Back to the original topic:

I think that they could do a better job with getting the word out to the major websites.

IGN lists the release date as "TBD" and does not include Elemental on their list of upcoming games.  That should really be addressed.

Gamespot does correctly list the release date, but the preorder info lists it as a $70 game instead of a $50 dollar game since they are linking to the limited edition for some reason.  This probably makes the game much less appealing to people who havent heard it before but might be interested (a $70 price tag will probably turn off a lot of gamers, $50 is to be expected).

I've seen a good number of previews for the game considering its indie nature and Civ 5 looming large, so good job with that.

Civ 5, no thanks because of the intrusive DRM. Starcraft 2, loved it, played it, finished it in about 5 days of VERY casual play, was just wayyy to easy. SC2 had a good little story, but the single player game was just wayyy to short and the multiplayer doesnt interest me, to much of a clickfest. I still play MoM today, looking forward to Elemental, pre-ordered it over a month ago.

I normally view the balance/gameplay phase as the most important part of beta testing. I can usually trust that companies will get their technical issues hammered out, but whether the game flows the way it's supposed to, whether it's fun and every unit and building has a purpose and whether the AI gives you a challenge is what will make or break it, and what you really need a good sized group of testers to help out with. The rest can be done internally.

I'm not sure that the reasons for only testing this internally are as obvious as implied. In fact the most obvious and common reasons why companies do this are negative ones (they don't want the bad PR of people seeing it). Perhaps, as said, if I had been following Sins in the beta stage it would make more sense, however I'm guessing most people on these forums did not.

You're skipping Civ5 due to "Intrusive DRM" yet you're fine with Starcraft2, which has far, far worse?  I don't really know what to say to that.

No LAN option, for starters?  The way battle.net went down and people couldn't continue their campaigns?

I'm not bashing on Starcraft 2 or anything like that, but axing Civ5 for DRM while being fine with Starcraft 2 is... strange.

Not to mention region locking the game's multiplayer...

I wouldn't classify a lack of LAN option as "DRM". When I think DRM, I think of some crap like SECUROM. Then again, I believe that was Civ 4, not Civ 5. Steam isn't exactly a rootkit, virus-like DRM like SECUROM.

Your certainly correct that managing PR in a beta is extremely important. During early to mid beta it's fairly common for there to be a Non Disclosure Agreement of some kind. This is because at that point the beta is frequently not fun yet, and they don't want people talking about how awful it is on public forums and things like that because that can be a PR nightmare. Usually however when the game is actually close to being finished, when it plays well and is actually fun, the NDA is lifted and beta testers are encouraged to talk about their experiences. This is because it's good advertising and they want the beta testers to be able to talk about how great the game is now. This is what makes it rather unusual that they are not allowing people to see the final version, because in theory they should want people to be talking about how much better it is.

I assume the only way to find out whether the concept of testing the final beta internally is effective will be to play the finished product. I agree that the concept of beta testing seems to work differently here than what is considered standard, but I reserve my final judgement until I've experienced the game.

Region lock? What the hell is that exactly?

Ah...thanks for the explanation!

I'm positive they won't.  They have zero reason to.

Or at least they think it will earn them more money.  Getting more money when you already have gazillions is so ho-hum - getting more money beyond a certain threshold doesn't particularly make life any more satisfying.  Money for the sake of money is the ultimate road to well, nowhere that important.  And the more "more money" becomes the focus, the less of all the important things are that are essential for it.  In the end, the product has to be basically functional and useful, but if too many corners are cut...

Best regards,
Steven.