I just stumbled upon this First View of DC from Rurikhan on youtube after a twitter feed......

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ESqsDGrlLM

Apparently his version is not the one which people play in closed beta since he can play in single player and stuff like that....

Why is there another beta version for the press???

Nice Find, I would love to try campaign out, Dragon Mode actually looks fun there, and I prefer a single player experience, over Multiplayer, hopefully it'll be in the next update

From the Steam Page:

That doesn't answer my question. Obviously the press already has a superior version to the one available in closec beta and I just wonder why......

Just watch the video....

Because they probably want to get more feedback on the balancing of the gameplay before everyone stops and gets distracted with the story parts. It's not unusual to have betas roll out in stages.

Heck, I alone have a list many items long of things I want to test.

I don't know the official reasoning, but:

The press need something to write about that isn't general knowledge already, so they will publish articles / videos that get exposure for the game.

Part of the reason for the closed beta is to test the network code and balancing, which, as Stabbey said, would be harder to do if most people were playing the single player campaign.

Ha ha ha I love the Rivellon Times already. Great work Macbeth!

Yeah, you might be right....

It's pretty annoying really there are a few points that spring to mind from it:

1. if everyone would rather play single player...that's a problem isn't it? I personally find the multiplayer really bland, why arn't there more rpg elements to a multiplayer campaign? diplomacy? any depth at all? Risk with the option of zergy combat isn't much of a game it turns out.

2. They no doubt got there copys free, given that next to no ones actually making reviews/previews I'd say you wasted time that could have been spent by your fans advertising your game.

It's just all a bit disappointing really.

Raging is not the solution, you know...

The idea is to allow us to try the RTS game, + the multiplayer campain. I agree with you that "something" is missing for most of us in the campain, as the RPG part is not here. We are here to improve it and make it not buggy anymore, and this mission is quite important too !

On the other hand, Press has both to sell and try it. The best part of this game is obviously the campain, so, they test it and publish over it. As you say, the mutliplayer game isn't everything in this one, and, you have a single player game much richer. They want the press to have the picture which make them shine the most.

We will get the full game and be able to finish the campain soon enough, don't worry and, it's gonna be awesome;

I think you and I have different definitions of raging.

It was my understanding that a beta, and by extension it's forum was a place for feedback. I could just blindly worship the game and company but I don't think that'll help much in the long run.

I'm not sure what you mean by the press selling it..or publishing over it? Something was lost in translation there. Nor does the assumption that only they can properly beta test the single player make sense.

The press isn't beta testing the single player, they are playing a beta with the first chapter of the single player campaign in hope that they will write / post about the game, thus giving it more exposure, which in turn should hopefully result in more sales.

Whether single player or multi-player, as RTS is a significant part of the game, the units need to be balanced and the AI refined. The most effective way to do that is with multi-player. That is what the beta is focusing on first, to get the most feedback on.

There are actually previews / videos coming out, such as the (20 minute) Let's Try Divinity: Dragon Commander - Single Player Campaign.

Acharenus

I don't want to upset you, and I know I can't speak the best possible English, but my idea was, just 'it make the product brighter" and it's not for them to say "this Jeep is unbalanced", but rather "this game is awesome".

On the other hand, we try to figure out what is wrong in the gameplay of the RTS, press and beta testers just have different objectives.

I agree it would be awesome to try the single player campain, but we won't be able to "improve" it by doing so. For the advertisement, I don"t know what is the most effective thing.

I'm not, but don't want to upset anyone, that'a all

No need to be upset, guys.

Just relax everyone, we've got an equally important job to do as the press. Imagine if we weren't working on the multiplayer and had the opportunity to do so, then the game shipped with a shoddy multiplayer mode, how bad would you feel then? (Not that I think that would happen)

Yes the press gets the single player, but as Raze said its not the entire single player they're getting. End of the day we didn't need to be given beta access AT ALL. Here we're just fans of Larian, and they have no requirements to keep us happy and smiley beyond providing us with the game that we paid for. I just find being a beta tester for them as being a cherry on the top of the proverbial ice cream.

Sometimes people disagree, that doesn't necessarily mean either party is upset in the slightest.

"I agree it would be awesome to try the single player campain, but we won't be able to "improve" it by doing so. For the advertisement, I don"t know what is the most effective thing. "

In the same way that we can't change the multiplayer parts? I don't think you understand the point of a beta...or a forum for a game in general.

The assumption seems to be that being included in a beta should make you so grateful that you have no complaints, or that to enjoy a game you should have no complaints or ideas in how it should be improved.

I'm not sure what harbored these notions on these forums given the moderators seem fairly understanding but it's not an attitude that's for the long term benefit of the game.

Beyond bugs there is a lot of room for improvement in the multiplayer and I would like to think that we're not just playing a demo and that the dev team actually cares what it's fans have to say about it.

As it stands the multiplayer modes are rather bland and lifeless compared to almost any of there competitors, sup com manages to have the same zergy gameplay and feel far more strategic and engaging, what's the difference there?

The multiplayer campaign feels like a pointless skin for a series of skirmishs, map built units have little to no bearing on the outcome of battles played on the maps and the lack of even the most basic diplomacy or interaction with your empire really detracts from the experience. A lot of the joy in total war games is the organic storys that evolve about your generals, allys and culture as you play. All of that is sadly lacking here.

Acharenus, I do agree with you, really, but, as you say, MP should be improved, and in many ways. My point is : solo campaign shall be great (I mean, it's Larian "own field" to make a great RPG, and we won't be able to improve it as we wishe.

BUT, we can on the MP, and I already complained against the lack of diplomatic, or "stuff to do" in the multiplayer campaign, which is more a Risk with skirmish everywhere than a true campaign.

I think Larian read this, and we are more efficient for them here than on a solo campaign, saying their work is awesome. That's all.