Quote:
Originally Posted by shoyon456
There is a difference between not saying how far a long they are, and indefinitely putting off a PLANNED '08 BETA. Yes they gave their reason and that is fine, they want it to look good.
|
Just additions I'd like to make based on these.
It was either in this thread, or another, where I stated that smart business strategy (responsible) is releasing information when you're absolutely sure you can deliver on it because that will be the expectation the customers demand. If there is any doubt whatsoever that you can't meet those expectations - don't say a word.
A lot of people keep referencing Gaile and her "expect a beta in 2008" (paraphrase). This is the prime example of
why smart companies keep their mouths shut about things until they can do what they said they would do. The moment Gaile said what she did, either on her own accord, or by instruction of someone else (which is what I believe was the case), that was the bar of expectations the customers (us) expected. Even though in the back of our minds we knew it wasn't written in stone, it's what the majority
expected to happen no matter what the circumstance.
If anyone in the development team knew that there was a
reasonable chance beta would not happen in '08; In other words jumping the gun just to keep the hounds "calm-submissive", the transfer of information should have been halted right away and it looks like it was. Meaning who ever was/is leading this project stands up to everyone and says, "Everyone keep your mouths shut from here on out, unless I tell you specifically".
It wasn't the case though, was it? Or at least not until after Gaile's statement.
Are people going to infer that Gaile's statement was a
smart business decision on behalf of Anet? Considering the constant anger about it I argue that saying something you can't keep your word on was a very
bad business decision. It must have been if people here are angered about the delay.
Following this lead, what happens if tomorrow we get a bunch on information on the game, be it visual, or written details, and 3 months down the road we're informed half of that information has been changed, promises revoked, ideas scrapped, areas over-hauled, tweeks made and new delays added? Is this community going to be as understanding as they were with Gaile? I somehow doubt that.
Now, I'm not saying that when they do show us, or tell us something, that I don't expect some minor alterations. However, a complete turn around only means that what they did show me, or told me, was worthless and a waste of time for both parties.
This is why keeping hush on things is smart, not bad, until you're 95%-100% certain you can deliver on that information. It prevents Anet from having to go back on it's word. This is something a lot around here seem to dispise. Yet some are willing to greatly risk that for a taste of eye-candy.
I know, I know - Concept art isn't much to ask for. Or..is it? The determined cynics are easily predictable.
"So what. Concept Art. Whoopdeedo. How do I know that wasn't drawn 7 years ago? Or even if it is gw2 art, that doesn't mean they went ahead with it!"
I think you and I both know, no matter what angle of this debate we hold, someone, somewhere, would post a similar remark to "supposive GW2 concept art". The rumor mills would multiply and the conspiracy writers would find new fuel for the fire.
Now from a gamers perspective we gain a lot. From a developers perspective, not so much. Quiet a few of the outspoken, but in the process raise the desire for more answers to more questions, more demands to answer those questions, more reasons to add pressure...
Quote:
However in most professional worlds timelines for business plans are much more secure and safe.
|
And they're also under risk analysis, which at any time, even in the most professional and highly successful companies are subjected to delays based on any number of factors within the risk analysis. As the saying goes, "S*** Happens" and it happens to the professionals as well no matter how well drawn and secure your project plan is outlined.
Let's assume for a moment Anet did run into a problem along the way. A moderate to severe problem. Let's say in our imperfect world a data drive got totally wiped and the backup along with it that housed a major portion of coding. It's something unforseen, or at least in the low percentile of "risk" during development, but it ended up happening. Maybe it wasn't an "end-of-the-word" problem, but it ranked up there in the things you really don't want happening. Think like driving a car. Sure, you consider a flat tire is a real possibility and you plan for it, but your entire wheel falling off? That's very rare. It happens, but rare..and if it does..it's a bigger fix than the flat.
Let's assume for a moment that this event was the cause for the delay of a 'planned '08 beta'. There's two choices immediate to Anet that have to be decided upon from contingency plans:
1) Continue as per your project timeline states, while sacrificing any quality this error has caused ,so you can keep your original timeline in tact. Staying on scheduale is priority number one no matter what state the product is in.
2) Identify the error, the cause, and the fix. Review your data, including your risk analysis, and make adjustments to your plan based on your forecasted material. This may include budget adjustments to reallocate resources, and expanding your timeline of completion by delaying other areas of development in order to prevent the error from occuring again. The highest quality of product is priority number one.
Even if this is the case (and noone really knows. We're just playing pretend here) and Anet suffered a setback, does telling us, or not, change the fact there has been, in fact, a delay? No. So there's no real motivation to explain such and truthfully no obligation to explain it to the public. In fact, by keeping quiet,
not announcing time frames (2008 planned beta), they avoid the backlash that comes with possible delays. As another saying goes, "Do it right, or don't do it at all".
If people here are unhappy with the way Anet is doing things then that is a personal issue brought on by themselves based on the idea that gaming companies
must provide eye candy xNumber of times in ySpan of time. If Blizzard does it, so must Anet? If Turbine did it, so must Anet? If FunCom did it, so must Anet? Sometimes doing things a bit different, or out-of-the-box, pays off.
Turbine was ripped, rather brutally by some "Professionals", for releasing Mines of Moria against Litch King. The pessimist would think of it as the worst marketing plan ever conceieved. The optimist saw opportunity. That opportunity was knowing that web sites, especially gaming ones, would be flooded with audiences about Litch King. They would be current WoW players, perhaps old ones who left and curious about the new expansion. Maybe players interested in playing for the first time, or gamers looking for something new. Banners would be everywhere with WoW and they were. So why not capitalize on the attention?
Turbine putting MoM on target with WotLK, everywhere I went, I saw a LotRO advert, or article, right beside WoTLK. It worked for Turbine, despite the critics rulebooks because Blizzard didn't have sole posession of the limelight. It was clever, typically unheard of, and risky, but it worked like a charm. Anyways, I went off track there....
Each game is different in development time. Each company under different amounts of resources. I don't think anyone believes otherwise. None of us can say for absolute certain what Anet has in available resources; Financial, exact manpower per development area, equip, testing phases, and so on. What we do know is it's less than Blizzard, but more than some start-up. I think that's a fair statement.
We can't expect Anet to deliver a timetable based on Blizzard's output. We also shouldn't expect a significant resource shortfall a start-up would run into that would cause a full stop to development. Each one of these exaggerates realistic expectations. Im not saying it isn't out of the realm of possibility, either way on this spectrum, but that each end of such spectrum is the
extreme.
I will speak again, from my personal feeling and only for myself: I don't want Anet to bait me with pretty pictures and promises they can't keep in the FunCom style of gaming (yes, I went there). I don't want another broken beta time frame promise because someone, somewhere, knew it there was a reasonable chance it might not be ready...but they just had to throw the hounds a chew toy.
Tell me something when you can live up to those words - show me something when that's what I
will see. If you can't, keep quiet and keep working until you can and when you can keep your word.
Sorry for the semi-novel here. While most people I know are off to Superbowl parties (something I could care less about) I had to find something to do to kill some time
Take care.