Noted use of underline. Truly.
I think the "simply can not happen" assumption really can only come if you know how development runs in general and what's going on in the thick of it.
I don't ever expect you to know how the team works, how decisions are made and I wouldn't ever hold that against you really because you're physically not present.
I would never tell you what was possible or impossible for you in your work or otherwise, unless I knew your absolute situation and was right there in it with you.
It's tough, it really is. I do feel your pain.
What I DO understand though is the frustration you have as an outsider and how we must seem when we do have to make adjustments to promises, don't show to be conforming to "simple ideals" that you all would prefer from us, when the game that you've enjoyed for so long isn't matching up to expectations. That truly must be horrible for people as invested as you all dearly are and it's equally horrible for people like many of us who are so desperate to make things perfect but don't entirely have the power you're asking of us.
I think some of your suggestions are wonderful!! Absolutely!! I would LOVE to talk honest detail with you all - actually the whole of the CM team would, but due to some factors we currently aren't able but I HOPE...I truly hope we can begin to work on that side of things asap. I do.
Thanks for taking so much time to reply on the forums Sally, it does make a positive difference, and I know a lot of people appreciate it!
A question on this particular subject in the quote above. I tend to agree with the "simply can not happen" point, let me explain why:
1) Plan: Publish dev update on xyz
2) Situation: Something changes (it's game development!!), for one of a million reasons xyz is either not happening, or not happening within a set timeframe.
3) Option A: Dev diary postponed!
4) Option B: Dev post discusses the plan for xyz, what went wrong and how that affected things.
No doubt there would also be other options as well, and please understand I'm not trying to make this a black and white situation. I'm simply trying to understand why there (at least from the outside), appears to be an unwillingness to discuss things in a more transparent manner such as:
"Update 6: We are currently working on update 6. The plan is to fix / change / improve feature Y. Feature Y has been a bit problematic since launch because of this reason (explanation). For Update 6, we are taking this approach (details), but this has the potential hitting snags because it needs more (optimisation / time / is difficult / needs more testing / needs to go back to drawing board)."
I'm definitely not trying to teach anyone to suck eggs, and I'm no expert. I'm just trying to understand Frontier's stance of:
Game development is always ongoing, from investigating and fixing issues through to looking into new updates. However whilst development is always ongoing it isn't always in the right state to be shared. Talk about something too early and then you can end up with disappointment and anger if that thing has changed or isn't what some had envisioned. It's like seeing a live action version of your favourite book, it doesn't matter how good the acting is if the portrayal is different to your head-cannon.
Our developers are working really hard on the feedback we've been given, Update 6 is being worked on and we are exploring additional features and improvements to Odyssey which we will be more than happy to share with you once we can be sure what we show you is at least very close to what you will get.
As always we will share any news we can on the forums, social and of course in Supercruise News on Tuesdays.
I just want a big red flashing phone that is a hotline through to the Brabster.
forums.frontier.co.uk
Being perfectly blunt, this stance just doesn't make sense to me in 2021 for a live service game, with a highly active and involved community. It's possibly unfair for me to compare Frontier and Elite to other live-service games, but it seems to me that many other studios of live-service games are far more open with their communications and are less concerned about "However whilst development is always ongoing it isn't always in the right state to be shared. Talk about something too early and then you can end up with disappointment and anger if that thing has changed or isn't what some had envisioned."
Reason being, they keep players in the loop with roadmaps, developer updates (that discuss missed dates, changes to development, removed features
as well as success). There's very rarely a negative backlash from the respective communities, because the players are kept in the loop.
Totally not expecting you to be able to fully answer this here, as a full answer would need to go way beyond the scope of what Paul said in the quote above. I'm just saying that I honestly don't understand Frontier's position on this. It also feels wildly different to the approach of most other live service games. Sure, every studio is different and I totally appreciate that. But sometimes when the wheel has already been invented, and shown to work in very positive ways...
No offence intended, I think you, the rest of the CMs and the Devs do an amazing job!
I'm just trying to understand how / why the policies are set this way.