Uhm, no. Beta is not a buzzword. If nothing else, it is a warning that the software is not production ready. It is also a plea to anyone using the beta to test any and all aspects of the software to find bugs and other issues and report them to the developers so that they can be fixed. Beta is not a buzzword, but a label to let you know that should you download and use the software, you should expect issues and it is expected of you to report them. That is hardly a buzzword.
You feel like beta testing shouldn't encompass the bucket list of urgent issues and bugs? What? That's what beta testing is about. Beta testing allows the software to be tested by a variety of users who 1) have a variety of computer configurations, 2) have a variety of software running while they work, and 3) work in ways that the developers might not. Therefore, even if something appears to work well on the developer's machine, it might not on mine. So, yeah, EXPECT a bucket list of urgent issues and bugs. It's BETA and that's part of what should be understood when downloading beta software. If you don't understand that, then wait for the official release.
So you mean to say a beta is just that, no strings attached? As if we haven't seen it used for marketing purposes, or pushed to sell an unfinished product (commonly known as 'early access')? You are making the assumption that nobody is allowed to judge a beta build, just because it's work in progress and
meant to be riddled with bugs. Yet it's okay to sell, because you can always blame the consumer for purchasing an unfinished product, right?
Supporting a developer before a project is complete might seem like a good idea, but in practice it's not. Once you have your sales, suddenly the deadlines are gone, nothing really matters. Unless you'd bet hard that the developers care, which most people on the forums do. It's a double edged sword. GMS2 was rumored and for 2015 (I need to check my source on this), and people were getting impatient toward late 2016. I guess you can say that my gripe is that the full version access to the beta costs money. That heavily affects my rationale. What about the people who want to support and leave feedback, but just don't see the point of purchasing an unfinished product? Is that what the trial version is for, I don't get it? Maybe there are valid reasons for this, but for the sake of argument let's put the cost aside and assume it's for the best.
The beta starts when the developers say so, regardless of the condition or stability of the project. Rushing something out is NOT out of the question, even something that has been delayed. If we assume beta testing is for the reasons you mention the test should focus on scale and diversity of multiple configurations and the bugs that developers missed in the years that this project has been taking place - just like you said. I'm sure the testing has given lots of essential feedback and helps to ensure the quality of the final build. One of my first reports was the following:
variable_instance_set(id,"val",100);
show_message(string(variable_instance_exists(id, "val"))); //False, should be true.
Multiple people reported on this and I couldn't help but think just how irrelevant this seemed to a beta. It didn't seem noteworthy, it seemed like mission critical stuff. Maybe in your eyes this is exactly the things a beta test is for, and I'm in no position to argue that.
My thoughts come from my own anecdotal evidence, everything is just my opinion - hence the phrase "makes me thinks this was rushed".