Smaller, more frequent updates (with poll)

[ToyotaSupra]

It isn't really my place to dictate what the devs do with this game, but that isn't what I'm doing (I don't want to come off as rude). I want to hear your opinion on this. Apologies if this is not allowed, or posted before.

I feel personally that the update is taking a long time, but of course the reason behind this is that programming a videogame is a long and arduous process, with many things that could go wrong but little that goes right without correction. Schema himself said that he works almost 10 hours a day ironing out these issues. And of course, we get fidgety wanting to play the latest update to this brilliant game.

Therefore I think that it would be easier on both the fandom and the developers if they release smaller updates with some bugfixes and maybe 1 main feature (or foundation for it) frequently instead of 3 or 4 major features after a period of time. I think this would be suitable until Schema gets a full office, with blackjack...and...

What do you say?

 

[Miow22]

smaller updates would be bad because people's ship designs would be constantly catching up.

 

[Saxopi]

Hmmm, good poll.

Oh wait my mistake, look here.

The big problem with this is that if anything will come out of this at all. Smaller more frequent updates would require devs to work on the game more frequently. Big and infrequent updates, surprising or big as they can be, would practically alse require devs to work on the game as much.

There would honestly be no difference if both tasks require dev to keep working on the game in time to mean the community's quota or a deadline of some sort. There would be no difference if it takes as much time to finish a big update as it takes to release small, frequent updates that would otherwise all be included in one big update otherwise.

In other words - seven dead people in a week is one dead person a day, you end up with seven bodies at the end of the week anyway. (holy crap that rhymes)

This is also no different from several petitions out there. No matter how many signatures are signed, ultimately it all comes down to a higher authority's decision. And for sure, that's not our [i.e.: community's] decision to make.

So no disrespect, but I think this poll is bullshit. Any side of the poll that ends in the majority side will most likely be subject to scrutiny, not just from the lot of the people but also the devs, will most likely have overlooked consequences, and will most likely be ignored. If not, then I guess I'm wrong and I apologize.

Couple that with the fact that all of us tend to be opinionated, dogmatic bygones and you can see why I think any conclusion made here, if any conclusion will come at all, won't come to fruition. So I just want to help shed some light on why I think collating opinions that would likely affect the progress of the game such as; saying how we think the game should be updated, won't do any help. It might just end up in a flame war, or a convoluted set of pros and cons even the devs can't make sense of.

Besides, expressing opinion on what intervals the updates should be released? Preposterous. Instead why not help the devs check for bugs, problems, and things that need fixing, so that each update gets progressively better than the last, no matter how long and short these updates might take.

 

[Miow22]

Pi-Rex
Bravo.

 

[Ithirahad]

I see your point, Pi-Rex, but the tone of that post is a lot more likely to start a flame war than the OP...

 

[Saxopi]

Yes, I may have been a bit brash with my post and I apologize to any offended, inadvertent or otherwise, but know that all internet debates are almost entirely made up of opinions and thoughts of all participants. They will be open to interpretation and accusation.

The opinion of one might be insignificant, but the opinion of the majority might not be.

 

[rece ktore leczo]

I think that updates should be released when they're complete. No rushing to give smaller, partial updates.
If Schema would be working on changing some mechanics, i would prefer to have one big overhaul than smaller updates changing only part of the system.

I.e. factory/mining update. It should be one big update changing factory recipes, ores and salvaging than few smaller updates changing only one part of a whole.

But if the new feature would be small and completed pretty fast (with bugfixing) then i wouldn't mind it for it to be released.

 

[ToyotaSupra]

Hmmm, good poll.

Oh wait my mistake, look here.

The big problem with this is that if anything will come out of this at all. Smaller more frequent updates would require devs to work on the game more frequently. Big and infrequent updates, surprising or big as they can be, would practically alse require devs to work on the game as much.

There would honestly be no difference if both tasks require dev to keep working on the game in time to mean the community's quota or a deadline of some sort. There would be no difference if it takes as much time to finish a big update as it takes to release small, frequent updates that would otherwise all be included in one big update otherwise.

In other words - seven dead people in a week is one dead person a day, you end up with seven bodies at the end of the week anyway. (holy crap that rhymes)

This is also no different from several petitions out there. No matter how many signatures are signed, ultimately it all comes down to a higher authority's decision. And for sure, that's not our [i.e.: community's] decision to make.

So no disrespect, but I think this poll is bullshit. Any side of the poll that ends in the majority side will most likely be subject to scrutiny, not just from the lot of the people but also the devs, will most likely have overlooked consequences, and will most likely be ignored. If not, then I guess I'm wrong and I apologize.

Couple that with the fact that all of us tend to be opinionated, dogmatic bygones and you can see why I think any conclusion made here, if any conclusion will come at all, won't come to fruition. So I just want to help shed some light on why I think collating opinions that would likely affect the progress of the game such as; saying how we think the game should be updated, won't do any help. It might just end up in a flame war, or a convoluted set of pros and cons even the devs can't make sense of.

Besides, expressing opinion on what intervals the updates should be released? Preposterous. Instead why not help the devs check for bugs, problems, and things that need fixing, so that each update gets progressively better than the last, no matter how long and short these updates might take.

Interesting reply, you bring up a lot of points here. But I want to clear something up. I wanted to get the point across that I didn't want to dictate that my word meant god, that is not the case. I'm a small time user, not even popular so I know that what I say means very little in the grand scheme of things. I apologise if I came across any differently.

The point of this thread was to see the opinions and thoughts of others, not to cause a flame war, or even to influence the 'higher authority' to change. I wanted to see if the group agreed with my opinions, not to ask the devs to change. In hindsight, this should have been posted in General Discussion or worded differently.

'This is also no different from several petitions out there. No matter how many signatures are signed, ultimately it all comes down to a higher authority's decision. And for sure, that's not our [i.e.: community's] decision to make.' Heavily disagreed. If we the buyers disagree with something then we can ask for change. See Mass Effect 3's ending to see how much the signatures can influence the higher authority.

From what I get from your post (again, apologies if I'm wrong), you feel that discussions like this can devolve into a flame war easily. This is not what the community here is like as far as I've seen. I have seen no flame wars from when I joined up almost a year ago on the old forums to now and I doubt that that will change. We are entitled to our opinions especially as we are the ones who will pay for the game's development. I also cannot help the developers much as I cannot program and the bugs I find in the game are already reported.

 

[the guyver]

I would like to see more frequent smaller updates ,
but i know while the game is in alpha there will be core changes that mean all other features and code will need updating to work with the new core changes ,
also meaning its a good time to add new features specifically designed for the new core that will inevitably result in lots of debugging time between updates with lots of new features in each update.

once the core is more 'stable' (beta) more frequent updates may be possible, and probably without the need to have to update ships every new update, only for major updates

 

[Cybertooth]

I think part of the problem is that with the current update, and the last one, schema has combined several things into one update. Now im fine with that, and i dont mind waiting, but i can see that the people who would like more frequent updates would have preferred it to have been done as seperate planet, weapon, and decorative blocks updates.

 

[Saxopi]

So, practically, Toyota just wants to see other people's opinions on the contrasting update intervals at hand.

Gheh, I'm not a person who likes to rely or entertain other people's opinions but rather cold facts, so I guess this discussion isn't for me to begin with. And no, I don't think it will end up in a flame ware 'easily'. I only believe a discussion like this will bring about very contradictory remarks to the point where no consensus can be reached and the poll is rendered fruitless.

But hey, let's see what happens.

 

[Miow22]

yes. Cold, Cold facts.

 

[Visitor]

I'd rather keep updates irregular, at the mercy of developers without encouragement for any frequency. Truth is that some changes take more time and some take less, some things need a lot to work and certain other things are ready quicker than it was previously assumed. I see no point in striving to release stuff when everyone's certain it needs more work or withhold new version additional feedback on would be appreciated just because there was just one out not long time ago.

 

[GaeasSon]

I am in favor of the Devs working in a way that makes sense to them, and then releasing when all the changes hang together coherently, however frequently or infrequently that may be. Are they working on a stack of quick-fix unrelated bugs? I'll take a release a day. Are they (just for instance) trying to implement a vast new weapons mechanic with more than a hundred individual weapons permutations? How about some time in a month or two?

 

[Doomerzzz]

Yeah best to just leave it to the developers so that it isnt rushed and that what they release is complete rather than just getting small updates everywhere that will only disadvantage everyone

 

[whiterhino16]

The best way I can think of is little updates in between updates. Little bug fixes and things, maybe if we be extra special good a new block or two. It would remind few people that there is a Dev team and it wont take much work.