test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Early Access Eligibility Criteria
nitocris83
Member, Cryptic Developer, Administrator Posts: 4,498Cryptic Developer › Cryptic Developer
Greetings Adventurers!
We have recently begun gathering a focus group to provide early feedback on upcoming content and we understand there are questions from the community in regards to eligibility. While there are some general qualities we look for, the criteria is subject to change based on the content focus and the feedback type being sought. If the content is heavily reliant on theorycrafting, we will turn to some community members who have shown a history of quality feedback in that area; If the content is based on X focus of the game, we would look for players who have shown dedication and interest in X area.
What are the general eligibility criteria?
We appreciate the community excitement around these initiatives and we hope they remain a positive experience to ensure future early access projects!
EDIT: Early Access groups are by invitation only, not application. Players are welcomed to let us know they are interested in participating in future initiatives!
We have recently begun gathering a focus group to provide early feedback on upcoming content and we understand there are questions from the community in regards to eligibility. While there are some general qualities we look for, the criteria is subject to change based on the content focus and the feedback type being sought. If the content is heavily reliant on theorycrafting, we will turn to some community members who have shown a history of quality feedback in that area; If the content is based on X focus of the game, we would look for players who have shown dedication and interest in X area.
What are the general eligibility criteria?
- History of high quality feedback (well expressed, constructive, relevant)
- No history of abusive behavior or toxicity
- Access to a PC (all early access is done on Owlbear)
- Ability to communicate in English (English does not need to be the primary language of the player but there has to be enough level of fluency to play the game and provide feedback in English)
- Being critical of the game (as long as it remains non-abusive) is not a disqualifying criteria
We appreciate the community excitement around these initiatives and we hope they remain a positive experience to ensure future early access projects!
EDIT: Early Access groups are by invitation only, not application. Players are welcomed to let us know they are interested in participating in future initiatives!
Post edited by nitocris83 on
10
Comments
Edit: I would love to be considered for such a group.
Contagion - Cleric
Testament - Wizard
Pestilence - Ranger
Dominion - Paladin
NIGHTSWATCH
since I Got the feedback/ posts and history to back me up Also a Mod 9 Pvp feedback pvp Siege Tester
I also spearheaded the last Pvp with the Devs event in the forums and was at the event
And gave tons of feedback on the pvp CC resistance stack system and throughout the Pvp forum section over the years
https://www.reddit.com/r/Neverwinter/comments/bzy5ei/we_are_the_the_neverwinter_systems_team_ask_us/
Question ?
Are there any plans to make some new PVP maps? Running the same 4 over and over again is getting boring, some new scenery would be nice. Are there any plans on making new PVP gear that is actually more viable then PVE gear? Since the removal of tenacity it's been more beneficial to wear PVE gear and to avoid using PVP gear at all. I know you guys are probably sick of hearing about it but do you have any plans to revive the combat league?
NoworriesDev dev responds
there is a no and two yes as answers, as to which is which, the future will tell
Also will be specified which aspect we are meant to be testing or is this a "Give us all feedback" kind of thing?
I too wish to be recreated, and to be loved long after my death.
Anyhow...involving players like this is a good thing, IMO.
I'll clarify in my original post since I can see the confusion!
Consider having a process by which people can nominate others to be in this group so that you have an improved chance of finding the people that are well regarded/respected in the community.
As an example; while I certainly would not mind being part of this group, I would much rather have you include a person like schietindebux who consistently provides valuable insight in stuff I care about (i.e. warlock). I am sure there are many people like that, and the community can tell you who they are.
The reason I say "having a process" is because this would not work too well just in an open thread, as it would rapidly devolve into debates about people and personalities. Maybe have a nomination form or somesuch?
- leaks: leaking issues are relevant as long changes have economic impact. Closed beta testers works greatly imho for class design and balance, with the goal of having a competent analysis about specific ingame aspect. Open testing works better for checking content/items, as it's allowing more people to test them. Separating these two things looks challenging but quite interesting, especially considering players too are more inclined in testing aspect of game they like more.
- listening: changes should be more responsive to feedback posted. Many major bug reported in early open preview days (and i bet on owlbear too) has been looked into after PC's live, that brought to additional work from devs. Reading feedback before going ahead with implementation helps a better prioritization, just a tought.
That said, several mistakes has been made both on players and developer team side, happy to read that didn't stop the process
If there were several groups, let's call it a different task - class balance, economics, and dungeons I am very much in charge of. I would love to help if you really want and listen to the players. Class balance and changes in mechanics have a lot of ideas for players to be happy with their characters. I will gladly help.
When Star Wars: The Old Republic went out of their way to remove all traces of theory-crafting from the MMO, Neverwinter's amazing theory-crafting is exactly what attracted me in the first place. The skill trees were Neverwinter's greatest strength, and it could have easily used more skill trees! It is also exactly what has me so profoundly disappointed with mod 16 since from the outside it looks as though any meaningful and class-relevant theory-crafting has been taken out of the game. I'm not a D&D purist, but I remember the joy of playing through Neverwinter Nights 1 and 2 and making a character from the ground up that was exclusively mine. It didn't matter to me if other players didn't like that I made an Evoker Wizard with 5 levels of Pale Master, 5 levels of Arcane Scholar of Candlekeep, and 5 levels of Red Wizard of Thay. It was fun. That's all that really mattered.
Neverwinters' established player-base enjoy: choices, risk vs reward, power-sharing, specialization, hybridization. Post-mod 16, has left me with a wizard that serves parties better as a tank than any Fighter, Paladin or Barbarian. It's certainly unexpected but I don't know where to go with that. Some skill trees to tweak with could get the wizard back to being an actual wizard... or an even more effective "Magitank".
I'm not asking to be added but for the love of Neverwinter, just give players their skill trees back!
Its awesome to hear this! Im actually very excited for Neverwinters future.
Traxus Atheanes GF
Bastiel Atheanes DC
Ellara Atheanes CW
Keira Atheanes TR
Sarasin Atheanes SW
Jerkface McGee HR
-MANTARA- OP
Also keep in mind than the number of people volunteering to help by providing feedback probably far exceeds the number of people they actually need - and people have different skill sets and areas of expertise. For example, if they were to release a PvP-focused mod (which, by the way would probably not be a smart move), it would be pretty pointless to seek comments from players who never do PvP.
I sort-of know what they were looking for when they did the closed test for M9 and M16, as I participated in both - I have no idea what they are looking for in M17, but I do know that they have already selected the players participating, and probably sent them the NDAs to sign by now.
I am just glad that the problems with the M16 player testing (like the leaks) did not make them give up on soliciting player input under NDAs.
I hope that something different happens from module 16, since some of the beta test of the last module simply abandoned the game and as one of the reasons cited that in several times warned the dev's about how bad this system of scale was, which in fact proved to be, since the zone scale has already been removed.
Having this as an example, I only have to corroborate the words of @metaleiro that in a great post described the real feeling of many players about this forum and the relationship of dev's with the community.
10-20 people means people should just go back to playing the game and providing info for others and providing feedback.
I figure I crossed myself off the list when I got moderated a while back.
Obsidian Oath - Warlock
A whole lot of other Obsidian toons as well.
Instead of doing QA internally tests ( and hiring professional testers like all decent companies do ) you guys keep shooting your own feet using normal players as your testing material.
Thats one of the main reasons game is going down the pipe as it is.
Thats one of the reasons info leaks too early and you watch auction prices going bananas.
And finally.. thats the main reason you get bugs over bugs and bad decisions when you launch a patch.
Get some professional game testers and stop using your players as testers. Players views and opinions are biased torwards their own agendas and you will never get propper neutral feedback. Ever.