Ricebug on 17/12/2013 at 00:44
I think it's going to depend on the author and his or her weaknesses and strengths. I ALWAYS have trouble with objectives, for example.
Nightwalker on 17/12/2013 at 15:02
I totally agree with Tannar. I lost track years ago of how many missions I've tested. I've done both Alpha and Beta testing and there is value in both. Not having to worry about AI allows you to check thoroughly for missed textures, sounds, etc. that you might miss otherwise. It's never necessary but, as he said, especially in really large, complex missions, it can be very beneficial.
dbrilliant on 18/12/2013 at 05:50
Quote Posted by Ricebug
I'm pretty far along in my current project and am already anticipating the beta phase. However, there's a couple of questions for those who do the testing.
On a
first test, would you prefer a mission without enemy AI? You'd get the completed mission with no enemies to deal with (unless they're goal-related). This would give you a greater range of freedom to explore, check, etc instead of always having to look over your shoulder.
On the
second testing phase, after the author has fixed everything, you get the mission with everything included. This time, you can focus on tactics, AI interaction, etc.
But I'd like to hear from the beta testers themselves. What's on your wish list? What do you dislike (other than an author ignoring your recommendations)?
After a thousand FMs, this probably sounds like a mute point, but there are still new authors coming on-line (and testers, also).
I like the idea Terry! Sometimes, the first phase may require certain AI, that are mission critical, meaning they're supposed to trigger something later. Those AI should be there, but yes it would allow more freedom to explore and look at texture, script issues etc...
Gloria Creep on 22/12/2013 at 23:36
I would like ALL INCLUSIVE please, in Betatest of course.
Strategy is my kind of playing + all that's in the game: spiders, haunts a.s.o. I love testing with all of it!
:angel:
