The Dangers of the Beta-Demo

The Battlefield 3 beta has become a cautionary tale of how not to do a beta.

Betas have become a popular marketing tool in recent years. It’s odd when you think about it. We praise “polished” games but jump through marketing hoops to play an unfinished one. Personally, I think it’s the industry’s insane demand for the new, New, NEW that drives us to consume that NEW thing even through it’s not actually complete. But that’s a discussion for another blog. For now, I’m more interested in what happens when this marketing train flies off the tracks.

This year we’ve had four major betas: Gears of War 3, Uncharted 3, Assassin’s Creed: Revelations, and Battlefield 3, the latter of which has become a cautionary tale of how not to do a beta.

Like all PR nightmares, the core problem with the Battlefield 3 beta was one of messaging. While developer DICE said “beta, beta, beta,” what consumers saw was “demo, demo, demo.” And it was not a good demo. Not only was it a poor representation of the franchise, lacking the major features that set Battlefield apart from other shooters (there were no vehicles and precious little in the way of destructible environments), but it was also buggy as hell. Kill Cams regularly fell through the world, so would the player if you went prone, you could spawn on dead squad mates, etc, etc. Naturally, this didn’t sit well with gamers, who complained loudly. The complaints so annoyed DICE’s Community Manager Daniel Matros that he chided gamers on the community forum:

Right now, I am not in the mood to even browse in here and check out most parts of the forum. The beta is a privilege, not a right. The vibe I'm getting now is just that tons of ungrateful people don't understand how much work we are putting on this game how many overtime hours we are doing and also how many meetings we are in to ship a game like this.”

While I can sympathize with someone faced with an onslaught of negative criticism, Matros’s response highlights just how out of touch DICE was with their community.

The Battlefield 3 beta wasn’t a privilege. It may have been a privilege for its first couple days of release, when access was limited to those who had pre-ordered copies of Medal of Honor the previous year, but then the beta opened to everyone and became a demo. It was made widely available on the PC, Xbox LIVE, and Playstation Network, it was heavily promoted on the Xbox dashboard and PSN homepage, it was free, and most importantly it was starting mere weeks from the game’s actual release date.

This timing was the biggest issue. People understand that a beta is a naturally unfinished product, but the closer that a game gets to release, the more complete we assume it to be. So to release the naturally unfinished beta mere weeks from the actual release date means that those inevitable bugs and technical issues become unfairly indicative of the final product. Put simply -- and obviously -- a beta-demo should be more like a demo and less like a beta.

That kind of polish isn’t just there to boost consumer perceptions of quality but actual quality as well. DICE made several changes to the multiplayer based on feedback from beta and promoted this fact to anyone that would listen in an attempt at PR damage control, but these changes caused more problems. Since the time between the beta and the game’s release was so short, those multiplayer changes had to be incorporated in a Day 1 patch, and it was too late to get them on the disc. EA apparently thought that these changes were so significant that it was worth delaying review copies being sent to press outlets, thereby forcing reviewers to play patched version of the game rather than an early, unpatched version. As a result of all this, there were very few early reviews of Battlefied 3.

Not only does this harm the perception of the game’s quality -- we’ve all been trained by the movie industry to know that if a studio doesn’t provide review copies of a product for the press ahead of time, it’s probably a shitty product -- but it also gives competing games a chance to steal valuable hype. Uncharted 3, which came out a week later, had reviewers gushing with praise, and those positive reviews were plastered all over gaming websites the week of Battlefield’s release.


You can follow the Moving Pixels blog on Twitter.

The beta-demo has a fine line to walk, and EA clearly slipped this time. With betas being an established and popular marketing tool, it’s important for publishers to take note of what EA did wrong and keep that in mind when creating their own beta schedule. Hype, after all, is a very fickle thing.

The year in song reflected the state of the world around us. Here are the 70 songs that spoke to us this year.

70. The Horrors - "Machine"

On their fifth album V, the Horrors expand on the bright, psychedelic territory they explored with Luminous, anchoring the ten new tracks with retro synths and guitar fuzz freakouts. "Machine" is the delicious outlier and the most vitriolic cut on the record, with Faris Badwan belting out accusations to the song's subject, who may even be us. The concept of alienation is nothing new, but here the Brits incorporate a beautiful metaphor of an insect trapped in amber as an illustration of the human caught within modernity. Whether our trappings are technological, psychological, or something else entirely makes the statement all the more chilling. - Tristan Kneschke

Keep reading... Show less

This has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it.

It hardly needs to be said that the last 12 months haven't been everyone's favorite, but it does deserve to be noted that 2017 has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it. Other longtime dreamers either reappeared or kept up their recent hot streaks, and a number of relative newcomers established their place in what has become one of the more robust rock subgenre subcultures out there.

Keep reading... Show less

​'The Ferryman': Ephemeral Ideas, Eternal Tragedies

The current cast of The Ferryman in London's West End. Photo by Johan Persson. (Courtesy of The Corner Shop)

Staggeringly multi-layered, dangerously fast-paced and rich in characterizations, dialogue and context, Jez Butterworth's new hit about a family during the time of Ireland's the Troubles leaves the audience breathless, sweaty and tearful, in a nightmarish, dry-heaving haze.

"Vanishing. It's a powerful word, that"

Northern Ireland, Rural Derry, 1981, nighttime. The local ringleader of the Irish Republican Army gun-toting comrades ambushes a priest and tells him that the body of one Seamus Carney has been recovered. It is said that the man had spent a full ten years rotting in a bog. The IRA gunslinger, Muldoon, orders the priest to arrange for the Carney family not to utter a word of what had happened to the wretched man.

Keep reading... Show less

Aaron Sorkin's real-life twister about Molly Bloom, an Olympic skier turned high-stakes poker wrangler, is scorchingly fun but never takes its heroine as seriously as the men.

Chances are, we will never see a heartwarming Aaron Sorkin movie about somebody with a learning disability or severe handicap they had to overcome. This is for the best. The most caffeinated major American screenwriter, Sorkin only seems to find his voice when inhabiting a frantically energetic persona whose thoughts outrun their ability to verbalize and emote them. The start of his latest movie, Molly's Game, is so resolutely Sorkin-esque that it's almost a self-parody. Only this time, like most of his better work, it's based on a true story.

Keep reading... Show less

There's something characteristically English about the Royal Society, whereby strangers gather under the aegis of some shared interest to read, study, and form friendships and in which they are implicitly agreed to exist insulated and apart from political differences.

There is an amusing detail in The Curious World of Samuel Pepys and John Evelyn that is emblematic of the kind of intellectual passions that animated the educated elite of late 17th-century England. We learn that Henry Oldenburg, the first secretary of the Royal Society, had for many years carried on a bitter dispute with Robert Hooke, one of the great polymaths of the era whose name still appears to students of physics and biology. Was the root of their quarrel a personality clash, was it over money or property, over love, ego, values? Something simple and recognizable? The precise source of their conflict was none of the above exactly but is nevertheless revealing of a specific early modern English context: They were in dispute, Margaret Willes writes, "over the development of the balance-spring regulator watch mechanism."

Keep reading... Show less
Pop Ten
Mixed Media
PM Picks

© 1999-2017 All rights reserved.
Popmatters is wholly independently owned and operated.