The epic win of Beyond

[Chris Simon]

irony is often overlooked.

that said, although i agree a game developer should not bother about the noise ... who do they actually listen to? if you look at the 3+ years of development (since release) it's been a quite erratic direction, more of a roller coaster. it clearly sometimes seems there is noone there.

and if you listen to the ceo, he seems to be living in his personal fantasy and describing a totally different game.

so yes, clear ideas, focus and persistence. but ... please! clear ideas, focus and persistence for real!

Thats why in my previous post I said devs should take inspiration from the suggestions (the reasonable ones), not just do everything "people" want.

Oh, I'm in complete agreement that FD should stop listening to the "mob" as far as game direction and design decisions are concerned.

There's a big difference between suggestions being made and considered- and demands being made by a mob.

It's FD's game, and should remain thus- if anything, when any decisions are made the result should always give MORE options, and not less.

(I repped the post for you, Mike )

I was just trying to clear the air. You started your post "I disagree", but then basically said the same thing we were saying, so it confused me.

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

irony is often overlooked.

that said, although i agree a game developer should not bother about the noise ... who do they actually listen to? if you look at the 3+ years of development (since release) it's been a quite erratic direction, more of a roller coaster. it clearly sometimes seems there is noone there.

and if you listen to the ceo, he seems to be living in his personal fantasy and describing a totally different game.

so yes, clear ideas, focus and persistence. but ... please! clear ideas, focus and persistence for real!

the ideas have already been down in black and white since 2013.. and damn fine ideas they are too.

more to the point FD considered them and green lit them as well.. I KNOW FD know what features make a damn fine space game, and i shall never question that..... they just need to be encouraged to double down on that vision and make it, and not go for the trimmed down version at every opportunity for the quick win, which imo is something they have done far to much of imo.

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?f=36

I was just trying to clear the air.

i have to do that a lot... usually after too much stout. I find striking a match helps

 

[Chris Simon]

the ideas have already been down in black and white since 2013.. and damn fine ideas they are too.

more to the point FD considered them and green lit them as well.. I KNOW FD know what features make a damn fine space game, and i shall never question that..... they just need to be encouraged to double down on that vision and make it, and not go for the trimmed down version at every opportunity for the quick win, which imo is something they have done far to much of imo.

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?f=36



i have to do that a lot... usually after too much stout. I find striking a match helps

"helps"

 

[Sylveria]

I was just trying to clear the air. You started your post "I disagree", but then basically said the same thing we were saying, so it confused me.

No worries. I was simply catching up on the thread and saw the comment but didn't catch the context in which it was made. (then realized Mike's initial statement was meant sarcastically )

 

[Chris Simon]

No worries. I was simply catching up on the thread and saw the comment but didn't catch the context in which it was made. (then realized Mike's initial statement was meant sarcastically )

I learned it seems to be a good idea to take everything on this forum as sarcasm until proven otherwise. [noob]

 

[znôrt]

I find striking a match helps

it's indeed cathartic

[video=youtube;NboPLc3oil8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NboPLc3oil8[/video]

 

[znôrt]

encouraged to double down on that vision and make it, and not go for the trimmed down version at every opportunity for the quick win, which imo is something they have done far to much of imo.

so just focus and persistence then! where do i sign?

 

[Han Zulu]

I think you didn't understand our point. Mike and I were trying to show that people want different and often contradictory things in the game and therefore "listen to your community" is a bad thing to do for a developer.
There will always be people who don't like this and that, but as long as the game keeps it's design integrity together, MOST people will like it. Or at least not dislike it too much.
And that's a lead designer's job. Not community's

Very true. Which is why I think having an open (focused) discussion about coming features can be a little dangerous or backfire. I like the discussion, but I'm afraid it might create very strong expectations from different groups in the community, who will assume their wishes are implemented and get upset (more than usual) when they're not. Still, I like having the open dialogue about the features, but it's a delicate activity.

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

No worries. I was simply catching up on the thread and saw the comment but didn't catch the context in which it was made. (then realized Mike's initial statement was meant sarcastically )

I learned it seems to be a good idea to take everything on this forum as sarcasm until proven otherwise. [noob]

what can i say?, i am British.....

that said i was going for the light hearted humour version of sarcasm rather than the tetchy ar$hole kind

 

[Sylveria]

Very true. Which is why I think having an open (focused) discussion about coming features can be a little dangerous or backfire. I like the discussion, but I'm afraid it might create very strong expectations from different groups in the community, who will assume their wishes are implemented and get upset (more than usual) when they're not. Still, I like having the open dialogue about the features, but it's a delicate activity.

Context is also difficult to glean when reading conversation as opposed to listening to it in-person, too. Sarcasm and so forth is not likely to be understood or interpreted- especially when body language and tone are not present.

This remains the biggest problem with interpreting text communication.

 

[Han Zulu]

Context is also difficult to glean when reading conversation as opposed to listening to it in-person, too. Sarcasm and so forth is not likely to be understood or interpreted- especially when body language and tone are not present.

This remains the biggest problem with interpreting text communication.

Yup. Totally agree.

And it's a constant problem for me, because I can easily switch between sarcasm, joking, and serious instantaneously, so over the years I have worked hard on keeping them apart and try to remember putting smiley faces and "j/k"s and such.

The worst now though is when I'm being casual, essentially being serious, not joking, but not being serious in the sense of "you wrong, I'm right" way, but rather, "here's my view, take it for what it's worth." And then it's taken as me accusing the other person in the most extreme way. Sad. Oh, well.

 

[Sylveria]

Yup. Totally agree.

And it's a constant problem for me, because I can easily switch between sarcasm, joking, and serious instantaneously, so over the years I have worked hard on keeping them apart and try to remember putting smiley faces and "j/k"s and such.

The worst now though is when I'm being casual, essentially being serious, not joking, but not being serious in the sense of "you wrong, I'm right" way, but rather, "here's my view, take it for what it's worth." And then it's taken as me accusing the other person in the most extreme way. Sad. Oh, well.

I usually refer to first person reference (speaking for/from my own personal position) rather than inferring authority by using "we or our" in my opinions, too. If you read most of my posts, it's clear that I don't speak for others- but only for myself- which is something that would behoove people to adopt as a habit. I also try to avoid the use of knowingly "inflammatory" or "questionable" language. Sometimes, especially when replying to a specific topic/situation it's (unfortunately) unavoidable...

Usually, people on the forum here know my reputation- I'm all for backing sensible ideas that have positive outcome for all, and not just some. I prefer more option over less, while retaining simplicity over complexity. I'm also a "if you think you can do better- here's the keys!" sort of person. (which I LIVE by as a motto) I believe it's very easy for someone who isn't personally vested in efforts to criticize another, and despise such behavior. Walk a mile in someone else's shoes before you judge others.

That said- I don't want to keep this OT- I think the majority of us as players know fully well FD does their absolute best and I personally applaud their efforts to encompass as much as they have throughout the years with very little thanks or recognition in return. Many of us are grateful- and although we're technically "customers", as GreyAreaUK once put it, they didn't sign a "contract for eternal joy" with us purchasing a product.

 

[Han Zulu]

...

vRep++

 

[Chris Simon]

Context is also difficult to glean when reading conversation as opposed to listening to it in-person, too. Sarcasm and so forth is not likely to be understood or interpreted- especially when body language and tone are not present.

This remains the biggest problem with interpreting text communication.

Reading into the context of the written conversation is the only reason I'm not totally opposed to the idea of emojis. I don't like to use them, but I acknowledge their usefulness.

It makes a big difference in perception to say, for example "You're so silly. [wacko]", "You're so silly. [mad]", "You're so silly. [squeeeee]" or "You're so silly. "

 

[Titan1978]

That's interesting to me! I work in software development for an enterprise size solution. I've designed/developed if for tens of years so have a strong emotion tie to it.

I was out one evening, got speaking to someone, and it turns out they were currently contracting for one of our smaller clients. The chat obviously then moved around onto our software. "Yeh! They hate it!" he said.

At this point I could have ended the conversation, facepalmed, said they were in the wrong, he was mistaken. Instead I looked into it, and long story short found out what was really the issue - a matter of a number of distinct misunderstandings/oversights between us and the client (that we didn't know about) - and it got resolved!

Ultimately, if a client/user isn't happy, it's worth finding out why... Because most likely there's a reason for it. Yes, the initial language may not be ideal - eg: they were saying they hated our software, implying all of it? - but behind that, there were simply a number of distinct addressable reasons for it.

I would agree for taking criticism for a product thats out. Hell nothing improves WITHOUT some dose of criticism. My beef with the other thread was criticism on something thats not even out yet. You cant be a food critic and ravage ratings of a new dish without sampling it. Its no different with software. They want to criticize to make Horizons better? Heck be my guest - this is a democracy. But to nuke somehting thats not even been demo'd in an open trailer is just nuts.

 

[Chris Simon]

I would agree for taking criticism for a product thats out. Hell nothing improves WITHOUT some dose of criticism. My beef with the other thread was criticism on something thats not even out yet. You cant be a food critic and ravage ratings of a new dish without sampling it. Its no different with software. They want to criticize to make Horizons better? Heck be my guest - this is a democracy. But to nuke somehting thats not even been demo'd in an open trailer is just nuts.

You misjudge the community. People who want to criticize and be actually helpful go to Suggestions and Feedback subforum. The rest is here to moan. And what could be better to moan about than something that isn't out yet so you can't hear any reasonable counter-arguments?

 

[Audaxxx]

The game needs to be exactly like the DDF and kickstarter but at the same time the forum dads need to realise that that time has passed it isnt 1984 any more and that is not what people want to play, it has to have (insert 100 other features here).

to do anything less and the game will fail.

When I say listen to the community I don't mean try and implement every single specific idea that each and every individual wants. I was thinking more along the lines that if the overwhelming majority of the community are totally against something then please don't totally ignore them and implement it anyway. I'm sure Fdevs aim is to try and please as much of the playerbase as possible and if this is the case then wouldn't listening to the playerbase as a whole be a good course of action.

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

When I say listen to the community I don't mean try and implement every single specific idea that each and every individual wants. I was thinking more along the lines that if the overwhelming majority of the community are totally against something then please don't totally ignore them and implement it anyway. I'm sure Fdevs aim is to try and please as much of the playerbase as possible and if this is the case then wouldn't listening to the playerbase as a whole be a good course of action.

possibly, possibly not.... (and i am not trying to be difficult here) but what you are suggesting is dangerously close to design by committee.. Sometimes it is ok to build something for a niche - so long as the niche is big enough to be viable of course but then i thought that was one of the points of the KSer to see if it was).

often the games i love are the ones which DONT appeal to the masses... but the fans who they DO appeal to are very defensive about.

Take instant ship transfer.... for me i was "lucky" that time as the majority ended up wanting what was in the DDF and recognised that a minor increase in convenience would have been detrimental to the core of the game.......... but what if the majority had wanted instant?, what if the majority want actual fast travel, or fully featured 3rd person view like warthunder?

even if i am in the minority I STILL think it would be a disaster to implement any of the above.... imo sometimes it is best to have a vision and stick with it, even if it makes things harder in the short term.... the vision was in the DDF... perhaps some of those features FD genuinely feel would be detrimental to the game now for some reason.. if so I think it would be nice to hear why..... Others perhaps they are technically unable to figure out how to implement them.. again, communication is key, however, for the most part, FD have already detailed the game they want to make and we all bought into it...... Now i think FD just need to make best efforts to make it, and should not really need input from us.

(The prime minister asked what the majority thought about being in the EU and we got Brexit....... suffice to say the majority are not always right imo )