Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Tiel Syysch
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
634
|
Posted - 2013.01.15 18:26:00 -
[1] - Quote
There's a lot of examples like this, this just happens to be the most recent:
Quote:[FEEDBACK] Re-adjusting heavy dropsuits Update: Balancing work on dropsuits are ongoing, and we will keep you posted with future updates on the results.
We don't know what this means. What are the perceived imbalances that you are addressing? In what ways are you thinking about approaching this imbalance?
We have no clue what you think is wrong with anything, and we don't know what direction you're trying to move with anything until it blindsides us in a new build. Many of us feel so out of the loop with it all, and it's as if we are unable to provide any kind of guidance on anything because we're left in the dark all the time. We have no details on what you're thinking, we have no idea what direction you're trying to go with the game's mechanics, and balance seems useless to propose because everything is done behind the scenes and the only thing we're allowed to see is the final product with no explanation of why changes are made.
This is the perfect example of why many of us are unhappy with the amount and type of dev communication we receive. All we get are these rare occurrences and they tell us hardly anything, if not leaving us with even more questions. I know I'm not alone in wanting more details into why changes are being made, and in advance what changes you're considering, because a lot of it seems like all we can expect is dartboard methodology with these vague balance considerations. |
Naturi Riclenore
BetaMax.
120
|
Posted - 2013.01.15 18:57:00 -
[2] - Quote
I myself have brought this up as well; they give us these tidbits of info, and it only causes more ?????? and deer-in-headlight looks. No one is asking for an in-depth look / analysis of every little thing, but a little high level detail about how is "should" work would be nice.
Case in point: When they changed the content streaming. They said "We made some changes to content streaming server. you should definitely play ambush." First off, no one knew what they even meant by content streaming. So no one knew what to look for. On top of that, it was broken, so no one even saw anything different to try and determine if it was broken, cause no one knew it was broken, cause we had no idea what to look for. Had CCP said "We made some changes to content streaming server. You should definitely play ambush as the sky may rain down upon you ;) " That statement is still vague enough to not give away what would happen, but you know what changes to look for.
The thing is, we get blindsided each new build with stuff that isn't in the patch notes (we know not everything can be), or some crazy nerf / buff that no one knows a reason for. It would be nice to have some information about how many of the systems are "supposed" to work, so we can give better feedback. |
Noc Tempre
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
1170
|
Posted - 2013.01.15 19:43:00 -
[3] - Quote
I'll avoid my usual snark reserved for these style threads and just +1. |
Free Beers
Internal Error. Negative-Feedback
1043
|
Posted - 2013.01.15 19:51:00 -
[4] - Quote
Tiel Syysch wrote:There's a lot of examples like this, this just happens to be the most recent: Quote:[FEEDBACK] Re-adjusting heavy dropsuits Update: Balancing work on dropsuits are ongoing, and we will keep you posted with future updates on the results. We don't know what this means. What are the perceived imbalances that you are addressing? In what ways are you thinking about approaching this imbalance? We have no clue what you think is wrong with anything, and we don't know what direction you're trying to move with anything until it blindsides us in a new build. Many of us feel so out of the loop with it all, and it's as if we are unable to provide any kind of guidance on anything because we're left in the dark all the time. We have no details on what you're thinking, we have no idea what direction you're trying to go with the game's mechanics, and balance seems useless to propose because everything is done behind the scenes and the only thing we're allowed to see is the final product with no explanation of why changes are made. This is the perfect example of why many of us are unhappy with the amount and type of dev communication we receive. All we get are these rare occurrences and they tell us hardly anything, if not leaving us with even more questions. I know I'm not alone in wanting more details into why changes are being made, and in advance what changes you're considering, because a lot of it seems like all we can expect is dartboard methodology with these vague balance considerations.
This is dead on. It's obvious CCP has a high level plan but in reality is just design by play testing. If we are being honest here the communication is pretty damn aweful and thats as nice as i can put it.
When we give feed back on current build we have no idea whats coming or what you are thinking. Even if you agree something is broken this is what happens.
-step 1 don't mention its being looked at or mention it in general.
-step 2 dont ask or discuss what the community actually views as broken (this is big since we have seen every build horrible nerfs/changes we didn't ask for)
-step 3 don't tell us what ccp views as broken (again we aren't on same page about things)
-step 4 ccp makes changes that we dont know about untill new build (again wtf ccp we are the customer and you fix a problem and dont tell us?)
-step 5 ccp ignores use after the changes are terribad and we all ***** about it (we get it we QQ a lot but its your damn fault for the product quality not ours)
-step 6 rinse, repeat, ignore because ccp's **** obviously doesn't stink.
Side note: I love the ,,I,, with 50 sp once we hit the hard cap. I love the sense of humor you have ccp but i'm a paying customer here so you can have a big **** you back as i am not spending any more money ever on this game. |
Tarquin Markel
The Synenose Accord Celestial Imperative
85
|
Posted - 2013.01.15 19:53:00 -
[5] - Quote
Agreed, but ...
Considering that there is a group of people with a vested interest in every last aspect of gameplay, can we really blame them for not calling Jita Riots Round 2 down on their own heads until any changes are finalized?
Quote:CCP: Okay, so we're thinking of modifying X.
Peeps: What! You can't change X! It'll nerf item Y! We love Y! We depend on Y! Y is our reason for playing this game!
CCP: Uh, okay, so we decided X wasn't the issue, and we're going to do some work on Z instead.
Other Peeps: Oh look, CCP giving in to pressure from whiners. What a surprise. BTW, we love Z and will now throw a massive online fit because you want to change it.
CCP: ....
Edit:
Have you ever noticed how CCP spokespeople always seem to say, "We love our fans," through gritted teeth, a grimace, or both? |
KalOfTheRathi
CowTek
168
|
Posted - 2013.01.15 19:59:00 -
[6] - Quote
Or a corp as big as the Imperfects gets all their members to give input and sound like a lot of input. When in reality it is one corp expressing how they want to twist the game to their benefit.
The closer a corp is to an Eve corp the more likely there input will be destructive to Dust514. Yet, CCP does not seem to realize that. With what they put up with on a constant loop with Eve I have no idea why not?
|
Free Beers
Internal Error. Negative-Feedback
1043
|
Posted - 2013.01.15 20:06:00 -
[7] - Quote
KalOfTheRathi wrote:Or a corp as big as the Imperfects gets all their members to give input and sound like a lot of input. When in reality it is one corp expressing how they want to twist the game to their benefit.
The closer a corp is to an Eve corp the more likely there input will be destructive to Dust514. Yet, CCP does not seem to realize that. With what they put up with on a constant loop with Eve I have no idea why not?
Um what? This has nothing to do with us. This is all general comments regarding communication and the feedback loop. Please show me where its something different from out posts. contribute, troll, or gtfo
People like you that just see a corp tag next to a persons name are part of the problem. You can't be part of the discussion because your blinded by your love for the IMP ****. Also since a lot of people are sensative and try hard to make as many interweb friends as possbile the above paragraph is pure sarcasim and shouldn't be taken personally. |
Thranx1231
CowTek
90
|
Posted - 2013.01.15 20:11:00 -
[8] - Quote
Tiel Syysch wrote:There's a lot of examples like this, this just happens to be the most recent: Quote:[FEEDBACK] Re-adjusting heavy dropsuits Update: Balancing work on dropsuits are ongoing, and we will keep you posted with future updates on the results. We don't know what this means. What are the perceived imbalances that you are addressing? In what ways are you thinking about approaching this imbalance? I know exactly what this means.
You had better not be spending any SP on Heavy Skills. Because CCP is going to make you regret it.
The painfully dull method of accumulating SP means that finding out they are going to change something means you cannot spend it on any related items. It will not be worth it because you cannot afford to waste it. The effort to replace it is too slow.
Somebody has gotten the ear of a Dev, then posts about talking to a Dev, the next thing we get is this.
|
Free Beers
Internal Error. Negative-Feedback
1043
|
Posted - 2013.01.15 20:21:00 -
[9] - Quote
Thranx1231 wrote:Tiel Syysch wrote:There's a lot of examples like this, this just happens to be the most recent: Quote:[FEEDBACK] Re-adjusting heavy dropsuits Update: Balancing work on dropsuits are ongoing, and we will keep you posted with future updates on the results. We don't know what this means. What are the perceived imbalances that you are addressing? In what ways are you thinking about approaching this imbalance? I know exactly what this means. You had better not be spending any SP on Heavy Skills. Because CCP is going to make you regret it. The painfully dull method of accumulating SP means that finding out they are going to change something means you cannot spend it on any related items. It will not be worth it because you cannot afford to waste it. The effort to replace it is too slow. Somebody has gotten the ear of a Dev, then posts about talking to a Dev, the next thing we get is this.
Sadly I dont understand what its about heavies. We know at low sp certain things like heavies are op but as sp rises they are much more in balance.
CCP has to balance to the top not the bottom. I do hate heavie right now but thats because i have low ar and ehp skill. I dont think there needs to be a nerf. |
Tiel Syysch
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
634
|
Posted - 2013.01.15 20:22:00 -
[10] - Quote
Tarquin Markel wrote:Agreed, but ... Considering that there is a group of people with a vested interest in every last aspect of gameplay, can we really blame them for not calling Jita Riots Round 2 down on their own heads until any changes are finalized? Quote:CCP: Okay, so we're thinking of modifying X.
Peeps: What! You can't change X! It'll nerf item Y! We love Y! We depend on Y! Y is our reason for playing this game!
CCP: Uh, okay, so we decided X wasn't the issue, and we're going to do some work on Z instead.
Other Peeps: Oh look, CCP giving in to pressure from whiners. What a surprise. BTW, we love Z and will now throw a massive online fit because you want to change it.
CCP: .... Edit: Have you ever noticed how CCP spokespeople always seem to say, "We love our fans," through gritted teeth, a grimace, or both?
Not every item has to be opened up as a democratic process for the community to decide. This isn't American Idol. What they do need, though, is to give us insight into what they're doing and why they're doing it. We have no idea what direction the game is trying to go, whether it's supposed to be tactical, or fast paced, or arcade-y, or whatever. We can't propose changes or ideas that fit the vision of Dust without knowing what that vision is.
Things just keep being balanced and tweaked, though, with no reasoning given to us. It's just a mess. I keep saying that they've got several dials for each item and with a new build they just crank a few of them in random directions, because that's what it feels like. There's no rhyme or reason to why things keep changing the way they are. Why are these weapons buffed/nerfed? Why did the redlines in ambush get pulled in severely? Where did these weird changes that nobody asked for come from, for example missile dispersion? Why does the SP system keep changing around? We don't know any of this.
We're supposed to be testing things, but in order to test, we have to have a vision of how the game is supposed to be in order to determine whether something fits that vision. That vision is something CCP has so far been unwilling to share with us (maybe they don't have one themselves?).
KalOfTheRathi wrote:Or a corp as big as the Imperfects gets all their members to give input and sound like a lot of input. When in reality it is one corp expressing how they want to twist the game to their benefit.
The closer a corp is to an Eve corp the more likely there input will be destructive to Dust514. Yet, CCP does not seem to realize that. With what they put up with on a constant loop with Eve I have no idea why not?
CCP should be able to distinguish between quality feedback and just a flood trying to pad the votes. They're big boys, they can determine what the best course of action is when presented with solutions the community has seen (I hope), or develop their own.
And lol at "a corp as big as the Imperfects," we're actually quite small compared to many of the big corps. |
|
Noc Tempre
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
1170
|
Posted - 2013.01.15 20:43:00 -
[11] - Quote
Quote: maybe they don't have one themselves?
Every private discussion I've had with devs lead me to believe this is the correct answer. |
Thranx1231
CowTek
90
|
Posted - 2013.01.15 22:09:00 -
[12] - Quote
Tarquin Markel wrote:Have you ever noticed how CCP spokespeople always seem to say, "We love our fans," ... No. |
KalOfTheRathi
CowTek
168
|
Posted - 2013.01.15 22:38:00 -
[13] - Quote
Free Beers wrote:KalOfTheRathi wrote:Or a corp as big as the Imperfects gets all their members to give input and sound like a lot of input. When in reality it is one corp expressing how they want to twist the game to their benefit.
The closer a corp is to an Eve corp the more likely their input will be destructive to Dust514. Yet, CCP does not seem to realize that. With what they put up with on a constant loop with Eve I have no idea why not? Um what? This has nothing to do with us. This is all general comments regarding communication and the feedback loop. Please show me where its something different from out posts. contribute, troll, or gtfo People like you that just see a corp tag next to a persons name are part of the problem. You can't be part of the discussion because your blinded by your love for the IMP ****. Also since a lot of people are sensative and try hard to make as many interweb friends as possbile the above paragraph is pure sarcasim and shouldn't be taken personally. Check out Sleepy Zan and his recent postings. Specifically regarding his camping in MCC and getting to have a long talk with a Dev and things will be fixed. Insinuating it was because of his interaction with the Dev. Being interpreted by myself that Imperfects have a closer connection to the Devs than the rest of the Beta testers.
Which is horrible because Sleepy Zan is an admittedly gleeful griefer. He runs down Blue snipers for sport and cannot wait until friendly fire is active. Can Not Wait. Yes, your tag by his name on his postings colors my view of your Corp. Imperfects rant, grief and bad mouth everybody. It is a constant around these forums.
Also, I have no idea how big you are or are not. The wording was meant to be open ended because, if you were big that implied undue connection or if you were small it also implied the same. Probably trying to be too funny while being too late into my sleep cycle. Sorry.
My previous readings of Imperfects postings have lead me not to check on your Corp directly. The attitude presented by them is pretty consistent. Just my reaction. Not necessarily how the most of you actually are or what the Corp aspires to.
BTW, the "you're blinded by your love for the IMP ****" statement is confusing. If it doesn't mean Imperfects then I don't understand that statement at all. I have no love for Imperfects postings or the attitudes associated with them. If it doesn't mean Imperfects then I have no love for it either as I know not of which you speak, Ke-mo Sah-bee. Your sarcasm is lost on me.
I am part of the discussion because the Imperfects do not actually run the Forums nor, hopefully, Dust514. Much as they want to. |
KalOfTheRathi
CowTek
168
|
Posted - 2013.01.15 22:46:00 -
[14] - Quote
Separate response to the Original Posting and the Original Post.
I agree with you well stated posting and liked it previously. In fact, did so immediately.
Just thought that should be made quite clear considering the directions the other part of the thread has taken. |
still 'mirin
Pink Fluffy Bounty Hunterz RISE of LEGION
2
|
Posted - 2013.01.15 22:46:00 -
[15] - Quote
KalOfTheRathi wrote:Free Beers wrote:KalOfTheRathi wrote:Or a corp as big as the Imperfects gets all their members to give input and sound like a lot of input. When in reality it is one corp expressing how they want to twist the game to their benefit.
The closer a corp is to an Eve corp the more likely their input will be destructive to Dust514. Yet, CCP does not seem to realize that. With what they put up with on a constant loop with Eve I have no idea why not? Um what? This has nothing to do with us. This is all general comments regarding communication and the feedback loop. Please show me where its something different from out posts. contribute, troll, or gtfo People like you that just see a corp tag next to a persons name are part of the problem. You can't be part of the discussion because your blinded by your love for the IMP ****. Also since a lot of people are sensative and try hard to make as many interweb friends as possbile the above paragraph is pure sarcasim and shouldn't be taken personally. Check out Sleepy Zan and his recent postings. Specifically regarding his camping in MCC and getting to have a long talk with a Dev and things will be fixed. Insinuating it was because of his interaction with the Dev. Being interpreted by myself that Imperfects have a closer connection to the Devs than the rest of the Beta testers. Which is horrible because Sleepy Zan is an admittedly gleeful griefer. He runs down Blue snipers for sport and cannot wait until friendly fire is active. Can Not Wait. Yes, your tag by his name on his postings colors my view of your Corp. Imperfects rant, grief and bad mouth everybody. It is a constant around these forums. Also, I have no idea how big you are or are not. The wording was meant to be open ended because, if you were big that implied undue connection or if you were small it also implied the same. Probably trying to be too funny while being too late into my sleep cycle. Sorry. My previous readings of Imperfects postings have lead me not to check on your Corp directly. The attitude presented by them is pretty consistent. Just my reaction. Not necessarily how the most of you actually are or what the Corp aspires to. BTW, the "you're blinded by your love for the IMP ****" statement is confusing. If it doesn't mean Imperfects then I don't understand that statement at all. I have no love for Imperfects postings or the attitudes associated with them. If it doesn't mean Imperfects then I have no love for it either as I know not of which you speak, Ke-mo Sah-bee. Your sarcasm is lost on me. I am part of the discussion because the Imperfects do not actually run the Forums nor, hopefully, Dust514. Much as they want to. Yet here you are, derailing an entire thread because of them. Good job showing how much they don't matter. |
Geth Massredux
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
63
|
Posted - 2013.01.15 23:02:00 -
[16] - Quote
Well there is a non disclosure agreement that everybody at ccp has signed. So I'm pretty sure they have to follow the rules and get ordered to say anything. Or they get fired. Simple as that. |
Free Beers
Internal Error. Negative-Feedback
1043
|
Posted - 2013.01.15 23:05:00 -
[17] - Quote
still 'mirin wrote:KalOfTheRathi wrote:Free Beers wrote:KalOfTheRathi wrote:Or a corp as big as the Imperfects gets all their members to give input and sound like a lot of input. When in reality it is one corp expressing how they want to twist the game to their benefit.
The closer a corp is to an Eve corp the more likely their input will be destructive to Dust514. Yet, CCP does not seem to realize that. With what they put up with on a constant loop with Eve I have no idea why not? Um what? This has nothing to do with us. This is all general comments regarding communication and the feedback loop. Please show me where its something different from out posts. contribute, troll, or gtfo People like you that just see a corp tag next to a persons name are part of the problem. You can't be part of the discussion because your blinded by your love for the IMP ****. Also since a lot of people are sensative and try hard to make as many interweb friends as possbile the above paragraph is pure sarcasim and shouldn't be taken personally. Check out Sleepy Zan and his recent postings. Specifically regarding his camping in MCC and getting to have a long talk with a Dev and things will be fixed. Insinuating it was because of his interaction with the Dev. Being interpreted by myself that Imperfects have a closer connection to the Devs than the rest of the Beta testers. Which is horrible because Sleepy Zan is an admittedly gleeful griefer. He runs down Blue snipers for sport and cannot wait until friendly fire is active. Can Not Wait. Yes, your tag by his name on his postings colors my view of your Corp. Imperfects rant, grief and bad mouth everybody. It is a constant around these forums. Also, I have no idea how big you are or are not. The wording was meant to be open ended because, if you were big that implied undue connection or if you were small it also implied the same. Probably trying to be too funny while being too late into my sleep cycle. Sorry. My previous readings of Imperfects postings have lead me not to check on your Corp directly. The attitude presented by them is pretty consistent. Just my reaction. Not necessarily how the most of you actually are or what the Corp aspires to. BTW, the "you're blinded by your love for the IMP ****" statement is confusing. If it doesn't mean Imperfects then I don't understand that statement at all. I have no love for Imperfects postings or the attitudes associated with them. If it doesn't mean Imperfects then I have no love for it either as I know not of which you speak, Ke-mo Sah-bee. Your sarcasm is lost on me. I am part of the discussion because the Imperfects do not actually run the Forums nor, hopefully, Dust514. Much as they want to. Yet here you are, derailing an entire thread because of them. Good job showing how much they don't matter.
Somebody loves himself some IMP alrght. We do have lots of fanbois it seems. Guess I could make space in the groupie room.
|
S Park Finner
BetaMax.
89
|
Posted - 2013.01.15 23:12:00 -
[18] - Quote
We are guinea pigs GÇô not Quality Assurance, not co-developers.
Flatten weapon damage and see how people use weapons vs. armor vs. shields. Change the balance between movement speed and damage per second in the heavy dropsuit and see if it impacts how people group up against them or to support them. Make dropships more difficult to fly and make people pay for them and see how it changes their use.
And as for CCP sharing their objectives for the game... except for the high level goals don't expect them to give competitors any greater insight into their objectives or what they've learned than they have to. You can already see, in the descriptions of other games, elements of what DUST is doing. The devil is in the details and as soon as you tell someone what you've learned you've given it away.
We should not kid ourselves about our role here. |
Free Beers
Internal Error. Negative-Feedback
1043
|
Posted - 2013.01.15 23:14:00 -
[19] - Quote
Geth Massredux wrote:Well there is a non disclosure agreement that everybody at ccp has signed. So I'm pretty sure they have to follow the rules and get ordered to say anything. Or they get fired. Simple as that.
CCP talks to people in irc about things at times. Sadly, not much in the last 3 months though. When the conversations do occur it's normally in irc dustbeta channel and anyone in there can be invovled. As many questions as I have asked in channel or pm there wasn't once they said anything to me that was NDA breaking.
The truth is most conversation has to do with
-servers crashed -them getting clarifcation of bugs or asking us to reproduce a bug -asking us to test stuff.
I am really hard on ccp but they dont play favorites at all trust me I would love favortisim but it just doesn't happen.
if you or anyone wants to get invovled then post in the thread and join the channel. Sadly 98% of convo is just trash talking and nova trying to make friends on the interweb. |
|
CCP Cmdr Wang
C C P C C P Alliance
1876
|
Posted - 2013.01.16 03:54:00 -
[20] - Quote
I think many of you misunderstand the purporse of the weekly update posts. They are meant to keep the general forum populus informed (on a high level) on what the dev team has discussed regarding forum feedbak and comments by players. It is not meant to be, nor should it be a detailed essay of development work being done on DUST.
These weekly updates begain as a response to beta testers asking for a brief weekly update that will let them know that the dev team is looking at their comments and taking steps to address them and that's what the weekly updates have been doing.
We are working on publishing more dev blogs that will give more insight to the vision of DUST and the features/game mechanics that have been and are going to be introduced, but it will take us time before we can reach the level of frequency and volume that EVE dev blogs have.
We understand the desire to have a two way communication between players and devs and when done correctly, it is a very powerful tool. However, like some of you stated, what is communicated to us should represent the majority of the player base, and not the vocal minority. The CSM has proven to be very helpful in this regard and we are looking into how we can expand it to include DUST delegates as well in the future.
Lastly, we would like to thank all of you for giving us your feedback during the DUST beta period. To help us build better communication channels, we would like to ask that you give ideas that can improve it in the same level of detail that you have shown in pointing out what was broken with it in this thread. |
|
|
TODDSTER024
Royal Uhlans Amarr Empire
33
|
Posted - 2013.01.16 04:39:00 -
[21] - Quote
I still love this Beta. |
Tiel Syysch
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
634
|
Posted - 2013.01.16 04:42:00 -
[22] - Quote
Well it's not just the weekly update posts that are a point of frustration. It's pretty much all communication, that was just the most recent thing to grab as an example. There's hardly anything informative coming our way, spanning back several months at this point. There used to be a fair amount of activity on the forums and IRC, and lately all we get are "thread moved to appropriate section" posts for the most part.
The weekly update posts could stand to have more elaboration, though. Part of the reason is feedback to us that you see a given problem or suggestion the way that we intended. Otherwise, we feel like in the middle of all the chaos you overhear just "small missiles" and then it's off to the drawing board to mess with small missiles! More activity (from your end) on the forums could help out with this as well, participating in threads that you see a legitimate suggestions and discussions to help guide fleshing out an idea, because let's face it a lot of people are bad at fully proposing an idea. That way we don't feel like you just hear the topic and then go off to do your own thing to it.
New dev blogs are good and all, but so far I don't think I've seen one that has really told us, the closed beta testers, anything we didn't already know. They all seem like marketing material to get people out of the loop interested, and not a look at what's on the horizon. The rewards one was a little informative, but really only so far as you guys refused to tell us how it worked exactly before the dev blog, because it was being written at the time and "wait for it."
Many of us still don't know what kind of game you want Dust to be, though, and that's a huge problem for those of us that feel that way. It was always explained as tactical before I joined into the beta, but things have gone in a direction that is anything but tactical with each new build. We don't know how to tailor our feedback when not knowing what vision you have for Dust. If it's supposed to be an arcade shooter, that'll alter our perception of various mechanics (and how we provide feedback) differently than if it's supposed to be a tactical shooter.
One of the biggest issues is all the changes being made with no explanation, such as AR iron sights and ambush red line changes. They're just thrust upon us and we have to beat an explanation out of you as to why they were done, if we ever get one at all (I don't think we have about either of those). Most of the time we make up our own ideas for why they were done, and it just leads to all this speculation about the direction the game is heading.
I spoke to you in IRC (I'm Skytt in there) about communication a while back, and setting up some kind of organized feedback system to have better two-way communication, but I never heard anything since then. I'd still like to see that. You could choose a reasonable number of the more rational members of the community and have a weekly or bi-weekly feedback session (whatever fits your schedule) with them where their role is to simply relay the important matters the community has between you and everyone else. They can do all the typing it up to save you time to work on other stuff.
If we're supposed to have any role in the testing that isn't purely providing you with usage data, and instead actually having some kind of impact on the development of the game with our ideas and suggestions, then something really needs to be done to establish better two-way communication. |
Telcontar Dunedain
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
328
|
Posted - 2013.01.16 05:31:00 -
[23] - Quote
CCP Cmdr Wang wrote: .... We are working on publishing more dev blogs that will give more insight to the vision of DUST and the features/game mechanics that have been and are going to be introduced, but it will take us time before we can reach the level of frequency and volume that EVE dev blogs have.
We understand the desire to have a two way communication between players and devs and when done correctly, it is a very powerful tool. ... we would like to ask that you give ideas that can improve it in the same level of detail that you have shown in pointing out what was broken with it in this thread.
Specifically in regards to process-
As you come up with a topic for a devblog, give us a -very- rough draft as an UNLOCKED forum post.
Stay in the thread responding to questions and concerns through the lifecycle of the thread.
Edit the original post as you go to better reflect the modifications we all found useful.
THEN send it to the marketing team for polish.
ASK the forum what would be a good NEXT devblog. Poll even.
Specifically in regards to content -
Be sure to state what your deep goals are with upcoming changes and additions to the game.
For example "we think flattening the damage of all light weapons is a good idea that will make people have the ability to...."
"we are making this change -temporarily- and will solicit feedback on these changes"
"if we find the changes unpleasant we will back them out via a hotfix" "this change is substantial and will require a new build"
Ongoing forum participation needs to include originating longer threads, staying in them and elaborating your positions. |
Noc Tempre
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
1170
|
Posted - 2013.01.16 05:54:00 -
[24] - Quote
CCP Cmdr Wang wrote:I think many of you misunderstand the purporse of the weekly update posts. They are meant to keep the general forum populus informed (on a high level) on what the dev team has discussed regarding forum feedbak and comments by players. It is not meant to be, nor should it be a detailed essay of development work being done on DUST.
These weekly updates begain as a response to beta testers asking for a brief weekly update that will let them know that the dev team is looking at their comments and taking steps to address them and that's what the weekly updates have been doing.
We are working on publishing more dev blogs that will give more insight to the vision of DUST and the features/game mechanics that have been and are going to be introduced, but it will take us time before we can reach the level of frequency and volume that EVE dev blogs have.
We understand the desire to have a two way communication between players and devs and when done correctly, it is a very powerful tool. However, like some of you stated, what is communicated to us should represent the majority of the player base, and not the vocal minority. The CSM has proven to be very helpful in this regard and we are looking into how we can expand it to include DUST delegates as well in the future.
Lastly, we would like to thank all of you for giving us your feedback during the DUST beta period. To help us build better communication channels, we would like to ask that you give ideas that can improve it in the same level of detail that you have shown in pointing out what was broken with it in this thread.
We have CSM reps reaching out to us because you aren't listening to them either. I'm sorry, but you either completely missed the content in the first post or are purposely spinning it. We are complaining that you are posting nonsense on the feedback. I hope you recognize how ironic that you want us to just sit back and wait for all the dev blogs. How about all the blogs promised that were never delivered?
I am dead serious, shut down the servers if you aren't going to use our feedback to improve the game. DUST will become a laughing stock if you continue on the trend of the last 6 months, which has exponentially been getting worse. How can you represent yourself as CCP and ignore all the lessons of Incarna launch disaster? Treat us with some respect, most of us are not idiots, merely frustrated beyond logical arguments. |
Free Beers
Internal Error. Negative-Feedback
1043
|
Posted - 2013.01.16 06:14:00 -
[25] - Quote
Noc Tempre wrote:CCP Cmdr Wang wrote:I think many of you misunderstand the purporse of the weekly update posts. They are meant to keep the general forum populus informed (on a high level) on what the dev team has discussed regarding forum feedbak and comments by players. It is not meant to be, nor should it be a detailed essay of development work being done on DUST.
These weekly updates begain as a response to beta testers asking for a brief weekly update that will let them know that the dev team is looking at their comments and taking steps to address them and that's what the weekly updates have been doing.
We are working on publishing more dev blogs that will give more insight to the vision of DUST and the features/game mechanics that have been and are going to be introduced, but it will take us time before we can reach the level of frequency and volume that EVE dev blogs have.
We understand the desire to have a two way communication between players and devs and when done correctly, it is a very powerful tool. However, like some of you stated, what is communicated to us should represent the majority of the player base, and not the vocal minority. The CSM has proven to be very helpful in this regard and we are looking into how we can expand it to include DUST delegates as well in the future.
Lastly, we would like to thank all of you for giving us your feedback during the DUST beta period. To help us build better communication channels, we would like to ask that you give ideas that can improve it in the same level of detail that you have shown in pointing out what was broken with it in this thread. We have CSM reps reaching out to us because you aren't listening to them either. I'm sorry, but you either completely missed the content in the first post or are purposely spinning it. We are complaining that you are posting nonsense on the feedback. I hope you recognize how ironic that you want us to just sit back and wait for all the dev blogs. How about all the blogs promised that were never delivered? I am dead serious, shut down the servers if you aren't going to use our feedback to improve the game. DUST will become a laughing stock if you continue on the trend of the last 6 months, which has exponentially been getting worse. How can you represent yourself as CCP and ignore all the lessons of Incarna launch disaster? Treat us with some respect, most of us are not idiots, merely frustrated beyond logical arguments.
You mad bro?
Noc what in the last 8 months of does Dust gives you any indication that CCP cares what we think? Lower your expectations man you play EvE you were here for incarna.
Once the bad press hits they will be shocked and blame it on listening to the community and kill all the forums but the bug reporting one.
Tell me is you heard this one before.
|
Tectonious Falcon
The Southern Legion
395
|
Posted - 2013.01.16 06:20:00 -
[26] - Quote
Noc Tempre wrote:CCP Cmdr Wang wrote:I think many of you misunderstand the purporse of the weekly update posts. They are meant to keep the general forum populus informed (on a high level) on what the dev team has discussed regarding forum feedbak and comments by players. It is not meant to be, nor should it be a detailed essay of development work being done on DUST.
These weekly updates begain as a response to beta testers asking for a brief weekly update that will let them know that the dev team is looking at their comments and taking steps to address them and that's what the weekly updates have been doing.
We are working on publishing more dev blogs that will give more insight to the vision of DUST and the features/game mechanics that have been and are going to be introduced, but it will take us time before we can reach the level of frequency and volume that EVE dev blogs have.
We understand the desire to have a two way communication between players and devs and when done correctly, it is a very powerful tool. However, like some of you stated, what is communicated to us should represent the majority of the player base, and not the vocal minority. The CSM has proven to be very helpful in this regard and we are looking into how we can expand it to include DUST delegates as well in the future.
Lastly, we would like to thank all of you for giving us your feedback during the DUST beta period. To help us build better communication channels, we would like to ask that you give ideas that can improve it in the same level of detail that you have shown in pointing out what was broken with it in this thread. We have CSM reps reaching out to us because you aren't listening to them either. I'm sorry, but you either completely missed the content in the first post or are purposely spinning it. We are complaining that you are posting nonsense on the feedback. I hope you recognize how ironic that you want us to just sit back and wait for all the dev blogs. How about all the blogs promised that were never delivered? I am dead serious, shut down the servers if you aren't going to use our feedback to improve the game. DUST will become a laughing stock if you continue on the trend of the last 6 months, which has exponentially been getting worse. How can you represent yourself as CCP and ignore all the lessons of Incarna launch disaster? Treat us with some respect, most of us are not idiots, merely frustrated beyond logical arguments.
Pretty much this. CCP why'd you hire us as beta testers, if you were going to completely ignore our feedback and do whatever you want. You do the opposite of what you say all the time. "we don't want to listen to the vocal minority" then why did you nerf tanks so much and buff AV?
Knowing you CCP heavies are either A) going to get nerfed and become completely useless or B) get buffed and become the only thing worth using. You need to tweak things and add new mechanics. I made a thread about heavies and while some people didn't like it you can't deny that it was a tweak and wouldn't increase or decrease the worth of heavies, merely shift what they're good for.
|
Noc Tempre
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
1170
|
Posted - 2013.01.16 06:23:00 -
[27] - Quote
Free Beers wrote:
You mad bro?
Noc what in the last 8 months of does Dust gives you any indication that CCP cares what we think? Lower your expectations man you play EvE you were here for incarna.
Once the bad press hits they will be shocked and blame it on listening to the community and kill all the forums but the bug reporting one.
Tell me is you heard this one before.
I remember the midnight matches with CCP during E3, and random GM's in game checking on our opinion. Did they get fired or something? My expectations are actually set by CCP themselves sadly. |
Bendtner92
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
369
|
Posted - 2013.01.16 08:13:00 -
[28] - Quote
Like others have said, you're making all these strange changes we have no idea are happening before they're implemented. If the change suck (in the case of the daily cap and grenade timer among many other things) we have to live with it for months until the next build in most cases.
When you decide to make changes to stuff make some threads (one thread for each change) asking for feedback. Like this "hey guys, we're making these changes to grenades in the upcoming build. We're doing this because we think this and that. What do you think about them?", then gather feedback on them. Keep responding to the thread and close it after a few days when you've gathered some feedback and then decide to either go forward with the initial changes or update them.
A lot of bad changes could've been avoided this way. Of course you don't need to do it with every single minor change, but it would be nice if you did it with a few things. |
Free Beers
Internal Error. Negative-Feedback
1043
|
Posted - 2013.01.16 09:02:00 -
[29] - Quote
Noc Tempre wrote:Free Beers wrote:
You mad bro?
Noc what in the last 8 months of does Dust gives you any indication that CCP cares what we think? Lower your expectations man you play EvE you were here for incarna.
Once the bad press hits they will be shocked and blame it on listening to the community and kill all the forums but the bug reporting one.
Tell me is you heard this one before.
I remember the midnight matches with CCP during E3, and random GM's in game checking on our opinion. Did they get fired or something? My expectations are actually set by CCP themselves sadly.
So you had a great first date proceeded by poor communication, neglect, and mental abuse. Probably should just break up now and get it over with. We all know you will get blamed when things go wrong |
crazy space 2100046106
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
879
|
Posted - 2013.01.16 09:18:00 -
[30] - Quote
Keep faith, your forum posters not professional game devs |
|
R F Gyro
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
315
|
Posted - 2013.01.16 09:55:00 -
[31] - Quote
Is this thread a troll? |
Bendtner92
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
369
|
Posted - 2013.01.16 10:24:00 -
[32] - Quote
R F Gyro wrote:Is this thread a troll? Far from it.
A lot of people are unhappy with the amount of communication from CCP.
Personally I'm dissapointed with the lack of feedback coming from them. They usually don't tell us why they change things, or even tell us that they do change things. I wish they would respond to more threads here on the forums, and tell us more about upcoming changes (see my post a few posts back). |
R F Gyro
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
315
|
Posted - 2013.01.16 10:39:00 -
[33] - Quote
I'm unhappy that I don't have a Ferrari
Is this a request that the devs spend less time improving the game and more time talking about improving the game?
If so, I'm not sure I'd support it.
If it is just a request for the devs to work harder, or for CCP to employ more of them, then I'll ignore it. |
Bendtner92
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
369
|
Posted - 2013.01.16 10:49:00 -
[34] - Quote
R F Gyro wrote:I'm unhappy that I don't have a Ferrari Is this a request that the devs spend less time improving the game and more time talking about improving the game? If so, I'm not sure I'd support it. If it is just a request for the devs to work harder, or for CCP to employ more of them, then I'll ignore it. Well, here's the thing.
For every bad change they make they need to spend more time fixing it again. If they hadn't made the change (by actually getting feedback from the forums beforehand) they could use that time otherwise. If they're making all of these bad changes is that then actually improving the game? I think not.
Another thing is that if they keep messing up all kind of things they'll be viewed as comepletely incompetent at making a game (if they aren't already by a lot of people by now).
|
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
220
|
Posted - 2013.01.16 12:10:00 -
[35] - Quote
While I agree that communication does seem to be a weak link in all this forum business, people should realise that our direct feedback is only a small portion of the feedback available to CCP. There are another 80 - 90% of the player base who will never ever come on the forum to give their feedback but they still contribute to the massive plethora of stats CCP get from millions of data hooks they have in the game. They can see which weapons are used most, which get the most kills, which items are bought most, which dropsuits die most and an uncountable number of other things - this is where a lot of the changes will come from, not just listening to what 10% of the playerbase whine about. |
trollolollo man
Maphia Clan Corporation CRONOS.
24
|
Posted - 2013.01.16 14:12:00 -
[36] - Quote
Tiel Syysch wrote:Well it's not just the weekly update posts that are a point of frustration. It's pretty much all communication, that was just the most recent thing to grab as an example. There's hardly anything informative coming our way, spanning back several months at this point. There used to be a fair amount of activity on the forums and IRC, and lately all we get are "thread moved to appropriate section" posts for the most part.
The weekly update posts could stand to have more elaboration, though. Part of the reason is feedback to us that you see a given problem or suggestion the way that we intended. Otherwise, we feel like in the middle of all the chaos you overhear just "small missiles" and then it's off to the drawing board to mess with small missiles! More activity (from your end) on the forums could help out with this as well, participating in threads that you see a legitimate suggestions and discussions to help guide fleshing out an idea, because let's face it a lot of people are bad at fully proposing an idea. That way we don't feel like you just hear the topic and then go off to do your own thing to it.
New dev blogs are good and all, but so far I don't think I've seen one that has really told us, the closed beta testers, anything we didn't already know. They all seem like marketing material to get people out of the loop interested, and not a look at what's on the horizon. The rewards one was a little informative, but really only so far as you guys refused to tell us how it worked exactly before the dev blog, because it was being written at the time and "wait for it."
Many of us still don't know what kind of game you want Dust to be, though, and that's a huge problem for those of us that feel that way. It was always explained as tactical before I joined into the beta, but things have gone in a direction that is anything but tactical with each new build. We don't know how to tailor our feedback when not knowing what vision you have for Dust. If it's supposed to be an arcade shooter, that'll alter our perception of various mechanics (and how we provide feedback) differently than if it's supposed to be a tactical shooter.
One of the biggest issues is all the changes being made with no explanation, such as AR iron sights and ambush red line changes. They're just thrust upon us and we have to beat an explanation out of you as to why they were done, if we ever get one at all (I don't think we have about either of those). Most of the time we make up our own ideas for why they were done, and it just leads to all this speculation about the direction the game is heading.
I spoke to you in IRC (I'm Skytt in there) about communication a while back, and setting up some kind of organized feedback system to have better two-way communication, but I never heard anything since then. I'd still like to see that. You could choose a reasonable number of the more rational members of the community and have a weekly or bi-weekly feedback session (whatever fits your schedule) with them where their role is to simply relay the important matters the community has between you and everyone else. They can do all the typing it up to save you time to work on other stuff.
If we're supposed to have any role in the testing that isn't purely providing you with usage data, and instead actually having some kind of impact on the development of the game with our ideas and suggestions, then something really needs to be done to establish better two-way communication. Quote +1for this |
Musta Tornius
BetaMax.
265
|
Posted - 2013.01.16 14:53:00 -
[37] - Quote
Everyone in this game should take a long good look at this thread. |
Aeon Amadi
Maverick Conflict Solutions
1003
|
Posted - 2013.01.16 17:29:00 -
[38] - Quote
Tiel Syysch wrote:
One of the biggest issues is all the changes being made with no explanation, such as AR iron sights and ambush red line changes. They're just thrust upon us and we have to beat an explanation out of you as to why they were done, if we ever get one at all (I don't think we have about either of those). Most of the time we make up our own ideas for why they were done, and it just leads to all this speculation about the direction the game is heading.
The Iron Sight for the AR was implemented because there was a lot of feedback in the Feedback/requests forums stating that the AR "mask" was odd. Was mostly because the gun wasn't lifted to the face to be sighted, the camera just moved to the sight on top of the AR itself and was rather unorthodox.
I think another big thing to do with it was that CCP intends (at some point) to implement a weapon customization system. |
Naturi Riclenore
BetaMax.
120
|
Posted - 2013.01.16 17:46:00 -
[39] - Quote
crazy space 2100046106 wrote:Keep faith, your forum posters not professional game devs
We may not be professional game devs, but many (probably most) of us are very avid gamers and this is not our first pony ride. There are things that work, and things that don't. Problem is, we receive so little communication about how DUST is SUPPOSED to function, that we are under the impression our feedback is totally ignored.
Most here understand that CCP wants us to play and give feedback / point out bugs / issues and they don't want to handhold us. So instead of trying to give specific things to look at, they instead leave it up to us to explore find out things. I'm 100% fine with that, as are most people. But is it really too much trouble to give us some sort of an explanation of how some things are suppose to work.
The devblogs are pretty much a joke to most of us as they contain very little new information; if any new information at all. They stated (back in august) we would be seeing more communication and more devblogs.. Guess how many devblogs have appeared... 3 (THREE)... one which was just announcing open beta, so it really doesn't count.. so 2.
Add to that, they make drastic changes with no warning, and no explanation as to why a change was made. There are also key features missing, which no one can explain why they weren't there from day 1. For instance: This is an FPS, why does it not show my PING and what Server I'm connected to? In Voice Comms, why does it not show who is talking? Why does it not tell me 1. I'm SL and 2. If SL has changed. These things have been asked for for at least 4 builds, yet nothing as to why they weren't there, or when we may see them (Wang mentioned a couple of them in a recent Feedback Update thread).
All we are asking for is some 2-way communication.
|
Tiel Syysch
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
634
|
Posted - 2013.01.16 18:20:00 -
[40] - Quote
Aeon Amadi wrote:Tiel Syysch wrote:
One of the biggest issues is all the changes being made with no explanation, such as AR iron sights and ambush red line changes. They're just thrust upon us and we have to beat an explanation out of you as to why they were done, if we ever get one at all (I don't think we have about either of those). Most of the time we make up our own ideas for why they were done, and it just leads to all this speculation about the direction the game is heading.
The Iron Sight for the AR was implemented because there was a lot of feedback in the Feedback/requests forums stating that the AR "mask" was odd. Was mostly because the gun wasn't lifted to the face to be sighted, the camera just moved to the sight on top of the AR itself and was rather unorthodox. I think another big thing to do with it was that CCP intends (at some point) to implement a weapon customization system.
Check out the last sentence of what you quoted, because that's exactly what you're doing. There were A LOT of people that were fine with the sight the AR had. SOME people wanted iron sights. The change to iron sights-only was just bonkers, and if it was done because of "weapon customization some day in the future," there was no reason they couldn't have both as options leading up to that instead of drastically altering the weapon without including a way to get the old sight back.
Naturi Riclenore wrote:crazy space 2100046106 wrote:Keep faith, your forum posters not professional game devs We may not be professional game devs, but many (probably most) of us are very avid gamers and this is not our first pony ride. Not to mention there are some of us who are game devs, or have been in the past. |
|
Cross Atu
Conspiratus Immortalis
775
|
Posted - 2013.01.16 18:33:00 -
[41] - Quote
CCP Cmdr Wang wrote:I think many of you misunderstand the purporse of the weekly update posts. They are meant to keep the general forum populus informed (on a high level) on what the dev team has discussed regarding forum feedbak and comments by players. It is not meant to be, nor should it be a detailed essay of development work being done on DUST.
These weekly updates begain as a response to beta testers asking for a brief weekly update that will let them know that the dev team is looking at their comments and taking steps to address them and that's what the weekly updates have been doing.
We are working on publishing more dev blogs that will give more insight to the vision of DUST and the features/game mechanics that have been and are going to be introduced, but it will take us time before we can reach the level of frequency and volume that EVE dev blogs have.
We understand the desire to have a two way communication between players and devs and when done correctly, it is a very powerful tool. However, like some of you stated, what is communicated to us should represent the majority of the player base, and not the vocal minority. The CSM has proven to be very helpful in this regard and we are looking into how we can expand it to include DUST delegates as well in the future.
Lastly, we would like to thank all of you for giving us your feedback during the DUST beta period. To help us build better communication channels, we would like to ask that you give ideas that can improve it in the same level of detail that you have shown in pointing out what was broken with it in this thread. Thank you for the response.
Regarding improvement there is one key element that I would like to draw your attention to, and that is "working as intended" testers/players are much more able to provide feedback (and keep that feedback relevant/useful) when the purpose of various things is explicitly stated. A simple high level statement (on the same threshold as the weekly updates) would serve this purpose and allow discussions of balance and functionality to remain much more clear and constructive.
Thank you for your continued work and communication. Cheers, Cross
|
Free Beers
Internal Error. Negative-Feedback
1043
|
Posted - 2013.01.16 20:41:00 -
[42] - Quote
crazy space 2100046106 wrote:Keep faith, your forum posters not professional game devs
There are more of us here than you realize. |
GoD-NoVa
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
174
|
Posted - 2013.01.16 20:51:00 -
[43] - Quote
where were all you guys support when i made a thread about this? O_o |
Free Beers
Internal Error. Negative-Feedback
1043
|
Posted - 2013.01.16 20:55:00 -
[44] - Quote
GoD-NoVa wrote:where were all you guys support when i made a thread about this? O_o
sorry man you didn't coordinate threads with the other imperfects Actually i read yours but lots of IMP **** lovers follow me around to I stayed out of your thread on purpose. |
GoD-NoVa
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
174
|
Posted - 2013.01.16 21:02:00 -
[45] - Quote
i was the first to bring up this issue lol i found it!!!! https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=449515#post449515 |
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
1155
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 09:15:00 -
[46] - Quote
I never had any trouble with those weekly updates. They're meant to be pointers, notes on what is discussed in dev meetings and not full report. Also, someone mentioned how worse those forums would be if they were actually saying "hey, we discussed about making heavies 50% slower and raise bullet spread for HMG by 40% or so"
It would quickly end with multiple " NERF WHAT DA **** CCP!!" vs "HEAVIES DO ARE OP, JUST TAKE IT" etc.... And we already have that every new build. Trust me, you dont want that every week. Especially when there absolutely no reason to think that they actually changed anything in the game. They discuss the feature. Meaning they probably decide of a few test\tweaks to run that may not even end up with any actual change.
Now, is their comm perfect ? Of course not. It's often clumsy, or lacking a bit in accuracy (tourney, late migration with dates all wonky, incomplete patch notes etc..). But even if they were to do more, i think we'll remain unsatisfied as we would then want even more. Or maybe they could add a live feed of all their meeting, who would like that ?
i think we can't actually complain about CCP compared to most dev teams.... |
Bendtner92
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
369
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 11:43:00 -
[47] - Quote
Laurent Cazaderon wrote:I never had any trouble with those weekly updates. They're meant to be pointers, notes on what is discussed in dev meetings and not full report. Also, someone mentioned how worse those forums would be if they were actually saying "hey, we discussed about making heavies 50% slower and raise bullet spread for HMG by 40% or so"It would quickly end with multiple " NERF WHAT DA **** CCP!!" vs "HEAVIES DO ARE OP, JUST TAKE IT" etc.... And we already have that every new build. Trust me, you dont want that every week. Especially when there absolutely no reason to think that they actually changed anything in the game. They discuss the feature. Meaning they probably decide of a few test\tweaks to run that may not even end up with any actual change. Now, is their comm perfect ? Of course not. It's often clumsy, or lacking a bit in accuracy (tourney, late migration with dates all wonky, incomplete patch notes etc..). But even if they were to do more, i think we'll remain unsatisfied as we would then want even more. Or maybe they could add a live feed of all their meeting, who would like that ? i think we can't actually complain about CCP compared to most dev teams.... Personally I don't mind them being vaque about things in the weekly updates. What I do mind, however, is that these changes to the heavies are being implemented without our feedback.
In my opinion, once they've settled on the specific changes, they should make a thread, outline all the specific changes, and ask for feedback on them. GM's should be watching the thread and delete any rageposts, so we get a good discussion going about the changes. The devs should respond to the thread, and then close it after a few days. After that they should decide if they want to change something based on our feedback.
Edit: I totally fear that they'll mess up the heavies, and then all the people who have put SP into them, including myself, will have to live with those changes until a new build, if they ever fix it again. |
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
1155
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 13:36:00 -
[48] - Quote
I get what you mean Bendtner. But would it be relevant for us to judge changes before effectively testing them ? I guess if it had worked this way in the past, maybe we could have avoided some unpleasant changes like the 2sec timer. That and other stuff dont need any testing for us to know that it's a bad move.
Maybe it's also a man-power issue. Doing such a thing would require much more time from devs and such that they probably dont have. |
Naturi Riclenore
BetaMax.
120
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 16:12:00 -
[49] - Quote
Laurent Cazaderon wrote:I get what you mean Bendtner. But would it be relevant for us to judge changes before effectively testing them ? I guess if it had worked this way in the past, maybe we could have avoided some unpleasant changes like the 2sec timer. That and other stuff dont need any testing for us to know that it's a bad move.
Maybe it's also a man-power issue. Doing such a thing would require much more time from devs and such that they probably dont have.
Caz, there are some things that do not need to be tested to get input on.
As you mentioned, the 2 second timer on grenades. We could have told them "Bad idea.. bad idea... bad idea.. bad idea.." way before the change took place. I'm sure a large number of people have played other FPS's and so right away, that's a bad idea. You just know from experience it's a bad idea.
I played an MMO (not that one) and there was an ability in the game that 100% of the community said "It is EXTREMELY OP.. TAKE IT OUT OF THE GAME AND FIX IT!" Now this wasn't just a minority, or some people thinking it was OP, 100% of the community (EVERYONE) KNEW it was OP and wasn't working properly. 1.5 years later the developer said "We are taking 'OP' ability out of the game because we have found the damage calculation is incorrect." 1.5 years and then they take action, when 100% of the players said "remove it, it's not working properly." The developer listened to nothing the community had to say, and implemented some pretty poor stuff that no one wanted to start with. We just don't want to see that happen with DUST.
On top of that, they announced 2 new game variations today, then don't say what the game variations are.. WTF. How come you can't tell us what the game variations are? We have to try random games to even try and see the new variations (which you may or may not see due to the matchmaking system). So we are randomly thrown into matches, so we MIGHT see a new game variation and we MIGHT not. How are we suppose to test that?
We just want a 2-way roadand feel they are at least somewhat interested in our opinions. |
Caeli SineDeo
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
295
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 19:41:00 -
[50] - Quote
CCP Cmdr Wang wrote:I think many of you misunderstand the purporse of the weekly update posts. They are meant to keep the general forum populus informed (on a high level) on what the dev team has discussed regarding forum feedbak and comments by players. It is not meant to be, nor should it be a detailed essay of development work being done on DUST.
These weekly updates begain as a response to beta testers asking for a brief weekly update that will let them know that the dev team is looking at their comments and taking steps to address them and that's what the weekly updates have been doing.
We are working on publishing more dev blogs that will give more insight to the vision of DUST and the features/game mechanics that have been and are going to be introduced, but it will take us time before we can reach the level of frequency and volume that EVE dev blogs have.
We understand the desire to have a two way communication between players and devs and when done correctly, it is a very powerful tool. However, like some of you stated, what is communicated to us should represent the majority of the player base, and not the vocal minority. The CSM has proven to be very helpful in this regard and we are looking into how we can expand it to include DUST delegates as well in the future.
Lastly, we would like to thank all of you for giving us your feedback during the DUST beta period. To help us build better communication channels, we would like to ask that you give ideas that can improve it in the same level of detail that you have shown in pointing out what was broken with it in this thread.
First off I am glad you responded here.
Now to the point your weekly update thread is nice. But it lacks the information for us to give you better feedback. As tiel pointed out the heavy thing is a great example. you could mention if you working this the suits or the weapons and give us a quick idea on which way you are going
Example Heavy Rebalancing: We have on going balancing going on with each class currently we feel we need to rework the Proto heavy suits slot lay outs and more. We could lower the HP but adjust the slots to allow you to gain more through fittings.
It is quick and simple and allows us to start a thread and give you feed back. and maybe even give your development team a idea they did not think of for fixing that situation.
Thanks again. :)
I know you guys are working hard and we can get frustrating some times. But it would be nice to work towards better communication that you guys can access and quickly go through without taking up to much work time. |
|
BMSTUBBY
KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION
95
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 20:16:00 -
[51] - Quote
A video game developer giving the fans what they want, Pfff! LOL
What fantasy land are all you living in.
Quote:We understand the desire to have a two way communication between players and devs and when done correctly, it is a very powerful tool. However, like some of you stated, what is communicated to us should represent the majority of the player base, and not the vocal minority. The CSM has proven to be very helpful in this regard and we are looking into how we can expand it to include DUST delegates as well in the future.
Or in other words deal with it because it wont change anytime SOONGäó.
This is what you are getting,
Quote:DUST 514-« brings intense infantry combat, large-scale warfare, and deep character advancement to a free-to-play massively multiplayer shooter.
Anyway I applaud the effort. |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |