Listen to Feedback: Sonic Melee Not Ready

[golstat2003]

6 minutes ago, Wravis said:

Did you miss all of the people who don't like having a single target toggle in melee set that requires you to take the first two attacks in the set to make full use of it?

  

 Aside from Glacier Peak, Shard Warrior, Ghost, Championess, and now you and Steampunkette repeatedly telling not to give my opinion and just accept their decisions, yeah. No one is telling me to shut up.

Do you want me to make a new thread and remove "Sonic Melee Is Not Ready" from the title so you're not confused about the fact that this thread isn't specific to Sonic Melee? Maybe I should title it "Make Better Decisions and Reconsider How You Respond to Criticism So People Don't Feel Disinclined To Test New Features" because "Listen to Feedback" is easy to purposely misconstrue as claiming they don't see comments.

 

The title of this thread is: Listen to Feedback: Sonic Melee Not Ready

I never said don't give feedback. 

 

Once again:

 

At this point post your feedback and keep posting your feedback about the set. And then after thanksgiving when they get back to making further changes and releasing them to OB, test some more and give further feedback.

 

That's the best solution here. You're not being told to shut up.

 

What you're being told is that the set is not going to be delayed and further changes will be made after it's released.

Edited 5 hours ago by golstat2003

[lemming]

Posting feedback about the set good.

Not liking the response is fine.

Repeating that you don't like the response over and over and over, not fine.

[golstat2003]

2 minutes ago, lemming said:

Posting feedback about the set good.

Not liking the response is fine.

Repeating that you don't like the response over and over and over, not fine.

 

To be fair he/she is responding to the response to his response to the response to his response, etc etc etc. At this point we're all just posting for funsies in my opinion.

 

It is what it is. The set will not be seeing any major revisions. They asked to keep sending feedback. They've said further changes will be made post release.

[lemming]

Yea, on the whole "This isn't how I would develop stuff"

 

The HC team does stuff differently that what I took part of in SW, including when I was part of a team of a multiplayer web game.  (very small team there, and we talked with the players a lot directly)

 

It's not wrong, it's just different.   Some of it is to deal with multi-branched git handling from what I can discern.  It can be a pain with an excellent organization, and CoH was built by people that seemed to be learning how to do organization.  And some parts were done by people outside of CoH (AE for one)

And it's hard to do that after the fact.  (I still have ptsd about some 90s era code)

[Wravis]

Yeah. It's turned more into a debate about our differing philosophies regarding how to run community testing, development deadlines, and the benefits of speaking out against things you don't like.

Which is probably giving poor GooglyMoogly a migraine.

I'm going to stop for now. It's the same people telling me I'm wrong over and over. We're not going to agree. The thread was thoroughly derailed, and it was never on sturdy rails to begin with.

[golstat2003]

4 minutes ago, lemming said:

Yea, on the whole "This isn't how I would develop stuff"

 

The HC team does stuff differently that what I took part of in SW, including when I was part of a team of a multiplayer web game.  (very small team there, and we talked with the players a lot directly)

 

It's not wrong, it's just different.   Some of it is to deal with multi-branched git handling from what I can discern.  It can be a pain with an excellent organization, and CoH was built by people that seemed to be learning how to do organization.  And some parts were done by people outside of CoH (AE for one)

And it's hard to do that after the fact.  (I still have ptsd about some 90s era code)

 

Software development (game or otherwise) can be an absolute . . . shit show, in keep organized. As someone who leads a team that does all aspects from end to end and has dealt with git in the past. . . . yeeeeeeeah, I will be nice and just say it can be special sometimes.

[Steampunkette]

1 hour ago, Wravis said:

1) Do you think that is a good, productive way to create content for a game? Rush it out to hit arbitrary deadlines you've set for yourself, and fix it later? This is a game. The Homecoming team isn't a group of infallible higher beings who can't be seen as flawed or it'll risk societal collapse. Acknowledging mistakes isn't a weakness. Stubbornly refusing to admit mistakes is

I don't think that is a good way to develop content. So I am voicing my opinion. And people keep telling me to shut up. Stop telling me to shut up.

2) I agree, they shouldn't make a fixed statement about the length required to test things. I'm not suggesting they should. But this was an entirely new set with new feature mechanics, that deserved more time.

I registered my discontent, and keep getting told to shut up. 

  

At this point it's not even the Homecoming Team that's the problem. It's the group of people who keep high fiving each other and repeating each other telling me and people who are unhappy to be quiet. Stop telling people who have complaints to be quiet.

Why ask for feedback if the stance will be "if you don't like it, too bad"?  I don't think that's the Homecoming team's policy, but I do think that it's the route that tends to be taken because it's easier to accept the praise and ignore the criticism. And I think it's a pattern through a lot of testing. Hence why I pointed it out. Hence why multiple people have pointed it out. 

The initial post was not very constructive. I'm aware. I apologize. That doesn't make the opinion presented wrong. I'm not the only one who has that opinion.

 

1) I have no opinion on that matter.

 

I'm a TTRPG designer. Stuff's done when I'm done with it. I don't have a playerbase of 2,000+ people who want more content every 3 months. Believe me, I'd be happier if I -did-. But I would like to point out how you immediately turned it into a judgement position. Where the team is "Weak" because they don't follow your preference for how to resolve this impasse. 

 

I recognize that I don't know everything and I accept that sometimes I'm not going to be happy with how someone else resolves issues I see with their material. Then I move on. I spoke out, initially, about Kobold Press' approach to the Warlock, for example, where they bumped the Patron to 3rd level and jumped all up in the "You don't know who your patron is 'til third!" defense for the mechanical weakness of a level 1 and 2 warlock compared to contemporary classes. And then... I moved on. It was clear that balance wasn't the reason they made that choice, but unifying all classes to get their subclasses at level 3 was a mandate from on high that kneecapped the power level of the Warlock.

 

Oh well. I move on.

 

2) You are literally asking them to make a public statement that they were wrong.

Like come the hell on, Wravis. You can't talk out both sides of your mouth, here.

 

 

"They should, at least, acknowledge that it was a bad decision". Your words, my guy. 

[PeregrineFalcon]

I honestly think that the biggest problem here isn't whether the devs listen to us or whether we argue amongst ourselves, it's how we (players and devs both) receive said feedback. Too many of you read a post and the voice in your head sounds like R. Lee Ermey, or Sam Kinison, and then you react accordingly. No one, but you, controls what that voice in your head sounds like.

 

I've written "No. I think your suggestion would make this powerset OP." And had people losing their friggin marbles and act like I just condemned their entire family, and their dog, to summary execution. I know you've all seen some of the suggestion threads where this happened, before such threads disappeared.

 

Bottom line: The players, the Mods, and the Devs who read this forum need to calm down, put on their adult pants, and read each post as if it were being spoken aloud by Mister Spock, not as if it were being screamed in their ear by Sam Kinison.

[Lines]

5 minutes ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

 Too many of you read a post and the voice in your head sounds like R. Lee Ermey, or Sam Kinison, and then you react accordingly. No one, but you, controls what that voice in your head sounds like.

 

The voice in my head is Snagglepuss.

 

I like it here.

[Wravis]

9 minutes ago, Steampunkette said:

2) You are literally asking them to make a public statement that they were wrong.

Like come the hell on, Wravis. You can't talk out both sides of your mouth, here.

 

 

"They should, at least, acknowledge that it was a bad decision". Your words, my guy. 

Responding because you're putting words in my mouth.

There's a wide gamut of options when acknowledging a poor decision was made, that don't include "make a public statement and commit to a specific set of rules to abide by in the future". I never suggested they make a public statement of apology.

[Championess]

22 minutes ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

I honestly think that the biggest problem here isn't whether the devs listen to us or whether we argue amongst ourselves, it's how we (players and devs both) receive said feedback. Too many of you read a post and the voice in your head sounds like R. Lee Ermey, or Sam Kinison, and then you react accordingly. No one, but you, controls what that voice in your head sounds like.

 

I've written "No. I think your suggestion would make this powerset OP." And had people losing their friggin marbles and act like I just condemned their entire family, and their dog, to summary execution. I know you've all seen some of the suggestion threads where this happened, before such threads disappeared.

 

Bottom line: The players, the Mods, and the Devs who read this forum need to calm down, put on their adult pants, and read each post as if it were being spoken aloud by Mister Spock, not as if it were being screamed in their ear by Sam Kinison.

 

I thought everyone's default narrator was Morgan Freeman.  

 

Whichever side of the argument you're on if all you did was post this:

 

You'd have won the argument.  We may or may not have ended up with a sonar system that could instantly wreck a map.

[ShardWarrior]

3 hours ago, Wravis said:

Except this restaurant isn't open yet, and invited people in to test dishes to see if people thought it should be on the menu. Then sent servers around to ask "how is everything", heard people's opinions about the temperature of the food and the ambiance of the building, and then, before the meal was over, announced "we already decided what was going to be on the menu. We need to open by the end of the month. There's no time to change the selection. Thanks for coming" before listening to the feedback on the actual flavor, texture, variety, or pricing.

Now I'm saying "hey wait, we have things to say about the food. Why did you waste our time bringing us out here if you weren't going to hear our opinions?"

 

I mean this with all due respect as I can empathize you are upset with how you feel things are handled here, but you can quite clearly see the inflated sense of entitlement in this response.  Your analogy here is that everyone who ate the restaurant did not like the food.  Some people might have liked the food.  Some people may see the potential in the menu and will give the restaurant time to make adjustments after they have opened.  What about their positive feedback?  Or are you suggesting that ONLY the people who did not care for the menu are deserving to be listened to and their feedback is more important than anyone else?  This is exactly what you are suggesting here.

 

Your time was not wasted.  You tested the set and provided your feedback.  You have done your part.  HC did not listen to you and that is what is upsetting you.  You may want to consider that shouting into the wind is not helping and you are not going to get the results you are after, most likely ever.  

Edited 3 hours ago by ShardWarrior

[GM_GooglyMoogly]

OK.  I hid another set of posts of folks poking each other.

 

It seems that the topic was either discussed enough or that it has struck a dissonant chord (see what I did there?) causing folks to resort to personal comments.

Edited 3 hours ago by GM_GooglyMoogly