Menu
What's New
By:
Filters

Space - State of the Universe - an overview and outlook of past and future

John B Knight said:
No doubt there is ways to adore a stone in the desert for the curves the sand smoothes over the milennia - yet i disagree to consider that the right aproach when it comes to online entertainment in a global market ;)
Click to expand...

It is the right approach no question about it because with limited resources you are limited in what you can do. It would be unrealistic although very desirable to be able to do more or indeed everything.
 
John B Knight said:
Dear Mindark, please put your focus on space as promised above - here is the list of avatars that support this request:

1) John Black Knight | support case: #322834
2) Qster Qster QQQ | support case: #323240
3) Titus SoReal Magnusson
4) Wand AxeMurderer Silva
5) Hawkwind Hawk Lonewolf
6) Alaina Bonnie Knight
7) milton osga hastings
8) Bendak Starkiller Mandalore
9) Antrace Letale Very
10) Mikkel Cowfoot Esteves
...
90) Billy Jean Ruby
91) Xane
92) Sashenka Rue Mara
93) Jo Aloisius Smith
94) Gloria GoNi Nicestyle
95) Carn Carni Fireclaw
96) Daisy ColdFinger
Click to expand...


If you want space to be updated you have to have it's priority increased. Whilst this petition helps what would really make a difference is if you appealed to planet partners as well because when MindArk prioritise they consult planet partners as well as probably Monria. Now planet partners will probably prioritise according to their own individual planetary needs especially Arkadia who have publicly stated in the past they couldn't give two hoots about space.

So if you had planet partners interested or indeed on your side about having space updated and players behind you as well with petition then it's got a good chance of it's priority increasing and hence wallah a space update.
 
Signed. I value your opinions and ideas about space and I sincerely hope they listen :)
 
GeorgeSkywalker said:
It is the right approach no question about it because with limited resources you are limited in what you can do. It would be unrealistic although very desirable to be able to do more or indeed everything.
Click to expand...

I have personally offered them to fund/support development in certain areas related to the game/space through support cases, i have 'funded' the game through considerable investments into space, players have 'funded'/supported space development since its release with over 1 million dollars spent in that area of the game alone (ship purchases (motherships/equus), tp & planet entry fees, decay of tools, pvp ammo, ship upgrades, fuel consumption, warp drive decay, auction fees for transport of items/stackables between planets).
Thats plenty of funding and plenty of time (5+years) to make some of the things happen that were announced in public management statements during the sale of motherships and since then over the years.
And if this support hadnt been enough the offer was there to make it more...the hands were just not taken.
 
John B Knight said:
I have personally offered them to fund/support development in certain areas related to the game/space through support cases,
...

And if this support hadnt been enough the offer was there to make it more...the hands were just not taken.
Click to expand...

What if what you were willing to fund and their ideas on how they want space to develop were different? which is very likely. No amount of funding should make them alter from their long term development plans, that just wouldn't be right. Nice to see they still have standards and adhere to them.

If however you were funding them to develop space with no strings attached i.e. they develop space on how they want it to be developed then they may be able to work with that perhaps they'd have to make this funding public as well. What if they then develop it to something you don't like?

That still leaves another hurdle to overcome i.e. priorities

John B Knight said:
players have 'funded'/supported space development since its release with over 1 million dollars spent in that area of the game alone (ship purchases (motherships/equus), tp & planet entry fees, decay of tools, pvp ammo, ship upgrades, fuel consumption, warp drive decay, auction fees for transport of items/stackables between planets).
Thats plenty of funding and plenty of time (5+years) to make some of the things happen
Click to expand...

Apart from funding your not appreciating how their priorities work.
If they have a list of things to do based on consultations with planet partners, monria and themselves then space is always likely to be prioritised last or at the end of the list. If that happens and other new items always end up being prioritised higher which is very likely as PP's will always have other items then space will always stay at end of list and hence it's turn for development may never come. So five years isn't even close to realistic!

In conclusion there are two possibilities on how space can develop:
1) Space gets a higher priority, ideally top of the list - hence it will then get developed first
2) Despite having a low priority (i.e. at bottom of list) it gets sufficient external funding (ideally with no strings attached) to hire a new team of developers to solely work on space development. This would be extremely costly as a new team would need to be hired perhaps over a long term period - months/years depending upon the exact functionality listed in it's development plan. Furthermore it's not known if this option would be agreeable with MindArk perhaps they would have objections to for example working against the prioritization system if for example planet partners oppose it! that's the nature of working with other people
 
GeorgeSkywalker said:
Apart from funding your not appreciating how their priorities work.
If they have a list of things to do based on consultations with planet partners, monria and themselves then space is always likely to be prioritised last or at the end of the list. If that happens and other new items always end up being prioritised higher which is very likely as PP's will always have other items then space will always stay at end of list and hence it's turn for development may never come. So five years isn't even close to realistic!

In conclusion there are two possibilities on how space can develop:
1) Space gets a higher priority, ideally top of the list - hence it will then get developed first
2) Despite having a low priority (i.e. at bottom of list) it gets sufficient external funding (ideally with no strings attached) to hire a new team of developers to solely work on space development. This would be extremely costly as a new team would need to be hired perhaps over a long term period - months/years depending upon the exact functionality listed in it's development plan. Furthermore it's not known if this option would be agreeable with MindArk perhaps they would have objections to for example working against the prioritization system if for example planet partners oppose it! that's the nature of working with other people
Click to expand...

That is exactly how to miss out on over 130million dollars that were donated towards developing virtual space content in other areas of the gaming industry during the last 4 years - by players and without demands...
Not investing in something where you could increase your income tenfold for a fraction of the cost of development elsewhere is simply shortsighted.
What is space ? Its dark and void - noone asks to change that - so make an educated guess on how much grafical work mindark developers got to do on a space server compared to a planetary server ;)
The main work and things that are asked for is simple 'move' procedures and database flags/transactations as well as some copy paste of planet mission/mob procedures to be applied to space.
Every issue in space has been analyzed, described and solutions have been offered manyfold - which one only needs to pick one and realize it with minimal effort.
The whole cargo mission promise could have been realized with adding vehicle storages to motherships/privateers and putting some generic space mission dialogues up (like for mission galactica) (simplistic minimalized version) - one day of work for a dedicated programmer and extendable from there
 
Too bad there is no real communication between MindArk and their customers, think of the progress that could be made...

As it is now communications is equivalent to sticking a message in a bottle and throwing it in the sea.
 
Xane said:
Too bad there is no real communication between MindArk and their customers, think of the progress that could be made...

As it is now communications is equivalent to sticking a message in a bottle and throwing it in the sea.
Click to expand...
If they listened to the masses there would be free teleporting accross the universe. LMAO
 
I would like to see significant upgrades to current spacecraft capabilities, new ships for other uses, space skills influencing what players can do in space. Increase space size maybe 100x bigger, Redesign cockpit HUD, allow for ships to enter planet and land. Review hangars use. Space mining, nonPvP corridors or warp drives. Player owned warp gates.
It has been stated that a big upgrade for space is coming Q4 which is now.
 
GeorgeSkywalker said:
The commitment and how exactly you implement continuous improvement depends on the interpretation/flexibility of those in charge of implementing it. So for example iterations of removing bugs could be seen as short term continuous improvement i.e. first version could be extremely bugged, second version critical bugs removed (critical would be deposit/withdraw/rce functions), etc etc. Furthermore further updates on systems can be seen as long term improvements e.g. we have space version one & eventually they'll get round to implementing space version two. Before that we could have small updates etc.

So yes, seriously they are continuously improving are they not? :) -hint you have to look at it in an extremely long term detached way ;)

Edit:
Forgot to mention we don't see most of the iterations of bug removement as that is behind the scenes whilst updates are being worked on which can be seen as continuous improvement within a sprint/cycle/iteration
Click to expand...

Funny to see you explaining to me what is in my area of expertise as I help companies to transform to agile ;-)

Are they improving ?

Actually, I'm sure they are not. They are adopting their business model bit by bit to be more profitable as they can't keep players, they are removing RCE so the market income is now part of their income, they don't have the capacity to fix the most important things, they don't have the capacity to deliver promised upgrades, they never keep commitments with regards to deadlines. Agile is not an excuse to deliver later, nor to break promises. Agreed they don't have to deliver the full blown solution and features can be added bit by bit, but in the end they have to deliver.

So no, I disagree with you ... I've been around here 11 years and the progress is making me cry ... up to a point I don't believe any longer in the concept they promote.

Fixed Time -> Nope, they don't deliver the product as
Fixed Budget -> No idea
Variabale Scope -> Definitively :)
No compromise on quality -> Very low quality

Agile does not equal "the best we can do", along with 47 other myths on that matter which people abuse to explain the beauty of this way of working.

Atami
 
AtamiKiangola said:
Funny to see you explaining to me what is in my area of expertise as I help companies to transform to agile ;-)

Are they improving ?

Actually, I'm sure they are not. They are adopting their business model bit by bit to be more profitable as they can't keep players, they are removing RCE so the market income is now part of their income, they don't have the capacity to fix the most important things, they don't have the capacity to deliver promised upgrades, they never keep commitments with regards to deadlines. Agile is not an excuse to deliver later, nor to break promises. Agreed they don't have to deliver the full blown solution and features can be added bit by bit, but in the end they have to deliver.

So no, I disagree with you ... I've been around here 11 years and the progress is making me cry ... up to a point I don't believe any longer in the concept they promote.

Fixed Time -> Nope, they don't deliver the product as
Fixed Budget -> No idea
Variabale Scope -> Definitively :)
No compromise on quality -> Very low quality

Agile does not equal "the best we can do", along with 47 other myths on that matter which people abuse to explain the beauty of this way of working.

Atami
Click to expand...

well that was insightful
 
:yay: BUMP :yay:
 

Dear Mindark, we still got faith in your promises made for space :D
 
John B Knight said:
Dear Mindark, we still got faith in your promises made for space :D
Click to expand...

I admit, I liked the bugfix VU, but I am disappointed there has been no movement on the promises for space.






Also, I always liked Enterprise...I don't know where all the fan-hate came from.
 
Add me to the list as well please.
Space needs a major update
 
:wise:

Faceof is Dynamic...:yay:
Faceof...:cool:
 
:yay:BUMP:lolup:
 
2016:
Bertha Bot said:
[h=3]State of the Universe Address 2016[/h]
Space
Later in the year, we will turn our primary focus to the development of content and systems for space. Some of the space projects on our radar include:
Galactic transport & space missions.
Space vessels - improved balance, modules, upgrades and new ship classes.
PVE space content, including new space creatures.
Improved PVP space gameplay and balance.
Originally Posted Here
Click to expand...

Guess we can conclude that it is now as late as can be in 2016 and development focus therefor is now on space.
Lets see some results of that :cool:
 
Me Really Never said:
they turn their focus on it... that means in 3 years they may have the update we need and want :D
Click to expand...

I'll help them

select * From [space] where ID like '%'

Followed by

sudo rm-rf space

I will become religious if that is what it takes for them to remove space and save what's left of the planet partners!
 
99 players have signed requesting mindark to keep their promises regarding space development focus - lets get it over 100 :wtg:
 
John B Knight said:
99 players have signed requesting mindark to keep their promises regarding space development focus - lets get it over 100 :wtg:
Click to expand...

I guess this must tell you how little part of the playerbase that actually cares for space or is it still not getting to you?
 
minim said:
I guess this must tell you how little part of the playerbase that actually cares for space or is it still not getting to you?
Click to expand...
How big's the playerbase?
 
Dusk said:
How big's the playerbase?
Click to expand...

No idea but there was 2637 unique avatars globaling the last week on "planet unique mobs" (so mobs like osseo won't even count i guess since it can be found on RT and Caly). I would guess that you could add a lot to that number since not everyone is globaling every week or even logging in and those that have signed on this list have done it over months. My guess is that if you define active players the same way as the active signers in that list you will have over 10k active players to.

Edit: But hey, less than 1% isn't to bad is it? :D
 
Dusk said:
....:laugh:
Click to expand...

Lol. You can smile as much as you want. Even at 2600 the number speaks for itself. It's way higher both you and me know that :) Are you space guys really this blinded?

The average player hates that rubbish force upon pvp zone we have between our hunting grounds. Should be pretty obvious and I don't really see how you can miss this. Please explain that to me so I can understand. Is it the
ostrich tactic?

us-ostrich-head-in-sand1.jpg
 
minim said:
No idea but there was 2637 unique avatars globaling the last week on "planet unique mobs" (so mobs like osseo won't even count i guess since it can be found on RT and Caly). I would guess that you could add a lot to that number since not everyone is globaling every week or even logging in and those that have signed on this list have done it over months. My guess is that if you define active players the same way as the active signers in that list you will have over 10k active players to.

Edit: But hey, less than 1% isn't to bad is it? :D
Click to expand...

There is over a million entropia accounts, there is 55k registered users on this forum, there is chat channels ingame with up to 9k members, there is globals of 2.6 k different players in a week, there is 260ish users currently online on this forum, 73 of them are registered members that can post during a time that is considered entropia prime time (high activity), there is 99 people who have signed this petition, there is 127 people who have voted to remove TP's, there is 60ish people who have voted to get interplanetary TP's, there is about a dozend players who dislike space enough to post continuously against it, there is minim the antispace-fanatic
You can do the percentages :cool:

From all the polls and petitions that i have seen on pcf i know that getting about 100 registered members to agree on something is a decent amount of players - this does not even account all the players which have pmed me to sign them up (cause they were not registered and didnt wanted to be for various reasons) but which i refused to do cause i wanted mindark when they check the thread to see a list of players which can be validified from the thread.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top