Sadly in the real development world, you want programming teams to be small
In the real development world, programmers follow Industry Standards and Best Practices. The guy programming a cash register isn't any different then a large studio. The standards are exactly the same.
You also need a good project manager that can get things done with clear goals.
The Marketing Team needs their keycard access to the studio taken away.
And not have a CEO that makes up shit on live podcasts that leaves all the team back in the studio in a state of shock with something promised that isn't even proven to be done.
Sadly in the real development world, you want programming teams to be small
In the real development world, programmers follow Industry Standards and Best Practices. The guy programming a cash register isn't any different then a large studio. The standards are exactly the same.
You also need a good project manager that can get things done with clear goals.
And not have a CEO that makes up shit on live podcasts that all the team back in the studio in a state of shock with something promised that isn't even proven to be done.
And says who those programmers do not?
It's not like what those developers are doing is "yet another FPS shooter game", or "yet another ark clone survival game", or "yet another WoW Copy/Paste MMO", or "yet another battle royale", what they are doing requires a lot of research and development, a lot of trying things out, a lot of proving design viability and with it, trial and error.
And thank God for that, this genre sure needs ambitious devs to push boundaries and try new ideas together to create new experiences. And for me, that's why SC continues to stand such support.
It's not like what those developers are doing is "yet another FPS shooter game", or "yet another ark clone survival game", or "yet another WoW Copy/Paste MMO", what they are doing requires a lot of research and development, a lot of trying things out, a lot of proving design viability and with it, trial and error.
Not this argument again. Industry Standards and Best Practices are the exact same, understand?
Everything starts from scratch. Games have been announce and released many time since SC announcement.
And "Boo Hoo, its so hard for the devs", yeah, that's what we paid them to do. They accepted our money. That wasn't too hard for them to do. Now, they need to deliver.
Now. Maybe they are great devs. I worked places where there are great workers, but the management were absolute clownshoes. So that is highly possible. It is Chris Roberts we're talking about. I'm sure dragonlady sucks to be around too.
Just don't sit there and try to gain sympathy for them. They are highly paid. Work in studios in the most expensive areas in the world.
Not this argument again. Industry Standards and Best Practices are the exact same, understand?
Everything starts from scratch. Games have been announce and released many time since SC announcement.
And "Boo Hoo, its so hard for the devs", yeah, that's what we paid them to do. They accepted our money. That wasn't too hard for them to do. Now, they need to deliver.
Now. Maybe they are great devs. I worked places where there are great workers, but the management were absolute clownshoes. So that is highly possible. It is Chris Roberts we're talking about. I'm sure dragonlady sucks to be around too.
Just don't sit there and try to gain sympathy for them. They are highly paid. Work in studios in the most expensive areas in the world.
Of course, industry standards are always adapting to the most efficient methods, one of those is aggressive scheduling that CIG also practices that is known for continuous fluctuations on schedules (to keep devs focused on delivery that is), something our office also works with btw.
I don't think they need sympathy as it's their job, but they also don't need unfair hate, like that PTU rant. If everyone was like that towards the devs, it would just destroy all their morale, I rarely see anyone (external to the community) giving any credit or merit, only shutting them down, that's why I wouldn't like to work on studios this publicly exposed.
they also don't need unfair hate, like that PTU rant.
This is your problem right there. You think everybody not liking what you like, is a "hater" (are you a female rapper from the 90s?).
I don't "hate" anybody. I just think Chris Roberts is a "fuck up", but I don't "hate" him. If somebody else was responsible, they would be held accountable, but it's Chris Roberts.
Wanting somebody at CIG to explain missing doors on ships, a problem that has persisted for over 6 months, isn't "hate" either.
Stop being so emotional ffs. Calm down. Turn it down a notch or 7.
I am still predicting a release with four viable systems available. Doubt if they can possibly make the full 100 system stretch goal anytime in the foreseeable future. Real systems, not copy/paste 'rocky planet-rocky moon' placeholders.
I'll send Erillion a dollar for every system past that they have out of the gate.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
I am still predicting a release with four viable systems available. Doubt if they can possibly make the full 100 system stretch goal anytime in the foreseeable future. Real systems, not copy/paste 'rocky planet-rocky moon' placeholders.
The systems bit is also quite understandable, we went from when a system was just the space area + stations and other things, and on those that had a landing zone it was a on-rails loading map with skyboxes and all... To what it is now where every planet and every moon have to be fully created and have content on them, then the 100 systems became unrealistic for release.
It's mostly because they are not just spinning algorithms and bamn the quick path to fill in space, instead, it's all being very crafted to both achieve the visual quality it does, and to keep all being created as a translation of the game lore.
So not a biggie, with OCS now getting out of the way and being possible to expand the game-world we'll see how quick areas can be created. And they are starting with the harder ones at that by doing the cities first.
That's feature creep for ya! Or more to the point, that when they promised that stretch goal, they really had no idea how they were going to do it. Like much of the game at that point.
Making it up as you go along leads to some troubles later....
Four systems for the MVP.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
That's feature creep for ya! Or more to the point, that when they promised that stretch goal, they really had no idea how they were going to do it. Like much of the game at that point.
Making it up as you go along leads to some troubles later....
Four systems for the MVP.
As with many indie efforts words get misused, SC is a leader in this category for sure.
While he said Minimum "Viable" Product what is really being built is the Minimum "Marketable" Product. (MMP).
Four planets could very well be the MMP goal.
"The minimum viable product (MVP) is a powerful concept that allows you to test your ideas. It is not to be confused with the minimal marketable product (MMP), the product with the smallest feature set that still addresses the user needs and creates the right user experience."
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
That's feature creep for ya! Or more to the point, that when they promised that stretch goal, they really had no idea how they were going to do it. Like much of the game at that point.
Making it up as you go along leads to some troubles later....
Four systems for the MVP.
I think they had the idea originally to answer their needs, because very originally the game was no "fully seamless" design, it was gameworld field with loadings per area you go to on different map levels. This is likely why they didn't need OCS originally and could just use the engine stock solution. What happened is the more ambitious takes they wanted, the more the engine solutions were unsuited to answer the game's needs; this is likely why this mentions of if they know they would have the budget they ended up with from the start they'd go with their own custom engine instead, but they still didn't have enough engineering resources for that at the start.
Took years of dev to have it finally cope with scope, the big scope increase the game faced is finally translating into implementation, at first it was just the 64bit to cope with much larger scale, then the procedural technology, now the technology to sustain an actual planet with cities and biomes and all that jazz on it.
I am still predicting a release with four viable systems available. Doubt if they can possibly make the full 100 system stretch goal anytime in the foreseeable future. Real systems, not copy/paste 'rocky planet-rocky moon' placeholders.
The systems bit is also quite understandable, we went from when a system was just the space area + stations and other things, and on those that had a landing zone it was a on-rails loading map with skyboxes and all... To what it is now where every planet and every moon have to be fully created and have content on them, then the 100 systems became unrealistic for release.
It's mostly because they are not just spinning algorithms and bamn the quick path to fill in space, instead, it's all being very crafted to both achieve the visual quality it does, and to keep all being created as a translation of the game lore.
So not a biggie, with OCS now getting out of the way and being possible to expand the game-world we'll see how quick areas can be created. And they are starting with the harder ones at that by doing the cities first.
They still need server meshing to really expand the game word. OCS allows them to expand it a bit, but they're still limited by what a single server can do.
They still need server meshing to really expand the game word. OCS allows them to expand it a bit, but they're still limited by what a single server can do.
Yes. Server Meshing is the MP scale, OCS is the game-world scale.
They can still increase the MP scale with it as they're still messing with parts of the game that can't scale properly yet on MP, such as the physics limited to 4 cores (or 8 threads) I forgot, so that alone they can't have more powerful servers because it'll always bottleneck. Then the OCS on the server-side culling can unload areas of space where no players are is set to optimize resources on where they are needed. So multiple bits that will boost MP until this final solution is in.
Now if you watched the presentation CR is stating something that feels like he doesn't require Server Meshing for SC to be considered "live", this is, if after full persistence is in, the game service will be permanent, with no wipes, then wouldn't that be a soft-launch?
But am doubtful they will be able to do that, because with exploits and any little balance problems that cause "infinite generation of game money" (remember GW2 launch madness cause a wrong price in a shop?), so data wipes feel likely to me.
@gervaise1 You misunderstood how the public roadmap works.
The roadmap only goes max 4 updates past current date (1 year timeframe), the last current update has nothing to do with any game release or anywhere near it, it only means work beyond that milestone has not been fully scheduled yet. So nothing to do with any game MVP, the game MVP has been described on the last game conference.
For that just check the main post on this thread that has that recent presentation relating to the major milestones to achieve before, still not scoped out on the public roadmap.
The SQ42 roadmap is set to come this month, hinted this week we're still to see.
@gervaise1 You misunderstood how the public roadmap works.
The roadmap only goes max 4 updates past current date (1 year timeframe), the last current update has nothing to do with any game release or anywhere near it, it only means work beyond that milestone has not been fully scheduled yet. So nothing to do with any game MVP, the game MVP has been described on the last game conference.
For that just check the main post on this thread that has that recent presentation relating to the major milestones to achieve before, still not scoped out on the public roadmap.
The SQ42 roadmap is set to come this month, hinted this week we're still to see.
Is that going to be a road map to delivery, or just a 4 Qtr look ahead?
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Is that going to be a road map to delivery, or just a 4 Qtr look ahead?
What was on the presentation this thread talks about is to release, it's not in-detail but highlights the major milestones left to achieve, like they've now done OCS that was a long blocker to expand to game-world but still have to do its server-side front, up to the server-mesh that is the MMO backend of the game.
So only when those milestones get added to the 4 quarters roadmap is when we see that they are on the 1-year scope of development, that what should hint how close are they of what they describe as the major points of the MVP release.
@gervaise1 You misunderstood how the public roadmap works.
The roadmap only goes max 4 updates past current date (1 year timeframe), the last current update has nothing to do with any game release or anywhere near it, it only means work beyond that milestone has not been fully scheduled yet. So nothing to do with any game MVP, the game MVP has been described on the last game conference.
For that just check the main post on this thread that has that recent presentation relating to the major milestones to achieve before, still not scoped out on the public roadmap.
The SQ42 roadmap is set to come this month, hinted this week we're still to see.
Is that going to be a road map to delivery, or just a 4 Qtr look ahead?
I assume it's going to include a rough list of all the unfinished stuff, but it's probably not going to include any schedule or estimation on when that stuff is going to be finished.
Oh if he meant SQ42 roadmap then that's unknown, I don't think it will be quarter because SQ42 has no alpha releases and updates, so it might just be what's left to do.
It's tad hard to know how will they handle features and such that are part of both titles
As far as the MVP there is nothing spelt out - and that is totally reasonable.
However - I suggest - the current "hope" lets call it - will be mid-year. If you track back through the development of the roadmap there was, I believe there was, a vague, outside hope of "by 3.4 but expecting it to be no earlier than 3.5". Which was at a time when they hadn't even spelt out what the key features they wanted to be in.
Remember there will be a plan above the roadmap!
And a plan out to completion - not just for 4 quarters. As well as financial plans, resource plans, budget plans, risk plans etc. Different types of planning at different levels. Which also factors in the big picture top down management view at a particular point in time.
If they only had the roadmap they wouldn't be able to say things like: we have enough money to finish.
This is not related to that, that roadmap only embeds what is within the next 4 updates, this is a roadmap of major points for the release of the game itself, so different things.
Who here do you think believes that?
You're just finding any excuse to spam Star Citizen propaganda.
Not everyone is aware of every post that gets made by every person on this site. I only saw and read this post it was VERY HELPFUL. Stop stalking the posters.
Comments
You also need a good project manager that can get things done with clear goals.
The Marketing Team needs their keycard access to the studio taken away.
And not have a CEO that makes up shit on live podcasts that leaves all the team back in the studio in a state of shock with something promised that isn't even proven to be done.
It's not like what those developers are doing is "yet another FPS shooter game", or "yet another ark clone survival game", or "yet another WoW Copy/Paste MMO", or "yet another battle royale", what they are doing requires a lot of research and development, a lot of trying things out, a lot of proving design viability and with it, trial and error.
And thank God for that, this genre sure needs ambitious devs to push boundaries and try new ideas together to create new experiences. And for me, that's why SC continues to stand such support.
Everything starts from scratch. Games have been announce and released many time since SC announcement.
And "Boo Hoo, its so hard for the devs", yeah, that's what we paid them to do. They accepted our money. That wasn't too hard for them to do. Now, they need to deliver.
Now. Maybe they are great devs. I worked places where there are great workers, but the management were absolute clownshoes. So that is highly possible. It is Chris Roberts we're talking about. I'm sure dragonlady sucks to be around too.
Just don't sit there and try to gain sympathy for them. They are highly paid. Work in studios in the most expensive areas in the world.
lol
I don't think they need sympathy as it's their job, but they also don't need unfair hate, like that PTU rant. If everyone was like that towards the devs, it would just destroy all their morale, I rarely see anyone (external to the community) giving any credit or merit, only shutting them down, that's why I wouldn't like to work on studios this publicly exposed.
I don't "hate" anybody. I just think Chris Roberts is a "fuck up", but I don't "hate" him. If somebody else was responsible, they would be held accountable, but it's Chris Roberts.
Wanting somebody at CIG to explain missing doors on ships, a problem that has persisted for over 6 months, isn't "hate" either.
Stop being so emotional ffs. Calm down. Turn it down a notch or 7.
I'll send Erillion a dollar for every system past that they have out of the gate.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
It's mostly because they are not just spinning algorithms and bamn the quick path to fill in space, instead, it's all being very crafted to both achieve the visual quality it does, and to keep all being created as a translation of the game lore.
So not a biggie, with OCS now getting out of the way and being possible to expand the game-world we'll see how quick areas can be created. And they are starting with the harder ones at that by doing the cities first.
Making it up as you go along leads to some troubles later....
Four systems for the MVP.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
While he said Minimum "Viable" Product what is really being built is the Minimum "Marketable" Product. (MMP).
Four planets could very well be the MMP goal.
"The minimum viable product (MVP) is a powerful concept that allows you to test your ideas. It is not to be confused with the minimal marketable product (MMP), the product with the smallest feature set that still addresses the user needs and creates the right user experience."
https://dzone.com/articles/minimum-viable-product-and
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Took years of dev to have it finally cope with scope, the big scope increase the game faced is finally translating into implementation, at first it was just the 64bit to cope with much larger scale, then the procedural technology, now the technology to sustain an actual planet with cities and biomes and all that jazz on it.
They can still increase the MP scale with it as they're still messing with parts of the game that can't scale properly yet on MP, such as the physics limited to 4 cores (or 8 threads) I forgot, so that alone they can't have more powerful servers because it'll always bottleneck. Then the OCS on the server-side culling can unload areas of space where no players are is set to optimize resources on where they are needed. So multiple bits that will boost MP until this final solution is in.
Now if you watched the presentation CR is stating something that feels like he doesn't require Server Meshing for SC to be considered "live", this is, if after full persistence is in, the game service will be permanent, with no wipes, then wouldn't that be a soft-launch?
But am doubtful they will be able to do that, because with exploits and any little balance problems that cause "infinite generation of game money" (remember GW2 launch madness cause a wrong price in a shop?), so data wipes feel likely to me.
The roadmap only goes max 4 updates past current date (1 year timeframe), the last current update has nothing to do with any game release or anywhere near it, it only means work beyond that milestone has not been fully scheduled yet. So nothing to do with any game MVP, the game MVP has been described on the last game conference.
For that just check the main post on this thread that has that recent presentation relating to the major milestones to achieve before, still not scoped out on the public roadmap.
The SQ42 roadmap is set to come this month, hinted this week we're still to see.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
So only when those milestones get added to the 4 quarters roadmap is when we see that they are on the 1-year scope of development, that what should hint how close are they of what they describe as the major points of the MVP release.
It's tad hard to know how will they handle features and such that are part of both titles
As far as the MVP there is nothing spelt out - and that is totally reasonable.
However - I suggest - the current "hope" lets call it - will be mid-year. If you track back through the development of the roadmap there was, I believe there was, a vague, outside hope of "by 3.4 but expecting it to be no earlier than 3.5". Which was at a time when they hadn't even spelt out what the key features they wanted to be in.
Remember there will be a plan above the roadmap!
And a plan out to completion - not just for 4 quarters. As well as financial plans, resource plans, budget plans, risk plans etc. Different types of planning at different levels. Which also factors in the big picture top down management view at a particular point in time.
If they only had the roadmap they wouldn't be able to say things like: we have enough money to finish.