Development Roadmap

[The Doctor]

I was wondering if there was an features roadmap in place.  I didn\'t see anything current, just a post by Talad two years ago that there was a roadmap but it isn\'t published, as they didn\'t want to be held to dates or timelines, but has that position changed?  I know that the developers have been hard at work on the bugfixes for the new CB, and there a lot of openings on the dev team that have gone unfilled (I\'d offer to help out, but I can\'t even draw convincing stick figures, let alone 3d models, and my coding sucks), but is there even a priority list from the devs that can be shared out?   Even if we promise not to whine when feature X was implemented before feature Y (yeah, tall order)?

[lynx_lupo]

I doubt anything will get public, but you can get hints from cvs history and various blogs.
I don\'t see any reason why this would help anyone, quite the opposite.

[AryHann]

Well, I think somehow it is possible to say that clean a bit the bugtracker is a good starting point.

About new features roadmap, well, I don\'t think that will become public. I mean what it is intended to be done. It is also true that with passing of time the team realizes what is more needed and this roadmap changes.

I think as lynx says you can find good information in some blogs, which unfortunately are not that updated - at least, the ones I check .-)

[Rilar]

A roadmap similar to the one of inkscape would make the development process more transparent resulting in more confidence in the team and with that maybe more people who want to join the team.
Also it would make clear what will never be implemented/is coming soon(tm)(r)(c). That will also result in less threads in vain in the wishlist and/or less complains about things which are already fixed but are not IG till the next update.
I don`t see _any_ counter argument if there is a clear disclaimer beside the roadmap telling everyone that the roadmap is not a guarantee for anything at all.

[lynx_lupo]

if you find the commit history too technical, acraig is posting ~weekly summaries in the sticky here.

Who would write and maintain the roadmap? Even more time that could\'ve been used in better ways.

[Rilar]

That will also result in less threads in vain in the wishlist and/or less complains about things which are already fixed but are not IG till the next update.

against:

Even more time that could\'ve been used in better ways.

IMHO a roadmap is a one-time effort which will reduce the maintance effort over time for instance for the forum moderators and GMS. But also wtb-developers will be more productive (by giving proposals which fit better to the project), not to mention the whole lot of forum suggestions.
And to maintain such a roadmap shouldnt be a fuss..
But

Who would write and maintain the roadmap?

This is indeed the question. It must be somebody who knows the project like the back of one\'s hand.. But I am surely not in the position to ask anybody to do it.


After those rational arguments I`d like to add my subjective opinion about the question why there should be a roadmap.
IMHO the lack of a roadmap is only one fashion how the obvious lack of confidence in the public and especially in the fans is shown. I see the development of PS at the moment not nearly as \"open\" as it should be as an open-source project. Yes, I know of the fear of the team about people complaining about missing things if there was an official timeframe and so on. But this doesn`t explain the missing dialogue to the players and fans. The server has to be rebuild.. is there an approximate timeframe how long it will take? - No.
Things are already fixed and will be there in the next update.. do you know _what_ (and I do not speak of the when..) will be fixed? - No.
IMHO this \"dialogue\" is too often a one way. Devs don`t know anything about the ongoing game (RP), GMs shouldn`t get involved in the RP, and are not supposed to know anything about the development (this statement has flaws, but I`d like to keep it simple). Players don`t know anything about the ongoing development and somehow have the feeling that they are treated like labor rats by the Devs and the GMs.
This is indeed exaggerated but in my personal experience it happens way too often this way.

The introduction of a roadmap will be only one step to make the whole system more transparent and to show confidence in the ones who are interested in the development, but it will definitely be a step.

And I really wonder why there has to be such a discussion after all... I thought that a (public) roadmap is common those days for big projects.. but it seems that this thought was false.

[lynx_lupo]

he server has to be rebuild.. is there an approximate timeframe how long it will take? - No.  Things are already fixed and will be there in the next update.. do you know _what_ (and I do not speak of the when..) will be fixed? - No.

1. Of course not, you can never know when something will go wrong and keep in mind it\'s a free time project, someone working on it can be \"derouted\" at any given second. Some things can\'t just be done by anyone, so if the people with the right skills/permissions are missing, tough luck, wait a bit more.
2. Read also the first part my previous post.

A roadmap is obvious (at any detail level):
* implement the basic mechanisms of a mmorpg
* make it work
* make it work properly
* make it fun and balanced
* add more and repeat

If you worry about prospect developers, the best way to prove themselves is to fix a few bugs as ps has a big genus (bt) already. That ranges from actual bug fixes to feature requests.

Also keep in mind that it\'s in (pre)alpha stages, players aren\'t supposed to be happy customers all the time, any time. PS is just too playable already.

[DaveG]

Originally posted by AryHann
About new features roadmap, well, I don\'t think that will become public.

As already implied by Arianna, there is a \"roadmap\" as you say.  But, our internal planning is not public.  Plans change and evolve; you\'ll see them when they get finished.    But as Lynx mentioned, you can see ALLOT of the current path by looking at BugTracker, the CVS history, or Acraig\'s weekly-ish summary.  You can also get some info about the some of the current goings ons by checking on IRC in irc://freenode/#planeshift-build.

amogorkon:
The day of the update, I and others answered a heaping pile of questions about the update.  I understand that the CVS history is long and cryptic for the public.  Feel free to ask me anything about it, and I will answer to the best of my knowledge.  Others are willing to do the same.  Pop into the build channel on IRC anytime.

[Rilar]

Also keep in mind that it\'s in (pre)alpha stages, players aren\'t supposed to be happy customers all the time, any time.

Either you didn`t understand me or I didn`t understand you. I try to make myself clearer.
I know this is a demo and I know that there are flaws, crashes and so on. I was not complaining about the state of the game. I was complaining about the lack of public relations.
If you see the players not as \"customers\" nor as regular \"players\" but as beta testers and therefore _involved_ in the development process you can treat them generally in two ways: as equal persons, maybe with less knowlegde about programming and so on, but nevertheless as persons involved in the development. Or you can treat them like \"test objects\", drastically named lab rat.

But, our internal planning is not public. Plans change and evolve; you\'ll see them when they get finished.

Thats the point. Lab rats,too, see only the result of the experiment.

But as Lynx mentioned, you can see ALLOT of the current path by looking at BugTracker, the CVS history, or Acraig\'s weekly-ish summary.

Why has the regular beta-tester (user/player) to search for those information all over the place before he can hardly figure out the project status?

The day of the update, I and others answered a heaping pile of questions about the update.

It wouldn`t have been necessary if you just made a thread in the forum answering those questions before they have been asked...

DaveG: It is nothing personal, really. I appreciate your engagement and value your character. It is just that I am mad about the general state of mind and the information policy of the team. And I get even more angry when such a common thing like a roadmap is neglected...

[dfryer]

One reason for a lack of \"official roadmap\" is that official roadmaps are usually so wrong.  We don\'t want false advertisement, we don\'t want unrealistic expectations, and there is no way to avoid that.  Often, as developers, there is only a vague feeling for what will be worked on next - at the top levels, it\'s what they feel like working on.

I do feel that the developers are somewhat disconnected from what\'s happening in game, and I\'m not sure whether that\'s fatal or unavoidable.

[Rilar]

we don\'t want unrealistic expectations, and there is no way to avoid that.

A roadmap could be a way to scale down the expectations. Just put the emphasize in the roadmap on the smaller steps. Don`t say \"milestone 3: finish the interior of all houses\" but \"milestone 5: implement forging to a useable degree\" for example.
The scale of a roadmap should more or less mirror the expected timeframe imho.. and btw, what can be a better reason for the fans to open a sparkling wine and drink to the teams success than the words \"another milestone is reached!\"?

And be honest, what is better for an open-source developer than a plaudit from your fans?

I do feel that the developers are somewhat disconnected from what\'s happening in game, and I\'m not sure whether that\'s fatal or unavoidable.

Neither fatal nor unavoidable.
Each way has at least two sides.. positve and negative.
For instance with an \"isolated\" way of development you are protected from public attacks if you`d disappoint expectations. On the other hand you miss a lot of communication, praise, honor on one side, information exchange about the needs ig, experiences in ig-life with your implementations and so on.
But, to be honest, my own expectations at the moment are (sorry to say that) so low that you have to exert to disappoint them. Please don`t take that as an insult or similar. I understand that there are disturbances in the development, maybe personal changes and so on. I just say that I don`t expect many changes in the near future. I am sad to have to say that because I see that it (my expectations) doesn`t have to be that way.

What I want to say: you would win more than loose if you:
- organised a \"public relations\" team.. for example formed by players who hang about in IRC all day long, are ig a lot and read the forums..
- set up a roadmap (of course)
- made the rules in game more flexible, overwork the guidelines for the behaviour for all GMs, to unify
- updated the FAQ, discussions should be in seperate threads
- put all links to PS-related sited together, unify/categorise them

.. and so on. If you need more ideas just ask ^^
If I knew how to help i`d do it... so I hope this productive critic helps a bit.

[Leion]

Just to give this Roadmap idea some more fuel:
Moore\'s law (transistors doubling every 18 months) is actually still valid because it\'s the goal of a roadmap the semiconductor industry follows. That\'s because you want to make sure, everybody involved in building semiconductors deliveres their parts at the same time.
E.g. you want to switch your processing to 50nm but \'oops\' there is no subcontractor offering the machinery to do that.
So in generall I\'d say the more players (devs) are involved, the more sense lies in a roadmap.

[DaveG]

We do have a public relations team.  His name is Luca.    The PR he deals with involves getting us outside help, and the like.  That\'s about as good as it\'s likely to get.

Originally posted by amogorkon

The day of the update, I and others answered a heaping pile of questions about the update.

It wouldn`t have been necessary if you just made a thread in the forum answering those questions before they have been asked...

Because I lack psychic abilities.  I can read the histories just fine, so I don\'t know what parts of it you don\'t understand.  FAQs usually suck when they\'re all predicted, and not actual questions.  =>  SOLUTION:  Next update, someone should start an update questions thread (not the main one; that\'s always a din) and if it remains coherent, we\'ll all come in and answer as many questions as appropriate.  (aka, formalize the Q&A)

Originally posted by amogorkon

But as Lynx mentioned, you can see ALLOT of the current path by looking at BugTracker, the CVS history, or Acraig\'s weekly-ish summary.

Why has the regular beta-tester (user/player) to search for those information all over the place before he can hardly figure out the project status?

Ok, first of all, your notion of beta-tester == user/player is off.  By and large, the bulk of the people who have played the game are cannon fodder.  Laanx has a full magnitude more accounts than characters; there\'s allot of people who don\'t contribute any more than by increasing server load.  I\'d separate people into 5 groups:

• Meat:  They play for a day, or a week, and then they\'re gone forever. (fairly useless)
• Players:  They play sporadically, and in doing so test the features.  However, they usually never report any of their testing, and/or assume it\'s already known.  (mildly useful)
  
• PlaneShifters:  There are many people who actually like to play the game.  They are vocal in the community, and serve an actual purpose.  Problems are reported, and because of that solutions are found.  (the reason Laanx exists)
• Testers:  Usually PlaneShifters that got bored with playing a rather un-complete game, non-stop.  (and rightly so)  They logon (at least on some occasions) for the sole purpose of TESTING stuff.  On occasion, they actually submit FIXES, too.  (PS would die without these people)
• Developers:  Half the time, they\'re testers that didn\'t stop.  Unfortunately, because of this, half the time they\'re also ex-players and don\'t use their new features quite as much as one would hope.  They have to rely on the testers and PlaneShifters to get these things to work correctly.  (barely use Laanx; testing on CVS)

For 1 and 2, we don\'t really want them to have a \"roadmap\", because they\'d just whine about it.  For 3 and 4, they need some information, which they should be able to get from the histories and asking others in-the-know.  Those sitting at 5 have as much of a roadmap as will exist.

Originally posted by amogorkon
the rules in game more flexible, overwork the guidelines for the behaviour for all GMs, to unify

I\'m going to have to agree with you on this one.  I don\'t think the in-game rules are quite as set in stone as they should be.  I know allot of progress was made on this issue, but I don\'t know how much.  (As I\'ve now climbed 1-5, I haven\'t the slightest clue if people are still complaining about the GMs or not...)