1306 replies to this topic

[Russ Bullock]

I know there are those that have legit concerns about the whole thing and I appreciate that.

But I said we would try this so we need to see it through. Who knows maybe it will work so well those people will change their minds or we abandon it for a new method that might work better for MWO.

I know 100 people is a ton but I think we just have to bite the bullet and jump on TS together and see if collectively we can trim it down. I think once the larger group hears we are capping it at say 8 members and we want 2 from 4 groups for instance. Many will voluntarily remove themselves from this first council. We then can nominate and vote amongst ourselves until we have a group to present.

Maybe I am far to optimistic but I just think we should dive in and see how it evolves.

Although we could use the Comstar TS I am more than happy to have you all plan the time and location,
Send PM's to me and those nominated with the server details perhaps.

[El Bandito]

Russ Bullock, on 16 September 2014 - 10:46 PM, said:

I know there are those that have legit concerns about the whole thing and I appreciate that.

But I said we would try this so we need to see it through. Who knows maybe it will work so well those people will change their minds or we abandon it for a new method that might work better for MWO.

Maybe I am far to optimistic but I just think we should dive in and see how it evolves.

No pain, no gain!

[IraqiWalker]

Mirkk Defwode, on 16 September 2014 - 10:45 PM, said:

All of this that is suggest for the Council to do should go to a PAID community manager that works with Moderators identifying the best suggestions with the most detail as to their intent and design.

This is something that should never fall back on community members to do. There is far too much personal interest in play for the players who are elected to speak on these issues and even then they may not bring forth all of the suggestions presented because of personal disdain for the person or their idea even if it has validity in it's nature or implementation.

The difference is that totals up to around 3-4 people, who aren't on the forums 24/7. While outsourcing it increases efficiency astronomically.

Since it's a council we will have players present suggestions from all viewpoints. Don't forget that at the end of the day, the council is just putting the suggestions together, and not picking and choosing, and then implementing the ones they like.

Also, this would take resources from PGI that we would rather see spent somewhere else. It's the community's way of helping out.

[Mirkk Defwode]

Russ Bullock, on 16 September 2014 - 10:46 PM, said:

I know there are those that have legit concerns about the whole thing and I appreciate that.

But I said we would try this so we need to see it through. Who knows maybe it will work so well those people will change their minds or we abandon it for a new method that might work better for MWO.

I know 100 people is a ton but I think we just have to bite the bullet and jump on TS together and see if collectively we can trim it down. I think once the larger group hears we are capping it at say 8 members and we want 2 from 4 groups for instance. Many will voluntarily remove themselves from this first council. We then can nominate and vote amongst ourselves until we have a group to present.

Maybe I am far to optimistic but I just think we should dive in and see how it evolves.

Although we could use the Comstar TS I am more than happy to have you all plan the time and location,
Send PM's to me and those nominated with the server details perhaps.

Seen this sort of thing fall flat on it's face in other titles. And I'd rather see a community manager step in and just work on collecting this data as just part of a job responsibility. I know 343 has three community managers to do this for all the Halo titles. I can check to see how Bungie handles this as they're big on community interaction as well. But they do this with employees so they don't really have a dog in the fight to lean one way or the other. Even among a coalition you'll see favoritisms and people with very specific agendas they'll look to push for that will bring out politicking that may alienate the community further. And after great strives toward mending the relationship this could be detrimental.

[Roadbeer]

Mirkk Defwode, on 16 September 2014 - 10:58 PM, said:

Seen this sort of thing fall flat on it's face in other titles. And I'd rather see a community manager step in and just work on collecting this data as just part of a job responsibility. I know 343 has three community managers to do this for all the Halo titles. I can check to see how Bungie handles this as they're big on community interaction as well. But they do this with employees so they don't really have a dog in the fight to lean one way or the other. Even among a coalition you'll see favoritisms and people with very specific agendas they'll look to push for that will bring out politicking that may alienate the community further. And after great strives toward mending the relationship this could be detrimental.

Yes, we get it, you're against it.

At this point, it's kinda like sex with Kobe Bryant. You can kick and scream all you want, it's still gonna happen.

[IraqiWalker]

Mirkk Defwode, on 16 September 2014 - 10:58 PM, said:

Seen this sort of thing fall flat on it's face in other titles. And I'd rather see a community manager step in and just work on collecting this data as just part of a job responsibility. I know 343 has three community managers to do this for all the Halo titles. I can check to see how Bungie handles this as they're big on community interaction as well. But they do this with employees so they don't really have a dog in the fight to lean one way or the other. Even among a coalition you'll see favoritisms and people with very specific agendas they'll look to push for that will bring out politicking that may alienate the community further. And after great strives toward mending the relationship this could be detrimental.

It has also worked in other titles. However, from what I have seen/understood this approach is actually not the same as the other titles.

Also, there's still the problem of 1 or 2 CMs, versus 10+ volunteers with more time and energy.

Edited by IraqiWalker, 16 September 2014 - 11:03 PM.

[Mirkk Defwode]

IraqiWalker, on 16 September 2014 - 10:56 PM, said:

The difference is that totals up to around 3-4 people, who aren't on the forums 24/7. While outsourcing it increases efficiency astronomically.

Since it's a council we will have players present suggestions from all viewpoints. Don't forget that at the end of the day, the council is just putting the suggestions together, and not picking and choosing, and then implementing the ones they like.

Also, this would take resources from PGI that we would rather see spent somewhere else. It's the community's way of helping out.

Works for 343 Industries dealing with Halo...and it's millions of players...

I get what you're saying, but I sincerely disagree with the concept on the basis of personal bias. I know everyone will bring their own pet peeves to the table and they're more likely to fight their own fight than look at the bigger picture. It's be sited the failures of a system like this from Eve and the communities I've seen attempt this in the past it's never gone well.

[N0MAD]

Russ Bullock, on 16 September 2014 - 10:46 PM, said:

I know there are those that have legit concerns about the whole thing and I appreciate that.

But I said we would try this so we need to see it through. Who knows maybe it will work so well those people will change their minds or we abandon it for a new method that might work better for MWO.

I know 100 people is a ton but I think we just have to bite the bullet and jump on TS together and see if collectively we can trim it down. I think once the larger group hears we are capping it at say 8 members and we want 2 from 4 groups for instance. Many will voluntarily remove themselves from this first council. We then can nominate and vote amongst ourselves until we have a group to present.

Maybe I am far to optimistic but I just think we should dive in and see how it evolves.

Although we could use the Comstar TS I am more than happy to have you all plan the time and location,
Send PM's to me and those nominated with the server details perhaps.

So how do you plan to include the whole community in this? you (PGI) on a number of occasions have said the Forum population is only the loud minority group of the entire MWO population. Or is this just to appease the vocal minority an special interest groups? because if you want the imput of the total community by logic it cant be just done here on the Forums.
How are you going to get this out to the Entire community.
Also so that this group cant be called out lets say as your fan group or yes men, on what basis will you be picking the group? is it most posts, best K/D, most popular players, most Mech pack purchases, what? what qualifications are needed to be part of this council.

Edited by N0MAD, 16 September 2014 - 11:15 PM.

[IraqiWalker]

Mirkk Defwode, on 16 September 2014 - 11:02 PM, said:

Works for 343 Industries dealing with Halo...and it's millions of players...

I get what you're saying, but I sincerely disagree with the concept on the basis of personal bias. I know everyone will bring their own pet peeves to the table and they're more likely to fight their own fight than look at the bigger picture. It's be sited the failures of a system like this from Eve and the communities I've seen attempt this in the past it's never gone well.

The council isn't debating anything. They're getting the ideas, and converting them into mechanics. We won't be debating just our ideas. No, we've got, in the case of ECM, years of posts, and topics to go through, and refine. The council is going to be innovating their own version of MW:O. Not to mention that at the end of the day, the community and PGI will have power over these ideas.

[Peiper]

N0MAD, on 16 September 2014 - 10:08 PM, said:

So how do you propose the Community vote or even know there is a vote considering the Majority of the population doesn't visit the forums? Or are you also of the opinion that only the SMALL percentage of the player base who visits the forum get to vote for the entire pop?
All of you Keep saying let the community vote on some forum post, but keep ignoring the fact that the forum is only inhabited by a Minority group

N0MAD, on 16 September 2014 - 11:05 PM, said:

So how do you plan to include the whole community in this? you (PGI) have on a number of ocasions have said the Forum population is only a Loud minority group of the entire MWO population. Or is this just to appease the vocal minority an special interest groups? because if you want the imput of the total community by logic it cant be just done here on the Forums.

How are you going to get this out to the Entire community.

When there are votes, put the ads up on the launcher, facebook, and front page of the forums. I don't see why this couldn't happen. If they don't vote, they can't complain. Hell, a mass email could also go out through/from PGI to all players: Hey, wake up, if you care about this go vote!

If you're worried about the majority of the people's wishes represented by the minority, you should try coming and living the oligarchy that is the United States. (I'm being satirical, but seriously... get my point?)

Edited by Peiper, 16 September 2014 - 11:06 PM.

[IraqiWalker]

N0MAD, on 16 September 2014 - 11:05 PM, said:

So how do you plan to include the whole community in this? you (PGI) have on a number of ocasions have said the Forum population is only a Loud minority group of the entire MWO population. Or is this just to appease the vocal minority an special interest groups? because if you want the imput of the total community by logic it cant be just done here on the Forums.
How are you going to get this out to the Entire community.

Let the entire player base vote on feature suggestions. This election shouldn't be voted on by the entire player base, only the forum base should be allowed to vote on it. Mainly because it's a conversation between PGI and the community, so only those that want, or care to talk should be allowed to participate. Those that refuse to participate should have no bearing on the course of the election.

[Mirkk Defwode]

IraqiWalker, on 16 September 2014 - 11:01 PM, said:

It has also worked in other titles. However, from what I have seen/understood this approach is actually not the same as the other titles.

Also, there's still the problem of 1 or 2 CMs, versus 10+ volunteers with more time and energy.

Yup all 8 folks that'll be capped at from Russ' last post...

Russ Bullock, on 16 September 2014 - 10:46 PM, said:

I think once the larger group hears we are capping it at say 8 members and we want 2 from 4 groups for instance. Many will voluntarily remove themselves from this first council. We then can nominate and vote amongst ourselves until we have a group to present.

Maybe I am far to optimistic but I just think we should dive in and see how it evolves.

Feels like people don't want me voicing my opinion with this debate as well. I'm against it from personal experience and witnessing it externally. This is anecdotal experience that makes me have a heavy bias against this. So I'll actively speak out against it while I can.

IraqiWalker, on 16 September 2014 - 11:05 PM, said:

The council isn't debating anything. They're getting the ideas, and converting them into mechanics. We won't be debating just our ideas. No, we've got, in the case of ECM, years of posts, and topics to go through, and refine. The council is going to be innovating their own version of MW:O. Not to mention that at the end of the day, the community and PGI will have power over these ideas.

With all the power to omit anything they don't agree with on some level or another...

[IraqiWalker]

Peiper, on 16 September 2014 - 11:05 PM, said:

When there are votes, put the ads up on the launcher, facebook, and front page of the forums. I don't see why this couldn't happen. If they don't vote, they can't complain. Hell, a mass email could also go out through/from PGI to all players: Hey, wake up, if you care about this go vote!

If you're worried about the majority of the people's wishes represented by the minority, you should try coming and living the oligarchy that is the United States. (I'm being satirical, but seriously... get my point?)

The silent population should vote on feature suggestions, but shouldn't vote on who gets into the council. They have no involvement with it, and have no idea who the memebrs are. It's like asking a kid from Norway to vote in the county election for Madison county. They have no idea who's active, or what their platforms are.

Plus, players that choose not to get involved with the community forfeit their voice, because they've made the decision not to participate. Once they participate, they are no longer in the silent section.

Also, no one can say that those players are refusing to communicate due to experience with PGI, when they have none. If they have communicated with PGI, and are active about it, they're not with the silent section.

Mirkk Defwode, on 16 September 2014 - 11:09 PM, said:

Feels like people don't want me voicing my opinion with this debate as well. I'm against it from personal experience and witnessing it externally. This is anecdotal experience that makes me have a heavy bias against this. So I'll actively speak out against it while I can.

The problem is that what you are describing has happened in OTHER titles. Not in this one. Which means that we can try it. Also, there is also anecdotal evidence of it working. So we have a shot at trying it out. If it fails, no damage is done, and if it succeeds, it could be spectacular.

Your complaint has been repeated by you in an identical manner. There is no point in re-stating the same point multiple times.

Mirkk Defwode, on 16 September 2014 - 11:09 PM, said:

With all the power to omit anything they don't agree with on some level or another...

No, not really. Take all ideas, compile them, turn them into mechanics, and present them to the community. I'm not seeing the omit part.

[N0MAD]

Peiper, on 16 September 2014 - 11:05 PM, said:

When there are votes, put the ads up on the launcher, facebook, and front page of the forums. I don't see why this couldn't happen. If they don't vote, they can't complain. Hell, a mass email could also go out through/from PGI to all players: Hey, wake up, if you care about this go vote!

If you're worried about the majority of the people's wishes represented by the minority, you should try coming and living the oligarchy that is the United States. (I'm being satirical, but seriously... get my point?)

Putting it on the launcher is a great idea, facebook other 3rd party sites and email not such a good idea.
Many like myself dont want to or dont use Social media (terrible isnt it) and many of us that play many games have such mails directed into the junk mail,lets face it many companies like to spam us with stuff we not interested in.
​So yes Have a Spot on launcher with appropriate links, then at least the community is given a chance to see whats going on.

[MischiefSC]

Mirkk Defwode, on 16 September 2014 - 11:09 PM, said:

Yup all 8 folks that'll be capped at from Russ' last post...




Feels like people don't want me voicing my opinion with this debate as well. I'm against it from personal experience and witnessing it externally. This is anecdotal experience that makes me have a heavy bias against this. So I'll actively speak out against it while I can.



With all the power to omit anything they don't agree with on some level or another...

How about if the group who gets elected gets paid by PGI and becomes PGI employees, and then does the exact same thing?

I get your concern. I absolutely do. All for you voicing it.

The reality is that at some point someone (actually several people) have to collect the data, condense it and present it to the community, as well as present in a manner that can involve expedient and intelligent back-and-forth conversation with PGI about it. That's going to be a small group of people, or even one person. One person is inherently riskier than several.

Working for PGI does not given anyone a special insight. It simply gives someone a pay check to cover the time invested, so you can do that work in addition to having a home and food and that sort of stuff. It certainly does give easier access to the people in PGI who will actually have the final say on what does and doesn't happen but the effort of gathering the contributions and turning them into votable content is just grunt work. It's not deciding anything.

As to concerns that the community isn't involved -

The community at large will be involved in actually voting on the content that gets moved forward. It doesn't matter if that content is provided by Paul picking suggestions at random, the result of 100 hours of PGI employee time or 8 volunteers gathering it and refining it, you end up with some optional changes to ECM. That gets (I hope) put before the player base as a whole to vote on what they'd like most. If they don't like any of it, well then we get to start over.

Or we can just have PGI pick what they want to do and do it, based on the occasional perusal of forum content. There is no way to get the opinion of 'the community as a whole' if they don't come to the forums. They've never been involved in any other decision in any way at all before, all this is doing is having a lot more people proof ideas before PGI looks at them to see what will and won't work.

Even if you put a vote in the launcher if people don't get into the forums to actually read the detailed write-up you're not going to get an informed or educated vote - you'll just get people looking at a 3 word description and saying 'yea, sure, I hate ECM. Nerf that ****' and clicking a button before moving on.

This idea that somehow putting up a poll in the launcher without effectively requiring them to read the write up of the options is going to provide some better ideas is disingenuous. At the end of the day all you're talking about is trying to move more people from the 'silent majority who never goes to the forums' into being 'forum goers'.

Which, in turn, makes their opinion irrelevant to some people.

Hence the more I look at it the more I think that while that would be nice I don't believe it would create some better, more valuable 'consensus'. All this is purely advisory and non-obligatory. It's just refining some opinions and suggestions through as many people as conveniently and reasonably possible to turn over to PGI to consider for changing certain balance options.

To which I can only say....

[N0MAD]

MischiefSC, on 16 September 2014 - 11:37 PM, said:

How about if the group who gets elected gets paid by PGI and becomes PGI employees, and then does the exact same thing?

I get your concern. I absolutely do. All for you voicing it.

The reality is that at some point someone (actually several people) have to collect the data, condense it and present it to the community, as well as present in a manner that can involve expedient and intelligent back-and-forth conversation with PGI about it. That's going to be a small group of people, or even one person. One person is inherently riskier than several.

Working for PGI does not given anyone a special insight. It simply gives someone a pay check to cover the time invested, so you can do that work in addition to having a home and food and that sort of stuff. It certainly does give easier access to the people in PGI who will actually have the final say on what does and doesn't happen but the effort of gathering the contributions and turning them into votable content is just grunt work. It's not deciding anything.

As to concerns that the community isn't involved -

The community at large will be involved in actually voting on the content that gets moved forward. It doesn't matter if that content is provided by Paul picking suggestions at random, the result of 100 hours of PGI employee time or 8 volunteers gathering it and refining it, you end up with some optional changes to ECM. That gets (I hope) put before the player base as a whole to vote on what they'd like most. If they don't like any of it, well then we get to start over.

Or we can just have PGI pick what they want to do and do it, based on the occasional perusal of forum content. There is no way to get the opinion of 'the community as a whole' if they don't come to the forums. They've never been involved in any other decision in any way at all before, all this is doing is having a lot more people proof ideas before PGI looks at them to see what will and won't work.

Even if you put a vote in the launcher if people don't get into the forums to actually read the detailed write-up you're not going to get an informed or educated vote - you'll just get people looking at a 3 word description and saying 'yea, sure, I hate ECM. Nerf that ****' and clicking a button before moving on.

This idea that somehow putting up a poll in the launcher without effectively requiring them to read the write up of the options is going to provide some better ideas is disingenuous. At the end of the day all you're talking about is trying to move more people from the 'silent majority who never goes to the forums' into being 'forum goers'.

Which, in turn, makes their opinion irrelevant to some people.

Hence the more I look at it the more I think that while that would be nice I don't believe it would create some better, more valuable 'consensus'. All this is purely advisory and non-obligatory. It's just refining some opinions and suggestions through as many people as conveniently and reasonably possible to turn over to PGI to consider for changing certain balance options.

I get it the people that actually spend most if not all of their time actually playing the game instead of racking up 17k posts are the people that know the least about how the game actually plays.

[Karl Streiger]

N0MAD, on 16 September 2014 - 11:48 PM, said:

I get it the people that actually spend most if not all of their time actually playing the game instead of racking up 17k posts are the people that know the least about how the game actually plays.

Its not that you need 17k games to get a hint about the game isn't it.
You need maybe 100 games first to be able to pilot well - after that maybe 20-30 games per Mech to get a feeling for that Mech - thats it.

Rest is training - and play and repeat and repeat and repeat - i don't want to insult somebody - but the best MWO players are not the best MWO players because they know more - its simple that they as "hive mind" are able to adept and after that is again only training (that is nothing more as repeat thing regularly)
I would also say that a guy that never played MWO before and has the physical ability - would be able to match the best MWO players in two weeks with continuous training by other high level players

Edited by Karl Streiger, 16 September 2014 - 11:56 PM.

[IraqiWalker]

N0MAD, on 16 September 2014 - 11:48 PM, said:

I get it the people that actually spend most if not all of their time actually playing the game instead of racking up 17k posts are the people that know the least about how the game actually plays.

So you think people that post very often don't play the game?

I've got almost 3500 posts here. I also have just around 3000 games played. Does that mean I don't play the game? No not really.

EDIT: This is not counting the stats resets, btw. Just what I have on my profile page right now.

Edited by IraqiWalker, 17 September 2014 - 12:05 AM.

[Jacob Side]

add my vote to RoadBeer

[Creovex]

I vote for interns and not forum jockies....