I mean I am not a businessman nor expert on these topics but as you have mentioned you have a wide pool of testers, probably to the extent that a few people disliking the system isn’t a big deal, shouldn’t it work that if you only have people who like the game test it you’ll still have enough testers?
And I’m pretty sure although it is, as you quote, unpaid labour, even this can be made more productive by having happier/ more enthusiastic testers, which will be able to give more in depth, helpful testing in less time, saving time for you guys too. But as I said, I could be missing something out
Regardless if its unpaid labor or not. If you end up enjoying what your testing, then that time you invested to try and help out is actually worth something!
Though I admit, that I too have been wanting to try beta testing some of your games eventually, but have also been worried if I end up not being able to provide good feedback on it, either because the book wasn’t to my liking or rubbed me the wrong way for whatever reason that I might possibly be thrown on a blacklist to never test a game again. Though this discussion has been illuminating to read.
I’m assuming if someone does get into a private testing of one of your books but they give their reasoning as to why they are unable to provide good feedback after giving it a read on the off chance that they do not like it that you guys wouldn’t really mind so much as long as it wasn’t a consistant issue with that person?
If that’s what I’m understanding then that greatly alleviates my fears in regards to your closed testing processes!
6 Likes
Hm, this is actually a bit illuminating in something we can change. Notably, the only way to get blacklisted for joining and not participating is to do so repeatedly on different betas.
9 Likes
Hey, even I didn’t know that! I though it was more like a 'you didn’t give good enough feedback that one/two times.
And @Kanaya, at the great risk of appearing as a shill for CoG (
) I’d like to point out in general they’re pretty down to earth and not super harsh/ cruel (I mean, it could be to maximise profits as having tons of repeat and unique visitors with tons of back-links and content gives a massive SEO boost, and helps them, or because they’re super nice people) and if there’s any reason you can’t give the expected level of feedback (e.g. exams, financial burden, loss of loved one) I don’t think they’d blacklist you outright and probably give you like one more chance.
1 Like
Speculating about what COG staff will or won’t do is incredibly frustrating. We’ve seen this time and again on the forum from things as simple as “I don’t know how to get [problem/issue/whatever] addressed, there’s no way to get what I want” (Uhm, send us an email??) to people saying “Jason’s going to penalize me for saying this,” to an example like this.
ASK US. Email is usually best. We’re not gods on Mount Olympus, we’re six incredibly busy people, dancing as fast as we can to deliver the #content you like: our games. Everyone on staff is team no drama and we’re pretty transparent.
10 Likes
This seems somewhat familiar to me, so I must have seen it somewhere before.
Are the expectations, rules, requirements etc, for beta testing spelled out in details anywhere?
If not, that might be an idea, to minimize misunderstandings and make the choice to sign up less intimidating. I know I found it really daunting for a long time, mainly because it felt kinda vague to me, which triggered my anxiety.
3 Likes
Yes! On each beta thread there are the same set of instructions for everyone. There really are not rules, there are some guidelines for what we’re looking for, and some specifics on how to sign up. (Hint: how you sign up is the first intellectual hurdle.)
4 Likes
I look at beta testing like an opportunity to do several things.
Before I get into that, however, I want to suggest that legit beta testing is actual work.
For some people, beta testing has devolved into “I get to play for free.”
That’s not beta testing. That’s playing for free.
One of the things I get to do as a beta tester is read through the story.
Not just the one story, but the several forms the story can take with different playthroughs.
The first time that I do a playthrough, I read for comprehension and enjoyment.
After that, I allow myself to start paying attention to where it looks like I might have failed a stat check, or could have selected a more interesting choice.
I will, on my own, and not because anyone told me to beta test this way, open the scene files in Notepad++ (I like using it) and start to look at how stat distribution unfolds over the course of the story, given the different choices.
When I do that, I get interested in thinking about how any given paragraph or sentence is constructed around interacting with a stat.
Let me make up an opposed pair. If you had clarity/obscurity, how would you have to construct your text in order to properly represent those stats? The creative process is what fuels me. Trying to follow in someone’s path of creative thinking, for me, is very enjoyable.
I also like the idea of contributing to a community. In my specific case, the better the company does, then the more chance potential buyers will be waiting for another COG or HG game to drop because they get enjoyment out of titles produced by either brand. Which means… the more potential buyers there are for the game I just submitted to HG.
It’s not like the company even has any sort of multiple choice/personality inventory type of mandatory questionnaire that we have to fill out to be allowed access to a beta.
That aside, having read through the comments so far on this thread, if the fears of any given beta tester is something like… “was my feedback good enough?” then the answer to that is something that has already been stated before in one form or another:
The company/staff (to my knowledge) can’t really give you feedback on your feedback because if they tell you how to do the work you’re doing, then it makes it sound like you’re an employee and you’re not getting paid for your work. But no beta tester is an employee, and should not think they are for whatever reason. Along this line of thinking, I think it wouldn’t hurt to have beta testers sign a “I understand that I am volunteering my time and that I will not receive any monetary compensation” agreement. The company could even put that clause somewhere in a non-disclosure agreement, but we aren’t even required to sign those.
In any case, @Mary_Duffy, (and all other staff) don’t worry about it too much.
Just know that you are respected and appreciated.
5 Likes
It wasn’t entirely speculation? More a fear? I know I read one or two of the looking for testers threads and what I read there is what made me mildly fearful and caused me to assume that. Mostly back to my initial post since you might like the premise of something but how it reads or how it makes you feel could cause you to not like it and therefore become biased in how you review it, you know? Wouldn’t want that to stop me from participating in betas that do peak my interest though.
Though I understand why it’s frustrating. Though, in my case. I never really asked before hand because I understand you guys are busy and I wouldn’t want my message to interrupt anything any of you guys might be busy with. It takes quite awhile for me to get used to people / places and on top of that. I’m still kinda new here and I’m a bit shy to start with.
But that’s just me, I’m not sure about anyone else! I apologize though. Frustrating you in any way wasn’t my intention!
6 Likes
I’m not frustrated with you, but the general air of how things are bruited by folks on the forum without much evidence of anything.
I guess…don’t be fearful of our beta threads? I dunno.
3 Likes
Wait why would they require testers to do that.
That would require a large amount of resources, from hiring legal counsel to draft the NDA to send it to every single tester with a definite signature just in case a tester wants monetary compensation, which is very unlikely.
I’m just kidding-- I speculate the speculation is based on other speculation-- one guy’s a bit shy to contact you guys directly, asks if they should or not, other people think ‘we shouldn’t talk to the leaders directly’ and spread that to other people, exemplified by the rumour you get insta-blacklisted for bad feedback.
2 Likes
The tone of some of the things said can really be off-putting.
“bruited by folks on the forum without much evidence of anything” is not only intimidating (for example) it also says to those less-confident in themselves that you judge what “evidence” they may provide rather harshly.
When looking at the beta threads, the following is most likely the most challenging for people to understand and not take in a threatening manner:
Older threads had something else in it but I can’t recall what it is that I would have changed at this moment.
10 Likes
They don’t, that’s my point. 
1 Like
The funny thing is I’d argue a lot of people agree with your statement that the tone can come off as off putting or intimidating but don’t mention it because they’re intimidated or dissuaded from engaging leaders/ testing.
It is an oddly weird cycle.
1 Like
I’m sorry. I’m genuinely not trying to intimidate anyone.
I was responding to clarify to @Kanaya that I am not frustrated with them in particular, but that I do find general speculation about what the staff does/how we respond to certain things (“I’ll be banned!” “I’ll be blacklisted!” “Jason will do X or Y!”) very frustrating. I don’t judge anyone’s “evidence” harshly, I’m saying there’s usually no evidence. I.e., it’s baseless speculation.
Pro-tip! Don’t guess what we’ll do, just ask! I think I just said that, too:
5 Likes
I was not trying to attack you either, only point out some of the dynamics involved, especially from staff, “leaders” (such as myself) and moderators when communicating with some of the newer folks in the community (or those not as confident in themselves or whatever) …
All of us, no doubt, work on improving our communication - that is something I work on every day.
6 Likes
I’m autistic, so I like for everything to be spelled out in details, with no unknowns, preferably in concise bulletpoints, so it’s easy to get an overview. 
A lack of guidelines is more intimidating to me (and probably some other people), than strict guidelines would be.
Taking this into account, the standard beta test thread is vague and confusing for me personally.
I do love the explaination of different types of feedback, that’s very much exactly what I needed to know regarding that topic.
It’s an unfortunate reality, that writing in a formal or professionel language can easily come of as intimidating.
Much disagreement, both here and on the rest of the internet, seems to stem from unintended use of the wrong tone.
And while I still remember: Is the “dot com” part of Jason’s mail address missing in the guide on purpose, or is it a mistake?
Because, having to go check that that is indeed the ending choice of games uses for their mails, almost made me drop applying.
Mate if it helps I still don’t know-- I send to both and then one will say ‘cannot be sent’ and I’ll try and remember (and forget) what it actually is next time haha
EDIT: But I believe that is a test because they don’t want people who won’t put in the time to read the post to test the game, as they’ll put in the same amount of effort. Just basic reading comprehension
In terms of providing more instructions or rulez for beta testing, as @Carlos.R
otherwise it would be unpaid labor, rather than (as I pointedly used scare quotes for it), “unpaid labor.”
I mean, I suspect some people are intimidated by COG Staff period, just by virtue of us being staff. So in hopes of making you unintimidated: I’m currently wearing pajamas and drinking store brand cola while making pasta and sauce for lunch.
6 Likes
Education doesn’t matter; close reading does.
3 Likes