Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
CIG - The Challenges Of Making Game Demos
This discussion has been closed.
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Comments
Ugh to the discussions of extremes.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
And if what the supporters have been saying all along is true, the internet drama drives more sales than anything any supporter or dev team could possibly say or do.
Our existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, drives sales. You don't want the answers and explanations because deep down in places you don't talk about at CitCons you want us on that wall, you need us on that wall.
But the community keeps growing, it shows that how much impact those situations actually had, that with those situations gotten tons of people who never heard of SC actually do so with them not having to invest money into publicity, 9/10.
But they do answer to backers, SQ42's mission demo had a negative general impact on the community and that's when you see a reaction on their side.
The community disappointment was NOT because SQ42 was delayed but because the demo wasn't shown, meanwhile on the media the highlight was the delay. Hence why that video did not touch the delay of game to next year; because it wasn't the backers concern.
BTW Don't feed the trolls I would suggest go to your local scientology center and have a chat with them, you can expect the same outcome here.
When you have cake, it is not the cake that creates the most magnificent of experiences, but it is the emotions attached to it.
The cake is a lie.
With the constant demand to show progress or have people claim the development isn't moving forward.
Unlike say Mass Effect Andromeda. Earlier this year no mention, big disappointment for some but nothing one could say. In September some pre-alpha PS Neo footage. And an announcement of a 7th November trailer. So almost 2 months away.
SC though - say nothing get slammed. Show something in August people expect more in September and then more in October. Miss a beat and get rewarded with a boatload of "negativity". Which is why its all but impossible to discuss how the game is progressing - or not.
The rest is valid once November 7 comes with no trailer. The word, approximately two months out, was that Sq42 was going to be featured at CitCon. If we don't hear anything at all and get a "we tried" video after November 7th comes and goes in silence your comparison is reasonable.
People expect more every month because that's what CIG promised. They promised constant updates and open development. If they didn't want to catch so much flak maybe he should have thought about what he was saying before he said it.
In here it's not even every month, it's every WEEK. Every week they need to show something new, progress on some area and so on. The biggest proof of that is them having to change ATV formats as criticism grown over showing art sneak peaks; now every week it's one big amount of info and footage of everything they are working on.
If CIG next week ATV doesn't do that, there will be the backlash in return. And the one after that, and the one after, etc...
What are you on about November 7?
This game is starting to look like a pyramid scheme. That is sad....
I'd think you're kinda too full of yourself
I don't think people are so much negative to CIG just because of one missing demo. It's more like a chain-failure, and the CitizenCon demo was just one part of that chain.
I think CIG can also turn that negativity around easily enough. They told us to except 3.0 release this year, and once they keep that promise it's large enough that one missing demo is easily forgotten. But so far CIG has missed so many promises I don't think anyone seriously believes they keep that one either. It's a chain of broken promises CIG is leaving behind.
Only way to not disappoint anyone? Do both. The likeness of that happening? Unlikely.
The same feeling around the community as well.
3.0 was supposed to be released this year too, I wonder who doesn't understand game StarCitizen development in this case but I guess his initials are CR.
IMHO the whole SC patchwork is breaking under the weight of the gameplay mechanics that needs to be implemented. Happy golfing cause small widgets won't interfere the underlying system.
When you have cake, it is not the cake that creates the most magnificent of experiences, but it is the emotions attached to it.
The cake is a lie.
http://www.dereksmart.org/2016/06/star-citizen-fidelity-of-failure/
As I said, 'Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.' I can't see why people aren't thinking this way. SC has raised more money than any other game out there and has produced, nothing. I think it is about time to call the company on this.
I know people will say, well it is an ambitious game. Well, maybe they need to trim back and get to reality. There are people that want this game. I would like to see it myself but I can't play a game built star dust. If this goes on any longer, this will be a non-game. It is getting close.
The problem with all the crowdfunding is they don't have to produce ANYTHING. They get the money, they can keep it. Even Kickstarter is that way. All they have to say is: "We cannot produce anything with this flawed game engine." Done and they keep the money. The Sex Pistols had put out a great LP about this....
So what the community should do, is get mad and call CIG out?
Community: "AHHH CIG WE'RE ANGRY GIVE US GAME NOW!"
CIG: "OH NO THEY'RE ANGRY! *gives game*"
Community: "HAY we happy now!"*
Well that could work, expect the last happy ending; if the community ever forced them to rush the game to deliver it ASAP at this point, we'd get the most rushed barebones version of it. No thanks.
3.0 is not coming this year, this is for certain. Actually, it might, since the feature list for it is kinda vague, as far as I know. If it only includes Levski and a single simplistic PG planet, yeah, I can see how they can release it this year. If it also includes other planets, new AI, mining, cargo, significant FPS upgrades etc. then obviously not. At this point I'd say even 2.6 releasing in a stable state in 2016 is questionable.
I think 2.6 hitting live servers in December is possible, after that they will release 2.6a, 2.6b etc. to imitate progress.
love how so many here want to extend this mistake to equal end times for SC. so stupid. In fact going by the responses I could conclude that all this episode does is show how well / normal things have gone prior to this.
as for those constantly jumping on the open development, it is all relative. Is it the most open dev I have ever followed? not by a long shot! is it more open than some companies? most definitely. CR comes from those latter companies.
"Trump is a blunt force, all-American, laser-guided middle finger to everything and everyone in Washington, D.C." - Wayne Allyn Root
"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
I for one am glad they called the ball to stop work on the demo once it reached a state of making changes just to get the demo working. Anything that wasn't directly usable in the main core code was just being wasted work. Atleast from the video a good portion of the demo code additions and fixes are things that directly benefited the main core code. Its not tell the end when they started doing bandaid fixes that non usable stuff was being done.
I am glad they are showing progress even if its small progress it is still progress. Alot of the stuff they are still working on is behind the scenes tech additions to support the crazy design of the game. I bet people will still complain once the game is released with 90% of what has been advertised and said.
And that is the point. There are posters saying RSI should be e.g. nailing down a demo many weeks before they plan to show it. Absolutely - for a non-crowdfunded game.
The game is crowdfunded however which creates a different dynamic. There is both a demand - from backers - and a need if funding needs to be raised to show "progress". The management (business and project) techniques and communication strategies have to be adapted.
Example: at the start they had a tendency to provide hard targets. Far to common for internal projects - especially if reporting to senior management. A date will be given but it will usually have some "float" even if it is a challenge programme.
When communicating with backers however do you give a hard target e.g. 4 weeks - and get slammed if you miss it or a stretched deadline e.g. 4+2 weeks and get slammed for not being very good,told a monkey could do it, fire the staff get better management. A lose lose. (If there is one thing you should bank on happening in a project it is slippage - so proper project management builds in float, contingencies and applies risk management).
Thankfully since the alpha came out RSI have "abandoned" hard targets. Since last year it has been a "new features will be added to the alpha when ready" - indicating a shift to "soft targets" internally (with float!). Which as I have said previously is fine and makes sense.
Accepting that they can no longer have any targets however doesn't mean that progress of the game cannot be considered; just that the approach has to be different. What you have to look at is the progress since e.g. the alpha launched (or whenever) along with the rate of progress.