open All Channels
seplocked Assembly Hall
blankseplocked [Proposal] CCP, commit to excellence. No features left behind.
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 32 33 34 35 [36] 37 38 39 40 ... : last (98)

Author Topic

Jubal Dara
Ordnance Tech Systems
Posted - 2010.06.02 14:28:00 - [1051]
 

Edited by: Jubal Dara on 02/06/2010 15:11:35
I'm in and I agree 100%.

And I, too, forgot the checkbox...

Jollygood69

Posted - 2010.06.02 14:33:00 - [1052]
 

forgot the checkbox Embarassed. Supported.

Mayyee
Posted - 2010.06.02 14:34:00 - [1053]
 

quality > quantity
Very Happy

Graham Johnstone
Minmatar
Core Impulse

Posted - 2010.06.02 14:34:00 - [1054]
 

Fully supported.

TheBlueMonkey
Gallente
Fags R Us
Posted - 2010.06.02 14:37:00 - [1055]
 

If only the CSM counted for somthing :(

Ishihiro tanaka
Amarr
NED-Clan
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2010.06.02 14:38:00 - [1056]
 

Edited by: Ishihiro tanaka on 02/06/2010 14:38:43
/signed

Tasha Voronina
Caldari
Caldari Navy Reserve Force
Posted - 2010.06.02 14:49:00 - [1057]
 

I've always been of the opinion that quality is more important than quantity (though neither should ever get neglected entirely). Hence my support of this proposal.

Liorah
Posted - 2010.06.02 14:52:00 - [1058]
 

Quote:
From all I've seen, this is the root cause of every fight that the CSM has ever had with CCP. They want more, we want better. It's natural, given the incentives - we care most about having a game we like more, they care most about increasing the subscriber base - but it's not healthy. I think the CSM has the right side of this more so than CCP does, because subscriber retention is a massive sticking point for Eve.

Indeed. I really like this game, and it has a LOT of incredible potential, if they just finish some of the numerous things they've started and left half-baked.

If they fix the many problems, and actually add some flesh to the countless skeleton ideas in the game, I will re-sub my accounts. Until then, their inaction has cost them subscriber accounts.

Calvinus Maximus
PPN United
Against ALL Authorities
Posted - 2010.06.02 14:56:00 - [1059]
 

Supported

Milo Caman
Gallente
Anshar Incorporated

Posted - 2010.06.02 14:58:00 - [1060]
 

Supported

Roc Wieler
Masuat'aa Matari
Ushra'Khan
Posted - 2010.06.02 15:02:00 - [1061]
 

Edited by: Roc Wieler on 02/06/2010 15:03:20
Supported

ssuLost
Caldari
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2010.06.02 15:06:00 - [1062]
 

Supported

Squizz Caphinator
Woopatang

Posted - 2010.06.02 15:06:00 - [1063]
 

this includes alliance logos too!

(no, I won't give up on that)

Silenciel
ICE is Coming to EVE

Posted - 2010.06.02 15:08:00 - [1064]
 

Agree, more realibility is needed for perfection.

Sabua
Posted - 2010.06.02 15:09:00 - [1065]
 

sounds neat go go go CCP

Trasience
Posted - 2010.06.02 15:13:00 - [1066]
 

Edited by: Trasience on 02/06/2010 15:13:04
+!

gsPhil
Erlang Biolabs

Posted - 2010.06.02 15:16:00 - [1067]
 

I support this

Silent Bruce
Minmatar
Invictus Australis
BricK sQuAD.
Posted - 2010.06.02 15:17:00 - [1068]
 

Edited by: Silent Bruce on 02/06/2010 15:19:59
Edited by: Silent Bruce on 02/06/2010 15:18:13
Supported.

CCP claim to follow the Scrum agile process. They have made good progress in finally recognising their customers (represented by the CSM) as a stakeholder and involving them in the development process.

However their adherence to fixed release dates is much more indicative of olde worlde waterfall development, not agile practices. Agile, and Scrum in particular, advocate selecting the highest priority feature (as chosen by the customer) and implementing that to a release-ready state before moving on to the next highest priority feature. It takes as long as it takes, as estimated by the pigs, not by the chickens in marketing and finance.

It seems almost unique to the game industry that software is permitted to be released without proper user acceptance testing and quality gating. If CCP truly observed the best practice that they claim, they would listen to their customers' cries for quality and take a good hard look at their release management. Short release cycles are not necessarily an indication of agility, when they are driven by arbitrary dates instead of production readiness.

In Tyrannis's case, there are clear indications of quality being sacrificed to meet a date. Call it "last minute unforeseen issues" if you like. Call it "two weeks for players to settle in" if you like. I call it shenanigans. Every software professional playing Eve knows what really happened - you *******ed up the release because you were chasing a date. It happens. It's only unforgivable if you do it again and again.

Full disclosure: I am a certified scrum master with twelve years of enterprise software development and software project management experience.

Iltarus Almondis
Posted - 2010.06.02 15:21:00 - [1069]
 

This is so +1!

Gjs312
Rionnag Alba
Against ALL Authorities
Posted - 2010.06.02 15:22:00 - [1070]
 

Tbh I think the smartest thing they could do from a marketing standpoint is take 3 (or hell, 6) months and just go back and fix existing bugs and issues and release a minimum amount of new content, its what players have been practically screaming at them to do for at least a year now but CCP seem to have their fingers stuck in their ears. Marketing could come up for some sort of a cool name for it if they want to feel useful.

As it stands, I think a lot of eve frustration stems from new releases introducing a lot of new features designed to look pretty in advertisements (planetary interaction strikes me as a replacement for walking in stations, as imo ambulation will probably never get introduced due to the crusade players have made against it for the exact reasons I was just saying). Meanwhile the game experience for veterans still feels like one based in buggy, badly written 2001 era code, I.E. one node per system and a whole bunch of bugs and design flaws introduced by development teams stuck in the mentality of "release and forget about it" in a number of examples with factional warfare as a glaring one.

End result is that existing subscribers feel that CCP couldn't give a **** about them compared to grabbing up as many new trial accounts and prospective members as possible with flashy new content now matter how badly implemented. Its sort of a disenchanting feeling when you look back on it as CCP seems to be forgetting its roots as a small down to earth company that was built on being in touch with its player-base and grown up into just another faceless international corporation that like many others seems to base most decisions on the bottom line profit. I'm not going to jump on the "SUBS CANCELLED TAKE THAT" bandwagon since they have heard it so many times insincerely it means nothing (and I probably won't), but I can really say I've been noticing a lot less general "interest" in the game then I did a year ago.

Also bring back nanos they were counterable with heavy neuts **** carebears. Mad




TL:DR- Whiny bitter vet.

Spugg Galdon
Posted - 2010.06.02 15:33:00 - [1071]
 

Eurrrgh. The fix list is long but all the fixes are minimal changes that will make an enormous difference.

Please CCP, listen to your player base. We want things that work, not things that kind of work and a load of new stuff to distract us from the stuff that doesn't work. I think everyone accepts that P.I was a must and should of been around from the start but wasn't because its such a huge element of the game. I think we all understand how difficult it was to implement and we appreciate the hard work you have done but please, throw some resources towards fixing everything that doesn't work, is mediocre or requires a complete overhaul.

** Supported **

Dave Iratus
Gallente
Caminus Trux Germani
Ewoks
Posted - 2010.06.02 15:34:00 - [1072]
 


Pay M
Minmatar
Die Philosoffen
Ewoks
Posted - 2010.06.02 15:34:00 - [1073]
 

supportet 100%

Ranger002
Minmatar
High Guard Command

Posted - 2010.06.02 15:38:00 - [1074]
 

Originally by: Dierdra Vaal

Is CCP's frantic release schedule to blame?
Are 6 months really enough time to develop new features AND improve old features AND fix bugs? While it is awesome to get two free expansions a year, isn't CCP risking quality in order to maintain quantity? Perhaps a release schedule of 9 months per expansion (so 2 expansions every year and half) will give them more time to develop existing features into Excellence, as well as developing new features into a good release-ready state.


This!

bonesbro
Legio Prima Victrix
Posted - 2010.06.02 15:42:00 - [1075]
 

Supported. Please - skip an expansion and just fix bugs. Fix lots of bugs. Fix the font (my eyes aren't good and getting worse, and reading the game gives me migraines).

Polish. Polish. Polish!

Arrhidaeus
The Bastards

Posted - 2010.06.02 15:44:00 - [1076]
 

To be cliche, "Good is the enemy of Great."

Support x10000

Emini
Posted - 2010.06.02 15:45:00 - [1077]
 

Edited by: Emini on 02/06/2010 15:45:34
I support this. +1

L'Artisan
Gallente
Posted - 2010.06.02 15:46:00 - [1078]
 

Absolutely concur, check the wheels are tightly fastened on the shiney new car of features before driving it. ;)

Mr XEM
Evoke.
Ev0ke
Posted - 2010.06.02 15:47:00 - [1079]
 

+1

Cedori
Shiva
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2010.06.02 15:48:00 - [1080]
 

Yes please . . .


Pages: first : previous : ... 32 33 34 35 [36] 37 38 39 40 ... : last (98)

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only