1306 replies to this topic

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

+1 sandalwood grips XD

[wanderer]

Quote

ability to act in ways that will ruin things for the silent majority

A silent player is meaningless in the conversation to begin with, and has surrendered his influence to those that will speak.

And further, the council has no power of it's own- they would be simply the ones to take the tangled mess of "I'M RIGHT! No, I'M RIGHT!" and sort it into something coherent for the actual powers- that is, PGI to act on.

This is not forming a group with authority over players. It is making a human microphone so that the collective voice of the players is easier to hear over the endless forumbabble.

[IceSerpent]

Ayenn Destiny, on 16 September 2014 - 11:56 AM, said:

Wow, do I not agree with this idea! The idea of instituting a method by which the vocal minority will be given the ability to act in ways that will ruin things for the silent majority makes my blood run cold. The last thing I want to deal with is another group of "elected officials" that will not act in the better interests of their presumed constituents.

In other words, you have no clear understanding of what the idea in question is, yet you disagree with it nonetheless?

Edited by IceSerpent, 16 September 2014 - 12:15 PM.

[Chronojam]

If the silent majority has been utterly passive thus far, I don't see how you could easily gauge their reaction to events beyond trying to infer things from raw player count statistics. If a member of the silent majority joins the discussion and decides to participate, they cease being a member of the silent majority immediately.

[Roadbeer]

Chronojam, on 16 September 2014 - 12:20 PM, said:

If the silent majority has been utterly passive thus far, I don't see how you could easily gauge their reaction to events beyond trying to infer things from raw player count statistics. If a member of the silent majority joins the discussion and decides to participate, they cease being a member of the silent majority immediately.

Shrodinger would be so proud.

[DEN_Ninja]

Chronojam, on 16 September 2014 - 12:20 PM, said:

If the silent majority has been utterly passive thus far, I don't see how you could easily gauge their reaction to events beyond trying to infer things from raw player count statistics. If a member of the silent majority joins the discussion and decides to participate, they cease being a member of the silent majority immediately.

Only way to really get a good gauge of the community in my opinion are in game client polls. Give them a reason to give a crap while you are at it. Along with places to look up things so they can make their own judgements.

[PappySmurf]

Roland says (Again.... look at EvE, and behold how a player council has improved that game)

I played eve for 5 years. and I left EVE because these same Counsel members ruined the game from extorting the markets with there policy's they said were so great for the player base when in fact were for themselves to make USD off of the player base as in stealing bank money to outright 3rd party sites for farming.All of EVE now it is just counsel member corps extorting the player base ya they did wonders for the game.

[Hoax415]

Roland, on 16 September 2014 - 12:02 PM, said:

[snip]

I think you are overstating that position. The idea that forum posters for any video game represent only a small rabid minority and are far from an accurate cross section of the ideas and wants of the full playerbase is hardly new or revolutionary.

There have been devs that have posted the actual data in several games across several genres and eras showing that the forum users are a small subset of the overall playerbase. Think well under half in every instance I've ever heard of.

Your second point is well taken, there is no reason to think that the "silent majority" sees the game from some wholly different perspective but there is reason to wonder how well their concerns match ours.

PS that the EVE player council was a resounding success and great for the players is hardly an accepted fact.

Edited by Hoax415, 16 September 2014 - 12:25 PM.

[Bront]

PappySmurf, on 16 September 2014 - 12:23 PM, said:

Roland says (Again.... look at EvE, and behold how a player council has improved that game)

I played eve for 5 years. and I left EVE because these same Counsel members ruined the game from extorting the markets with there policy's they said were so great for the player base when in fact were for themselves to make USD off of the player base as in stealing bank money to outright 3rd party sites for farming.All of EVE now it is just counsel member corps extorting the player base ya they did wonders for the game.

Did you read how Russ said any player council wouldn't have unilateral power to change the game? They also wouldn't likely have any say in monetary issues.

[D34K]

I vote for ChiXnhawk.

[PappySmurf]

Bront (Did you read how Russ said any player council wouldn't have unilateral power to change the game? They also wouldn't likely have any say in monetary issues. )

YA right this is exactly the same way the EVE player Counsel was formed and then the devs started trusting there decisions on what the players wanted more and more and gave them more control over game development and policy.

Game player counsels are bad news for online games no matter what form they take or what they promise its just like trusting a politician or used car salesman you know your going to get screwed over by them in the future.

Edited by PappySmurf, 16 September 2014 - 12:52 PM.

[stjobe]

Ayenn Destiny, on 16 September 2014 - 11:56 AM, said:

Please don't let this happen, PGI!

I think you might have missed the part where it was PGI's idea in the first place:

Russ Bullock, on 12 September 2014 - 10:57 AM, said:

Okay how about this, this is what many of you have been waiting for:

Well first a question: Do you think you the community can come to an agreed upon consensus? One in which if the changes are implemented everyone says great job PGI on listening to us now we feel great about ECM and your ability to listen to feedback?

If the answer is Yes then I suggest the following:

You the community decide how your going to present a proposal, nominate a peer that you feel has the best handle on this, put together your own player council whatever you like but present a proposal that your peers vote on. The vote would likely need to be far greater than just 51% in favor. Perhaps something more like 80+%

At that point PGI will analyze the proposal, if we see any technical problems or balance problems that we feel perhaps you didnt see, we will point those items out to you. Then if necessary you can adjust your proposal and put it to a vote again, if successful PGI will again analyze and repeat if necessary until we have a final design solution for implementation.

PGI will then communicate how long it will take to implement with full explanation as to why, and we will patch the changes in upon the agreed upon delivery date. Once complete if this whole process has gone smoothly and civily we will proceed with doing things like this far more frequently or at least for other areas of the product that are controversial.

What do you say?

[Roland]

PappySmurf, on 16 September 2014 - 12:23 PM, said:

Roland says (Again.... look at EvE, and behold how a player council has improved that game)

I played eve for 5 years. and I left EVE because these same Counsel members ruined the game from extorting the markets with there policy's they said were so great for the player base when in fact were for themselves to make USD off of the player base as in stealing bank money to outright 3rd party sites for farming.All of EVE now it is just counsel member corps extorting the player base ya they did wonders for the game.

And yet those members were elected by the playerbase.

I mean, sure, it may be the case that you don't like the changes they have presented to CCP, but have you considered that perhaps your opinion is not universal? I mean that with no disrepect at all.

The reality is that you'll never be able to please everyone... but it is in a developer's best interests to please the majority of their players. And since they cannot have in depth discussions with every individual player, an elected group of player representatives can help facilitate that communication.

Again, there seems to be some assumption that a player council would somehow get elected by (?) and would somehow not represent the playerbase. How could that happen? Given that everyone has a vote, how exactly is it going to occur that the council ends up being so unrepresentative of the playerbase of the game?

PappySmurf, on 16 September 2014 - 12:51 PM, said:

YA right this is exactly the same way the EVE player Counsel was formed and then the devs started trusting there decisions on what the players wanted more and more and gave them more control over game development and policy.

And generally the game has improved, become more popular, and become better balanced as a result.

[Oderint dum Metuant]

Ayenn Destiny, on 16 September 2014 - 11:56 AM, said:

Wow, do I not agree with this idea! The idea of instituting a method by which the vocal minority will be given the ability to act in ways that will ruin things for the silent majority makes my blood run cold. The last thing I want to deal with is another group of "elected officials" that will not act in the better interests of their presumed constituents.

Game development is not in any way a democracy nor can it function as one. By its very nature, game development is an oligarchy headed by the paid developers themselves. Ideally those developers listen to their customers. Customers' should not have any way to organize and promote a narrow vision or set of ideas. Points in case: The ECM "issue" (which is really a war against LRMs) or the clan weapon changes (which is really a misunderstanding of the fact that at this time devoted clan mech users are a self selecting group of generally superior players).

Let the developers do their job and pursue their vision. The hands of the unwashed masses in that cooking pot will distract them from their focus and could result in a game that ends up being a mix of their vision and a FUBARed coagulation of ill informed ideas that lead said developers slightly astray causing micro balance issues that can become deep coded in MWO there by compromising its overall design.

Please don't let this happen, PGI! You will cause more problems than good if you let players organize and then twist your ear.

Learn from CIG and S42/SC. Listen to the clamor and figure out the consensus rather than let self serving special interest groups get some kind of voice-box.

Congratulations on not reading and understanding the thread at all and making a huge post that was pointless after the first 5 words.

[Hoax415]

His blood ran cold man. That's how you know he's dialed in and reacting rationally to information he understands.

RAN COLD WITH THE TERROR OF THE THOUGHT OF A PLAYER COUNCIL ON ECM. COLD I SAY.

He prayed to the old gods and the new that we wouldn't be so foolish as to accept this devil's bargain sure to damn us all to endless torment and poor design goals. But when he realized that we were willing to take this risk his blood ran cold.

Colder than ice.

Colder than the dark and infinite void.

So cold. For fear of what we had wrought this day in this thread with our ignorance and our disregard for the fundamental laws of the cosmos.

For it has been written in the stars since the dawn of time itself that a player council on ECM can only bring about darkness and never ending war.

Edited by Hoax415, 16 September 2014 - 01:10 PM.

[stjobe]

Hoax415, on 16 September 2014 - 01:07 PM, said:

His blood ran cold man. That's how you know he's dialed in and reacting rationally to information he understands.

RAN COLD WITH THE TERROR OF THE THOUGHT OF A PLAYER COUNCIL ON ECM. COLD I SAY.

He prayed to the old gods and the new that we wouldn't be so foolish as to accept this devil's bargain sure to damn us all to endless torment and poor design goals. But when he realized that we were willing to take this risk his blood ran cold.

Colder than ice.

Colder than the dark and infinite void.

So cold. For fear of what we had wrought this day in this thread with our ignorance and our disregard for the fundamental laws of the cosmos.

For it has been written in the stars since the dawn of time itself that a player council on ECM can only bring about darkness and never ending war.

Okay, I admit. I lol'd.

Well played sir, well played indeed

[MischiefSC]

At some point every change to this game is going to come down to PGI deciding they want to do X. They will take input internally and they see the forums. Maybe they take the advice of someone from ngng. If they want some folks from the forum community to shoulder the volunteer work of sorting, condensing and working towards a consensus of the forum community as well how is this a world destroying big deal?

We asked for pgi to listen to our suggestions, this is it. The "silent majority" is not and can not be represented because they have elected not to participate. As soon as they do they're part of the forum population.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Tichorius Davion, on 16 September 2014 - 12:23 PM, said:

Only way to really get a good gauge of the community in my opinion are in game client polls. Give them a reason to give a crap while you are at it. Along with places to look up things so they can make their own judgements.

Which would be a way to surp[ass the eve polls. I have yet to see anything like that there.

Hoax415, on 16 September 2014 - 12:23 PM, said:

PS that the EVE player council was a resounding success and great for the players is hardly an accepted fact.

Especially when certain polarizing figures were on it. Its generally accepted the CSM are out to either destroy the game or are out to improve their own life at the expense of others'

Bront, on 16 September 2014 - 12:25 PM, said:

Did you read how Russ said any player council wouldn't have unilateral power to change the game? They also wouldn't likely have any say in monetary issues.

Then whats the point? They neuter the power of the council to do anything up front, they get turned into powerless figureheads/cheerleaders.

Edited by Mechwarrior Buddah, 16 September 2014 - 01:28 PM.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

PappySmurf, on 16 September 2014 - 12:51 PM, said:

YA right this is exactly the same way the EVE player Counsel was formed and then the devs started trusting there decisions on what the players wanted more and more and gave them more control over game development and policy.

NOPE

Gotta know yer EVE history.

The council was formed as a watchdog group to go to Iceland and make sure CCP werent cheating in their own game again as a measure of trust building after the T20 scandal. Then whewn that was deemed impossible, and over the course of a few years, it became what it is now. Your position that it was created because CCP started to trust their players is INCREDIBLY wrong

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Quote

Given that everyone has a vote, how exactly is it going to occur that the council ends up being so unrepresentative of the playerbase of the game?

Same way it does in EVE... Getting your corpmates to vote for you, getting alt accounts to do the same, not having ppl vote at all. Its how the ppl who are for nerfing high sec get onto the CSM when like 75% of the player base is IN high sec and DONT want it nerfed.

oops triple post; was replying as I went

Edited by Mechwarrior Buddah, 16 September 2014 - 01:37 PM.