Back to the original topic:

I think that they could do a better job with getting the word out to the major websites.

IGN lists the release date as "TBD" and does not include Elemental on their list of upcoming games.  That should really be addressed.

Gamespot does correctly list the release date, but the preorder info lists it as a $70 game instead of a $50 dollar game since they are linking to the limited edition for some reason.  This probably makes the game much less appealing to people who havent heard it before but might be interested (a $70 price tag will probably turn off a lot of gamers, $50 is to be expected).

I've seen a good number of previews for the game considering its indie nature and Civ 5 looming large, so good job with that.

Well GameFaqs has it listed, dated and everything. Apparently IslandDog is haunting those forums now... hmm, not sure telling people you have to use Impulse for updates and multiplayer and pretty much leaving it at that is a great well to spread interest though.

Civ 5, no thanks because of the intrusive DRM. Starcraft 2, loved it, played it, finished it in about 5 days of VERY casual play, was just wayyy to easy. SC2 had a good little story, but the single player game was just wayyy to short and the multiplayer doesnt interest me, to much of a clickfest. I still play MoM today, looking forward to Elemental, pre-ordered it over a month ago.

There's no doubt quite a few people here (like me) who didn't buy Sins until after release based on good word of mouth (or for me the demo). So I don't remember that beta. I do remember the Entrenchment beta, which included both systems testing (mines, oh god) and balance testing. Being an expansion that can be expected to operate differently then a new game, but it's clearly not obvious that a beta test won't include a balance phase.

I normally view the balance/gameplay phase as the most important part of beta testing. I can usually trust that companies will get their technical issues hammered out, but whether the game flows the way it's supposed to, whether it's fun and every unit and building has a purpose and whether the AI gives you a challenge is what will make or break it, and what you really need a good sized group of testers to help out with. The rest can be done internally.

I'm not sure that the reasons for only testing this internally are as obvious as implied. In fact the most obvious and common reasons why companies do this are negative ones (they don't want the bad PR of people seeing it). Perhaps, as said, if I had been following Sins in the beta stage it would make more sense, however I'm guessing most people on these forums did not.

Yeah. I mean League of Legends was in beta for months, and that was mostly balance testing. The idea that the actual gameplay shouldn't be assembled and then tested as part of the beta process is unique to Stardock. It's not obvious at all.

You're skipping Civ5 due to "Intrusive DRM" yet you're fine with Starcraft2, which has far, far worse?  I don't really know what to say to that.

Starcraft 2 is worse than Civ V? Really? Because if you are not online you can play the game but get no achievements?  Something else maybe?

No LAN option, for starters?  The way battle.net went down and people couldn't continue their campaigns?

I'm not bashing on Starcraft 2 or anything like that, but axing Civ5 for DRM while being fine with Starcraft 2 is... strange.

Well, I don't know if it was obvious (it isn't for me), but I don't remember that fact said clearly when it was announced that pre-orders would be able to beta test the game. Nor looking at the early dev journals about beta plans I see any reference saying that the final beta phase wouldn't be public.

Maybe it would be an improvement saying those things clearly next time (or maybe my search-fu is weak and it was said and I missed the post).

Not to mention region locking the game's multiplayer...

I think what's getting in the way here with regards to a near-final beta is the idea that "betas aren't supposed to be fun" which Brad has mentioned a few times.  However, testing balance and fun with a near-final beta may be fun, but it also has two perhaps much more important purposes - refining balance and "the fun aspect" on a larger scale, and also giving players (most beta testers are fans) a great deal of confidence in the state of the game when it *is* released.  And that can be really important, in terms of sales, goodwill and thus the number of people who buy early.  These things are still very relevant to an independent company like Stardock, and can not (and arguably "should not" - showing my bias here ;-)) be underestimated.

What do other people think?

Best regards,
Steven.

I wouldn't classify a lack of LAN option as "DRM". When I think DRM, I think of some crap like SECUROM. Then again, I believe that was Civ 4, not Civ 5. Steam isn't exactly a rootkit, virus-like DRM like SECUROM.

I really, really hate this too. I have friends, shocking I know, outside my region. I think it's silly that I can't play with them or some of them try to pressure me to buy the Euro version. ugh.

Your certainly correct that managing PR in a beta is extremely important. During early to mid beta it's fairly common for there to be a Non Disclosure Agreement of some kind. This is because at that point the beta is frequently not fun yet, and they don't want people talking about how awful it is on public forums and things like that because that can be a PR nightmare. Usually however when the game is actually close to being finished, when it plays well and is actually fun, the NDA is lifted and beta testers are encouraged to talk about their experiences. This is because it's good advertising and they want the beta testers to be able to talk about how great the game is now. This is what makes it rather unusual that they are not allowing people to see the final version, because in theory they should want people to be talking about how much better it is.

I may be out of my depth here and as this is my first post here I might not even know what I am talking about.  I have been a big silent follower of the game for a very very long time so I assume that we are going to get heaps of people like myself that will come out of the wood works when the time comes to buy the game.  I could always suggest that it might be an idea if you already mod for other games that you post something about this in other forums about the modding capabilites which could in turn attract more attention.

Well at least that is my 2 cents and I am sure someone else has already stated that before. 

I assume the only way to find out whether the concept of testing the final beta internally is effective will be to play the finished product. I agree that the concept of beta testing seems to work differently here than what is considered standard, but I reserve my final judgement until I've experienced the game.

Please tell me that Elemental does NOT region lock their multiplayer.

Stardockians? Yes/No?

Region lock? What the hell is that exactly?

He is talking about locking out cross-region online matches, i.e. someone located in the United States playing against someone located in Europe, like Blizzard is doing with Starcraft 2 (big mistake!). I don't know about Stardock's policy, but it would genuinely surprise me if they did.

Ah...thanks for the explanation!

Why does Blizzard do this? To secure better/faster connections, to save money or what?

I'm positive they won't.  They have zero reason to.

The ultimate reason for everything in this world: to earn more money.

Or at least they think it will earn them more money.  Getting more money when you already have gazillions is so ho-hum - getting more money beyond a certain threshold doesn't particularly make life any more satisfying.  Money for the sake of money is the ultimate road to well, nowhere that important.  And the more "more money" becomes the focus, the less of all the important things are that are essential for it.  In the end, the product has to be basically functional and useful, but if too many corners are cut...

Best regards,
Steven.