However, that isn't really the point of the forums. Intrepid don't need our input, as they have hundreds (perhaps thousands) of YEARS of MMO development experience in house who will literally always do a better job at this than we collectively could.
Please do not try to make this meme argument.
Having 100 people with 1 year of experience will never be better than five people with 20 years of experience. Adding the collective years of experience of employees is a meaningless PR tactic and an absolute meme move.
However, that isn't really the point of the forums. Intrepid don't need our input, as they have hundreds (perhaps thousands) of YEARS of MMO development experience in house who will literally always do a better job at this than we collectively could.
Please do not try to make this meme argument.
Having 100 people with 1 year of experience will never be better than five people with 20 years of experience. Adding the collective years of experience of employees is a meaningless PR tactic and an absolute meme move.
Well to be fair, Intrepid is still a pretty small studio relative compared to other MMO studios, so he's right. Especially since they have game development veterans.
on the current topic, this argument is full of sense, and goes on the way you say.
Intrepid got some veteran devs. with some experience, years experience in video game and MMORPG development. they are so far better than our "collectiv mind" on forum
Even so, that's not even the definition of the 'problem'.
MMO design isn't a monolithic perfection state that one is striving towards. It's a requirement from effectively, a customer.
It's not as if the fact that there are other groups with years of experience in games results in the games being 'better' in the way that we all end up enjoying either.
A simple example is that in my old company, the CTO was the only person with a specific skillset, and I was the only one with a different specific skillset. Without us, there was a project that would have taken a year to be done, and would probably still have been done incorrectly.
Similarly, when a new 'specification' presents itself, the CTO still has to spend months designing it, and still asks both the customer, and even junior developers, for help and insight, and often, that turns out to be helpful.
Could it have been done alone? Actually, for some parts of it, no. Lots of it is 'asking the user exactly how they want something to be', and then having to come up with a whole new way of doing something because they want a combination of features that has never been done before and there's no framework. Sometimes they can provide the framework for you.
That's partially why I have the perspective I do on this sort of thing. I've been in that place, asking the client multiple times for their input, and wishing they didn't just go 'well I don't know, you're the experts, you do what seems best'. Not even because they all complain later, but simply because what they end up getting is 'generic version of product' that is nowhere near the best fit for them.
However, that isn't really the point of the forums. Intrepid don't need our input, as they have hundreds (perhaps thousands) of YEARS of MMO development experience in house who will literally always do a better job at this than we collectively could.
Please do not try to make this meme argument.
Having 100 people with 1 year of experience will never be better than five people with 20 years of experience. Adding the collective years of experience of employees is a meaningless PR tactic and an absolute meme move.
What meme argument?
Intrepid don't have 100 developers with a year of experience each, they have some of the most experienced MMO developers ever (considering the industry is only about 25 years old...).
Also, adding collective experience of employees is not a PR tactic, although it doesn't hold as much weight if those employees all have experience in the same environment. If we were talking about their developers all having worked on the same games, then sure. Thing is, we have their history we can look at, and it is varied.
You say this as if you think Intrepid are looking for input here.
If Intrepid want input on a given topic, they will open a discussion on it. This is not the developer discussions - they are simply there to give people the feeling that they are being listened to.
This is a very good point, but a dealbreaker for me.
I spent a long time getting disappointed by blizzard, so if AoC is also planning to ignore players, then this is not the game I am looking for.
For me to invest myself into a new MMO, I want to be 100% sure that the company takes player input into consideration. If the last 15 years of bad MMO's have proven anything (to me), is that no team seems to get something decent done without player input, and I didn't leave WoW to join another game being developed behind closed doors.
You are free to have your opinion, just describing what is important for me, personally, in a new MMO. I don't want to invest 1-2 years in this game and then suddenly have unbalanced classes or a pay-to-win cash-shop in the game.
Is this how the dev team is acting here? Do they not answer to user feedback in the forum? I am relatively new to this game, so any info on this would be greatly appreciated.
there is not a single company in the world that has the manpower to read all comments objectively without a ranking system. Subjective opinions will always weight in more, it is human nature, which is why the voting system is important to help the team have an objective view on opinions.
Is this how the dev team is acting here? Do they not answer to user feedback in the forum? I am relatively new to this game, so any info on this would be greatly appreciated.
They clearly read and follow the discussions. They don't always give feedback "act is better than word" probably...
They care, there is different between listening anything players are saying with a totally falacious system to "vote" (upvote without downvote = meaningless) is not the best.
Comments are not only "good" or "don't care" but also "i disagree"
And even more, arguments means a lot on both side. Because over the problem the customer point out. over the ideas to solve it, you have to understand what exactly they have in their mind, to do what you think the best for the game : devs are not here to do exactly what players want, but do what best for game. and sometime players gives good advice, sometime, it is totally stupid (even if they are majority) and sometime, they didnt have all key to understand (because ... knowing the code could change how to understand things)
So far better to have a real forum for it, than a "reddit like" system...
All MMORPG i know, either with feedback or not any from devs are on the forum system. Because it remains the best to follow real discussion
AND, one point you seems to not consider, it does far more that only comment about the game, but allow the community to speak to each other related to the game, but not in kind of opinion if things are good or bad, but also speak to many different subject.
You are free to have your opinion, just describing what is important for me, personally, in a new MMO.
You want an MMO designed by committee?
I've worked in production in two distinct industries. The only thing they have in common is the complete lack of value of customer/client suggestions, coupled with the fact that we still had to make it seem as if we valued that feedback.
Additionally, WoW probably takes on board more player feedback than any MMO out there. It takes them years to get anything done, but most of what they do is their attempt at implementing something that was asked for by players, rather than allowing the developers to just make a good game.
Additionally, WoW probably takes on board more player feedback than any MMO out there. It takes them years to get anything done, but most of what they do is their attempt at implementing something that was asked for by players, rather than allowing the developers to just make a good game.
I have no proof for that, but the thought occurred to me many time during WoW's early years, that they listened too well to what the loudest minority wanted.
Apart from that, it is usually better that developers have a vision to follow and try to realize that, with or without player feedback. Preferably with feedback, but without loosing track of the vision.
WoW is failing in large part because it catered too hard to the entitled players.
Entitled to ever-faster movement and ever-shorter travel times to get to constant action. Thus the content in-between destinations became irrelevant.
Entitled to overly-simple dungeon-party creation and entry, to the point where doing dungeons is more akin to playing a mission based game like Monster Hunter where you just sit in town until you teleport to your mission with a group. Thus the content outside of hubs and instanced content became irrelevant.
Entitled to forever seeking less effort required for any activity. Thus baseline content became overbearingly easy.
Entitled to not have to put in effort to get to the point where others who did put in effort have achieved. Thus levelling became oversimplified and just a chore you do to get to "the real content" that is the forever soon-to-be-irrelevant endgame. Levelling is no longer a fulfilling part of the game, it's what you have to quickly push past to get to the game.
Each of these, and more, were the things with the highest upvotes in threads.
Each of these were created to cater to the loud masses screaming for things they wanted without wanting to put in effort.
People have put so much faith into Ashes of Creation because they see hope that this is a studio that understands that the lowest common denominator is not what you should cater to.
Forums like this allow all opinions to come through. Even the unpopular ones that are what's actually best for the game. Ones that would normally be drowned out by those that, as Blizzard themselves put it, "Don't know what they actually want".
If you want an echo chamber where only popular opinions, which many are or could be bad for the game, are visible, then there are places like Reddit that you can go for that.
You are free to have your opinion, just describing what is important for me, personally, in a new MMO.
You want an MMO designed by committee?
I've worked in production in two distinct industries. The only thing they have in common is the complete lack of value of customer/client suggestions, coupled with the fact that we still had to make it seem as if we valued that feedback.
Additionally, WoW probably takes on board more player feedback than any MMO out there. It takes them years to get anything done, but most of what they do is their attempt at implementing something that was asked for by players, rather than allowing the developers to just make a good game.
I dislike the tendency a lot of people in design roles have towards devaluing user feedback.
People aren't always good at articulating what they want, and not all their suggestions will be applicable or actionable, but this doesn't mean that designers should just disregard it completely. Interpreting and critically analyzing what users are saying is one of the core skills a designer needs to build if they want to make products which people can actually use.
In the projects I've worked on, even suggestions which seemed to be based on a fundamental misunderstanding of how a product worked, or which were rooted in frustration, were signals that something in the design wasn't working as effectively as it could be.
I'm sorry to hear that your previous jobs had such an adversarial relationship between the design team and the end users, but I don't think that the perspective that you've expressed based on it is useful here. By asserting that Intrepid don't plan to pay attention to what people are saying, you're discouraging others from making their voices heard, and in the process robbing the developers of the information they need to make key decisions. I wish that I had a way to shut down this sort of pessimism and negativity.
I'm sure that Intrepid have enough confidence in their creative vision to incorporate user feedback in a purposeful, carefully considered way. Asserting that they will either disregard suggestions, or blindly implement them, is an insult to the competence of their design team.
WoW is falling apart because it's still WoW 1.x and has needed to move to WoW 2.0 almost 10 years ago.
This. And the community has been asking for this forever.
It is also true that they add some features that a minority asks for, but the big issues like character boosts etc are hated by a vast majority of the players. Wow classic's (temporary) success was proof of that, and most youtube videos etc (the loud guys) are also against that.
Based on that, to say that they are making those decisions based on what players are asking is a far stretch. Maybe those are the features they get asked for through tickets, but I seriously doubt that support tickets go against what everyone says in forums, youtube videos, and comments. No PC gamer ever asked for diablo for mobile. EVERY player asked them to stop the bots (they didn't) and so much more. But there are millions of videos about this online, let's try not to derail this thread into blizzard stuff. They are dead anyway, let them rest in peace.
The point that is relevant to AoS, is that stuff like that that makes me worry about a game, when players have no way of protesting a bad outcome. I don't want a game that does what the majority asks for, but I want a game where the dev-team ANSWERS when a majority asks for something. It is the radio silence that turns me off.
You make a good point saying that, if a game would just blindly do what players ask for, it could derail pretty fast. However, if a huge group of players asks for something, I expect the dev-team to be verbal and transparent about their decisions especially when the suggestions are bad.
"We are not doing this because..."
"Cool idea, but that would cost too much to implement right now"
"We like this, but can't get into it before 2023"
"We are creating something, would like player input on these options"
"We need a cosmetics shop for revenue"
"This sounds good, but would hurt the game in the long run"
That is the type of transparency I am looking for.
Following that line of thought, would you say that AoC is a game where Dev's interact and answer the forum? I have been trying to find an answer to a user post or a user comment somewhere, but couldn't find any on the forum and neither on reddit. Should I dig deeper or am at the wrong game for this?
You are free to have your opinion, just describing what is important for me, personally, in a new MMO.
You want an MMO designed by committee?
I've worked in production in two distinct industries. The only thing they have in common is the complete lack of value of customer/client suggestions, coupled with the fact that we still had to make it seem as if we valued that feedback.
Additionally, WoW probably takes on board more player feedback than any MMO out there. It takes them years to get anything done, but most of what they do is their attempt at implementing something that was asked for by players, rather than allowing the developers to just make a good game.
I dislike the tendency a lot of people in design roles have towards devaluing user feedback.
People aren't always good at articulating what they want, and not all their suggestions will be applicable or actionable, but this doesn't mean that designers should just disregard it completely. Interpreting and critically analyzing what users are saying is one of the core skills a designer needs to build if they want to make products which people can actually use.
In the projects I've worked on, even suggestions which seemed to be based on a fundamental misunderstanding of how a product worked, or which were rooted in frustration, were signals that something in the design wasn't working as effectively as it could be.
I'm sorry to hear that your previous jobs had such an adversarial relationship between the design team and the end users, but I don't think that the perspective that you've expressed based on it is useful here. By asserting that Intrepid don't plan to pay attention to what people are saying, you're discouraging others from making their voices heard, and in the process robbing the developers of the information they need to make key decisions. I wish that I had a way to shut down this sort of pessimism and negativity.
I'm sure that Intrepid have enough confidence in their creative vision to incorporate user feedback in a purposeful, carefully considered way. Asserting that they will either disregard suggestions, or blindly implement them, is an insult to the competence of their design team.
Wait.
You work in design, for a company where you are expected to collate user feedback yourself?
Your company should have a specific team for that. That is not and should not be a core skill of a product designer or developer - it is it's own specific skill that takes years (decades even) to learn to do well. You can either be good at that, or you can be a good designer - you can't be both as the time spent improving in one will mean you can't improve in the other.
Case in point is your reply to my post. You have completely misunderstood it.
As I have said perhaps a dozen or so times on these forums, 99% of feedback right now is actually worthless. This is because 99% of feedback is from people that haven't played the game, and 100% of feedback is from people that have not played the game as Intrepid intend the game to be.
Feedback saying "I don't like it when this happens" is arguably sometimes good. However, you can't say you don't like a thing until you are experiencing that thing in context - and right now, not even Intrepid have that full context.
That isn't to say there isn't some worthwhile feedback - there absolutely is (in the alpha section of the forums, not at all in the general section). It is simply saying that 99% of the feedback given to Intrepid is worthless.
Even in the questions they specifically ask us, it isn't like we are telling them anything they didn't know. Look at their recent question on environments - this is what they got from that in terms of feedback
Many agreed that day/night cycles, including NPC routines to match them, contribute to making a world feel more alive
Others highlighted the importance of ambient sound in setting the stage
Smaller environmental details (critters, wind, dust, raindrops, footprints, etc.) can help prevent an expansive world from feeling static
Some shared that realistic mob scaling, including enormous and difficult world bosses, sparked their senses of wonder and danger
A few provided their thoughts on when realism went so far as to be annoying, such as carry weight or hunger/thirst mechanics
There is literally nothing there that isn't a decade old at this point.
Literally useless - and that is when Intrepid ASKED for feedback (tip - they asked for people to contribute so they feel like they are contributing, not because they wanted feedback, or thought players could give insights that they themselves couldn't figure out).
Or we could look at the player initiated thread on mounts. So far, there are only two suggestions not from Tolkien, and of those, both can be found in other games.
Once the game is in a near feature complete state, feedback such as "I don't like it when X happens" is useful. Intrepid can look to see if tit is a common thing that people don't like, and can pass that on to the appropriate developers to see if they should/can come up with a solution (you are not supposed to like some things).
However, feedback that is "I don't like it when X happens, you should do it this way instead" should simply be read by Intrepid as "I don't like it when X happens".
Put somewhat simpler, when the game is in a state where players are experiencing it somewhat close to how Intrepid intend it to be, letting Intrepid know what you do not like about it has some value. Telling them what you do like is kind of pointless, and telling them how you think things should be done is kind of arrogant.
By asserting that Intrepid don't plan to pay attention to what people are saying, you're discouraging others from making their voices heard, and in the process robbing the developers of the information they need to make key decisions. I wish that I had a way to shut down this sort of pessimism and negativity.
I'm sure that Intrepid have enough confidence in their creative vision to incorporate user feedback in a purposeful, carefully considered way. Asserting that they will either disregard suggestions, or blindly implement them, is an insult to the competence of their design team.
This is very well said. If players don't FEEL like their voices are heard, they stop giving input. I agree with that 100%.
By asserting that Intrepid don't plan to pay attention to what people are saying, you're discouraging others from making their voices heard, and in the process robbing the developers of the information they need to make key decisions. I wish that I had a way to shut down this sort of pessimism and negativity.
I'm sure that Intrepid have enough confidence in their creative vision to incorporate user feedback in a purposeful, carefully considered way. Asserting that they will either disregard suggestions, or blindly implement them, is an insult to the competence of their design team.
This is very well said. If players don't FEEL like their voices are heard, they stop giving input. I agree with that 100%.
That is why the Developer Discussion threads exist - so players can FEEL like they are being heard.
Just because they FEEL like they are, that doesn't mean they are.
It is good company practice to make your customer FEEL like they are listened to, and that their opinions are valued.
Intrepid don't need our input, as they have hundreds (perhaps thousands) of YEARS of MMO development experience in house who will literally always do a better job at this than we collectively could.
There are MMO developers on the forums, with a wide range of years to their craft. I can guarantee you, the forums, collectively, have more years of experience than the AOC dev team.
And as such, by your logic, the dev team would be required to listen to the forums since the forums have " hundreds (perhaps thousands) of YEARS of MMO development experience"
It is a stupid and meaningless argument that proves nothing and means nothing. It is something that PR whips out when they want to create the perception that the company is more impressive than it actually is.
Also, having lots of years in an industry does not mean they are good. It just means they either, know how to land new jobs or have been able to avoid being fired.
By asserting that Intrepid don't plan to pay attention to what people are saying, you're discouraging others from making their voices heard, and in the process robbing the developers of the information they need to make key decisions. I wish that I had a way to shut down this sort of pessimism and negativity.
I'm sure that Intrepid have enough confidence in their creative vision to incorporate user feedback in a purposeful, carefully considered way. Asserting that they will either disregard suggestions, or blindly implement them, is an insult to the competence of their design team.
This summarizes this part of the conversation pretty well.
I don't think that I misunderstand you, I just vehemently disagree with your core premise.
I can't grasp believing that, in a user-centric field, the opinions of users are valueless. Are you familiar with the concept of a focus group? Understanding the relative priorities of your players is going to be pretty essential when you're prioritizing what to implement.
When I'm building websites, I don't wait until I've finished implementing everything to start discussing my designs with the client, or testing it with users. If you're worked in a design-centric field, then you must understand that when you're building something, it's with the intent that someone can eventually actually use it. If you're not taking into account the wishes of that end user, then one would have to question who precisely your design is for.
You talk about the value of experience, but given the bitter, pessimistic sentiment you've expressed towards the ideas that have been discussed in this forum, I have to question the relevance of yours.
I understand the human need to feel as if you know something that others don't, that you are "in on the trick" when others can't see it. It's the basis of many beliefs in conspiracy theories, that wish to feel as if you've got it all figured out, and you won't be fooled. But cynicism does not equate to truth.
And it is Steven Sharif that says they want to focus on player input ->
As I said, it is good business to make your customers think you are listening to them.
Proof isn't in words, it is in actions. He has in the past also said he doesn't care about player feedback, and that he is making his game the way he envisions it.
So far, we have not seen much in the way of Intrepid listening to players, and this is a good thing.
By asserting that Intrepid don't plan to pay attention to what people are saying, you're discouraging others from making their voices heard
This is not an assertion that I have made.
If you think this is an assertion I made - which you clearly state here you do - then you have misunderstood what I said.
Disagree or not, you have misunderstood. Even after being told you misunderstood, you still think you didn't.
So, you design websites.
Cool.
Thing is, that is small scale. The design paradigm of a website shares almost nothing at all with the design paradigm of a $50,000,000 piece of software.
Even in website design though, I am quite sure you would have come across many, many suggestions of things that would lower the usability of the sites you are designing. It could be as simple as suggestions in regards to designs of buttons or color schemes, but it could also be in relation to security of the website, or data that needs to be collected.
Having done some freelance web design in my time, I know that even with such a small scale project, you get more worthless feedback than useful feedback. The more complex a project is, the higher that percent of useless feedback is.
When you scale that up to an MMO (MMO's are generally considered the most complex entertainment software ever made), the ratio of worthwhile to worthless feedback is fairly extreme.
The other thing to keep in mind with comparing Ashes to web design - if the person you are building the website for says to change something, you are likely to change it. Sure, you will take the user experience in to consideration as well, but at the end of the day, the person paying for the site to be made gets what they want.
In Ashes, that person is Steven. He owns the game, he is paying for the game, the rest of us are just here for the ride.
0
Options
FuryBladeborneMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Following that line of thought, would you say that AoC is a game where Dev's interact and answer the forum? I have been trying to find an answer to a user post or a user comment somewhere, but couldn't find any on the forum and neither on reddit. Should I dig deeper or am at the wrong game for this?
We have dev discussions for the first couple of threads that changes every month. If you look at those topics, they have a marker of "staff". This means that somewhere in the thread, an official Intrepid employee posted. Other topics will also be marked in the same way. I quickly skimmed through the most recent 5 pages of the forums, and saw that at that time there were 9 threads with responses from staff. While it doesn't seem like Intrepid is constantly posting, it does seem like they are monitoring and responding where they feel it is needed.
I do want to point out that IS not responding allows the players discussions to evolve in the way that the players want. Once there is an official response on a topic, the discussion and player ideas are likely to be altered.
During the monthly dev updates at https://www.twitch.tv/ashesofcreation, the last 20-30 minutes of each stream are spent going over questions pulled from the forums.
Steven has described on multiple occasions how he stays up late at night personally reading the forums. I looked up one of those times, "It’s important to me to understand the community sentiment, so much so that sometimes scrolling through the discord/forums reading on my mobile and I fall asleep, letting my mobile fall on my face."-Steven https://ashespost.com/7-25-20-reddit-ama-transcript/
Personally, I have never felt like Ashes ignores its player base.
Of playing MMO's, sure. I really hope this isn't what you mean though. That would be embarrassing for you.
No, I mean people who have built MMOs. But I can understand how some might lack the capability to understand basic, straightforward English.
After all...
Bacon in and of himself probably has more experience making MMO's than every poster on these forums - Steven included.
It is a very hard thing to understand the differences between an individual and a collective.
It is really embarrassing that you are completely incapable of being able to understand the basics of math, logic, and data analytics.
Of playing MMO's, sure. I really hope this isn't what you mean though. That would be embarrassing for you.
No, I mean people who have built MMOs.
Good.
I did say I hope that is what you meant.
Now, by all means, feel free to use the basics of math, logic and data analytics to come up with your assertion that there is more experience in MMO development on these forums than at Intrepid.
Intrepid have somewhere between 150 and 200 staff, all of whom are currently working on developing an MMO.
These forums have 8,515 people that have ever posted a single comment (as of writing this).
Even if we assume that everyone involved here has exactly the mean level of experience developing MMO's of all people that have ever developed MMO's, this means that in order for there to be more experience on these forums than at Intrepid, about 2% of the population on these forums need to be MMO developers.
Not software developers - MMO developers.
However, we do need to take in to account the fact that many of the members of staff at Intrepid are among the most experienced MMO developers in the industry and any people on these forums that have worked on MMO's are probably ex-MMO developers - to the point where that 2% would need to be closer to 5% of the total population of these forums would need to have worked on developing MMO's. We also need to account for the fact that some of those people that have posted on these forums are indeed staff at Intrepid. We also need to account for people that have multiple accounts on these forums - you know, if we want any sort of validity to our claims.
Now, feel free to show me why you believe this to be true, because there really is no reason to believe it, even with my understanding of basic math, logic and data analytics.
0
Options
bloodprophetMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
WoW is falling apart because it's still WoW 1.x and has needed to move to WoW 2.0 almost 10 years ago.
This. And the community has been asking for this forever.
It is also true that they add some features that a minority asks for, but the big issues like character boosts etc are hated by a vast majority of the players. Wow classic's (temporary) success was proof of that, and most youtube videos etc (the loud guys) are also against that.
Based on that, to say that they are making those decisions based on what players are asking is a far stretch. Maybe those are the features they get asked for through tickets, but I seriously doubt that support tickets go against what everyone says in forums, youtube videos, and comments. No PC gamer ever asked for diablo for mobile. EVERY player asked them to stop the bots (they didn't) and so much more. But there are millions of videos about this online, let's try not to derail this thread into blizzard stuff. They are dead anyway, let them rest in peace.
The point that is relevant to AoS, is that stuff like that that makes me worry about a game, when players have no way of protesting a bad outcome. I don't want a game that does what the majority asks for, but I want a game where the dev-team ANSWERS when a majority asks for something. It is the radio silence that turns me off.
You make a good point saying that, if a game would just blindly do what players ask for, it could derail pretty fast. However, if a huge group of players asks for something, I expect the dev-team to be verbal and transparent about their decisions especially when the suggestions are bad.
"We are not doing this because..."
"Cool idea, but that would cost too much to implement right now"
"We like this, but can't get into it before 2023"
"We are creating something, would like player input on these options"
"We need a cosmetics shop for revenue"
"This sounds good, but would hurt the game in the long run"
That is the type of transparency I am looking for.
Following that line of thought, would you say that AoC is a game where Dev's interact and answer the forum? I have been trying to find an answer to a user post or a user comment somewhere, but couldn't find any on the forum and neither on reddit. Should I dig deeper or am at the wrong game for this?
There are a couple of times I can think of off the top of my head where they got feedback and changed things. The quick time event that had at the very beginning and the mage jump spin for fireball. Both received negative feedback from the community and got changed. Don't think they came on here and talked about it. They reviewed the feedback and changed things.
Most people never listen. They are just waiting on you to quit making noise so they can.
Comments
Having 100 people with 1 year of experience will never be better than five people with 20 years of experience. Adding the collective years of experience of employees is a meaningless PR tactic and an absolute meme move.
Well to be fair, Intrepid is still a pretty small studio relative compared to other MMO studios, so he's right. Especially since they have game development veterans.
Intrepid got some veteran devs. with some experience, years experience in video game and MMORPG development. they are so far better than our "collectiv mind" on forum
MMO design isn't a monolithic perfection state that one is striving towards. It's a requirement from effectively, a customer.
It's not as if the fact that there are other groups with years of experience in games results in the games being 'better' in the way that we all end up enjoying either.
A simple example is that in my old company, the CTO was the only person with a specific skillset, and I was the only one with a different specific skillset. Without us, there was a project that would have taken a year to be done, and would probably still have been done incorrectly.
Similarly, when a new 'specification' presents itself, the CTO still has to spend months designing it, and still asks both the customer, and even junior developers, for help and insight, and often, that turns out to be helpful.
Could it have been done alone? Actually, for some parts of it, no. Lots of it is 'asking the user exactly how they want something to be', and then having to come up with a whole new way of doing something because they want a combination of features that has never been done before and there's no framework. Sometimes they can provide the framework for you.
That's partially why I have the perspective I do on this sort of thing. I've been in that place, asking the client multiple times for their input, and wishing they didn't just go 'well I don't know, you're the experts, you do what seems best'. Not even because they all complain later, but simply because what they end up getting is 'generic version of product' that is nowhere near the best fit for them.
Tell them your best fit.
What meme argument?
Intrepid don't have 100 developers with a year of experience each, they have some of the most experienced MMO developers ever (considering the industry is only about 25 years old...).
Also, adding collective experience of employees is not a PR tactic, although it doesn't hold as much weight if those employees all have experience in the same environment. If we were talking about their developers all having worked on the same games, then sure. Thing is, we have their history we can look at, and it is varied.
As such, it is not just a meaningless PR tactic.
This is a very good point, but a dealbreaker for me.
I spent a long time getting disappointed by blizzard, so if AoC is also planning to ignore players, then this is not the game I am looking for.
For me to invest myself into a new MMO, I want to be 100% sure that the company takes player input into consideration. If the last 15 years of bad MMO's have proven anything (to me), is that no team seems to get something decent done without player input, and I didn't leave WoW to join another game being developed behind closed doors.
You are free to have your opinion, just describing what is important for me, personally, in a new MMO. I don't want to invest 1-2 years in this game and then suddenly have unbalanced classes or a pay-to-win cash-shop in the game.
Is this how the dev team is acting here? Do they not answer to user feedback in the forum? I am relatively new to this game, so any info on this would be greatly appreciated.
This made me spill my coffee.
They clearly read and follow the discussions. They don't always give feedback "act is better than word" probably...
They care, there is different between listening anything players are saying with a totally falacious system to "vote" (upvote without downvote = meaningless) is not the best.
Comments are not only "good" or "don't care" but also "i disagree"
And even more, arguments means a lot on both side. Because over the problem the customer point out. over the ideas to solve it, you have to understand what exactly they have in their mind, to do what you think the best for the game : devs are not here to do exactly what players want, but do what best for game. and sometime players gives good advice, sometime, it is totally stupid (even if they are majority) and sometime, they didnt have all key to understand (because ... knowing the code could change how to understand things)
So far better to have a real forum for it, than a "reddit like" system...
All MMORPG i know, either with feedback or not any from devs are on the forum system. Because it remains the best to follow real discussion
AND, one point you seems to not consider, it does far more that only comment about the game, but allow the community to speak to each other related to the game, but not in kind of opinion if things are good or bad, but also speak to many different subject.
I've worked in production in two distinct industries. The only thing they have in common is the complete lack of value of customer/client suggestions, coupled with the fact that we still had to make it seem as if we valued that feedback.
Additionally, WoW probably takes on board more player feedback than any MMO out there. It takes them years to get anything done, but most of what they do is their attempt at implementing something that was asked for by players, rather than allowing the developers to just make a good game.
not at all.
Each of these, and more, were the things with the highest upvotes in threads.
Each of these were created to cater to the loud masses screaming for things they wanted without wanting to put in effort.
People have put so much faith into Ashes of Creation because they see hope that this is a studio that understands that the lowest common denominator is not what you should cater to.
Forums like this allow all opinions to come through. Even the unpopular ones that are what's actually best for the game. Ones that would normally be drowned out by those that, as Blizzard themselves put it, "Don't know what they actually want".
If you want an echo chamber where only popular opinions, which many are or could be bad for the game, are visible, then there are places like Reddit that you can go for that.
It is very much the case.
Adorable.
I dislike the tendency a lot of people in design roles have towards devaluing user feedback.
People aren't always good at articulating what they want, and not all their suggestions will be applicable or actionable, but this doesn't mean that designers should just disregard it completely. Interpreting and critically analyzing what users are saying is one of the core skills a designer needs to build if they want to make products which people can actually use.
In the projects I've worked on, even suggestions which seemed to be based on a fundamental misunderstanding of how a product worked, or which were rooted in frustration, were signals that something in the design wasn't working as effectively as it could be.
I'm sorry to hear that your previous jobs had such an adversarial relationship between the design team and the end users, but I don't think that the perspective that you've expressed based on it is useful here. By asserting that Intrepid don't plan to pay attention to what people are saying, you're discouraging others from making their voices heard, and in the process robbing the developers of the information they need to make key decisions. I wish that I had a way to shut down this sort of pessimism and negativity.
I'm sure that Intrepid have enough confidence in their creative vision to incorporate user feedback in a purposeful, carefully considered way. Asserting that they will either disregard suggestions, or blindly implement them, is an insult to the competence of their design team.
This. And the community has been asking for this forever.
It is also true that they add some features that a minority asks for, but the big issues like character boosts etc are hated by a vast majority of the players. Wow classic's (temporary) success was proof of that, and most youtube videos etc (the loud guys) are also against that.
Based on that, to say that they are making those decisions based on what players are asking is a far stretch. Maybe those are the features they get asked for through tickets, but I seriously doubt that support tickets go against what everyone says in forums, youtube videos, and comments. No PC gamer ever asked for diablo for mobile. EVERY player asked them to stop the bots (they didn't) and so much more. But there are millions of videos about this online, let's try not to derail this thread into blizzard stuff. They are dead anyway, let them rest in peace.
The point that is relevant to AoS, is that stuff like that that makes me worry about a game, when players have no way of protesting a bad outcome. I don't want a game that does what the majority asks for, but I want a game where the dev-team ANSWERS when a majority asks for something. It is the radio silence that turns me off.
You make a good point saying that, if a game would just blindly do what players ask for, it could derail pretty fast. However, if a huge group of players asks for something, I expect the dev-team to be verbal and transparent about their decisions especially when the suggestions are bad.
"We are not doing this because..."
"Cool idea, but that would cost too much to implement right now"
"We like this, but can't get into it before 2023"
"We are creating something, would like player input on these options"
"We need a cosmetics shop for revenue"
"This sounds good, but would hurt the game in the long run"
That is the type of transparency I am looking for.
Following that line of thought, would you say that AoC is a game where Dev's interact and answer the forum? I have been trying to find an answer to a user post or a user comment somewhere, but couldn't find any on the forum and neither on reddit. Should I dig deeper or am at the wrong game for this?
Wait.
You work in design, for a company where you are expected to collate user feedback yourself?
Your company should have a specific team for that. That is not and should not be a core skill of a product designer or developer - it is it's own specific skill that takes years (decades even) to learn to do well. You can either be good at that, or you can be a good designer - you can't be both as the time spent improving in one will mean you can't improve in the other.
Case in point is your reply to my post. You have completely misunderstood it.
As I have said perhaps a dozen or so times on these forums, 99% of feedback right now is actually worthless. This is because 99% of feedback is from people that haven't played the game, and 100% of feedback is from people that have not played the game as Intrepid intend the game to be.
Feedback saying "I don't like it when this happens" is arguably sometimes good. However, you can't say you don't like a thing until you are experiencing that thing in context - and right now, not even Intrepid have that full context.
That isn't to say there isn't some worthwhile feedback - there absolutely is (in the alpha section of the forums, not at all in the general section). It is simply saying that 99% of the feedback given to Intrepid is worthless.
Even in the questions they specifically ask us, it isn't like we are telling them anything they didn't know. Look at their recent question on environments - this is what they got from that in terms of feedback
- Many agreed that day/night cycles, including NPC routines to match them, contribute to making a world feel more alive
- Others highlighted the importance of ambient sound in setting the stage
- Smaller environmental details (critters, wind, dust, raindrops, footprints, etc.) can help prevent an expansive world from feeling static
- Some shared that realistic mob scaling, including enormous and difficult world bosses, sparked their senses of wonder and danger
- A few provided their thoughts on when realism went so far as to be annoying, such as carry weight or hunger/thirst mechanics
There is literally nothing there that isn't a decade old at this point.Literally useless - and that is when Intrepid ASKED for feedback (tip - they asked for people to contribute so they feel like they are contributing, not because they wanted feedback, or thought players could give insights that they themselves couldn't figure out).
Or we could look at the player initiated thread on mounts. So far, there are only two suggestions not from Tolkien, and of those, both can be found in other games.
Once the game is in a near feature complete state, feedback such as "I don't like it when X happens" is useful. Intrepid can look to see if tit is a common thing that people don't like, and can pass that on to the appropriate developers to see if they should/can come up with a solution (you are not supposed to like some things).
However, feedback that is "I don't like it when X happens, you should do it this way instead" should simply be read by Intrepid as "I don't like it when X happens".
Put somewhat simpler, when the game is in a state where players are experiencing it somewhat close to how Intrepid intend it to be, letting Intrepid know what you do not like about it has some value. Telling them what you do like is kind of pointless, and telling them how you think things should be done is kind of arrogant.
This is very well said. If players don't FEEL like their voices are heard, they stop giving input. I agree with that 100%.
That is why the Developer Discussion threads exist - so players can FEEL like they are being heard.
Just because they FEEL like they are, that doesn't mean they are.
It is good company practice to make your customer FEEL like they are listened to, and that their opinions are valued.
That doesn't mean they are.
And as such, by your logic, the dev team would be required to listen to the forums since the forums have " hundreds (perhaps thousands) of YEARS of MMO development experience"
It is a stupid and meaningless argument that proves nothing and means nothing. It is something that PR whips out when they want to create the perception that the company is more impressive than it actually is.
Also, having lots of years in an industry does not mean they are good. It just means they either, know how to land new jobs or have been able to avoid being fired.
-_-
You like talking out your ass a lot, don't you?
But of making MMO's? Hell no.
Bacon in and of himself probably has more experience making MMO's than every poster on these forums - Steven included.
There is one common thread among people that do not value experience. They are - without exception - people that do not yet have any.
This summarizes this part of the conversation pretty well.
I don't think that I misunderstand you, I just vehemently disagree with your core premise.
I can't grasp believing that, in a user-centric field, the opinions of users are valueless. Are you familiar with the concept of a focus group? Understanding the relative priorities of your players is going to be pretty essential when you're prioritizing what to implement.
When I'm building websites, I don't wait until I've finished implementing everything to start discussing my designs with the client, or testing it with users. If you're worked in a design-centric field, then you must understand that when you're building something, it's with the intent that someone can eventually actually use it. If you're not taking into account the wishes of that end user, then one would have to question who precisely your design is for.
You talk about the value of experience, but given the bitter, pessimistic sentiment you've expressed towards the ideas that have been discussed in this forum, I have to question the relevance of yours.
I understand the human need to feel as if you know something that others don't, that you are "in on the trick" when others can't see it. It's the basis of many beliefs in conspiracy theories, that wish to feel as if you've got it all figured out, and you won't be fooled. But cynicism does not equate to truth.
Proof isn't in words, it is in actions. He has in the past also said he doesn't care about player feedback, and that he is making his game the way he envisions it.
So far, we have not seen much in the way of Intrepid listening to players, and this is a good thing.
You said This is not an assertion that I have made.
If you think this is an assertion I made - which you clearly state here you do - then you have misunderstood what I said.
Disagree or not, you have misunderstood. Even after being told you misunderstood, you still think you didn't.
So, you design websites.
Cool.
Thing is, that is small scale. The design paradigm of a website shares almost nothing at all with the design paradigm of a $50,000,000 piece of software.
Even in website design though, I am quite sure you would have come across many, many suggestions of things that would lower the usability of the sites you are designing. It could be as simple as suggestions in regards to designs of buttons or color schemes, but it could also be in relation to security of the website, or data that needs to be collected.
Having done some freelance web design in my time, I know that even with such a small scale project, you get more worthless feedback than useful feedback. The more complex a project is, the higher that percent of useless feedback is.
When you scale that up to an MMO (MMO's are generally considered the most complex entertainment software ever made), the ratio of worthwhile to worthless feedback is fairly extreme.
The other thing to keep in mind with comparing Ashes to web design - if the person you are building the website for says to change something, you are likely to change it. Sure, you will take the user experience in to consideration as well, but at the end of the day, the person paying for the site to be made gets what they want.
In Ashes, that person is Steven. He owns the game, he is paying for the game, the rest of us are just here for the ride.
We have dev discussions for the first couple of threads that changes every month. If you look at those topics, they have a marker of "staff". This means that somewhere in the thread, an official Intrepid employee posted. Other topics will also be marked in the same way. I quickly skimmed through the most recent 5 pages of the forums, and saw that at that time there were 9 threads with responses from staff. While it doesn't seem like Intrepid is constantly posting, it does seem like they are monitoring and responding where they feel it is needed.
I do want to point out that IS not responding allows the players discussions to evolve in the way that the players want. Once there is an official response on a topic, the discussion and player ideas are likely to be altered.
During the monthly dev updates at https://www.twitch.tv/ashesofcreation, the last 20-30 minutes of each stream are spent going over questions pulled from the forums.
Steven has described on multiple occasions how he stays up late at night personally reading the forums. I looked up one of those times,
"It’s important to me to understand the community sentiment, so much so that sometimes scrolling through the discord/forums reading on my mobile and I fall asleep, letting my mobile fall on my face."-Steven
https://ashespost.com/7-25-20-reddit-ama-transcript/
Personally, I have never felt like Ashes ignores its player base.
After all... It is a very hard thing to understand the differences between an individual and a collective.
It is really embarrassing that you are completely incapable of being able to understand the basics of math, logic, and data analytics.
I did say I hope that is what you meant.
Now, by all means, feel free to use the basics of math, logic and data analytics to come up with your assertion that there is more experience in MMO development on these forums than at Intrepid.
Intrepid have somewhere between 150 and 200 staff, all of whom are currently working on developing an MMO.
These forums have 8,515 people that have ever posted a single comment (as of writing this).
Even if we assume that everyone involved here has exactly the mean level of experience developing MMO's of all people that have ever developed MMO's, this means that in order for there to be more experience on these forums than at Intrepid, about 2% of the population on these forums need to be MMO developers.
Not software developers - MMO developers.
However, we do need to take in to account the fact that many of the members of staff at Intrepid are among the most experienced MMO developers in the industry and any people on these forums that have worked on MMO's are probably ex-MMO developers - to the point where that 2% would need to be closer to 5% of the total population of these forums would need to have worked on developing MMO's. We also need to account for the fact that some of those people that have posted on these forums are indeed staff at Intrepid. We also need to account for people that have multiple accounts on these forums - you know, if we want any sort of validity to our claims.
Now, feel free to show me why you believe this to be true, because there really is no reason to believe it, even with my understanding of basic math, logic and data analytics.
There are a couple of times I can think of off the top of my head where they got feedback and changed things. The quick time event that had at the very beginning and the mage jump spin for fireball. Both received negative feedback from the community and got changed. Don't think they came on here and talked about it. They reviewed the feedback and changed things.