It was the same last quarter though and the quarter before. Some stuff in 3.7 was moved to 3.8 and has now been released as part of 3.8. Stuff that was moved out of 3.8 into 3.9 is still in 3.9 and looks set to be released. And now some stuff in 3.9 has been moved to 4.0 - some stuff added to 3.9 as well.
Seem to remember you commenting along the same lines as well.
The issue isn't those 9 cards that they delayed this roadmap update, it's the 16 cards that they removed completely.
If you look at their old roadmaps, they planned to release a lot of major stuff like repair, salvage, land claims and server meshing in 2018 and it's still missing. RSI isn't just delaying stuff for a bit, they're completely failing to execute large part of their plan.
8 years (by end of Nov. 2020) is still falling in the development principle. Diablo 3 took +10 years and BG&E2 announced 10 years agi is not even on sight... both from multi-billionnaire companies with up-to-date pipelines and thousands of devs. What matter are patch after patch adding more substance and unique features while SQ42 is closing to beta.
So serious question, do you think you will have the full game, as in 100 systems and all the features/mechanics in a couple of years? I can't see it myself.
8 years (by end of Nov. 2020) is still falling in the development principle. Diablo 3 took +10 years and BG&E2 announced 10 years agi is not even on sight... both from multi-billionnaire companies with up-to-date pipelines and thousands of devs. What matter are patch after patch adding more substance and unique features while SQ42 is closing to beta.
So serious question, do you think you will have the full game, as in 100 systems and all the features/mechanics in a couple of years? I can't see it myself.
I can.
Have fun
No, you really can't. That's just you being silly.
If you watched the latest ISC they looked rather sceptical at making 3 of Microtech's moons in the next quarter.
To do all 100 systems in the next 2 years would require approximately 16 planetary objects per month.
you may then be interested in obtaining in game the more sophisticated medical ships - Apollo, Endeavor (Medical Bay Module) - the more advanced versions of the Cutlass Red basic med-evac.
8 years (by end of Nov. 2020) is still falling in the development principle. Diablo 3 took +10 years and BG&E2 announced 10 years agi is not even on sight... both from multi-billionnaire companies with up-to-date pipelines and thousands of devs. What matter are patch after patch adding more substance and unique features while SQ42 is closing to beta.
So serious question, do you think you will have the full game, as in 100 systems and all the features/mechanics in a couple of years? I can't see it myself.
I can.
Have fun
No, you really can't. That's just you being silly.
If you watched the latest ISC they looked rather sceptical at making 3 of Microtech's moons in the next quarter.
To do all 100 systems in the next 2 years would require approximately 16 planetary objects per month.
You said "in a couple of years", not "in the next 2 years"
And yes, I still can see it. A personal opinion. Once you have tools, once you add (a limited amount of) procedural generation, then content generation is much faster than in the beginning.
It was the same last quarter though and the quarter before. Some stuff in 3.7 was moved to 3.8 and has now been released as part of 3.8. Stuff that was moved out of 3.8 into 3.9 is still in 3.9 and looks set to be released. And now some stuff in 3.9 has been moved to 4.0 - some stuff added to 3.9 as well.
Seem to remember you commenting along the same lines as well.
I'm just surprised at how much they constantly remove, and this update has removed loads of stuff even compared to previous examples.
In February last year Erin said that the new roadmap would be more realistic. It has been anything but more realistic. In Q3 last year CIG said they were moving to staggered development which would help get more features into the game, again doesn't happen...
These quarterly updates are costing ~$15 million a time.
There is - as I have said before - a part of me that would really want them to be "better". There is another part of me that knows what that would mean and how that might introduce an actual delay.
And as for the staggered development - as I said at the time I "understood" what was said but know enough to know that I didn't know what it meant. And I was pretty certain it wasn't what some people were making it out to be. If it was truly staggered you would expect to see a decent % of SC stuff in Q2 already complete say.
I suspect "the schedule" was being used as a "scapegoat" for delays. Which happens! There are bound to be pressures. In the video the comment is made: he is being pushed by his boss CR. And saying well we would have been quicker but we had to spend time reporting our progress every week .... its an easy excuse. I could speculate what was meant but there are several possibilities: organisational; how work flows are managed; going back to what they said they would do: have one quarterly release. And - interestingly - one of the videos recently said that all development would now have to be complete a month before release was it? So end February for Q1.
At the end of the day the schedule isn't a disaster. It does inform backers - and others - and the fact that the work is being released into the alpha gives you confidence that they are working on what they say they are. Even if their dates are sometimes - not always - optimistic.
As to the "value" of the things being moved your point is valid. The stuff being released is iterative though - so does it represent more or less that 3 months of work? We also have no idea what % of effort is going to SQ42. I suspect a lot - although obviously SC work that supports SQ42 will also have priority.
Even the % complete doesn't really give a guide - why some stuff has finished really quickly. As above you could have a more robust PM system; things could be structured so that what management saw would be all at "about the same level of value". Smaller milestones etc. would be managed within teams. They could even have some form of earned value management system.
At the end of the day though CIG and SC / SQ42 are pretty small projects in the great scheme of things. And the level of PM has to be appropriate. So yes a part of me cringes but another part of me understands.
And yes, I still can see it. A personal opinion. Once you have tools, once you add (a limited amount of) procedural generation, then content generation is much faster than in the beginning.
Just because it is your personal opinion does not make it valid....
Right now they are on v4 of their planetary tech and the idea of 1 basic moon per month has them sceptical yet for some weird reason you think they can knock out 400 planetary objects in the 2 years?
8 years (by end of Nov. 2020) is still falling in the development principle. Diablo 3 took +10 years and BG&E2 announced 10 years agi is not even on sight... both from multi-billionnaire companies with up-to-date pipelines and thousands of devs. What matter are patch after patch adding more substance and unique features while SQ42 is closing to beta.
So serious question, do you think you will have the full game, as in 100 systems and all the features/mechanics in a couple of years? I can't see it myself.
I tend to agree with you that a couple more years is a very aggressive timeline. 2023 I would be comfortable predicting and I base that off looking around and seeing what is already in game. It's huge and very detailed but it also has the framework built as far as infrastructure goes. It feels like development could speed up due to that but obviously I am in no position to say "it will happen". I am going purely on what I am seeing in my travels. Only time will tell.
Oh also, I only play in the open universe, not Star Marine or SQ42, so I cannot speak to what they look like.
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.
And yes, I still can see it. A personal opinion. Once you have tools, once you add (a limited amount of) procedural generation, then content generation is much faster than in the beginning.
Just because it is your personal opinion does not make it valid....
Right now they are on v4 of their planetary tech and the idea of 1 basic moon per month has them sceptical yet for some weird reason you think they can knock out 400 planetary objects in the 2 years?
It would entirely depend on the type of planets they are making. Currently the planets and moons are inhabited with small outposts all over the place. The next system Pyro that they are working on is mostly just dead planets. I would think making gas giants and ocean worlds is probably going to be a bit simpler so that can be done almost entirely procedural, meanwhile planets with ancient civilizations and massive cities will take a lot longer, even with procedural biomes in, as they are all unique. Though the current route they are taking is sure, put the planet in, put some biomes and some basic outposts up, then they can always go back to polish. For instance they still have yet to create roads and rivers. While we do have planets and they have a lot on them, they are no where near 100% completed. So that will be fine if you want to focus on mining, trading, and a bit of exploration to just have placeholder planets and get big economic systems in. But for the stories that they want to have in the verse, these systems need lots of time to be polished over.
Comments
If you look at their old roadmaps, they planned to release a lot of major stuff like repair, salvage, land claims and server meshing in 2018 and it's still missing. RSI isn't just delaying stuff for a bit, they're completely failing to execute large part of their plan.
And as for the staggered development - as I said at the time I "understood" what was said but know enough to know that I didn't know what it meant. And I was pretty certain it wasn't what some people were making it out to be. If it was truly staggered you would expect to see a decent % of SC stuff in Q2 already complete say.
I suspect "the schedule" was being used as a "scapegoat" for delays. Which happens! There are bound to be pressures. In the video the comment is made: he is being pushed by his boss CR. And saying well we would have been quicker but we had to spend time reporting our progress every week .... its an easy excuse. I could speculate what was meant but there are several possibilities: organisational; how work flows are managed; going back to what they said they would do: have one quarterly release. And - interestingly - one of the videos recently said that all development would now have to be complete a month before release was it? So end February for Q1.
At the end of the day the schedule isn't a disaster. It does inform backers - and others - and the fact that the work is being released into the alpha gives you confidence that they are working on what they say they are. Even if their dates are sometimes - not always - optimistic.
As to the "value" of the things being moved your point is valid. The stuff being released is iterative though - so does it represent more or less that 3 months of work? We also have no idea what % of effort is going to SQ42. I suspect a lot - although obviously SC work that supports SQ42 will also have priority.
Even the % complete doesn't really give a guide - why some stuff has finished really quickly. As above you could have a more robust PM system; things could be structured so that what management saw would be all at "about the same level of value". Smaller milestones etc. would be managed within teams. They could even have some form of earned value management system.
At the end of the day though CIG and SC / SQ42 are pretty small projects in the great scheme of things. And the level of PM has to be appropriate. So yes a part of me cringes but another part of me understands.
I tend to agree with you that a couple more years is a very aggressive timeline. 2023 I would be comfortable predicting and I base that off looking around and seeing what is already in game. It's huge and very detailed but it also has the framework built as far as infrastructure goes. It feels like development could speed up due to that but obviously I am in no position to say "it will happen". I am going purely on what I am seeing in my travels. Only time will tell.
Oh also, I only play in the open universe, not Star Marine or SQ42, so I cannot speak to what they look like.
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.