General / Off-Topic Transparency between Frontier and the Community

[TheRaven81]

I think a bit more transparency could go a long way. Like, take this example fictional scenario:

The Community has suggested A, B, C, D, E, and F as things they'd like to see in the game. Now a new edition of the newsletter has arrived(which is short for the sake of the scenario, and posted on every communication/social platform):

Hey Coaster Fans!

We'd like to take this opportunity to tell you about some things we're working towards for Planet Coaster:

1. Suggestion A
   -detail and vision of Suggestion A
2. Suggestion C
   - detail and vision of Suggestion C
3. Suggestion D
   - detail and vision of Suggestion D

We're also working on fixes for
-Problem X,
-Problem Y.
Hopefully these fixes will be ready in time for the next update, which should be coming in a few weeks.

Thank you all for your support with feedback and suggestions! Keep it coming, we see it all!

Until next time, keep building!

So now we see this Newsletter, and know at least somewhat what's going on in terms of what they are working on. Of course, naturally you'll get the people who reply and say "What about Suggestion B/E/F ? When is it coming?". The best reply would be something like this:
"Currently we are only working on Suggestion A/C/D at this time, but don't take that as if we've forgotten everything else. There is a chance B/E/F may come in the future - no guarantees though!"
That last bit is the most important though - "no guarantees" - this way it reduces expectations like "Feature X will definitely come simply because they mentioned it once"

Now it's next month, time for the next newsletter, and almost time for the next update. Pretty much same general thing. But notice the new detail.

Hey Coaster Fans!

We'd like to take this opportunity to tell you about some things we're working towards for Planet Coaster:

1. Suggestion A
   Still hard at work making this part but we're making positive progress! Stay tuned!
2. Suggestion C
   - Our team tried its best to get this to work, but we're having trouble getting Feature X to work so we've passed it over to another branch of the team to see if they have any ideas. But we've not lost hope on this yet! So now for the time being we'll be working on this instead:
3. Suggestion E
   - detail and vision of Suggestion E

It's getting close to time for the next update, and we finally have a fix for Problem X. This fix will be in the next update. However we are still working on Problem Y, and it's proving more difficult than we anticipated, so it may not be ready in time.

Thank you all for your support with feedback and suggestions! Keep it coming, we see it all!

Until next time, keep building!

The next update comes and you see in the update notes that
- Suggestion G has finally been added(a suggestion from many months ago),
- Suggestion A was added,
- Problem X was fixed,
- Problem Y was fixed (but due to it's difficulty, there may still be issues),
- Problem Z (another long awaited fix reported by many, but finally done).

--------------END SCENARIO--------------

Transparency like this could easily relieve this community a lot of all the negative things I've seen like "They don't listen to us", or "I have no faith in them anymore", "They don't tell us anything until it's too late", etc.. I think the current level of transparency that they have with us is not that great. Including the community in the process is important. This way we know what is going on, what's being worked on, and yes, even what the future may hold for the game.

It is unfortunate but as I go through this forum, I don't see many with a positive outlook, and I'd be willing to bet that transparency like what I showed in the fictional scenario could change that.

 

[inspectorgadget1]

It is unfortunate but as I go through this forum, I don't see many with a positive outlook

I'd disagree with this. Recently a minority have started to take over the forums with their posts (which has been acknowledged by Frontier/the mods) and various changes are now being implemented to stop this from happening:

https://forums.planetcoaster.com/showthread.php/33075-Moderation-going-forward

Some of the regulars have been forced off the site because of this. Most I'd say have a positive outlook with regular free/DLC updates and the game continuing to be worked on.

In regards to communication (which has come up countless times before) I can't see this changing.

"Currently we are only working on Suggestion A/C/D at this time, but don't take that as if we've forgotten everything else. There is a chance B/E/F may come in the future - no guarantees though!"
That last bit is the most important though - "no guarantees" - this way it reduces expectations like "Feature X will definitely come simply because they mentioned it once"

If something is shown/mentioned is being worked on and for whatever reason that isn't implemented in-game then it's guaranteed (and has occurred numerous times before) that the odd individual will slate them for that. The days of content/new features being revealed months in advance unfortunately I'd say are long gone.

 

[mr.sugar]

When speaking about better communication, some people usually "attack" it with argument that it´s a bussiness and that they cannot tell us everything. That sure is correct, but nobody (or at least I´m not) asking for that.

To begin with, I would be happy if Frontier just came out and told us, what their direction with PC is. Honestly, this game is not defined enough. What they wanted to do with it? Right now, it looks like it´s supposed to be scenery sandbox game envolved around theme parks. While before the release it was more like game where you build and MANAGE the park (so spiritual successor of RCT series).

Now, that would be very nice to just say, what they aim for with this game.

I'd disagree with this. Recently a minority have started to take over the forums with their posts (which has been acknowledged by Frontier/the mods) and various changes are now being implemented to stop this from happening

The question is if they do it right. They can ask moderators to be strict, add new rules that should help with that. Or they could also (the better way) stop ignoring certain group, adress their problems (or at least give some answers) and that would fix the problem (whatever you believe it or not, it would made a major difference and Frontier would come out as a winner from the situation as a company with good communication and care of the community)

 

[lilibat]

It is unfortunate but as I go through this forum, I don't see many with a positive outlook, and I'd be willing to bet that transparency like what I showed in the fictional scenario could change that.

I also disagree with this. There are a few really negative people who seem to hate the state of the game to the point I wonder why they are even on the forum, and they tend to be very loud and often obnoxious. Sure I have some issues with the game I'd like addressed, but good grief.

As far as communication I think they do fine. Sure I'd like more but I am mostly satisfied with the way it is. I have been playing games for a long time and Frontier is more transparent than many if not most game companies.

 

[mr.sugar]

I also disagree with this. There are a few really negative people who seem to hate the state of the game to the point I wonder why they are even on the forum, and they tend to be very loud and often obnoxious. Sure I have some issues with the game I'd like addressed, but good grief.

As far as communication I think they do fine. Sure I'd like more but I am mostly satisfied with the way it is. I have been playing games for a long time and Frontier is more transparent than many if not most game companies.

Well, and I think there is just few positive people to the point I wonder why they even have a need to go fight against "negative" feedback in some threads.

I don´t think communication is good at all. They have nice marketing and it only looks like they communicate for the first sight, but it´s not like that at all. There are companies that do it much better (and don´t need to waste resources on live streams for instance - they are nice, but the content is not much balanced and ofcourse, it again focus only on "scenery builders")

For what they put into their PR, the outcom is actually quite bad. Their PR is complicated, heavy on resources and yet, it doesn´t give much to the community.

 

[redrum]

Is it fair to say the OP doesn't like surprises, and is asking for access to Frontier's internal product roadmap?

The newsletter scenario above leaves no room for surprises. It leaves no room for DLC to be developed internally over months, and one week before release, announced with trailers and teasers. I get the feeling Frontier enjoys doing this, so why not let them have their fun?

There's nothing inherently wrong with a publisher choosing that strategy. It's their thing. Personally I don't mind whether the plans are withheld until one week before, or told 6 months in advance. It's a $50 game, not a $1200 3d modeller that I rely on for work.

We got detailed change notes after people asked, some people even angry-asked I recall. That was a reasonable request because it's beneficial to be aware of the detailed additions or changes when they're released.

I recall a performance review I had at work, this one time, I was asked to improve my communication. God that was awkward! It was asked by my manager who I thought had terrible communication themselves! [big grin]

 

[LN]

Frontier doesn't even want the community to decide about what is next on the agenda. Because that way discussions will go even further than they already do here on these forums.

If you let a large group of people have a saying about the why, the what and the how for the future of the game, they eventually will want more to say about the game, resulting in more verbal abuse. That is why in businesses the biggest decisions are made at the top, not at the bottom, that is where the ideas come from.

All Frontier wants is feedback, feedback which is constructive and leads to something they can work with. They didn't really say we have control over what is in the game. That is where people have the wrong perception of things. That's why people think they communicate badly, while nothing has changed really in the past 2 years.

About people being loud on the forums? No problem at all, the biggest problem is that people always want to respond to everything, while there is a very nice button which works as a charm, it's called "Report this post". If you feel somebody is taken over the forum, uses false statements, or likes to use opinions as facts, just hit that button, and within no time, the post is either gone, or a mod has intervened. At least that is what I experience.

 

[TheRaven81]

Is it fair to say the OP doesn't like surprises, and is asking for access to Frontier's internal product roadmap?

The newsletter scenario above leaves no room for surprises. It leaves no room for DLC to be developed internally over months, and one week before release, announced with trailers and teasers. I get the feeling Frontier enjoys doing this, so why not let them have their fun?

I got no problem with surprises. And the scenario leaves plenty of room - it was just a general example. That "list of things they are working on" could easily be changed around for a surprise, worded correctly it would still create hype and start speculation. Like this maybe:

We've got something really exciting planned for Planet Coaster and we can't wait to show you! We'll have more info for you in the next coming months.

Then the speculations begin, about what that "something" could be, or what people want it to be. That "something" could be anything. All communication doesn't have to be black & white, clear as crystal, with every little detail possible. I mean, take this most recent Vintage DLC. The surprise came when someone here noticed activity on steamdb, and people began speculating about what they could be doing or adding with these updates.

Do I think it's bad the way they are doing it now? No. I just think it could be better.

 

[LN]

I got no problem with surprises. And the scenario leaves plenty of room - it was just a general example. That "list of things they are working on" could easily be changed around for a surprise, worded correctly it would still create hype and start speculation. Like this maybe:


Then the speculations begin, about what that "something" could be, or what people want it to be. That "something" could be anything. All communication doesn't have to be black & white, clear as crystal, with every little detail possible. I mean, take this most recent Vintage DLC. The surprise came when someone here noticed activity on steamdb, and people began speculating about what they could be doing or adding with these updates.

Do I think it's bad the way they are doing it now? No. I just think it could be better.

So instead of 1 week in advance you want to know 1 month in advance?

because their announcements are already in the line of "coming soon" without mentioning details.

I don't participate in the speculations, because it's only speculations and I don't want to be disappointed, but surprised by what Frontier is planning with the game, that being said, I don't mind their current tactics.

 

[mr.sugar]

If their communication would be good, they would.:

1) stop announcing things in streams (especially dedicated to workshop) or at least combine it with clear written announcements

2) they could dedicate at least one stream to development, let's say once in two-three months span and ideally they could react at some feedback or suggestions.

 

[shaneturner12]

Whilst I agree there are issues on the communication side there is another side to this. Frontier have already had issues in the past where they've announced something in advance and then found they couldn't deliver it or that it wasn't up to a suitable standard.

Shane

 

[WingardiumLevicoaster]

If their communication would be good, they would.:

1) stop announcing things in streams (especially dedicated to workshop) or at least combine it with clear written announcements

2) they could dedicate at least one stream to development, let's say once in two-three months span and ideally they could react at some feedback or suggestions.

Usually there is a stream once a month or so with a developer guest where you can ask 'some' questions.

 

[TheRaven81]

Whilst I agree there are issues on the communication side there is another side to this. Frontier have already had issues in the past where they've announced something in advance and then found they couldn't deliver it or that it wasn't up to a suitable standard.

Shane

If there's no direct detailed promises/guarantees made when they announce something in advance(feature X will come on Y date), then when it can't be done for whatever reason there's usually less disappointment from the community for it. You can't really be disappointed about something that wasn't guaranteed to be delivered.

 

[LN]

If there's no direct detailed promises/guarantees made when they announce something in advance(feature X will come on Y date), then when it can't be done for whatever reason there's usually less disappointment from the community for it. You can't really be disappointed about something that wasn't guaranteed to be delivered.

Well, you can't be dissapointed either if you don't know....

 

[Wagi]

I think we've seen before where even a casual mention of something - even an off-handed quip - by a Frontier team member has been taken by some as an actual iron-clad promise while others consider it something that very likely is coming when neither may be actually true.

Even in the very short period between the announcement of the Vintage package and it's release we had all sorts of conjecture and claims as to what was in it, and then added disappointment when those wishes didn't pan out. No, people shouldn't be disappointed based only on their own wishful thinking, but lets be honest that it happens all the time. That's human nature.

Having weeks or even months of the same sort of conjecture and claims over vague information that Frontier might share isn't going to fix that.

Sure, I'd love to be privy to their inner plans myself, but it's certainly not ruining my enjoyment of the game if I don't. There's no entitlement to that information.

 

[Spanky]

Usually there is a stream once a month or so with a developer guest where you can ask 'some' questions.

The fact is that until the release of none of the developer guest may say something to an upcoming DLC. Any kind of spoiling is stopped immediately by Ed, Bo or Will. Questions about an upcoming update are ALWAYS completely ignored in the stream or answered with a trivial statement.

To begin with, I would be happy if Frontier just came out and told us, what their direction with PC is. Honestly, this game is not defined enough. What they wanted to do with it? ...
Now, that would be very nice to just say, what they aim for with this game.

The question is if they do it right. They can ask moderators to be strict, add new rules that should help with that. Or they could also (the better way) stop ignoring certain group, adress their problems (or at least give some answers) and that would fix the problem (whatever you believe it or not, it would made a major difference and Frontier would come out as a winner from the situation as a company with good communication and care of the community)

Can only agree with you here. Why is there, for example, for Elite a roadmap and for us Coaster fans only place for speculation?

Okay, finally we have Zoltan now, maybe he can make some statements about Frontier's next plans.

 

[mr.sugar]

I'm curious if they react to the criticism on JWE Facebook page. It seems more and more people is unhappy with the game

 

[SoapyIllusion]

** My opinions only, conclusions have been drawn from my personal observations **

To start, I'd like to point out I totally agree with the idea of the Planet Coaster team presenting a road map for the future as the Elite Dangerous team has done for their game. With that being said, I don't think Frontier as a whole drives this decision making. I think Frontier ( like many other companies do ) allow their individual teams to run autonomously making their own decisions on how they handle product development (including communication). Elite Dangerous has their own management team , as does Planet Coaster. From what I gather the two teams do not share the same ideology. Which is a shame.

In my opinion there is a reason behind this. Maybe that reason is purely grounded in conflicting ideologies. Or maybe the future of the two games as a whole isn't the same? Maybe Frontier has guaranteed funding for ED for several years allowing the team to comfortably plan and share a road map. Maybe Planet Coaster hasn't been given the same certainty. Maybe the team goes month to month finding out the game got a bit more funding. Maybe the team is still fighting for long term company investment?

Personally I think the future of Planet Coaster for the company is uncertain. I think if the team could share more (meaning they had more to share) they would. But I think the reality is, No one has that much into the future to discuss. And what they could share may only cause more unrest within the community. Something (understandably) would want to avoid.

Only time will tell for sure.

 

[LN]

I'm curious if they react to the criticism on JWE Facebook page. It seems more and more people is unhappy with the game

Well, Is that a problem of the game, or did some people had their expectations totally off.

There where a pretty lot of video's before release that showed the game in it's full glory, how can people then buy the game and yet still be disappointed?
How does one blame Frontier for that?

For me, JWE is exactly as expected, it does require some learning, then the game is fun. But it is indeed somewhat limited in options.

** My opinions only, conclusions have been drawn from my personal observations **

To start, I'd like to point out I totally agree with the idea of the Planet Coaster team presenting a road map for the future as the Elite Dangerous team has done for their game. With that being said, I don't think Frontier as a whole drives this decision making. I think Frontier ( like many other companies do ) allow their individual teams to run autonomously making their own decisions on how they handle product development (including communication). Elite Dangerous has their own management team , as does Planet Coaster. From what I gather the two teams do not share the same ideology. Which is a shame.

In my opinion there is a reason behind this. Maybe that reason is purely grounded in conflicting ideologies. Or maybe the future of the two games as a whole isn't the same? Maybe Frontier has guaranteed funding for ED for several years allowing the team to comfortably plan and share a road map. Maybe Planet Coaster hasn't been given the same certainty. Maybe the team goes month to month finding out the game got a bit more funding. Maybe the team is still fighting for long term company investment?

Personally I think the future of Planet Coaster for the company is uncertain. I think if the team could share more (meaning they had more to share) they would. But I think the reality is, No one has that much into the future to discuss. And what they could share may only cause more unrest within the community. Something (understandably) would want to avoid.

Only time will tell for sure.

I'm glad decisions aren't made by the same team for every game at Frontier (if that is the case), because that would resolve in repetitive gameplay in different games.

Ubisoft for instance, it's clear their mindset is the same whatever office you go, so you get the same games, with different names: Assassin's Creed, Far Cry, Ghost Recon Wildlands.
They are basicly the same game with different environments and even the sequels don't offer new things, now, those games I get bored with pretty fast, At least with PC I don't have that.

Personally, I think the future of PC is bright. DLC's probably sell oke, there are plenty ideas left, and the game can still be improved, from the latter of course I hope they will do that.

 

[mr.sugar]

Well, Is that a problem of the game, or did some people had their expectations totally off.

There where a pretty lot of video's before release that showed the game in it's full glory, how can people then buy the game and yet still be disappointed?
How does one blame Frontier for that?

For me, JWE is exactly as expected, it does require some learning, then the game is fun. But it is indeed somewhat limited in options.

But 'limited in options' is exactly the problem. Some people use stronger words though. And this might not have been visible from videos.