That's not a rational position - that's a subjective opinion which others clearly do not share.
Is this a rip off? Or is this Frontier first encounters all over again?
- Thread starter sporadic_kit
- Start date
really?
what is not rational about only making announcements when you have something to announce?
Well it is rational position, just not something you want. There are many rationales behind comms, and FD have chosen theirs. But as I said, give them feedback, it usually does miracles.
OK, let me clarify. It's not rational to say that is an objectively correct position. It's merely your point of view. Others have a different point of view and different expectations. Approaching those with less sarcasm and little more open-mindedness might be helpful.
100% agree, and of course it's not that difficult to do technically. There are any number of ways they could do it... from the Josh Parnell approach to what you suggest, to something in-between. Culture shift though is a slow process, and FD have shareholders, and a Board of directors too which may not be too happy about it.
Simple. But complex.
Yes, and Josh does seem to do a great job at communicating the project - a rare case of someone that likes and is good at programming that also enjoys communicating to the masses.
Although that didn't prevent (and would never prevent) LT to be at least 3 month late.
Last edited:
Based on available evidence (this thread), in a general sense this statement is largely false.
Although that didn't prevent (and would never prevent) LT to be at least 3 month late.
Difference is, everyone knows why. And therefore are completely cool with it. Anyone who isn't cool with it - just gets pointed to that forum. That fixes that.
Frontier can (IMO) learn a lot from this young man. In fact, when LT is done, they should hire him.
Based on available evidence (this thread), in a general sense this statement is largely false.
Rex_Black
R
who said it was?
no, it is a rational thing to do. my point of view is that the way fd are announcing things is fine.....thats a point of view. i would much prefer that fd dealt with things the way they are - announcing things when there is something to announce - than have to make announcements twice a week when they may well have nothing to announce
yup, they do. i can't help feeling that the expectations may be part of the problem, but thats just my point of view.
pot/kettle?
Squicker
S
Based on available evidence (this thread), in a general sense this statement is largely false.
It is Sunday, perhaps it's a hangover!
Squicker
S
Expectations may be part of a larger problem but are still legitimate if based on something actually stated. The KS FAQ, "when a project slips, the project should share the story with the backers, speed bumps and all".
Lots of people might not actually care why it's slipped, but others who do have formed a legitimate expectation based upon what they read when they backed. So if it is part of a problem to hold a legitimate expectation, it's only part of a problem because someone is not meeting the expectation.
Granted, no one is liable to die over it - although reading this thread I feel I may expire at any moment! - but it's still a dropped ball because it's not clear if speedbumps are due to a poor initial plan, significant defects, lack of resource or desired enhancements.
That seemed to be the implication of your post.
And my point of view is that more communication would be helpful. So while they're both points of view, neither is objectively right or wrong.
Everything in life comes with expectations. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect a little more communication from FD. You may be happy with the current situation, and that's fine. But try and understand that not everyone feels the same way.
How so? I don't recall being sarcastic or dismissing your point of view.
Almost everything is linked to the release date. Still being in Alpha is linked to the release date.
What I really want to know is probability of success. This is also linked to release date.
The only reason I see for FD to clam up on comms is if that probability is declining.
So it's in FD's interests to keep the lines of communication wide open, and IMO not doing so is hurting them. Beta is slipping behind from their original optimistic estimate. Why?
If they have nothing substantive to explain away why Beta is slipping from initial estimate, that is really very troubling.
Because FSD and other features stemming from community feedback added complexity meant that the requirements changed. If you change the requirements of any software development project to include more or more complex stuff, this means more work, and hence, more time required.
Did FD make a statement to that effect?
Do you work for FD?
If you work for FD, how much slippage can we expect from this, and did the original project budget cater for it?
If you don't work for FD, what business do you have spreading supposition and misinformation?