314 replies to this topic

[Jestun]

Roadbeer, on 30 April 2013 - 08:48 AM, said:

Go just one level up, and that's the forum that holds the CURRENT PATCH.

Why is that so hard to grasp?

The fact that the Patch Notes forum only holds out of date patch notes?

How can you not understand how stupid that is? If something only contains historic patch notes then you label it as such. If it's labeled "Patch Notes" then guess what people will expect to see in there... THE PATCH NOTES!

:edit:

It's easy for someone who knows where something is to say how obvious it is that it's there.

What you need to do is look at it through the eyes of someone else, someone who does not know.

You are looking for the patch notes. Your options are as follows:

News - news of the latest patch?
Announcements - the announcement of the latest patch?
Dev's corner - less likely, but maybe?
Patch feedback - getting warmer...

Ah! Patch Notes!


Except that's not where they would find the latest patch notes.

Edited by Jestun, 30 April 2013 - 08:53 AM.

[Roadbeer]

:sigh:
Semantics again. I can't help you.

[Jestun]

Roadbeer, on 30 April 2013 - 08:52 AM, said:

:sigh:
Semantics again. I can't help you.

I never expected you to.

[Roadbeer]

I take it back, that's not where the "Patch Notes" takes you when you click on it in the launcher. I was mistaken.
Having said that, nothing has changed when it comes to feedback about the current patch and where hotfixes were pinned.

Edited by Roadbeer, 30 April 2013 - 08:57 AM.

[Dishevel]

The important thing here is what they did and why they did it.
The poll they put out for the last few days is angering to me to say the least.
What the community wanted by a vast majority was "General Discussion" put back.
They said they had heard us and would address our concerns. The poll dose not ask the major concern we had.
Agree or not the community spoke clearly for what they wanted. IGP clearly heard it.
The understood exactly what we wanted.
They will not do it. Whatever their reason, the decision is clear.
They do not want us to have a "General Discussion" forum at all. For any reason. It will not be allowed.
The end. If you think you can make it clearer to them you are wrong. You can not.
There is no argument you can use to convince them. They know them all and have made their decision.
My problem is that they told us they would address our concerns.
They did not. They did their level best to sidestep our concerns and leave them on the roadside dead and forgotten.
The discussion was a lie. The community is a hindrance to what they want to accomplish.
I do not know what their plans are. I do know that what is going on here is not a mistake.
It is exactly what they want for a well planed reason and we are not going to get in the way of it.

[Gregory Owen]

Dishevel, on 30 April 2013 - 09:05 AM, said:

The important thing here is what they did and why they did it.
The poll they put out for the last few days is angering to me to say the least.
What the community wanted by a vast majority was "General Discussion" put back.
They said they had heard us and would address our concerns. The poll dose not ask the major concern we had.
Agree or not the community spoke clearly for what they wanted. IGP clearly heard it.
The understood exactly what we wanted.
They will not do it. Whatever their reason, the decision is clear.
They do not want us to have a "General Discussion" forum at all. For any reason. It will not be allowed.
The end. If you think you can make it clearer to them you are wrong. You can not.
There is no argument you can use to convince them. They know them all and have made their decision.
My problem is that they told us they would address our concerns.
They did not. They did their level best to sidestep our concerns and leave them on the roadside dead and forgotten.
The discussion was a lie. The community is a hindrance to what they want to accomplish.
I do not know what their plans are. I do know that what is going on here is not a mistake.
It is exactly what they want for a well planed reason and we are not going to get in the way of it.

there is a name for this, it's called pulling a "Smedley"

John Smedley was head developer on Star was galaxies, he made drastic changes to the game and refused to revert them, he refused to listen to the million+ strong community and continued down the road of his "Vision" which led to it's demise.

https://www.google.c...iw=1280&bih=591

this is exactly what is happening with MWO, they are so confident what they are doing is correct, they will ignore the players and continue down this slope till it self-destructs.

if they want the game to be a success, they need to drop the ego's now, come talk with us,and quit dismissing us forum users as the minority.


off-topic, "project zomboid" just released there first public test of 2.9 yesterday and put out 5 separate hotfix updates in 1 day while also talking to the community and taking suggestions, and they are only 5 people.

Edited by Gregory Owen, 30 April 2013 - 09:39 AM.

[Dishevel]

Gregory Owen, on 30 April 2013 - 09:36 AM, said:

there is a name for this, it's called pulling a "Smedley"

John Smedley was head developer on Star was galaxies, he made drastic changes to the game and refused to revert them, he refused to listen to the million+ strong community and continued down the road of his "Vision" which led to it's demise.

https://www.google.c...iw=1280&bih=591

this is exactly what is happening with MWO, they are so confident what they are doing is correct, they will ignore the players and continue down this slope till it self-destructs.

if they want the game to be a success, they need to drop the ego's now, come talk with us,and quit dismissing us forum users as the minority.


off-topic, "project zomboid" just released there first public test of 2.9 yesterday and put out 5 separate hotfix updates in 1 day while also talking to the community and taking suggestions, and they are only 5 people.

I do not really knwo what to think.
they may be right. They may need to wipe the community to push through the changes they need to make to make the game appeal to a wider audience. This may in fact make them more money in the long run. I do not know.
What I do know is that between wiping out the community and insistence on third person view they are working on losing me.
I am not in the overall scheme of things important to them and do not think that I should be.
I am just sad that I feel like I am going to lose out on a game I was really liking for a a while.

[Jestun]

Dishevel, on 30 April 2013 - 09:46 AM, said:

I do not really knwo what to think.
they may be right. They may need to wipe the community to push through the changes they need to make to make the game appeal to a wider audience. This may in fact make them more money in the long run. I do not know.
What I do know is that between wiping out the community and insistence on third person view they are working on losing me.
I am not in the overall scheme of things important to them and do not think that I should be.
I am just sad that I feel like I am going to lose out on a game I was really liking for a a while.

I think they are overestimating the size of the "I want to play a giant shooty robot game, I considered Hawken but when I found out it had a general discussion forum it became clear it was not the game for me so instead I decided to wait until MWO deleted theirs" crowd.

[Gregory Owen]

Dishevel, on 30 April 2013 - 09:46 AM, said:

I do not really knwo what to think.
they may be right. They may need to wipe the community to push through the changes they need to make to make the game appeal to a wider audience. This may in fact make them more money in the long run. I do not know.
What I do know is that between wiping out the community and insistence on third person view they are working on losing me.
I am not in the overall scheme of things important to them and do not think that I should be.
I am just sad that I feel like I am going to lose out on a game I was really liking for a a while.

that is pretty much exactly what Smedley was hoping for, they removed the original combat system and implemented a much simpler one, without even telling us they were working on it. it caused all the original players to leave, they did it hoping to appeal to a wider audience which never existed. so instead of being happy with a million players, they lost them all because they game was no longer the one we purchased.

I think it's a big pitfall they've set themselves up for being in "open beta" for so long, players are currently happy with certain mechanics and think they need to stay that way, and others need to be changed but fall on deaf ears.
and many many things still haven't even been implemented or fixed. let alone all the revisions to things they have going on : UI,HSR,netcode,collision.


then there is this forum debacle, they've upset such a large percentage of the community they had to remove the general discussion forum to improve it's initial impressions to new players. which has just enraged the community now to the point of abandonment.

Edited by Gregory Owen, 30 April 2013 - 10:14 AM.

[Dishevel]

Niko Snow, on 30 April 2013 - 10:18 AM, said:

Greetings MechWarriors!

As per http://mwomercs.com/...endum-26042013/,
With 236 votes cast, the forum referendum comes to a close.

With the wishes of the forum community:
We shall keep Workarounds as a section of Support & Feedback.
We shall keep the BattleMechs Guides divided by Weight-class.
We shall unify the other Guides sections into one.
We shall not create a Menus & UI Discussion area.
We shall not create a Mech Decore Discussion area.
We shall merge the Barracks.
We shall keep the Factions sections under MWO Universe.
We shall keep the Fan Forums on the Front Page.
We shall merge BattleTech Discussions.

For further discussion on these changes please continue in this thread

We will continue to review your feedback on this matter to determine if any further changes or referendums may be necessary.

Thank you.

You do of course realize that none of the things they put in the referendum had anything to do with what the community asked for.
Which is why the absolutely pathetic number of votes received.
So that whole "With the wishes of the forum community:"
Just makes us feel dirty.

Edited by Dishevel, 30 April 2013 - 10:26 AM.

[Sidekick]

Which reminds me: the next time the admins poll something completely pointless, I will just for whatever seems the least desirable. Since only a few vote, a minority of misfits may cause serious chaos.


10000 subforums, here we come!

[Gregory Owen]

Niko Snow, on 30 April 2013 - 10:29 AM, said:

Actually all of these, including the changes we made more immediately before the referendum and listed here: http://mwomercs.com/...pdate-30042013/ came from Community feedback:
Forum replies, private messages, support e-mails and more. I'm sorry if you are upset that they weren't exactly what you wanted personally, but as the forums are an official conduit for feedback they have to be also be set up in a manner that meets our needs of organizing that feedback. The votes on these changes are matters we felt it was better to ask the Community to decide.

alright then niko,

give the community a poll asking if we'd like our "general discussion" forum back, there is more than enough community feedback asking for it.

[Dishevel]

Niko Snow, on 30 April 2013 - 10:29 AM, said:

Actually all of these, including the changes we made more immediately before the referendum and listed here: http://mwomercs.com/...pdate-30042013/ came from Community feedback:
Forum replies, private messages, support e-mails and more. I'm sorry if you are upset that they weren't exactly what you wanted personally, but as the forums are an official conduit for feedback they have to be also be set up in a manner that meets our needs of organizing that feedback. The votes on these changes are matters we felt it was better to ask the Community to decide.

But did anyone read what the community clearly asked for?
Did the thread that was overwhelmingly pro bring back general mean nothing?
What I wanted personally? Wow. I guess if we wipe out enough of the community and I stick around it will become that.
As it stands now though there was a massive stand by the forum community to bring back "General Discussion". That stand caused IGP to state that they were listening to us and would make changes. The changes made did not address the biggest thing that was asked for.
State it in any way you want. I will no longer ask for General back. As I have come to understand that the wishes of the majority of active forum members will not change the direction IGP has chosen for the forums. Period.

Sidekick, on 30 April 2013 - 10:31 AM, said:

Which reminds me: the next time the admins poll something completely pointless, I will just for whatever seems the least desirable. Since only a few vote, a minority of misfits may cause serious chaos.


10000 subforums, here we come!

Not that it mattered. So few voted due to the poll not having the one thing on it everyone wanted to vote on.
That low number of votes was not a mistake by the community but a statement.
A very clear statement.
Take out the abstains and what you have is a vast majority of those that vote in polls refusing to vote in this one.

[Rick Rawlings]

With 236 votes cast, the forum referendum comes to a close.

With the wishes of the forum community

um...

[Coolant]

Niko Snow, on 30 April 2013 - 10:29 AM, said:

Actually all of these, including the changes we made more immediately before the referendum and listed here: http://mwomercs.com/...pdate-30042013/ came from Community feedback:
Forum replies, private messages, support e-mails and more. I'm sorry if you are upset that they weren't exactly what you wanted personally, but as the forums are an official conduit for feedback they have to be also be set up in a manner that meets our needs of organizing that feedback. The votes on these changes are matters we felt it was better to ask the Community to decide.

So how come most other forums for games have a General Discussion section and they seem to do just fine organizing their feedback? I've never ever heard of any forums having difficulty with a General Discussion forum. Maybe you can give us an example of one?

[Dishevel]

Rick Rawlings, on 30 April 2013 - 10:41 AM, said:

With 236 votes cast, the forum referendum comes to a close.

With the wishes of the forum community

um...

Here is the really funny part.
The official poll on the hottest topic in a long while...
Just did the math. Subtracting the abstains from each question the average number of votes for each question was actually only 197.5 !
You have to hand it to them. They took a hot topic and made it a poll that almost no one cared about. then were able to make a post that they had listened to us and gave us exactly what we wanted.

Epic.

[Gregory Owen]

Coolant, on 30 April 2013 - 10:48 AM, said:

So how come most other forums for games have a General Discussion section and they seem to do just fine organizing their feedback. I've never ever heard of any forums having difficulty with a General Discussion forum. Maybe you can give us an example of one?

not most, All. I cannot find another game that has done this.
as far as I can tell it is some sort of PR recovery mode they have gone into, to prevent new players from seeing what the community is upset with all in 1 place, now you have to venture into each topic to see exactly what the current concerns are.

how can they consider 236 votes a legitimate poll of user wants, yet blow off the 700+ that voted against 3rd person, or the 500 plus that voted ecm needed massive changes.

[Dishevel]

Gregory Owen, on 30 April 2013 - 10:54 AM, said:

not most, All. I cannot find another game that has done this.
as far as I can tell it is some sort of PR recovery mode they have gone into, to prevent new players from seeing what the community is upset with all in 1 place, now you have to venture into each topic to see exactly what the current concerns are.

how can they consider 236 votes a legitimate poll of user wants, yet blow off the 700+ that voted against 3rd person, or the 500 plus that voted ecm needed massive changes.

Those numbers you quoted were just the number of people that voted on the wining side.
197.5 is the average number of non abstaining votes TOTAL, for and against.
A sad joke on us.

Also. Next step is to let this go on a little bit then lock so it floats on down the page.

Any other post will be wither "Off Topic" or "Already Discussed" and modded into oblivion.

[ferranis]

Niko Snow, on 30 April 2013 - 10:29 AM, said:

Actually all of these, including the changes we made more immediately before the referendum and listed here: http://mwomercs.com/...pdate-30042013/ came from Community feedback:
Forum replies, private messages, support e-mails and more. I'm sorry if you are upset that they weren't exactly what you wanted personally, but as the forums are an official conduit for feedback they have to be also be set up in a manner that meets our needs of organizing that feedback. The votes on these changes are matters we felt it was better to ask the Community to decide.

Dont lie, none of the changes you made came from community feedback. The damage-control for you against several thousand subforums came from the community...

If you dont have anything true to say, at least have the decency to be quiet.

[Roadbeer]

[image deleted]

Game forum structure is serious business

Edited by miSs, 30 April 2013 - 11:35 AM.