Definition of Alpha stage.

[Serious Stan 202]

How do you define an alpha? what is the criteria and when does it change to beta?

Im guessing when its not alpha or beta, then its done and on the store shelves.

[Guest]

Alpha is the stage when key gameplay functionality is implemented, and assets are partially finished. A game in alpha is feature complete, that is, game is playable and contains all the major features. These features may be further revised based on testing and feedback. Additional small, new features may be added, similarly planned, but unimplemented features may be dropped. Programmers focus mainly on finishing the codebase, rather than implementing additions.Alpha occurs eight to ten months before code release.

Edited May 20, 2013 by Guest

[Element47 2481]

there are no exact stages at which alpha becomes beta, this often differs from project to project.

-generally- alpha is considered under active development and not feature-complete, while beta is mostly feature-complete but needs bug- and stress-testing.. major bugs may still lead to larger changes..

EDIT: as you see, there is no consensus :D in my understanding, one of defining points of an alpha is, that its not feature-complete. if your code contains all planned functionality, you can enter beta-testing to test for bugs stability and performance

EDIT.2: also, you cannot name a fixed timeframe between alpha and a rc or final version, as this obviously depends on how successful you are in the develpment and bugfixing. persisting issues can prolong development phases..

Minecraft was in alpha for 1 1/2 years, beta was another year until a milestone release was presented as final stable.

Edited May 20, 2013 by e47

[ActionManZlt 160]

Pre-alpha is any internal development build.

Alpha is a usable internal development build. You can play the game, but it will be incomplete and broken. Parts will be testable.

Beta is feature complete. You can play the game, but it will likely have broken bits.

Release Candidate is a beta build that has passed a series of tests, and is going through final checks to see if it can become the 'gold' version.

Gold is the version that gets printed.

https://en.wikipedia...ease_life_cycle

The dayZ mod will likely not make it to beta for a long time, if ever, because it's basically been abandoned by the developers during the alpha stage and left to the community to tinker with. If the community ever decides to stop adding features, then you could call it a beta, and if all the bugs get fixed (which won't happen), you could drop the "beta" qualifier.

The DayZ SA is currently internal alpha too, and will likely go through a private beta test before release. It's likely to be one of these "never-ending beta" products too though, as it's continually worked on by the develoeprs as we play it...

Edited May 20, 2013 by ActionMan

[terminal_boy 860]

Feature complete = the code for all the implemented features is in the build/version.*

* This doesn't mean it works correctly or, in extreme cases, even load and run.

[Serious Stan 202]

there are no exact stages at which alpha becomes beta, this often differs from project to project.

-generally- alpha is considered under active development and not feature-complete, while beta is mostly feature-complete but needs bug- and stress-testing.. major bugs may still lead to larger changes..

EDIT: as you see, there is no consensus :D in my understanding, one of defining points of an alpha is, that its not feature-complete. if your code contains all planned functionality, you can enter beta-testing to test for bugs stability and performance

EDIT.2: also, you cannot name a fixed timeframe between alpha and a rc or final version, as this obviously depends on how successful you are in the develpment and bugfixing. persisting issues can prolong development phases..

Minecraft was in alpha for 1 1/2 years, beta was another year until a milestone release was presented as final stable.

Do you think it gains a game development company more to release a game in alpha stage more than it would be to postpone a real game?

i mean, arma3 was released in aplha stage. And i bought it because i like arma2, but i cant really complain on the lack of content because its in alpha and i think thats what the developers want.

I like that Rocket is waiting for the release. If he released a SA now it would unleash a hell on the boards.

[Element47 2481]

Do you think it gains a game development company more to release a game in alpha stage more than it would be to postpone a real game?

i mean, arma3 was released in aplha stage. And i bought it because i like arma2, but i cant really complain on the lack of content because its in alpha and i think thats what the developers want.

I like that Rocket is waiting for the release. If he released a SA now it would unleash a hell on the boards.

releasing an unfinished product "into the wild" always bears a risk. however, involvement of the potential customer base/user community into the early development can provide very useful insights, allowing to tailor the product for the real-time needs and wishes of the users while at the same time profiting from contstant user feedback of a large user base. the social networking factor additionally provides a public relations vector, allowing to succesfully market a product to the target audience long before its finished. again, minecraft is a very successful example of such a product.

there are, of course, risks associated - disclosing valuable info to the competitors, losing novelty factor, creating social media clusterfucks, losing track of development by trying to listen to the community too much, etc..

in the end, it depends on the individual product, market situation, community and company, whether its a good or bad idea to go public at an early develoment stage.. as for DayZ, i think its doing pretty good with its current strategy. and it definitely should take its time rather than rush.

Edited May 20, 2013 by e47