Let me start off by saying that I adore this game, the developers and the development style that is used here.
There is however something I want to talk about regarding release dates. It is often seen at small development companies that they have trouble sticking to their deadlines. Big companies have hundreds of employees and if something happens they are capable of dealing with this a lot easier and they can therefor stick to deadlines. I understand, that when working in a team of two, your deadline is compromised if something happens like someone getting ill or whatever because you essentially lose 50% of your productivity.
I understand that it is harder for small companies to stick to deadlines and I have no problem with this. What I do however dislike is that the used remedy to this problem, is to just not make any deadlines anymore. I understand that it is hard, I understand that you will most likely disappoint people and I understand that it is tough on the ‘team’, but the solution to a problem is not to just avoid the problem completely.
At this point in the process, you are still dealing with the alpha-players. These people follow your process and I think you guys have a remarkably good way of dealing with this. You are very transparent and give regular updates, but scaring away from deadlines at this point is not necessary yet. I understand it is scary to say that you want the alpha to be released a xx-xx-2017 but an indication of ‘We expect to have a playable version is x or so weeks’ won’t hurt
While i agree somewhat with what you are saying, i believe that at this point - being pre alpha - a deadline is perhaps wanted but not needed. As you said, at this point in time it’s the early adopters and the hardcore fans that will stick around a pretty long time.
After the first release i believe - and hope the developers do as well - being more vocal (and strict) about your deadline is warranted.
As far as i know, up to about a week or so ago, the game was still not pre alpha feature complete.
It’s also possible that the Devs do have deadlines, they just aren’t sharing them with us because of the risk of them being missed. Some people aren’t as forgiving when game companies don’t release on the date they have set; I actually don’t blame the Devs for not openly stating when they intend to release, particularly given that they have missed this mark on two previous occasions. I suspect they will announce a date when they are totally locked in and know they can deliver it at that time, which will probably mean a short announcement window.
This is very true. Gamers, in general, are a very unforgiving bunch (interestingly, it often comes from teenagers who have never had to meet a “proper” deadline in their life). It can get pretty nasty.
The devs are right not to set a firm release date; they probably have internal dates pencilled in but they’re right not to go public until they can say with a degree of certainty that they will meet the target. Remember - the devs do not “owe” us anything at this stage. They have taken precisely €0.00 of our cash; and that will remain the case until release day (unless there’s a funding campaign prior to launch). At this point they could abandon the whole project - I’m sure they won’t because they’ve invested thousands of hours of their own time in developing the game. Although there’s been delays, we’re undoubtedly going to see a much more developed game on release day. It looks brilliant as anyone who’s seen the two videos will agree, and the level of detail for an “early access” release is astounding.
I’ll agree that stricter deadlines come into play once the devs start collecting (their well earned) revenue, but for now we just have to wait. Given that the game looks much better than I had imagined, I’m happy to hold tight.
Before you read the next, have in mind that I’m not saying this to rush you, or to be a douche. I’m merely giving friendly advise because i really feel that you deserve to succeed in this endeavour. I truly wishes this to be a success, and will help you if nescessary.
While my skills in coding and game development are sucky at best, i have a good understanding in customer satisfaction and care, and business modelling. Therefore i have some points here that should be taken in to account.
We are talking about an early alpha release of the game, we who want this game will buy it anyway, so polishing is stricktly speaking unnescessary at this point. By pushing back release and stuff, you are only setting the expectations you’ll need to meet way higher, and thus many people will expect a fully-functional beta, not an Alpha.
Not setting any more deadlines are of course a valid way of doing things. This ensures you get the time to develop the product you want without the pressure of deadlines.
It would be better to have a statement saying “we won’t release the game before it is in late Alpha or Early Beta” to set the crowds expectations at the same level as yours.
It’s important as a provider to remember that you are not providing a velfare-service, but you are going to sell a product. This product is going to compete with other products and will have to be priced accordingly, and meet the expectations set by the pricing and set through marketing. This forum and website are a form of marketing. This means that already set deadlines and promises will either have to be kept, or you’ll need a valid reason for not keeping them. Alternatively you can revert to step 3 here and change the ground rules. After all, that’s your descision. Caring for your potential customers, and setting their expectations on the right level is very important to ensure satisfaction upon release.
Strictly speaking, for Steam purposes, it’s going to be advertised/sold as “Early Access” (not as alpha, pre-alpha or beta). All that the potential customers will know, is that the game is incomplete and may or may not develop further, and thus are taking a risk.
But the developers did not say that the pre alpha release would be on Steam (although it is kind of implied in a post) I can imagine that a pre alpha release is done outside of Steam to get some initial feedback, and when they deem the game ready for Alpha, they publish to Steam.
They did say that “When we’re ready, Steam Greenlight Campaign and if, or when, that is successful then release once integration with Steamworks SDK is complete”. It took SimAirport six days to have their game greenlit. And then they released about a month later as Early Access on Steam. That I believe is the route they will take (though I think that if going for Steam’s Early Access, it is not necessary to go through Greenlight).
Tbh, it doesn’t really matter I believe they have garnered enough support and goodwill already that a greenlight campain will be over before you know it
Let the Devs decide the Game release strategy. I know we here are jobless… but you know just guessing things won’t release the game. Let the Devs decide. We will support them.
Thanks for the interesting discussion here. I think the least we can do is comment on your opinions and questions.
I have to disagree here, polishing is never unnecessary, and especially not as we are polishing stuff that’ll serve as a foundation for us to expand upon. Time we invest in making sure that stuff (hopefully) works from the start, so that we can (hopefully) avoid launching a title with stuck passengers and deadlock aircrafts are considered as a long-term investment. I’m saying hopefully because running closed tests on up to 15 clients versus having several hundred try out the game is impossible to compare, but 15 people doing a lot of testing should at least somewhat make the product more ready for larger scale testing.
While it is impossible to say, my personal perception is that when we delay something people don’t automatically go “oh, that means they’ll release something a lot bigger and better down the road” because that would defy the purpose of delaying the product as of now. We simply needed more time to listen to peoples suggestions, test systems and prepare for future expansions.
The problem here is that we’re not releasing a late alpha or an early beta, we’re releasing an early access pre-alpha (early alpha). Our strategy to make sure that our expectations are aligned is a completely transparent development process as well as sending the title prior to release to YouTubers so that they can try out the game, and then people can decide for themselves whether or not they like what they see.
I completely agree, but according to what’s been said here a financial transaction is yet to be made. In the instance of a financial transaction, yes, the relationship changes, and we have a different responsibility in terms of being transparent with delivery dates. However, the price as you mentioned will always be adjusted for the risks involved in this project. We might still fail at delivering deadlines in the future ahead, albeit none will of course be as critical as the first one (release). But as you said, the price will always be adjusted for that, and this is one of the reasons to why indiegames are cheaper than titles developed by real studios.
We will go for a Steam Greenlight early access release. We purchased the entry free months ago and started looking at Steam SDK integration today!
