Quote Originally Posted by Abriael View Post
Not on an extremely limited alpha that shows just a fraction of the game, otherwise those opinions will majorly be "there's nothing to do, it sucks!". That's why there's a NDA to begin with.



Because if those people ragequit the game when when it was an incomplete product, but still offered a TON more content than the alpha, and had more features than the alpha, an extremely limited alpha that, as good as it may be, offers much less than the game they ragequit, isn't gonna get them excited. As a matter of fact, will turn them off.

If Square Enix intended the alpha as, even partly, a promotional product, we wouldn't have an NDA, which is the geometric opposite of promotion.

There are a lot of games with testing phases that have the very visible purpose to act as promotion (mostly because they are just localizations of finished products), and guess what? they don't have a NDA, because their purpose is building the buzz, and they have the level of completeness to do that effectively.

Anyone with an even limited knowledge of marketing would know that an extremely limited alpha is not effective promotional material. It's more easy for it to turn off people than to get them hyped. That's what advanced betas are for.
Okay, but I still believe that adding inactives is the right call, time will tell which end is correct. Now I do believe that in Beta we should have a more increased chance of getting in. That's how I will feel. alpha is chip change compared to Beta is the big dollar bills. That's why I didn't mind Inactives getting into Alpha ( it's only a stress test mainly anyways). Beta is where the "actual" testing starts for the content and what not.. in which I firmly believe the people that stood here through thick and thin should get in before inactives.

I hope that was their way of thinking.