Re: Anyone on this list?

["J. Perkins" <jason@379.com>]

A good point against the "release early/release often" approach. But by
developing in a bubble you lose a lot of valuable feedback. Where
appropriate, you could release a few small "technology tests". They did
this with the original quake - just a single, rather boring level that
you could run around on. Allowed them to find bugs and get some user
feedback, without really commenting on the quality of the game itself.

Jason
379
 


On Tue, 2002-10-29 at 16:04, Jan Ekholm wrote:
> This is actually a valid point. I've tried "a few" 10% finished games that
> didn't work, were a hassle to install/compile/run, just to see them crash.
> The result has been that I've got a mental image of the project as
> "immature", even though a lot of time may have passed, and the game may
> have matured into something very playable. This is the reason I want to
> lay low on anything I work on. When we/I have something that's close to
> a vision of an 1.0 version, then it's time to release.