Frosty3579 wrote:
I would want to demonstrate as much functionality as possible. I get players wanting things to look "polished" and feel "smooth" but it is alpha, not release. If everything was polished and ready to go, why have alpha and not just release? Alpha should be to test out functionality, not seeing if it is pretty. You want logging in, character creation, navigation of the first zone or two, quest handling, combat, and resurrection to work and to be stress-tested. There are some thing you will only discover after a few hundred people are all using them at once.
I tend to agree with this one--mainly about the principle of an alpha--although I do believe the movement and collision mechanics should be pretty complete (i.e. the game engine should be solid).
For me, a big part of the answer depends on what your release plan looks like
after alpha launch, e.g. if you're going to be on weekly sprints rolling monthly epics, because knowing the frequency of improvement would affect my tolerance for unpolished/underdeveloped content.
I tend to favor quality over scope in my projects, so I'd rather see less stuff of better quality initially.
What I would consider must-haves:
- At least one complete story arc (or equivalent)--meaning approx. 3-5 character levels worth of content in a cohesive plot
- At least one of each type of mission/quest, e.g. delivery, escort, retrieve/collect, map clear
- A meaningful amount of character progression--maybe 25-33% of the planned cap, with at least a basic version of the associated NPC (e.g. trainer) interactions
- At least one power/ability set within each of the typical archetypes (close-range offensive, close-range defensive, mid-/long- equivalents)
- Some basic version of the game economy
- A close-to-fully-expressed HUD--not necessarily with underlying functions, but I'd like to have a rough idea of the UI
- A pretty good representation of the game's ultimate vision (meaning I can kind of picture what the future state will look like)
Like, I feel an alpha is appropriate when you're at the point where the problem is more about scale and user satisfaction than core functionality. It would be way better for people to think, "Man, I can't wait for more content," than to think, "Man, I can't wait for this thing to get fixed." Of course the latter is inevitable, but I think it would be a good idea to hold out until it's more likely people will be excited about growth prospects.