Better Road Map Format?

Here is my two pence.
Last year we changed the format to moving away from showing every bug fix. Whilst it meant that some major issues were not shown, it meant that it was less clogged up. Like suggested a stickied thread being updated once a week would be great but we can wish.
What ever DTG say the roadmap was always something to look forward to, on the chance a new route would be announced.
This, I believe really got the community excited about what was coming up in the game. Yes there were the problems with things being on the roadmap for a very long time e.g. the 313. But the visual representation of how far along different projects were was great. Below is my vision of the perfect roadmap.

(Short introduction about what is going on etc..)


Next release - stuff that will most likely be released before the next roadmap.



Upcoming- stuff that has been very much finished and done a first round of testing, should not stay for more than 3/4 weeks in an ideal world.



In testing cycle - the main work has been done, and it is now in the testing, fix, testing, fix cycle.



In Production - The place where the item spends the most time. This is where the main development takes place.



In Planning - This is where the routes have the scope decided on, branch lines, locos etc.



Preservation Crew Focus - This shows the next few routes that the Preservation Crew will look at. No More than 2/3 sets at a time and all should be released less than 2 months after being added as the prime focus.



Preservation Crew Tasks - This shows what tasks the Preservation Crew will do e.g. Level crossings, Better skybox.



Removed From the roadmap - This shows what has been removed, and a short sentence about why.

Thanks For reading!

 

This is what killed the roadmap... Stone dead.
Just because people thought "well it's on the roadmap so it'll be out in a few weeks" doesn't mean that's how development works
The roadmap has always been "a document paved with good intentions", but life and commercial requirements get in the way. Of course the wolfpack on here and other forums just want their new shiny thing and don't actually care much why they can't have it right now.

There was absolutely nothing wrong with where the roadmap was 12 months ago. The problem is that people jump on every word said and every wishlist item discussed and then try to force DTG into their version of things. If that didn't happen we would still be getting a wishlist of items possibly forthcoming rather than the current radio silence, to avoid upsetting the wolfpack

 

The 313 did kill it, but not for that reason. It was meant to show a list of items that were being worked on with the oft used phase "if it isn't on the roadmap it isn't being worked on".

There is no way that the 313 was worked on constantly for that long, it just doesn't take that long to make a loco. It should have been removed and they should have said it isn't currently being worked on.

Indeed we still don't know the real story of the development of the 313 and what went on. All sorts of stories and theories about - was the 314 actually made first? Did they make a 313 then a better 314 and so scrap the first 313 and remake it based on the 314? Who knows.

At least now we have a timeframe for both sides of 6 months and if something isn't coming in the next 6 months it isn't on there.

 

The older roadmap format would work if there would be better clarity between Planning and Production phase. Maybe there should have been a Pre-production phase with items that are not being actively worked on.

The new format is probably better than the recent one (talking about the last few roadmaps that didn't have much going on). Time will tell.

But I hope they are going to cut down on the clutter. The new format is very hard to read with about 40% of the total roadmap length (not including the opening article) are the picture headers with Miscellaneous category taking the cake for total space wasted.


I hope the next roadmap will be more readable and will forecast more than yesterday's one.

 

Who knows, and indeed why should people actually care? The thing was on the roadmap and "in development" can mean many things, but if people want only what's being "actively worked on" on the roadmap then they shouldn't complain when things appear on there only a few weeks before release.
Can't have it both ways.

 

You forget the purpose of the roadmap is to give people something to complain about before release, as well as after.
Consider the rich emotional life of the forum members depressed one minute, exhilarated the next.

And all the while, wives and girlfriends regard us as autistic adolescents…

 

I dont care (about the roadmap) as long:

- content is improving
- content isnt get cut back
- content impresses with quality

So no vote in my case.

 

I didn't vote- where's the, "put the roadmap out of its misery" option?

 

The early roadmap with a year's worth of routes and locos on it was great.

But the playerbase (or a vocal portion of it) couldn't understand that it was a biweekly snapshot of current progress rather than a release schedule carved into stone. Definitely more trouble than it's worth to put all that out there.

 

The roadmap is not much better. It would be nice to have something like a percentage complete, maybe a rough indication like just started, well on the way, in test or delayed might be useful.