I think in the ideal world, a beta test would reveal no problems at all, as the alpha test (or perfect design/manufacturing) would have cured them all. I think, from the fact that many of the testers were getting the "we know that and have fixed it already" seems to indicate that the alpha was pretty successful. I think back to some of the computer programs I have gotten in beta form. Ouch. I don't even think they try the software themselves sometimes. . . just compile and release. Of course I'm joking, but if you want to read some real fun beta tester info, do a newsgroup search on beta versions of operating systems.

The only question I have is why, if Outlaw knew the problems, didn't they fix them before the beta units went out? Maybe the time constraints rushed them a little, but I'd hope to beta test the 'real' unit, not the 'almost' unit. I've even seen some magazine reviews of various products where the reviewer would comment about some malfunction and then he'd say the new units are already fixed. Seems like suicide to me, but if that's how the game gets played, so be it.

I think the most interesting reads will be when the first 50 people have theirs and spend 6 days locked up in a dark room because they are so into it. That should make for a really good read.

S.