I am currently in two betas that have NDA's. I can't share anything about the games to any of my readers. I just don't understand how a NDA can be better than not having one. Can someone explain to me how it makes it better?
Here are my thoughts on why having an NDA is bad. I think both negative, and positive feedback would benefit the gaming company. Yes, the game is in beta, but do you really think companies invite players to beta thinking oh our game is buggy as heck but lets start beta anyways?
By the time any players test beta the company truly thinks the game is worth letting players see, and play. I could understand a NDA for the alpha stage, but for beta it just doesn't make sense.
Is it better to find out about something after launch that pisses off most players because no one in beta could complain about it? I would think it would be better to let the beta players share their experiences good, or bad. I find having discussions with other players on Google + is a great way to see what other players think.
You don't truly know how players are going to react once the game launches, and if you let them discuss things while the game is in beta the developers could fix it before the game launches. It doesn't always happen in beta.
I don't think most players bash a game just for fun. I think they truly see something that feel needs fixed. If it is a crazy idea than other players will chime in, and let that player know.
It is just frustrating to see things in beta, and it goes to launch. You send feedback during beta, but it goes unnoticed. Three days after launch every player is complaining about it, and ends up making many players quit before they patch it.
I really think NDA's should be for Alpha only, and once a game reaches beta stage the company should be man enough to let players decide if the game is worth playing.
Here are my thoughts on why having an NDA is bad. I think both negative, and positive feedback would benefit the gaming company. Yes, the game is in beta, but do you really think companies invite players to beta thinking oh our game is buggy as heck but lets start beta anyways?
By the time any players test beta the company truly thinks the game is worth letting players see, and play. I could understand a NDA for the alpha stage, but for beta it just doesn't make sense.
Is it better to find out about something after launch that pisses off most players because no one in beta could complain about it? I would think it would be better to let the beta players share their experiences good, or bad. I find having discussions with other players on Google + is a great way to see what other players think.
You don't truly know how players are going to react once the game launches, and if you let them discuss things while the game is in beta the developers could fix it before the game launches. It doesn't always happen in beta.
I don't think most players bash a game just for fun. I think they truly see something that feel needs fixed. If it is a crazy idea than other players will chime in, and let that player know.
It is just frustrating to see things in beta, and it goes to launch. You send feedback during beta, but it goes unnoticed. Three days after launch every player is complaining about it, and ends up making many players quit before they patch it.
I really think NDA's should be for Alpha only, and once a game reaches beta stage the company should be man enough to let players decide if the game is worth playing.
