bambikaka wrote:Being a bit blunt, in one sense we want Dev feedback because we are nosy and cannot wait till official release to know, what it is in the game or patch or DLC. Then in another, we want Dev feedback in the sense of "Tell me what you are doing" "So I can tell you how to do it", that obviously is not going to go down too well.
I totally agree. However DEVs are still watching over us, no matter how much influence can be applied (look at CBJ/Lino's contributions in the last month or so)
My point regarding useful feedback[...] I'm doing it since 1989 and we all saw how it works out... games are not that much different than commercial programmes. the dev has an idea about the problem, the users have an other, the dev knows how to do it, but without taking the users ideas on account only the dev will us it
This is precisely the point! Devs have a direction, whichever way they're focussed. Management (& I use that term in its loosest possible sense, when dealing with teams this tiny) has to focus upon the 'bigger picture'.. ie keep them focussed upon the pieces that will make the whole. (This is usually where critical design changes prove problematical & come to light, eg lack of 'radar' in X:R v1.x)
The Publisher (eg DeepSilver in the case of many X games; Sony in the case of No Man's Sky, + other many examples) also has to take at least some blame for pushing something that wasn't ready for release (in the opinions of the ppl who actually did the work, + the delays in releasing hardcopy, for those of us who went that route) & more importantly /pressuring/ that release date!
In X we're accustomed to release dates for <whatever> being pushed back. Unless it's game-breaking (ie CTD) we expect an 'immediate' fix to take 2-3 days; a 'critical' fix to take 2-3 weeks; an 'important' fix to take 2-3 months & any other changes can happen ad-hoc. This is not satisfactory for the user (us), but how would you change the situation with only 20 ppl?
There are still surprise updates (/not/ the DLCs!) however.. & this shows their commitment to what they've produced
just go to x3 forums. what is all around? even more sectors, even more missions, even more ships, even more kind of weapons, even more modules, even more automated services etc etc etc... what did they make? even less sectors, even less missions, even less (1) ships, even less weapons, even less modules, even less automated services
What would be the point? Once <player> has got everything they need or want, why continue? IME that's why most players quit X3 & start again: they want a challenge! It may be a different challenge, or it may be the same start, but the /whole/ point of the game is the building from the lowest to the highest (if you survive that long..)
Did you ever play SimCity, before EA ruined it with Sims? What was the point of that game? An open-ended city sim, with no goal, no tutorial (the game-provided ones I worked through were laughable even compared to ES standards), & then you were stuck on your own with no idea what to prioritise, what you needed, what increasing something would cause problems somewhere else, etc.. etc etc
Anyone reading this far & thinks I'm some sort of an Ego shill you can go get stuffed! I don't work for them, have never had any payment from them in any kind, & don't expect to either! I attained my (limited) position purely because of the info & dedication I've spent retaining & passing on to the wiki
!
)
