Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Chaoz]

Pre-alpha

Pre-alpha refers to all activities performed during the software project before testing. These activities can include requirements analysis, software design, software development, and unit testing. In typical open source development, there are several types of pre-alpha versions. Milestone versions include specific sets of functions and are released as soon as the functionality is complete.

Alpha

The alpha phase of the release life cycle is the first phase to begin software testing (alpha is the first letter of the Greek alphabet, used as the number 1). In this phase, developers generally test the software using white box techniques. Additional validation is then performed using black box or gray box techniques, by another testing team. Moving to black box testing inside the organization is known as alpha release.
Alpha software can be unstable and could cause crashes or data loss. External availability of alpha software is uncommon in proprietary software. However, open source software, in particular, often have publicly available alpha versions, often distributed as the raw source code of the software.
The alpha phase usually ends with a feature freeze, indicating that no more features will be added to the software. At this time, the software is said to be feature complete.

from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_release_life_cycle

so as you can see going by that definition Anteworld has every right to be in alpha stage since testing has begun and not all features are already present...

[zuluknob]

err...no. as near zero development has been done on anteworld(you could crowbar craters into the gameplay category but i think they are more for the potential licencees, like the latest addition...smoke). All work has been done on the outerra engine/editor(even cameni said as much in a separate post)(yes i know that they need a engine to put the game into and they have it). I suggest that people have a look in the forum for what the devs described the anteworld game to be and realise that as yet the game only exists in their minds and on the forum. outerra.exe is just that...outerra not anteworld.

[PRiME]

I'm sure if they had a larger team to get these features in for anteworld they would, atm from what I have read they are focusing on core engine components such as rendering (ati/nvidia) performance and stability. Which is part of anteworld and common for alpha development (check steam early access and you will find many titles in this stage 'starforge/kineticvoid' etc). So until they expand their workforce from 2 core developers I don't think we will see too much playful features added. 

In saying all that it would be a wise idea for the lads to try and find a way to move along allot faster before some big company comes down and steals all the ideas and builds a better engine in a fraction of the time (due to them having hundreds or more staff capable of doing it). Atm I don't really see anyone doing that 'just yet' except other indie developers because AAA companies don't believe in procedural programmer for the larger part (in my observations).

[cameni]

err...no. as near zero development has been done on anteworld(you could crowbar craters into the gameplay category but i think they are more for the potential licencees, like the latest addition...smoke). All work has been done on the outerra engine/editor(even cameni said as much in a separate post)(yes i know that they need a engine to put the game into and they have it). I suggest that people have a look in the forum for what the devs described the anteworld game to be and realise that as yet the game only exists in their minds and on the forum. outerra.exe is just that...outerra not anteworld.

Yes, that's right, we said as much. And we also said that engine needs work before the imagined game play can be added. Everyone seems to understand that.
Now, you are basically complaining that the development is too slow and the game is far yet, and suggesting to dumb it down and cut it short and get just any game play in there, right? Might set up a poll to see if many people think that, but so far it doesn't look like it was the case.

If you are complaining that Anteworld cannot be called an alpha game because of whatever definition of an alpha game, then we simply just don't agree there.

[PytonPago]

err...no. as near zero development has been done on anteworld(you could crowbar craters into the gameplay category but i think they are more for the potential licencees, like the latest addition...smoke). All work has been done on the outerra engine/editor(even cameni said as much in a separate post)(yes i know that they need a engine to put the game into and they have it). I suggest that people have a look in the forum for what the devs described the anteworld game to be and realise that as yet the game only exists in their minds and on the forum. outerra.exe is just that...outerra not anteworld.

Yes, that's right, we said as much. And we also said that engine needs work before the imagined game play can be added. Everyone seems to understand that.
Now, you are basically complaining that the development is too slow and the game is far yet, and suggesting to dumb it down and cut it short and get just any game play in there, right? Might set up a poll to see if many people think that, but so far it doesn't look like it was the case.

If you are complaining that Anteworld cannot be called an alpha game because of whatever definition of an alpha game, then we simply just don't agree there.

 ... no need to have the mood getting down, he just hasnt gone trough the forum properly before posting (and he may have done that by now already after some reactions, and understood) ...

I dont think there is any reason to go this debate along, except getting links to some threads about antenworld plans and your dev. financing method chosen for the easy-way approaching people.

[zuluknob]

No i am suggesting that you do what nearly everyone else does to get a kickstarter/indegogo or suchlike campaign going, that is to create a section of your world that is much more fleshed out and less buggy for people to see. At no point have i suggested that you leave it at that. The only reason to fence it off to an island for the demo is so you can limit the work you have to do on the biomes.

My complaint such as it is, it's really an attempt to get you and others to see sense, is that since the model importer you have worked(excluding bugfixes and things you haven't shown us yet) on rocks, craters and now smoke(unless your potential licencees are world of tanks not much use atm) While those are needed in the long run for the engine, as far as what anteworld alpha demo needs they are far down the list. There are much more important things to do.

If your recent work is to satisfy a potential licencee i hope you have a written contract of intention to buy with figures already negotiated for when you have all the things they need for their production working or they could turn round at any point and say...sorry but we have decided to go with a more established engine.

I guess that it would take you all of a day(if that) to add a player char that can walk, run, jump and crouch as it would be just manipulating a camera(how many first person games can you see the player char in? not that many, so its not needed yet). How much longer to copy and modify the crater part to add in digging or inverting it to fill in holes or add mounds and make it persistent(save the table you are using)? How long to add in an inventory and interface? The ability to pick up and place/drop objects? Seeing as how you can already interact with models you load in not too much i guess, and i'm sure if you asked the community they would be happy to provide you with items. As most of that is just copying and modifying your existing code i am guessing that most of that could be done in a couple of weeks maybe a month. It will need more than just those things though before a demo but it is a start.

Even with loads of videos published on youtube, there are all of just over 3000 people registered here, why? Because everyone i show outerra too say the same thing...."ooh...pretty...what can you do?" When i show them they say..."so its an editor?" and their interest stops there. Having a playable game demo will bring in more customers and once you have more money coming in you can get more staff and move things forward at a faster rate.

No one in their right mind would run a fundraising campaign by nearly finishing their game before showing it off. They make a small area work nicely with a lot of the basic features enabled and not too many bugs. It's why i showed you planet explorers, but you chose to go on about how its made in unity and missing the point, crappy looking and using an existing engine though it is, people are excited about it and willing to give them money because of the gameplay, a gameplay which sounded similar to anteworld in some ways.

It looks like you are relying on selling the engine to fund the game when it's usual to do it the other way round. Make a propper demo(not an engine demo like now), get funding via a campaign, get more staff, work on both at the same time with a view of finishing the game before the engine is totally finished, sell the game, "finish" the engine, sell the engine to everyone interested and roll about in big piles of cash.

[pasto]

as i understood, money is not the problem. time is. with core engine components more people does not always mean faster development (if you dont want to sacrifice the quality)... good software is usually made by very small teams and as soon as the core is ready (basic toolset with stable architecture), you can employ an army of programmers / artists.

[necro]

The question is, why do you care about the money outerra wont earn because of not being a finished demo? Its not your money, so calm down. In my opinion  the projectowners should decide what and when parts will be implemented. I am so lucky that there is no big publisher who is stressing the development all over the time.

You free to create your own world engine. You can create thousands of islands if you wont. Noone is forcing you to take outerra for your "projects".

[zuluknob]

I care because i don't want to see their engine become just another failed attempt. The past is littered with failed game engines good and bad, most of them failing due to lack of funds.

 lol @ the publisher comment, have you not read cameni's comments. "things going on behind the scenes"...."licencees" from what cameni has said, it sounds like a company or other entity is interested in their engine, but they want more functionality before they consider licencing it from them. So it looks like your fear of someone else pulling the strings is the case.

Your failure to understand the existing island's purpose in an alpha demo is not my problem. Maybe you should read from the beginning before posting...
To which "projects" do you refer? Actually...don't bother to answer.

[ChookWantan]

This whole discussion is a recurring loop. We won't be able to convince Zulu that what we say is true, and he won't be able to convince us. Does this need to keep going?

[PytonPago]

I care because i don't want to see their engine become just another failed attempt. The past is littered with failed game engines good and bad, most of them failing due to lack of funds.

  ... i asure you, this project is going down only after Zeos, Cameni, Angrypig, Kelvinir, me and a lot of other people here drop dead after a FoxDie-like attack by microsoft  ... im not good at math - what would be the probability of that happening ? 

     As for my opinion, its better to have such open right-at-start pre-pre-alpha fun going on, as there is a lot of issues to be found and got resolved than just by a closed test-group. The suggestions from the people, and contributions in free-to-use stuff or theory makes them see better the expectations and push the limits of the engine further ... and make the community around it happy-er.
     why so soon to fund - well, many big companies have some investment-funds, small ones tend to work hard labor jobs some years to have some free months to do so, if not picked up by some investor (witch would conceal it at some ways to protect its investment and probably had an attitude of "your balls are mine, so do ..." at these developing guys).
      Yes, some people may take it as a bad joke .. tho, seems to work for the folks sticking to the OT project, and they have an idea of what it will take in means of time and work to be done to take it to a final engine (yes, a lot to do ... but we like to see it grow and poke them from time to time ) ... and they show the progress regularly, getting it to the test, so no issues there. And that is the main thing to be at a pre-pre-purschage project of any kind, to see that its not dying (as that is your point if i understand you properly). Asking Cameni how they do in this regard is just a post away anyway.

       As the license goes - its still an engine to sell as thought, so if finished it will be for sell to game/stuff developers to use. Doe freeware-content and community work there will be as by all the mod-able engines and games.

So ... Zulu, welcome, and stick by, comment and stop by for any progress, play whyte the importer or just have fun and discuss whyte people all your visions. People here are great, planet so big, things to model/import - a lot, devs. are save and sound, and responding, and working ... and if problems arrive - well, there is no unsolvable problem in this world (just a possible lack of will), so we handle them like real men!

[cameni]

It's why i showed you planet explorers, but you chose to go on about how its made in unity and missing the point, crappy looking and using an existing engine though it is, people are excited about it and willing to give them money because of the gameplay, a gameplay which sounded similar to anteworld in some ways.

I think it's you who is missing the point here, planet explorers can do gameplay because they don't need to implement the basic engine functionality required for that gameplay. You tend to simplify things by comparing it to something different and then neglecting the differences. Even though I believe your good intentions with this, this style of arguing by reducing apples to oranges and then comparing it to bananas leads absolutely nowhere.

Actually we aren't as much interested in licensing the engine, we don't imagine ourselves as a company forever providing just the support and not having any fun creating anything ours. We still need some income in the process, and we can't get funds by early licensing the engine for games because it's not yet usable in that regard (repeating: not even for our game yet). So we are licensing it for special simulators that can use it even in its current state, and that's providing us with some extra funds for further development as well. That's that thing "pulling the strings", but it's reasonable since at the moment it's the only area that can directly use the engine, apart from this tech demo that you are complaining about. Regardless of how you reduce and bananize the work needed to implement what is needed for the gameplay, of how you speak about fleshing out an island as if the procedural approach did care and we were manually preparing the terrain or what.

We are well aware that we have mostly special fans here and no significant portion of pure gamers that don't care about the technology and potential and see just a temporary fun. We know we would need to provide a gameplay to gain the interest of these, that's all true and fine. We will add the gameplay when we are able to do so, and when we can exploit the abilities of the engine with it.

I could repeat that thing about the engine that needs to be gotten into an usable state first, but you'd come out with some other reduction anyway because you know better.

All said, locking the thread to avoid further pointless looping.