Re: development cycles and design programs

Tim Jones wrote:
> 
> I think publishing games must be very similar to developing software
> and in which case schedule over runs are pretty much expected unless
> you take very firm control. I empathise and sympathise with AOG and CE
> with this respect and they are not actually that late compared to
> some real howlers in the computer games industry - Starfleet Academy
> was nearly a year late (anyone tried this?).
> 
> So slack cut.
> 
> I must admit I feel a bit jealous that some people already have the
> ESB for play testing and wonder how they got so lucky :-)
> 
> With regarding the soon to be available win32 ship designer and the
> soon to be modified design rules, I'm sure Stuart has taken this into
> account and designed his program to be flexible so that it can easily
> be upgraded for the new fleet book. I'd rather have a design program
> *now* than wait for the fleet book as it is going to probably be late
too,
> due to the nature of its development (no crticism of GZG intended).
> 
> I think we should all be grateful that Stuart is putting in a
considerable
> amount of personal time and not asking anything for it. I know I am.
> 
> sincerely
> tim jones
> --
> The stars are matter, We're matter, But it doesn't matter.

Humm...Maybe those writing the ship designer software should put a
toggle switch in.  So the user could switch between FT2 and FT3 design
rules...

Donald Hosford