I remember on the stream that Adam and Nat would like to know how, we as the community want the roadmap stream to be like, and what other information should they include on the roadmap update? Here are some of the things I think they could do as of right now? 1. In each roadmap update, they could include one photo of the upcoming route that they plan on making such as the upcoming Lucern route and the Harlem Line, and so forth that way we will all be hype up and happy about how it looks like, and give positive feedback that would help the team, in case if something on the route doesn't look right, that way they won't have to go back and fix it at the last minute or when the route is released. We want to make sure they get it right the first time before the final release. The picture could be concept art, 3d modeling, station, anything that is related to that route. 2. Another thing that I think they should do is tell us what step is the team at for the process of the route, such as what stage they are in, that way we will know where they are at in terms of route building stages and is it close to being released, instead of not getting any update at all, and left in the dark. They could have just given us a sneak peek of the upcoming route such as the Harlem Line by giving us one photo, and that would have been enough, but instead, they didn't. How is one photo going to hurt them or us in any way? I think they could have done that but anyhow this is the only thing I can think of at the moment.
I’m against teasers in the roadmap. These forums are a testament to the failure of inflated expectations. Hype is bad for us.
Stirring the pot a little, but how about ditching the roadmap stream entirely focusing on article instead. Then running a state of the game stream once a month to cover unanswered questions.
I would support this as, ultimately, it’s where we keep going all the time the roadmaps are unsatisfactory. It would break the circle a bit and mean that we would get more meaningful content. The downside for DTG would be that the informal ‘let’s play’ streams in the meantime may get spammed for updates
How about ditching the roadmap stream (Which has kind of turned into a "why isn't this stuff released already" stream in the last few months), have the article listing what's being worked on with a 1-10 rating on completion (with 1 being "we're thinking about it", 5 being core works (route building, loco building etc) and 8 & 9 being beta and QA testing. Then people can actually see where things are in the process and it avoids all the nonsense posts and questions about when things are being released. That the 313 would have stayed at "4" for six months would have been easy enough to see With regards to having "state of the game" every month. This would then become quickly meaningless as all people really want to know is when is a specific fix going to be released, or route going to be fixed. The "state of the game" is hardly ever a big issue... That people can't complete runs, have broken routes six months (or more) after release, see no movement on things like expansion packs, route merges etc and yet are being given the ability to share fake liveries and have real time advert changes makes some people wonder where the focus on players is, because fine, multi-coloured containers looks much better than all red ones, but sitting at a red light for ten minutes waiting for it to (never) clear will mean you may never see another container again after you uninstall the game We've seen too many "state of the game" type streams where we get "we know we've messed up, we're sorry and we'll change. The change hasn't been released yet, so until it is I would stick to where you are. Get Adam or even better the person who's arranging the releases on stream. If not get you on there with them on instachat so you can get direct answers as to when things are actually going to be fixed at the player end. I'm sure we'd all appreciate knowing when the game we want to play will allow us to actually play it as it should be
I think this would be the best option. I have it on right now playing in the background but I don't watch it live with full attention anymore
Yes please. Lately I haven't watched the roadmap streams. It's not a good source to find specific information. Too often I've spent 1 tot 2 hours watching a stream and not be any wiser in regard of the things that I'd like to know. An article costs considerably less amount of time to read, so would be my preferred method of sharing information. As for a "state of the game stream to cover unanswered questions", I'd be in favor of any Q&A stuff, but why does it have to be a stream? Last years Q&A stream I encountered the same problem as with many roadmap streams; after spending 1 to 2 hours watching, I barely got any new interesting information out of it. Wouldn't an article format (FAQ?) work better?
Only if it answered your specific questions, which may not get answered if they're not the ones DTG want to answer, ie same as the streams
Not sure it's related, but just thinking out loudly here. I've seen cases where game developers have some kind of tracker on their community forums which only show messages posted by staff. I wonder if that could be a useful thing on these forums. Right now, I have no clue which topics DTG staff replies in, there may be a lot of interesting bits of information, or questions like yours, which I simply don't notice. Such a tracker would make finding these posts a lot easier, and since it all runs automated, doesn't cost you any more time once it's implemented. You're posting these messages anyways, it just makes them easier to find for us.
I know an article-alike/FAQ format rather than a stream format doesn't increase the chances of my questions getting answered, but it does take me considerably less time to find out wether my questions has been answered or not. Reading an article/FAQ doesn't take 1 to 2 hours, and when it's divided into categories with headers, allow me to skip certain sections that do not interest me. For example, I'm not interested in a 30-minute discussion about the PS5 problem because the problem doesn't affect me, yet I cannot skip the part in the video since I do now know when it ends and the next 'category' begins.
I like the idea, but the articles should make up for the lack of the stream. What I mean is this: As it stands, articles now give very little (essentially zero) indication of what state a product is in (planning, early development, late development, testing, ...). The streams are the only place you can get some insight into how things are progressing (for example Adam's update on Skyhook's Horseshoe Curve in the last stream). If some of this information could be shared in the articles (in whatever way you feel confident is reliable), the articles would be a lot more helpful. Still having a stream once in a while - like monthly as you suggest - is a good way to give an opportunity to ask questions directly, should the need arise. While I'm still tuning in to every roadmap stream I can attend right now, they've evolved from a genuinely helpful and interesting source of information to mostly one hour of Adam apologising that his stuff hasn't been released yet and Nat summarising what's already in the article.
True, so long as the article is organised by platform else you're going to skim read past the PS5 problem to find that the problem you do have is either there or not
I dont watch the stream. Is there any point? To me the stream tends to cause more confusion amongst the board dwellers anyway cross that their "thing" hasnt been answered or is still at the bottom of the roadmap. I read the article and then shift through the "fall out" from the article and the resulting "issues" from the live stream to determine what is going on. I am guilty too. All I am interested in now is the bugs on the London Commuter to be fixed so I can finish all the scenarios... pretty please. The pretty photos of WIP is nice as some of the explanation, rather than a boring list. thanks DTG Protagonist
