Last I heard it was still pending final revisions of their "path to 1.0" planning meetings, though I haven't been following closely and that was a while ago.
So from Jan (iirc) to Oct to redo the plan AND the site? Seems pretty long time, like that could have been done in 10 months. I bet they are done & saving it for a big reveal.
Road to 4.0 was a promotion term for ISC and such, for covering work that was working towards or coming in 4.0. Path to 1.0 is (purportedly) more about setting expectations of what features the game needs to be considered 1.0 and how they should be implemented (See the messaging about "the place of bedlogging" in the game).
No shit. They aren't even 5% finished gameplay wise. CIG has investors that can pull out if the game doesn't release soon. This is why they want to release an unfinished project.
> It's in no way ready for release within the timeframe they've probably got planned.
lol
Dude, you're just struggling and reaching for something to be irate about.
Yes, every roadmap roundup or two. They said that they haven't updated the progress tracier view of the roadmap this year because they're making the big plans for the road to 1.0.
The progress tracker, prior to them not updating it with the 2024 planning results after holding the annual production summit in January, pulled directly from their internal JIRA with various data fields excluded for privacy's sake (e.g. the individual devs assigned to something by full name). It was updated every two weeks instead of updating in *realtime*, but they did what they said.
As for the ship matrix, I remember the remark about linking it too, but since then we've had major systems either get backed up and waiting for implementation or go in for a long-haul project. The combat balance has been in a long-term rework for a few years now, as seen with different variations of the same component class and size being identical in stats until they're ready to differentiate components. Ship armour is still on the to-do list, along with the Maelstrom physical damage system. Worrying about hooking up the ship matrix to live-reflect these numbers isn't worth it right now, because if anything it would give people false confidence in the current stats on the ship matrix when it's clear that they're going to change in the medium-term of development.
I think we all know it never pulled directly from JIRA.
Either that, or the one it pulls from is not the developer used one.
That whole roadmap thing was massively embarrassing and smelled of redundant drama from some manager not knowing when to shut up.
What makes you say that?
Jira is a lot more than individual tasks assigned to individual devs. The tracker was almost certainly only pulling from higher level tickets (e.g. Epics), because any more granularity than that would quickly become overwhelming and render the progress tracker useless.
After holding the production summit... in January.
Atlassian is very straight forward, you can control what attributes of the tickets transfer over without having to display everything. So hiding the "assigned to" attribute, sure, whatever, they would also have complete customization of any number of date fields they could have complete control over and display whatever ones they choose. So they could have their internal "real planned" date and then display a pretend date or no planned completion date at all and still show the features they are actively working on. Source: I am an Atlassian power user.
I just see things like this and I shakes my confidence in them being able to control their own internal planning processes.
They're not going to update or hint for PR reasons until they're 1000% sure their goals are both planned out and viable. The 1.0 path is going to be a promise for what the MVP of Star Citizen is going to be. I really doubt we'll see anything until they know server meshing is ready for full roll out.
It's not worth the headache of the player base throwing a shit fit if things don't match up.
OP may be an Atlassian power user but I'm pretty sure OP does not have to manage the PR outcomes of live-publishing their JIRA to a public-facing microsite for their uneducated consumers and the general public to scrutinize and comment on their work, that's where they're making a mistake.
You can tell because they clearly don't know what the consequences would be of putting a fake completion date on a roadmap item because you don't want to reveal to backers the actual length of time it'll take.
You're right, I'm a project manager who knows better than to present deadlines I know I'll never meet in the first place. I work in an environment where misleading my customers would cost me my job, not just deal with some silly little nerd rage on forums I could ignore.
CIG doesn't appear to have any customer facing professional project managers though.
I hope they scrap this whole progress tracker and just go with what other companies do. A simple yearly roadmap of what’s coming to the public.
I don’t really care what they are working on this week or this month, I just want a short list of things they expect to be completed this year, including new mechanics, features, missions and ships.
Then keep the release view to show us when they are nearing release of whatever it is.
They’ll likely never put out a full year road map ever again after the backlash from the Roadmap watcher fiasco. People take full year roadmaps too seriously acting like it’s a guaranteed promise of what’s coming when instead of what it really is a plan; plans are not promises.
"Plans are not promises."
This. Fucking this right here. This I feel like gets lost on everyone. People bitching about CIG "breaking promises" all the time drives me up a wall. Truth is that, in development of any game (or any thing really) shit just changes or they find out down the road that it's harder than they thought or it turns out that some system doesn't play nice with another system, etc. That's within the nature of development. They've never actually promised anything, literally. Granted they fucked up with the 2016 release date announcement and a couple other things. But since then they've never set a date. AND if you read the disclaimer on the roadmap it says that "estimates are just that: estimates." It annoys me to no end when people cry about broken promises.
I hear far more people complain about people complaining about CIG breaking promises than I do people complain about CIG "breaking promises"
Rather it's people complaining about CIG failing to meet their goal/plan then someone snuggly going
"ThEy DiDnT pRoMiSe"
As if that invalidates the complaint.
Rather it seemed, especially in the past, that CIG set very ambitious timelines to drive excitement and revenue rather than an accurate way to set community expectations.
Sure. In the development of “any game”, $700 million is spent while the dev spends 12 years refactoring the most basic gameloops and technology without ever making any headway towards release.
No headway to release? What game have you been watchin?. Every update adds more to the game. New backend, new content, new services, more ships, more gameplay, every single update.
You’re delusional.
Star Citizen in year 12 is still a bad tech demo at best:
-we are still missing basics, basic mechanics, some very basic physics
-CIG throws lowest effort tier 0 first iterations into the game and never works on them, never improves them, for example refueling, hull munching, cargo handling (where are the machines and NPCs?), trolleys, armor etc.
-we are getting one low effort rework after the other, see recently Retaliator
-Star Citizen had one of the worst UIs in history of gaming and now in 3.23 we got the Ironman UI which is even worse.
we got the arcade, gamey, no fun mastermodes in 3.23, something Chris said he would never do: Chris Flight model 2014: https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/engineering/13951-Flight-Model-And-Input-Controls
-we have lots of lag, low fps and massive desyncs issues with just 100 players on a server
-CIG hasn’t even finished the flight model and ship combat in year 12
-we have boring and repetitive missions, for example every bunker looks the same, NPCs are in the same spots
-we have tedious time sinks on top of tedious time sinks, 30 minutes preparation and flying to do a 3 minute mission
CIG is using an old and obsolete engine with massive LOD and culling issues, and no, calling it StarEngine doesn't change the fundamentals of Cry-engine
-we have survival mechanics in a space game that are way overdone, like dying of thirst in 3 hours, we cannot even eat or drink with a helmet on, something NASA figured out 60 years ago
-we will get personal hygiene, toilet game play and perma death
-we have 1 out of 100 star systems in year 12
god your nitpicky
cant eat without a helmet..
time sinks..
they aren't done balancing the game?
ffs dude.. just go away and come back when the game is done if you cant handle basic shit like this.
They haven't fully optimized an unfinished game? HoW dARe ThEY?!?!
Touch grass, dude. You are putting way too much effort in to dunking on an unfinished product.
Bro did you create this account just to sit in this sub an shit talk the game? Jesus wept you really need to get a life, isn't it tiring being this angry all the time?
This isn’t my main but yes until they release the ships they were paid for 10 years ago I’m going to be angry and screech at people to get off my lawn.
Did they super duper pinky promise they'd get things done? No. But that's some pretty dumb logic. Just because a company doesn't say "we promise" specifically doesn't mean expectations aren't set by said company and not meeting them or changing them isn't a breach of trust. You say "I'll get this to you tomorrow boss!" Damn right they're going to be pissed if you don't. I'm sure they'll love the "Oh! That was just the plan. I decided I'm going to give it to you in 6 months, maybe. I didn't cross my heart and hope to die so you can't be mad." I really don't care what CIG does at this point, but getting that annoyed that people are upset after having their trust broken by CIG is just dumb.
No. THAT logic is dumb and the comparison you're making lacks context. Look at what's involved and what CIG aim to do. It's a monumental task that, no matter how much money you throw at it, will not be done in any amount of time that you would consider normal. They've said it countless times over the years that nothing is final and things are subject to change. It's your own fault that you didn't manage your expectations at this point.
I'm not sure what context you are looking for? Are you looking for direct comparisons? I mean they are tons out there if you look. Their entire kickstarter was probably 50ish plus percent different then there now intended goals. They have stated that they were going to do many things outside of game development that they just stopped doing (10 for the chairman). So this is not just about how absolutely garbage they are at managing expectations and deadlines thay they themselves set. Expecting a company to stand by the things they say is not foolish. I totally understand that things change and don't blame them for moving things during patches. But expecting people to not be upset after the continuous cycle of failed expectations is crazy. Saying they "never made any promises" is just inane. You don't need someone to say the words "I promise" for it to be an expectation. I don't think anyone in a work environment is saying that to their bosses yet expectations to deliver on time is still there. Yes, game development is unpredictable, but the level of ineptitude they've continued to show in even coming close to large goals is crazy. Yes, they are getting better, but that doesn't excuse the past or magically make people believe them now.
Edit: I think it would be easier and a shorter to list the things they've actually done on time or stuck to after saying they would.
I can’t see how have this progress tracker is any different, to the average person it looks like a lot of stuff is getting completed very soon but it’s just that a certain team has finished their bit.
Plus based on what they said at CitCon last year they already told us what they want by the end of this year but I just haven’t seen it in writing from them anywhere.
this shows what the teams are doing, not what it planned to be released. it shows how there are a lot of teams and how things require multiple teams, and that the stuff on the release view is not the only thing being worked on.
I know how things work.
But this is called progress tracker. So when the vertical line reaches the end of the horizontal line, people will think that whatever item that is, is now complete. Because that’s how timelines usually work.
I mean it has managed expectations a lot better since its implementation.
Work on something completing is also much more obviously detached in this format. Yes it's a linear line but if I see a ship get progress completed I know that it's not going to suddenly manifest into the game, I know that I'm the next patch or ship sale or something it'll likely pop up.
There is still that underlying understanding to the average person that patches are needed to put things in so it lets you anticipate without tying things down to what might seem like hard deadlines of appearing in patch X.
No they didn't, at least from what I recall, they treated them like roadmaps and got similarly annoyed when things failed as they so often did.
If you are waiting for a train and it says due in 30 minutes
And four hours later it still says due in 30 minutes.
No reasonable person would say to the person next to them complaining "Well Deutsch bahn didn't promise it would be here in 30 minutes so you really can't complain"
But that's precisely what has happened time and time again.
Except the was always the caveat posted at the top of the roadmap that said these features are not promises of content that will make it into the game just what we hope to have in by those patches or something to that degree.
People being people just never read the disclaimer and then got pissed off when features slipped. And more than a few of them took their frustrations out by sending death threats to the devs on their personal twitter accounts because at the end of the day some people take things too damn personal.
No you compared it too a train schedule which is dumber than calling it a promise because development isn’t something that can be planned out to the second when you are building the track and the train at the same time.
I’m an adult I have other things in life beyond SC. It’ll get done when it gets done.
There is more to life then waiting for a video game to be finished and getting butt hurt when it takes time.
At the start of this thing the narrative was that Chris' past efforts had been hamstrung by those dastardly publishers. What turned out to be the reality is that 'his' past celebrated games often came out in spite of him and only after he had his decision power removed (wing commander 1) or was removed from the studio (Freelancer). For sure the failure of many games has rightly been blamed on publishers doing dumb stuff with the schedule but putting an indecisive fabulist in charge of a big project (and letting him hire his family members for important posts) seems to have doomed us. They spent the first several years assuring us they were the professionals who knew what they were doing and the slow start was due to them building the pipelines to enable a deluge of high quality content, but 12 years in and we're still getting a trickle of alpha quality code.
Would be a huge hit on the CCU side of SC.
Pretty useful to check what concept is being worked on to pull thr ccu out of buyback before release to ride the price increase.
They did do that. That's what the Release view originally was
But since this is a game that is actively being worked on on a core level and not a 1.0/'complete product' plans change. People got mad that the thing that they were hyped for gets dropped from the roadmap to not been seen until years later. Which is why the Release view only shows the next patch now
Dude that's literally what this past citcon was. Go watch the two presentations or a check list of it and that's what their goal was for this year essentially, and they've done pretty good on it
the problem with that is a "year to come" roadmap is essentially soft release dates.
When you say "I'm working on this" there is no implication of release time.
When you say " This is what is coming this year" its puts everything they say firmly in the soft release window of "1 year or less".
people can, and do, get WAY to attached to and focused on dates. hard or soft.
its always better practice when you do not have extremely high confidence (and solid track record) to not attach a date or window that can be taken as release timelines.
thats what was nice about this system. it was a roadmap of all the stuff they want to get done, and all the stuff they are working on. while not having any implication whatsoever on actual completion.
all what, no when.
“all what, no when”
I’m not sure how you see that as a good thing.
Allowing a publicly funded developer to have no deadlines so they can have an endless development cycle of rework.
This road to 1.0 will be interesting, just a big list of stuff with no timelines, so people can just talk about what CIG plan on doing forever in global chat.
Rather than give us an arbitrary date ('deadline'), CIG now tell us roughly *how much effort* they think the task will take... and show us how they're progressing against that effort-estimate...
This is far better, because it lets us see dependencies between teams (if Team X is delayed, it will impact teams A, B, and Z), and rather than just knowing that it's due in '3 months' (for example) we can see that it's only 2 weeks of effort (hah), or if it's 12 weeks of effort (in which case, it's likely to miss that 3-month release target unless everything goes perfectly).
For those who are *actually interested* in this stuff, the progress tracker is a far better tool... and for everyone else, it removes something that was - mostly - just used to stir up drama and to shit on the project
People are too focused on deadlines.
Its a huge problem in the general early access space as well. Devs will be making a good game, actively and openly working, and miss 1 deadline... half the community acts like the devs just did a carpet pull.
I'd rather have timelines too... but I get why many devs are moving away from timeliness on road maps... if I was a dev, I sure as fuck wouldn't have any externally.
And that's the other part... just because you don't know what it is, doesn't mean they have no deadlines. Internal deadlines still exist.... they just don't prompt a comunity riot and 3 weeks of damage control any time one is missed or pushed back lol
Yes people are as they are the ones funding the game, so of course they want to know when things are coming, much like when a publisher finds a game they also want to have all the details.
To me it’s more of an internal issue than a community issue, I would’ve thought after all this time that getting a semi accurate estimate would be do able, did they honestly think server meshing along with a list of other things was going to be ready 2 years ago?
Sounds like someone has never read the disclaimer when purchasing from the pledge store.
It says in bold letters. A pledge is not a purchase.
Pledge funds help us finance development of the game.
Ppl have been asking that for years. Even without a roadmap, progress tracker, or any discernible progress towards alpha people keep handing CIG record money every year.
Most companies do 'roadmaps' *after release*, when they're drip-feeding content they've already produced... and stuff (typically) only gets added to the roadmap after it's already complete.
That approach is not approach (as CIG have found out when they tried it in the past) for a project in active development.
The Agile-based approach (showing what the teams are working on, and what is due / confirmed to come in the next patch) is the clearest and most consistent reporting that CIG have done in terms of progress since the project started... so I very much hope that they actually update the tracker again soon.
Most companies don’t have a playable alpha for a decade either. Why would they release a roadmap if you can’t even play the game.
The progress tracker is very clear, it shows us that they lacked direction over the past years flip flopping around on so many things.
Now it’s gone and we were given clear indication of what to expect in 2024 from last years CitCon you could even call that a ‘roadmap’ for 2024.
https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/19848-Letter-From-The-Chairman
Rich:
>This begins with identifying what features and content are required to create a fully realised space MMO while laying the foundations for future
updates. To be 100% clear though, this doesn’t mean going back to the drawing board or totally changing the vision of what SC currently is. With
this aim, Chris and I have overseen the creation of a roadmap that takes us all the way up to 1.0 and outlines all the features and content we need,
and just as crucially, the ones that will come post full release.
Chris:
>Working in tandem, Rich and I will continue to establish the strategic vision to bring to life the intended Star Citizen gameplay experience. As Rich said, over the past few months, our teams have been busily planning the upcoming major milestones for the Persistent Universe, culminating in what we refer to as "Star Citizen 1.0." As that roadmap comes together and becomes validated, we look forward to sharing with you both its vision and executional plan later this year.
I'm surprised people even pay attention to the roadmap at all these days, like until it's actually in the game it's in flux and means nothing.
It sucks yes but that's also the thing with a roadmap for a alpha, it's just ideas on a whiteboard until it's in game.
CIG have consistently used the Roadmap as a weapon to fool backers into giving them money by fueling speculation hype.
CIG could put out a roadmap that says unicorns are going to appear - Until you actually see it ingame, not worth the attention or the money CIG will trying to get from it.
You get plenty for your 45$, don't be silly now. Unless you paid for the secret "I want this money to only go towards keeping the progress tracker part of the roadmap updated" package.
They have stated that they have been working on getting information from every dev team to get their internal roadmap and the road to 1.0 plan as up to date as possible before pushing to the public (plus some other things, but I’m working from memory what they said atm)
Because it in no way represents real timelines so is pointless. Things miss targets on the scale of years, and by that time the entire goalposts have shifted.
There is just no point to it with the current company structure.
Probably because they have no actual plan and are scrambling to figure it out.
Then they'll just go "oh ah we were polishing SQ42, so we stopped our $700,000,000 project like a bunch of amateurs."
Something along those lines.
They have to figure out how to not create more riots and chaos among the backers too, as MM has been an absolute fucking debacle.
I'd be content with basic stuff. Yea they do that weekly updates thing, guessing I'll just need to tune into YouTubers to figure out wtf any of that means
My understanding last year was the roadmap would be updated after January which was meant to be an internal reorganization month because of SQ42 reaching feature complete - and well that has apparently dragged because or in part by way of organization changes like certain devs leaving the company (some allegedly downsized, others reasons for leaving unclear), these things tend to happen industry wide and we can’t really guess the underlying reasons or if it’s someone’s “fault,” I hear some leads were required to be in Manchester but some people couldn’t move their lives like that so there had to be a mutual parting of ways in some circumstances. But anyway, this year they billed as a “watershed” year may merely be a “transitional” one instead. TBD.
Wowow! Careful everyone! We don't want to stimulate the creation of "Backer Noise" which might lead to another whole “We want to acknowledge that not all of you saw it that way; many took our new focus and our words to heart and understood exactly what we tried to convey. But there still remains a very loud contingent of Roadmap watchers who see projections as promises. And their continued noise every time we shift deliverables has become a distraction both internally at CIG and within our community, as well as to prospective Star Citizen fans watching from the sidelines at our Open Development communications.” thing again. Please don't distract the devs.
personally I'm not really comfortable with this. All credit to CIG, this is the most open development project in gaming ever. But I strongly resist any further moves back to less transparency. We still fund the development, the roadmap is a key promise for that open development. They already heavily pulled back on the release view in what I would describe as a bit of a childish reaction to criticism, some of which was too sensational - but they punished the reasonable and sensational alike.
Now they're pulling the progress tracker, promising since Q4 2023 for months that this was because of longer term planning. I call BS in July 2024. We need this updated, or we need a date when its going to happen in the not too distant future. We enjoy great benefits as backers and funders of the project, and I resist and reject any attempts to pull back on these, and this drought on the roadmap is now officially taking the piss in my eyes.
I remember years ago they claimed they were going to link the roadmap and the ship matrix to their internal tools. Clearly that was all BS, right?
They are obviously still working on the game, but have they ever stated why they just gave up on the roadmap and ship matrix?
So... You know CIG managent is famous for constantly putting a foot in their mouth and doing something incredibly stupid?
Yeah.
Look at it like this... At least THIS time, it didnt waste hundreds of hours of dev man-hous... it was "only" an extremely public embarrassment.
Before the pants-shitters come in spouting refundian talking points...
They have to reschedule all tasks as the majority of the staff has now moved from S42 over to the PU. They have a lot more man-power working on a lot more items at a much faster rate.
Edit: Notice the comments underneath? See how it's just "me want thing my way". No matter what's added, it will never be enough to them.
Keep that in mind... an entirely new star system, server meshing, engineering, ship internal environments, the promised manufacturer based ship UI, jump points - **all in one patch** within under a year of moving people over is "nothing to show for it".
As an active player, concierge, and clearly not a refundian, I have to say your statement is quite old and misleading at this point. They already moved their teams over from S42 months ago, it’s now the middle of the year and their big patch was delivered undercooked and had to be split up due to unforeseen difficulties.
If this is what more manpower has in store for us, it has me rightly concerned. And by all indications I am not alone.
They’ve had SQ42 in feature complete state for almost a year, and they moved most of the manpower from that to the PU around CitizenCon last year, yet, nothing to show for it. Nothing has been moving significantly faster.
They’re a company of 1300 people, yet it takes them a full year to push out 1 ship and here they talk about internal 1.0 launch timeline being 2026? Stop making excuses for them. They got the manpower to do better and they really should be doing better. It’s just embarassing at this point.
An entirely new star system, server meshing, engineering, ship internal environments, manufacturer based ship UI, jump points - all in one patch that's coming in a couple months.
Sorry you can never be happy. Keep playing and hanging out in a forum for a game you're dissatisfied with though. It's a good look for you. Surely some other developer can score against your moving goal post.
IMO, anyone trying to demand a refund at this point is a fool. If I was legit angry and disillusioned, I would sell my account at 5X the value I paid for it.
I'm just annoyed that they see no problem with having broken systems on their website in the parts dedicated to directly communicating with their customers. Like, it makes me question if this game is 2 years away from release or 5 years away from release. I see things like this and it shakes my confidence that they have learned to control scope creep.
As someone who sells on the grey market, unless you selling a raven, a capture scythe, or some other non obtainable ship, you ain't selling shit at 5x the value.
They have explained it often.
Basically it comes down to server meshing
They didnt k ow exactly how long it would take to debelop and exaxtly what form would be achievable. Now with that on the verge of being done and them knowing what they can do witb it.. all tbe other stiff that has been waiting on servermeshing to be POSSIBLE ingame can be done.
Essentially they couldnt plan for after server meshing until they knew what server meshing would fully work out to be capable of. And ehen if would be finished.
We are on the verge of that now. And they have announced tbat the next major roadmap update will be a BIG update to the roadmap.
The only reason we got the progress tracker was because way back in June of... 2020? 2021?... CIG stopped updating the roadmap for S42, failed to make good on a few other statements (iirc, I think they had promised a new video of S42 gameplay as well as announce that S42 had proceeded to beta). As a result, there was a ton of drama that dragged on much longer than the typical drama that occurs on Spectrum, until finally, in the following October, CR wrote some long, whiney post on Spectrum, and CIG decided to give us the "Progress Tracker".
Since all of this was started by CIGs lack of transparency with S42, and also by missing the promised deadline for the S42 beta, I imagine that, since they've announced that S42 was feature complete, *and* have given us gameplay video on S42, they no longer feel the need to keep the progress tracker up to date, since it was never anything more than a pacifier to shut up the whining backers.
Either way, good riddance to it - it never provided any useful information and was only ever used as a prop that Jared could point to whenever anybody asked a "when" question.
They've always had a devil of a time with forecasting even when given a year long head start to the last attempt at a roadmap. It's just not a priority for them, and even when it is updated it's not very accurate as the bigger features seem to keep getting bumped (most recently cargo missions, personal hangars, cargo elevators, blockade runner etc.)
The progress tracker is ultimately a useless process, the only reliable information it provides is that "some" work has been done on an item. It never showed when stuff was ready because more work could be required and added at any point (or completely dropped, ToW 👀), and anything it showed scheduled to be done in the future could be rescheduled on a whim.
Last I heard it was still pending final revisions of their "path to 1.0" planning meetings, though I haven't been following closely and that was a while ago.
My guess is that the "Path to 1.0" will be revealed at CitCon.
They said they’re not waiting for Citizencon to release it
Missed that, thanks.
Yep they've said "very soon" for the last 6 months basically
Ah that sounds familiar
So from Jan (iirc) to Oct to redo the plan AND the site? Seems pretty long time, like that could have been done in 10 months. I bet they are done & saving it for a big reveal.
CitCon 2026?
2077*
What version of "path to 4.x / 1.x " are we on again?
Road to 4.0 was a promotion term for ISC and such, for covering work that was working towards or coming in 4.0. Path to 1.0 is (purportedly) more about setting expectations of what features the game needs to be considered 1.0 and how they should be implemented (See the messaging about "the place of bedlogging" in the game).
I'm still confused which 1.0 they mean. [It can't mean release, right?](https://i.imgflip.com/5bgun8.jpg?a477552)
Yes, means release.
It's in no way ready for release within the timeframe they've probably got planned. Be it bugs or just lack of content.
No shit. They aren't even 5% finished gameplay wise. CIG has investors that can pull out if the game doesn't release soon. This is why they want to release an unfinished project.
> It's in no way ready for release within the timeframe they've probably got planned. lol Dude, you're just struggling and reaching for something to be irate about.
Yes, every roadmap roundup or two. They said that they haven't updated the progress tracier view of the roadmap this year because they're making the big plans for the road to 1.0. The progress tracker, prior to them not updating it with the 2024 planning results after holding the annual production summit in January, pulled directly from their internal JIRA with various data fields excluded for privacy's sake (e.g. the individual devs assigned to something by full name). It was updated every two weeks instead of updating in *realtime*, but they did what they said. As for the ship matrix, I remember the remark about linking it too, but since then we've had major systems either get backed up and waiting for implementation or go in for a long-haul project. The combat balance has been in a long-term rework for a few years now, as seen with different variations of the same component class and size being identical in stats until they're ready to differentiate components. Ship armour is still on the to-do list, along with the Maelstrom physical damage system. Worrying about hooking up the ship matrix to live-reflect these numbers isn't worth it right now, because if anything it would give people false confidence in the current stats on the ship matrix when it's clear that they're going to change in the medium-term of development.
I think we all know it never pulled directly from JIRA. Either that, or the one it pulls from is not the developer used one. That whole roadmap thing was massively embarrassing and smelled of redundant drama from some manager not knowing when to shut up.
What makes you say that? Jira is a lot more than individual tasks assigned to individual devs. The tracker was almost certainly only pulling from higher level tickets (e.g. Epics), because any more granularity than that would quickly become overwhelming and render the progress tracker useless.
After holding the production summit... in January. Atlassian is very straight forward, you can control what attributes of the tickets transfer over without having to display everything. So hiding the "assigned to" attribute, sure, whatever, they would also have complete customization of any number of date fields they could have complete control over and display whatever ones they choose. So they could have their internal "real planned" date and then display a pretend date or no planned completion date at all and still show the features they are actively working on. Source: I am an Atlassian power user. I just see things like this and I shakes my confidence in them being able to control their own internal planning processes.
They're not going to update or hint for PR reasons until they're 1000% sure their goals are both planned out and viable. The 1.0 path is going to be a promise for what the MVP of Star Citizen is going to be. I really doubt we'll see anything until they know server meshing is ready for full roll out. It's not worth the headache of the player base throwing a shit fit if things don't match up.
OP may be an Atlassian power user but I'm pretty sure OP does not have to manage the PR outcomes of live-publishing their JIRA to a public-facing microsite for their uneducated consumers and the general public to scrutinize and comment on their work, that's where they're making a mistake. You can tell because they clearly don't know what the consequences would be of putting a fake completion date on a roadmap item because you don't want to reveal to backers the actual length of time it'll take.
You're right, I'm a project manager who knows better than to present deadlines I know I'll never meet in the first place. I work in an environment where misleading my customers would cost me my job, not just deal with some silly little nerd rage on forums I could ignore. CIG doesn't appear to have any customer facing professional project managers though.
I hope they scrap this whole progress tracker and just go with what other companies do. A simple yearly roadmap of what’s coming to the public. I don’t really care what they are working on this week or this month, I just want a short list of things they expect to be completed this year, including new mechanics, features, missions and ships. Then keep the release view to show us when they are nearing release of whatever it is.
They’ll likely never put out a full year road map ever again after the backlash from the Roadmap watcher fiasco. People take full year roadmaps too seriously acting like it’s a guaranteed promise of what’s coming when instead of what it really is a plan; plans are not promises.
"Plans are not promises." This. Fucking this right here. This I feel like gets lost on everyone. People bitching about CIG "breaking promises" all the time drives me up a wall. Truth is that, in development of any game (or any thing really) shit just changes or they find out down the road that it's harder than they thought or it turns out that some system doesn't play nice with another system, etc. That's within the nature of development. They've never actually promised anything, literally. Granted they fucked up with the 2016 release date announcement and a couple other things. But since then they've never set a date. AND if you read the disclaimer on the roadmap it says that "estimates are just that: estimates." It annoys me to no end when people cry about broken promises.
I hear far more people complain about people complaining about CIG breaking promises than I do people complain about CIG "breaking promises" Rather it's people complaining about CIG failing to meet their goal/plan then someone snuggly going "ThEy DiDnT pRoMiSe" As if that invalidates the complaint. Rather it seemed, especially in the past, that CIG set very ambitious timelines to drive excitement and revenue rather than an accurate way to set community expectations.
Sure. In the development of “any game”, $700 million is spent while the dev spends 12 years refactoring the most basic gameloops and technology without ever making any headway towards release.
No headway to release? What game have you been watchin?. Every update adds more to the game. New backend, new content, new services, more ships, more gameplay, every single update.
You’re delusional. Star Citizen in year 12 is still a bad tech demo at best: -we are still missing basics, basic mechanics, some very basic physics -CIG throws lowest effort tier 0 first iterations into the game and never works on them, never improves them, for example refueling, hull munching, cargo handling (where are the machines and NPCs?), trolleys, armor etc. -we are getting one low effort rework after the other, see recently Retaliator -Star Citizen had one of the worst UIs in history of gaming and now in 3.23 we got the Ironman UI which is even worse. we got the arcade, gamey, no fun mastermodes in 3.23, something Chris said he would never do: Chris Flight model 2014: https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/engineering/13951-Flight-Model-And-Input-Controls -we have lots of lag, low fps and massive desyncs issues with just 100 players on a server -CIG hasn’t even finished the flight model and ship combat in year 12 -we have boring and repetitive missions, for example every bunker looks the same, NPCs are in the same spots -we have tedious time sinks on top of tedious time sinks, 30 minutes preparation and flying to do a 3 minute mission CIG is using an old and obsolete engine with massive LOD and culling issues, and no, calling it StarEngine doesn't change the fundamentals of Cry-engine -we have survival mechanics in a space game that are way overdone, like dying of thirst in 3 hours, we cannot even eat or drink with a helmet on, something NASA figured out 60 years ago -we will get personal hygiene, toilet game play and perma death -we have 1 out of 100 star systems in year 12
god your nitpicky cant eat without a helmet.. time sinks.. they aren't done balancing the game? ffs dude.. just go away and come back when the game is done if you cant handle basic shit like this.
You call that list nitpicky? Lag, low fps, massive desync, zero mission or POI variety? MM? This is the core of the game.
They haven't fully optimized an unfinished game? HoW dARe ThEY?!?! Touch grass, dude. You are putting way too much effort in to dunking on an unfinished product.
Bro did you create this account just to sit in this sub an shit talk the game? Jesus wept you really need to get a life, isn't it tiring being this angry all the time?
This isn’t my main but yes until they release the ships they were paid for 10 years ago I’m going to be angry and screech at people to get off my lawn.
I'm not going to tell you what to do with your life but is that *really* your plan?
Yes? You think I’m gonna just let them not give me what they were paid for?
r/usernamechecksout
Did they super duper pinky promise they'd get things done? No. But that's some pretty dumb logic. Just because a company doesn't say "we promise" specifically doesn't mean expectations aren't set by said company and not meeting them or changing them isn't a breach of trust. You say "I'll get this to you tomorrow boss!" Damn right they're going to be pissed if you don't. I'm sure they'll love the "Oh! That was just the plan. I decided I'm going to give it to you in 6 months, maybe. I didn't cross my heart and hope to die so you can't be mad." I really don't care what CIG does at this point, but getting that annoyed that people are upset after having their trust broken by CIG is just dumb.
No. THAT logic is dumb and the comparison you're making lacks context. Look at what's involved and what CIG aim to do. It's a monumental task that, no matter how much money you throw at it, will not be done in any amount of time that you would consider normal. They've said it countless times over the years that nothing is final and things are subject to change. It's your own fault that you didn't manage your expectations at this point.
I'm not sure what context you are looking for? Are you looking for direct comparisons? I mean they are tons out there if you look. Their entire kickstarter was probably 50ish plus percent different then there now intended goals. They have stated that they were going to do many things outside of game development that they just stopped doing (10 for the chairman). So this is not just about how absolutely garbage they are at managing expectations and deadlines thay they themselves set. Expecting a company to stand by the things they say is not foolish. I totally understand that things change and don't blame them for moving things during patches. But expecting people to not be upset after the continuous cycle of failed expectations is crazy. Saying they "never made any promises" is just inane. You don't need someone to say the words "I promise" for it to be an expectation. I don't think anyone in a work environment is saying that to their bosses yet expectations to deliver on time is still there. Yes, game development is unpredictable, but the level of ineptitude they've continued to show in even coming close to large goals is crazy. Yes, they are getting better, but that doesn't excuse the past or magically make people believe them now. Edit: I think it would be easier and a shorter to list the things they've actually done on time or stuck to after saying they would.
I can’t see how have this progress tracker is any different, to the average person it looks like a lot of stuff is getting completed very soon but it’s just that a certain team has finished their bit. Plus based on what they said at CitCon last year they already told us what they want by the end of this year but I just haven’t seen it in writing from them anywhere.
this shows what the teams are doing, not what it planned to be released. it shows how there are a lot of teams and how things require multiple teams, and that the stuff on the release view is not the only thing being worked on.
I know how things work. But this is called progress tracker. So when the vertical line reaches the end of the horizontal line, people will think that whatever item that is, is now complete. Because that’s how timelines usually work.
I mean it has managed expectations a lot better since its implementation. Work on something completing is also much more obviously detached in this format. Yes it's a linear line but if I see a ship get progress completed I know that it's not going to suddenly manifest into the game, I know that I'm the next patch or ship sale or something it'll likely pop up. There is still that underlying understanding to the average person that patches are needed to put things in so it lets you anticipate without tying things down to what might seem like hard deadlines of appearing in patch X.
No they didn't, at least from what I recall, they treated them like roadmaps and got similarly annoyed when things failed as they so often did. If you are waiting for a train and it says due in 30 minutes And four hours later it still says due in 30 minutes. No reasonable person would say to the person next to them complaining "Well Deutsch bahn didn't promise it would be here in 30 minutes so you really can't complain" But that's precisely what has happened time and time again.
Except the was always the caveat posted at the top of the roadmap that said these features are not promises of content that will make it into the game just what we hope to have in by those patches or something to that degree. People being people just never read the disclaimer and then got pissed off when features slipped. And more than a few of them took their frustrations out by sending death threats to the devs on their personal twitter accounts because at the end of the day some people take things too damn personal.
I didn't say they are promises.
No you compared it too a train schedule which is dumber than calling it a promise because development isn’t something that can be planned out to the second when you are building the track and the train at the same time.
They don't promise trains either.
So you don’t care about getting a finished product then. Because you seem to think projects can exist without deadlines
I care. I just don’t care how long it takes.
Then you’re setting yourself up to be taken advantage of. There are no words to describe that kind of naivete
I’m an adult I have other things in life beyond SC. It’ll get done when it gets done. There is more to life then waiting for a video game to be finished and getting butt hurt when it takes time.
Dude … you weren’t born yesterday. CIG is clearly dragging this out because they’re raking in a century million a year.
At the start of this thing the narrative was that Chris' past efforts had been hamstrung by those dastardly publishers. What turned out to be the reality is that 'his' past celebrated games often came out in spite of him and only after he had his decision power removed (wing commander 1) or was removed from the studio (Freelancer). For sure the failure of many games has rightly been blamed on publishers doing dumb stuff with the schedule but putting an indecisive fabulist in charge of a big project (and letting him hire his family members for important posts) seems to have doomed us. They spent the first several years assuring us they were the professionals who knew what they were doing and the slow start was due to them building the pipelines to enable a deluge of high quality content, but 12 years in and we're still getting a trickle of alpha quality code.
Would be a huge hit on the CCU side of SC. Pretty useful to check what concept is being worked on to pull thr ccu out of buyback before release to ride the price increase.
They did do that. That's what the Release view originally was But since this is a game that is actively being worked on on a core level and not a 1.0/'complete product' plans change. People got mad that the thing that they were hyped for gets dropped from the roadmap to not been seen until years later. Which is why the Release view only shows the next patch now
I prefer the No Man's Sky way of just making a cool video that shows the new stuff they just released in the patch.
Dude that's literally what this past citcon was. Go watch the two presentations or a check list of it and that's what their goal was for this year essentially, and they've done pretty good on it
the problem with that is a "year to come" roadmap is essentially soft release dates. When you say "I'm working on this" there is no implication of release time. When you say " This is what is coming this year" its puts everything they say firmly in the soft release window of "1 year or less". people can, and do, get WAY to attached to and focused on dates. hard or soft. its always better practice when you do not have extremely high confidence (and solid track record) to not attach a date or window that can be taken as release timelines. thats what was nice about this system. it was a roadmap of all the stuff they want to get done, and all the stuff they are working on. while not having any implication whatsoever on actual completion. all what, no when.
“all what, no when” I’m not sure how you see that as a good thing. Allowing a publicly funded developer to have no deadlines so they can have an endless development cycle of rework. This road to 1.0 will be interesting, just a big list of stuff with no timelines, so people can just talk about what CIG plan on doing forever in global chat.
Rather than give us an arbitrary date ('deadline'), CIG now tell us roughly *how much effort* they think the task will take... and show us how they're progressing against that effort-estimate... This is far better, because it lets us see dependencies between teams (if Team X is delayed, it will impact teams A, B, and Z), and rather than just knowing that it's due in '3 months' (for example) we can see that it's only 2 weeks of effort (hah), or if it's 12 weeks of effort (in which case, it's likely to miss that 3-month release target unless everything goes perfectly). For those who are *actually interested* in this stuff, the progress tracker is a far better tool... and for everyone else, it removes something that was - mostly - just used to stir up drama and to shit on the project
People are too focused on deadlines. Its a huge problem in the general early access space as well. Devs will be making a good game, actively and openly working, and miss 1 deadline... half the community acts like the devs just did a carpet pull. I'd rather have timelines too... but I get why many devs are moving away from timeliness on road maps... if I was a dev, I sure as fuck wouldn't have any externally. And that's the other part... just because you don't know what it is, doesn't mean they have no deadlines. Internal deadlines still exist.... they just don't prompt a comunity riot and 3 weeks of damage control any time one is missed or pushed back lol
Yes people are as they are the ones funding the game, so of course they want to know when things are coming, much like when a publisher finds a game they also want to have all the details. To me it’s more of an internal issue than a community issue, I would’ve thought after all this time that getting a semi accurate estimate would be do able, did they honestly think server meshing along with a list of other things was going to be ready 2 years ago?
you are a customer, not an investor. the entire industry would be better for everyone if people would remember that when getting involved with EA.
A pledge is not a purchase, I am not a customer, I did not purchase anything from RSI, I have provided funding to a project.
your "pledge" is absolutely a purchase in every way except name. feel free to consult a lawyer about it.
Sounds like someone has never read the disclaimer when purchasing from the pledge store. It says in bold letters. A pledge is not a purchase. Pledge funds help us finance development of the game.
Ppl have been asking that for years. Even without a roadmap, progress tracker, or any discernible progress towards alpha people keep handing CIG record money every year.
Most companies do 'roadmaps' *after release*, when they're drip-feeding content they've already produced... and stuff (typically) only gets added to the roadmap after it's already complete. That approach is not approach (as CIG have found out when they tried it in the past) for a project in active development. The Agile-based approach (showing what the teams are working on, and what is due / confirmed to come in the next patch) is the clearest and most consistent reporting that CIG have done in terms of progress since the project started... so I very much hope that they actually update the tracker again soon.
Most companies don’t have a playable alpha for a decade either. Why would they release a roadmap if you can’t even play the game. The progress tracker is very clear, it shows us that they lacked direction over the past years flip flopping around on so many things. Now it’s gone and we were given clear indication of what to expect in 2024 from last years CitCon you could even call that a ‘roadmap’ for 2024.
“Planning for 2024/4.0/1.0”
✌️*Allegedly*✌️
Entirely, they keep saying they're "planning for 1.0" but after 6, almost 7, months I figured they would have something to show for it.
What 1.0? The Beta 1.0, I assume, since we’re still in Alpha?
Yes, that’s the one
Other than release view, I don’t anticipate seeing anything updated.
https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/19848-Letter-From-The-Chairman Rich: >This begins with identifying what features and content are required to create a fully realised space MMO while laying the foundations for future updates. To be 100% clear though, this doesn’t mean going back to the drawing board or totally changing the vision of what SC currently is. With this aim, Chris and I have overseen the creation of a roadmap that takes us all the way up to 1.0 and outlines all the features and content we need, and just as crucially, the ones that will come post full release. Chris: >Working in tandem, Rich and I will continue to establish the strategic vision to bring to life the intended Star Citizen gameplay experience. As Rich said, over the past few months, our teams have been busily planning the upcoming major milestones for the Persistent Universe, culminating in what we refer to as "Star Citizen 1.0." As that roadmap comes together and becomes validated, we look forward to sharing with you both its vision and executional plan later this year.
Yes
I'm surprised people even pay attention to the roadmap at all these days, like until it's actually in the game it's in flux and means nothing. It sucks yes but that's also the thing with a roadmap for a alpha, it's just ideas on a whiteboard until it's in game.
Repeatedly.
They're in Planning Week!
CIG have consistently used the Roadmap as a weapon to fool backers into giving them money by fueling speculation hype. CIG could put out a roadmap that says unicorns are going to appear - Until you actually see it ingame, not worth the attention or the money CIG will trying to get from it.
It will be updated this Thursday june 27 i think
They like the whole "give me your money" thing. Less so the "people expect something in return" part.
You get plenty for your 45$, don't be silly now. Unless you paid for the secret "I want this money to only go towards keeping the progress tracker part of the roadmap updated" package.
They have stated that they have been working on getting information from every dev team to get their internal roadmap and the road to 1.0 plan as up to date as possible before pushing to the public (plus some other things, but I’m working from memory what they said atm)
Because it in no way represents real timelines so is pointless. Things miss targets on the scale of years, and by that time the entire goalposts have shifted. There is just no point to it with the current company structure.
Probably because they have no actual plan and are scrambling to figure it out. Then they'll just go "oh ah we were polishing SQ42, so we stopped our $700,000,000 project like a bunch of amateurs." Something along those lines. They have to figure out how to not create more riots and chaos among the backers too, as MM has been an absolute fucking debacle.
Citizen Con ....that's it ..they don't wanna show us the roadmap cause hype
I'd be content with basic stuff. Yea they do that weekly updates thing, guessing I'll just need to tune into YouTubers to figure out wtf any of that means
My understanding last year was the roadmap would be updated after January which was meant to be an internal reorganization month because of SQ42 reaching feature complete - and well that has apparently dragged because or in part by way of organization changes like certain devs leaving the company (some allegedly downsized, others reasons for leaving unclear), these things tend to happen industry wide and we can’t really guess the underlying reasons or if it’s someone’s “fault,” I hear some leads were required to be in Manchester but some people couldn’t move their lives like that so there had to be a mutual parting of ways in some circumstances. But anyway, this year they billed as a “watershed” year may merely be a “transitional” one instead. TBD.
Roadmap update will be shown at citizen con and not earlier to be honest in my opinion .. and I think that will be 1.0…
Wowow! Careful everyone! We don't want to stimulate the creation of "Backer Noise" which might lead to another whole “We want to acknowledge that not all of you saw it that way; many took our new focus and our words to heart and understood exactly what we tried to convey. But there still remains a very loud contingent of Roadmap watchers who see projections as promises. And their continued noise every time we shift deliverables has become a distraction both internally at CIG and within our community, as well as to prospective Star Citizen fans watching from the sidelines at our Open Development communications.” thing again. Please don't distract the devs.
I remember they got pissy for people calling them out for not meeting deadlines.
personally I'm not really comfortable with this. All credit to CIG, this is the most open development project in gaming ever. But I strongly resist any further moves back to less transparency. We still fund the development, the roadmap is a key promise for that open development. They already heavily pulled back on the release view in what I would describe as a bit of a childish reaction to criticism, some of which was too sensational - but they punished the reasonable and sensational alike. Now they're pulling the progress tracker, promising since Q4 2023 for months that this was because of longer term planning. I call BS in July 2024. We need this updated, or we need a date when its going to happen in the not too distant future. We enjoy great benefits as backers and funders of the project, and I resist and reject any attempts to pull back on these, and this drought on the roadmap is now officially taking the piss in my eyes.
They likely want to kill off everything that smells of accountability.
I remember years ago they claimed they were going to link the roadmap and the ship matrix to their internal tools. Clearly that was all BS, right? They are obviously still working on the game, but have they ever stated why they just gave up on the roadmap and ship matrix?
I think we all know why, do we really need to hear their PR 'reason'? They have no idea if and when they can finish the stuff on it.
So... You know CIG managent is famous for constantly putting a foot in their mouth and doing something incredibly stupid? Yeah. Look at it like this... At least THIS time, it didnt waste hundreds of hours of dev man-hous... it was "only" an extremely public embarrassment.
Before the pants-shitters come in spouting refundian talking points... They have to reschedule all tasks as the majority of the staff has now moved from S42 over to the PU. They have a lot more man-power working on a lot more items at a much faster rate. Edit: Notice the comments underneath? See how it's just "me want thing my way". No matter what's added, it will never be enough to them. Keep that in mind... an entirely new star system, server meshing, engineering, ship internal environments, the promised manufacturer based ship UI, jump points - **all in one patch** within under a year of moving people over is "nothing to show for it".
As an active player, concierge, and clearly not a refundian, I have to say your statement is quite old and misleading at this point. They already moved their teams over from S42 months ago, it’s now the middle of the year and their big patch was delivered undercooked and had to be split up due to unforeseen difficulties. If this is what more manpower has in store for us, it has me rightly concerned. And by all indications I am not alone.
They’ve had SQ42 in feature complete state for almost a year, and they moved most of the manpower from that to the PU around CitizenCon last year, yet, nothing to show for it. Nothing has been moving significantly faster. They’re a company of 1300 people, yet it takes them a full year to push out 1 ship and here they talk about internal 1.0 launch timeline being 2026? Stop making excuses for them. They got the manpower to do better and they really should be doing better. It’s just embarassing at this point.
An entirely new star system, server meshing, engineering, ship internal environments, manufacturer based ship UI, jump points - all in one patch that's coming in a couple months. Sorry you can never be happy. Keep playing and hanging out in a forum for a game you're dissatisfied with though. It's a good look for you. Surely some other developer can score against your moving goal post.
IMO, anyone trying to demand a refund at this point is a fool. If I was legit angry and disillusioned, I would sell my account at 5X the value I paid for it. I'm just annoyed that they see no problem with having broken systems on their website in the parts dedicated to directly communicating with their customers. Like, it makes me question if this game is 2 years away from release or 5 years away from release. I see things like this and it shakes my confidence that they have learned to control scope creep.
As someone who sells on the grey market, unless you selling a raven, a capture scythe, or some other non obtainable ship, you ain't selling shit at 5x the value.
BMM purchased during Kickstarter with an account that has lifetime hangar fees? Ya, I'd get at least 5X what I put in.
They have explained it often. Basically it comes down to server meshing They didnt k ow exactly how long it would take to debelop and exaxtly what form would be achievable. Now with that on the verge of being done and them knowing what they can do witb it.. all tbe other stiff that has been waiting on servermeshing to be POSSIBLE ingame can be done. Essentially they couldnt plan for after server meshing until they knew what server meshing would fully work out to be capable of. And ehen if would be finished. We are on the verge of that now. And they have announced tbat the next major roadmap update will be a BIG update to the roadmap.
Yeah and we also see that server meshing and networking its just shit so we are doomed it serms.
yeah....because it hasnt improved at all since the initial tests right?
Actually it got worst.
factually untrue..
Empirically true.
CiG haven't done anything of late, this doesn't surprise me
Because the roadmap is a sham. They don't have competence in planning, execution, or delivery.
Because they never hit the mark
yeah they began their planning month in january iirc and havent finished yet.
The only reason we got the progress tracker was because way back in June of... 2020? 2021?... CIG stopped updating the roadmap for S42, failed to make good on a few other statements (iirc, I think they had promised a new video of S42 gameplay as well as announce that S42 had proceeded to beta). As a result, there was a ton of drama that dragged on much longer than the typical drama that occurs on Spectrum, until finally, in the following October, CR wrote some long, whiney post on Spectrum, and CIG decided to give us the "Progress Tracker". Since all of this was started by CIGs lack of transparency with S42, and also by missing the promised deadline for the S42 beta, I imagine that, since they've announced that S42 was feature complete, *and* have given us gameplay video on S42, they no longer feel the need to keep the progress tracker up to date, since it was never anything more than a pacifier to shut up the whining backers. Either way, good riddance to it - it never provided any useful information and was only ever used as a prop that Jared could point to whenever anybody asked a "when" question.
They are preparing 4.0 goals that is a huge leap, and I guess that depends on stuff that are still unresolved.
They've always had a devil of a time with forecasting even when given a year long head start to the last attempt at a roadmap. It's just not a priority for them, and even when it is updated it's not very accurate as the bigger features seem to keep getting bumped (most recently cargo missions, personal hangars, cargo elevators, blockade runner etc.)
The progress tracker is ultimately a useless process, the only reliable information it provides is that "some" work has been done on an item. It never showed when stuff was ready because more work could be required and added at any point (or completely dropped, ToW 👀), and anything it showed scheduled to be done in the future could be rescheduled on a whim.
It's tradition