No changes will be made. If any they will fix bugs and maybe a little tweaking to Dark zone. Game comes out soon, its not gonna do well I assure you.

There are different types of "betas" for games. There are no official labels that I know of, but I personally divide them into a few categories: programming beta, coding beta, and networking beta. Here's my line of thinking: Programming beta: this is the fine-line between an alpha and a beta. This is where the developers learn about how effective their programming was. Does the game crash frequently? Do events load randomly and / or out of sequence? DOES THE GAME FUNCTION? This is usually done about a year or two before the intended release (usually limited to internal testers or a small sample of gamers), so the developers can repair or replace the malfunctioning programming. Coding beta: this is where developers fine-tune the coding to eliminate as many bugs and glitches AS POSSIBLE before release. Does my character get stuck on objects frequently and force me to re-load because I cannot move? Does the blue door to the third house refuse to open, or kill players upon entry? DOES THE GAME HAVE ANY MAJOR BUGS OR GLITCHES THAT BREAK CERTAIN MOMENTS OR AREA? These usually drop 6-9 months to the public prior to release, so the developers can locate the line or lines of code that caused the problem. [b][i][u]Now no game is perfect and some glitches and bugs will still pass through, which is why we have post launch updates.[/u][/i][/b] Networking beta: these are the betas you most frequently see. The "early access" opens to the public with a very small amount of in-game content accessible. They want as many people on the game as possible to stress test their servers and test their network connections to or between players. A majority of bugs discovered in this phase of development are not fixed before launch, because there isn't enough time to identify the line of code causing the problem, fix it, test the patch, inspect the coding fix, and re-test their patch. These usually come up about 1-2 months before release. To me, this is a networking beta, and the issues that disappointed a lot of people or upset them are likely to remain at launch. [spoiler]Sorry for the text wall[/spoiler]

*demo The game comes out in less than a month. It's finished. Ubisoft's goal is probably to just test the servers.

My Battlefield 4, Hardline, Destiny, and Battlefront PTSDs have been triggered. I absolutely [b][i]hate[/i][/b] people like you. [u][i][b]The game is finished.[/b][/i][/u] It comes out [b][i]in less than a month.[/i][/b] Your only valid excuse would be how the servers are being stress-tested, and I'd still have to call you on your bullshit. Dozens of Betas were deemed "successful", only to have issues at launch anyway.

Game is awesome. Consider rainbow six siege though. That released with shit tons of bugs.

It's not a beta. They just call it beta to defend their work and confuse customers until release. It's a -blam!-ing demo. Release is almost upon us. If you really think they will adjust some HUGE stuff, when really everything they might adjust will be some balancing here and there, then you sir, are just a stupid fanboy who wnats this game to be soooo good.

*demo

Betas these days serve as demos. The game is practically finished.

Nothing's going to change by the time it releases unless it gets delayed again.

*glorified demo

[quote]To all the people complaint about the Division, remember that it is a [b][u]glorified demo[/u][/b][/quote] These days beta stage games are pretty much part of the final product. Don't expect any big changes, it'll mostly be final tweaks.

First of all, if problems aren't addressed there's no chance of them getting fixed. Secondly, it's a beta, but let's be realistic. If anyone has problems with the game at this point the chances of it being much different in the final game are slim. These betas have basically been about testing servers and balancing. Aside from that this is likely what you're going to get.

R.I.P classic m44 carbine sniper from beta, that thing killed 200 people in dark zone

It will be. But the criticisms fall into two categories....reasonable and unreasonable. Reasonable: Some people just don't like third-person shooters. They don't like premise of the game. They don't like the fact that there is on dedicated PvP. They're leery about the game because the end-game is still unclear, and they're concerned about replayability (count me in this camp). Unreasonable: "Graphics downgrade" (Unless you own a $5000 PC, you don't own a machine that could run a game based on what was shown in the 2013 E3 trailer). Bullet-sponges ( A Destiny player calling the enemies in another game bullet sponges? Seriously?). "Its not a Tom Clancy/tactical shooter"( Ubisoft has said from day one that this game was going to be an RPG first, shooter second.) The there was my favorite. I generally like King Gothalion, but he had one of the DUMBEST comments about The Division on his most recent YouTube video. Basically complaining that everything was "samey"...and that all the locations were "concrete jungle. Seriously? You're going to play a game set EXCLUSIVELY in the midtown area of one of the world LARGEST CITIES...and bitch about the fact that everything is MAN-MADE. That's what a -blam!-ing megalopolis city like New York -blam!-ING IS.