• Please note: In an effort to ensure that all of our users feel welcome on our forums, we’ve updated our forum rules. You can review the updated rules here: http://forums.wolflair.com/showthread.php?t=5528.

    If a fellow Community member is not following the forum rules, please report the post by clicking the Report button (the red yield sign on the left) located on every post. This will notify the moderators directly. If you have any questions about these new rules, please contact support@wolflair.com.

    - The Lone Wolf Development Team

Roadmap please

You may also want to try some XP/Paired programming if you have newer devs. It may seem like a waist of resources to have 2 developers working on the same issues but the amount of context sharing and knowledge transfer you get is better than having a new dev "figure things out" on his own for a whole sprint.
 
Jamz said:
You may also want to try some XP/Paired programming if you have newer devs. It may seem like a waist of resources to have 2 developers working on the same issues but the amount of context sharing and knowledge transfer you get is better than having a new dev "figure things out" on his own for a whole sprint.
Click to expand...
As a project manager I've tried pair programming to bring new/junior devs up to speed and it has always been a dismal failure.

Finding two coders who think/work the same way is just not realistic. The senior also likely knows the system and knows exactly how to fix the problem/add the feature and finds it frustrating to explain everything. The senior dev doesn't get work he should be doing done and the junior doesn't really do anything and likely doesn't learn very much since he didn't do all the tracing of code and exploring that would have been required for him to do the task himself.
 
kbs666 said:
As a project manager I've tried pair programming to bring new/junior devs up to speed and it has always been a dismal failure.

Finding two coders who think/work the same way is just not realistic. The senior also likely knows the system and knows exactly how to fix the problem/add the feature and finds it frustrating to explain everything. The senior dev doesn't get work he should be doing done and the junior doesn't really do anything and likely doesn't learn very much since he didn't do all the tracing of code and exploring that would have been required for him to do the task himself.
Click to expand...

Well, when I did it, it worked well, on both sides. Yes, paired programming probably works best when they are at similar programming levels, and one is merely teaching the other the code and how things are done there. It can be done.

We followed the rule that one person had the keyboard for an hour while another looked things up or helped. Then we switched. Worked very well. When I was the junior, I might have had the keyboard for two hours to their one, but it did help a lot.

I'm not arguing that you have lost productivity. That will always happen when you onboard someone because it takes time to get them up to speed. When the company I was at did this, though, within a (two week) sprint, I could take stories on my own. I wasn't fast and code reviews were important but I could do something. That helped for my own sense of accomplishment.

I have also found that a lot of places don't implement Agile/Scrum well, usually on the business side. The business treats it like a buzz word to attract people, not realizing they have a big part to play in it.

But that's me and my own experience.

ETA: I would also say that both as the person teaching and being taught, both sides learned a lot. Having to relook at past code or think about things "they know" made them understand it better themselves. It also made them better teachers when they could see it from that new angle and explain pit falls.
 
BJ said:
Of course there are! However, since I don't know at this juncture which ones will be practical and which ones won't, I wouldn't want to get anyone excited only to have to remove them. Once we have the time and resources to thoroughly investigate the incredibly long list of ideas and requests we have I can put together something more informative. :)
Click to expand...

Sorry to push, but do you have at least an idea, how long it will take to investigate the list and tell us, when to expect further updates?
 
She's saying, politically, that they are not going to provide a list. And that they are not currently working on Realm Works.
 
daplunk said:
She's saying, politically, that they are not going to provide a list. And that they are not currently working on Realm Works.
Click to expand...

Yes, I know. And I was trying to ask politely, when they are going to resume working on Realm Works.

Or wether I should start looking for alternatives.
 
Feel like I am watching Battlestar Galactica.

"All this has happened before, and all this will happen again."

Groundhog Day here again.
 
Goodbye and thanks for all the fish

Happydevil43 said:
Sadly I am one of those.

As I generally only play published adventures (ok, I started building my own homebrew campaign, but just gave up - I dont have the time to devote to it, between playing and DMing in 4 games a fortnight) , the shiny buttons of new actively developed toolsets such World Anvil and Arkenforge are calling me.

I will still have RW for any campaign type stuff... but for individual sessons and as those systems get more and more features like RW (really its only autolinking that holds me back).. I'll find that I'll use RW less and less.

I havent given up hope yet... but what I want from a toolset is changing.
Click to expand...

I must admit that I too have grown tired waiting for RW to be something more than a 'passion project' for Rob and the Devs. It is frustrating to have a tool that shows so much potential, but lacks internal support. You have a Ferrari but are running it on a Volkswagen budget. I will continue to keep RW installed but at this point, It will be my 'passion project' and treated with the same level of interest as is shown by Lone Wolf...minimal. I'm going to put my effort (and $$$) into World Anvil at this point. Here's hoping that RW's 'some day' becomes 'today'.
 
Sadly, when I started this thread, my intent was honestly to give LWD the opportunity to show that they still have some love for RW and for this dedicated group of game masters who love the tool and are begging for it to evolve and to be loved by its creators. But instead of taking a day or two of time to put together any kind of road map that could be used to start these discussions in the right direction, to re-affirm support for us and from us, they have essentially put a nail in the lid of the coffin of RW.

It truly saddens me that I have invested so much time and effort in this tool on the false promise that it would continue to evolve and become something more. But alas, I think that, beyond continued use for the campaign info that I already have in the tool, I am probably soon to be done with RW. My $ and time and loyal customer-ship will likely go towards World Anvil or Yarps as I develop a new homebrew D&D campaign world.
 
Hi folks. We really do appreciate that you have so much interest in RW. We do too. We are working on it, and on HLC, and on HLO as fast, and as efficiently as we can. We completely understand your frustration. Please understand that this is an ongoing process with several brilliant minds working things out. I'm sorry we can't give you a more solid answer at this time. Please continue to be patient and we'll let you know what the roadmap looks like just as soon as we are able to. Thank you.
 
Sad, but true, yes.

And, Lj Stephens, thank you for your reaction, but imho it sounds regrettably to much like stonewalling.
 
Personally I think Realm Works is still the best idea for a World Management tool to date. The basic implementation is great and when I have properly taken the time to use it, my games have been stronger for it. The slow down and end of development is certainly unfortunate, but does not make me regret my purchase.

However, I probably wouldn't recommend the program to most people. Despite the power and flexibility of the program, there are a few major issues that I feel are going to be deal breakers for some of my friends. The lack of support and ease of access for players.

I also do not bother with the subscription to the server. Which I feel is probably a big reason Lone Wolf cannot prioritize this program. Without the subscriptions, there isn't the income stream to support the program. However, the long slow road of previous development depressed the willingness to give them a chance on the subs.

Even though it is on the back burner for now, I feel LWD can get this project going again and be quite successful. The biggest thing I need to start paying for a sub is for there to be the web based access for players to view my realms. I don't think web based editing is needed, though it would be a nice feature. The program basis of RW I feel makes it more useful than current and upcoming competitors when it comes to world management.

However, in my experience I am not going to get players to download a new program to view my world. In that sense, I need a web based front for players to access the information. Obsidian Portal is still the top choice of my friends for this, though a number are shifting to World Anvil and some are excited for YARPS.

Regardless, thank you for being honest about what is currently going on. I am still hopeful that Realm Works can continue development and become a powerhouse, but am prepared for it to stay where it currently is at.
 
I've checked out a few other tools for campaign management and none of them seem able to withstand the robust ocean of sand that I promise is actually a box though you can't see the edges of it.

I'm really sad it seems RW is being given up on.

Some new developers and a new subscription/business model could probably revive it but getting people to care again after a period of mismanagement would be hard.

It's always sad when a good thing doesn't work out, and for unclear reasons to boot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top