These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Dev Blog: From Two Expansions To Ten Releases!

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Batolemaeus
Mahlstrom
Northern Associates.
#21 - 2014-05-12 21:09:35 UTC
Darin Vanar wrote:

Other than logistics


Yeah, if you ignore the thing that makes 0.0 industry suck and highsec industry much better in comparison, it would indeed seem like nullsec is better.

Look, if you find a gigantic pile of gold bars in the middle of the jungle 200km from any civilization in a civil war torn country with military checkpoints everywhere, what are you going to do? The gold is there, it could make you insanely rich. If only you found a way to get it out.

Then you start making plans. But gold is heavy. You'd need a heavy lifting operation. You can't do that unnoticed. You can't bring it out piece by piece. You can't carry it alone. But telling people increases the risk. You want to bring trucks, but they can't traverse the jungle without getting stuck. You want to airlift, but that's going to attract attention...

Yes, I lifted this from Cryptonomicon. I think the author makes a good point, and it definitely applies to the full belts of 0.0.
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
#22 - 2014-05-12 21:12:18 UTC
I like the idea of small expansions/patches. It will bring great flexibilty to developement process.

"I am tormented with an everlasting itch for things remote. I love to sail forbidden seas..." - Herman Melville
Wrent Simulus
State War Academy
Caldari State
#23 - 2014-05-12 21:12:38 UTC
Here's my only concern, as someone who works with (but is not himself) a developer, I'm used to a sort of... flexibility needed with pushing to get developers to work, and giving them time to do so.

That said, one of my observations with this type of scheduling is a sort of constant push for either more iteration, or a "I need more time, it's not that easy" mentality from dev's. It's not that they're lazy, or unmotivated, but without a deadline crunch, there's a lot more push back from them and eventually things either fall completely off the plate, or get pushed into "next cycle"

My major concern is this: With shorter cycles, the pressure is off for any major updates, allowing major updates to fall into a "code-iterate-code-iterate" cycle and never get seen. With smaller easy to do things rushed out the door. The 'rough' cycle of 6 weeks turns into 7 weeks this time since it's new, then 8 weeks next time since we didn't have everything ready, then after that we'll need 9 since we were backlogged, and now we want to push a major update, but it will take more time, so we're looking at 10 weeks until that's ready...

Let me be clear, this isn't a developer issue. Dev's are by their nature perfectionists and will push and push and push to "get it right" and without a deadline I worry that that push will just drag out forever. That's who dev's are and it's totally okay. What the management needs to do is hold feet to the fire from time to time and make sure things get done. If 6 week increments (or close variations thereof) start habitually turning into 7-8-12 week cycles then that's a failure of management.

That said, I do hope this works and will continue to support/play the game. Just don't get lazy guys.
Caroline Grace
Retrostellar Boulevard
#24 - 2014-05-12 21:40:10 UTC
Robyn Aurilen wrote:
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).


A pathetic response all around. Also, I'm glad you were brave enough to post with your main, child.

1) They will be not doing 10 expansions, they will be doing point releases. Feel free to call them ~expansions~, they will be still just regular point releases (1.1, 1.2, 1.2, as you know them today), far away from anything remotely close to a solid expansion.

2) If you think media and press will be ~buzzing~ around every release, you're really naive.

3) No. The reason I want the old model is because I prefer it. Why I prefer it? Because I love expansions-model in games as they add huge new content I can explore for weeks and it revives my interest for the game. Cut this into 10 pieces per year and the excitement is melted into small pieces and my level of satisfaction is stable, but low all over the year.

I prefer to be satisfied by one big juicy stuff, rather than be continuously "bribed" by small things without a climax. So you can keep your opinion about this. But this is my opinion.

I'm Caroline Grace, and this is my favorite musical on the Citadel.
Gospadin
Bastard Children of Poinen
#25 - 2014-05-12 22:03:10 UTC
Caroline Grace wrote:
Robyn Aurilen wrote:
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).


A pathetic response all around. Also, I'm glad you were brave enough to post with your main, child.

1) They will be not doing 10 expansions, they will be doing point releases. Feel free to call them ~expansions~, they will be still just regular point releases (1.1, 1.2, 1.2, as you know them today), far away from anything remotely close to a solid expansion.

2) If you think media and press will be ~buzzing~ around every release, you're really naive.

3) No. The reason I want the old model is because I prefer it. Why I prefer it? Because I love expansions-model in games as they add huge new content I can explore for weeks and it revives my interest for the game. Cut this into 10 pieces per year and the excitement is melted into small pieces and my level of satisfaction is stable, but low all over the year.

I prefer to be satisfied by one big juicy stuff, rather than be continuously "bribed" by small things without a climax. So you can keep your opinion about this. But this is my opinion.


I agree.

Also, as someone who uses agile at work, I'm curious to hear the devs talk about what we're getting earlier in Kronos due to agile that we wouldn't have gotten in the full expansion format. Right now, it looks like nothing but slippage, which means Seagull was half right.

The industry stuff has been in the works for 6+ months, it's too bad they are missing their own deadline, especially when just a month ago it was part of this "expansion".
Robyn Aurilen
Sanctuary of Shadows
#26 - 2014-05-12 22:32:44 UTC
Caroline Grace wrote:
Robyn Aurilen wrote:
*snip*


A pathetic response all around. Also, I'm glad you were brave enough to post with your main, child.

1) They will be not doing 10 expansions, they will be doing point releases. Feel free to call them ~expansions~, they will be still just regular point releases (1.1, 1.2, 1.2, as you know them today), far away from anything remotely close to a solid expansion.

2) If you think media and press will be ~buzzing~ around every release, you're really naive.

3) No. The reason I want the old model is because I prefer it. Why I prefer it? Because I love expansions-model in games as they add huge new content I can explore for weeks and it revives my interest for the game. Cut this into 10 pieces per year and the excitement is melted into small pieces and my level of satisfaction is stable, but low all over the year.

I prefer to be satisfied by one big juicy stuff, rather than be continuously "bribed" by small things without a climax. So you can keep your opinion about this. But this is my opinion.


1) I never called them expansions, in fact nobody did. I (and the devs in this thread) called them releases, so uhh... thanks for agreeing with me there?

CCP Explorer wrote:
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.


2) I didn't say that, the (non-EVE) media and press doesn't buzz that much about current EVE expansions anyway EVE-related media/press does. Hardly naive to assume EVE-related news site generate buzz about EVE news... The only difference between the new and old models is that instead of "Zomg the next expansion contains X, Y and Z!" it'll be "Zomg the next release contains X, then Y comes 6 weeks later" etc.

3) Well that's fair enough, everyone likes what they like. Unfortunately, it seems that your preferences on the topic go against what CCP has decided is the best strategy for continuing development on EVE. In fact, it's ever likely that CCP Seagull's vision of player-built stargates and the new space they'd bring simply wouldn't be possible under the current model. You also seem to be under the impression that simply because releases are more frequent they wont release any new substantial features, which they are. They're simply shipping these features on the next release after that feature's done, big or small, with the hype-train leaving a few weeks/months before the release train. For example, the first release is going to feature the industrial rebalance, which is freaking huge, so you're still getting the juicy stuff, it just probably wont be packaged with other juicy stuff along with it. In short, I really don't think this is anywhere near as bad as
Schmata Bastanold
In Boobiez We Trust
#27 - 2014-05-12 22:53:40 UTC
Batolemaeus wrote:
Yes, I lifted this from Cryptonomicon.


Have a like for that, sir.

Invalid signature format
Schmata Bastanold
In Boobiez We Trust
#28 - 2014-05-12 22:57:47 UTC
Gospadin wrote:
The industry stuff has been in the works for 6+ months, it's too bad they are missing their own deadline, especially when just a month ago it was part of this "expansion".


This is what you get when you invite thousands of nerds to your party and allow them to give you feedback in person :)

Invalid signature format
Darryn Lowe
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#29 - 2014-05-12 22:58:43 UTC
I love this move just so long as I can still get a Prospector this coming June release. Twisted
Equto
Imperium Technologies
Sigma Grindset
#30 - 2014-05-12 23:25:11 UTC
While I like the idea as far as gameplay goes for the smaller releases. The bi-yearly releases allowed for amazing stories to be told to go along with the release and this seems like its going to take away from a lore side. What are the plans for the lore that used to be tied to releases ?
poppeteer
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#31 - 2014-05-12 23:25:13 UTC
'About' 10 releases, every 6 weeks .. does not compute.
Subtract ~8 weeks leave per year .. computes less. Blink
Tarpedo
Incursionista
#32 - 2014-05-12 23:26:11 UTC
Could be nice to see plans for 2-3+ mini-expansions ahead: if there is anything interesting I can keep account alive, otherwise I'll let it expire because I don't see anything new and interesting in the game - probably forever this time (there are competing games and they do it very good lately).
Niko Lorenzio
United Eve Directorate
#33 - 2014-05-12 23:52:45 UTC
As a long time player I can fully appreciate the benefit this new method will bring to EVE. I am however a little worried about the business side of it. Big expansions accompanied by epic trailers generate a lot of press and draw in new and returning players.
Isn't CCP worried about lack of such hype with smaller releases?

The CSM XI Election are now open until March 25th, 2016. Consider Niko Lorenzio for CSM XI.

CSM matters, your voice matters, your vote matters!
Katrina Bekers
A Blessed Bean
Pandemic Horde
#34 - 2014-05-13 00:42:18 UTC
I'm a die-hard fan of open source mantra "release early, release often", and I really hope this concept sinks into corporate CCP.

On one hand, iteration on code most likely will be improved. Instead of waiting six months to fix something half broken in a previous expansion, they have more flexibility to quickly correct the most blatantly unbalanced first implementations of a feature. Mind goes to the various iterations in areas such as incursions and FW, when they were reworked from scratch but still missing their balance.

OTOH, I know from first hand experience that devs can and will delay releases, asking for "just one more polish pass", thrown on project and development manager desks. The release managers need to start cracking some whips, or no new code will ever see the light of day again.

A whip cracking Seagull is now my favorite dream! <3

<< THE RABBLE BRIGADE >>
Kusum Fawn
Perkone
Caldari State
#35 - 2014-05-13 01:14:47 UTC
Schmata Bastanold wrote:
Gospadin wrote:
The industry stuff has been in the works for 6+ months, it's too bad they are missing their own deadline, especially when just a month ago it was part of this "expansion".


This is what you get when you invite thousands of nerds to your party and allow them to give you feedback in person :)


I prefer

"this is what you get when the ideas are not fully thought out and you invite a rabid player base that has shown its smarter then you at your own game"

but they are really just different degrees of the same statement.

Its not possible to please all the people all the time, but it sure as hell is possible to Displease all the people, most of the time.
Kusum Fawn
Perkone
Caldari State
#36 - 2014-05-13 01:18:02 UTC
Katrina Bekers wrote:
I'm a die-hard fan of open source mantra "release early, release often", and I really hope this concept sinks into corporate CCP.

On one hand, iteration on code most likely will be improved. Instead of waiting six months to fix something half broken in a previous expansion, they have more flexibility to quickly correct the most blatantly unbalanced first implementations of a feature. Mind goes to the various iterations in areas such as incursions and FW, when they were reworked from scratch but still missing their balance.

OTOH, I know from first hand experience that devs can and will delay releases, asking for "just one more polish pass", thrown on project and development manager desks. The release managers need to start cracking some whips, or no new code will ever see the light of day again.

A whip cracking Seagull is now my favorite dream! <3



LOL they already do point releases and ***** still broken 6 months after its released. Most of the broken is discovered in the much too short SISI tests that CCP routinely ignores.

Its ok you can still be excited, but try not to ignore the facts.

Its not possible to please all the people all the time, but it sure as hell is possible to Displease all the people, most of the time.
Wrent Simulus
State War Academy
Caldari State
#37 - 2014-05-13 01:26:08 UTC
poppeteer wrote:
'About' 10 releases, every 6 weeks .. does not compute.
Subtract ~8 weeks leave per year .. computes less. Blink


You're probably right on here. Figure 10 weeks of non-working time a year, leaves you 42 weeks. A -far- more realistic turn time of 10 weeks on these releases and 2 weeks set aside for fan fest pre and post as well.

Not a complaint, but I live these development cycles every day irl. The key is to manage expectations, don't tell us 6 weeks when we know flat out that's not possible. Say you're doubling the number of releases to four a year and making them smaller, leave it there. But don't float numbers like 6 weeks and "about" 10 when it's not feasible guys. Under-promise and over-deliver, not the other way around.

You do great work, keep doing it.
Felicity Love
Doomheim
#38 - 2014-05-13 01:33:46 UTC
Looks like the "new system" of sliding "releases" around to accommodate work flow has already taken place -- it's in the NEWS.

"EVE is dying." -- The Four Forum Trolls of the Apocalypse.   ( Pick four, any four. They all smell.  )
Wedgetail
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#39 - 2014-05-13 01:52:36 UTC
Change is four years behind schedule - so the only thing i can say is it's about <****> time you got around to doing this, i look forward to seeing your teams able to do their jobs.

you're a far cry from proving your organisation's set straight but this is the most intelligent move you've made in half a decade, make it count and let us see more.
Acks
RONA Corporation
Blue Sun Interstellar Technologies
#40 - 2014-05-13 02:27:47 UTC
As a very very old and bitter vet I am happy to see the shift from "Expansions" to 6 week "Releases".

Rolling things to the test server, getting feedback, then pulling them and recooking until right is the way to go.........
.... provided you actually listen to the test server feedback.

With the old Expansion model I can see how incorporating some of the feedback just was not possible without scrapping releases. This new model should hopefully allow for a better dialogue between the player base and the dev team, and ultimately a better EvE.

I am being cautiously optimistic that this is more than just a "New and improved!" sticker on the same old product.


P.S. Please double or triple the size of the "little things" crew. They get you more love from us more often than any other team, no matter how much awesome the others might deliver. MORE LITTLE THINGS!