I'm a little bit concerned about the length of the beta test

[astronautcowboy]

Do any of you have a Vita and use a Japanese PSN account on it like I do? If so, you might know about Samurai & Dragons, the game that got hit so hard by users on the first day that they had to take it offline for 3 weeks to ready it for re-release.

I don't think these games are even in the same league, be it based on quality and importance to SEGA. However, Samurai & Dragons is a free-to-play game too, and it was beta tested for a a similarly short while before its full release, and was so popular the game broke.

I know there's been an alpha and will be an open beta, but even so I hope SEGA takes their time and releases a stable product instead of one that explodes when the servers get overrun. A LOT of people are going to be playing this game when it comes out, especially if there are no IP blocks in place.

Just my 2 cents.

[Mike]

The Vita version won't be out until next year nor will it entering beta testing until autumn. The upcoming closed beta test on the PC has nothing to do with the Vita version.

[RocSage]

Unknown title with a different dev team that was made specifically for a device that is most likely going to decidely fail

vs

Known successful title with sega's best dev team (usually) made to work on PC.


You have to put into context the expectations of the game. Samurai and Dragons if it is actually popular probably wast expecting such popularity and as such wasn't prepared for the influx of players. PSO2 on the other hand is building on tested software and hardware with a relatively well known amount of players

[Totori]

Yes, also keep in mind that SEGA is expecting a large number of connections. I'm sure the server will be able to take the stress, it most likely has been tested in the Alpha, and from sega themselves.

A server fail might happen, but it won't be as bad, as that Vita title.

[astronautcowboy]

The Vita version won't be out until next year nor will it entering beta testing until autumn. The upcoming closed beta test on the PC has nothing to do with the Vita version.

This wasn't really about the Vita version - more about how SEGA botched a free-to-play game's launch by running a short beta recently.


Unknown title with a different dev team that was made specifically for a device that is most likely going to decidely fail

vs

Known successful title with sega's best dev team (usually) made to work on PC.


You have to put into context the expectations of the game. Samurai and Dragons if it is actually popular probably wast expecting such popularity and as such wasn't prepared for the influx of players. PSO2 on the other hand is building on tested software and hardware with a relatively well known amount of players

I don't know how the Vita's future is relevant.

I understand the dev teams are different but there typically is no such thing as a smooth online launch (just look into the launch of every MMO ever) and I hope SEGA will do enough stress testing before a public release.


Yes, also keep in mind that SEGA is expecting a large number of connections. I'm sure the server will be able to take the stress, it most likely has been tested in the Alpha, and from sega themselves.

A server fail might happen, but it won't be as bad, as that Vita title.

Hopefully the open beta will give them the best idea of the numbers. :D

[Totori]

It's nothing to worry about, I'm sure this is what the test is for, so the release date will be smooth without problems.

[Mike]

This wasn't really about the Vita version - more about how SEGA botched a free-to-play game's launch by running a short beta recently.
Whoops. :wacko: I didn't think that someone would be comparing the servers used by a Vita game and those by a PC game so I assumed you were talking about the Vita version of PSO2.

But anyways, the second alpha pushed hard on the two servers and in the upcoming closed beta, there will be 8 more servers. If the math is correct and server settings haven't changed, there will be 15,000 more available connections than total number of players during the closed beta (115,000 max connections vs. 100,000 participants). There is also the open beta afterwards so I doubt there will be any connection problems.

[RocSage]

I don't know how the Vita's future is relevant.

I understand the dev teams are different but there typically is no such thing as a smooth online launch (just look into the launch of every MMO ever) and I hope SEGA will do enough stress testing before a public release.

It's relevant because it effects prediction models.

If I have a game that is unknown, not advertised, and on a system with a low install base you are going to predict lower numbers of users than the opposite for all those things.

I mean if the system install base is only 100,000 people you aren't going to predict the game is going to have 200,000 users. More likely is you are going to predict maybe 1-10,000 users.

This is relevant because servers can be really expensive. So you rent to your expectations with maybe a little bit more. Becauses of this, Over and under predicting the number of users causes a lose of money either because of server crashes OR over expending on servers so there is a delicate balance.

On the other hand the user base of PS games is probably relatively stable so they likely know the amount of users they are going to have with a 5-10% error bar.

[astronautcowboy]

I would think it would have been easier to predict the S&D user base. Everyone knows exactly how many units the Vita has sold in Japan, and I think it's safe to assume that a free game on a young system with a small library is going to pretty much end up on everyone's memory cards. They could have even based their predictions on the other F2P Vita game, Minna to Issho. All I'm saying is SEGA made mistakes once, it could happen again.


Whoops. :wacko: I didn't think that someone would be comparing the servers used by a Vita game and those by a PC game so I assumed you were talking about the Vita version of PSO2.

It was more of a SEGA comparison. ;)

[RocSage]

I would think it would have been easier to predict the S&D user base. Everyone knows exactly how many units the Vita has sold in Japan, and I think it's safe to assume that a free game on a young system with a small library is going to pretty much end up on everyone's memory cards. They could have even based their predictions on the other F2P Vita game, Minna to Issho. All I'm saying is SEGA made mistakes once, it could happen again.

Vita has an install base of 1.4 million. Are you telling me that you expect sega to spend the money on server space for 1.4 million people? It's important to know where that install base is because US audiences are currently not to into MMOs or JRPGs. So we can cut that number by a lot. We also have to take into account that the asian market is swamped with many MMOs so even "F2P" doesn't guarantee anything more than maybe a burst of popularity. And remember for every user that you plan for that isn't there and those users that never buy anything is a lose to your bottom line. So there are a number of factors to take into consideration.

It could be that Sega gave this team budget and held them to it and they had no money to buy more servers even once there was some hints at popularity.


As far as there being problems... Sega always messes up Phantasy Star stuff so PSO2 will definitely have some mess ups in it. I just don't think this is one of them because this involves another team working with a lot of unknowns that could or could not be their fault. The best laid plans of mice and men and all that you know.

[astronautcowboy]

But that's worldwide sales. In Japan, the number is far less (and you NEED a Japanese PSN account on your Vita to play - trust me, dual accounting is not going to be as prevalent as it is on the PS3).

But...I don't think we're going to see eye to eye on this no matter what I say though, so I'll just leave this issue alone.

[Totori]

But that's worldwide sales. In Japan, the number is far less (and you NEED a Japanese PSN account on your Vita to play - trust me, dual accounting is not going to be as prevalent as it is on the PS3).

But...I don't think we're going to see eye to eye on this no matter what I say though, so I'll just leave this issue alone.

Well, the number isn't far less in Japan. The vita sold quite a good amount, and dual accounting is actually quite cheap. I plan to do so once (if I ever do) get a vita.

[kyuuketsuki]

It's important to know where that install base is because US audiences are currently not to into MMOs or JRPGs.
Wat.
We also have to take into account that the asian market is swamped with many MMOs so even "F2P" doesn't guarantee anything more than maybe a burst of popularity.
... Which would play into the OP's point about servers breaking due to a large number of people attempting to log into the servers day 1.

Anyways, I'm confused about this thread. What does the length of the beta have to do with the possibility of the servers breaking from too many simultaneous sessions? Further, a 10 day closed beta doesn't seem like it's "short". This is a closed beta meant to test some new systems and stress test the servers (with a peak possible population of 100,000). We have no idea how long the open beta will be. Though, again, I don't know what the length of beta testing has to do with server breakage from too many simultaneous sessions. The problem with Samurai-whatever sounds like a problem with not anticipating the popularity of the game and not having enough servers to handle the unexpected surge of players. That's not really something any amount of beta testing can prevent; all they can do is stress test, but no matter how stable the servers are, if there are 20 million simultaneous sessions coming into servers only meant to handle a couple million, something somewhere is going to break.

Pretty much every MMO of any popularity ever has had issues during the opening week or five. WoW's launch was a mess. The only "smooth" launch I can remember witnessing was SWtOR's... and that was only because they had strict limits on population that resulted in multi-hour queues to get on for the first couple weeks.

[RocSage]

Wat.
... Which would play into the OP's point about servers breaking due to a large number of people attempting to log into the servers day 1.

Anyways, I'm confused about this thread. What does the length of the beta have to do with the possibility of the servers breaking from too many simultaneous sessions? Further, a 10 day closed beta doesn't seem like it's "short". This is a closed beta meant to test some new systems and stress test the servers (with a peak possible population of 100,000). We have no idea how long the open beta will be. Though, again, I don't know what the length of beta testing has to do with server breakage from too many simultaneous sessions. The problem with Samurai-whatever sounds like a problem with not anticipating the popularity of the game and not having enough servers to handle the unexpected surge of players. That's not really something any amount of beta testing can prevent; all they can do is stress test, but no matter how stable the servers are, if there are 20 million simultaneous sessions coming into servers only meant to handle a couple million, something somewhere is going to break.

Pretty much every MMO of any popularity ever has had issues during the opening week or five. WoW's launch was a mess. The only "smooth" launch I can remember witnessing was SWtOR's... and that was only because they had strict limits on population that resulted in multi-hour queues to get on for the first couple weeks.

The US market has very few MMOs because they don't sell well right now apparently. We get about 1 or 2 a year, if that. The asian markets have several a year coming out.

The OP says nothing about the servers breaking due to popularity, but rather breaking due to not being tested.

Closed Beta is not for stress testing in general. Closed beta is for cleaning up the system and checking for bugs in systems with a small known group pretty much. Open Beta is for stress testing. All testing is meant to slowly ramp up the servers to test their stability with higher and higher populations.

There is a bit of confusion though because different companies have different section of development being called different things. Some companies have alpha testing and other don't. Some companies split beta into beta and alpha. But to be most accurate if you are not being paid you are not in an alpha test. You are in a beta test that is being labeled something incorrectly... even though true alpha tests do exist. They are just rare for anyone not connected in some way to someone working in the game industry.

But anyways, like I said i'd bet it's more of an oversight of budget or a miscalculation on popularity which you can't really predict all that well.

[kyuuketsuki]

The US market has very few MMOs because they don't sell well right now apparently. We get about 1 or 2 a year, if that. The asian markets have several a year coming out.
Oh they certainly aren't as big here as in the Asian market. That doesn't mean the U.S. isn't big on MMOs though. WoW had and has a huge U.S. user-base, as does SWtOR, and I'm sure Everquest, FFXI and FFXIV, and others have done just fine in the U.S.
The OP says nothing about the servers breaking due to popularity, but rather breaking due to not being tested.
Umm...
If so, you might know about Samurai & Dragons, the game that got hit so hard by users on the first day that they had to take it offline for 3 weeks to ready it for re-release.
Unless I'm woefully misreading, he's definitely talking about the servers breaking due to an unanticipated surge of day 1 users.
Closed Beta is not for stress testing in general.
Well it's not specifically for stress testing, you're right. But, as you mentioned, all testing is a chance to test the stability of the servers.

[Raikuro]

Maybe I'm remembering wrong, but didn't PSU have something similar happen when it started?

[RocSage]

Oh they certainly aren't as big here as in the Asian market. That doesn't mean the U.S. isn't big on MMOs though. WoW had and has a huge U.S. user-base, as does SWtOR, and I'm sure Everquest, FFXI and FFXIV, and others have done just fine in the U.S.


WoW sells well for reasons other than it being an MMO, SWtOR is likely doomed, but it currently is in the top 10 MMOs sub wise and knocked out CoH which has around 100k. That's worldwide btw. The top MMOs are deeply entrenched and are something like 5 years old now if not older and even in them a good amount of them have Asian subscribers and/or have massive amounts of multiple account users.

The MMOs that are selling in the US have little to do with them being MMOs, good or bad, and more to do with them being based on IPs that are well established in popculture. And those titles are quickly running out. So the market is a bit deceptive the US because MMOs are selling to a degree, but its more they are selling due to IP rather than MMO and they are guaranteed those sales regardless.



Umm...
Unless I'm woefully misreading, he's definitely talking about the servers breaking due to an unanticipated surge of day 1 users.

It's not a matter of misreading, but rather that I'm differentiating what he is saying. He is saying it failed due to lack of testing (which isn't the case) where as the problem is as far as can be known is a miscalculation. It's seems like it is the same thing on the surface, but what the problem is would be tracked to a different area and based on what is likely the case couldn't really be tested for and had they put out a large number as a guess they would have cut cost somewhere else or something like that and it likely couldn't have been helped.

[kyuuketsuki]

Ah, so basically we agree then, Roc: a lack of a lengthy beta had nothing to do with that Samurai-whatever game's servers breaking.

As far as the MMO market thing goes... all I can really say is: WoW did not get its unprecedented subscription base solely (or even primarily) from the World of Warcraft IP. No way. I'd be willing to bet the vast majority of WoW subscribers haven't/hadn't ever even played one of the Warcraft RTS games.

SWtOR, on the other hand, I'd buy that explanation.

[RocSage]

Ah, so basically we agree then, Roc: a lack of a lengthy beta had nothing to do with that Samurai-whatever game's servers breaking.


yup



As far as the MMO market thing goes... all I can really say is: WoW did not get its unprecedented subscription base solely (or even primarily) from the World of Warcraft IP. No way. I'd be willing to bet the vast majority of WoW subscribers haven't/hadn't ever even played one of the Warcraft RTS games.

SWtOR, on the other hand, I'd buy that explanation.

Nyah. I separated them out like that on purpose. WoW got to where it is based on several factors that created a perfect storm. The IP, EQ2 recent flopping, broadband becoming more prevalent around that time, and many others, but the biggest factor was a pop-social phenomena. Much like facebook games work and amazingly under similar, if not the same, pathways. To a degree WoW replaced "golfing" for businessmen, and from what I heard some businesses used or are using WoW as a way strengthen bonds and help improve group thinking and that type of thing.

[Macras]

because we already haven't had 2 alpha tests....

but seriously, nothing is stopping them from holding more than ONE beta. more than likely, they'll want to/ plan to have an open beta test, as that would more than likely highlight if they'll have issues with number of players connecting. also, the a2 was testing for this sort of issue, and likely, the results can be scaled up to a certain degree.

[Jinketsu]

Do any of you have a Vita and use a Japanese PSN account on it like I do? If so, you might know about Samurai & Dragons, the game that got hit so hard by users on the first day that they had to take it offline for 3 weeks to ready it for re-release.

I don't think these games are even in the same league, be it based on quality and importance to SEGA. However, Samurai & Dragons is a free-to-play game too, and it was beta tested for a a similarly short while before its full release, and was so popular the game broke.

I know there's been an alpha and will be an open beta, but even so I hope SEGA takes their time and releases a stable product instead of one that explodes when the servers get overrun. A LOT of people are going to be playing this game when it comes out, especially if there are no IP blocks in place.

Just my 2 cents.

<skipping the rest of the thread>

Considering the game was originally slated for a 2011 release, I don't think your worries are justified.