What happened to increased communication?

[Pthigrivi]

22 minutes ago, Flush Foot said:

Bite your tongue! I thought DSP was “universally beloved”! (at least in the factory-builder fandom)

I don’t even remember much in the way of catastrophic bugs (and even if there were, they pushed out patches quite frequently until things stabilized).

I think it depends a great deal on when you first interacted with it. I was an early adopter both of Factorio and of DSP, and frankly both were nearly unplayable on first release. I left them alone for a year or two and when I went back they were brilliant. Frostpunk was also utter frustration when I first played but is now one of my favorite games. Good things take time. I think KSP2 is on a great path. Honestly it won't even be a real game for me until resources come into it. Im very happy to wait a few years if that means the end product got the love it deserved.

Like, also keep in mind Starfield despite its rollercoaster reputation is the only new franchise single-player game of last year to crack the top 10 of MAU last year. All of the actual money is in brainless live-service, V-buck microtransaction shooters like fortnite. People can complain all they like but all studios care about is how folks vote with their wallets. If you care about thoughtful games that are for folks who like to think about science and problem solving take some time and give a little love. Show a little patience.

10 minutes ago, PDCWolf said:

The nature of the biz is as it is because gaming happens to be one of the very few industries where you can get away with releasing a broken product without massive repercussions. You released a broken electronic device, a car, a home appliance? You get a class action lawsuit and forced into recalling, replacing, and paying for shipping. Greedy gaming companies release a minimum viable product that barely works? aww shucks, poor megacorporation, you critics are unfair!

In large  part thats because cars involve the actual health and safety of those who interact with them. Phones are a fundamental necessity of communication and most peoples economic life. Games are a pleasant luxury. If I design a house and it falls down on someone I'll expect to be sued. If I design a sofa and the folks saw and signed the proposal but then a week later just don't like the fabric very much thats on them.

Edited April 12 by Pthigrivi

[Flush Foot]

5 minutes ago, Pthigrivi said:

I think it depends a great deal on when you first interacted with it. I was an early adopter both of Factorio and of DSP, and frankly both were nearly unplayable on first release

I was playing DSP fairly consistently within a week or two of EA going live. After ‘beating’ the game a while later (certainly did so in my second save, maybe also my first?) I may have set it aside for a little while (mostly for other games, not because I was bothered by it) but came back for any ‘notable’ updates.

In fact, I was irked by the timing of DSP DF update being so close to both For Science! and Christmas travels (away from my PC) because it delayed my experience with both Dec updates. I alternated between both games off and on in Jan/Feb but had been consistently just KSP 2 until about a week/10-days ago (more travel, but also switching to very-modded KSP 1 after being in a discussion with someone on here).

[Pthigrivi]

14 minutes ago, Flush Foot said:

I was playing DSP fairly consistently within a week or two of EA going live. After ‘beating’ the game a while later (certainly did so in my second save, maybe also my first?) I may have set it aside for a little while (mostly for other games, not because I was bothered by it) but came back for any ‘notable’ updates.

In fact, I was irked by the timing of DSP DF update being so close to both For Science! and Christmas travels (away from my PC) because it delayed my experience with both Dec updates. I alternated between both games off and on in Jan/Feb but had been consistently just KSP 2 until about a week/10-days ago (more travel, but also switching to very-modded KSP 1 after being in a discussion with someone on here).

Right on. It may have just been a product of my setup at the time. I've been a bit AFK on this forum mainly because I've been delving into other games and thinking a lot about automation and base-building dynamics while I wait for more substantial updates but I did enjoy FS quite a bit and I found performance and stability much improved. As you say about modded KSP1 there are some tools I find I really do need--flight planning, transfers, alarm clock chief among them. I also really want life support and trajectory prediction factoring drag but we'll see how all that goes. Im an architect by trade so it'll be fun in the interim to play with planetary static physics and base building when colonies arrive. I just don't see any utility in griping at the devs about pace. If they take till next year to release colonies I'll take my precious gaming moments Factorio megabasing. All games are an indulgent gift.

Edited April 12 by Pthigrivi

[PDCWolf]

44 minutes ago, Pthigrivi said:

In large  part thats because cars involve the actual health and safety of those who interact with them. Phones are a fundamental necessity of communication and most peoples economic life. Games are a pleasant luxury. If I design a house and it falls down on someone I'll expect to be sued. If I design a sofa and the folks saw and signed the proposal but then a week later just don't like the fabric very much thats on them.

Did you mislead about the state of the sofa for 4 years whilst pushing back the date? Did the sofa break apart as soon as they sat on it? did you tell them how your speed at fixing it and adding the promised features to the sofa was good but it took a year for the first cushion to come in? Did you tell people that the sofa was gonna be more expensive once it was done only to sell the same model cheaper two months later?

That you'd imply that common scummy behaviors on the industry are ok because "it's a luxury product" is probably the lowest this forum has ever reached.

[Pthigrivi]

39 minutes ago, PDCWolf said:

Did you mislead about the state of the sofa for 4 years whilst pushing back the date? Did the sofa break apart as soon as they sat on it? did you tell them how your speed at fixing it and adding the promised features to the sofa was good but it took a year for the first cushion to come in? Did you tell people that the sofa was gonna be more expensive once it was done only to sell the same model cheaper two months later?

That you'd imply that common scummy behaviors on the industry are ok because "it's a luxury product" is probably the lowest this forum has ever reached.

I mean, we screen pretty hard against misanthropes who are utterly focused on their own personal disastifaction no matter what the reality is so that doesn't happen so much for us. Our clients are generally reasonable people who understand we are in a creative enterprise and the proof is in the pudding even if it takes longer than they initially expected. When folks are unreasonable we're understanding, but we'll probably take our time to make sure the final product is really up to snuff. We may shine them on in the process because often they suck up a hugely outsized amount of time compared to folks who are just as deserving but more constructively responsive. 

Edited April 12 by Pthigrivi

[PDCWolf]

8 minutes ago, Pthigrivi said:

I mean, we screen pretty hard against misanthropes who are utterly focused on their own personal disastifaction no matter what the reality is so that doesn't happen so much for us. Our clients are generally reasonable people who understand we are in a creative enterprise and the proof is in the pudding even if it takes longer than they initially expected. When folks are unreasonable we're understanding, but we'll probably take our time to make sure the product is really up to snuff. We may shine them on in the process because often they suck up a hugely outsized amount of time compared to folks who are more constructively responsive. 

Hmm, and by "screening hard" is how industry people arrive at choosing to never communicate anymore... because clearly everyone else is outside the club, or misanthropes, or haters, or whatever. Right? Everyone else is the problem, not the workers, their team leaders, their managers, the product, nah, it's the narcissist misanthropes that make it all about them and not the fact we're ripping them off and leaving them in the dark after taking the money.

[Pthigrivi]

Just now, PDCWolf said:

Hmm, and by "screening hard" is how industry people arrive at choosing to never communicate anymore... because clearly everyone else is outside the club, or misanthropes, or haters, or whatever. Right? Everyone else is the problem, not the workers, their team leaders, their managers, the product, nah, it's the narcissist misanthropes that make it all about them and not the fact we're ripping them off and leaving them in the dark after taking the money.

It's all a matter of how much time it takes to satisfy the need for the greatest number of people.  If you take time to understand the nature of the idea and have the patience to truly solve problems  in the right way and make something great most folks will feel like they got what they asked for even if it takes more time than they expected. Other people are fundamentally concerned first and foremost with perpetual dissatisfaction no matter the time or effort invested and making them happy is impossible and invites a kind of diminishing returns death spiral. My business, and most other businesses cut our losses when clients present that behavior. 

[PDCWolf]

9 minutes ago, Pthigrivi said:

It's all a matter of how much time it takes to satisfy the need for the greatest number of people.  If you take time to understand the nature of the idea and have the patience to truly solve problems  in the right way and make something great most folks will feel like they got what they asked for even if it takes more time than they expected. Other people are fundamentally concerned first and foremost with perpetual dissatisfaction no matter the time or effort invested and making them happy is impossible and invites a kind of diminishing returns death spiral. My business, and most other businesses cut our losses when clients present that behavior. 

Well, that's the problem with generalizations. You'd think a business that just failed a sales number by about 4 million would be a bit more interested in making changes, and so far the only structural changes have been sinking a studio and firing Paul Furio... and there seem to be no results unless we keep assuming they've been doing magical invisible work or that they'll just do better if we give them infinite time. I'd say we do better at being realistic, clients expectations just haven't been treated well, not the ones clients built themselves, not the ones the business built for them either.

Further on, this has been a common trend these years, putting the spotlight in just how good that mentality of calling everyone who criticizes a hater (or worse) has been. It's been 10000 jobs lost last year, and already 8000 just from january to today, with studios falling like flies and new, flagship products being absolutely destroyed by early access indies pushing the counterculture to the common zeitgeist and becoming the literal highest selling games in the last 20 years.

Now, I'm definitely not saying business ought to just go out and listen to everyone, just that... the spark of humbleness has been lost, so has passion, and maybe, just maybe, people are angry because there's real stuff to be angry about.

[Fizzlebop Smith]

5 minutes ago, PDCWolf said:

Well, that's the problem with generalizations. You'd think a business that just failed a sales number by about 4 million would be a bit more interested in making changes, and so far the only structural changes have been sinking a studio and firing Paul Furio... and there seem to be no results unless we keep assuming they've been doing magical invisible work or that they'll just do better if we give them infinite time. I'd say we do better at being realistic, clients expectations just haven't been treated well, not the ones clients built themselves, not the ones the business built for them either.

Further on, this has been a common trend these years, putting the spotlight in just how good that mentality of calling everyone who criticizes a hater (or worse) has been. It's been 10000 jobs lost last year, and already 8000 just from january to today, with studios falling like flies and new, flagship products being absolutely destroyed by early access indies pushing the counterculture to the common zeitgeist and becoming the literal highest selling games in the last 20 years.

Now, I'm definitely not saying business ought to just go out and listen to everyone, just that... the spark of humbleness has been lost, so has passion, and maybe, just maybe, people are angry because there's real stuff to be angry about.

*applause*

[Pthigrivi]

55 minutes ago, PDCWolf said:

Well, that's the problem with generalizations. You'd think a business that just failed a sales number by about 4 million would be a bit more interested in making changes, and so far the only structural changes have been sinking a studio and firing Paul Furio... and there seem to be no results unless we keep assuming they've been doing magical invisible work or that they'll just do better if we give them infinite time. I'd say we do better at being realistic, clients expectations just haven't been treated well, not the ones clients built themselves, not the ones the business built for them either.

Further on, this has been a common trend these years, putting the spotlight in just how good that mentality of calling everyone who criticizes a hater (or worse) has been. It's been 10000 jobs lost last year, and already 8000 just from january to today, with studios falling like flies and new, flagship products being absolutely destroyed by early access indies pushing the counterculture to the common zeitgeist and becoming the literal highest selling games in the last 20 years.

Now, I'm definitely not saying business ought to just go out and listen to everyone, just that... the spark of humbleness has been lost, so has passion, and maybe, just maybe, people are angry because there's real stuff to be angry about.

Listen, lets pretend for a moment you actually care about KSP being a great game. I want you to think about your strategic approach to making that happen. Whats better: a) concrete, actionable, polite advice on real gameplay changes; or b) repetitious, unsolvable industry process complaints?

Edited April 12 by Pthigrivi

[Fizzlebop Smith]

44 minutes ago, Pthigrivi said:

Listen, lets pretend for a moment you actually care about KSP being a great game. I want you to think about your strategic approach to making that happen. Whats better: a) concrete, actionable, polite advice on real gameplay changes; or b) repetitious, unsolvable industry process complaints?

 

You should review the commentors post history.

MANY **extremely well thought** out constructive critiques..

Which lends a perceived soapbox

Besides it's a moot hill tondie on when there is no generalized mass to appeal to.

 

We are fractious and divided due to murky (at beast) communication commitments. Those that have been met have been superfluous.

 

There is barely a waning majority that think this game is worth recommending.. much less their view on the EA development / leadership woes

A FEW key individuals like Dakota might be loyal to the community but otherwise..

The only loyalty is to the anonymous Joe shareholders not the community.

There hasn't even been a facsimile of commitment to the proposed tenants of an EA guidelines regarding this subject

[Icegrx]

1 hour ago, Fizzlebop Smith said:

The only loyalty is to the anonymous Joe shareholders not the community.

Which is incredibly frustrating, because in this case the community has invested money into the games future. 

we are the investors 
 

[NH4Cl Enthusiast]

12 hours ago, steveman0 said:

I don't think this is a fair representation of the situation. From a technical standpoint, the team appears to be doing exceptionally well, albeit moving a bit slowly. The For Science update was incredibly well-executed and very well received. While there have been some noted complaints of missing or incomplete gameplay aspects, the technical execution was nearly flawless with only a few minor issues refined in 0.2.1. They nailed a lot of the core gameplay aspects, improved performance yet again, and knocked out more bugs in the process while introducing virtually none.

What you are describing sounds more like what may have happened with Star Theory and led to the current situation the team is in currently where they are having to devote a lot of time and effort to cleanup past mistakes to get the code base into a good state... but that does appear to be happening.

Darren shared on discord some of what they do for testing and it is the full suite of best practices for the industry and likely a major contributing factor to both the smooth release of For Science and part of why development seems slow.  It's because it is by some view of it. Given the long-term development plans for the game, heavy focus on testing is a very smart move as it ensures the work they are doing now will continue to work through the long development life of the title. I suspect a lot of effort is still needed to clean up past mistakes and is why many of the older standing bugs have not been resolved yet... because they are doing it right to ensure unit and regression testing will prevent reemergence through future updates. I suspect this all comes from a change approach in the development process, likely when moving from Star Theory to IG.

The problem does not appear to me that they are doing a poor job at the technical level, the opposite in that regard. The root problem is as this whole thread has been created for is that they, for whatever reason, don't want to speak to any of this and are keeping everyone in the dark about just about all work that is actually happening.

 

I don't disagree with the facts you're saying but I do disagree with their interpretation.  I think they have ground to a very slow pace because that's the only pace they can produce relatively bug free code.  This in itself would not be a bad thing, but the problem here is that in addition to being slow, the content they do produce is not really that complicated or difficult. If you look at the science system, it's incredibly simple. The design is mostly just lifted off from KSP1 and given a small QOL update, but they didn't really have to think about any new systems or gameplay. Everything else is copied over too, all the way down to majority of parts and even the stock crafts. Don't underestimate how much time they should also have saved just because absolutely everything was already solved once (for better of for worse) by the KSP1 team, all they have to do is figure out the technical part of how to copy it over to the new codebase and new version of Unity.  

And this goes throughout the whole game. They spent a lot of time pondering about the wobble situation and ended up with just repeating KSP1 solution because they couldn't figure out anything better. They already know how the maneuver nodes should work, but they don't seem to know how to make them work. They already knew that the KSP1 science system is kinda meh, but they couldn't figure out anything better so just took the old one anyway and just implemented a feature to allow you to basically bypass the entire thing.  They've admitted the UI is not good, but apparently changing a font is too hard. They know the part manager sucks big time, but they can't figure out anything better. They know the delta-v display is incorrect but they can't seem to figure out anything better. 

I agree the science update was of good technical quality but you're giving them a lot of credit for producing a simple thing and then fixing some major bugs. I'm not so experienced with Unity that I could argue about their technical competence more than this though, but I can say with confidence that their game design skills as a team are on the level of cash-grab mobile game developers.

This in turn comes back to the communication. I think Dakota and Mike seem to be doing a fine job all things considered but it's very very hard to keep the community engaged and interested when the dev team hands you stuff like the eclipse thing which amounted to "we turn down the lights a bit." I'll happily come back to admit I was wrong if it turns out to be so, but if the dev team is actually cooking something interesting then we're back to having poor communication. When colonies finally do come, I'm fairly sure they will be exactly as the science was. They will work, but it will be a very basic and empty feature which amounts to a build menu where you are able to spawn in crafts at some other place than KSC. Again I'm hoping I'm wrong and will be pleasantly surprised if we get something else.

[Meecrob]

1 hour ago, NH4Cl Enthusiast said:

cash-grab mobile game developers

Look into Nate's past...

[NH4Cl Enthusiast]

2 hours ago, Pthigrivi said:

Listen, lets pretend for a moment you actually care about KSP being a great game. I want you to think about your strategic approach to making that happen. Whats better: a) concrete, actionable, polite advice on real gameplay changes; or b) repetitious, unsolvable industry process complaints?

I don't know if you have been extraordinarily lucky with the companies you've dealt with but the sad reality is that majority of all companies will absolutely not do anything at all to fix their problems unless their customers make so much noise that it threatens their bottom line. Even bad PR is not a problem for most as long as they can push sales somewhere else to compensate. Examples are plentiful in the game industry where screaming has helped. Creative Assembly refunded a whole bunch of copies of Total War: Pharaoh and made other amends but only after a month of screaming, review bombing and boycotting them. Before that it was the usual tone deaf "you're wrong" message. End result is now we have a properly priced game and actually good DLC. Cyberpunk had to be fixed because the uproar was so big that Sony ended up pulling the game from their store.  We can't know if polite advice would have worked but I dare say it would not have worked as well as "your company will sink unless you fix this now." End result is that we now have a good game. We'll see if Colossal Order follows that path or not, but if people hadn't absolutely roasted the game they probably would be just working on a new DLC now instead of fixing the core issues.

I mean I'm with you on this in principle, I want to be polite and constructive and if I deal with a company that actually respects that, I'm the nicest customer ever. But this too ties back to the communication. We're being fed quite a lot of smiles and hype while all the feedback and constructive criticism and ideas that have accumulated over the last ten years is summarily being ignored. And I repeat my point from my previous post, the reason is not that the community managers are doing a bad job, it's because they have nothing to work with. That's why I'm kinda defending them here because we need to roast the people responsible and those people are collectively the dev team and more precisely people like Nate who are ultimately responsible for the poor performance of their team. Dakota and Mike can collect our feedback until their heads expand so much they become buoyant but if the dev team does nothing worthwhile with it, what can they do?

[PDCWolf]

9 hours ago, Pthigrivi said:

Listen, lets pretend for a moment you actually care about KSP being a great game. I want you to think about your strategic approach to making that happen. Whats better: a) concrete, actionable, polite advice on real gameplay changes; or b) repetitious, unsolvable industry process complaints?

This assumes there was never A. We're here because we passed A long ago, we had another round of A before and after FS!, and the only real thing A managed was a bandaid fix on wobble... which also meant they went back on their own statements of not wanting to implement bandaids.

The problem with your argument is that you seem to think B is unjustified, and it's somehow blindsiding you by being a completely unwarranted surprise appearance. In reality B is the obvious consequence of what happened with A, along with many other fiascos along the way both inside this project and others.

Sure, IG can't fix the industry, because no individual studio can, but maybe they can follow better practices instead of the bottom of the barrel that "industry standard" has become.

[kdaviper]

1 hour ago, PDCWolf said:

This assumes there was never A. We're here because we passed A long ago, we had another round of A before and after FS!, and the only real thing A managed was a bandaid fix on wobble... which also meant they went back on their own statements of not wanting to implement bandaids.

The problem with your argument is that you seem to think B is unjustified, and it's somehow blindsiding you by being a completely unwarranted surprise appearance. In reality B is the obvious consequence of what happened with A, along with many other fiascos along the way both inside this project and others.

Sure, IG can't fix the industry, because no individual studio can, but maybe they can follow better practices instead of the bottom of the barrel that "industry standard" has become.

So are you upset that they listened to the community and changed their mind about implementing a stop-gap? 

 

[steveman0]

8 hours ago, NH4Cl Enthusiast said:

I don't disagree with the facts you're saying but I do disagree with their interpretation.  I think they have ground to a very slow pace because that's the only pace they can produce relatively bug free code.  This in itself would not be a bad thing, but the problem here is that in addition to being slow, the content they do produce is not really that complicated or difficult.

There's a phrase I picked up in another field that is applicable here. Move slow to go fast. Taking time with testing to make bug free code is a very reliable way to keep the project maintainable into the future. This is a smart move for what might be a decade long development cycle. A slow pace is good if it saves them rewriting substantial parts of the code in the future as it appears they need to do with a lot of the early alpha dev work.

I'll also point out that content that is complicated or difficult does not necessarily make for a better game. There is elegance in simplicity. Some of the best games is history rely on simple systems. In order to reach a wider audience, simple systems are a better approach. This does not stop them from still making a very compelling game from this.

8 hours ago, NH4Cl Enthusiast said:

but I can say with confidence that their game design skills as a team are on the level of cash-grab mobile game developers.

This makes it clear that your own subjective take on the direction of the game is clouding your views of the objective reality. For Science! was an incredibly well received patch that got many, myself included, to play much further into the game than KSP1 ever did. The science, tech progression, and missions were all substantially responsible for this. I did a 40k+ science mission to Dres, collected all the atmospheric samples of Jool in an epic single-probe mission, and I landed a rover on Eeloo all because of the science and mission systems they designed for the game.

I can't take anything else you say seriously in light of this clearly biased perspective.

18 hours ago, Scarecrow71 said:

I'm curious as to what you think is a small, underfunded organization.  Because the team developing KSP2 is 50+ people strong and is backed by one of the largest game companies in the world. 

The entire studio is only 40 employees by their own website of which only a fraction are going to be developers. Obviously, if you falsely assume their development team is much larger than reality than it can seem like they accomplish much less thn they should. You need to keep reality in check for any expectations you are going to hold.

[PDCWolf]

29 minutes ago, kdaviper said:

So are you upset that they listened to the community and changed their mind about implementing a stop-gap?

I'm happy wobble got looked at, let's not confuse that. What I criticize from that move is making us wait so long telling us they were working on a long term solution only to, when the pot boiled, apply a hack they repeatedly told us they were avoiding, in place of a proper solution that we have no outlook on (as in, we don't know when are they implementing that, or if they chucked it to the backburner since the problem is "fixed" now).

 

[NH4Cl Enthusiast]

52 minutes ago, steveman0 said:

 

This makes it clear that your own subjective take on the direction of the game is clouding your views of the objective reality. For Science! was an incredibly well received patch that got many, myself included, to play much further into the game than KSP1 ever did. The science, tech progression, and missions were all substantially responsible for this. I did a 40k+ science mission to Dres, collected all the atmospheric samples of Jool in an epic single-probe mission, and I landed a rover on Eeloo all because of the science and mission systems they designed for the game.

I can't take anything else you say seriously in light of this clearly biased perspective.

 

Let me deconstruct your argument here. You're saying my view is subjective and yours is objective. Then you go on describing in detail how you personally had the time of your life with the update and did things you've never done. And then you dismiss every single thing I've said because you think I'm biased and subjective.

Now are we reeeeeaally sure we're not a liiiiiittle bit subjective ourselves? 

Also I did not say that mobile cash-grabs are in any way objectively bad designs. They are usually good at incentivizing the player to peek over the next corner and unlock the next thing to get that dopamine hit. That's fine in itself but those kinds of games among other things lack replayability and depth. This is also the problem with both KSP1 and KSP2 science designs but I don't see much point in discussing this further with you if your stance is that you will not listen to anyone's subjective opinions or even if they have some you will just not in fact listen at all. Which is an interesting choice on a game discussion forum but you do you.

[Scarecrow71]

1 hour ago, steveman0 said:

The entire studio is only 40 employees by their own website of which only a fraction are going to be developers. Obviously, if you falsely assume their development team is much larger than reality than it can seem like they accomplish much less thn they should. You need to keep reality in check for any expectations you are going to hold.

And if you think the entire team I'm part of is only developers and automation jockeys, then you seriously have no idea how business works.  In my role, I would never - NEVER - push out new content knowing that we have bugs in the existing code.  Our first priority is to always fix the bugs we know about, push that out to make sure it is fixed, and only then will we start working on enhancements and new content.  You shouldn't ever work on new content either in lieu of or in conjunction with fixing bugs because you almost always end up creating new buggy situations; you will end up breaking code that currently works.

The plain, simple truth is that we have bugs that have existed since launch.  And instead of working to fix those as a priority, the team has decided to work on new content that they aren't pushing out.  In addition to that, they've gone nearly radio-silent, so we have zero idea what they are or are not working on.  Oh, sure, you can point to the last KERB and say "Hey, they say they are researching this".  But when they have been researching the same bugs for months at a time, you have to wonder how much work they are really putting towards fixing them.  Or if they are capable of fixing them at all.  We may not see this whole issue the same way, steve-o, but even you have to agree that something smells a bit fishy with that.

Edited April 12 by Scarecrow71

[calabus2]

So back on topic. When exactly are we going to see a clear and concise plan including timelines for deliverables and a detailed list of outstanding bugs and when they will addressed? 

[kdaviper]

9 minutes ago, calabus2 said:

So back on topic. When exactly are we going to see a clear and concise plan including timelines for deliverables and a detailed list of outstanding bugs and when they will addressed? 

Likely never

[DoomsdayDuck555]

29 minutes ago, calabus2 said:

So back on topic. When exactly are we going to see a clear and concise plan including timelines for deliverables and a detailed list of outstanding bugs and when they will addressed? 

I could see us potentially getting a peek at the internal bug priority list, but if they gave out a timeline for major updates then they would have to either rush out the updates to meet the deadline, or they would have to go back on their word about the release dates.

[The Aziz]

38 minutes ago, calabus2 said:

clear and concise plan including timelines for deliverables and a detailed list of outstanding bugs and when they will addressed?

If you can name any other company that did this months in advance with accuracy with error margin of less than a week, let me know.

But unless there are people in the gamedev who can foresee the future, I don't think you can.

41 minutes ago, calabus2 said:

when they will be addressed

Tell me you know nothing about software dev without telling me you know nothing about software dev.

11 minutes ago, DoomsdayDuck555 said:

potentially getting a peek at the internal bug priority list

aaand what that's gonna do? Priority isn't equal to first to be fixed. Never was, never will be.