How are you going to give us meaningful feedback before you even try the changes? Or is your brain so awesome that you can look into the future? And while we are on the subject of feedback, guys, a few one liners and a catch word here and there really doesn't help. If you really care about improving the game, then please structure your feedback in a way that will:

1. List specific issues and the circumstance when it happened. We then put these in a weekly report and discuss them with the dev team on ways to address this.

2. Provide insight on why you think this is happening, if you can. Translation, explain as best as you can on how to reproduce the error/bug you encountered.

The patch notes are there to let players know what changes are coming so they can plan their gameplay accordingly, not so that people can theory craft before hand on how things will work before they actually try it.

How are you going to give us meaningful feedback before you even try the changes? Or is your brain so awesome that you can look into the future?

CCP Reykjavik
CCP Shanghai
Same company different studios, one has near perfected the player feedback process, the other is still rolling on the floor after it fell over its first baby step.

btw expect people to ignore your post

Lets say, the minute that something was decided to be a feature, at what point do they include the community?

The second they decide?
When they have the design goals for the feature?
When they have the code in draft form?
When they have proved the principle of the design goals on a working play-test?
When they are finalizing the code for the new feature?
When they are bug testing the design/feature?
When they are theory testing the design goals of the new feature and its relationship to other older features?
When they are about to finalize a content lock on the coming update?
When they decide they can combine a few additional features around the same code creating a bigger feature?
After they code lock the coming update?

All of these are happening along a dynamic development timeline. If they DID include some FORUM based community feedback...

Who would they listen to?
How long would they have to listen?
How would they prove they listened?
How would we be sure they listened?
How are they accountable for changes if we say 'scrap it'?

Including such random voices as "the community" would really cause too much noise for a designer. Feedback has to be well articulated and focused.

Inevitably, we would hear about new features under development and want feature x.1 x.2 and x.3 as well with no understanding behind the teamwork, capabilities, resources, and restrictions of the managers and technicians working on whatever is proposed.

Lets say, the minute that something was decided to be a feature, at what point do they include the community?

The second they decide?
When they have the design goals for the feature?
When they have the code in draft form?
When they have proved the principle of the design goals on a working play-test?
When they are finalizing the code for the new feature?
When they are bug testing the design/feature?
When they are theory testing the design goals of the new feature and its relationship to other older features?
When they are about to finalize a content lock on the coming update?
When they decide they can combine a few additional features around the same code creating a bigger feature?
After they code lock the coming update?

All of these are happening along a dynamic development timeline. If they DID include some FORUM based community feedback...

Who would they listen to?
How long would they have to listen?
How would they prove they listened?
How would we be sure they listened?
How are they accountable for changes if we say 'scrap it'?

Including such random voices as "the community" would really cause too much noise for a designer. Feedback has to be well articulated and focused.

Inevitably, we would hear about new features under development and want feature x.1 x.2 and x.3 as well with no understanding behind the teamwork, capabilities, resources, and restrictions of the managers and technicians working on whatever is proposed.

da truf

So why does Eve online do it that way.

And why does it work for eve online but not for dust 514?

Eve has SiSi where features can be tested and as i said most sticky posts on the eve-o forums are for iteration stuff.

I would wager some people in this community are at least insightful. Surely someone would of brought up that giving the Amarr Commando a racial bonus for armor/shield modules when it is on a suit that sacrifices modules and a race that typically has the least modules is a bad idea for a bonus. Or that giving every suit a passive scanning radius of 10 meters is next to useless and provides little use of passive scanning and thus profile dampening.

That is BS, you want me to link you to at least 100 dev blogs where CCP made changes based on player feedback on the forums before anything was on the test server? Because I've been here for 9 years I could do it.

I think CCP Cmdr Wang is flailing and venting.

It is dark times for dust. Bad reviews, low numbers, no lead...one should expect some frustration and badly phrased comments coming from the devs.

Let him rant....either they will fix the game or they will not.

Though that comment about making Dust being equivalent to landing a man on the moon...that crap is hilarious and should be laughed it.

Seriously if they are the same thing then what the hell are these guys doing making a video game when they could be putting people on the moon?

When they have proved the principle of the design goals on a working play-test?
When they are finalizing the code for the new feature?

Start linking then. i concede to you if you reach 50 links. And i mean features, like the new scanning interface and stuff, and not devblogs where they proposed number changes to stuff that already existed in game, and that them goons math people dissected after a week and proved bullshit.

I think CCP Cmdr Wang is flailing and venting.

It is dark times for dust. Bad reviews, low numbers, no lead...one should expect some frustration and badly phrased comments coming from the devs.

Let him rant....either they will fix the game or they will not.