|
6 years ago ::
Sep 30, 2007 - 7:35PM
#331
|
Date Joined:
Aug 31, 2007
|
Simple deduction means that the selection could not have been entirely random.
The other obvious possibility is that they are not really looking for feedback. But they feel like they need to go through the motions for publicity reasons.
My guess however would line up with what you have said. The play testing group probably contains only a small set of really randomly selected people. Most are probably part of the various well known large groups, the ones that can be trusted to both test the rules and keep quiet about it.
Jay
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Oct 01, 2007 - 5:50AM
#332
|
|
|
Well it could be worse they could have gone the whole "pay to test" that is the craze in the computer testing world as of late. You know "pre-sign up" for DDI super gold member for a year at 120.00 dollars and get to playtest D&D 4th edition! Only the first 100 people in get a key! So while random is not the best way at least they are doing some public playtesting at all.
Or there is also this testing model.
Actually. This may BE the model they are using.
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Oct 01, 2007 - 9:56AM
#333
|
Date Joined:
Aug 17, 2007
|
The other obvious possibility is that they are not really looking for feedback. But they feel like they need to go through the motions for publicity reasons.
My guess however would line up with what you have said. The play testing group probably contains only a small set of really randomly selected people. Most are probably part of the various well known large groups, the ones that can be trusted to both test the rules and keep quiet about it.
Jay
I believe this is the most likely scenario. There just isn't enough time to process and use any outside playtesting data before the books are sent to the printer. Lots of changes they are making for 4E show little regard for players' opinions. Why should playtesting be any different?
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Oct 01, 2007 - 10:05AM
#334
|
Date Joined:
Jul 26, 2003
|
There just isn't enough time to process and use any outside playtesting data before the books are sent to the printer. Lots of changes they are making for 4E show little regard for MY opinion. Why should playtesting be any different?
There, fixed for ya.
Honestly folks, if they did a random selection method, isnt it more likely that once they had a list together of who to randomly contact, they would then send out invites as sort of an application process and then make selections from there? I really doubt they just willy-nilly sent out 100 playtest packets and hoped those folks would sign the NDA and send it back. Use your heads.
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Oct 01, 2007 - 10:29AM
#335
|
Date Joined:
Jan 11, 2005
|
There, fixed for ya.
Honestly folks, if they did a random selection method, isnt it more likely that once they had a list together of who to randomly contact, they would then send out invites as sort of an application process and then make selections from there? I really doubt they just willy-nilly sent out 100 playtest packets and hoped those folks would sign the NDA and send it back. Use your heads.
You've completely missed the point of the last twenty posts. Go back and read them, realize that it is logical to deduce that any type of random selection whether invites or NDAs (EVEN THOUGH INVITES HAVE TO BE SENT BEFORE PACKETS) would be time consuming, costly, ineffective and worthless to the designers. There is no debate over whether invites are sent first or not.
I didn't bother to read the thread before posting.
There, fixed for ya.
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Oct 01, 2007 - 5:23PM
#336
|
|
|
Our group would like the chance to help preview and test the new game system please contact as when your ready. thanks Ron_med
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Oct 03, 2007 - 4:11AM
#337
|
Date Joined:
Sep 26, 2007
|
My group would gladly playtest 4E. Group consist of 7 people most have been playing since the late 70's/ early 80's.
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Oct 03, 2007 - 4:39PM
#338
|
Date Joined:
Jul 28, 2004
|
Look we would all like to playtest 4E but I dont think we need all of the "hi I have a group and would like to test messages" The selection is random and the invites already went out.
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Oct 04, 2007 - 11:17AM
#339
|
Date Joined:
Feb 19, 2006
|
Looks like Dave Noonan posted something in his blog about more invites for playtesting - I wonder if this includes more DDI "random" invites. Throw us a bone, Dave, throw us a bone . . .
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Oct 04, 2007 - 5:59PM
#340
|
Date Joined:
Aug 22, 2007
|
I don't want more DDI random invites. I want DDI nonrandom invites. Yes, he's crazy folks, he's talking about picking playtesters based on their merits! Give us an application! Let us show what we can do!
|
|
|
