Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Why "we talk when it's ready" is a problem for the quality of SWTOR
Elikal
Member UncommonPosts: 7,912
I always believed in the method of scientific critique. The way to get better theories is not by positivisitc proof, which is impossible, but by ruling out via falsification by critique.
Theory: All swans are white. Now you don't go out and try to find white swans. You go out and try to find swans NOT white. Only the try to falsification makes solid theories.
Same with what works in games.
Assumption One: A MMORPG with such a massive funding needs a broad audience. I think that is a relatively solid theory.
Assumption two: Even the most intelligent and experienced team of developers can err in some design decisions. All humans are prone to err. It's a bit a no brainer. So what do you do to minimize the risk: you share info in the ongoing process under the pretense that more minds see more than one mind. A game developing team always has some blind spots. Actually any development team of any product. Now while faith in your abilities is good and fine, one can overdo it.
Conclusion from there two theoremes: Offering info only "when we are ready", means when Bioware has finalized it so far, that essentially nothing substantial can be changed anymore. Which greatly increases the risks for the game overall. If you share info while still the process is more open, there is more time to make changes. Now as it is, it looks like swim or drown, all or nothing. I find this highly risky for the product itself.
Personal note: While not entirely logical, I also would like to add, that I feel that Bioware has no faith in their community - the potential customers, by revealing information only, when everything is essentially set in stone. I feel like Bioware values our input little. Every info we get sounds like "we know better how to make a cool game than anyone of you, so we don't NEED any input". Even if you were so much smarter than us, it would be a nice gesture to at least hear us on things ongoing. You can then still reject our suggestions, but denying us any serious input by presenting things only when ready and unchangable also has an atmosphere of shutting us out.
The history of failed MMOs of the past 4 years has given us gamers a reasonable background for being skeptical, I think.
(Comment: Yes I also posted this on the official forum. I believe in widespread discussions to bring out the best. And yes it has typos, English is not my first language. Now we got that cleared.)
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
Comments
About your conclusion: wouldn't it be worse if a company gives you information about a specific feature (about bar brawls) and then decides later to cut it out of the game (Age of Conan). With a "we talk when it's ready" you can at least be sure that it's ready and that's it isn't a bug infested hellhole, only to be cut out of the final product.
They cannot develop together with the community because that would probably be a crazy game made up of "you know what would be cool" things and not by a good solid foundation. The developers have a mental picture in their mind of what they want to do and for that to work they have to create it first.
I doubt Da Vinci would have made a painting such as Mona Lisa if he had had the village standing behind him a and allowing them to make changes.
All statements I make is from my point of view unless stated otherwise.
Bioware doesnt want to reaveal something, then figure later it doesnt work, look, or feel right. Then they have to come out and say, "oh yeah, the cantina fights will not be in after all". Then you add to the dissapointment.
Allow Bioware to do their thing, just give them patience.
With the IP being Star Wars I can see why they are being guarded with their game considering just how fanatically vocal the SW fans can be.
I myself am an eternal optimist but bounces back from disappointment fast which has to be the best way to be when games are concerned
Nice post by the way.
Ah the genius theory.
The theory is largely held as outdated. Essentially every single so called work of genius art is today know to be the result of generations of gradual improvement. But even if we say there are some genius people, a MMO is more something for mass consumation, not some piece of art merely admired from afar. No one would put a Mona Lisa copy in his living room.
All those developers of previous game had those visions. And where did that lead to? I mean yes a development team needs a strong creative vision. But some details also need early feedback, and not only from family and friends.
Now the false concept of improving a theory is: if the theorist is intelligent, his theories are good. Wrong. The theories are good because they are tested hard, confronted. Confrontation leads to improvment, as in life so in the mind. It is not complacency that leads to improvement. If you are unsure and ask friends you often get kind answers but not often really critical ones. The same misconception exists about critique. It is said, critique need to be intelligent to improve the theory. Wrong. It is solely the intelligence of the critizised person on whom the use of the critique depends. Even the greatest fool can help improve a theory, because his question might shed light on something experts have not thought about, because they are too involved with the process. This has often enough been the case. We learn more from explaining our theories to complete fools than by explaining them to other experts, who usually share the same "blindness" as each other.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
That's what the focus testing is for.
You just want more info and try to rationalize it. There is no need for them to tell anything.
More importantly, I wouldn't have "faith" in the community either. We are pretty damn moronic at the end of the day.
Opinions often get in the way and usually screw things up.
I'd rather have a company complete its product and then ask opinions rather than ask opinions of what their product should be.
Jeremiah 8:21 I weep for the hurt of my people; I stand amazed, silent, dumb with grief.
Join me on Twitch Facebook Twitter
Thank goodness you aren't a game developer. Honestly I know of some devs who have a habit of talking about features that were not ready to be discussed those games are now considered niche games often able to be had in the bargain bin like AOC, funcom spoke of bar brawls and massie battles that came to frutiion partly in the case of the battles and they are still suffering for it.
Who do you know that makes a game where they just throw out a list of possible ideas in hopes that the community would tell them where to go with the game sounds like the way to never get the game developed between the people who will push for this game to be SWG2 to those who want a free for all full loot pvp game.
Honestly though your posts are beyond reaching for finding ways to say that Bioware is doing wrong don't you think??
but yeah, to call this game Fantastic is like calling Twilight the Godfather of vampire movies....
Finding humans doing things wrong does not need real effort.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
Lets take this hs philosophy elsewhere or at least call a spade a spade.
Do you think scientists set out to disprove their theories with targeted antithetical hypothesis? Been following the global warming debate much. Your post and several trends in modern society show why we must guard against socializing scientific thought by the masses.
The core underpinning of science is empirical studies.
If you absolutely must draw the correlation then the focused beta test are the empirical studies, just because you dont take part in those studies does not mean that the end hypothesis is illegitimate.
And yet, here we are in a forum contributing day by day in with the idea that by controverse debate we all might get somewhere. Otherwise none of us would BE here, would we now?
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
Elikal, this is nothing more than another post by you to try and justify why you think you should know more about this game. The information is not coming as fast as YOU like and therefore BioWare MUST be doing something wrong. Well, I have news for you, the information is not coming fast enough for most of us, but the thing is, most of us understand that if bad information is released it will hurt the game and BioWares reputation. So we try to be happy with what we are getting and sit back and wait. Instead of whining about it.
Oh and by the way, the Scientific Method you are talking about. You have it a LOT wrong. It works like this:
1- Propose a Theory.
2- Research Theory for any related information.
3- Conduct very specific testing to prove (or disprove) the theory. This may be repeated MANY times to rule out factors that can contaminate your data.
4- Analyse data and review Theory. Adjust Theory as needed OR completely change if the data supports that move.
5- Further testing to prove (or dispove) the adjusted/new Theory.
6- Publish for peer review.
7- Continue with Theory or return to number 3 if peer review turns up further information.
You seem to want the "Peer Review" before anything else is even done. Poor choice of action there.
"If half of what you tell me is a lie, how can I believe any of it?"
Well, Bioware could be like Lionhead and release a bunch of cool features that never end up in the game, leading to a mass nerdrage from fans.
Groovy.
Let's take the most discussed current topics space combat and social clothing, as example.
If these 2 gameplay stay as we know them:
no 3D, nor multiplayer for space shooter
no social clothing tab
Do you think it's better to say it up front or hold it until they show how great is everything else?
Why would anything about either of those need to be said? As you yourself stated Deewe, we already know that the Space Shooter is a Tube Shooter at launch, deal with it. As for social clothing, I don't think I have seen anything mentioned about that and to be honest, I haven't seen too many people that care about it either (may 2 in all). All in all, they can say absolutely nothing about either of those and still no surprise.
"If half of what you tell me is a lie, how can I believe any of it?"
Some people will be upset with whatever BW does with the space part of the game. There is no way for them to please everyone. Personally I love space sim games (wish they would make a comback), but I am not going to judge how I will like or dislike what they have done until I try it. Maybe I'll love it, maybe I'll hate it, but all MMOS have features that some love while others hate.
As for the social clothing, they have said they might look into it. Personally I could care less about this feature. I'll wear what ever armor I find that I like. This is the kind of thing that can be added later in the game (ala EQ2). I would rather they focus on the game play, animations, and end game content then worry about social clothing at this point.
A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort.
Herm Albright
(1876 - 1944)
Elikal, I used to think as you do.
Not anymore.
Investors that own the MMOs and the Publishers that are their Henchman do not care one little bit about what customers say or think. If they do become interested they contact a Focus Group consultant that makes sure the people in the focus group say almost exactly what the Investors want to hear. No rocking the boat.
When we, that is the Players, say that this feature should be improved or that changed, the Investors get their Public Relations guru out of their penthouse apartments and have them talk to us... and the PR folks tell us what they want us to hear and make it sound like it was what we wanted to hear. No rocking the boat.
We Players are just livestock... a "human resource".
Unfortunately you too will get it one day.... you too will understand.
I am the Player that wonders... "What the %#*& just happened?!"
...............
"I Believe... There should be NO financial connection or portals between the Real World and the Virtual in MMOs. "
__Ever Present Cockroach of the MMO Verses__
...scurrying to and fro... .munching on bits of garbage... always under foot...
Yes, I "get" is already. By this system year after year we get the same mediocre games. They sell, so apparently from a purely monetarian point of view, it works.
For a gamer interested in progress however, things are different.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
While you may be a seasoned gamer... you may know absolutely nothing about creating a game.
They have their veteran game designers working on this game. They have likely done countless hours of research. Just because they didn't ask you or someone you know directly doesn't mean they haven't gone to great lengths to get opinions and input.
But the reality is this:
"TOO MANY COOKS SPOIL THE BROTH."
You will NEVER please 100% of the people 100% of the time. With such a broad range of 'gamers' out there, they would all likely put different weight values on different core features of a game. And some would even go so far as to say that certain minor features are even more important than the major pilars of a game.
Bottom line... you will have your say. It may not necessarily be at game launch, but you will get to have input. Just because you aren't given NDA or SNDA information pre-launch doesn't mean that input isn't valuable, either.
The problem is with what you're expecting (or from what I can gather of what you appear to want).
You're essentially saying that you want info on systems as soon as possible so we can tell the developers where they're going wrong. The problem with that is for us to truly tell whether a feature is good or bad, it needs to be finished.
They already have people giving them feedback on features that aren't complete; those are called beta testers.
Also, there needs to be a certain level of corporate secrecy. They can't completely outline all their features from day one because there's always the possibility that someone will take one of their unique features and co-opt it for their own game. Possibly even getting it out earlier.
"Because it's easier to nitpick something than to be constructive." -roach5000
I hate to blast a hole through your scientific approach, Eli. But you miss the point. When a company says "when its ready", they mean ready for testing and feedback, not ready for retail. I think you skipped that step.
elikal, posting in a TOR section again?
who would have thought!
Developer says: Feature X is something we are testing and would like to implement if possible
Players read: Feature X is the only thing that will make my life complete. I would be lost without Feature X in my life.
Developers say: Feature X didn't work the way we hoped and won't be included until we can get it working as intended.
Players scream: The developers tell lies, break promises and they touched me in a bad place when the canceled Feature X. The game will fail and I will rant to everyone on the internet about it.
The stupidity of humanity in general is why developers should only discuss features that work and are ready to implement into the game.
Imo, the OP is WAY off base in this. Take Warhammer for example. They hyped the crap outta that game and it released with only 1/3 of its endgame content, 2/3 which to this day hasnt been released. Dev's need to keep their d**n fool mouths shut until they are ready to lift their NDA's and start stress testing the servers. People like to say that the fickle nature of the gaming subset is what kills these games, but its hype that poisons them before the gold masters are ever stamped.
Warhammer fanatic since '85.
Pretty much this. They release information when it is in the game and ready to be tested, they've released information regarding how they plan on testing TOR, and they will only bring in players to test when they feel they have most of the system in place and require feedback etc.
In order for us to give feedback, there needs to be a game there to test, not a list of features on a web page.