Poetic Discourse: Reexamining the CCP Development Cycle
Players want it all. They want their iterations and fixes, but with every expansion they want something big and meaningful as well.
The problem is that CCP’s development cycle for each expansion is quite short. And being quite short, they don’t have the time to really give depth of features.
Player expectations (which are always high), simply don’t mesh well with the short development windows that CCP gives itself.
The development time for a summer expansion is approximately five months. January to May. Tack on another month for fixes and iterations once the expansion is released. Then there are two months of summer holidays, when CCP development slows to a crawl. The winter expansion cycle is much shorter, starting around the end of August. A three month development window, with another month of fixes and iterations once the expansion is released. This is the CCP development year.
What seems to happen, especially with the big features, is that CCP announces a really exciting upcoming idea at their fanfests and player meets. Then come release day, that idea always seems to be a pale shadow of the original pronouncements and “promises.” The short development cycles should likely be blamed. There’s never enough time to deliver everything, and some of the features of these bold and grand ideas have to be left on the cutting room floor.
Take Inferno’s faction warfare, as an example. This probably should have been re-developed from scratch, given a complete rethink. But due to the short window of development, existing features were simply massaged and iterated upon. What resulted was a system that focused on PvE and loyalty points, rather than a system that focused on PvP. The five month summer expansion development window precluded anything but the massaging of existing features, rather than the development of all-new features.
I would suggest a single expansion cycle per year. Each expansion will focus on either a broad theme (i.e., industry or war) or a single big exciting (jesus) feature (i.e., POS revamp or ring mining.) This allows CCP to really give a theme or single concept the development time it deserves and to really pack on the features, deliver to expectations.
As well, throughout the year, various smaller iterations, fixes, and rebalances can be released. Every team will not be working on the main expansion full-time, and when they’re not doing so, they can work on some of the low-hanging fruit. The little things. These are released to the players as they are completed.
What we end up with, is a fully-fleshed out concept/theme, once per year. As well, throughout the year, a random collection of little things released in a relatively constant stream.
It would seem to me, with the upcoming POS revamp, that a change in development cycle would be advantageous. The POS revamp, as envisioned at fanfest and player meets, is a massive project. A rethink of what currently exists. Modular structure-cities in space. It will require a lengthy development window. It will require work from most of the CCP development teams (though not all of them simultaneously.) So, while CCP still get the time to develop POSes in the correct way, working to deliver the expectation (rather than the pale shadow), there is still development time throughout the year to tackle little things, release them as they are finished. Players are thus not waiting a full 12 months for one big feature, plus a collection of smaller features. Rather, they wait 12 months for the big feature, and are delivered smaller features throughout the year.
Even with the change in development cycle, CCP doesn’t lose out on the marketing potential that expansions bring. The expansion concept remains, CCP is just given time to deliver a yearly expansion of greater depth and scope.
Some will complain, that we’re being short-shrifted an expansion per year. That’s not really looking at the larger picture. Given the short development cycles to begin with (especially winter), we’re being short-shrifted on the larger features in a two-expansion per cycle to begin with. I think, in the long run, CCP will be able to deliver better content if they switch to a one-expansion per year cycle.
You can read more of Poetic Stanziel’s opinions at his Poetic Discourse Blog.
Interesting proposal but I doubt the boys in marketing though will like it.
Given all the problems we saw with the UI & how it was patched ad infinitem maybe EVE's code has grown to the point though that 2 BIG expansions a year is overdoing it & a small fix it patch then a large expansion with jesus features.
Hopefully after Dust we'll get more DEVs working on Eve again like they did with Incursions or the WH expansion
It's all about managing your development logistics, just have a team work on long term development and a team that can fix short term issues.
And what's preventing them to work on a new feature for say 1 or 2 years, while another team works on features on the upcoming expansion ?
They tried that, it was called Incarna. Or did you forget about the whole "18 months" debacle?
I honestly think that this winter is the first "fresh" content we've had in a long time, in the form of the new dessies and that mining frig. Everything else has been iteration or bug fixes for a while now.
ITT: Poetic tells us what we've known for years via a wall of text.
2 expansions a year, one is focused on jesus features, the other on fixes/balances/little upgrades
Or CCP could just do what most companies do and that make an expansion every 2-3 years with patches and small fixes in-between for things that break. This would give CCP even MORE time to properly make said feature. Had walking in station been done on a 2 year development cycle, it would of been the biggest and best expansions in the history of the game. Instead we got 1/16th of what incarna COULD of been, and that applies to a ton of things in the entire game. The real problem is CCP is an ADD kid, and can't keep focused on ONE project and see it through to completion. They get it to a point where it works, and go "eh it works we will get back to it later" and "later" never happens or is 40 years down the road.
1 or 2 year dev cycles would solve almost everything we see with expansions as they are now.
Sorry John, but you can't openly insult syndication bloggers. I deleted your comment and yet you reposted it. don't push it.
What is so special about him?
Seeing you have no time to answer will I assume he is special in a way.
Now, anyone can choose a name. It does however not warrant a recognition. You'll see this when someone writes as "Riverini", trying to fake you, and people will recognize it as a fake and not as the real you. Or choose a name like "Super Elite PvPer" and one also will get called out for it.
I called the writer of the article a "Pencil", because this is what writers occasionally are being described as. He intends to be a blogger, or a writer, and it is all I am willing to give him for recognition. It also rhymes with Stanziel, so I believe, which is another reason for choosing it. I was not denying him his hobby or simply hate him.
How software is developed has very little influence on what is being developed. In fact has the industry been moving towards more agile processes for years and we are still getting large changes in software. For example, did CCP develop the Carbon Engine in more than 6 months. They also repeatedly told us how they develop their game, are writing about it on the forums, even made videos about it. In short, some stuff at CCP is being worked on for years before it sees daylight. So his view of software development shows a complete lack of experience and he also did not learn anything by looking at CCP, which leaves him looking pathetic when he wants to write about it. Hence the nickname.
If he feels insulted by it then I hereby do apologize. <3 If not then please let me use it, because it really is only creative.
I wouldnt mind a 1 year expension , if the quality goes up with every expansion then im willing to w8 a year instead of 6months. If tey like Apocrypha then there is enough extra game content to keep even the bitter vets busy.
They did this once before with Revalations I and II
I think for bigger stuff they should do that…
It's time for CCP to examine separation of content and mechanic. The established mechanics in Eve are quite versatile compared to the online gaming world as a whole. The content is remarkable with regards to setting, probably the richest PVP environment you'll find anywhere (just so many ways to die…).
I see these as separate entities in many ways. To be sure, there needs to be coordination between the two – however, if they were both on one-year development tracks, staggered 6 months apart… anyone see where I'm going with this?
The POS thing is a perfect example of where coordination will be needed – but TBH after the models are good to go, they become largely a question of mechanics. Incursions, to me were largely storyline / content. The AI largely existed already, requiring some mechanics-type work regarding the power of NPC ships, changes to how bounties were paid out and how systems were impacted.
Just because all the star systems CCP is ever going to make appear to already be in place doesn't mean the player base will reject a new storyline / content thread. Just because most of the mechanics are pretty good doesn't mean the player base won't accept new ways of playing the game. Frankly, if i got one of each once a year I'd be thrilled…
In the article you assume that there's only 1 development team for new content and they all working on the same thing. If they have 2 development teams, they can work on an expansion for a year long.
For example look at fanfest 2012, crimewatch was introduced in April 2012. It wasn't finished then, but they where working on it before april 2012.
Besides that, the expansions look small, but that's because CCP decided to clean up and rewrite codes.
A big part of there time is invested in that.
my 2 cents
edit: same thing=same expansion.
I think what they're doing is fine. Eve needs a lot of love in terms of iterating on old features and rewriting old code. Releasing big new Jesus features at this point would be inappropriate. And as other posters alluded to, they don't work on all features in a 6 month cycle. Work on the POS revamp has been going on for some time now, and probably won't even be fully released by the summer expansion. Personally, I like the 6 month cycle; it gives players something to look forward to in shorter bursts of time.
Truthfully i have no idea how they decide what to focus on and what changes to make. Just from a player point of view however i think that numerous small changes are easier to absorb by the player base than large drastic changes. It would like being away from the game for a year or two and then logging in and having the universe changed. The focus on one aspect of the game also has a benefit for them that they can only upset a fraction of their player base at one time. Avoiding mass protests such as the one that happened in Jita i am sure is one of their top priorities.
Sorry John, but you can't openly insult syndication bloggers. I deleted your comment and yet you reposted it. don't push it.