333 réponses à ce sujet

[grregg]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Thought requires data.

(...)

Yes, it does. And that's precisely why the best feedback you can give is what features you liked and why, and what you didn't like and why. This is where you have all the necessary data since it only requires playing the game and some introspection.

Look at what David Gaider wrote in his post on romance when he said that he disliked The Witcher's card collection feature. He said that he didn't like it because it made him treat female characters in a certain way. We might agree or disagree but nonetheless it's useful information.

I'm afraid that any suggestions as to how to implement a feature made without knowledge of the development process will fall into one of the following categories:

1. Impossible - when the suggestion is so out of touch with the process that we simply cannot do it that way,

2. Harmful - when it would be possible to do it the suggested way, but the side effects would be crippling, or

3. Trivial - when the suggestion is good, but it is something that it's pretty obvious to any developer.

The cases when you get a good, non-trivial implementation suggestion are pretty rare.

So again, tell me what you liked and why, what you didn't like and why, and also what struck you as unnecessary fluff (something like "the alchemy system was Ok, I guess, but I never really used it since...").

Modifié par grregg, 22 janvier 2013 - 05:47 .

[Ladybright]

Wulfram wrote...

If we were talking about an actual conversation with the designers, or even taking a survey prepared by them, or even responding to a question prepared by them, then I'd see your point. They can bring reality into the conversation in a better way than the layperson can by using common sense and whatnot.

But we're not. We're engaged in undirected chatter, overwhelmingly among lay people. For that to remain even tangentially related to the sort of game we're going to get, that requires people exercise some sort of common sense as to what is practical.

But 'practical' doesn't mean trying to poke your fingers into the development process. All that's really going to be gleaned from posts on the BSN is what people do and do not like, since as you said, most people here are lay people.

It would be more important for you to talk about what features you do/do not want, and why + how much you want them, since as a fan you can't meaningfully talk at the table of what is practical and what isn't.

[Wulfram]

If the Devs want that sort of feedback, I'd suggest going to somewhere other than these forums. We're utterly tainted by echo chamber effects if nothing else.

[Fast Jimmy]

How many truckloads of garbage should one be willing to sift through to find a single pearl? Especially when you have a crew of professional pearl farmers?

Fair enough, but then why have a company supported landfill? They do seen to have some slight inclination to sort through the garbage.

[Ladybright]

@Wulfram: They do. I'm going to hazard a guess and say there are many sources of feedback they look at, of which the BSN is only one.

Modifié par Ladybright, 22 janvier 2013 - 05:50 .

[Kidd]

EDIT: My post isn't useful. I am so sorry.

Modifié par KiddDaBeauty, 22 janvier 2013 - 05:56 .

[hoorayforicecream]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

How many truckloads of garbage should one be willing to sift through to find a single pearl? Especially when you have a crew of professional pearl farmers?

Fair enough, but then why have a company supported landfill? They do seen to have some slight inclination to sort through the garbage.

The purpose of the forums is not just to gather feedback. It is also a place where fans can answer each others' questions and have discussions about things. It is an information dissemination channel, where the devs can announce things like patches/DLC, or answer questions. Clandestine observation of such discussions (of specific game content, not necessarily speculation about implementation of said content) can also be useful to the developers, because it also helps answer the questions "What did you like? What didn't you like?". For example, the many romance threads, the mage vs templar threads, and the lore discussion threads aren't explicitly about game development, but it helps the developers understand what the hard core fanbase finds interesting, or interpretations the fans had about specific things that the devs may not have noticed.

And sometimes there are pearls that sit on the top of the dungheaps, that require minimal effort to extract. This typically comes in the form of "I liked this for this reason. I didn't like that for that reason" posts.

These aren't the sort of topics that are the subject of this thread. This thread is specifically directed at those who would muddle the message by telling the developers how to do their jobs without knowing how game development works.

[nightscrawl]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

If I have paid money expecting a quality product, but the devs misinterpreted request data because I feign ignorance on not what I like, but how I would prefer it be implemented...

There is a difference between feigning ignorance, or even not discussing implementation at all, and actually being ignorant. It's one thing to say, "I prefer a list of dialog options over the wheel," a preferred implementation method, and stating that "the dialog wheel doesn't work because of these reasons."

Look at how people discuss putting in toggles for things like the silent PC, or checking a box for sexual preference, or any other myriad things a toggle has been suggested for. People who suggest those act like it is the easiest thing in the world to put in a toggle, and because it's so easy, they don't understand why the devs just don't do it and make them happy. I cannot begin to imagine the devs' frustration at seeing this suggested ad nauseam.

I don't believe that Shorts suggested that implementation shouldn't be discussed at all, rather that if it is discussed, it is still framed in the manner of your preference, rather than why or how the devs should do something to conform to your preference. (This is general you, not you, Jimmy)


I'm certainly not excluding myself here, I'm sure I'm guilty as well.

[In Exile]

Fast Jimmy wrote..
Fair enough, but then why have a company supported landfill? They do seen to have some slight inclination to sort through the garbage.

So people can throw away their garbage?

The forums might, you know, just be here so we can talk about the game and have our debates about why Marethari is the devil (ha!) or why Anders is a loon.

[The Teyrn of Whatever]

I agree with OP in that the tone threads or posts take should be worded in terms of preference, not as lectures telling BioWare devs and writers how to do their damned jobs. We are consumers of BioWare games and fans of their products. We are not shareholders or equal partners. BioWare will cherry pick our comments and are under no obligation to listen to us. They can take or leave any given comment, and they probably leave more often than take.

Modifié par The Teryn of Whatever, 22 janvier 2013 - 06:41 .

[In Exile]

nightscrawl wrote...
There is a difference between feigning ignorance, or even not discussing implementation at all, and actually being ignorant. It's one thing to say, "I prefer a list of dialog options over the wheel," a preferred implementation method, and stating that "the dialog wheel doesn't work because of these reasons."

The best example of that are posts to the effect of "the list had more options" even in threads where devs post and explain that no, the list did not have more options. With a breakdown of the mechanism.

[Wulfram]

I'd also like to suggest that its better to lay your cards on the table and admit "I'm only suggesting this because I think it wouldn't be too difficult" than it is to pretend you aren't thinking like that and hide your possibly mistaken assumptions.

I really don't think anyone ever posts any sort of suggestion without putting some sort of thought into it's feasability. And saying "I liked" or "I didn't like" is just a way of suggesting something gets expanded, retained or expanded. In fact, saying "I liked" is really shorthand for "Please do this. I know you can do this because you did it before"

[Fast Jimmy]

These aren't the sort of topics that are the subject of this thread. This thread is specifically directed at those who would muddle the message by telling the developers how to do their jobs without knowing how game development works.

I don't disagree with much of what you are saying (or Shorts, for that matter), but what I would despise seeing this turn into is a club to smack down posts in the future.

For instance, if Shorts starts posting links to this thread whenever he feels someone is talking outside their talent skill set, it will quickly be seen as a bully-type activity and likely to cause flame wars, which could completely wreck any possible attempt at conversation in a thread that could have a decent enough idea, but may be worded in a way that puts a little to much "editorial" flair in the body of their post.

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 22 janvier 2013 - 06:09 .

[eroeru]

Upsettingshorts wrote...
The arguing over these assumptions is noise.

Yeah, I'd agree. There's too much noise. This doesn't make it easy to find a good read. I've not bothered to even post my usual semi-angry responses a while now, until now. Too little to talk about, little to no relevant topics and too much ground already covered.

Upsettingshorts wrote...
Now if you'll excuse me I have to get back to contributing to the downfall of the BSN.  Or class.  One or the other.

But as to discussions requiring info, as I said, most criticisms and suggestions as such are based on previous works and the info devs do give us. Now the problem of misinterpreting the info can be overcome with some cool nerve and argumented discussion. How the discussion needs to be argumented is another topic, and quite frankly a bothersome one, but saying that there should be *no* discussion because it ends up bad (by whatever standards you may have) seems a pretty harmful agenda to promote.

As for ideas for future games - these don't need anything but an understanding of what makes a game good (for you).

Modifié par eroeru, 22 janvier 2013 - 06:10 .

[upsettingshorts]

Just peeking in from lecture to briefly address two points (plus it's geology so who can blame me):

I gave the wrong impression when I said I'd do that. In particularly egregious cases where a given poster insists upon their assumptions to a fault, sure. Like in that thread In Exile mentioned about the list dialogue options, where folks continued to insist that the list in DAO had more options than the wheel in DA2, despite developers explicitly demonstrating the contrary.

That said, I don't think people should be complacent about this or I wouldn't have created the thread at all.

eroeru wrote...

 saying that there should be *no* discussion because it ends up bad (by whatever standards you may have) seems a pretty harmful agenda to promote.

It's a good thing I'm not doing that at all, then.

The point of the thread is to argue that a particular habit prevalent in such discussions is useless, and can also be harmful (as in said assumptions about game development becoming urban legends)

If people want to engage in baseless speculation, fine.  But let's have some self-awareness about it at least.  That's a middle ground I can accept.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 22 janvier 2013 - 06:13 .

[Fast Jimmy]

^

Fair enough.

I hope you aren't the one lecturing?

[In Exile]

Fast Jimmy wrote...
For instance, if Shorts starts posting links to this thread whenever he feels someone is talking outside their talent skill set, it will quickly be seen as a bully-type activity and likely to cause flame wars, which could completely wreck any possible attempt at conversation in a thread that could have a decent enough idea, but may be worded in a way that puts a little to much "editorial" flair in the body of their post.

When you say editorial flair, do you mean something like "Bioware abandoned RPGs forever, they will stop shaming us once they ..."? Because I think that's a problem.

[upsettingshorts]

EntropicAngel wrote...

Wow. I didn't know the DA forums were so...faction-ed.

Hah!  

But really, Maria and I get along about as often as we don't.  

Now other people and I... well, there's a reason Addai was surprised she found herself agreeing with me.

Okay, back to geology.

[eroeru]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

I gave the wrong impression when I said I'd do that. In particularly egregious cases where a given poster insists upon their assumptions to a fault, sure. Like in that thread In Exile mentioned about the list dialogue options, where folks continued to insist that the list in DAO had more options than the wheel in DA2, despite developers explicitly demonstrating the contrary.

Even in the particular example, I think the thread had merit in that (some of) the posters could then see their discontent wasn't so much around the quantity of choices in dialogue, but the particular ways it was implemented, ideally cleared up more by the end of the thread. The dissatisfaction is still there, and can be valid, even if the poster is confused. And even confused posters should be able to discuss. It's at least a possibility to arrive at something clearer.

edit: also, it's a possibility that developers themselves are confused. Mostly it's not the case, but with some specific fan-perspectives, they'd maybe find something valuable or a new idea. I think that'd be the more interesting and sometimes useful type of fan-feedback.

Though they'd in *any* case get some info about more general preferences, even from discussions about ideas and disappointments.

Modifié par eroeru, 22 janvier 2013 - 06:43 .

[Fast Jimmy]

In Exile wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...
For instance, if Shorts starts posting links to this thread whenever he feels someone is talking outside their talent skill set, it will quickly be seen as a bully-type activity and likely to cause flame wars, which could completely wreck any possible attempt at conversation in a thread that could have a decent enough idea, but may be worded in a way that puts a little to much "editorial" flair in the body of their post.

When you say editorial flair, do you mean something like "Bioware abandoned RPGs forever, they will stop shaming us once they ..."? Because I think that's a problem.

I don't disagree, but if fellow forumites start taking forum etiquette into their own hands, there will be war on our hands. 

[In Exile]

Fast Jimmy wrote...
I don't disagree, but if fellow forumites start taking forum etiquette into their own hands, there will be war on our hands. 

We always get a toxic environment when someone opens with "here is why DA2 is crap and how you're a bad person for liking it."

[eroeru]

Yeah, even I have come to agree that the time is long past for that kind of toxicity.

Modifié par eroeru, 22 janvier 2013 - 06:27 .

[Emzamination]

In Exile wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...
I don't disagree, but if fellow forumites start taking forum etiquette into their own hands, there will be war on our hands. 

We always get a toxic environment when someone opens with "here is why DA2 is crap and how you're a bad person for liking it."

That's not toxicity, that's passionate love. /no sarcasm