@ MajMalph:
I'm not going to comment on the details, as my comments would mostly mirror what's already been said. What i would like to say is this:
1st, I very much appreciate how quickly our request for more communication, early communication, on proposed changes was taken to heart and acted on. This is exactly the kind of thing we need more of. If there's any doubt about that, compare the ghost town that was the forums a week ago to what they are now. All the lurkers have come out of the woodwork, logged in, and made their opinions known. That alone, ignoring the details of those opinions even, ought to be a clear message that there is still a substantial community of players who care about what you're doing. Please please keep it going.
Next, the criticism. What this last bombshell lacks is context. You see, we do want early communication, but Glin skipped a crucial step. How can we comment constructively, especially to scary, wide effect changes in game mechanics if we don't know WHY these changes are happening? That is to say, each and every detail of the proposed plan was discussed, hashed, rehashed, planned, and decided on in some form of internal meeting/discussion/brainstorming session. And those decisions were made based on long and short term goals you guys have for the game as a whole. Right? But if we the players don't know what those goals are, we can't possible have a constructive, contextual perspective about how and if the changes meet those goals. OR even if the goals are valid in the first place. What was needed was for Glin to start the discussion something like this:
We the devs/producers feel that there are some issues/problems with DDO's engame, power creep, TR cycle, and Grind (( for example )). Here is what we think those problems are: ((a short paragraph describing the perceived issues in each of those areas))
Now, we THINK we have come up with some interesting ways to address those issues, and it will mean some drastic and some not so drastic changes to a couple of key mechanics. But before we get into those, we'd like to hear your opinion regarding the issues we discussed above. So here's a brief questionnaire to get the discussion flowing:
1) How much of your gaming time is spent at end game, and what do you feel is the problem with current end game playstyle?
2 et al ) a few more questions measuring the players' attitude towards the issues you're working on.
Ok, so we're going to take a couple days to digest your feedback, and get back to you with what we're planning.
**************
A few days later
**************
So, we've looked at your feedback and folded it in to our own thoughts, and here's what we've come up with:
1) End game, Grind, and Power Creep: Here's what it boils down to, and here's what we're going to do about it. This change will hurt quite a bit at first, but it seems that it will be the healthiest in the long term. To offset the damage in the short term, here's what we'll do.
2) next issue, next solution, with reasoning, expected fallout, hoped for long term results
3) and so on. **************************
So, I've been pretty long winded I know, but I hope you see what I'm getting at. Your early communication regarding TR/ETR/ITR is appreciated, but it really needs that context in order to have any hope of being constructive. Otherwise you're just asking for backlash and doom.
I hope you agree and I hope you're able to pass it on and do something about it.
p.s. having the devs wait another week before returning to thread may not be the greatest plan. the hotheads will get hotter, the already out-of-hand speculation and misinformation will just get worse, the knee-jerkers will start having outright seizures. I'd suggest at least a token drop in today to say, We're hearing you, especially on the issues of Fate Points, Keys, Tomes, Heroic TR, and lost ed xp. Please don't lose heart, it's early yet, and we'll definitely be coming back for more discussion next week. Keep the input coming, and please keep it civil.... You know, something like that to help keep the pot from boiling over.
|