The PC Sprint... Say What?

That quote should be MoonTheLoon, not me, but that aside...As much as I don't care for it either, I've generally been taking them to suggest they won't thoroughly process much of what we've mentioned regarding say, UI/resources/"deep" gameplay, until then. Stuff like belief~sticker amounts/timers/etc. anything that can somewhat run between platforms (but still mostly mobile-oriented), will be given more consideration than anything PC specific.

I hate to ride the negativity train as I really do think Monkeythumbz and Matt, as individuals and professionals, do a good job in many areas. So take these comments as directed at 22Cans as a whole.

If it is true that the design team won't even see those notes until right before the sprint starts, it's no wonder they have been so out of touch with what the community wants. I had to laugh earlier in the week when they were prancing around the Steam forums glad-handing each other about that analogy of Jack's that Godus was a "tabletop game played by the Gods" like it somehow justified stickers or really solved anything. That entire thread, in my mind, was a testament to just how nose deaf, willingly or not, the design team is.

Considering their statements about community involvement on Kickstarter and Steam EA, Its unconscionable that their base level planning wouldn't included modes for inserting community feedback into the iteration process on a constant basis. I realize this is an unfinished product. I realize a settlement revamp is on the way. Therefore, I'm going to withhold judgement until we see it and can actually gauge whether they have been taking our critiques seriously.  Like Aynen said, "the proof is in the pudding", although I have a hard time believing they are including us in the pudding making process as much as we'd like.

I was thinking the same thing. If they profess to having an "iterative and flexible design process" but can't even include current concerns or requests into at least a brief overview of the state of matters, there's something misaligned within their process. And honestly, and sadly, at this junctures I think it's safe to say they may be so far behind  - with a backlog the size of Jupiter (see what I did there?) - it's probably a bit too late to attempt to change up their procedures to include more current information on a consistent basis.

I try not to dig up old dirt, but this fits the subject; One major thing that was an area of contention, once they returned from the long period of silence this past Winter, was that their entire focus had been on addressing outdated or misinterpreted concerns and requests that were months out of alignment with the community's collective conscience and experience. They seemingly cherry picked minute vagaries from the four months prior [arguably the year prior], and took them in a direction that was vastly different than both the original project outline and the player [Backer] expectations... and essentially missed the mark almost completely. It's not that everything that came from that "iterative sprint" was bad or poorly done, only that much of it seemed as though they had a poor understanding of a great deal of the issues surrounding the game's core function (or deliberately ignored it, though that's debatable and unproven).

Had they even attempted to discuss, or at least disclose and share their ideas with the community - briefly outlining the fixes and new features they were spending so much time, effort, and resources working on - they would [should] have easily been able to adjust and guide the end results into a more unitedly acceptable path. Instead, they went dark, worked on whatever they pleased (or assumed we wanted), using whatever information they supposedly gathered [mostly via analytics, apparently], and slowly churned out something that was immanently (and nearly unanimously) viewed as a the wrong direction. I'm not saying, nor have I ever inferred, that they should completely alter course and code - just that they could certainly be more flexible within the scope of the design process; at least from what I know about "round table briefs" within a creative [design] process. They don't have to make the changes right away, just address them (i.e. specify the WHAT, HOW, and WHY of the ideas they're playing with/thinking of), and then propose and share (through the community delegate) the conclusive (but in no way definitive) directives that stem from reviewing such feedback and suggestions.

It's just odd to me - whom currently works in an engineering design division of a large company, worked in a web design firm, and was a graphic designer for years - that they can't seem to adjust, or even address, even the slightest issues at hand without halting all work to focus strictly on a singular feature. That just seems like a very narrow scope to work within, and almost never works - especially when dealing with product as publicly exposed as this project. Al though, perhaps that's why they keep so much enclosed and private; to restrict the damaging public influence over the "current" development. If that's the case, this game will likely never resemble way we imagined they envisioned from the pitch. At least, not any time within then next year.

Perhaps things will change (even slightly) for the better starting with this "Settlement Update" that is supposedly addressing a range of issues, not just Settlements. We can only wait and pass judgement after the fact.

<Ugh. I have done a lot of rambling today.>

I hope so too. Although, if your observation holds any bearing or merit, it may already be too late.

I am fully aware this sentiment has been repeated a thousand times... But let me aire my grievance to you storm beaten forum friendlies before I set off to fish my face off tomorrow.

If I had known for a certainty through clear communication and up front marketing on 22Cans part, that when I backed this train-wreck, Godus was a single game being developed on Marmalade for Mobile and PC at the same time, and not two separate yet similar games with individual design goals, teams, and development cycles for multiple, separate platforms, 22Cans would have never seen a penny of mine. (and I'm sure they don't care, but I'm going to whine like a little butthole anyway.)

The reality distortion field you'd have to be walking around in every day to actually believe that everyone that is up in arms about this simply didn't read the description properly or doesn't have the capacity to understand early access is a mighty one.

"fuzzy facts" and circular reasoning be damned!

Afaik even the alpha version the kickstarters played had gems and a shop. So the earliest playable version of godus had F2P elements.

By "review" I meant a formal process by which we go through the 70+ notes Matthew and I have collated about the various features and functions requested by the community, work which ones are both technically feaible and desirable from a gameplay design stand-point, and then whittle them down even further so that the sprint has a specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound (a.k.a S.M.A.R.T.) focus.

That doesn't mean they haven't been shown them so far, or that particular features and functions aren't on their rader - just that they haven't been reviwed yet.

I doubt one PC sprint will be enough to cover off all community generated requests and suggestions, so we'll need to priortise those that will give the greatest benefit for the greatest number of PC players (e.g. off the top of my head, I'd say that fixing timers is more important than adding the totem back in, IMHO).

Out of curiosity, as this seems the best running discussion in which to ask this, do the devs in their off time glance over the forums at all? Or do you and Matthew do much of the heavy lifting in that regard?

That's definitely a great suggestion, and one I think we'd all like to see. Unfortunately, it's also yet another thing we've asked for repeatedly since the Alpha release, and so far they haven't really addressed it. Perhaps now with the designated CM's handling our requests, and the dedicated "PC Sprint" promised to be coming up (Soon™) in the presumably distant near future, such things might actually have a chance to get answered.

We'll just have to wait and see.