Focussed feedback

So given that we have a focus on bugs and not new features is it a good time to reintroduce focussed feedback like they did for some of beyond?

Fleet carriers would be a good starting point for fdev to outline their designs and get feedback and it may give us a little something to keep us going til summer next year?
 
focused feedback was a resounding flop the 1st time around, just a bun fight of nonsense where all the good ideas were washed in an immersion dribble fest which resulted in the half baked mess we have today.

perhaps if we didnt stick our nose is they would have baked all the ideas properly who knows...
 
I wish the devs would just make the game they want to make. For better or worse, it would result in a more complete experience.

The community keeps imposing on them and they keep trying to appease the community, so you end up with all these half-arsed ideas that never pan out all the way, because they're just spreading it around trying to make a little bit of everything everyone says they want.
 
I wish the devs would just make the game they want to make. For better or worse, it would result in a more complete experience.

The community keeps imposing on them and they keep trying to appease the community, so you end up with all these half-arsed ideas that never pan out all the way, because they're just spreading it around trying to make a little bit of everything everyone says they want.
I utterly agree. However a pressure movement with the main aim being "IGNORE US" will never got off the ground.
 
focused feedback was a resounding flop the 1st time around, just a bun fight of nonsense where all the good ideas were washed in an immersion dribble fest which resulted in the half baked mess we have today.

perhaps if we didnt stick our nose is they would have baked all the ideas properly who knows...
Bit what if the first one focussed exclusively on seismic charger sizes?
 
So given that we have a focus on bugs and not new features is it a good time to reintroduce focussed feedback like they did for some of beyond?

Fleet carriers would be a good starting point for fdev to outline their designs and get feedback and it may give us a little something to keep us going til summer next year?
The big problem Focused Feedback had was that people are not necessarily very good at going from the text of an idea to how that will actually work out in-game, or understanding the full implications of ideas.

For example with C&P - lots of talk in Focused Feedback about how the plans were great and taunting player-killers with "you're doomed now" - compared with the actual fairly faithful implementation of those plans mainly not affecting player-killers that much beyond a couple of weeks initial adjustment and a few loopholes closed, but impacting the "casual/accidental" criminal in ways most players contributing to the FF discussion didn't even consider.

Similarly with the Engineering rewrite discussion - a lot of things which hardly anyone considers a problem now were being blown up into major issues, with spreadsheets, because people were considering each proposal in isolation rather than the overall effect.

I think Frontier probably did get some useful information out of them, but not necessarily the information the players thought they were getting, and it's probably easier for them to set expectations if they get that information some other way. A read through the various FC threads already on the forums probably gives them the same sort of "hopes and concerns" information just as well.
 
So given that we have a focus on bugs and not new features is it a good time to reintroduce focussed feedback like they did for some of beyond?

Fleet carriers would be a good starting point for fdev to outline their designs and get feedback and it may give us a little something to keep us going til summer next year?
I think for the moment let them get on with bug fixing before we start talking about the carriers - we don't have enough to go on there yet and it'll only distract everyone right now.
I guess feedback about bugs but then that is what they've been getting..
 
I think for the moment let them get on with bug fixing before we start talking about the carriers - we don't have enough to go on there yet and it'll only distract everyone right now.
I guess feedback about bugs but then that is what they've been getting..

But how will FD organise the beta? What will they fix, and in what order? You don't need any feedback if you have a massive list of bugs- you fix it and ask if the problems gone. If it has then its done. Repeat as needed. If FD are rebalancing then feedback is critical however. I pray that both will be done.
 
I thought the next 12 months is bug fixing - I am not sure how focussed feedback would work. Either the bug is fixed or not?
 
I think Frontier probably did get some useful information out of them, but not necessarily the information the players thought they were getting, and it's probably easier for them to set expectations if they get that information some other way.

User feedback and focus groups work the way Neil Gaiman describes reader feedback: great for learning that there is a problem; but not much good for identifying where the problem is, and no good at all when it comes to how you ought to fix it.
 
User feedback and focus groups work the way Neil Gaiman describes reader feedback: great for learning that there is a problem; but not much good for identifying where the problem is, and no good at all when it comes to how you ought to fix it.

Theorycrafting is fine from feedback, but you need frequent tests to see how things work and its here where FD fail. Too often FDs ideas of fun are totally disconnected from what players think are fun. By the time the new feature drops its too far along to correct its flaws and you wind up with multicrew, Powerplay and engineering v1. How much time would be saved if FD play tested these features earlier?
 
But how will FD organise the beta? What will they fix, and in what order? You don't need any feedback if you have a massive list of bugs- you fix it and ask if the problems gone. If it has then its done. Repeat as needed. If FD are rebalancing then feedback is critical however. I pray that both will be done.
That's the thing isn't it, what are we talking about here?
Something being out of balance isn't a bug as such, annoying as it might be.
So how and what do they prioritize? I guess they can ask us that... Though I imagine they've got some idea.
Balancing is of course fun all round as they'll be many different opinions on the what and how - in some sense might be best to just let FD get on with that - they'll be lots of shouting if it isn't liked, I suspect they'll be shouting whatever they do, so probably they need to find a balance in their balancing :)
Actual straight up bugs are probably easier to be getting on with all in all.
 
Balancing is of course fun all round as they'll be many different opinions on the what and how - in some sense might be best to just let FD get on with that - they'll be lots of shouting if it isn't liked, I suspect they'll be shouting whatever they do, so probably they need to find a balance in their balancing :)

The problem being FD are not very good at it.Take mine arming times: any combat player will tell you 5 seconds is stupid. FD put it in thinking mines hit the firing ship, when players would have said 'put the launchers at the back of a ship and keep the arming time low'. FD then waste that time on a pointless change and have to swap it back. The same with drag munitions- the best way to get an idea of what needs balancing is to get feedback from combat pilots who use these weapon over and over.
 
Back
Top Bottom