Just a caution here about the Tech Alpha Builds and what MS will expect.

First, participants will most likely be under an NDA... so no discussion here about what you experience.

Next, you'll be a guinea pig for hardware, multiplayer, and streaming content testing. They'll want specific things checked. They will not want to hear about rodents or the direction of water flow in the rivers. It's a TECH alpha. They need to see if this thing will even work on the general public's hardware. You'll have assignments. And no whining allowed. Weak systems will be very much needed, so they can test the limits of what is possible.

In all, this will probably not be a lot of fun, and it can be quite frustrating to get a taste of the sim in it's rough state, and limited as to what they are looking for in your testing.

Yep.  I've done alpha and beta testing for various games over the years, it's not usually "getting to play the game for free" like most people think it is.  Still, I enjoy the challenge of bug chasing and testing programs in and out of scope.

35 minutes ago, rhumbaflappy said:

Just a caution here about the Tech Alpha Builds and what MS will expect.

First, participants will most likely be under an NDA... so no discussion here about what you experience.

You may well be correct but I have to wonder why MS is making such a big splurge about the Tech Alpha to the general flightsim crowd if they genuinely expect them all to keep schtum about it.

The MS flightsim team usually kept the Alpha Build in house. But this is not the Aces. It's a new group. So we have a semi-private Alpha.

I'm hoping they do not release the Beta Build to the general public, as some games are now released. Better to keep that semi-private as well until the RTM Build is finished, and then sell the heck out of the product. The Beta should be a lot more fun. The Aces kept the Beta very selective. You needed an invitation to join it. It was based on knowledge of scenery, aircraft, reputation... Sometimes a friend could get you in!

Edited August 30, 20196 yr by rhumbaflappy

53 minutes ago, rhumbaflappy said:

Just a caution here about the Tech Alpha Builds and what MS will expect.

First, participants will most likely be under an NDA... so no discussion here about what you experience.

Next, you'll be a guinea pig for hardware, multiplayer, and streaming content testing. They'll want specific things checked. They will not want to hear about rodents or the direction of water flow in the rivers. It's a TECH alpha. They need to see if this thing will even work on the general public's hardware. You'll have assignments. And no whining allowed. Weak systems will be very much needed, so they can test the limits of what is possible.

In all, this will probably not be a lot of fun, and it can be quite frustrating to get a taste of the sim in it's rough state, and limited as to what they are looking for in your testing.

Thanks dad 🤓

Thinking you get to play the game early for free is a bit naive, isn't it?

(I just called the sim a "game"...)

Edited August 30, 20196 yr by threegreen

36 minutes ago, Superdelphinus said:

Thanks dad 🤓

Heh... old news for some of us, but it's not a bad idea to tamp down excitement about what's likely to be in an Alpha or even Beta build.

The main thing needed in my experience is a tolerance for the developer not listening to what you, as a tester, think are critical issues. You do what you can, and let it roll off your back if it doesn't happen.

I could tell 'ya some horror stories about the closed beta for Falcon 3.0. At least that was finally cleaned up after release, but if they had only listened to us.... 😄 I expect MS will do much better

17 minutes ago, threegreen said:

Thinking you get to play the game early for free is a bit naive, isn't it?

(I just called the sim a "game"...)

It’s a sim, but 99.9% of the people that will use it will be playing games with it, not using it for simulation in the true sense of the word. 

/runs for the hills 

29 minutes ago, Superdelphinus said:

It’s a sim, but 99.9% of the people that will use it will be playing games with it, not using it for simulation in the true sense of the word. 

/runs for the hills 

Though judging by the kind of addons we have for current sims the simulation aspect surely is the leading one? I'm usually someone insisting on it being a simulation instead of a game, but I caught myself there typing game instead of sim.

2 hours ago, threegreen said:

Though judging by the kind of addons we have for current sims the simulation aspect surely is the leading one? I'm usually someone insisting on it being a simulation instead of a game, but I caught myself there typing game instead of sim.

Still all game related I’d say. The mass majority of people using the sim are essentially playing with it; just flying around, playing the role of a pilot (sometimes in very complex aircraft), practicing procedures or navigation. All gaming.

I don’t think many people who use these sims are actually simulating anything, in the actual sense of the word - I think in xplane there’s probably a bit more of it because of the plane maker and blade element theory. It’s all either outright ‘gaming’, or the gamification of learning and/ or practicing. 

None of this should matter whatsoever. 

15 minutes ago, Superdelphinus said:

None of this should matter whatsoever. 

I agree but I'm curious. Personally, I fly complex airliners on the real world routes for a VA simulating real world ops as close to reality as I can. I consider that simulating the real world job of a commercial pilot. What would be simulation in the actual sense of the word for you?

I think the simulation is the flight sim itself in this context, the developers of the aircraft are doing the simulating. I don’t think pretending to be a real pilot, or a real racing driver in car sims, or a train driver in train sims, or a farmer in farm sims, are any more simulation than being an astronaut in no mans sky, or a soldier in modern warfare. I think there is a root that is about justification of spending time doing this stuff that particular demographics can absolutely not call gaming, because that sounds like a flippant waste of time and not something worthy. 

Again, this sounds like I’m trying to put people down which I am absolutely not trying to do. I’m just quite interested in the human condition, in all of its glory!

There’s probably something, deep in my psychology, that makes me particularly bristle when people talk about these sims being ‘serious’ and other games being toys or vapid wastes of time when I believe there is absolutely no more virtue in flying a pmdg plane for 3 hours, than playing fortnite for 3 hours. They are both entertaining for the user in different ways and both equally valid or invalid in terms of a use of time. To each their own.

Frankly, if MS are inviting Alpha/Beta testers from the community then I think they should at least let the testers post screenshots and videos, what's the big deal anyway?

A long time ago I made a distinction between "game" and "sim" but then I realized that I don't have to justify my playing a video game to study flying any more than I have to justify my reading pilots' memoirs to do the same thing.  Especially if I'm recreating things in said video game that I read in the books.

A lot of people make good money in the entertainment industry, including computer gaming.  It is a worthwhile career and you are doing good works.  My last job was for a game company (iMagic).  I don't have to justify that, either, and wouldn't even if I hadn't paid my dues earlier by doing payroll and writing down-to-the-bare-metal device drivers and such.

I do gotta say that flight sims have come a long way since we first started with them. 🙂

Hook

51 minutes ago, MatthewS said:

Frankly, if MS are inviting Alpha/Beta testers from the community then I think they should at least let the testers post screenshots and videos, what's the big deal anyway?

What's the big deal? NDA/EULA. Educate yourself further on what NDA legally means.