Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Around The Verse - Level Design

1235»

Comments

  • CoticCotic Member UncommonPosts: 268
    Ok but why does his opinion matter? Everybody makes assumptions based on the information they have access to and their particular level of bias, that is unavoidable so I am confused why you want to take him to task for doing what we all do. I don't see @rpmcmurphy making statements as though they are the only truth people should listen to.

    Perhaps the issue with Illfonic is not so much that it might be common but that using backer's money would encourage more carefulness, especially so at that period of the project when funding was a much smaller figure.

    For a lot of people the details are not so relevant, all they know is that something has not materialized. It is very easy to get bogged down in details as a way of justifying delays. We don't concern ourselves with the details of why a taxi or bus doesn't get to us on time, all we care about is that it is late. Perhaps CIG just need to be more careful with what they say, if they set expectations and fail to achieve them, it is going to backfire. People should not have to come up with excuses or look to justify that.

    Eventually the game will release and all of this won't matter any more, that is what I am hoping for :)

  • CrazKanukCrazKanuk Member EpicPosts: 6,130
    Cotic said:
    Ok but why does his opinion matter? Everybody makes assumptions based on the information they have access to and their particular level of bias, that is unavoidable so I am confused why you want to take him to task for doing what we all do. I don't see @rpmcmurphy making statements as though they are the only truth people should listen to.

    Perhaps the issue with Illfonic is not so much that it might be common but that using backer's money would encourage more carefulness, especially so at that period of the project when funding was a much smaller figure.

    For a lot of people the details are not so relevant, all they know is that something has not materialized. It is very easy to get bogged down in details as a way of justifying delays. We don't concern ourselves with the details of why a taxi or bus doesn't get to us on time, all we care about is that it is late. Perhaps CIG just need to be more careful with what they say, if they set expectations and fail to achieve them, it is going to backfire. People should not have to come up with excuses or look to justify that.

    Eventually the game will release and all of this won't matter any more, that is what I am hoping for :)



    I actually resisted responding to this.... well one time. I think that's progress. My therapist probably wouldn't agree. 

    Yes, everyone has an opinion. I get that. However, why is it alright to hold a company accountable for their words, yet a random person posting on the Internet has zero accountability. I'm not saying that someone can't have an opinion, but believing that there could only be one truth is another thing. 

    The Illfonic thing is a typical outsourcing problem. Everyone wants to believe outsourcing is the Ronco solution ("set it and forget it"), but it isn't and there actually needs to be dedicated staff to oversee the outsourcing effort. It was once cost-efficient enough that you could outsource, still have 2 or 3 re-designs and it would be cost-efficient, but that's simply not the case anymore. Although for those who know how to manage it properly, it can still provide a net benefit. 

    CIG most definitely needs to be more careful with what they say. It might be more beneficial to go the way of some other projects, such as CU, and just pull a release date off the table entirely. This is why I say that transparency kills. Everybody wants it, but few can actually handle it. I don't think there are excuses being made. I think it's a product of knowing about a product too early for the consumer to handle, especially in the case of games, which are traditionally longer projects. 

    Yup! At some point it will release and then we'll have to find another polarizing game to create circular arguments over :)


    Crazkanuk

    ----------------
    Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
    Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
    Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
    Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
    Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
    ----------------

  • rpmcmurphyrpmcmurphy Member EpicPosts: 3,502
    CrazKanuk said:
    Yes, everyone has an opinion. I get that. However, why is it alright to hold a company accountable for their words, yet a random person posting on the Internet has zero accountability. I'm not saying that someone can't have an opinion, but believing that there could only be one truth is another thing. 


    I should probably steer well clear but...

    The reason CIG can and should be held accountable is because they are taking money on the back of their words. I am not.
    In November of last year they took over $7.5 million, an amount probably bolstered by the impression that they would be releasing 3.0 before the year's end.  I, on the other hand, am not selling a product or making 'promises'. I am just an opinion, they are marketing, they are selling. A subtle difference.

    This assumption that I believe there could only be one truth is based on what exactly?
    You don't know my logic for reaching conclusions, you don't know how I look at things, what weight I do and don't assign to things. Perhaps I have a large pool of examples to work from, perhaps I have looked at CIG's previous conduct over various matters and I build my opinion from that.
    This is one of the frustrating things in having a discussion with you. You accuse others of assumptions while being assumptive yourself because you have no idea how I reach my conclusions, instead you claim I only see one truth on the subject.

    CrazKanuk said:
    CIG most definitely needs to be more careful with what they say. It might be more beneficial to go the way of some other projects, such as CU, and just pull a release date off the table entirely. This is why I say that transparency kills. Everybody wants it, but few can actually handle it. I don't think there are excuses being made. I think it's a product of knowing about a product too early for the consumer to handle, especially in the case of games, which are traditionally longer projects. 


    I don't think transparency kills but I do think the company needs to address things that mess up their schedule, they can't just give the good news and then hush up on the bad while also being touted as the most transparent AAA project ever.
    On the whole, people are cool with delays as long as they get plausible reasons for why it is occurring, that's the bit that CIG skips. A lot of people would probably appreciate seeing what has affected the schedule, why it has done so and what that means going forwards. It would give proper transparency into the project instead of this psuedo-transparency.


  • CrazKanukCrazKanuk Member EpicPosts: 6,130
    CrazKanuk said:
    Yes, everyone has an opinion. I get that. However, why is it alright to hold a company accountable for their words, yet a random person posting on the Internet has zero accountability. I'm not saying that someone can't have an opinion, but believing that there could only be one truth is another thing. 


    I should probably steer well clear but...

    The reason CIG can and should be held accountable is because they are taking money on the back of their words. I am not.
    In November of last year they took over $7.5 million, an amount probably bolstered by the impression that they would be releasing 3.0 before the year's end.  I, on the other hand, am not selling a product or making 'promises'. I am just an opinion, they are marketing, they are selling. A subtle difference.

    This assumption that I believe there could only be one truth is based on what exactly?
    You don't know my logic for reaching conclusions, you don't know how I look at things, what weight I do and don't assign to things. Perhaps I have a large pool of examples to work from, perhaps I have looked at CIG's previous conduct over various matters and I build my opinion from that.
    This is one of the frustrating things in having a discussion with you. You accuse others of assumptions while being assumptive yourself because you have no idea how I reach my conclusions, instead you claim I only see one truth on the subject.

    CrazKanuk said:
    CIG most definitely needs to be more careful with what they say. It might be more beneficial to go the way of some other projects, such as CU, and just pull a release date off the table entirely. This is why I say that transparency kills. Everybody wants it, but few can actually handle it. I don't think there are excuses being made. I think it's a product of knowing about a product too early for the consumer to handle, especially in the case of games, which are traditionally longer projects. 


    I don't think transparency kills but I do think the company needs to address things that mess up their schedule, they can't just give the good news and then hush up on the bad while also being touted as the most transparent AAA project ever.
    On the whole, people are cool with delays as long as they get plausible reasons for why it is occurring, that's the bit that CIG skips. A lot of people would probably appreciate seeing what has affected the schedule, why it has done so and what that means going forwards. It would give proper transparency into the project instead of this psuedo-transparency.




    Ok, thanks for the perspective on the whole "money-grab" thing. I appreciate that. Also, I'd agree that might seem more shady. That's not as far a stone to cast, I suppose. 

    I only accuse you of seeing one truth because we have these circular arguments around things like how you're coming to your conclusion or that you don't seem open to the idea of other possibilities. You simply see it as someone white knighting. Either way, I can certainly understand how when someone questions your motives or makes claims that you're wrong or that you aren't basing your arguments on fact, that you might get defensive. I don't think that's uncommon. I'd say I get defensive regarding my stances too. After that it can, and does, descend into circular banter because nobody has any real concrete answers. 

    I think the jury is still out on the whole transparency thing. I'm a firm believer in transparency. You could be right, too. Maybe the state of transparency today is the problem. I often use CU as an example of a project who has had multiple delays and, yet, gets let off the hook. I don't THINK they do anything that much differently than CIG. So they would be using the same pseudo-transparency idea. So, really, it's just an illusion of transparency and, ultimately, the reaction is still largely based on the community and what the Internet says today. There really isn't anything low-level delivered as far as explanations go. Good point. 


    Crazkanuk

    ----------------
    Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
    Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
    Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
    Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
    Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
    ----------------

  • KefoKefo Member EpicPosts: 4,229
    CrazKanuk said:


    I think the jury is still out on the whole transparency thing. I'm a firm believer in transparency. You could be right, too. Maybe the state of transparency today is the problem. I often use CU as an example of a project who has had multiple delays and, yet, gets let off the hook. I don't THINK they do anything that much differently than CIG. So they would be using the same pseudo-transparency idea. So, really, it's just an illusion of transparency and, ultimately, the reaction is still largely based on the community and what the Internet says today. There really isn't anything low-level delivered as far as explanations go. Good point. 


    I don't follow CU so just throwing this out there. Does CU, when they hit something that's going to delay them for whatever reason, go radio silent until the backers are whipped into a frenzy from speculation or do they have the professional courtesy to actually address the issue(s) when it comes up within a reasonable time frame and tell their backers what's going on and what the short/long term plan is?

    If they do actually tell their backers then maybe that's why they get let off the hook. People tend to be a bit more forgiving if you treat them like adults and you know update them on everything that's going on.

    Barring that maybe it's just because Mark Jacobs has actually run a game company successfully before and has put out a game in the last 10-15 years while Chris hasn't and ran a previous game company into the ground.


  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member LegendaryPosts: 7,650
    edited March 2017
    Kefo said:
    If they do actually tell their backers then maybe that's why they get let off the hook. People tend to be a bit more forgiving if you treat them like adults and you know update them on everything that's going on.
    They have felt under schedule since 2014, right now they do some sort of updates time to time on what's the progress towards the release of the beta (2015, 2016, slipped now to 2017).

    CIG's direction on communication is meeting the same end towards the next update, since the schedule reports, that do are indeed explaining and informing of delays on the progress towards the next milestone (via its estimates). They have been improving on the criticism they got on their communication (as of silence instead of informing when stuff gets delayed) and now is a matter of time until the schedule is out and they can close "3.0's Release Date Pandora Box" they opened last year.
  • KefoKefo Member EpicPosts: 4,229
    MaxBacon said:
    Kefo said:
    If they do actually tell their backers then maybe that's why they get let off the hook. People tend to be a bit more forgiving if you treat them like adults and you know update them on everything that's going on.
    They have felt under schedule since 2014, right now they do some sort of updates time to time on what's the progress towards the release of the beta (2015, 2016, slipped now to 2017).

    CIG's direction on communication is meeting the same end towards the next update, since the schedule reports, that do are indeed explaining and informing of delays on the progress towards the next milestone (via its estimates). They have been improving on the criticism they got on their communication (as of silence instead of informing when stuff gets delayed) and now is a matter of time until the schedule is out and they can close "3.0's Release Date Pandora Box" they opened last year.
    I haven't read the last few reports but are they actually explaining the delays and why they hit them or is it still "we have blockers. We are working on them. Everything will be awesome when the blockers are gone" cause that doesn't really tell anyone shit except they are having problems which can be assumed of any company lol
  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member LegendaryPosts: 7,650
    edited March 2017
    Kefo said:
    I haven't read the last few reports but are they actually explaining the delays and why they hit them or is it still "we have blockers. We are working on them. Everything will be awesome when the blockers are gone" cause that doesn't really tell anyone shit except they are having problems which can be assumed of any company lol
    What more do you want? If something delays there certainly are blockers. The report is giving enough depth when every task ETA is increased, like this one http://archive.is/FJRQs 

    You see every task that misses its ETA having explanation towards what's missing/caused the delay, you have bigger features like when the MegaMap was pulled from 2.6 as it would go over schedule. You even have updates on a delay caused due illness of one of the network engineers assigned with the task.

    They are doing exactly what is to expect from it, for me this has been one of their best moves to have proper open development, so as we see that process flowing, we're aware of what's the status of one update and what's missing to do so it happens.
  • Octagon7711Octagon7711 Member LegendaryPosts: 9,000
    They're a bit heavy in the concepts department and need more bug smashers.  The bug smashers cover one thing at a time, they should also present a list of issue fixes, planned and completed, or I'll start thinking it is one guy doing one fix every week.

    "We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa      "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are."  SR Covey

  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member LegendaryPosts: 7,650
    edited March 2017
    They're a bit heavy in the concepts department and need more bug smashers.  The bug smashers cover one thing at a time, they should also present a list of issue fixes, planned and completed, or I'll start thinking it is one guy doing one fix every week.
    Such a wild random post xD
  • KefoKefo Member EpicPosts: 4,229
    MaxBacon said:
    Kefo said:
    I haven't read the last few reports but are they actually explaining the delays and why they hit them or is it still "we have blockers. We are working on them. Everything will be awesome when the blockers are gone" cause that doesn't really tell anyone shit except they are having problems which can be assumed of any company lol
    What more do you want? If something delays there certainly are blockers. The report is giving enough depth when every task ETA is increased, like this one http://archive.is/FJRQs 

    You see every task that misses its ETA having explanation towards what's missing/caused the delay, you have bigger features like when the MegaMap was pulled from 2.6 as it would go over schedule. You even have updates on a delay caused due illness of one of the network engineers assigned with the task.

    They are doing exactly what is to expect from it, for me this has been one of their best moves to have proper open development, so as we see that process flowing, we're aware of what's the status of one update and what's missing to do so it happens.
    Your link doesn't work btw.

Sign In or Register to comment.