar nor larger demographic would inherently give better feedback.

What would doing this actually change for Anet?
There would be a smaller pool of people to get data from which, by default, would mean fewer data points to compare. This would seem to be a bad thing for beta testing.

You’ve prescreened your testers which will skew your results. Many veterans develop a sense of tunnel vision for how the game should be played and play the game accordingly. This automatically removes certain edge cases from testing. Also, in the case of testing specializations that by design change how the profession is meant to be played can create a lot of confusion and bad feedback. If you’re so locked into a certain mindset that you can’t accept a different way to play the profession then you’re never going to give good feedback. New players don’t have this tunnel vision and are more accepting of changes. They bring a new perspective to the feedback that is just as valuable as veteran feedback. Again, veteran only seems like a bad thing for beta testing.

What has this not done for Anet?
Actually improved the quality of feedback.

To do that you need to educate people how to give good feedback, which they’ve tried doing. Sadly, many people don’t want to learn how or just don’t care to learn or just flat out refuse to give good feedback for reasons… And this is a problem for vets and new people alike.

In short, doing this just makes things harder for Anet with no benefit. This just feels like you’re looking for a way to give Vets a higher status than newer players in something.

I’m sure there will be open beta at some point, if you want to get your opinion in before that (and you stated you would likely buy HoT before release, assuming money isn’t an issue and you’re passionate about testing) then preorder is always an option.

The veteran beta concept was applied to WvW and PvP because there are ways to rank people who do those game types. There is no such system for PvE unless you count achieves and that would probably cause more trouble than the info is worth.

I think Anet setting up a forum with a template for good feedback would be a good system for the next BWE though.

Torsailr.8456:

This is a bad concept that could not accomplish it’s stated goals.

First, as others have pointed out, what is a veteran? That in itself is a question without a valid answer and attempting to answer it would only alienate people and bring a lot of grief to Anets’ door. But for the sake of argument lets say Anet comes up with a definition everyone agrees with…

You make the assumption that vets are better at giving good feedback than new players; just reading these forums kinda proves that to be false.

You also make the implication that there is a different demographic between new players and veteran players which would lead to better feedback. Without evidence to the contrary it is more likely that new players have a similar, or more likely larger, demographic to veterans. Neither a similar nor larger demographic would inherently give better feedback.

What would doing this actually change for Anet?
There would be a smaller pool of people to get data from which, by default, would mean fewer data points to compare. This would seem to be a bad thing for beta testing.

You’ve prescreened your testers which will skew your results. Many veterans develop a sense of tunnel vision for how the game should be played and play the game accordingly. This automatically removes certain edge cases from testing. Also, in the case of testing specializations that by design change how the profession is meant to be played can create a lot of confusion and bad feedback. If you’re so locked into a certain mindset that you can’t accept a different way to play the profession then you’re never going to give good feedback. New players don’t have this tunnel vision and are more accepting of changes. They bring a new perspective to the feedback that is just as valuable as veteran feedback. Again, veteran only seems like a bad thing for beta testing.

What has this not done for Anet?
Actually improved the quality of feedback.

To do that you need to educate people how to give good feedback, which they’ve tried doing. Sadly, many people don’t want to learn how or just don’t care to learn or just flat out refuse to give good feedback for reasons… And this is a problem for vets and new people alike.

In short, doing this just makes things harder for Anet with no benefit. This just feels like you’re looking for a way to give Vets a higher status than newer players in something.

Youre right, it will be hard to determine veteran status and whatever filter they would apply, there will be players excluded that in general give valuable feedback and there will be players participating that give bad or no feedback.

But that also applies to the current beta tester filter (pre purchase), so even if we dont agree yet that veterans in general give better feedback, we might agree that it wont devalue the general feedback as a whole either. So this wouldnt be a valid arguement to not do it, in my opinion.

Maybe i went into too much detail in guestimating the social background of veterans and new players and players who give valuable and unconstructive feedback.
My main arguement basically is that veteran players give better feedback because of their long time experience of the game. Players who have spent a thousand hours each in pve, pvp and wvw might look at skill or trait balance issues a different way compared to someone who only played pve for 200 hours. Veterans usually see a bigger picture.

My goal is not to make Anet only listening to veteran feedback, I am just trying to find a way to streamline better feedback, regardless if that feedback is implemented in the game or not.
I am not trying to highlight or filter good feedback but to minimize unconstructive feedback.

Some posters voiced their concern about biased feedback from veteran players but I think feedback is easier evaluated, if you know more about the background of your target group that is giving it.

I am not saying that the feedback of veterans should have a priority of implementation in the game, I am just wondering if it would be beneficial for gathering feedback in general, if you apply filters to your group of beta testers. Therefore it would also make sense to me to make a BWE for only new players and then compare the feedback and determine what and how it gets implemented, depending on my target group.

Coulter.2315:

I’m sure there will be open beta at some point, if you want to get your opinion in before that (and you stated you would likely buy HoT before release, assuming money isn’t an issue and you’re passionate about testing) then preorder is always an option.

The veteran beta concept was applied to WvW and PvP because there are ways to rank people who do those game types. There is no such system for PvE unless you count achieves and that would probably cause more trouble than the info is worth.

I think Anet setting up a forum with a template for good feedback would be a good system for the next BWE though.

I dont really want to beta test at the moment and give my opinion about HoT to Anet, if I wanted to, I would simply purchase HoT now. This post is not about how HoT should be like but about the process of getting there.

This is possibly the most arrogant & self-deluded thread I’ve seen in a while.
I’m playing since 2 years now, became admin of a Server-community & post on these forum regularly. Still I do not posses the audacity to imagine my opinion being more important than that of others. Regardless how good your actual education is, it is simply impossible for you – or anyone – to emulate the preferences of the majority accordingly. Even tho a good chunk of feedback is worthless from a technical POV, it still very clearly communicates what this player liked, or did not, therefore generating data that just needs to get filtered properly (a-nets job, not yours) to display the actual preferences of the community, hence enabling a-net to possibly craft the best-received expansion possible. If they achieve it or not, is up to discussion, but restricting incoming feedback to a insignificantly small minority would cripple them right off the bat.

You love this game properly as much as I do, or the guy currently grinding queensdale with his first warri.
You know about this game as much as I do, and everyone else who is able to read the wiki.
You understand the technical aspect of the game about as good as I do, which is exactly as much as every new player potentially could do, if he has a IT background, which still pales in comparison to the guys who actually programmed it and know what the engine allows & what not, what can cause issues & which bugs are related to which part of the game.

Your input is as important as mine, and as important as that of every nub. Your ability to give decently structured feedback does not increase the value of said feedback. Get off your high horse and rather post constructive feedback, instead of theorizing together your own brew of “constructive feedback format”.

Also, buy HoT if you want to play the beta. No freebees for you, just because you paid earlier than some other people for it. In fact, we already got a free character slot, so yea, you get 800 gems for free by purchasing it now.

My problems with this:

1) A bit of entitlement leaking out there
2) The purpose of a beta is play test an unfinished product, nothing more or less
3) This “We’re vets Anet, treat us special” mentality is a bit selfish
•There won’t be a special vets BWE, forum or otherwise.

Arantheal.7396:

This is possibly the most arrogant & self-deluded thread I’ve seen in a while.
I’m playing since 2 years now, became admin of a Server-community & post on these forum regularly. Still I do not posses the audacity to imagine my opinion being more important than that of others. Regardless how good your actual education is, it is simply impossible for you – or anyone – to emulate the preferences of the majority accordingly. Even tho a good chunk of feedback is worthless from a technical POV, it still very clearly communicates what this player liked, or did not, therefore generating data that just needs to get filtered properly (a-nets job, not yours) to display the actual preferences of the community, hence enabling a-net to possibly craft the best-received expansion possible. If they achieve it or not, is up to discussion, but restricting incoming feedback to a insignificantly small minority would cripple them right off the bat.

You love this game properly as much as I do, or the guy currently grinding queensdale with his first warri.
You know about this game as much as I do, and everyone else who is able to read the wiki.
You understand the technical aspect of the game about as good as I do, which is exactly as much as every new player potentially could do, if he has a IT background, which still pales in comparison to the guys who actually programmed it and know what the engine allows & what not, what can cause issues & which bugs are related to which part of the game.

Your input is as important as mine, and as important as that of every nub. Your ability to give decently structured feedback does not increase the value of said feedback. Get off your high horse and rather post constructive feedback, instead of theorizing together your own brew of “constructive feedback format”.

Also, buy HoT if you want to play the beta. No freebees for you, just because you paid earlier than some other people for it. In fact, we already got a free character slot, so yea, you get 800 gems for free by purchasing it now.

Oh my. I guess you only read the op and didnt care to read my other posts, so i will clear some things up again.
I never said that veteran feedback should get more consideration from Anet than feedback from new players. And I never said they should give new players less access to beta testing than right now.
And i bolded the part i strongly disagree with. Personally, I know significantly more about all aspects of the game compared to 2 or 3 years ago, so i feel better qualified to give valuable feedback now compared to 2 years ago.

I also mentioned that i dont want to beta test atm and i didnt make this post because i feel excluded.

I understand your thinking in how this would improve feedback. But I am inclined to agree with some of the other posters in that a veteran player does not mean they will be good at giving feedback.

I think what the forums and devs could benefit with is an improved forum interface. Maybe one that had an internal ranking system that could promote positive feedback. If an arena-net employee sees a post that has very good feedback, they could increase the user’s score. Once a user has hit a threshold they would gain access to a new portion of the forums that only users above a certain point could access. The forums currently are made up of about 20% good feedback, 20% random “i wants”, 40% of “I dislike x and will make sure everyone knows it” then 20% of trolling. (Numbers do not represent any facts at all, but are my opinion on browsing the forums daily.)

The hardest part for the staff is to weed through all the posts finding the 20% good feedback. They really need a section that a user has to earn in order to have access to. Of course this whole idea would get shut down by the vocal 80% that do not ever post positive feedback.

But in the end, I still stick by my thought that the majority of happy people playing the game do not ever touch the forums. So how do you implement a system to weed out the good feedback from the bad? That would be the real issue, rather than trying to say who is a veteran or not.

Zypher.7609:

I understand your thinking in how this would improve feedback. But I am inclined to agree with some of the other posters in that a veteran player does not mean they will be good at giving feedback.

I think what the forums and devs could benefit with is an improved forum interface. Maybe one that had an internal ranking system that could promote positive feedback. If an arena-net employee sees a post that has very good feedback, they could increase the user’s score. Once a user has hit a threshold they would gain access to a new portion of the forums that only users above a certain point could access. The forums currently are made up of about 20% good feedback, 20% random “i wants”, 40% of “I dislike x and will make sure everyone knows it” then 20% of trolling. (Numbers do not represent any facts at all, but are my opinion on browsing the forums daily.)

The hardest part for the staff is to weed through all the posts finding the 20% good feedback. They really need a section that a user has to earn in order to have access to. Of course this whole idea would get shut down by the vocal 80% that do not ever post positive feedback.

But in the end, I still stick by my thought that the majority of happy people playing the game do not ever touch the forums. So how do you implement a system to weed out the good feedback from the bad? That would be the real issue, rather than trying to say who is a veteran or not.

An unfolding access to less whiny forums? I’d love that. How many +1s would I have to get for something that wonderful?

Rauderi.8706:

Zypher.7609:

I understand your thinking in how this would improve feedback. But I am inclined to agree with some of the other posters in that a veteran player does not mean they will be good at giving feedback.

I think what the forums and devs could benefit with is an improved forum interface. Maybe one that had an internal ranking system that could promote positive feedback. If an arena-net employee sees a post that has very good feedback, they could increase the user’s score. Once a user has hit a threshold they would gain access to a new portion of the forums that only users above a certain point could access. The forums currently are made up of about 20% good feedback, 20% random “i wants”, 40% of “I dislike x and will make sure everyone knows it” then 20% of trolling. (Numbers do not represent any facts at all, but are my opinion on browsing the forums daily.)

The hardest part for the staff is to weed through all the posts finding the 20% good feedback. They really need a section that a user has to earn in order to have access to. Of course this whole idea would get shut down by the vocal 80% that do not ever post positive feedback.

But in the end, I still stick by my thought that the majority of happy people playing the game do not ever touch the forums. So how do you implement a system to weed out the good feedback from the bad? That would be the real issue, rather than trying to say who is a veteran or not.

An unfolding access to less whiny forums? I’d love that. How many +1s would I have to get for something that wonderful?

No idea, but tell you what I would be posting daily with good feedback to get access to it. Mostly I stick to reddit now for a generally less whiny experience.

If a product wants to succeed it should the the opinion of everyone not just a few self-important “veterans.” Everybody’s opinion should be heard and considered.

So no. Also why? There are a lot of veterans here that I wouldn’t trust to provide feedback. I certainly don’t want them telling arena net what is good or bad.

Wanze.8410:

My goal is not to make Anet only listening to veteran feedback, I am just trying to find a way to streamline better feedback, regardless if that feedback is implemented in the game or not.
I am not trying to highlight or filter good feedback but to minimize unconstructive feedback.

I agree that better feedback is necessary; I don’t think a veteran BWE would accomplish it. I think two things are necessary for better feedback:
1. More dev interaction.
2. More player education on good feedback.

Perhaps I’m overly pessimistic but I don’t believe either is possible here. The first because company policy and/or time availability inhibits dev interaction and the second because most players don’t care enough.

Enough with my pessimism though…how could this work? Perhaps a CDI style feedback thread for each issue (Chronomancer, Tempest, Revenant, events, maps, etc).

Start with Gaile or an appropriate dev creating a feedback thread that starts with an overview of the discussion and rules for posting. The rules and overview post is important to tell players what’s expected and what the devs need to know in feedback. It also tells them how to give the feedback.

Follow that with strict moderation that deletes any post not meeting those rules. The heavy moderation is important to keep the thread on track and acts as a negative reinforcement of the rules; if you can’t follow the rules then you forfeit your voice.

Also, frequent dev acknowledgement of the topics discussed would be important. Frequent being at least every other day, preferably every day though. Dev attention alone is usually enough to keep threads civil and on topic. It also allows the feedback to be a discussion instead of a one sided rant.

I don’t think that veerans with thousands of hours played could speak to the needs and desires of those not yet so engaged in the game. The sort of bias this could create could very well cripple the game.