Suggestion for the BIG 2.7

[Tippis]

3 hours ago, Mars Exulte said:

Feedback on features etc is one thing, spitballing how to run the company is no more reasonable than standing over your mechanic's shoulder telling him what to do on your car, and is about as welcome.

…and yet, it is occasionally not just helpful but necessary. You can try to belittle it as “armchair development” but the simple fact is that it has helped resolve some pretty significant issues before they were implemented. It has its place, because no matter how professional, developers don't understand the full scope and every use-case for their software.

 

That makes it in every way completely unlike the armchair moderating you're attempting. If a thread offends you to this degree, just report it and move on. If your complaint is valid, it will be addressed; if it's not, your attempt at telling people not to discuss the game on the game's discussion forum was just pointless to begin with. And before you try the “no, you” angle, note the difference between telling people they should not use the forum for its primary purpose and telling someone to let maybe let the forums work as forums, including using the forum features in place to deal with exactly your issue.

 

3 hours ago, Mars Exulte said:

It's not about ebil customers or white knighting ED.

It most certainly is. Just look at your own wording in how you choose to characterise the two parties.

 

Anyway, this whole discussion is just off-topic so let's just drop it.

[Dangerzone]

On 2/25/2021 at 5:33 PM, Eagle7907 said:

This would be much better utilized if stable was more frequently updated is where I am getting at, or like I originally posted, to spread the risk when ED tries to plan big updates like the 2.7 update. I’m excited like any other guy here, and I look forward to new stuff, but when things don’t work out as planned, do we have to be pushed back so much?

 

Respectfully As almost primarily a stable-build player (for multiplayer)I would hate to see stable release to be released before it's ready for release just to meet deadlines. Even if that's 6 months between releases... so be it and I would like to give a different perspective as to why:

 

We all still have the choice of installing open beta if we want to play with new things. I'd hate ED to change and force a stable release on us stable players based on a calendar event rather than based on being ready. If OB guys hit bugs, they don't need to "fall back so much" to stable. They can fall back to a previous open beta version that has less bugs if one exists. Open Beta have a huge amount of options - please don't remove the main benefit of being a stable player away from us.

 

Alternatively if stable release players want to try new things - they can update to an open beta to try. 

 

I do get what your saying when considering things from your point of view - but the differences in people's opinions mostly come down to different priorities for each user. My priority order differs to someone else's and thus I will prefer something different to another, so I disagree on some points. 

 

However even with that in mind - as it currently stands now - ED have given the most flexibility and most option for all users to have whatever they choose. Stable, the latest Open Beta, or to fall back (using command prompt) to a previous Open Beta version they are happy with, while aiming to release Stable Release only when it's good and ready. 

 

Some of the proposals here as I see it are effectively asking ED to change their release strategy which will mean less options and stability for players so that it will benefit fewer who want it released in a particular way. (Mainly open beta players want open beta features but more stability - at the cost of stable players having additional stability). 

 

As a developer myself, and one who values the freedom for each user to choose - I applaud the release methodology that ED are using.

 

As I see it nothing that's been asked here will give you any more options than they currently give - all it will do is remove options and stability from other players to have them closer conform to specific priorities. 

 

Their development release, and even their copy protection I think leans towards slightly favoring their customers needs base more than themselves and that's the perfect place to sit as a company IMO. The release model may not be perfect - but I for am yet to see a suggestion that improves on what they're doing without affecting others negatively, and every suggestion to change the release procedures so far has the potential to make it worse not better.

 

I applaud ED for the way they do their releases and hope it remains this way for many years to come unless someone can come up with a strategy that adds benefit without removing benefits from other players or creating greater task load on ED.

Edited March 5, 2021 by Dangerzone

[Eagle7907]

I appreciate your response, and I understand your concerns. I too would appreciate something that is well tested as well. If that came across to you differently, I didn’t mean to. I wouldn’t want a broken OB pushed to Stable. My point was IF OB was/is in a good working order, that it would be a good strategy to push the OB to Stable before any large/core updates like the clouds/wx or previously like the 2.5.6 lighting. If something in the large update simply makes the OB unplayable then the loss of features (which have been tested) in the previous updates are not such a setback. What ED just did is exactly what I was getting at. There haven’t been any blocking bugs from the last two OB updates. Anyways, with the rules of the internet, no one is completely happy with any improvements.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro