Thoughts on you being a free qa tester?.

[Ramstar]

EDIT

Trying this a different way because it seems this is going in the direction of 'that is EA'.. OP updated.

I fully understand what EA is and it's definitions and that we make choices to buy them blah.

FROM A CONSUMER ETHICS POV
- What would be the issue if EA logic was really a free demo like Vein?



ORIGNAL POST
--
I think there should be more game 'demos' like vein so everyone is working for free until a point where paying for it is acceptable.

I get EA games are mostly about the title. I get helping indie devs and making suggestions for improvements. I get indie devs don't have the resource or scale labs to properly test their game so kind of falls on us gamers but where is the balance.

The logic of paying for the game is to fund development time, but we are working for free whilst paying for the privilege.

Thoughts?

[Zarineth]

I wish that people who compare playing EA games to work in QA actually tried working in QA first. Very rarely working in QA have anything to do with actually playing the game.

[Rin]

Цитата допису D. Flame:

They don't cost less and often they cost more.

"OK." And your point is? Buying into EA is optional.

[skOsH♥]

Цитата допису AmsterdamHeavy:

Цитата допису skOsH:

This. Actual testing is not fun at all, very tedious, but if I find a ton of issues with their game and help their devs then I am doing the same thing they should be doing

And if they're getting paid, and I am doing the same monotonous process to also help improve the game, but I am *not* being paid, just having access to the game isn't a fair trade, at all

I'm surprised that companies can't pay people to do this monotonous work because if I use the technique of testing everything for collision/clipping/tangled hitboxes/functionality/environment interaction in a very boring but methodical manner, I would expect to be paid a lot.

But....I do it for free, but sometimes the devs do not fix it correctly or a new bug is created....then it feels like they aren't doing any QA testing themselves.....but I am.....They're getting paid, I'm not, and sometimes I feel like I am putting more effort in

I don't like being free labor. Pay me, or just hire me as a dev. I've made games, and mods for games, and have helped EA titles with the annoying way to test games (instead of just playing), because the amount of bugs and issues you can find increases due to deliberately trying to find them.

No one asked you to do that.

This sounds like one of those street-side windshield washers complaining about not getting paid when no one asked them to clean a windshield in the first place.

But if the people getting paid to QA, aren't doing their jobs, why are they getting paid?

If we want the people that are getting paid to do their jobs, we could not help them with EA bugs and issues with the game...but then...what would happen if they didn't know how to fix the games problems?

Why did they get paid? Are they getting paid to not even wash someone's window?

If so, then the end result is a game that's not well polished

[D. Flame]

Цитата допису Rin:

Цитата допису D. Flame:

They don't cost less and often they cost more.

"OK." And your point is? Buying into EA is optional.

Being optional does not excuse it from criticism.

[BJWyler]

Цитата допису Ramstar:

EDIT

Trying this a different way because it seems this is going in the direction of 'that is EA'.. OP updated.

I fully understand what EA is and it's definitions and that we make choices to buy them blah.

FROM A CONSUMER ETHICS POV
- What would be the issue if EA logic was really a free demo like Vein?



ORIGNAL POST
--
I think there should be more game 'demos' like vein so everyone is working for free until a point where paying for it is acceptable.

I get EA games are mostly about the title. I get helping indie devs and making suggestions for improvements. I get indie devs don't have the resource or scale labs to properly test their game so kind of falls on us gamers but where is the balance.

The logic of paying for the game is to fund development time, but we are working for free whilst paying for the privilege.

Thoughts?

Well, the problem may not necessarily be that you don't "get" EA, but clearly that you don't understand what QA and the actual testing process involves. And the vast majority of gamers don't.

If you buy into Early Access, or any early development of the game, you are helping to fund the game, and getting to play some content as a bonus.

Actual testing is a mind-numbingly repetitive process that involves filling out detailed forms when issues are discovered. Playing the content is not actual testing, so you are not working for free.

[crunchyfrog]

Цитата допису BJWyler:

Цитата допису Ramstar:

EDIT

Trying this a different way because it seems this is going in the direction of 'that is EA'.. OP updated.

I fully understand what EA is and it's definitions and that we make choices to buy them blah.

FROM A CONSUMER ETHICS POV
- What would be the issue if EA logic was really a free demo like Vein?



ORIGNAL POST
--
I think there should be more game 'demos' like vein so everyone is working for free until a point where paying for it is acceptable.

I get EA games are mostly about the title. I get helping indie devs and making suggestions for improvements. I get indie devs don't have the resource or scale labs to properly test their game so kind of falls on us gamers but where is the balance.

The logic of paying for the game is to fund development time, but we are working for free whilst paying for the privilege.

Thoughts?

Well, the problem may not necessarily be that you don't "get" EA, but clearly that you don't understand what QA and the actual testing process involves. And the vast majority of gamers don't.

If you buy into Early Access, or any early development of the game, you are helping to fund the game, and getting to play some content as a bonus.

Actual testing is a mind-numbingly repetitive process that involves filling out detailed forms when issues are discovered. Playing the content is not actual testing, so you are not working for free.

This is absolutely true.

I did a TINY amount of testing back in the day for a few things.

I wrote for certain gaming magazines in the PS1 and 2 era. I got to do mostly walkthroughs and guides, but I'd also review as well or write the odd story (usually when someone else cound't be arsed).

And because of this I'd get game discs about 2-3 months before release. I'd have around a month to work on a piece before it needed to be finished and sent in. Then they had to get the magazine ready for the printers one month before release. So these would mean that the magazine release would coincide with a game's release a lot of the time.

Because of this some games were already "gold" by the time I got them, but other times they weren't quite finished and I'd regularly be working off unfinished code, and receive regular updated discs to do the next "bit". I have quite a few for Colin McRae Rally 2.0 for example.

Anywho, on a few rare occasions I gave some other feedback and as thanks I'd sometimes end up testing a small thing for someone. While it wasn't the whole game, it would usuall be a small facet or area. I once tested a load of those Action Replay discs for Datel.

And testing is laborious and not fun at all.

For something like an open world game it involves going round the map and painstakingly pushing up against every single asset and bit of the enivronment to see if you clip out or get stuck. FOR HOURS.

Or in something like a racing game, doing the same plus driving round in reverse and other silly things to try and break it.

Testing is not a fun endeavour. It traditionally used to be one of the ways to get a foot in the door at gaming jobs, as it was such a dogsbody job, it was much the same as "teaboy".

[D. Flame]

Цитата допису crunchyfrog:

And testing is laborious and not fun at all.

Testing is not a fun endeavour.

False. Testing is fun, and even better if you get paid to do it.

[Komarimaru]

Цитата допису D. Flame:

Цитата допису crunchyfrog:

And testing is laborious and not fun at all.

Testing is not a fun endeavour.

False. Testing is fun, and even better if you get paid to do it.

As one who did it for 8 years before getting into a different field. I beg to differ since that depends entirely on what you're testing.

[Tito Shivan]

Цитата допису Komarimaru:

As one who did it for 8 years before getting into a different field. I beg to differ since that depends entirely on what you're testing.

Some people find peace and even fun on a grindy and repetitive job. Just like some people have fun playing grindy games.

The problem with QA in gaming is too many people think it's the easy entry-job into the industry and it'll be 'just playing games'. It's actually quite of an dead end route intro the industry for the most part.

[Komarimaru]

Цитата допису Tito Shivan:

Цитата допису Komarimaru:

As one who did it for 8 years before getting into a different field. I beg to differ since that depends entirely on what you're testing.

Some people find peace and even fun on a grindy and repetitive job. Just like some people have fun playing grindy games.

The problem with QA in gaming is too many people think it's the easy entry-job into the industry and it'll be 'just playing games'. It's actually quite of an dead end route intro the industry for the most part.

It's wasn't easy nor fun at a certain company starting with a B. People loved the games, sure, bit they're no idea the testing that was done on said games. Brutal hours, lists from hell, etc.

[D. Flame]

Цитата допису Tito Shivan:

Цитата допису Komarimaru:

As one who did it for 8 years before getting into a different field. I beg to differ since that depends entirely on what you're testing.

Some people find peace and even fun on a grindy and repetitive job. Just like some people have fun playing grindy games.

The problem with QA in gaming is too many people think it's the easy entry-job into the industry and it'll be 'just playing games'. It's actually quite of an dead end route intro the industry for the most part.

I will play one section on a game over and over again, letting myself die or reloading a save hundreds of times, just to learn the quirks to figure out what is causing a bug or to perfect a new technique or strategy for beating a boss.


Initial video, near the end of the testing and learning process:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7uYl5afN2cI

Strategy perfected:
https://youtu.be/DZq3AnAZlDg?si=skh5EnRin9xh4NMo