Single post in Dev Log 204
Forum Index > Core > Announcements > Dev Log 204 >
![Garthic [Jamie]'s Avatar](https://pokefarm.com/upload/Novan-chan/Avatars/bdy_garth.png)
First up, let's answer the questions that were posed in the announcement thread regarding the reboot about a week ago!
Then on to Niet's Dev Post.
Q: Was the "Reboot" really shelved just because people said 'no'? A: Let's get the Elephant outta the way. No - it's not that simple. This is further explained a little later on but that was thrown about a little bit so we wanted to get it cleared up first and foremost. Q: With the "Reboot" being scrapped, does that mean that all the work done was wasted? A: No. Not at all, actually. In fact, we didn't say it was 'wasted' or 'wasted time' for that matter. To add on to that, it's actually not wasted in the slightest - Just because it's not being used for PFQ doesn't mean that it isn't being used for something else. Yes, this does mean we're working on a second project. No, this does not mean we are stopping support for PFQ. Q: Some things that received backlash in the past weren't removed or changed, so what's going on here? A: Difference in scale. The changes we have planned are very large and the game that people would come back to after 'upgrading' the website would basically be the same by name, but not by substance. The things being talked about that were added despite backlash didn't change what PFQ is to such a large extent. Q:Foundational coding issues were mentioned as part of the reason behind the "Reboot" - what's happening with that? + Why was the Reboot shelved? + Will future updates be possible with the 'spaghetti code'? A: Nothing. This is a bit of a long explanation made short - If anything does need adding, it can be done even if it requires the messing about that we were looking to make easier, but the thing is that we didn't just want to 'rebuild' PFQ over again. What we want to make is something that is so much more than what PFQ is - but it was made very clear to us that a number of people like PFQ for what it is right now -- That is not what we would've been making. We had to make a choice because the plan was to upend what PFQ is and make it... Well, more - and there was issue taken with that. Which is fine, by the by, we understand that we're talking about changing something in a BIG way that people do like as it is. This isn't just a 'users' thing, either. It has been expressed by some staff members that they share the same concerns and we can absolutely understand that. We decided to take this as a sign that it would be better for us to, instead of simply running a single project, to allow people who like what PFQ is, to enjoy it... Exactly as it is. (Note: This doesn't mean "no updates" or anything like that - again, PFQ WILL still be supported with content updates/tournaments etc.) So now we are working on our second project - that's it, pretty much. We'll give it a name some time later on, but it is not a "Reboot" and any idea of one has been shelved, at least for the moment. What we're working on could be considered as kind of a sequel, we suppose? Either way, despite the mess-about that will come about as a result of the funky-foundation that is PFQ's baseline code, the fact is that updates (for the most part) can be done despite that mess-about... So if the thing we're working on now is going to be "number 2" in the line of games we make then we don't need to do that anymore. This way people can also make the choice not to join the new thing we're working on if they don't want to - which is different from us upgrading this website because that would've been a 'no choice'-scenario. Q:Can we see suggestions from the approved sub-forum implemented? A: Yes. It was appropriately pointed out that for some such suggestions a ridiculous amount of time has passed. This needs rectifying - not necessarily all done at once, of course, but just worked on as part of a queue in general. Q:What about suggestions that were rejected because 'the Reboot would fix it'? A: They are absolutely open for discussion once again - please feel free to suggest these things again / BUMP relevant threads or if you're feeling particularly adventurous, PM a Mod about getting a thread removed from rejections because of that specific rejection reason! :D Q: Why don't you have someone to do 'news updates' for you on-staff? A: Uh. Well. This is awkward. Hi. My name is Garthic and my favourite colour is Blue. Now why don't you tell me something about yourself? :D In complete seriousness and my being silly aside - there's no excuse for it. We were lacking in our communication and this is us adressing that and fixing it. We'd prefer to let our actions on that front speak for us in place of our words. Such actions will mean a lot more than us merely saying we're going to do something - it's far better if we actually do it. --- I just want to note that some questions were not about the topic at hand and were noted but skipped on for the purpose of this thread - these are specifically for the update and, for example, not the events being run. (On which note, if there are any such issues remaining, please feel free to post any queries in the help forum!)
Q: Was the "Reboot" really shelved just because people said 'no'? A: Let's get the Elephant outta the way. No - it's not that simple. This is further explained a little later on but that was thrown about a little bit so we wanted to get it cleared up first and foremost. Q: With the "Reboot" being scrapped, does that mean that all the work done was wasted? A: No. Not at all, actually. In fact, we didn't say it was 'wasted' or 'wasted time' for that matter. To add on to that, it's actually not wasted in the slightest - Just because it's not being used for PFQ doesn't mean that it isn't being used for something else. Yes, this does mean we're working on a second project. No, this does not mean we are stopping support for PFQ. Q: Some things that received backlash in the past weren't removed or changed, so what's going on here? A: Difference in scale. The changes we have planned are very large and the game that people would come back to after 'upgrading' the website would basically be the same by name, but not by substance. The things being talked about that were added despite backlash didn't change what PFQ is to such a large extent. Q:Foundational coding issues were mentioned as part of the reason behind the "Reboot" - what's happening with that? + Why was the Reboot shelved? + Will future updates be possible with the 'spaghetti code'? A: Nothing. This is a bit of a long explanation made short - If anything does need adding, it can be done even if it requires the messing about that we were looking to make easier, but the thing is that we didn't just want to 'rebuild' PFQ over again. What we want to make is something that is so much more than what PFQ is - but it was made very clear to us that a number of people like PFQ for what it is right now -- That is not what we would've been making. We had to make a choice because the plan was to upend what PFQ is and make it... Well, more - and there was issue taken with that. Which is fine, by the by, we understand that we're talking about changing something in a BIG way that people do like as it is. This isn't just a 'users' thing, either. It has been expressed by some staff members that they share the same concerns and we can absolutely understand that. We decided to take this as a sign that it would be better for us to, instead of simply running a single project, to allow people who like what PFQ is, to enjoy it... Exactly as it is. (Note: This doesn't mean "no updates" or anything like that - again, PFQ WILL still be supported with content updates/tournaments etc.) So now we are working on our second project - that's it, pretty much. We'll give it a name some time later on, but it is not a "Reboot" and any idea of one has been shelved, at least for the moment. What we're working on could be considered as kind of a sequel, we suppose? Either way, despite the mess-about that will come about as a result of the funky-foundation that is PFQ's baseline code, the fact is that updates (for the most part) can be done despite that mess-about... So if the thing we're working on now is going to be "number 2" in the line of games we make then we don't need to do that anymore. This way people can also make the choice not to join the new thing we're working on if they don't want to - which is different from us upgrading this website because that would've been a 'no choice'-scenario. Q:Can we see suggestions from the approved sub-forum implemented? A: Yes. It was appropriately pointed out that for some such suggestions a ridiculous amount of time has passed. This needs rectifying - not necessarily all done at once, of course, but just worked on as part of a queue in general. Q:What about suggestions that were rejected because 'the Reboot would fix it'? A: They are absolutely open for discussion once again - please feel free to suggest these things again / BUMP relevant threads or if you're feeling particularly adventurous, PM a Mod about getting a thread removed from rejections because of that specific rejection reason! :D Q: Why don't you have someone to do 'news updates' for you on-staff? A: Uh. Well. This is awkward. Hi. My name is Garthic and my favourite colour is Blue. Now why don't you tell me something about yourself? :D In complete seriousness and my being silly aside - there's no excuse for it. We were lacking in our communication and this is us adressing that and fixing it. We'd prefer to let our actions on that front speak for us in place of our words. Such actions will mean a lot more than us merely saying we're going to do something - it's far better if we actually do it. --- I just want to note that some questions were not about the topic at hand and were noted but skipped on for the purpose of this thread - these are specifically for the update and, for example, not the events being run. (On which note, if there are any such issues remaining, please feel free to post any queries in the help forum!)