I think Game Center would be more useful than in-app purchases. Yet, together they can be a great way to make money. And even if making money isn't the primary goal, money can help with making great games.
Game Center can give players a reason to play - and keep playing! In-app purchases are a way for apps to make money.
It's the FarmVille/CityVille model. The game is free to play. It's played by millions of people. Many of the big MMORPGs are going with this model. It's excellent marketing, as it includes repetition. That orange cat for FarmVille might seem like an incredibly expensive purchase at first, but overtime it might seem like a cool purchase.
Typical scenario...
• First, the game is strange and alien. • Oh, but it's free and my friends are playing, maybe I'll try it. • Hey, I like this game. I want to keep playing.
Then the in-app purchases go to work...
• Hey, my friends are doing better than me. I'll buy stuff to catch-up • ...or... that cat is so cute. I think I'll buy it for my farm. • ...or... I really like this game. It's OK to spend some money on it.
They might see a FarmVille card in Best Buy, or they might decide to use their credit card to buy a nice big house. Whatever reason, the percentage of players that do buy stuff make the game successful for everyone. Without the FarmVille version of in-app purchases, would the game even work? Would Facebook be as successful?
I don't like Facebook, but I think FarmVille is a great game. It's well-made, but would it even exist if there wasn't the FarmVille/CityVille equivalent of in-app purchases? I don't think it would be as popular or successful as it is now.
Quantumsheep has nailed it. I would up vote his post a thousand times if I could.
I truly hope the team listen to this. Do NOT focus on features such as In-app purchasing at this point. Such a feature is beneficial to the developer, not the end user. Gamecenter is however user centric, and actually adds value to a game, which is exactly what more GameSalad games need. Either that, or other forms web based interactions (facebook etc).
There are also more important developer tools that should be implemented before In-App; to allow for the creation of better content, not new methods of charging for what currently *isn't selling* very well.
The announcement of pause for the next release is a good first move.
Yup... agree entirely with Quantumsheep... the focus needs to come away from the drive to add new devices to publish to, and new ways to monetize apps, and come back squarely onto engine features that allow for a wider variety of games that are more compelling for the end user.
The lack of social features in GS games is a huge handicap, and puts us at a clear disadvantage... the whole appstore games culture has evolved around onboard leaderboards of some kind or another, and its now become an expected part of a games design. Social features definately help to increase a games lifespan, giving players a continuing reason to keep coming back and replay games.
Arrays for example are another much needed feature that needs to come ahead of In-App... unless we just want to carry on seeing physics based block games being the mainstay of GameSalad built games. Without Arrays theres a whole heap of game genres that are to a degree unfeasable... but would be easily doable with the feature added. Theres a reason no ones done an RPG, Quiz or stat heavy game with GS... and it shouldnt be that way.
So I join QS wholeheartedly in his opinions regarding where the GS priorities should lay....
Well said! Certainly, In-App purchasing is on our roadmap, but it's a hard sell for top priority when we look at the demand for things like tables/arrays, polygon collision, and actors referencing each other - all items that substantially increase the range of games that could be built with GameSalad.
-- Yodapollo
tenrdrmerMember, Sous Chef, Senior Sous-ChefPosts: 9,934
quantumsheep said: I have never, ever, read a review or had an email from a customer saying 'Please can you let me spend money on your app by adding in-app purchases please?'
If, and only if it becomes a bona fide requirement by Apple should this be put in above stuff like social features/Gamecentres/Arrays.
No-one listened when the kids yelled about wanting iAds so they could make their games free.
Now people want in-app purchasing.
Tell me. If your game doesn't capture people's imaginations, then what use are ads and iaps?
Just my $0.02
QS
I was actually referring to GameCenter/Leader boards about the reviews. I have had more than one review gripping about no leader board and the only review site review I got also said that was a major area the game was lacking in.
I think that should be number 1 priority feature wise. In - App Purchase I think should be number 2 on the main feature list but number 1 on the monetizing features.
Well said! Certainly, In-App purchasing is on our roadmap, but it's a hard sell for top priority when we look at the demand for things like tables/arrays, polygon collision, and actors referencing each other - all items that substantially increase the range of games that could be built with GameSalad.
-- Yodapollo
So we just need to see a proper Roadmap... listing your priorities, and a rough estimation of when we might actually see them. Thats the biggest bit of community communication you could possibly do...
Like youve already said...communicating with the community is now going to be a big priority, so why not just do the one big thing on the communication front that people have been hassling for!
A proper roadmap helps give your users something to plan against...and also helps drive the software forward. It gives your users a greater degree of trust in the product and GS as developers....
It doesnt have to be set in stone, and is always open to changes, but at least it lets us know what your working on, when we might expect to see it, and how it might affect our plans and the projects were currently working on.
So when the community is asking for a Roadmap, its not because we're wanting to just hassle you guys...its because were wanting you to work more closely with us.
Well said! Certainly, In-App purchasing is on our roadmap, but it's a hard sell for top priority when we look at the demand for things like tables/arrays, polygon collision, and actors referencing each other - all items that substantially increase the range of games that could be built with GameSalad.
-- Yodapollo
I like the sound of those bits you chose to highlight there, but I noticed you failed to mention GameCenter, leaderboards or any social features there...
...does that mean theyre already coming in the next update?... or more worryingly does that mean theyre just not high up on the GS list?....
Certainly didn't mean anything by not mentioning GameCenter and other social features. I was just trying to make a point in relation to actual game mechanics. GameCenter and social features are definitely important to us.
The thing about in-app purchases is, theoretically, how simple it should be to implement. A purchase translates into a changed boolean attribute, voila. The IAP is managed from iTunes Connect, you just need to tie each IAP to an attribute. Kind of like iAds, where Apple has already done the work. I don't know much about GameCenter so I don't know what extra might have to go into it, but I would at least expect IAP to be very valuable for the work necessary to implement it.
Granted I could be wrong. Maybe there's some roadblock in there that would require some major overhaul to get it working. Only the GS programmers really know for sure.
tenrdrmerMember, Sous Chef, Senior Sous-ChefPosts: 9,934
Chunkypixels said: So we just need to see a proper Roadmap... listing your priorities, and a rough estimation of when we might actually see them. Thats the biggest bit of community communication you could possibly do...
Like youve already said...communicating with the community is now going to be a big priority, so why not just do the one big thing on the communication front that people have been hassling for!
A proper roadmap helps give your users something to plan against...and also helps drive the software forward. It gives your users a greater degree of trust in the product and GS as developers....
It doesnt have to be set in stone, and is always open to changes, but at least it lets us know what your working on, when we might expect to see it, and how it might affect our plans and the projects were currently working on.
So when the community is asking for a Roadmap, its not because we're wanting to just hassle you guys...its because were wanting you to work more closely with us.
So when can we expect to this infamous "roadmap"
See it still sends the wrong message when its mentioned over and over and you don't provide an answer to that part but choose to answer bits of other questions.
tenrdrmer said: So when can we expect to this infamous "roadmap"
See it still sends the wrong message when its mentioned over and over and you don't provide an answer to that part but choose to answer bits of other questions.
mmhmm. Im not one to complain at all, but here was absoluty nothing in the big picture that we didnt already know like you said. pause and macstore, and some memory fixes. Thats it. All they had to say is theres nothing new added that hasnt been mentioned. Instead of making a big deal and writing a bunch of paragraphs that boil down to that. Again im not complaining about lack of features, just i dont know why we always get a long run around.
tenrdrmerMember, Sous Chef, Senior Sous-ChefPosts: 9,934
JohnPapiomitis said: mmhmm. Im not one to complain at all, but here was absoluty nothing in the big picture that we didnt already know like you said. pause and macstore, and some memory fixes. Thats it. All they had to say is theres nothing new added that hasnt been mentioned. Instead of making a big deal and writing a bunch of paragraphs that boil down to that. Again im not complaining about lack of features, just i dont know why we always get a long run around.
I knew someone would come along and say it better me. We just want to know the plan. not Well everythings planned and we're getting to it.
We want to see the goals and what you are shooting for on a time frame of goals.
For instance: (this is hypothetical obviously) GameSalad Roadmap: 0.9.2 Shooting for March - 2011 - More Memory/performance issue - GameCenter implemented with Leader boards and achievements for Pro users - In-App Purchasing for Scene Additions only (you can sell more levels just not ammo, weapons, lives, etc…) - Pro Only
0.9.3 Plan - Shooting for May 2011 - More Memory/performance issues - Facebook/Twitter integration for posting scores, achievements, etc. - Pro Only - Polygonal Collisions - Possibly Pro Only - Full Page iAds - Pro Only
0.9.4 plan - Shooting For July 2011 - Memory/performance issues Solved - tables/arrays - Full Game Center Support
0.9.5 + Plan Fully Automated mind reading art drawing engine that produces your game including art work directly from your thoughts - Pro Only Of course.
Something as simply laid out as that would make so many people happy you have no idea. And then, Here's the Kicker, If you can't include a feature by the road map goal or are going to be pushing the estimated release date back just tell us and tell us why. not some BS runaround excuses which answer no questions.
People will be much more forgiving when you are honest and forthcoming with them. Yes there will still be those who you could not please if you gave them everything they wanted in the engine and then gave them an xcode build they could further modify on their own. But the community can deal with those people as long as the community has a majority that believe you/GameSalad are not bullSh1ting us.
The fact is, this forum is split into people that care about their games, and those that care about making money.
The two should not be separated.
Making a good game is no guarantee of success. And some awful rubbish seems to sell too. But I honestly believe you have a better chance of success making a good, polished game than just chucking out lots of rubbish and hoping something sticks.
Instead of thinking 'That'll do', think bigger. If there are bugs in your game, try and fix them! If the graphics aren't up to par, get better ones. If the gameplay's dull, add something to make it more exciting! If the controls suck, change them!
There's a reason why the more successful GS games do well. Because they are polished and the people that make them have tried to think not of themselves first, but the end user.
We are all, collectively, in competition with not just eachother or those that use Corona. We should be seeing EVERY game out there as competition.
And to compete with them, we need to be able to make better games and offer the same feature sets that customers are accustomed to on the app store. So that, at the very worst, people say 'this was a bad game' -not 'this was a bad GameSalad game'.
My early games had some interesting ideas, but where rubbish really. I learned my lesson, and try really hard to make better and better games.
I sincerely hope that when people ask for new features, they are features that allow us to compete and make better games. Not just another call for monetizing crap.
tenrdrmerMember, Sous Chef, Senior Sous-ChefPosts: 9,934
quantumsheep said: The fact is, this forum is split into people that care about their games, and those that care about making money.
The two should not be separated.
Making a good game is no guarantee of success. And some awful rubbish seems to sell too. But I honestly believe you have a better chance of success making a good, polished game than just chucking out lots of rubbish and hoping something sticks.
Instead of thinking 'That'll do', think bigger. If there are bugs in your game, try and fix them! If the graphics aren't up to par, get better ones. If the gameplay's dull, add something to make it more exciting! If the controls suck, change them!
There's a reason why the more successful GS games do well. Because they are polished and the people that make them have tried to think not of themselves first, but the end user.
We are all, collectively, in competition with not just eachother or those that use Corona. We should be seeing EVERY game out there as competition.
And to compete with them, we need to be able to make better games and offer the same feature sets that customers are accustomed to on the app store. So that, at the very worst, people say 'this was a bad game' -not 'this was a bad GameSalad game'.
My early games had some interesting ideas, but where rubbish really. I learned my lesson, and try really hard to make better and better games.
I sincerely hope that when people ask for new features, they are features that allow us to compete and make better games. Not just another call for monetizing crap.
/endsheepyrant
QS
This isn't just a call for monetizing though. You are missing the point. The point is we were given a run around about a "Big Picture" Post and and when it finally got here after several unfulfilled promises It was crap. I was a bunch of paragraphs about crap they had already told us. Absolutely no new information. thats the same crap that been done since I have been here and longer according to other users.
Hell if a features not gonna happen. Just say so. If its not at the top of your priorities just say so. Quite leaving it open to speculation.
I dont wont give near as big of a !@#$% what feature may or may not be coming and in what order if they would just tell us there plans. Companies refusing to give some transparency to their customers are generally hiding something. And that what it appears here too.
The only thing sid about features is they are priorities. but nothing about when what order if they have started etc. All it says to me is, They sure wish they knew how to implement something like gamecenter, We might figure it out one of these days but don't tell the users we really have no clue cause they will all leave for something else.
I got news for you. Most of us are not gonna leave if you would just be honest with us. We are here not for the features that maybe coming. we are here because we like the tool, some have no real other choice since coding of some sort would be required so what are you worried about there.
Just give us some real answers.
Remember the "we're gonna answer 10 questions posted to twitter" crap you did a while back. Yet another runaround.
tenrdrmer said: I dont wont give near as big of a !@#$% what feature may or may not be coming and in what order if they would just tell us there plans. Companies refusing to give some transparency to their customers are generally hiding something. And that what it appears here too.
Everything I've mentioned above in this thread is a high priority for the GameSalad development team. I'm working on a public roadmap to post for the community, but the nature of software development, and especially agile development does not allow me to tie down features to a release. They are on the schedule. Some are with our design team, others have moved and are assigned to developers for implementation, others still are with our QA team, testing away and either pushing on to Sous-Chefs or sending back to developers for fixes.
Also, we've been in the process of rapidly growing our development team, which can be a bit of a double-edged sword. One, it's super awesome. We're going to have more developers which means more will be implemented faster. It means more bodies on bug fixing and stability improvements. Two, it limits bandwidth for an amount of time, as those who would normally be programming and laying the groundwork for this all this awesome stuff are tasked with performing the due diligence and rigorous interviewing that comes with recruiting new development talent.
I understand that you still want a roadmap, with at least the features I've discussed prioritized. They will not be tied to dates or even release numbers, it's just not how the system works. Ranking them in terms of priority is more than possible, and will be done.
tenrdrmerMember, Sous Chef, Senior Sous-ChefPosts: 9,934
Everything I've mentioned above in this thread is a high priority for the GameSalad development team. I'm working on a public roadmap to post for the community, but the nature of software development, and especially agile development does not allow me to tie down features to a release. They are on the schedule. Some are with our design team, others have moved and are assigned to developers for implementation, others still are with our QA team, testing away and either pushing on to Sous-Chefs or sending back to developers for fixes.
Also, we've been in the process of rapidly growing our development team, which can be a bit of a double-edged sword. One, it's super awesome. We're going to have more developers which means more will be implemented faster. It means more bodies on bug fixing and stability improvements. Two, it limits bandwidth for an amount of time, as those who would normally be programming and laying the groundwork for this all this awesome stuff are tasked with performing the due diligence and rigorous interviewing that comes with recruiting new development talent.
I understand that you still want a roadmap, with at least the features I've discussed prioritized. They will not be tied to dates or even release numbers, it's just not how the system works. Ranking them in terms of priority is more than possible, and will be done.
That would be great.
And I realize the nature of development means you cant guarantee it all at a certain time but you cannot tell me there are no realistic goals for each release. I'm saying the community is going to be more accepting and respect your humility much more when you you plan on something being in a release and you step and say sorry guys this ones not coming we're having some issues implementing it. then just hiding behind a general statement of all of this is a high priority for us too.
...No... Ive worked in software development teams, working & scheduling with Agile systems, and to say that you cannot tie tasks down to specific releases is just complete hogwash, and your trying to use it as an excuse.
We worked to milestones, and aimed to have a set list of tasks completed for each milestone date. For the most part we'd succeed, and on the occasions where we didnt, the task would get re-assessed and then moved back into the following milestone, and any knock on effects would then be re-adjusted too.
To say flat out that you cannot put tasks within set milestones/release schedules just says that you dont actually have things as under control and well organised as they should be... from what your saying, your version of Agile sounds more like some sort of unorganised free-for-all.
Using Agile development as justification for not giving a proper roadmap is just wrong.
tenrdrmerMember, Sous Chef, Senior Sous-ChefPosts: 9,934
...No... Ive worked in software development teams, working & scheduling with Agile systems, and to say that you cannot tie tasks down to specific releases is just complete hogwash, and your trying to use it as an excuse.
We worked to milestones, and aimed to have a set list of tasks completed for each milestone date. For the most part we'd succeed, and on the occasions where we didnt, the task would get re-assessed and then moved back into the following milestone, and any knock on effects would then be re-adjusted too.
To say flat out that you cannot put tasks within set milestones/release schedules just says that you dont actually have things as under control and well organised as they should be... from what your saying, your version of Agile sounds more like some sort of unorganised free-for-all.
Using Agile development as justification for not giving a proper roadmap is just wrong.
This is what i'm saying most of us understand that Goals are not set in stone going to happen. but to say you cannot even set them is bull. most of us are adults and can handle the news that a gal wont be meet but come on show some ambition and set some goals so we know what your shooting for with each release.
Heck even in my apps I Set goals for my self to have x number of levels designed for each release. and implement a certain feature with the next build. If your not setting those goals they your not prioritizing anything and your priority list you claim you will post will not mean anything other that GameSalad dishing out another runaround
With a regular market you might have to be vague about when things will be implemented in software because users don't know what it's like to make these things, but with GS, everyone has experience creating programs. Some of us even know code so don't be afraid to explain to us exactly what is happening. Especially if you are having problems. We're one of the few markets that will be able to sympathize.
Understood. This feedback definitely helps as I work on a public facing roadmap. Maybe the middle ground is prioritizing our features in terms of target quarters. Maybe how many releases we hope to have in a quarter and the features we aim to have included. That would allow me to put some kind of time frame to it, without pinning a feature to a specific release. Would that kind of roadmap be helpful as to what you're looking for?
-- Yodapollo
tenrdrmerMember, Sous Chef, Senior Sous-ChefPosts: 9,934
Understood. This feedback definitely helps as I work on a public facing roadmap. Maybe the middle ground is prioritizing our features in terms of target quarters. Maybe how many releases we hope to have in a quarter and the features we aim to have included. That would allow me to put some kind of time frame to it, without pinning a feature to a specific release. Would that kind of roadmap be helpful as to what you're looking for?
-- Yodapollo
That would be a huge step in the right direction in my opinion.
Thank You. Now since the bitching never stops when might we see such a thing?
Due to the nature of bugs being reported on each release, is it possible you can increase your beta testing team? A few people here would be glad to fill out bug reports and not report them to the forum etc.
tenrdrmerMember, Sous Chef, Senior Sous-ChefPosts: 9,934
TwistedMech said: Due to the nature of bugs being reported on each release, is it possible you can increase your beta testing team? A few people here would be glad to fill out bug reports and not report them to the forum etc.
I'm pretty sure all sous-chefs are beta testers. So I think that promotion is prob needed if you want to do that.
This might have been mentioned before, so my post might be redundant: App memory limitations for image intense apps is limiting developers right now, if they want to create apps with plenty of high quality images. Every image loaded adds up to the memory, and after so many images loaded, for example by switching the scenery backdrop image so many times, or a puzzle game image (like in my "3x3 Puzzle" App, which is limited to 52 pictures due to memory overload), it gets to the app crash point, for example at 130 MB or so for an iPodTouchRetina. One way of being better than the competition as an app developer is excellent graphics, and plenty of them, and that right now gets easily beyond the memory limits, even though, images should be treated like the call to play music, it should not stay permanently in temporary, and limited memory. An App can be up to 2GB, but if embedded images when called are clogging up memory, only a tiny fraction of the possible app size can actually be used, apparently about 60MB, so, about 3%. Meaning, theoretically an app should be able to use about 30 times as many pictures as is possible with GS right now due to a missing memory release. I wish this issue would get top priority, so I can program without these limitations.
Comments
Game Center can give players a reason to play - and keep playing!
In-app purchases are a way for apps to make money.
It's the FarmVille/CityVille model. The game is free to play. It's played by millions of people. Many of the big MMORPGs are going with this model. It's excellent marketing, as it includes repetition. That orange cat for FarmVille might seem like an incredibly expensive purchase at first, but overtime it might seem like a cool purchase.
Typical scenario...
• First, the game is strange and alien.
• Oh, but it's free and my friends are playing, maybe I'll try it.
• Hey, I like this game. I want to keep playing.
Then the in-app purchases go to work...
• Hey, my friends are doing better than me. I'll buy stuff to catch-up
• ...or... that cat is so cute. I think I'll buy it for my farm.
• ...or... I really like this game. It's OK to spend some money on it.
They might see a FarmVille card in Best Buy, or they might decide to use their credit card to buy a nice big house. Whatever reason, the percentage of players that do buy stuff make the game successful for everyone. Without the FarmVille version of in-app purchases, would the game even work? Would Facebook be as successful?
I don't like Facebook, but I think FarmVille is a great game. It's well-made, but would it even exist if there wasn't the FarmVille/CityVille equivalent of in-app purchases? I don't think it would be as popular or successful as it is now.
I truly hope the team listen to this. Do NOT focus on features such as In-app purchasing at this point. Such a feature is beneficial to the developer, not the end user. Gamecenter is however user centric, and actually adds value to a game, which is exactly what more GameSalad games need. Either that, or other forms web based interactions (facebook etc).
There are also more important developer tools that should be implemented before In-App; to allow for the creation of better content, not new methods of charging for what currently *isn't selling* very well.
The announcement of pause for the next release is a good first move.
The lack of social features in GS games is a huge handicap, and puts us at a clear disadvantage... the whole appstore games culture has evolved around onboard leaderboards of some kind or another, and its now become an expected part of a games design. Social features definately help to increase a games lifespan, giving players a continuing reason to keep coming back and replay games.
Arrays for example are another much needed feature that needs to come ahead of In-App... unless we just want to carry on seeing physics based block games being the mainstay of GameSalad built games. Without Arrays theres a whole heap of game genres that are to a degree unfeasable... but would be easily doable with the feature added. Theres a reason no ones done an RPG, Quiz or stat heavy game with GS... and it shouldnt be that way.
So I join QS wholeheartedly in his opinions regarding where the GS priorities should lay....
In-App purchasing should be way down the list...
Well said! Certainly, In-App purchasing is on our roadmap, but it's a hard sell for top priority when we look at the demand for things like tables/arrays, polygon collision, and actors referencing each other - all items that substantially increase the range of games that could be built with GameSalad.
-- Yodapollo
I think that should be number 1 priority feature wise. In - App Purchase I think should be number 2 on the main feature list but number 1 on the monetizing features.
Like youve already said...communicating with the community is now going to be a big priority, so why not just do the one big thing on the communication front that people have been hassling for!
A proper roadmap helps give your users something to plan against...and also helps drive the software forward. It gives your users a greater degree of trust in the product and GS as developers....
It doesnt have to be set in stone, and is always open to changes, but at least it lets us know what your working on, when we might expect to see it, and how it might affect our plans and the projects were currently working on.
So when the community is asking for a Roadmap, its not because we're wanting to just hassle you guys...its because were wanting you to work more closely with us.
...does that mean theyre already coming in the next update?... or more worryingly does that mean theyre just not high up on the GS list?....
Certainly didn't mean anything by not mentioning GameCenter and other social features. I was just trying to make a point in relation to actual game mechanics. GameCenter and social features are definitely important to us.
-- Yodapollo
Granted I could be wrong. Maybe there's some roadblock in there that would require some major overhaul to get it working. Only the GS programmers really know for sure.
See it still sends the wrong message when its mentioned over and over and you don't provide an answer to that part but choose to answer bits of other questions.
We want to see the goals and what you are shooting for on a time frame of goals.
For instance: (this is hypothetical obviously)
GameSalad Roadmap:
0.9.2 Shooting for March - 2011
- More Memory/performance issue
- GameCenter implemented with Leader boards and achievements for Pro users
- In-App Purchasing for Scene Additions only (you can sell more levels just not ammo, weapons, lives, etc…) - Pro Only
0.9.3 Plan - Shooting for May 2011
- More Memory/performance issues
- Facebook/Twitter integration for posting scores, achievements, etc. - Pro Only
- Polygonal Collisions - Possibly Pro Only
- Full Page iAds - Pro Only
0.9.4 plan - Shooting For July 2011
- Memory/performance issues Solved
- tables/arrays
- Full Game Center Support
0.9.5 + Plan
Fully Automated mind reading art drawing engine that produces your game including art work directly from your thoughts - Pro Only Of course.
Something as simply laid out as that would make so many people happy you have no idea.
And then, Here's the Kicker, If you can't include a feature by the road map goal or are going to be pushing the estimated release date back just tell us and tell us why. not some BS runaround excuses which answer no questions.
People will be much more forgiving when you are honest and forthcoming with them. Yes there will still be those who you could not please if you gave them everything they wanted in the engine and then gave them an xcode build they could further modify on their own. But the community can deal with those people as long as the community has a majority that believe you/GameSalad are not bullSh1ting us.
The two should not be separated.
Making a good game is no guarantee of success. And some awful rubbish seems to sell too. But I honestly believe you have a better chance of success making a good, polished game than just chucking out lots of rubbish and hoping something sticks.
Instead of thinking 'That'll do', think bigger. If there are bugs in your game, try and fix them! If the graphics aren't up to par, get better ones. If the gameplay's dull, add something to make it more exciting! If the controls suck, change them!
There's a reason why the more successful GS games do well. Because they are polished and the people that make them have tried to think not of themselves first, but the end user.
We are all, collectively, in competition with not just eachother or those that use Corona. We should be seeing EVERY game out there as competition.
And to compete with them, we need to be able to make better games and offer the same feature sets that customers are accustomed to on the app store. So that, at the very worst, people say 'this was a bad game' -not 'this was a bad GameSalad game'.
My early games had some interesting ideas, but where rubbish really. I learned my lesson, and try really hard to make better and better games.
I sincerely hope that when people ask for new features, they are features that allow us to compete and make better games. Not just another call for monetizing crap.
/endsheepyrant
QS
Dr. Sam Beckett never returned home...
Twitter: https://twitter.com/Quantum_Sheep
Web: https://quantumsheep.itch.io
Hell if a features not gonna happen. Just say so. If its not at the top of your priorities just say so. Quite leaving it open to speculation.
I dont wont give near as big of a !@#$% what feature may or may not be coming and in what order if they would just tell us there plans. Companies refusing to give some transparency to their customers are generally hiding something. And that what it appears here too.
The only thing sid about features is they are priorities. but nothing about when what order if they have started etc. All it says to me is, They sure wish they knew how to implement something like gamecenter, We might figure it out one of these days but don't tell the users we really have no clue cause they will all leave for something else.
I got news for you. Most of us are not gonna leave if you would just be honest with us. We are here not for the features that maybe coming. we are here because we like the tool, some have no real other choice since coding of some sort would be required so what are you worried about there.
Just give us some real answers.
Remember the "we're gonna answer 10 questions posted to twitter" crap you did a while back. Yet another runaround.
Quit BSing and give some answers.
I agree, the info isn't as forthcoming as any of us would like.
*My* point was that the priority of features that go on the wishlist should reflect more what our customers are asking for.
Cheers,
QS
Dr. Sam Beckett never returned home...
Twitter: https://twitter.com/Quantum_Sheep
Web: https://quantumsheep.itch.io
Also, we've been in the process of rapidly growing our development team, which can be a bit of a double-edged sword. One, it's super awesome. We're going to have more developers which means more will be implemented faster. It means more bodies on bug fixing and stability improvements. Two, it limits bandwidth for an amount of time, as those who would normally be programming and laying the groundwork for this all this awesome stuff are tasked with performing the due diligence and rigorous interviewing that comes with recruiting new development talent.
I understand that you still want a roadmap, with at least the features I've discussed prioritized. They will not be tied to dates or even release numbers, it's just not how the system works. Ranking them in terms of priority is more than possible, and will be done.
And I realize the nature of development means you cant guarantee it all at a certain time but you cannot tell me there are no realistic goals for each release. I'm saying the community is going to be more accepting and respect your humility much more when you you plan on something being in a release and you step and say sorry guys this ones not coming we're having some issues implementing it. then just hiding behind a general statement of all of this is a high priority for us too.
...No... Ive worked in software development teams, working & scheduling with Agile systems, and to say that you cannot tie tasks down to specific releases is just complete hogwash, and your trying to use it as an excuse.
We worked to milestones, and aimed to have a set list of tasks completed for each milestone date. For the most part we'd succeed, and on the occasions where we didnt, the task would get re-assessed and then moved back into the following milestone, and any knock on effects would then be re-adjusted too.
To say flat out that you cannot put tasks within set milestones/release schedules just says that you dont actually have things as under control and well organised as they should be... from what your saying, your version of Agile sounds more like some sort of unorganised free-for-all.
Using Agile development as justification for not giving a proper roadmap is just wrong.
Heck even in my apps I Set goals for my self to have x number of levels designed for each release. and implement a certain feature with the next build. If your not setting those goals they your not prioritizing anything and your priority list you claim you will post will not mean anything other that GameSalad dishing out another runaround
Understood. This feedback definitely helps as I work on a public facing roadmap. Maybe the middle ground is prioritizing our features in terms of target quarters. Maybe how many releases we hope to have in a quarter and the features we aim to have included. That would allow me to put some kind of time frame to it, without pinning a feature to a specific release. Would that kind of roadmap be helpful as to what you're looking for?
-- Yodapollo
Thank You. Now since the bitching never stops when might we see such a thing?
We're are currently hiring for a variety of positions, and that includes trying to increase the size of our QA team.
-- Yodapollo
Maybe have the road map like Corona's road map?
(http://www.anscamobile.com/resources/roadmap/)
You could have Top, High, and Low priorities.
Thanks.
I was thinking along the lines of something like that, but discussion on this thread suggests a roadmap like that doesn't provide quite enough detail.
-- Yodapollo