These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE Information Portal

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next pageLast page
 

Dev Blog: From Two Expansions To Ten Releases!

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
CCP Falcon
#1 - 2014-05-12 17:40:39 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Phantom
Evening capsuleers!

I'm here to present you a Dev Blog from CCP Seagull, that includes more information about the changes that are coming to the way we deliver content to you in EVE Online.

This blog will cover the ins and outs of why we're switching from two expansions to many smaller more focused releases throughout the year, and how we intend to do it!

You can read CCP Seagull's latest Devblog here for more information!

CCP Falcon || EVE Universe Community Manager || @CCP_Falcon

Happy Birthday To FAWLTY7! <3
Bariolage
Control F9
#2 - 2014-05-12 18:06:39 UTC
Change in schedule makes both big and small features more manageable to release? Win win.
Chribba
Otherworld Enterprises
Otherworld Empire
#3 - 2014-05-12 18:07:40 UTC
Nom nom nom, and do we call them small expansions or patches?

/c

★★★ Secure 3rd party service ★★★

Visit my in-game channel 'Holy Veldspar'

Twitter @ChribbaVeldspar
CCP Veritas
C C P
C C P Alliance
#4 - 2014-05-12 18:22:51 UTC
I believe "release" is the preferred nomenclature.

CCP Veritas - Technical Director - EVE Online
CCP Explorer
C C P
C C P Alliance
#5 - 2014-05-12 18:32:27 UTC
CCP Veritas wrote:
I believe "release" is the preferred nomenclature.
Yep, releases is the term. Following a release we will have a few daily patches, and then perhaps a few weekly patches, and then another release 6 weeks later.

Erlendur S. Thorsteinsson | Senior Development Director | EVE Online // CCP Games | @CCP_Explorer
Soldarius
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#6 - 2014-05-12 18:34:13 UTC
I endorse this product and/or service.

I'm thinking this will also reduce stress at CCP. Deadlines are a kick in the nuts when you know stuff isn't ready and the next window isn't for 6 months.

http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
Batolemaeus
Mahlstrom
Northern Associates.
#7 - 2014-05-12 18:38:57 UTC
I tend to give CCP a hard time over a lot of things, but I'm very much fine with this change.

Though, I hope you have sane merging tools. I hate merging so much. It takes all the fun out of doing development...


Btw., may I suggest you use your new development style to rapidly react to situations where you misjudged player behavior, i.e. if you did something stupid like doubling jump fuel consumption banking entirely on a hypothetical situation that players might reduce the number of running POS in Eve? Sometimes taking an observer stance to react with well thought out responses to developing problems might be a good thing to consider when you have processes in place to make timely intervention as possibility. Blink
Seith Kali
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#8 - 2014-05-12 18:39:36 UTC
It is great news all round. Suddenly addressing sov looks like an attainable goal. With 6 week releases taking stuff out that isn't 'working as intended' is feasible also.

Apprentice Goonswarm Economic Warfare Consultant - Drowning in entitlement and privilege. 
Caroline Grace
Retrostellar Boulevard
#9 - 2014-05-12 18:40:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Caroline Grace
I don't agree with this change and I'm heavily concerned about this brutal change to EVE Online development.

This change will kill the natural "buzz" about EVE Online in the press, media and around the playerbase as there will be now no expansion-big content to be looking for. Expansions create excitement, they force many people to come back -- for good reasons. They create the buzz between players. They create the notion the game is getting updated and that something big new is added to the game's universe. People like to see their game is getting updated. People like to see their game is receiving not only patches and regular small content, but also big, vision-like upgrades. Patches with fancy names will remain just patches, no matter how hard you will try to convince players otherwise.

There is a reason why any gaming company doesn't do just patches, but also expansions. Every gaming company knows why.

You will be not doing 10 expansions per year -- you will be doing 10 (fancy named) patches and that will basically kill the flow of returning/leaving players from the last 10 years which worked just fine for EVE. Although I understand some of the reasons why you want this titanic change to EVE development, it sounds more like "we want to make things easier for us at the cost of giving players something big regularly every year".

As a paying customer for an entertaiment service, I don't quite frankly give a flying unicorn about what is easier for developers of the game I play. That is not my concern. But if the cost for giving developers easier life is to burn the classic model of expansions, I'm in a shock.

I'm Caroline Grace, and this is my favorite musical on the Citadel.
okst666
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#10 - 2014-05-12 18:51:48 UTC
the most important question to me as a graphics whore... will every release have its own awesome CG-Trailer as the past two anual releases had?

If not - I would be very dissappointed :(

[X] < Nail here for new monitor
Naomi Hale
#11 - 2014-05-12 18:57:02 UTC
Well the new release model sounds like it eliminates one of the worst things I remember from the industry, deadlines. Nothing worse than trying to be part of a creative process and having to work overtime, sleep deprived and on a timer. Not sure how it is/was at CCP (or any mmo studio) but I hated the words Alpha, Beta and Gold by release and never wanted to see or play the games again.

Good for you guys Big smile.

I'm Naomi Hale and this is my favourite thread on the forums.
Don Aubaris
#12 - 2014-05-12 19:01:32 UTC
Titans? You mean the very old Greek gods that didn't have to take into account humans (aka players) (since they didn't exist yet)?
I hope this is not CCP's view for the future Shocked
My Greek Mythology is a bit rusty, but much more then war and incest I can't recall about them.
Plus the fact that they got replaced by the Olympian Gods.
It doesn't sound good! Roll
Allthough after the defeat one of them did create humankind...if I recall correctly.
So the very far future, when a manager sees this is not the way,looks bright Cool

Also the poster above, Caroline Gracen ,has a point. Every expansion gets people back, albeit termporarly.
That will not happen every 6 weeks. Allthough it's perhaps some managers' wet dream.
Better to keep the 2 'major' events and add some minor ones in.
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#13 - 2014-05-12 19:44:28 UTC
Love the last comment logo in the dev blog...Eve forever...LOL.

If these industry change numbers don't get a massive alteration, and allow high sec and low sec a fair footing against the ridiculous bonuses being gifted to null sec, CCP may be remembered forever as the most successful game company destroyed by their own hubris and ignorance of its player base.

Bottom line, it becomes a race. Can CCP survive with dwindling subs as the high sec casual player exodus ramps up, and the dev's race to complete Valkyrie, which could be wildly successful.
Tarsas Phage
Sniggerdly
#14 - 2014-05-12 20:06:00 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Love the last comment logo in the dev blog...Eve forever...LOL.

If these industry change numbers don't get a massive alteration, and allow high sec and low sec a fair footing against the ridiculous bonuses being gifted to null sec, CCP may be remembered forever as the most successful game company destroyed by their own hubris and ignorance of its player base.

Bottom line, it becomes a race. Can CCP survive with dwindling subs as the high sec casual player exodus ramps up, and the dev's race to complete Valkyrie, which could be wildly successful.



How may I subscribe to your newsletter?
Hoban Gallifrey
New Eden University
#15 - 2014-05-12 20:25:18 UTC
Stealth announcement of delay to industry features?

What exactly is going to be in Kronos if the industry stuff is being bumped?
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#16 - 2014-05-12 20:26:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
If these industry change numbers don't get a massive alteration, and allow high sec and low sec a fair footing against the ridiculous bonuses being gifted to null sec, CCP may be remembered forever as the most successful game company destroyed by their own hubris and ignorance of its player base.
Funny thing that…

What these industry changes do is to put high and low on a fair footing against null, by giving null very handy bonuses. You seem to be of the very silly impression that null (and low) is currently on par with highsec, and that the changes will push null ahead. This is of course almost the exact opposite of what's going on. Instead, highsec has some ridiculous bonuses that puts it far ahead of everywhere else, and now the other parts of space are simply allowed to catch up… almost… since highsec will get buffed too.

I think the company you're talking about is called SOE, who, unlike CCP never bothered to fix the design flaws they had in their games and even went so far as to put more in just to make things “better” — the industry changes are proof positive that CCP is not destined to go down that road.
Darin Vanar
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#17 - 2014-05-12 20:28:20 UTC
Sounds good to me, it's a very exciting model for players if you can roll out the right stuff. Something for everyone.

Plus, it's great if it allows you to have more ambition towards the game, because we can use more modern approaches to dealing with sci-fi mmo games.

If we can eventually evolve past needing to use lists in space (overview lists), and have the client behave more intuitively, more visually, I think this alone will reach an even broader spectrum of gamers.
Robyn Aurilen
Sanctuary of Shadows
#18 - 2014-05-12 20:32:41 UTC
Caroline Grace wrote:
I don't agree with this change and I'm heavily concerned about this brutal change to EVE Online development.

This change will kill the natural "buzz" about EVE Online in the press, media and around the playerbase as there will be now no expansion-big content to be looking for. Expansions create excitement, they force many people to come back -- for good reasons. They create the buzz between players. They create the notion the game is getting updated and that something big new is added to the game's universe. People like to see their game is getting updated. People like to see their game is receiving not only patches and regular small content, but also big, vision-like upgrades. Patches with fancy names will remain just patches, no matter how hard you will try to convince players otherwise.

There is a reason why any gaming company doesn't do just patches, but also expansions. Every gaming company knows why.

You will be not doing 10 expansions per year -- you will be doing 10 (fancy named) patches and that will basically kill the flow of returning/leaving players from the last 10 years which worked just fine for EVE. Although I understand some of the reasons why you want this titanic change to EVE development, it sounds more like "we want to make things easier for us at the cost of giving players something big regularly every year".

As a paying customer for an entertaiment service, I don't quite frankly give a flying unicorn about what is easier for developers of the game I play. That is not my concern. But if the cost for giving developers easier life is to burn the classic model of expansions, I'm in a shock.


That was the most entitled piece of tat I've ever seen. Did you even read the post? They're still doing expansions, just not huge ones. The focus is shifting to releasing content regularly rather than ~big releases~. There will still be "buzz" surrounding releases, this buzz will be more consistent and result in EVE being in the media more, if anything. People do like to see their game getting updated and now they'll see it updated more... oh noes! Your mini-rant about it being just patches is just one of semantics, thus irrelevant.

As for your last point, again, entitled tat. You should give at least a flying unicorn about what's easier for the devs. If it's suddenly easier to work on the game then it stands to reason that work will be completed quicker and extra time can be spent ironing out features and making New Eden better. If your only reason for wanting the development model to remain the same is essentially "it's always been like that" then that's a pretty terrible reason, especially considering the benefits of the new model (read the dev blog for more info).
Darin Vanar
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#19 - 2014-05-12 20:39:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Darin Vanar
Tippia wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
If these industry change numbers don't get a massive alteration, and allow high sec and low sec a fair footing against the ridiculous bonuses being gifted to null sec, CCP may be remembered forever as the most successful game company destroyed by their own hubris and ignorance of its player base.
Funny thing that…

What these industry changes do is to put high and low on a fair footing against null, by giving null very handy bonuses. You seem to be of the very silly impression that null (and low) is currently on par with highsec, and that the changes will push null ahead. This is of course almost the exact opposite of what's going on. Instead, highsec has some ridiculous bonuses that puts it far ahead of everywhere else, and now the other parts of space are simply allowed to catch up… almost… since highsec will get buffed too.


Yes, but you have resources in null and low sec that makes the space very rich.

Other than logistics, the highsec space is very poor and feels very barren by comparison and in need of these so called bonuses to even remotely feel like we are playing the same game. Just not looking at the ice belts, the value of highsec is based on what null and lowsec deem it to be; they are the ones that pool resources into it that don't come from highsec, which allow it to be successful. If that stops, it won't be successful.

At least that's how I look at it.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#20 - 2014-05-12 20:45:30 UTC
Darin Vanar wrote:
Yes, but you have resources in null and low sec that makes the space very rich.
…which is already the case and is already part of what fails to give null a fair footing against highsec. These changes will work from that baseline and make null almost on par with highsec (low gets the usual shaft, but that will always be the case for various unrelated reasons).

Quote:
Other than logistics, the highsec space is very poor and feels very barren by comparison and in need of these so called bonuses to even remotely feel like we are playing the same game.
It may feel that way if you haven't looked at the actual numbers. If you do, you will quickly notice why highsec is netiher poor nor barren and why its vast benefits have created a huge imbalance in the industry sector.

You are talking about raw materials. That is a very tiny part of industry and whatever advantage null has there is completely overwhelmed by every other part of the sector. It's those other parts that are being adjusted to make things a bit more even. And by very necessity, highsec will always be the hub for materials trading as all the different materials from across the map are gathered in one spot to be exchanged against each other.
123Next pageLast page