While going through various youtube videos today, i found a conversation between Andy P ( Customer Experience Manager) and a fellow starmadian.. The conversation can be found here in the comment section>
But here is a copy of the conversation for your own reading..
No Man 1 week ago
The main problem of this game is only one thing. There is no practical development in this game. The game is in alpha, yes. But the game is in alpha for 5 years. For example the last "bigger" update came out at the beginning of the year. This was 4 months ago. Since than, absolutely nothing happened. If you read forum posts from developers of this game, you read that they are constantly planing things and discussing things and are proposing things. But most of these things have already been planned and discussed year ago. See Bench's posts a few years ago. There is a big list of planned features for this game. It has been written a few years ago. The list is so long, that you have to scroll some time before you find the end of the list. Yet nearly none of these features have been developed. Keep in mind that it was written 2 years ago. Everything else are results of this devleopment method. So what has to happen? This game needs more active programmers. At the moment the main programmer seems to be the only one actively and constantly working on it. Someone else is currently working on planets. At least sometimes. Thats pretty much about it. The developers said that they are currently working on a universe update which may be the next big thing. At the same time they are saying that they want to start planning this feature. At this rate we see this update at the end of the year. Then we will have a more pretty universe. Thats it. Whats next? The crew update? Will it take anoter 1-2 years for NPCs to walk around the ships and stations? What about missions, planetary structures, etc? At this rate the game MAY exit alpha in another five years.
No Man1 week ago
Also they lately said, that they were working on bug fixes for the last 30 days. What have they done between the last bigger updates and the last 30 days? Nothing? Even more planning and discussing?
Andy Pü1 week ago
You know there are news to read? -> StarMade News - Latest Performance improvement on missiles, performance improvement on other projectiles, consolidated blocks (removed the need to produce EVERY SINGLE SHAPE of a block separately, Pipe T-Junction, light-bar corner, many minor fixed in weapons
Andy Pü1 week ago
About forum posts and development: To my knowledge, the power proposal was the first public proposal of this type, and this was to begin detail planning, everything on benchs list is a "wishlist" we all agreed upon, we do (and can!) not plan every detail of them, as they rely on the actual implementation, some systems that would be in line for development may not be possible at the moment, because we see another system it relies on, that needs to be adjusted first, we prefer updating the other system, than having to replace it or alter it again at a later point, that slows us down, so we do things right, than push play experience with half-done things that kinda work but have to be broken again. We did that in the past and it does cause a lot of overhead in adjustments and worktime to bandaid systems all the time. We have rough ideas how things should play together. And yes, its quite a while in development, and another 2-3 years to leave alpha, + another 2-3 years until being finished is a quite reasonable estimate.
No Man1 week ago
Hey Andy, thank you for stopping by. Yes I do read your news posts. But 3 - 4 months for performance improvements and bugfixes as well as new block shapes and lod Objects are not really much. My point still stands. If this is all that has been done in that time frame, you really do need more programmers. Schema said in an interview about two years ago, that the game was not more than an engine demo. It still is. At the same time Benchs list was a little more than just a wishlist. I remember him saying, that he had to write a very long documentation about how the game should look and play like at the end of its development. Out of this documentation, he created that list. As I already said. he wrote it 2 years ago and only a little bit has been done today. Of course fine planning and documentation takes time. But normally not multiple weeks or even months. By the way, changing release cycles usually should not take months either. Also 4-6 years more of development? For a game that has been in alpha for 5-7 years already? That is a little bit to much and out of proportion. However I appreciate that the development team is actually answering these concerns of the starmade community.
Andy Pü1 week ago
We know additional programmers would be useful, but that would also put us under delivery pressure. As a developer that needs to be paid, also needs us to make money in a different scale and approach from what we do now. From that point on, we cannot replace features if they do not fit our plans, it would be too much of a financial loss, and we have to push the possibly broken system through to final release, no turning back. In the current state we may be slower, but also keep our freedom. With a little bit of smiling, I can refer to star citizen for this. They build up a complete (and partially insane) development plan, got all their attention burnt through before really delivering anything, and are now left with a huge pile of funds, and a set, but quite impossible fund goal. I do not want to be in their position and have to pre-plan many many thousands of development hours. If you see at like 30% of the funds used, you are only 20% in your development goals, you have to make cuts on features to compensate and lower your goals. Or drain more money from your customers by selling more things you did not build yet... To this day, and I am sure for quite a while in the future, we do not demand money to play, try or use the game, as we are on our own aware and sure we are not in a position to sell the current state by any means. Any purchase is a plain showing of support, not a requirement. Depending on the actual goals, a 10 year development phase is not uncommon for indie games. At least when going for this scale, 2d based games are usually much quicker from way less complexity in UI, physics and data structures. Even if you have a limited height world or movement limited to be in "in gravity only" the complexity drops a lot. This is for sure not a general excuse, but with such high set goals, its for sure not being done in a short time, especially as we have to go new paths and merge things other games did on purpose avoid. And performance is a major thing to work on. All those "impressive" space games with large ships have mostly static ships, the amount on it you can customize is very limited and fully nailed down to a range by the developers. This circumvents a lot of calculation, as you can pre-calculate models and bring them in easy to compute formats. Other games with good universe economy always have a very limited size of the universe (X³ for example), I think I played no example yet with an "unlimited scale" in mind or at least as goal. Games with heavy entity modification, up to building from scratch, have usually problems with performance on large moving objects (minecraft), or give you a very limited physics range to work with (planet explorers). All of the above mentioned are great games, and I like them and played them for possibly way too long, but at some point, they miss a key feature you would like to have in them, and wont ever get it, because they have no option to go in that direction. Either by selecting a pre-made engine or by missing parts in the framework to add it in, so they would need to start from scratch to get to this direction. We have our own engine, and so far not faced a practical limitation that forces us to ditch a goal we have. So yeah, we will be slower, because we have to work with problems other may not have, or avoided in the first place, but we wont stop.
No Man1 week ago
I understand that you have developed your own engine and want to keep your freedom with it. Of course you are right, you have to face problems others do not face. Solving these problems is what makes Starmade stand out of the crowd. I just do not understand why you do not want to hire more developers. According to these statistics: StarMade - You have made quite a substantial amount of money since Starmade released on Steam. Keep in mind that there are no mentions about the money you made back when the yogs people came in. So money is probably not one of you problems. Having active developers working on the game puts you under delivery pressure. Of course. But you also already are. However I now do understand a lot better what your current situation is. So thank you for your time.
Andy Pü1 week ago
Well, those numbers look quite good. However, from our steam link process, most people that purchased starmade before our release on steam, added it to their steam account. (I have no actual stats on this) But you cannot really count them as purchase then, because they paid way less. We also had sales and humblebundle, so it may look like you can just multiply "total owners" by "current selling price", this would be great. If it would be that way we would for sure have more developers hired. :P
No Man1 week ago
So your core problem actually is money? If that is true, your current approach is completely correct and I have to apologize for my behavior. However, you may want to communicate this with your community, as this may solve a lot of misunderstandings. Thanks again for your time.
Andy Pü1 week ago (edited)
I did not say that, just that we do not have excess funds to hire multiple programmers at 60000€/year without it being a risk or putting pressure on us to make money to pay them. =) But I doubt any company could do that anyway. I just wanted to mention that, as we had a few people stating we earned millions since release, by just calculating them all as 'current price purchases'.
No Man1 week ago
Which would probably lead to the same core problem, or do I understand something wrong?
But here is a copy of the conversation for your own reading..
No Man 1 week ago
The main problem of this game is only one thing. There is no practical development in this game. The game is in alpha, yes. But the game is in alpha for 5 years. For example the last "bigger" update came out at the beginning of the year. This was 4 months ago. Since than, absolutely nothing happened. If you read forum posts from developers of this game, you read that they are constantly planing things and discussing things and are proposing things. But most of these things have already been planned and discussed year ago. See Bench's posts a few years ago. There is a big list of planned features for this game. It has been written a few years ago. The list is so long, that you have to scroll some time before you find the end of the list. Yet nearly none of these features have been developed. Keep in mind that it was written 2 years ago. Everything else are results of this devleopment method. So what has to happen? This game needs more active programmers. At the moment the main programmer seems to be the only one actively and constantly working on it. Someone else is currently working on planets. At least sometimes. Thats pretty much about it. The developers said that they are currently working on a universe update which may be the next big thing. At the same time they are saying that they want to start planning this feature. At this rate we see this update at the end of the year. Then we will have a more pretty universe. Thats it. Whats next? The crew update? Will it take anoter 1-2 years for NPCs to walk around the ships and stations? What about missions, planetary structures, etc? At this rate the game MAY exit alpha in another five years.
No Man1 week ago
Also they lately said, that they were working on bug fixes for the last 30 days. What have they done between the last bigger updates and the last 30 days? Nothing? Even more planning and discussing?
Andy Pü1 week ago
You know there are news to read? -> StarMade News - Latest Performance improvement on missiles, performance improvement on other projectiles, consolidated blocks (removed the need to produce EVERY SINGLE SHAPE of a block separately, Pipe T-Junction, light-bar corner, many minor fixed in weapons
Andy Pü1 week ago
About forum posts and development: To my knowledge, the power proposal was the first public proposal of this type, and this was to begin detail planning, everything on benchs list is a "wishlist" we all agreed upon, we do (and can!) not plan every detail of them, as they rely on the actual implementation, some systems that would be in line for development may not be possible at the moment, because we see another system it relies on, that needs to be adjusted first, we prefer updating the other system, than having to replace it or alter it again at a later point, that slows us down, so we do things right, than push play experience with half-done things that kinda work but have to be broken again. We did that in the past and it does cause a lot of overhead in adjustments and worktime to bandaid systems all the time. We have rough ideas how things should play together. And yes, its quite a while in development, and another 2-3 years to leave alpha, + another 2-3 years until being finished is a quite reasonable estimate.
No Man1 week ago
Hey Andy, thank you for stopping by. Yes I do read your news posts. But 3 - 4 months for performance improvements and bugfixes as well as new block shapes and lod Objects are not really much. My point still stands. If this is all that has been done in that time frame, you really do need more programmers. Schema said in an interview about two years ago, that the game was not more than an engine demo. It still is. At the same time Benchs list was a little more than just a wishlist. I remember him saying, that he had to write a very long documentation about how the game should look and play like at the end of its development. Out of this documentation, he created that list. As I already said. he wrote it 2 years ago and only a little bit has been done today. Of course fine planning and documentation takes time. But normally not multiple weeks or even months. By the way, changing release cycles usually should not take months either. Also 4-6 years more of development? For a game that has been in alpha for 5-7 years already? That is a little bit to much and out of proportion. However I appreciate that the development team is actually answering these concerns of the starmade community.
Andy Pü1 week ago
We know additional programmers would be useful, but that would also put us under delivery pressure. As a developer that needs to be paid, also needs us to make money in a different scale and approach from what we do now. From that point on, we cannot replace features if they do not fit our plans, it would be too much of a financial loss, and we have to push the possibly broken system through to final release, no turning back. In the current state we may be slower, but also keep our freedom. With a little bit of smiling, I can refer to star citizen for this. They build up a complete (and partially insane) development plan, got all their attention burnt through before really delivering anything, and are now left with a huge pile of funds, and a set, but quite impossible fund goal. I do not want to be in their position and have to pre-plan many many thousands of development hours. If you see at like 30% of the funds used, you are only 20% in your development goals, you have to make cuts on features to compensate and lower your goals. Or drain more money from your customers by selling more things you did not build yet... To this day, and I am sure for quite a while in the future, we do not demand money to play, try or use the game, as we are on our own aware and sure we are not in a position to sell the current state by any means. Any purchase is a plain showing of support, not a requirement. Depending on the actual goals, a 10 year development phase is not uncommon for indie games. At least when going for this scale, 2d based games are usually much quicker from way less complexity in UI, physics and data structures. Even if you have a limited height world or movement limited to be in "in gravity only" the complexity drops a lot. This is for sure not a general excuse, but with such high set goals, its for sure not being done in a short time, especially as we have to go new paths and merge things other games did on purpose avoid. And performance is a major thing to work on. All those "impressive" space games with large ships have mostly static ships, the amount on it you can customize is very limited and fully nailed down to a range by the developers. This circumvents a lot of calculation, as you can pre-calculate models and bring them in easy to compute formats. Other games with good universe economy always have a very limited size of the universe (X³ for example), I think I played no example yet with an "unlimited scale" in mind or at least as goal. Games with heavy entity modification, up to building from scratch, have usually problems with performance on large moving objects (minecraft), or give you a very limited physics range to work with (planet explorers). All of the above mentioned are great games, and I like them and played them for possibly way too long, but at some point, they miss a key feature you would like to have in them, and wont ever get it, because they have no option to go in that direction. Either by selecting a pre-made engine or by missing parts in the framework to add it in, so they would need to start from scratch to get to this direction. We have our own engine, and so far not faced a practical limitation that forces us to ditch a goal we have. So yeah, we will be slower, because we have to work with problems other may not have, or avoided in the first place, but we wont stop.
No Man1 week ago
I understand that you have developed your own engine and want to keep your freedom with it. Of course you are right, you have to face problems others do not face. Solving these problems is what makes Starmade stand out of the crowd. I just do not understand why you do not want to hire more developers. According to these statistics: StarMade - You have made quite a substantial amount of money since Starmade released on Steam. Keep in mind that there are no mentions about the money you made back when the yogs people came in. So money is probably not one of you problems. Having active developers working on the game puts you under delivery pressure. Of course. But you also already are. However I now do understand a lot better what your current situation is. So thank you for your time.
Andy Pü1 week ago
Well, those numbers look quite good. However, from our steam link process, most people that purchased starmade before our release on steam, added it to their steam account. (I have no actual stats on this) But you cannot really count them as purchase then, because they paid way less. We also had sales and humblebundle, so it may look like you can just multiply "total owners" by "current selling price", this would be great. If it would be that way we would for sure have more developers hired. :P
No Man1 week ago
So your core problem actually is money? If that is true, your current approach is completely correct and I have to apologize for my behavior. However, you may want to communicate this with your community, as this may solve a lot of misunderstandings. Thanks again for your time.
Andy Pü1 week ago (edited)
I did not say that, just that we do not have excess funds to hire multiple programmers at 60000€/year without it being a risk or putting pressure on us to make money to pay them. =) But I doubt any company could do that anyway. I just wanted to mention that, as we had a few people stating we earned millions since release, by just calculating them all as 'current price purchases'.
No Man1 week ago
Which would probably lead to the same core problem, or do I understand something wrong?