333 réponses à ce sujet

[mcsupersport]

In case you didn't realize...people posting here ARE telling you what they want in their game, maybe not the EXACT way you think they should, but that is what they are doing. The issue of a toggle for helmets is a prime example, sure it may not be easy and people think it is, but the pure discussions of it are simply the only way people know to say "HEY, I want my helmet off in convos but on in combat."

So instead of taking all the time to try to tell us how YOU think we should ask for things, why don't you instead try to discuss them or ideas people had.

[upsettingshorts]

I did that.

I refused to provide specific examples because doing so is the fastest way to get this thread off topic.

If you personally limit yourself to saying what you like and what you don't, and aren't telling BioWare how they ought to deliver it, this thread is not directed at you.

But there are a lot of people who don't limit themselves.

[axl99]

When that happens, it becomes a cluster**** of wants and needs on every forum.

And when a dev comes on to explain the limitations they faced, they get talked down to and drowned out regardless. And this also goes double for any other dev outside of Bioware that have given their two cents on these forums.

[mcsupersport]

Telling them how they should deliver something also tells them what I want, just NOT in the way you think I should tell them.

You see you are trying to tell a bunch of people HOW they should deliver their IDEAS of what they want out of a game and criticizing how they are.....just like people are trying to tell Bioware what or how they should give them what they want. Both are simply trying to influence and convey an idea to a different crowd.

Spend less time critiquing posters and more time talking with them about their ideas.

[Darth Krytie]

mcsupersport wrote...

Telling them how they should deliver something also tells them what I want, just NOT in the way you think I should tell them.

You see you are trying to tell a bunch of people HOW they should deliver their IDEAS of what they want out of a game and criticizing how they are.....just like people are trying to tell Bioware what or how they should give them what they want. Both are simply trying to influence and convey an idea to a different crowd.

Spend less time critiquing posters and more time talking with them about their ideas.

On the other hand, like what happened between us in your post, sometimes the way an idea is presented can come across as not very welcoming for discussion or make another poster feel put off or defensive. Sometimes, it does matter how people present their opinions if a person truly wants discussion.

[axl99]

I don't know about you guys, but all I've been seeing from day one was a serious lack of empathy.

[upsettingshorts]

mcsupersport wrote...

Telling them how they should deliver something also tells them what I want, just NOT in the way you think I should tell them.

And that introduces a lot of meaningless noise and results in entire pages of threads being wasted discussing how wrong your HOWS are.

You know exactly like the thread you just started is playing out right now.

Of course I have no authority to compel you to post the way I want.  That's why I made an argument and didn't just say, "Stop telling BioWare how to do their jobs its frigging annoying" and leave it at that.

mcsupersport wrote...

You see you are trying to tell a bunch of people HOW they should deliver their IDEAS of what they want out of a game and criticizing how they are.....just like people are trying to tell Bioware what or how they should give them what they want. Both are simply trying to influence and convey an idea to a different crowd.

I know more about posting on a forum than any of us that don't work in game design know about game design.

Which is to say I know more than nothing..  I'm a forum poster criticizing forum posting.  I have extensive experience forum posting.  I'm vastly more qualified to speak on the subject than I am about game design.  It's not the same at all.  

mcsupersport wrote...

Spend less time critiquing posters and more time talking with them about their ideas.

Gee, you think seven posts out of many thousands is too much time devoted to this subject?

Something I definitely need to think about.  Definitely.  

Darth Krytie wrote...

Sometimes, it does matter how people present their opinions if a person truly wants discussion. 

It always matters.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 22 janvier 2013 - 02:03 .

[Danny Boy 7]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

-respectful snip

TL/DR:  Could we please just stick to describing what we liked and didn't like and why, and cut back on pretending we actually know how game production works?

Aren't you making the assumption that some of the people making posts with these titles aren't game developers? I'm not saying they are, but I've also noticed that it's just a clever title that is reusable by the particular person who uses it since he/she means it as an episodic discussion. 

Sort of like.

The Problem With Cats....Litter

The Problem With Cats....Dander

I just don't see what the problem is.

[CrystaJ]

I'm well aware I don't know what I'm talking about 99.9% of the time.

I just come for the stinky cheese buffet. Don't judge me.

[DarthPig]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

You know exactly like the thread you just started is playing out right now.

Ha!

Modifié par DarthPig, 22 janvier 2013 - 02:20 .

[upsettingshorts]

Danny Boy 7 wrote...

Aren't you making the assumption that some of the people making posts with these titles aren't game developers?

Yes, and it's a safe one.

If they are developers reading, this thread is also not directed at them.  They'd probably be among the first to qualify their opinions anyway.

Danny Boy 7 wrote...

I'm not saying they are, but I've also noticed that it's just a clever title that is reusable by the particular person who uses it since he/she means it as an episodic discussion. 

Don't read too much into the thread title, for reasons already covered in the OP and in responding to Fast Jimmy on page 1.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 22 janvier 2013 - 02:26 .

[hoorayforicecream]

Danny Boy 7 wrote...

Aren't you making the assumption that some of the people making posts with these titles aren't game developers?

It's pretty easy to pick out the people who aren't. These folks tend to misuse industry terms, don't consider basic and common constraints, don't understand the magnitude of repercussions certain suggested changes will make, and generally don't exhibit understanding of how the development process works because they've never needed to, or been exposed to that part of the development.

[AstraDrakkar]

Bioware placed this forum here for the purpose of discussion, debate, and input from it's fans. Not just a selected group of "educated" individuals, but ANY fan who has something to add to a discussion about Bioware's games.

I may not agree with something that someone else has posted, I may not understand it, or I may think that what they posted is irelevant, but they have the right to post nonetheless.

Modifié par AstraDrakkar, 22 janvier 2013 - 02:55 .

[Danny Boy 7]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Danny Boy 7 wrote...

Aren't you making the assumption that some of the people making posts with these titles aren't game developers?

Yes, and it's a safe one.

If they are developers reading, this thread is also not directed at them.  They'd probably be among the first to qualify their opinions anyway.

Danny Boy 7 wrote...

I'm not saying they are, but I've also noticed that it's just a clever title that is reusable by the particular person who uses it since he/she means it as an episodic discussion. 

Don't read too much into the thread title, for reasons already covered in the OP and in responding to Fast Jimmy on page 1.

True, but you're under the assumption that BioWare couldn't take anything from suggestions (as in couldn't take something someone has no knowledge about and if it appeals to them implement it in a way thats "realistic"), I'm not saying every thread that lists out it's ideas/methods for implementing that particular thread's feature has some realistic goal, but I've also seen that they also mention how they think it could be done and leave it up to the developer how it is actually implemented. 

Noise is inherent in any thread, especially one regarding something controversial or just popular. Often if someone says "I liked Origins Warrior combat, but I preferred the second game's rogue and mage combat. I'd like to see this implemented in Dragon Age: The Next." they'll get someone asking how can Bioware ever implement such a ridiculous idea and the OP will give their opinion, but yes often it's one based with no first hand knowledge and will come off as presumptious. Then later when coming up with a new discussion/thread they'll likely post their topic and how they'd implement it, if only to save time.

Is it done sometimes out of some snide, know it all attempt to prove how stupid Bioware is and how easy it would be to implement something, sure...but regardless of how they structure it, if that's what they really want to get across...it's what is going to get across.

[In Exile]

Danny Boy 7 wrote...
True, but you're under the assumption that BioWare couldn't take anything from suggestions (as in couldn't take something someone has no knowledge about and if it appeals to them implement it in a way thats "realistic"), I'm not saying every thread that lists out it's ideas/methods for implementing that particular thread's feature has some realistic goal, but I've also seen that they also mention how they think it could be done and leave it up to the developer how it is actually implemented.  

I'd imagine that most Bioware employees don't actually bother to read our posts. So I'd imagine that Bioware doesn't want to really dig in deep to "Why Bioware's design is garbage and how they can rise to sub-human in my eyes."

[upsettingshorts]

AstraDrakkar wrote...

Bioware placed this forum here for the purpose of discussion, debate, and input from it's fans. Not just a selected group of "educated" individuals, but ANY fan who has something to add to a discussion about Bioware's games.

I may not agree with something that someone else has posted, I may not understand it, or I may think that what they posted is irelevant, but they have the right to post nonetheless.

Your response isn't really addressing anything I have said.

I did not claim that only developers have a right to share their opinions here.  

I am only advocating that posters who are not game developers - the vast majority of us - refrain from framing arguments asserting their preferences in a manner which presumes to instruct BioWare on how they might be implemented.  This happens a lot.  

If you do not do that, then this thread is not directed at you.

Danny Boy 7 wrote...

Noise is inherent in any thread, especially one regarding something controversial or just popular.

Indeed, but I do not see the problem in pointing out ways in which I think it might be reduced.

I do not actually anticipate success.  Worth a shot though.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 22 janvier 2013 - 03:00 .

[Firky]

I think people saying what they do/don't like is appropriate, but I also don't have a problem with people who just want a helmet toggle and don't see why it's not simple. It seems simple, to my mind, but I assume it's not.

But, I've also learned some really interesting things from the extended, "but how expensive/hard is this feature?" I personally love item descriptions (crazy though that may sounds) and tried to work them out as $ per word. Then I was corrected to include things like QA and a whole bunch of other stuff. It was really interesting.

Also, some of the designers got into talking about the conversation editor one time. That was really interesting. (I can understand explaining might be frustrating for them, but they can - and frequently do - ignore misconception if they want to, just taking the feedback.) The fact that David Gaider has started up his blog is a great alternative, too, IMO.

If they stopped popping in altogether to discuss the process occasionally, though, I'd be poorer for it.

Modifié par Firky, 22 janvier 2013 - 03:08 .

[Danny Boy 7]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

Danny Boy 7 wrote...

Aren't you making the assumption that some of the people making posts with these titles aren't game developers?

It's pretty easy to pick out the people who aren't. These folks tend to misuse industry terms, don't consider basic and common constraints, don't understand the magnitude of repercussions certain suggested changes will make, and generally don't exhibit understanding of how the development process works because they've never needed to, or been exposed to that part of the development.

True but as I recall not all terms are industry based or should I say not...all encompassing...know what I mean? Sometimes it's studio based, jargen they personally use to refer to certain sub systems. You could say that even fellow developers are unaware of the magnitude or lack there of that certain suggestions can have on a certain studio's current project.

As an example in a field I'm actually well versed in, the common American Football position of Runningback or (RB) is often refered to Halfback (HB) which isn't completely unknown, but would every other or even most football teams/coaches know that we refer to our three backs as Wing Backs instead of HBs or even RBs. Some highschools like to refer to a wide reciever who stands back and to the left of a tight end as a wing back or even another RB when the player's position could just be another tight end who for that particular formation is now placed slightly behind his counterpart because we need him to either block or catch based on the defense's choice of lineman or lack there of.

Not to mention some developers may just refer to a system the wrong way. Not to say that it's some strange pseudo language but just because someone doesn't use the right jargen as it applies to my departement/team etc doesn't necessarily mean they're not a member of the industry.

[Pseudo the Mustachioed]

@Dannyboy: I can certainly imagine there might be a difference in terminology between companies but it's not great enough to make it hard to recognize a dev on a forum by how they use said terminology

Often devs jump from team to team/company to company, and its a super small and incestuous little industry so... it's basically a universal language.

Modifié par Pseudocognition, 22 janvier 2013 - 03:20 .

[Danny Boy 7]

In Exile wrote...

Danny Boy 7 wrote...
True, but you're under the assumption that BioWare couldn't take anything from suggestions (as in couldn't take something someone has no knowledge about and if it appeals to them implement it in a way thats "realistic"), I'm not saying every thread that lists out it's ideas/methods for implementing that particular thread's feature has some realistic goal, but I've also seen that they also mention how they think it could be done and leave it up to the developer how it is actually implemented.  

I'd imagine that most Bioware employees don't actually bother to read our posts. So I'd imagine that Bioware doesn't want to really dig in deep to "Why Bioware's design is garbage and how they can rise to sub-human in my eyes."

Oh I agree, I'm just saying that regardless of how someone frames their inflammatory/ignorant comments it's not gonna change how much is recieved by Bioware or how much noise is going to be heard, I imagine they have better than average reading comprehesion and can choose what is decent enough to look into good or bad. They're human so I'm not saying they might not outright dismiss something because the person has zero knowledge of what they're talking about, all I mean is that they recognize when someone is trying to be helpful and get their request across as best as possible.

[axl99]

LinkedIn also does wonders by the way.

[In Exile]

Danny Boy 7 wrote...
Oh I agree, I'm just saying that regardless of how someone frames their inflammatory/ignorant comments it's not gonna change how much is recieved by Bioware or how much noise is going to be heard

Right, so long as the thing is inflammatory, I agree. 

all I mean is that they recognize when someone is trying to be helpful and get their request across as best as possible.

Doesn't that go right back to how someone frames their comment?

[Danny Boy 7]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Danny Boy 7 wrote...

Noise is inherent in any thread, especially one regarding something controversial or just popular.

Indeed, but I do not see the problem in pointing out ways in which I think it might be reduced.

I do not actually anticipate success.  Worth a shot though.

Well maybe I'm being a bit sensitive, it's just you didn't present your argument in a way that I think would get a lot of traction outside of, "Well he's being an ass so I'm going to tell him off!" when you have a valid point. Bringing up Fast Jimmy's common title doesn't really help as even though it's not meant as a parody of his threads (which Idk are quite thought provocking and popular) it comes off as sarcastic/smug, which idk may be your intent, but you're gonna get more flies with honey than vinegar. 

[upsettingshorts]

This was previously addressed.

But really, more flies with honey than vinegar, on the BSN? Nahhhh.

I've restated the topic's message several times, responded to Fast Jimmy personally, and mentioned that I am just as guilty as the next guy in perpetrating the very behaviors I am criticizing here. If that does not satisfy you, then I would say you are being too sensitive.

That said, I am not sure what your point has been. There are probably occasional exceptions. Some people are developers. A few here and there might simply be using terminology wrong. But infrequent exceptions do not disprove whole trends. Certainly I am painting with broad strokes, but the forum is a big place and there's a lot of posters to cover. I've been active long enough to have observed certain trends, and indeed, participated in them. As such, I'm being specific in what posters I am speaking of, and what kinds of posts I am speaking of. If they or their posts do not qualify, this thread has nothing to do with them and they can ignore it.

[hoorayforicecream]

Danny Boy 7 wrote...

hoorayforicecream wrote...

Danny Boy 7 wrote...

Aren't you making the assumption that some of the people making posts with these titles aren't game developers?

It's pretty easy to pick out the people who aren't. These folks tend to misuse industry terms, don't consider basic and common constraints, don't understand the magnitude of repercussions certain suggested changes will make, and generally don't exhibit understanding of how the development process works because they've never needed to, or been exposed to that part of the development.

True but as I recall not all terms are industry based or should I say not...all encompassing...know what I mean? Sometimes it's studio based, jargen they personally use to refer to certain sub systems. You could say that even fellow developers are unaware of the magnitude or lack there of that certain suggestions can have on a certain studio's current project.

As an example in a field I'm actually well versed in, the common American Football position of Runningback or (RB) is often refered to Halfback (HB) which isn't completely unknown, but would every other or even most football teams/coaches know that we refer to our three backs as Wing Backs instead of HBs or even RBs. Some highschools like to refer to a wide reciever who stands back and to the left of a tight end as a wing back or even another RB when the player's position could just be another tight end who for that particular formation is now placed slightly behind his counterpart because we need him to either block or catch based on the defense's choice of lineman or lack there of.

Not to mention some developers may just refer to a system the wrong way. Not to say that it's some strange pseudo language but just because someone doesn't use the right jargen as it applies to my departement/team etc doesn't necessarily mean they're not a member of the industry.

It isn't just the misuse of commonly-accepted terminology. It's the terminology misuse combined with lack of basic development scheduling, lack of constraint awareness, and lack of reasonable estimation of how much time and energy it takes for certain features.

Using your football example, it isn't just somebody who confuses the term 'running back' with 'half back' or 'wing back'. It's somebody who doesn't use the right terms and also doesn't know the basics of how to construct plays, doesn't know the difference between the quarterback and the running back, doesn't understand what sort of results one can expect from a training schedule of so long, and doesn't know how long the season is or when it begins. But they act as if they do.

I've been to a good number of developer conferences and worked with hundreds of devs over the course of my career. I've met, chatted with, interviewed, interviewed with, swapped war stories with, drank with, and partied with devs from all over the world. There's a significant difference between "bump mapping" vs "normal mapping" and the kind of pie-in-the-sky stuff posted on the BSN.