I don't know about you but I'm handling Camelot Unchained's open development and delays just fine. Probably because CSE isn't as dishonest and incompetent as CIG.
Vikingir said: The public has shown they cannot handle open development.
Yeah indeed, this is just not smart to do. Crowdfunded projects and the handling of dates and delays is showing the big publishers and titles ways of handling this stuff without openness works much better.
Indeed. Big publishers don't need to waste money and precious time on making publicly playable alpha builds that are based on half baked solutions that eventually get thrown away for better iterations. Not only CIG's devs have to work out temporary solutions to make features with limited capabilities work in a PLAYABLE alpha build but they have to debug various iterations that are not likely to be included in the final products.
On the other hand by the nature of crowd funding CIG have been forced into pouring resources into making playable alpha builds for sales purposes. Well it is understandable but in the long run this practice might easily end up resulting the same amount of "marketing" expenses as the amounts publishers usually spend on promoting products ready for launch.
[...] the nature of crowd funding CIG have been forced into pouring resources into making playable alpha builds for sales purposes.
Well, the public alpha builds was planned from the beginning, although only those who pledged for alphas got them at first (this was changed later on to include everyone). It was never because of sales issues.
From a development standpoint making alpha builds is healthy for the project too, since it helps developers to focus on milestones. Besides, when a build is published the developers get lots of feedback concerning bugs and quirks, and general opinions about features. This is valuable feedback and helps the project get better.
[...] the nature of crowd funding CIG have been forced into pouring resources into making playable alpha builds for sales purposes.
Well, the public alpha builds was planned from the beginning, although only those who pledged for alphas got them at first (this was changed later on to include everyone). It was never because of sales issues.
Even if it was planned from the go, it's something they needed to do to get more sales. If they were just aiming to create a game, they could have gone with a more limited and more buggy alpha.
Though I don't think there's anything really wrong with them using some extra money so that people can enjoy their alpha builds. CIG's job is after all to make a game for their backers to play.
The schedule is transparent, both positively and negatively, with the caveats that are there and explain it.
But mirroring estimates publicly without buffers or maneuverability was just driving drama on a weekly basis, ends up on the realization that even if they attempt to being open about it, it brings more harm than good. Less weekly drama but still reporting progress, better.
Vikingir said: The public has shown they cannot handle open development.
Yeah indeed, this is just not smart to do. Crowdfunded projects and the handling of dates and delays is showing the big publishers and titles ways of handling this stuff without openness works much better.
A bad management decision at CIG??? I am not surprised....
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
A bad management decision at CIG??? I am not surprised....
Not at all, it's the "gamers" that isn't able to manage this type of openness, not the developer. It's really sad to observe that players don't want an open development process. By attacking it repeatedly with hate rethoric, from a unpatient viewpoint, they show they're not able to handle it. So ultimately the openness goes away. Watch and observe if the patience improves then. LOL "Why haven't we heard anything in 3 months!??!! It's outrageous! We demand an update!" and so on ...
It is interesting to read the first posts of this thread about the expectations concerning 3.0 and even 3.1. A hint : 3.1 isn't even mentioned anymore.
Delays can happen for many different reasons. Being open about development is also fine. But that doesn't necessarily need to include wild release guesses from CiG's top nob. Because that is how it comes across atm. Again and again he repeats this dumb mistake. Is there no one in his company that can talk some sense into that man?
rertez said: Indeed. Big publishers don't need to waste money and precious time on making publicly playable alpha builds that are based on half baked solutions that eventually get thrown away for better iterations. Not only CIG's devs have to work out temporary solutions to make features with limited capabilities work in a PLAYABLE alpha build but they have to debug various iterations that are not likely to be included in the final products.
On the other hand by the nature of crowd funding CIG have been forced into pouring resources into making playable alpha builds for sales purposes. Well it is understandable but in the long run this practice might easily end up resulting the same amount of "marketing" expenses as the amounts publishers usually spend on promoting products ready for launch.
Whelp it is part of it.
The need to maintain the alpha exists as that is the expectation from any crowdfunded project, that also has its told on development on things as, having to optimize, polish and find playable workarounds/solutions (hence placeholder code) to be able to achieve something releasable as the game is heavy in development. It has its cost in resources but the project wouldn't be possible to captivate interest and funding otherwise I think.
Why do folks continue to assume publishers don't have access to the same dates CIG is giving backers access to here..
It has nothing to do with an altruistic choice about openness.. Folks demanded updates on the progress because they're funding the project, just as publishers will demand updates on progress because it's their money.
The only difference between publishers and crowdfunding is that publishers can act unilaterally to trim scope and maintain progress towards a definite release. Individual backers mean nothing. Newsflash: that's not a good thing for the consumers.
Publishers aren't going to fund a project then tell the developer to just hit them up whenever whatever it is they're working on is finished. Jesus, why am I having to even remind anyone of this...
Why do folks continue to assume publishers don't have access to the same dates CIG is giving backers access to here..
It has nothing to do with an altruistic choice about openness.. Folks demanded updates on the progress because they're funding the project, just as publishers will demand updates on progress because it's their money.
The only difference between publishers and crowdfunding is that publishers can act unilaterally to trim scope and maintain progress towards a definite release. Individual backers mean nothing. Newsflash: that's not a good thing for the consumers.
Publishers aren't going to fund a project then tell the developer to just hit them up whenever whatever it is they're working on is finished. Jesus, why am I having to even remind anyone of this...
Cause it's SC and the fans are willing to overlook anything or hand wave it away because publishers are evil!!11!!
If you mention me, I wasn't talking about relationship of publisher > dev, I was talking about how they deal with stuff publicly, and that is what lets them drive hype and interest in their games, without openness, something Crowdfunded projects do not get away with, as they are exposed to far more elements that demand more openness, and as we see through many titles, it's one ongoing drama about delays. So behind closed doors, dates and delays can happen frequently with no public impact whatsoever, but in crowd funding, you need to give dates from the very beginning.
Cause it's SC and the fans are willing to overlook anything or hand wave it away because publishers are evil!!11!!
In the aspect that Star Citizen would have never been possible if it depended in a publisher, sure. The publishers aren't evil, but they aren't ambitious as they don't want to take risks. They follow the money and that is why PC MMO's have seen better days, now that the biggest publishers are seeing mobile MMO's as the next big moneh moneh moneh! \o/
So behind closed doors, dates and delays can happen frequently with no public impact whatsoever, but in crowd funding, you need to give dates from the very beginning.
It's the other way around. Publishers set milestones with deadlines towards the devs and they pay the devs as the milestones are completed. You miss a date and you don't get paid until you get your stuff sorted. With crowd funding you get the funds in beforehand without those contractual obligations.
CR is one of those people that requires someone controlling him, he's admitted as much before despite his whole anti-publisher rhetoric.
With Star Citizen he has behaved like a 5 year old kid told by his mother that he can have $1 to spend in the toy shop, he then runs around the whole shop picking up $1 items before dropping them again when the next shiny thing catches his eye. Then his father walks in and gives him another $1 and he proceeds to do the same all over again looking at the $2 toys, then his aunt comes in and again he runs around the store, then his uncle, then his godmother, his godfather and on and on.....
Then the shop closes and there's no more money but atleast the 5 year old boy can put his $20 in the bank.
It's the other way around. Publishers set milestones with deadlines towards the devs and they pay the devs as the milestones are completed. You miss a date and you don't get paid until you get your stuff sorted. With crowd funding you get the funds in beforehand without those contractual obligations.
Oh I wasn't talking relationship between publisher > studio, I was taking what is given to the public, hence whatever happens internally, does not have public impact.
Also the "not get paid", remember this is not black and white, the date the publisher agrees with the studio is not the date the developers will be given to work with, like they take the conservative approach (they have to due the cost sake) but the devs won't be given that as their deadlines, otherwise, it'd be more likely the "real" date to be pushed back, the usual pressure to keep people focused on short-med term goals.
One thing in the bug-fixing changelog of 3.0 caught eye:
Fixed an issue where the Starfarer had no atmosphere.
So it seems they do have implemented atmosphere in ships, that may finally deal with the naked players floating around in space. lol
yeah, the first iteration of the Room System should be in 3.0 unless i am mistaken so yeah, deaths should be interesting. before release though i would love the animation due to atmo venting to be you slowly suffocating as you freeze.
"Cherish the quiet...before my STORM!" For a $5/5000 in-game credit bonus for backing Star Citizen (MMO) or Squadron 42 (Single Player/Co-op) use my Referral code: STAR-3QDY-SZBG
yeah, the first iteration of the Room System should be in 3.0 unless i am mistaken so yeah, deaths should be interesting. before release though i would love the animation due to atmo venting to be you slowly suffocating as you freeze.
That is scary though if you clip through one room or ship to space unintentionally you'll just RIP.
But yeah I recall now they said they were implementing the atmosphere in Levski and such, if this is simulated on your character then it should correctly kill you.
yeah, the first iteration of the Room System should be in 3.0 unless i am mistaken so yeah, deaths should be interesting. before release though i would love the animation due to atmo venting to be you slowly suffocating as you freeze.
That is scary though if you clip through one room or ship to space unintentionally you'll just RIP.
That would be pretty funny. One minute you're just happily walking in your ship, then the next second your character falls through the floor and is floating through space gagging and choking while holding his hands to his throat trying to breath and GRRRAARHAOROPERIUOWHOGH and then you implode or something and die! Meanwhile, your ship continues to drift off into the distance of vast space, its owner mysteriously missing....
It is interesting to read the first posts of this thread about the expectations concerning 3.0 and even 3.1. A hint : 3.1 isn't even mentioned anymore.
Delays can happen for many different reasons. Being open about development is also fine. But that doesn't necessarily need to include wild release guesses from CiG's top nob. Because that is how it comes across atm. Again and again he repeats this dumb mistake. Is there no one in his company that can talk some sense into that man?
THIS IS IT RIGHT HERE.
The reason there is even a leg to stand on for both heretics and skeptics is because Chris Roberts lied. He sold the initial (Kickstarter )scope to original backers. Only after the money began flooding in, did he ask the backers if they'd like the scope of the game changed. After which point feature creep began and still does to this day, He's lied about his own observed time lines on alpha releases just so funding could keep coming in.
I have no doubts that the game will be finished in grade AAA quality. I have no doubts that the money is being spent for current and future content. What I do doubt is when the game will finished based on CR's assumptions and I have doubts about how much money they've been blowing through just to keep this project a float.
If CR would have been straight with us, the funding would have slowed significantly and the scope of the game would have been smaller, no doubt. He lied because he felt it would benefit the game and it's players in the long run. The problem is, you don't tell your investors 3 years is when they get the product when you meant 8 years. (Don't tell me he didn't know. He would have capped features if he had known.) He took a gamble, won the bet but hurt the projects reputation as a whole.
If you have little or no investment in this project, come in here questioning these issues, actively authoring dissidence, karma is a bitch and will catch up with you.
Every time Goonsquad/SA/DS post salt on Star Citizen, I spend more money on it. Every time a mentally disturbed former backer or Elite CMDR toxic emo comments, I spend more money on it. Every time they refuse to answer why they spend so much time arguing about a game they don't even like, I spend more money on it. Want to watch the world burn because you can't have your way? You got whats coming to you.
That would be pretty funny. One minute you're just happily walking in your ship, then the next second your character falls through the floor and is floating through space gagging and choking while holding his hands to his throat trying to breath and GRRRAARHAOROPERIUOWHOGH and then you implode or something and die! Meanwhile, your ship continues to drift off into the distance of vast space, its owner mysteriously missing....
The heads exploding type of stuff was that set of unrealistic things sci-fi introduced, used to have the idea it was instant death, such brutal, now it's indeed the suffocation and kind of freezing.
But yeah the clipping is one of the main issues games have even after released due to the collisions, only the server lag or desyncs are enough to drive clipping problems so they'll have work to do in that front before they can add consequences for your character dying.
Tiamat64 said: Meanwhile, your ship continues to drift off into the distance of vast space, its owner mysteriously missing....
"The Ghost Ship", you finding a ship driving through space without a pilot, "What happened here?" you ask, a mystery it is, gives me Alien Isolation vibes.
It is interesting to read the first posts of this thread about the expectations concerning 3.0 and even 3.1. A hint : 3.1 isn't even mentioned anymore.
Delays can happen for many different reasons. Being open about development is also fine. But that doesn't necessarily need to include wild release guesses from CiG's top nob. Because that is how it comes across atm. Again and again he repeats this dumb mistake. Is there no one in his company that can talk some sense into that man?
THIS IS IT RIGHT HERE.
The reason there is even a leg to stand on for both heretics and skeptics is because Chris Roberts lied. He sold the initial (Kickstarter )scope to original backers. Only after the money began flooding in, did he ask the backers if they'd like the scope of the game changed. After which point feature creep began and still does to this day, He's lied about his own observed time lines on alpha releases just so funding could keep coming in.
I have no doubts that the game will be finished in grade AAA quality. I have no doubts that the money is being spent for current and future content. What I do doubt is when the game will finished based on CR's assumptions and I have doubts about how much money they've been blowing through just to keep this project a float.
If CR would have been straight with us, the funding would have slowed significantly and the scope of the game would have been smaller, no doubt. He lied because he felt it would benefit the game and it's players in the long run. The problem is, you don't tell your investors 3 years is when they get the product when you meant 8 years. (Don't tell me he didn't know. He would have capped features if he had known.) He took a gamble, won the bet but hurt the projects reputation as a whole.
If you have little or no investment in this project, come in here questioning these issues, actively authoring dissidence, karma is a bitch and will catch up with you.
That's the sort off tribal mentality that comes with cognitive dissonance: 'you can't criticize this project unless you're invested in it'.
Why would I throw money at a project I have hangups about, or see a significant amount of risk in?
I've invested time and attention in following this project's development, dialoging with those who are financially lighter because of it, and have grown a few grey hairs over the course.
Rather than authoring dissidence, I like to think I am helping this project succeed in some small way by bringing up possibly uncomfortable points that may make their way through the community until reaching an officer's attention. Echo chambers lead nowhere good. If I really wanted this project to fail, I would simply ignore it.
Edit: one more thing: benevolent deception, isn't. If CR knowingly lied in order to part backers with their money 'for the greater good' as you imply, very loosely this amounts to fraud. For his sake let's hope Hanlon's razor applies.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar Authored 139 missions in VendettaOnline and 6 tracks in Distance
80 issues remain outstanding as of Thursday (this was shown on screen as most up-to-date number). There were 88 issues on Tuesday when AtV was recorded.
3.0 will be the first time ‘real’ persistence will be in the game - leveraging a lot of technology development done over the past couple of years.
Difficulty getting some performance capture in as different actors perform the same action slightly differently - in this case interacting with a countertop.
Subsumption will allow NPCs to pay attention to you and interact. Working to get facial animations synchronized with Subsumption.
Working to get item highlighting in shops to actually highlight the whole item - not omitting things like magazines, scopes, or other attachments.
Issues with doors fleeing the ships they belong to.
Work being done to fix longstanding issues they weren’t sure how to fix until now.
CopyBuild 3, the basis for the Delta Patcher, has been launched internally. Degree of success of that launch is unknown.
Work on Quantum Drive as frequently ships were colliding due to exiting QD in the same place. Also, ships were randomly exiting Quantum Drive inside the system’s star.
3.0 branch has been split off of the main development branch.
Comments
Probably because CSE isn't as dishonest and incompetent as CIG.
..Cake..
On the other hand by the nature of crowd funding CIG have been forced into pouring resources into making playable alpha builds for sales purposes. Well it is understandable but in the long run this practice might easily end up resulting the same amount of "marketing" expenses as the amounts publishers usually spend on promoting products ready for launch.
From a development standpoint making alpha builds is healthy for the project too, since it helps developers to focus on milestones. Besides, when a build is published the developers get lots of feedback concerning bugs and quirks, and general opinions about features. This is valuable feedback and helps the project get better.
Viking
Though I don't think there's anything really wrong with them using some extra money so that people can enjoy their alpha builds. CIG's job is after all to make a game for their backers to play.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
Viking
A hint : 3.1 isn't even mentioned anymore.
Delays can happen for many different reasons. Being open about development is also fine. But that doesn't necessarily need to include wild release guesses from CiG's top nob. Because that is how it comes across atm. Again and again he repeats this dumb mistake. Is there no one in his company that can talk some sense into that man?
The need to maintain the alpha exists as that is the expectation from any crowdfunded project, that also has its told on development on things as, having to optimize, polish and find playable workarounds/solutions (hence placeholder code) to be able to achieve something releasable as the game is heavy in development. It has its cost in resources but the project wouldn't be possible to captivate interest and funding otherwise I think.
It has nothing to do with an altruistic choice about openness.. Folks demanded updates on the progress because they're funding the project, just as publishers will demand updates on progress because it's their money.
The only difference between publishers and crowdfunding is that publishers can act unilaterally to trim scope and maintain progress towards a definite release. Individual backers mean nothing. Newsflash: that's not a good thing for the consumers.
Publishers aren't going to fund a project then tell the developer to just hit them up whenever whatever it is they're working on is finished. Jesus, why am I having to even remind anyone of this...
In the aspect that Star Citizen would have never been possible if it depended in a publisher, sure. The publishers aren't evil, but they aren't ambitious as they don't want to take risks. They follow the money and that is why PC MMO's have seen better days, now that the biggest publishers are seeing mobile MMO's as the next big moneh moneh moneh! \o/
With Star Citizen he has behaved like a 5 year old kid told by his mother that he can have $1 to spend in the toy shop, he then runs around the whole shop picking up $1 items before dropping them again when the next shiny thing catches his eye.
Then his father walks in and gives him another $1 and he proceeds to do the same all over again looking at the $2 toys, then his aunt comes in and again he runs around the store, then his uncle, then his godmother, his godfather and on and on.....
Then the shop closes and there's no more money but atleast the 5 year old boy can put his $20 in the bank.
Also the "not get paid", remember this is not black and white, the date the publisher agrees with the studio is not the date the developers will be given to work with, like they take the conservative approach (they have to due the cost sake) but the devs won't be given that as their deadlines, otherwise, it'd be more likely the "real" date to be pushed back, the usual pressure to keep people focused on short-med term goals.
Delayed
A creative person is motivated by the desire to achieve, not the desire to beat others.
So it seems they do have implemented atmosphere in ships, that may finally deal with the naked players floating around in space. lol
"Cherish the quiet...before my STORM!"
For a $5/5000 in-game credit bonus for backing Star Citizen (MMO) or Squadron 42 (Single Player/Co-op) use my Referral code: STAR-3QDY-SZBG
But yeah I recall now they said they were implementing the atmosphere in Levski and such, if this is simulated on your character then it should correctly kill you.
THIS IS IT RIGHT HERE.
The reason there is even a leg to stand on for both heretics and skeptics is because Chris Roberts lied. He sold the initial (Kickstarter )scope to original backers. Only after the money began flooding in, did he ask the backers if they'd like the scope of the game changed. After which point feature creep began and still does to this day, He's lied about his own observed time lines on alpha releases just so funding could keep coming in.I have no doubts that the game will be finished in grade AAA quality. I have no doubts that the money is being spent for current and future content. What I do doubt is when the game will finished based on CR's assumptions and I have doubts about how much money they've been blowing through just to keep this project a float.
If CR would have been straight with us, the funding would have slowed significantly and the scope of the game would have been smaller, no doubt. He lied because he felt it would benefit the game and it's players in the long run. The problem is, you don't tell your investors 3 years is when they get the product when you meant 8 years. (Don't tell me he didn't know. He would have capped features if he had known.) He took a gamble, won the bet but hurt the projects reputation as a whole.
If you have little or no investment in this project, come in here questioning these issues, actively authoring dissidence, karma is a bitch and will catch up with you.
But yeah the clipping is one of the main issues games have even after released due to the collisions, only the server lag or desyncs are enough to drive clipping problems so they'll have work to do in that front before they can add consequences for your character dying.
"The Ghost Ship", you finding a ship driving through space without a pilot, "What happened here?" you ask, a mystery it is, gives me Alien Isolation vibes.
Why would I throw money at a project I have hangups about, or see a significant amount of risk in?
I've invested time and attention in following this project's development, dialoging with those who are financially lighter because of it, and have grown a few grey hairs over the course.
Rather than authoring dissidence, I like to think I am helping this project succeed in some small way by bringing up possibly uncomfortable points that may make their way through the community until reaching an officer's attention. Echo chambers lead nowhere good. If I really wanted this project to fail, I would simply ignore it.
Edit: one more thing: benevolent deception, isn't. If CR knowingly lied in order to part backers with their money 'for the greater good' as you imply, very loosely this amounts to fraud. For his sake let's hope Hanlon's razor applies.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance
Relevant video cut: http://www.youtubecutter.com/watch/d99796bc/
80 issues remain outstanding as of Thursday (this was shown on screen as most up-to-date number). There were 88 issues on Tuesday when AtV was recorded.
3.0 will be the first time ‘real’ persistence will be in the game - leveraging a lot of technology development done over the past couple of years.
Difficulty getting some performance capture in as different actors perform the same action slightly differently - in this case interacting with a countertop.
Subsumption will allow NPCs to pay attention to you and interact. Working to get facial animations synchronized with Subsumption.
Working to get item highlighting in shops to actually highlight the whole item - not omitting things like magazines, scopes, or other attachments.
Issues with doors fleeing the ships they belong to.
Work being done to fix longstanding issues they weren’t sure how to fix until now.
CopyBuild 3, the basis for the Delta Patcher, has been launched internally. Degree of success of that launch is unknown.
Work on Quantum Drive as frequently ships were colliding due to exiting QD in the same place. Also, ships were randomly exiting Quantum Drive inside the system’s star.
3.0 branch has been split off of the main development branch.