Silari wrote: ↑Mon Jul 25, 2022 2:44 pm
TheRailmaker wrote: ↑Mon Jul 25, 2022 1:39 pm
So for me this means, its useless to suggest something here, cause nothing will happen.
There is an entire section of the forums that shows that is wrong:
viewforum.php?f=66 . 1100 threads of things people suggested that got into the game. Just because your suggestion didn't make it into the game doesn't mean they don't listen to them.
Same opinion as Koub. Any suggestion that managed to slip through our “quality process”
points to something, which will improve the gameplay-value.
That’s just our (the community) view. Nothing is wrong with it and we need to know it and the forum or discord is one of the best places to discuss it.
On the other side there is a software-development team, which knows much, much more than we. They have the truth. Because I’m myself also a software developer and have similar things on my desk and have visited them for a week some years ago, I think I can imagine how it works, but don’t take me too serious, because what follows is a lot of “professional guessing”, keep that in mind please! (Be free to correct me)
They have thousands of things they can do. There are things they must do:
- bug fixes.
- changes that come from outside, like regularities (changes on steam for example) or changes in operating systems.
- things they have promised (Factorio 1.2, see
viewforum.php?f=38)
- game-polishing (if a new game-mechanism works, but feels clumsily implemented)
- things that pop up in the community and give a lot of discussion
Below that I think they have some time to do things a developer wants to implement. You see that on things like the improvement of train-routing for example or the steady improvement of the lua-api. I think that’s an interesting point in Factorio development, that they don’t follow an exact plan and say instead if someone really likes to do something which we think is a good idea, then the dev is so involved that in the end a good product will come out.
We had seen many times that a new idea popped up in the forum and a devs immediately took it and implemented it. That’s eventually because the dev already worked on that part or because the implementation was so simple and gameplay-value so high. Or — another explanation I guess could be true — a dev had time to read the forum and liked an idea.
So in the end we can say wube gives the “needs” (I want this feature) of the devs a bit more weight than following a strict plan. And I think that explains a lot of things why Factorio is as it is and why it is a successful game.
Which doesn’t mean they don’t have a plan. See above: the higher priority is to implement Factorio 1.2 and fulfill their promises. To do that I think they have detailed plans what parts of the game-engine needs to be improved or replaced, so that a lot of new features fall “out of the bag”. Could be, that this thread will be implemented as part of a complete rewrite of tool handling or something like that.
That’s also interesting: as long as there is not too much pressure behind it, they don’t implement things that have low impact. Like this thread. Instead they try to look behind the curtain: now where we have enough experience with this, how can we improve the general aspect of it? And that results in an idea to replace big parts of the software with a new implementation which solves a lot more issues than just this simple feature and gives also the ability to experiment a wide range of more things to find an optimized solution. That’s why some suggestions are implemented after 6 years. It’s also because the team is relatively small for such a game. Development is quite slow. They could increase the team size, but that would dramatically change how they work. (A team of 20 developers cannot work in the same way as 10. The overhead of communication would kill them.)
The most important thought stands above that all: improvement of gameplay-value. There It could be, that a good idea turns out to be not a good game-improvement. They have not so much scruples to throw away many month of development, if it turns out to not been working. That’s very uncommon in game-industry (and most other software development I have seen).
Again: all above is based on observations I’ve made. There is much interpretation I put into! So don’t take me too serious! I could be completely wrong.
But if I’m half correct, we can say Factorio development is very agile and dependent on the personal interests of the devs. That’s not uncommon in game-industry (especially for Indy games), but we don’t see often, that new features go such deep into polishing and that fixing bugs is one of the highest priorities, but I think that’s part of the success.