Democratic Development

[Mefi282]

So I've never heard a suggestion like this before, so excuse me if somebody already did this.

Since there are new features suggested a lot, and some just get ignored or denied I think Squad should release a poll what features the community wants for the next version. Of course Squad would only list feautures that are doable.

It could look somethink like this:

Which features should be implemented for 0.25? Vote now!

1 Asteroids

2 Solar System improvements

3 resources

4 Engine improvements

Also Squad would not have to implement the features that have been voted the most. It just be a tool to see what the community wants.

Tell me what you think about this.

Edited February 27, 2014 by Mefi282

[Die_Kartoffel]

4 Engine Improvements

Aand in not so far future KSP for 64bit please:D

Ps.: Asteroids will come with 0.24;)

[allmappedout]

Not going to happen - Squad have their own roadmap but they're not going to show it to us just because too many people are inclined to believe it will either a) definitely happen or definitely happen in the next release.

Whilst they're happy to show off things that are nearing completion, all it does is build expectations within the community without any promise of that expectation being fulfilled.

Personally I like the surprise of the changelog, but that's just me!

But just as an example, imagine 100% of the community voted for 64-bit support for it, Squad mightn't be able to deliver it, but the community would be very likely to believe that Squad will work hard on getting it in. People will then be annoyed that their ideas have been 'ignored', even if Squad couldn't even implement it if they wanted to. So now you end up with an angrier community than if you said nothing!

[Kasuha]

Software development is not a democratic process. If the software is to be any good, there must be an architect responsible for it who knows the project from all sides and can decide what will and what will not work. The better the architect, the better the result. Trying to apply democratic principles to software development always ends in disaster. Always.

You have one democratic option in KSP: you want a feature? Write a mod for it and take care of it, then you can have that feature as long as you care.

[DrDam]

You have one democratic option in KSP: you want a feature? Write a mod for it and take care of it, then you can have that feature as long as you care.

... nothing to add

[Mefi282]

Not going to happen - Squad have their own roadmap but they're not going to show it to us just because too many people are inclined to believe it will either a) definitely happen or definitely happen in the next release.

Whilst they're happy to show off things that are nearing completion, all it does is build expectations within the community without any promise of that expectation being fulfilled.

Personally I like the surprise of the changelog, but that's just me!

But just as an example, imagine 100% of the community voted for 64-bit support for it, Squad mightn't be able to deliver it, but the community would be very likely to believe that Squad will work hard on getting it in. People will then be annoyed that their ideas have been 'ignored', even if Squad couldn't even implement it if they wanted to. So now you end up with an angrier community than if you said nothing!

You understood something wrong, Squad would just release a list of things they could do, and not the community decides what to vote about.

[Anton P. Nym]

You understood something wrong, Squad would just release a list of things they could do, and not the community decides what to vote about.

Sometimes you know what can be done beforehand... sometimes you don't. Proposed features sometimes don't pan out in development, and if you've talked them up beforehand then you're going to have a real problem either scrubbing them or pushing out a busted version. (See the fallout on the collapse of the "local resources" feature in KSP, for instance.)

I don't think voting for features would work out very well for KSP.

-- Steve

[Nemrav]

its called open source !

and you pay for ksp, so good luck trying....

not that its a bad thing, but, as others have pointed out, there's a problem with the guarantees and people complaining if not filled out to the letter...

[Shna_na]

I prefer them to take their own path but taking community suggestions into account, as they currently do. It seems to be an efficient system that massively involves the community as well as keeping the game headed in the right direction.

[RSwordsman]

Nah. I trust the devs to take the game in the right direction. And with mods to fill in the gaps, a democratic system is totally unnecessary.

[WhiteWeasel]

Reminds me of Amplitude studios' (Endless Space devs) Games2gether. The way it works is they put up three items, and unless if said otherwise usually they implement all three items, just the most voted for gets main priority. Thing is though, they kinda worked that into their dev cycle from the start, It would be difficult for Squad to switch development methods. They do also have a nice development progress map too.

[Rusty6899]

I think the devs are doing a good job. Obviously I have my own opinions on how the game could be best developed, along with everyone else who plays it, but in reality, they know the game better than any of us and have their plan and vision for the game and have a better idea of the steps needed to make it happen.