Star Citizen - media blowout, Chris Robert's new game

lopoetve said:
Very few of those had major game breaking bugs that players hit constantly. Generally it was bugs that were annoying or broke for a handful of people.

I don’t think you get it. I played wing commander when it came out. Same with 2. Wing commander 3 / 4 were an annual, if not more often play through. I played prophecy dozens of times. I love what Chris Robert’s creates. I can also admit that brilliant minds need project and product managers, and this looks like a brilliant mind that is missing just that. I’ve watched companies burn because of that. I do not want to watch CIG burn. I pledged at the beginning of the Kickstarter. Ive bought ships since. Ive bought ships in the last MONTH. I’m looking at IAE with a shopping list. I’m extremely well paid and all my hobbies are on hiatus due to covid still. I love what this could be and so much of what they are creating.

And I can still call our poor management or lack of discipline - because ive experienced it, lived it, and my job is fixing it these days. I want him to succeed. But I see what I see, and I hope they correct it.
Click to expand...
The thing is though. I have always agreed here that things wasn't managed well and they had made some bad decisions yet you think I say the opposite that they are saints?

Sorry there not! They've had problems.

Wasted a lot of time, made some brain dead decisions etc. I don't understand why you think I am saying the complete opposite
 
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this
jonneymendoza said:
Wasted a lot of time, made some brain dead decisions etc. I don't understand why you think I am saying the complete opposite
Click to expand...
I mean, just last page you called their need for another wipe "Brilliant". I'm sure I could go back and dig up numerous other examples.
 
Im looking forward to the wipe.

I also dont own a single thing in the game ship wise that I dont permanently own for $, so it doesnt affect me - at all.
Everyone should have known wipes would be coming.... its in alpha. Wipes happen a lot, and used to happen almost weekly. Should be thankful it lasted over a year since the last full reset with how crap things can be in the game.
 
jonneymendoza said:
The thing is though. I have always agreed here that things wasn't managed well and they had made some bad decisions yet you think I say the opposite that they are saints?

Sorry there not! They've had problems.

Wasted a lot of time, made some brain dead decisions etc. I don't understand why you think I am saying the complete opposite
Click to expand...
Because t he perception is that you keep saying that won't happen anymore, and it's all perfect from here on out - or close to. While I'd love it to be, I don't see this having a smooth road from here on out, especially given the already-existing history both for Chris Roberts and CIG itself. These guys have proven to lack the right experience to finish.
FighterAce124 said:
Im looking forward to the wipe.

I also dont own a single thing in the game ship wise that I dont permanently own for $, so it doesnt affect me - at all.
Everyone should have known wipes would be coming.... its in alpha. Wipes happen a lot, and used to happen almost weekly. Should be thankful it lasted over a year since the last full reset with how crap things can be in the game.
Click to expand...
Oh I don't mind the wipe, but I'm debating if sudden unexpected ones or planned ones would be better to get the data they want. Inflation in the verse would be an issue if people could sell things to each other right now, given the infinite supply of money from the UEE, but announcing a wipe screws with the economy too - and the only reason it's functioned right now for a bit is that people got to the point of not expecting wipes.

Basically, if you know the economy is broken, why participate? Right now people are fucking around for fun because a month from now - it all goes away. Cool. So we restart, new rules, and start making money - but for a while there, I suspect we'll see a very laissez faire approach since "it may all go away again!" - that's likely not the data they were looking for. or may not be at least.
 
I use HOSAS and its great. Two Thrustmaster TCA Sidestick Airbus Editions.
Used HOTAS before, was solid and worked perfectly.
 
HOTAS or HOSAS (with of course KB/M to fall back for on-foot movement and the like) are considered the gold standard. Some actually use dual sticks + throttle, + foot pedals depending on their hardware configuration but that's in no way "necessary". You can also fly quite comfortably with a gamepad, but not quite as dynamically as with HOTAS/HOSAS. As for VR, not yet (officially) - there are those who have had a good time with using a VR HMD and using it for head movement/viewport in the game both while flying and on the ground - this does speak to the design that even in an early implementation you can decouple head from body movement. Proper VR support will come quite a bit later, most likely when more systems are added. However, they already have Tobii eye tracker / TrackIR support built in which is something of a halfway point to VR in terms of experience.

As far as wipes and game systems, its worth noting that they are still getting data on what people do even with incomplete systems. Everything is incremental and what is learned along the way contributes. On an earlier comment, I grant that they should definitely disable some known, consistent errors or slap a labeled placeholder in, but its also worth knowing that sometimes a "likely" problem (ie you don't get ejected from your ship, or stuck in a wall, or anything else when trying to get into a chair every time - its an issue of chance.. What causes it to happen?) its more beneficial for an alpha to let this continue so they can see that people say..get ejected if they were crouching before they tried to get into a certain chair or bed, and then learn and fix the issue. Nobody is saying that CIG is perfect, they've obviously made mistakes - but they're still trying to build something uncompromising that has never before been attempted at this scale of depth, immersion, features, and technical elements.

While its okay to call out specific issues - and CIG themselves have an open backer dialog and admit that they made mistakes or that something didn't work out - I don't see much merit to either suggesting "Just have them stop reaching for the core immersive elements that make SC special and just do standard bullshit" or "Other game company spent a ton of time and money to create something that was obviously a much smaller scope project that was at most iterative, so CIG must be mismanaging" don't really seem equivalent ; the "its a scam, its nothing but sunk cost etc" have even less legitimacy.. I've said it time and time again - there has been accusation that a "competent" studio could make SC quicker, cheaper etc... but there has never been a serious challenger in this regard. There has been ample time for someone else to come up and basically prove the naysayers right that its all CIG / Chris Roberts fault if they could come up with something at the same level of scope and immersion , but nobody even tries. Why? Because CIG really is attempting to do something revolutionary, that requires new tech and a new way of thinking about things, a vast scope of interlocking game systems, not to mention finances. Just like at the original rationale for crowdfunding SC, it really does seem that major industries don't want to devote the time and resources on a blue sky project when they can continue to churn out less demanding titles and maximize short term profit (not to mention predatory monetization is almost the norm these days). In this way among many others I think SC has value and the fact that players are finding themselves more interested in a patently unfinished alpha with SC than something like Elite Dangerous that tried to take a more conventional path, is worthwhile to note. There's room for more than one space game and they don't all need to do the same things, but SC/SQ42 is by far one of the most ambitious at every level and I'd like to see what can be built with uncompromising vision and the finances to bring to into reality, even if it takes a long time.
 
Last edited:
RanceJustice said:
HOTAS or HOSAS (with of course KB/M to fall back for on-foot movement and the like) are considered the gold standard. Some actually use dual sticks + throttle, + foot pedals depending on their hardware configuration but that's in no way "necessary". You can also fly quite comfortably with a gamepad, but not quite as dynamically as with HOTAS/HOSAS. As for VR, not yet (officially) - there are those who have had a good time with using a VR HMD and using it for head movement/viewport in the game both while flying and on the ground - this does speak to the design that even in an early implementation you can decouple head from body movement. Proper VR support will come quite a bit later, most likely when more systems are added. However, they already have Tobii eye tracker / TrackIR support built in which is something of a halfway point to VR in terms of experience.
Click to expand...
And even KB/M can be quite enjoyable to use, and while not great for dogfighting, can do extremely well for larger ships where maneuvering isn't as significant as stability and ease of use.
RanceJustice said:
As far as wipes and game systems, its worth noting that they are still getting data on what people do even with incomplete systems. Everything is incremental and what is learned along the way contributes. On an earlier comment, I grant that they should definitely disable some known, consistent errors or slap a labeled placeholder in, but its also worth knowing that sometimes a "likely" problem (ie you don't get ejected from your ship, or stuck in a wall, or anything else when trying to get into a chair every time - its an issue of chance.. What causes it to happen?) its more beneficial for an alpha to let this continue so they can see that people say..get ejected if they were crouching before they tried to get into a certain chair or bed, and then learn and fix the issue. Nobody is saying that CIG is perfect, they've obviously made mistakes - but they're still trying to build something uncompromising that has never before been attempted at this scale of depth, immersion, features, and technical elements.
Click to expand...
True. I still say a quarter sprint on fixing some of those more glaring "oh god that's annoying" issues would be a good idea - especially with 3.15 and death of a spaceman coming, since so many of the fixes are "suicide and start over" - which isn't so sane anymore. Technical debt must be paid at some time - even if you don't expect to USE something, since everything else adapts around a broken system and you never know how much more broken it can get when you do replace it.
RanceJustice said:
While its okay to call out specific issues - and CIG themselves have an open backer dialog and admit that they made mistakes or that something didn't work out - I don't see much merit to either suggesting "Just have them stop reaching for the core immersive elements that make SC special and just do standard bullshit" or "Other game company spent a ton of time and money to create something that was obviously a much smaller scope project that was at most iterative, so CIG must be mismanaging" don't really seem equivalent ; the "its a scam, its nothing but sunk cost etc" have even less legitimacy.. I've said it time and time again - there has been accusation that a "competent" studio could make SC quicker, cheaper etc... but there has never been a serious challenger in this regard. There has been ample time for someone else to come up and basically prove the naysayers right that its all CIG / Chris Roberts fault if they could come up with something at the same level of scope and immersion , but nobody even tries. Why? Because CIG really is attempting to do something revolutionary, that requires new tech and a new way of thinking about things, a vast scope of interlocking game systems, not to mention finances. Just like at the original rationale for crowdfunding SC, it really does seem that major industries don't want to devote the time and resources on a blue sky project when they can continue to churn out less demanding titles and maximize short term profit (not to mention predatory monetization is almost the norm these days). In this way among many others I think SC has value and the fact that players are finding themselves more interested in a patently unfinished alpha with SC than something like Elite Dangerous that tried to take a more conventional path, is worthwhile to note. There's room for more than one space game and they don't all need to do the same things, but SC/SQ42 is by far one of the most ambitious at every level and I'd like to see what can be built with uncompromising vision and the finances to bring to into reality, even if it takes a long time.
Click to expand...
My fear is that the gravy train runs out and this thing is never finished. I don't think it's a scam, I think that no one can push chris roberts to actually wrap up a design step without constantly tweaking - it's not that they have to release without all the parts they want, but that some day you have to say "that part is good enough, ship it and lets move on" - and do it to more than just gold standard ships. The longer you take, the mroe things get out of date, and the less valid they are by the time you finally get there, and so on.
 
lopoetve said:
My fear is that the gravy train runs out and this thing is never finished.
Click to expand...
I mean, I'd imagine that the money will dry up at some point but when they're allegedly still pulling in millions per month then maybe it's fair to assume that that won't be any time soon. I would have thought that the money would have dried up by now to be perfectly honest but it still comes rolling in.

The million-dollar question is just how deep are the pockets of those who are still putting money in? And what's the split of CIG's income between long-term backers who are already in for thousands and new backers who are still willing to jump on board the SC train? I guess where I'm going with this is that I can't imagine that the pool of potential backers willing to fund a project that's already years old with no sign of completion any time soon is particularly large - I'd have thought that most people who have heard of the game and chosen to put cash in will have done so by now, so then the question becomes just how willing are these existing donors to continue to pump cash in with no end product in sight?

All of this really does make me question CIG's income figures - I just don't see how they can be drawing in multiple millions of dollars every month from a finite backer pool that's already put in a lot of cash - they have 3.25 million "Citizens" and even if we assume that every one of them has put in at least a starter package at $35, they've raised $386m in total so that's nearly $120 each on average. In reality we know that there are backers who have put in a lot more than that each, but surely even the most ardent supporters have their limit?
 
Ack. Didn’t mean to hit submit. Free fly weeks get people to buy game packages. Recommended upgrades get them to 100 or so easily. After that it gets…. Fuzzy. Some buy a lot. Others less.
 
I would love to know how many special packages have been bought (what are they called, Admiralty or something?). I have spent more on this game than just about any ever personally (a bit over $100, I think), but I hear so many people talking about the perks that you only get after a serious amount of money...
 
DWolvin said:
I would love to know how many special packages have been bought (what are they called, Admiralty or something?). I have spent more on this game than just about any ever personally (a bit over $100, I think), but I hear so many people talking about the perks that you only get after a serious amount of money...
Click to expand...

Chris Roberts is giving every single person that buys that pack the Rear Admiral.
 
Ha! I mean that once you have bought enough stuff (I think it was $1K) there is a title and a special helpdesk, and I think much higher leniency on melting packages back and forth.
 
DWolvin said:
I would love to know how many special packages have been bought (what are they called, Admiralty or something?). I have spent more on this game than just about any ever personally (a bit over $100, I think), but I hear so many people talking about the perks that you only get after a serious amount of money...
Click to expand...
lopoetve said:
Oh yes, there is. $1000 gets you in. From there, steps at 2500, 5, 10, 15k (special ship - a medium fighter), and 25k (a special skin on an existing ship - 600i).

https://support.robertsspaceindustr...les/360002542733-Concierge-Levels-and-Rewards
Click to expand...

Anyone who has any questions, let me know - I can give you my experience anyway. Its really nowhere near as odious as some think - all the items included are designed to be acquired in game, much like every other pledge package, ship, or cosmetic with very few exceptions. Its cumulative, so someone buying a couple of ships over the years and/or the optional subscription could easily end up with a Concierge flagged account without even trying . There are some nice little perks (I've always had great customer service experience, but even before I qualified as Concierge, but I know afterward I had some great experiences. There as a time early on where you were assigned to the same rep each time so you'd get to know them but the end of that was more about the size of the backer base over the years than any other policy, it was just untenable. ), but most of them are the most meaningful for those heavily interested in the game (ie more complex ship melting, restoring and the like , or RP focused items ). Earlier on, the vast majority of "big" pledge packages - like the kind that cost multiple thousands and gave you a whole host of ships - were visible to the general public. This caused complaint and many bad faith "THEY EXPECT YOU TO BUY A 10K, 15K, PACKAGE PAY TO WIN" clickbait articles, so after a poll certain packages were restricted exclusively to Concierge/Chairman's Club visibility under normal circumstances.

Overall I think the program is neat and provided they stay with the core of their promises about monetization from the beginning (my biggest fear for the project is enough "new blood" will arrive or for lack of a better word "corruption of industry-typical exploitative monetization" will mean them going back on the idea that ALL content including cosmetics, with very limited exceptions such as the skin from Kickstarter, will be obtainable in game. ) Elsewhere in the industry, from gatcha mobile games like Genshin Impact, to item-mall heavy MMOs (especially those from Korean companies. I knew one that regularly engaged with their whales who literally spent 6 figures per year), to even modern skin sales in battle royales like Fortnite, they will LAUGH at the idea of "whales" being those spending 1K cumulatively over years worthy of any special customer service time. Star Citizen being an open development ethos crowdfunded project is the only reason this is such a focal point - in most other situations it is not even publicized, and instead start relying on those players for their development. THis is another major difference with CIG - the vast majority of players are NOT Concierge and they are not building game systems to cater to Concierge type players to the detriment of others. This is a pivotal dynamic for a long term MMO type project - its a downward spiral if you start relying on a small cadre of far-from-average players - doesn't matter if its whales, "elite/hardcores", or streamers. Thankfully, every metric Iv'e seen on SC suggests that the vast majority of backer accounts have very modest spent totals and there are new players arriving with frequency!

Ohhh I can't believe I almost forgot....

One more thing, not a current Concierge perk exactly but... early Original Backers (KS era and the first year or so thereafter) were granted PHYSICAL "Citizen Cards". There were several "runs" of these and I'm lucky to have a couple myself. Maybe I'll take pics if there's interest. https://starcitizen.fandom.com/wiki/Citizen_Cards . Note these were granted to any who reached the totals listed at the time of each issue, so it didn't take being Concierge to get one necessary; a $30 pledge got one! Those under the "Admiralty" level were plastic, but Admiral cards were metal (with "fancy" ones like the Titanium card being a little different sort of metal). Note that Rear Admiral was a $250 total (which was actually my initial pledge way back when during KS - for a signed physical collector's edition of the game, which came with a Constellation in-game ship). However, there was a single later issue of a "VIP Concierge" physical card - it only had one rank and was granted to those who were part of what was at the time Concierge flagged, before the current system of in-game perks and other big stuff showed up in the Chairman's Club. So yeah, just some minutia that may be of interests to some.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, I hope for basically Warframe levels of obtainability. Nothing that matters requires cash, worst case scenario is that you can't get a particular cosmetic without cash. And even then, if you work the trade side of the game you can get anything with work on trade channels.
 
DWolvin said:
Yeah, I hope for basically Warframe levels of obtainability. Nothing that matters requires cash, worst case scenario is that you can't get a particular cosmetic without cash. And even then, if you work the trade side of the game you can get anything with work on trade channels.
Click to expand...
I’m good with whales. Hell, I might become one. But it has to be playable for everyone. And fun for everyone. Starting out in an Aurora will get old if everyone is flying Wardens. But if there are a mix, landing on krakens and doing business, and gunners on hammerheads….
 
Yep- I worry a bit that it's going to be hardcore sim, and not so fun, but the idea seems to have possibility. Can't wait for 3.15 (missed the last storyline weekend and won't have time for a bit).
 
There are weird conflicting things rolling out that in one hand shift things to more arcade or away from the original intent like the flight model. But other things like power management and food / drink stuff shifting to more of a hard core sim. I would like something more down the middle as they seemed to be billed as early on and scales tipping one way or the other in 2 and early 3 versions but never too far either way.
 
All I wanted was a good space dog fighting game with some RPG mechanics like X3 TC but now I have no idea wtf this is gonna turn out to be.
Might as well go play Spreadsheet Simulator I mean Eve Online.
 
DWolvin said:
Yep- I worry a bit that it's going to be hardcore sim, and not so fun, but the idea seems to have possibility. Can't wait for 3.15 (missed the last storyline weekend and won't have time for a bit).
Click to expand...
Ripskin said:
There are weird conflicting things rolling out that in one hand shift things to more arcade or away from the original intent like the flight model. But other things like power management and food / drink stuff shifting to more of a hard core sim. I would like something more down the middle as they seemed to be billed as early on and scales tipping one way or the other in 2 and early 3 versions but never too far either way.
Click to expand...

If the game is going to maintain its promise, then it is absolutely critical that play has a more sim-like, slower paced, element both on the ground and in space. Things now are arcade-y, fast, time-to-kill (TTK) is low etc... and I will dread if that doesn't change. So many of the mechanics of the game are predicated on there being enough TIME to do things. Being able to recognize that a ship is damaged and switch to targeting its weapon or propulsion systems to disable it without destroying, if you wish. Having time to talk to your pirate crew, have your scanner operator scan their ship, broadcast to said ship "You're about to fall apart and far from both a jump site and any hope of rescue. We've scanned your cargo - jettison half of it to use now and hold still until we exit the area, and you live. Make the rest of your trade run with ship and a portion of cargo intact. Or you can tempt fate, but the odds are not in your favor. You have 30 seconds to reply, but move and you'll be blown to bits". Likewise, when it comes to on foot combat you have to be able to flip the butt of your pistol around and thwack the guy into unconsciousness, or order them to go prone so you can secure them for transport in a cell, or have the harrowing knife-fight between two rivals come down to the wire realizing each other are visually taking plenty of damage etc...

All these emerging gameplay mechanics, everything promised that will be different about SC and capable of taking place in a MMO style universe, is predicated on TIME. It can't be too twitchy in any regard or this all goes down the drain , and that's to say nothing for my aforementioned discussion on "it needs to take a long time to get across the galaxy, on the level of hours or more, so that things like a space cruise ship/starliner and onboard activities will be worthwhile , realistic economies etc. I will be very disappointed if we lose the potential for these thiings to happen out of chasing fast, easy, or familiar over immersion. However, this doesn't mean it needs to be obtuse either for the sake of it.

trandoanhung1991 said:
All I wanted was a good space dog fighting game with some RPG mechanics like X3 TC but now I have no idea wtf this is gonna turn out to be.
Might as well go play Spreadsheet Simulator I mean Eve Online.
Click to expand...

You'll have ample opportunity to dogfight if you wish. However, SC was always ideally targeting being WAY more than just a dogfighting title and because of that has to be more than just a single-player arcade-ish space combat style title in mechanics. Don't worry though, this is NOT a spreadsheet simulator - EVE does that as well as it can be done - but there are plenty of other things to do and, if it comes to fruition, will be a totally different sort of sim.
 
I'm in the Chairmans club myself, about to step to the second level at 2500. Its nothing all that special, but you can get some packs with LTI for a damn good deal. I have two of the entrepreneur packs which cost $600 base for 5 LTI ships that I then upgrade to what I actually want. One of those packs is now worth ~1750 and the other is working its way up there as well.


At no point in my backing have I felt bamboozled or wronged. I knew precisely what I was paying into. I know the joy I get out of what is already in the game and the joy I will get in the near future.
 
Just had the ~buggiest~ non-crashing night ever.
In order:
1. Launching missiles from a Vanguard warden turns off the shields. MFD bug? Missile bug? Fuck if I know. Respawn! I honestly wish I could turn off most of the MFDs in the cockpit, since they're never going to fix that issue with interaction anyway.
2. Bug with hornet loadout. Guns randomly stop working / shooting, even though they're pulling capacitor.
3. Torpedo off an eclipse randomly... turned off. And I ran into it. My own torpedo. It went about 500m? Boom.
4. Launching decoy from eclipse blew it up. (after this I finally got the hammerhead - one shot!)
5. Hawk loadout let me run through the ammo once. Once and only once. No power setting would recharge. Useful! RAMMING SPEED! Back to the warden...

...

...

They REALLY need to do some bug squashing.
 
lopoetve said:
Just had the ~buggiest~ non-crashing night ever.
In order:
1. Launching missiles from a Vanguard warden turns off the shields. MFD bug? Missile bug? Fuck if I know. Respawn! I honestly wish I could turn off most of the MFDs in the cockpit, since they're never going to fix that issue with interaction anyway.
2. Bug with hornet loadout. Guns randomly stop working / shooting, even though they're pulling capacitor.
3. Torpedo off an eclipse randomly... turned off. And I ran into it. My own torpedo. It went about 500m? Boom.
4. Launching decoy from eclipse blew it up. (after this I finally got the hammerhead - one shot!)
5. Hawk loadout let me run through the ammo once. Once and only once. No power setting would recharge. Useful! RAMMING SPEED! Back to the warden...

...

...

They REALLY need to do some bug squashing.
Click to expand...

Just an FYI on the vanguards.... if you're moving at SCM or higher, you hit your own missile/torp. I blew my right tail off firing a torpedo in my harbinger doing that. This *IS* a bug, thank christ. Just figured Id share thats might be the issue with the shield turning off rather than them actually turning off :p
 
lopoetve said:
Yep. And parts of that are ok. Taking your helmet off to eat/drink, and having to stand there while y ou do? Ugh. Fortunately, you die so often it's not super bothersome. Until you forget to put it back on and go out into vacuum.
Click to expand...

LOL.
 
FighterAce124 said:
Just an FYI on the vanguards.... if you're moving at SCM or higher, you hit your own missile/torp. I blew my right tail off firing a torpedo in my harbinger doing that. This *IS* a bug, thank christ. Just figured Id share thats might be the issue with the shield turning off rather than them actually turning off :p
Click to expand...
That…. Might have been it. I can’t entirely remember. I salvoed all four, so….
 
jonneymendoza said:
Why?

And then introduce more bugs again when they add another feature?
Click to expand...
S:C has... let's say 1000 bugs right now.
They resolve 100 of them. So, they are left with 900.

FancyNewFeature is released and adds 200 bugs. They have 1100 bugs.

Or.
S:C has 1000 bugs right now.
FancyNewFeature is release and adds 200 bugs. They have 1200 bugs now.

This is the very basics of modern software development. You tackle tech debt, not just let it pile up endlessly and be insurmountable. The more crap you pile on top of bugs and tech debt, the more effort (time, money) it takes to resolve it later.
 
jonneymendoza said:
Why?

And then introduce more bugs again when they add another feature?
Click to expand...
Because otherwise you create so much technical debt that you can’t ever fix it - any change breaks more connected components, which were half written to compensate for other bugs, and so on. Every software product manager knows this. Every software project manager knows this.

This is the basics of agile software development. Small steps. Burn down bugs and fix them. Add features as you go. But don’t just ignore stuff.
 
lopoetve said:
Because otherwise you create so much technical debt that you can’t ever fix it - any change breaks more connected components, which were half written to compensate for other bugs, and so on. Every software product manager knows this. Every software project manager knows this.

This is the basics of agile software development. Small steps. Burn down bugs and fix them. Add features as you go. But don’t just ignore stuff.
Click to expand...
It's also not "sexy" and they can't sell it, so, it's clear why CIG doesn't work on it at all currently. Need to keep the grift up for as long as they can, then they'll ship it with a lot of bugs intact, and the bootlickers will defend it regardless.
 
Eulogy said:
S:C has... let's say 1000 bugs right now.
They resolve 100 of them. So, they are left with 900.

FancyNewFeature is released and adds 200 bugs. They have 1100 bugs.

Or.
S:C has 1000 bugs right now.
FancyNewFeature is release and adds 200 bugs. They have 1200 bugs now.

This is the very basics of modern software development. You tackle tech debt, not just let it pile up endlessly and be insurmountable. The more crap you pile on top of bugs and tech debt, the more effort (time, money) it takes to resolve it later.
Click to expand...
That's software development.

You don't squash all the bugs until it's feature complete.

The games far from it.

And a lot of those 1000 bugs are being addressed with new features actually such as ui building blocks, icach, global persistence. Gen 12, interior culling etc etc etc
 
jonneymendoza said:
That's software development.

You don't squash all the bugs until it's feature complete.
Click to expand...
Oh helllll no. You have an entire board of tech debt and bugs, and you put people to working on those. If you squash bugs BEFORE feature complete, you don't carry it forward. The IDEAL situation is to complete with no bugs, or as few and low impacting ones as possible. You do NOT wait til "feature complete" to START working on bugs. EVERY PR in a Feature should detail the bugs and tech debt, the decision why it remains in code, and an issue/story card for resolving it.

Well, I should say, anyone that's smart and been around with an IQ above 50 and not brain dead would. I can't speak for CIG, cos, they seem to run contrary to that.

jonneymendoza said:
And a lot of those 1000 bugs are being addressed with new features actually such as ui building blocks, icach, global persistence. Gen 12, interior culling etc etc etc
Click to expand...
No no. You're conflating what a bug is, I think. You can't fix a bug by putting a new feature in place. At best, you hide dependencies behind feature flags and only push them once the dependencies are resolved. Again, if that's what CIG is doing, then, they're running things contrary to how every well-functioning modern dev org runs. Which, honestly, explains A LOT.

If I have bug
"Run into torp at speeds above SCM"

I don't say
"Torp bug fixed with global persistence feature"

The two have zero relation.
 
Eulogy said:
Oh helllll no. You have an entire board of tech debt and bugs, and you put people to working on those. If you squash bugs BEFORE feature complete, you don't carry it forward. The IDEAL situation is to complete with no bugs, or as few and low impacting ones as possible. You do NOT wait til "feature complete" to START working on bugs. EVERY PR in a Feature should detail the bugs and tech debt, the decision why it remains in code, and an issue/story card for resolving it.

Well, I should say, anyone that's smart and been around with an IQ above 50 and not brain dead would. I can't speak for CIG, cos, they seem to run contrary to that.


No no. You're conflating what a bug is, I think. You can't fix a bug by putting a new feature in place. At best, you hide dependencies behind feature flags and only push them once the dependencies are resolved. Again, if that's what CIG is doing, then, they're running things contrary to how every well-functioning modern dev org runs. Which, honestly, explains A LOT.

If I have bug
"Run into torp at speeds above SCM"

I don't say
"Torp bug fixed with global persistence feature"

The two have zero relation.
Click to expand...
Bro. Many of the bugs are being addressed with the stuff I mentioned above. And that's not all of it either
 
jonneymendoza said:
That's software development.

You don't squash all the bugs until it's feature complete.

The games far from it.

And a lot of those 1000 bugs are being addressed with new features actually such as ui building blocks, icach, global persistence. Gen 12, interior culling etc etc etc
Click to expand...
How will a caching system fix a torpedo hitting its own ship? How will UI building blocks fix targeting systems that don’t exist (carrack). Global persistence? All those are just neat features. If you can’t get to work on a single server at small scale, it ain’t gonna work at large scale with multiples.

This is not how this works for any successful company.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top