Bit late on that front. CIG roadmapped planetary animals back in 2017![]()
CIG have always had whales in their sights
Bit late on that front. CIG roadmapped planetary animals back in 2017![]()
In fact when I talk about competitor, I mainly talk about Elite Dangerous post Odyssey in some future.
And it's not about borrowing CIG's tech/engine but more CIG looking at what FDEV do and vice versa. And in this case, with CIG having a public roadmap and FDEV not, it's mainly FDEV looking at what CIG do.
I think the real struggle with the roadmap is not technical at all but only political/marketing.
The roadmap, as they want to show it, is a double-edged tool :
It's not insignificant.
- it shows the real internal structure of the project, how many ressources are put on each part of the project
- it give to competitor (FDEV or other) a good view of what is worked on
- it give to the community and haters many arguments to complain/criticize management (and they will do)
- it can show in pure light wasted ressources (ex : 5 guys coding full year a feature abandoned at last)
- it represent the internal structure of the company
- others I don't think about
I think also that at the beginning of the year, the real state of their internal roadmap was not what CIG wanted to show publicly. During the year, CIG may have reshuffled some teams/tasks just to present the roadmap in its best light. Reshuffling working teams/tasks can take some significant time.
Thatās why we are 12 threads in here, right?just an imaginary one between SC and everyone else![]()
The funny thing is, all those are actually positives ā they're the very reason why you have a roadmap to begin with. So no wonder CI¬G don't want to deliver it: open and clear communication is wholly antithetical to their way of doing business.I think the real struggle with the roadmap is not technical at all but only political/marketing.
The roadmap, as they want to show it, is a double-edged tool :
It's not insignificant.
- it shows the real internal structure of the project, how many ressources are put on each part of the project
- it give to competitor (FDEV or other) a good view of what is worked on
- it give to the community and haters many arguments to complain/criticize management (and they will do)
- it can show in pure light wasted ressources (ex : 5 guys coding full year a feature abandoned at last)
- it represent the internal structure of the company
- others I don't think about
Not really. Their āaccountsā either come in the form of what they hand over to the tax man, or in the report they've occasionally published for the backers. The former is a standard dry list of cash positions, which is not itemised in a way that lets you see where they money has gone ā just that it has gone. And even then, so much is just shuffling around between the dozen shell companies they've erected that there's no telling if the money has actually gone at all (but then, that's the whole purpose of shell companies). The latter is all about not explaining where the money has gone, but rather to show how much they've accumulated and brag about it.That's not what CIG publish each year in its "accounting" (not sure of the term) document ?
Only if you do it poorly and if you have problems actually delivering what you say, in which case it's not really competitors taking advantage so much as you failing to keep up with the general march of time. If that happens, it is only right that you get slapped around by the competition. It's kind of how this whole open market thing is supposed to workā¦You will also show stuff that can be used by your competitors against you/take advantage on you ?
There are 12 threads because the project has been such an abject failure and such a comedy of errors for such a ridiculously long time that the bog-standard discussion that happens around all games has run up against DB scheme boundaries in three different forum versions. Of course, you know this already, but it must really upset you something fierce since you must so compulsively bring it up at every opportunity and try to make it seem like it's a problem with the posters rather than the failed project.Thatās why we are 12 threads in here, right?
So hilarious that only in ED forums you find 12 threads about itNo, we have 12 threads in here because it's HILARIOUS.
So hilarious that only in ED forums you find 12 threads about it![]()
Most places have far more, but there's a decently working policy in place here where you don't create multiple threads on the same topic.So hilarious that only in ED forums you find 12 threads about it![]()
But yeah, it's hilarious that this project has been going on for long enough to accumulate that many threads. Or sad. Or both.
Ho I know them. But 120 000 posts just from the community of one game is an ED's exclusivity. The NMS, X4, Astroneer, etc communities are way less worried about CIG and SC.Oh you should check out SomethingAwfulās...
Itās even funnier once you realize most of the posts are only from a hand full of guysHo I know them. But 120 000 posts just from the community of one game is an ED's exclusivity. The NMS, X4, Astroneer, etc communities are way less worried about CIG and SC.
So hilarious that only in ED forums you find 12 threads about it![]()
Too bad it's not actually true.
So they're negative-worried, then? How on earth does that work?The NMS, X4, Astroneer, etc communities are way less worried about CIG and SC.
it is also hilarious that most of the posts in this 12 threads are triggered by SC white knight like you.
Too bad it's not actually true.
After all, SC has been in development since 1997 too, and still hasn't been released, so it has ED beat by a good half-decade.
This is bizarre and delusional....it's mainly FDEV looking at what CIG do.
I started playing Vendetta Online to get my Elite fix, waiting for Elite 4 while following everything I could find about it. That was early 2000āsToo bad it's not actually true.![]()
To be fair, I remember on the old Frontier Developments website there was a page for Elite 4 from about 1998-ish.