I think it's incredible that Valve give this kind of opportunity to both the creator and to the community. Purely as an observer, however, I don't think the beta turned out well.
While mass public testing is probably the most comprehensive way to test and refine something, it depends on a degree of understanding and participation from the audience. Many might be happy to help pound on something to make it break, offer suggestions, and see how it progresses, but I suspect *most* players don't want to be a part of the testing -- they simply want fun, polished entertainment, preferably problem-free. With the newly-ported maps, it was probably frustrating to see bugs that didn't exist in L4D. This "It was already done! How can it be like this?" mentality isn't terribly surprising when it comes to players who just want to play the campaigns they love. As for experiences with Cold Stream, this was undoubtedly compounded by the simple fact that there would always be some portion of players who find it inferior simply because it isn't "a Valve campaign." I liked that the beta testing has been done in L4D2 prime (as opposed to following TF2's separate beta route). I'm curious how others feel about it. I suspect TF2's separation gives a good sense of what percentage of players want to take part in the beta testing. I have no idea what those numbers might look like. That would be really interesting. Personally, I'd love to see Valve undertake this sort of effort again. -- *The Rabbit* _______________________________________________ L4Dmapper mailing list L4Dmapper@list.valvesoftware.com https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/l4dmapper
