Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[inteuniso]

I recently introduced the wonderful Kerbal Space Program to my physics teacher (for what should be obvious reasons) and he said something interesting to me. "You're doing their work for free."

I briefly argued the point that I enjoyed Kerbal Space Program, and certainly don't mind testing the game for a team who's developing a game that is quite intriguing, on quite a low budget. But what he said got to me. Am I doing someone else's work for free? When you beta (or alpha) test, you apply to a job of testing a game that is not finished, and to find bugs that the developers will consequently fix. Your compensation? You get to play a buggy version of a game without all of the features promised in the final version.

Now, I don't mind doing this for small companies. Dwarf Fortress, Kerbal Space Program, Starfarer, and others don't have the kind of funds to pay me to find bugs. But what about other companies? Companies who DO have the funds, but instead have twisted the Beta Test from a job into a sneak peek at what's to come.

Take, for example, Starcraft 2. Did those who played the beta receive a free copy of the game? A multiplayer key? A cool hat? Did they actually receive anything in the form of compensation for work completed? To be fair, this is not a new trend. I remember the old days of Warhammer 40k: Dawn of War, and its' multiplayer beta. I found a bug during a multiplayer match, as I'm sure thousands of others did. I have to this day not gotten a single thing commemorating or rewarding me for the help I gave to the developers.

And so, I ask all of you. Is this right? Should we volunteer to do a job that historically has received monetary or other compensation? Please, discuss.

[Sowelu]

If I take a walk in the park and I pick up a piece of litter, should the city pay me?

[Dsarker]

Aren't we already compensated? I don't do any beta testing, (unless you count DF and KSP), but they're trying to make games that people enjoy. Fair enough, more people playing means more people buying. But they recognise that those who are beta testing will be more likely to tell them something useful if they're doing it from outside of the company (would you tell the guy who is keeping you in a job that their idea is complete crap?), and the reason they don't give rewards is because of the unbalanced nature that people will complain about it ("I wasn't selected for the beta, but I should still get X piece of ingame gear, otherwise it's not fair!") as opposed to the people that will say its okay.

What you DO get, however, is the ability to give suggestions to developers. Even if simply by the fact that people love having different liquid engines, or that people want animals that wouldn't have been implemented otherwise, you can have an effect.

[Sowelu]

Also, I would never hire someone who can't fill out a real bug report or spend hours looking into a tough issue.  No obligations = no pay, it's that simple.

[Fenrir]

You are doing their work for free.

They do not owe you anything, and you do not owe them anything. If you are willing to do the job without pay, do. If you are not willing to do the job without pay, do not. It is rather simple.

[Leafsnail]

...Aren't they also arguably doing their job for free as indie developers?

[Fenrir]

...Aren't they also arguably doing their job for free as indie developers?

With the exception of Dwarf Fortress, all of the games mentioned are available for sale, so no.

[GlyphGryph]

Also, you aren't really "testing" the game in the way a paid tester would be, at all. YOU aren't really testing it. Especially with multiplayer games, you're playing, and they are testing it by gathering data while that happens. Because you aren't testing, you're playing - the two are very very different.

You're reward for pointing out a bug (assuming you pointed it out in a way that leads to them being able to fix it) is that the bug gets fixed - that some flaw that reduced your enjoyment of the game hopefully no longer does say.

If you WERE getting paid, for the amount of "work" you likely do, it would probably be worth, what, a couple of dollars over the lifetime of the beta test? Most people get at least that much enjoyment out of being able to play the game early, so its an even trade off.

A lot of Betas aren't even Beta Tests at all - while they appreciate bug feedback, they are having a Beta solely to drum up publicity for when the game is actually finished, or to make sure they have enough support to continue working on it.

[Felius]

Depends on what the testing entails. A professional beta tester generally have to play the game in ways that are really not fun, and keep doing that for long periods of time to reproduce specific bugs that appear in very specific conditions. On the other hand, most of us when handled a beta game simply play it as we like, and if we find a bug report it.

If the first, yeah, it's pretty much work, and yeah, if they want me to do that I expect payment. If you're actually playing in a way you like enough to chose to do that instead of what else you could be doing at that moment, then no, no payment should be expected.

[kaijyuu]

It kinda disgusts me that this is a question at all. You were doing it quite contently before someone suggested you should get paid for it. If it was worth your time before, why would it suddenly no longer be worth your time without compensation?


And to legitimately answer your question: No. A real game tester spends hours doing repetitive tasks. If you start spending 8 hours a day, doing everything in the game over and over slightly different ways in the search of bugs, then you can ask for compensation. Casually beta testing it, though? No.

[Lectorog]

One is compensated for testing games. They're giving the game, or part of it, for free; they want you to play and report issues that you want fixed in the full/future game. Both parties are getting something desirable; if anything, the players get the better end: a game pre-play and a chance to contribute to the game.

Now, game developers also pay for people to test. Why? Because they do the job better. It's one thing to have a horde of average players test your game, and quite another to have paid professionals seek out, report, and contribute to fixing bugs and flaws. Another advantage of this approach is that your game isn't unveiled before you want it to be. For many games that come out now, they'd also have to make a level solely for beta testing, unless they wanted to allow players to start the story early.

In short, as has been said, you are compensated for testing games, in your enjoyment of it.

It kinda disgusts me that this is a question at all. You were doing it quite contently before someone suggested you should get paid for it. If it was worth your time before, why would it suddenly no longer be worth your time without compensation?


And to legitimately answer your question: No. A real game tester spends hours doing repetitive tasks. If you start spending 8 hours a day, doing everything in the game over and over slightly different ways in the search of bugs, then you can ask for compensation. Casually beta testing it, though? No.

I think it's just an interesting question being posed. I doubt the OP thinks that casual beta testers should be paid for their testing.

[inteuniso]

It kinda disgusts me that this is a question at all. You were doing it quite contently before someone suggested you should get paid for it. If it was worth your time before, why would it suddenly no longer be worth your time without compensation?

Because it made me think, and it made you reply. I never said I didn't like beta testing. It's fun, and I like to do it. I simply asked whether it was right or not. Frankly, I'm going to continue to beta test.

Your reply does carry merit. However, someone brought up the question, and I realized I hadn't thought about it like that before. Is it wrong to question the status quo?

[Urist Imiknorris]

But you are being compensated for it - you are being paid in the enjoyment of the game.

[Lectorog]

Is it wrong to question the status quo?

It's not wrong to question the status quo. Just remember that it's there for a reason.

[Max White]

No, your not doing their work for free. Your not even looking for bugs, that is an optional extra that they might benefit from. Your 'testing' is just giving them market information on how people like to play the game, and playing a game isn't their work, so your not doing their work in the first place, regardless of if you get paid for it. If you were doing any real testing, you would need to fill out paperwork for it all.

As it is, the marketing division is doing their job by giving you access, and you get to play it if you want, and if you don't want then that is also valuable information to them.