Cheaper/Free Trials of XNA for Peer Reviewers

[xRage08]

I've said it before and I'll say it again. I think HMX should give a set amount of Microsoft Points in return for peer reviewing. Not really giving back the $100 it costs, but I mean I'd prob pay the $100 dollars if I got like $35 of MP back.

And honestly, in response to trg's stab at Semi-Charmed Life '09, I didn't think it was all that bad a song. The chart was pretty good, and the audio isn't as bad as everyone claims either. I think it was good enough to release. Could it have been improved? Of course, but I still think it's perfectly good. If you don't like the song, don't buy it. If you claim "I have to buy it to see if I like it", then download the demo.

[kiggidykev]

Offering an incentive to playtesters/peer reviewers would be a nice option to encourage more people to partake and help justify the XNA fee, but I don't think it's going to happen for some time (if at all).

I've been doing the RBN thing since the start of February, and it felt really cool and unique to be part of the process. That feeling unfortunately didn't last long because of the amount of work involved in providing a worthwhile playtest or review with detailed notes (and even then, there's no guarantee that your advice will be followed).

I don't mean to be a downer, but I have to agree with what Sayburr said earlier on: if you're not planning to author songs, then it doesn't seem like a good investment for 100 bucks to pay for the ability to give up your time and work for someone else. It takes the very dedicated with a deep passion to want to be part of that, and isn't that the ideal when it comes down to having a final version of a song?

On the other hand, I would really prefer to see the reviewing system the way it is for the reasons mentioned before (avoiding no-effort reviews and tests, rushed songs to store). A weighted voting system would require the current system to be rebuilt from zero, and it would be terribly inefficient to do so.

[Die-Guitar-Hero]

Harmonix should hire volunteer playtesters and waive the xna fee for them! There could be an audition/application process or they could base it off forum reputation similar to the moderator system. Hell, I'd even write an essay!

[G_tarRoCK3R]

Harmonix should hire volunteer playtesters and waive the xna fee for them! There could be an audition/application process or they could base it off forum reputation similar to the moderator system. Hell, I'd even write an essay!

I think this would be a doable system. I would sign up for that! Then HMX can monitor those "paid for" XNA subscriptions to see if they are giving the quality produced reviews needed. If not, give it to somoene else. Perhaps they could even give out the 4 month ones, that way can kick off someone quicker whos not producing good reviews.

[aperfectorestes]

Harmonix should hire volunteer playtesters and waive the xna fee for them! There could be an audition/application process or they could base it off forum reputation similar to the moderator system. Hell, I'd even write an essay!

I would do this as well. I think this would be a sufficient gate to keep out the people that need kept out.

[overdriveguitarman]

Crap you have to be 18 or older?

Aww man...

[ThatAuthoringGroup]

I agree that this is an issue that needs to be looked at by HMX.

But something would need to be in place to prevent shenanigans.

Last month we had someone come in and just start giving positive reviews on all the peer review songs(in such rapid fashion that you could tell someone was just going through there and clicking positive without actually looking at the songs).

So yes someone paid money out of pocket to come in and try and raise hell with the PR system. If it is deregulated to where it's free and anyone could come in and test, all hell would break loose.

I like the idea of maybe HMX 'hiring' testers. If that means paying for the trial, offering a discount on DLC, or free downloads or something of that nature I don't know, but making it free to everyone would be a disaster.

[ThatAuthoringGroup]

Crap you have to be 18 or older?

Aww man...

Yes.

18 or older, I THINK you have to have a US xbox account, a 360 linked to a PC, pretty speedy internet connection.

Those are the requirements I can think of off the top of my head.

[Sayburr]

Yes.

18 or older, I THINK you have to have a US xbox account, a 360 linked to a PC, pretty speedy internet connection.

Those are the requirements I can think of off the top of my head.

...and you have to be one of the most awesome people on the planet! But, humble enough to accept undying gratitude from those of us who are lacking on the awesomeness detector.

[G_tarRoCK3R]

Fewer, more dedicated people > anyone and everyone, when it comes to Peer Review. Even with the current community, we have seen complaints that songs from big-name artists get through review too quickly without being looked at thoroughly, simply because the songs are popular (see: Semi-Charmed Life '09). Imagine that effect many times worse, if Peer Review were free.

Yea perhaps free peer review would be bad. But I'm one of the good ones so I could help out. Like someone said, they can come in and positive review everything and not have looked at the song. But thats where my weighted system would come in. HMX would see this person just positive everything and no comments in threads or feedback and just ban them from their free account.

It is true that you don't really "get" anything for being a playtester, aside from the satisfaction of knowing that you are helping out and quite possibly preventing songs with bad-quality authoring from getting through to the store. If you don't feel that that is worth the cost, you're free to not purchase XNA and wait/hope for a cheaper option down the road.

I guess you missed where I said I was DEBATING keeping my premium XNA account, unless you are talking in generalities than sorry.

I do get satisfaction from helping out the authors that are listening to my suggestions and advice, if I get ignored or blown off (or they are against videos, aka FREE advertising) then say goodbye to me reviewing your songs again.....I have a list of peeps I won't be reviewing or helping out. It is good when the authors acknowledge the hard work us play testers who PAY to help you guys out. At least say, I disagree thanks for your input, or I'll take a look at it, etc. (Not saying you do that, just saying generalities sister Margret (haha kidding, Anchorman FTW!))

This is something I can agree with 1000%! It's actually called "peer" review for a reason - peers (authors) are supposed to be looking at each other's work. The fact that we even have people who have paid to only playtest, is amazing and is very appreciated by those of us who are authors. More author participation in playtesting is needed to keep songs flowing through.

You are welcome