🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Jul23.134357.7464@cbnews.cb.att.com> nak@cbnews.cb.att.com (neil.a.kirby) writes:
>In article <1992Jul15.201804.12142@cactus.org> vlaurent@cactus.org (Vince Laurent) writes:
>>I am just about ready to put out an on-line game.  I have tested it
>>locally but would like to get feedback and suggestions from others
>>first.  Having never done anything like this, what is the best way
>>to go about it to get the testing and feedback BUT NOT to get the
>>game distributed?  Should I put out just a local version of the game
>>initially? This is what I am thinking of doing for a first phase.
>
>[more similar questions deleted]
>
>THis is a fragile point for your game.  You need a playtest group that you
>can trust.  You want them to sign non-disclosure agreements.

This is also an excellent situation for "expiring" software. Having beta
tested some recent Microsoft products, I can report firsthand that
commercial software developers put expiration timers into their beta
releases. After a certain period of time, the beta no longer runs, and
prints a message asking you to get a later version of the beta. That
also prevents beta versions of the game from "leaking" out and being
distributed up the ying yang - few people are going to distribute a game
which only works if you set the system date back to 6/30/92, although
they might try their hands at hacking it to get rid of the expiration
check so best hide it well.