The failures continue.

[Askorti]

But that's the problem, they don't want any help. You could even say they autistically avoid valuable help and suggestions since the beta, at least we get very little feedback and when we do it's vague. If they are not reading the forums, what difference does it make what people post?
The few times few devs actually get involved in suggestion threads they are treated with respect by the worst ranters (except MP playes, those guys are feral trolls).

That does not excuse behaving in such a way that only dis-incentivizes the devs from engaging the community.
If you are not OK with the devs ignoring you, do not give them even more good reasons to continue to ignore you.
If I was a dev, and had good reasons to expect that a visit to the forum would only end up with shoveling through vent and rant threads such as this one, I would probably pass on that privilege as well.

 

[WhyAmIHere]

That does not excuse behaving in such a way that only dis-incentivizes the devs from engaging the community.
If you are not OK with the devs ignoring you, do not give them even more good reasons to continue to ignore you.
If I was a dev, and had good reasons to expect that a visit to the forum would only end up with shoveling through vent and rant threads such as this one, I would probably pass on that privilege as well.

I mean they weren't here last year when the EA started either (when everyone was nice) so I don't think it's a forum attitude issue.

 

[Lord Grindelvald]

That does not excuse behaving in such a way that only dis-incentivizes the devs from engaging the community.
If you are not OK with the devs ignoring you, do not give them even more good reasons to continue to ignore you.
If I was a dev, and had good reasons to expect that a visit to the forum would only end up with shoveling through vent and rant threads such as this one, I would probably pass on that privilege as well.

Oh shush, they made their beds, they’re gonna have to lay in it.. This behavior isn’t coming from nowhere.

If a dev would show up here and engage with the community in a way any dev would during EA, he would be carried on hands. Mexxico being a prime example.

 

[Apocal]

If a dev would show up here and engage with the community in a way any dev would during EA, he would be carried on hands. Mexxico being a prime example.

People **** down mexxico's neck after he implemented the first caravan nerfs, even though he explained the changes beforehand and polled the community for their approval. The only reason more people didn't directly @ him with their salt was because most of them had no clue who he was, in spite of being really active.

It wasn't even the only time that happened to a dev who was active, just the most glaring because he was upfront and open and still got **** on.

 

[Lord Grindelvald]

People **** down mexxico's neck after he implemented the first caravan nerfs, even though he explained the changes beforehand and polled the community for their approval. The only reason more people didn't directly @ him with their salt was because most of them had no clue who he was, in spite of being really active.

It wasn't even the only time that happened to a dev who was active, just the most glaring because he was upfront and open and still got **** on.

Have you not read these topics?

The general consensus appears to be in favor. We could cherrypick each case but the overall majority would turn out positive.

 

[Apocal]

Have you not read these topics?

Have you? Because you'd have your answer really quick, if you did (I posted in them). It isn't that people don't offer any approval, but that approval is very much conditional and not a lasting protection from nasty comments. The mod staff get rid of the worst them, usually really fast, but I've seen people post some real spicy **** towards active devs.

The general consensus appears to be in favor. We could cherrypick each case but the overall majority would turn out positive.

The general issue is that players will go along with a dev when he does things they like and turn on him instantly when he does things they don't like. A dev who comes on the forum to explain things is still going to get **** on if the players don't like the changes. No amount of being activity or engagement is going to shield them. Just look at the reception emrozdemir (UI dev) got when the radial menu was introduced; he was active as hell on the forum, probably as much or more than mexxico, and people still **** on him about that change. Or they can get it for things that aren't even their fault, like when one of the campaign devs was catching **** because there were no SA servers up for MP.

 

[Lord Grindelvald]

Have you? Because you'd have your answer really quick, if you did (I posted in them). It isn't that people don't offer any approval, but that approval is very much conditional and not a lasting protection from nasty comments. The mod staff get rid of the worst them, usually really fast, but I've seen people post some real spicy **** towards active devs.

The general issue is that players will go along with a dev when he does things they like and turn on him instantly when he does things they don't like. A dev who comes on the forum to explain things is still going to get **** on if the players don't like the changes. No amount of being activity or engagement is going to shield them. Just look at the reception emrozdemir (UI dev) got when the radial menu was introduced; he was active as hell on the forum, probably as much or more than mexxico, and people still **** on him about that change. Or they can get it for things that aren't even their fault, like when one of the campaign devs was catching **** because there were no SA servers up for MP.

I think we’d have to take a step back and delve into the definition and use cases of early access to regain some perspective.

Because the example that you picked out, the radial menu, wasn’t built on community feedback. And not everything gets build on community feedback, ofcourse, that’d be impossible. But it was an unnecessary fix to a problem that did not exist while the evergrowing list of problems were thus far unaddressed. Naturally it raises some questions, backlash even, by players who felt misunderstood. It eventually got reversed-ish.

In terms of early access use cases, mexxico’s thread about snowballing is a prime (and to my limited knowledge, only) example of how community provided data and suggestions were tried and tested.

I’m trying to see where you’re coming from, but I dont think I can yet. Have you been satisfied or are you happy with the mutual engagement between players and devs thus far?

 

[Apocal]

I think we’d have to take a step back and delve into the definition and use cases of early access to regain some perspective.

Because the example that you picked out, the radial menu, wasn’t built on community feedback. And not everything gets build on community feedback, ofcourse, that’d be impossible. But it was an unnecessary fix to a problem that did not exist while the evergrowing list of problems were thus far unaddressed. Naturally it raises some questions, backlash even, by players who felt misunderstood. It eventually got reversed-ish.

He explicitly wanted the sort of back-and-forth between community members, in order to build a better system. And it was an issue that the game offered controller support but the command menu was non-compatible with controllers. Instead of that, he got (mostly, a few were constructive) what was essentially "why the **** did the UI dev do [UI thing] instead of doing [non-UI thing]?" Eventually there were some fixes, sure. But it was an example of a dev being upfront with his intentions and getting crapped on for it.

edit: Also, I think early access is mostly about getting numbers necessary so you can draw in large amounts of automated data -- I've only once participated in an EA where I could influence any substantial change to core game mechanics or systems and that is an ASCII-art roguelike, through a Discord that the only dev treats like his backyard BBQ.

In terms of early access use cases, mexxico’s thread about snowballing is a prime (and to my limited knowledge, only) example of how community provided data and suggestions were tried and tested.

It wasn't the first thread he did like that; he did one for caravans (which later got him roasted, lmao), and others for economy/starvation (they were sorta blended together at times and there were multiple), one for the lords' parties having like 90% recruits that I can't locate immediately, and I think one other that escapes my mind at present.

I’m trying to see where you’re coming from, but I dont think I can yet. Have you been satisfied or are you happy with the mutual engagement between players and devs thus far?

I'm mostly fine with it. The overwhelming majority of the devs don't have work that is even remotely suitable for me to remark upon; like what am I going to say to the guy in charge of refining inverse kinematics? I have don't have the technical background nor do I give a **** about graphics. The ones that do have work I can remark upon generally reply to my threads, even if only to say "no."

Most of them don't have public-facing developments to share with us, so it is by default going to be mostly the campaign team (like seven dudes at this point?) and even within that team, I'm assuming they have junior guys (who aren't going to say ****) and senior guys.

 

[Lord Grindelvald]

He explicitly wanted the sort of back-and-forth between community members, in order to build a better system. And it was an issue that the game offered controller support but the command menu was non-compatible with controllers. Instead of that, he got (mostly, a few were constructive) what was essentially "why the **** did the UI dev do [UI thing] instead of doing [non-UI thing]?" Eventually there were some fixes, sure. But it was an example of a dev being upfront with his intentions and getting crapped on for it.

edit: Also, I think early access is mostly about getting numbers necessary so you can draw in large amounts of automated data -- I've only once participated in an EA where I could influence any substantial change to core game mechanics or systems and that is an ASCII-art roguelike, through a Discord that the only dev treats like his backyard BBQ.

I can only sort-of-agree. I did find the topic you mentioned earlier which announced the arrival of the radial. There are multiple devs engaging in the topic, sharing info and listening to the users. In the same topic however a high percentage replied with the advice to keep it optional, which a dev agreed with to take it up internally. But he or someone else decided against it in order to collect feedback (which they did).

I'm mostly fine with it. The overwhelming majority of the devs don't have work that is even remotely suitable for me to remark upon; like what am I going to say to the guy in charge of refining inverse kinematics? I have don't have the technical background nor do I give a **** about graphics. The ones that do have work I can remark upon generally reply to my threads, even if only to say "no."

Most of them don't have public-facing developments to share with us, so it is by default going to be mostly the campaign team (like seven dudes at this point?) and even within that team, I'm assuming they have junior guys (who aren't going to say ****) and senior guys.

The players dont have to be consulted on every new sheep texture that gets implemented. Nor do they have to review every line of code that gets written.

But things like the radial menu are perfect examples of community-driven testing.
Implement the new-style menu but also implement a way to switch it back. Read the usage data and choose the better version.

Its, in a bigger picture, one of the things that just leaves a bitter taste.

I've replied in a different topic a couple of months ago, which was about the tone on the forums and general state of development but might as well be applicable here, regarding unmet suggestions. (Since then, in my opinion, the tone has become not gradually, but progressively worse.EDIT: In which I am also not without blame)

Lack of communication is a huge problem with TW. The game is EA. In EA they open up the game to players and listen to the community to "finish" the game. All the feedback, suggestions and tips provided are met with utter silence. So we dont know what's being done. If what we're suggesting gets listened to, gets used or contemplated.

And their silence is being read as indifference, which sparks anger and disappointment from the community.

2nd EDIT: I’ve gone a bit off topic here, but I was trying to reiterate my belief in importance of engagement and how I think it could be applied in more cases the way Mexxico did in his in order to turn public opinion around.

 

[The Sign of 33]

How about instead of complaining you actually write something constructive, so that the miraculous day when things are fixed has a chance of coming even slightly sooner. Use your energy and boundless intellect for the betterment of the game, instead of just being a sour grape complaining about old stuff everyone has already complained about a thousand times before.

"Betterment of the game", If it is going to help I'll praise TW management and devs everyday from now on, lol. TW doesn't need any "constructive" posts, they are already aware of the state the game is in, they know about the problems, they simply don't care enough to fix them and they get these "salty" posts as feedback rightfully so. Sometimes I think people here write "constructive" without even thinking, like it's written on a piece of paper along with other lines to use aganist dissatisfied people. It has been complained about a thousand times before and it shall be complained about a thousand times after until they fix these problems. Anyone new who comes to these forums shouldn't think it's all rainbows and butterflies with this game, these topics help new people to know what should they expect about the main problems of the game, otherwise %82 positive reviews on Steam is hardly what TW really deserves.

 

[Mad Vader]

%82 positive reviews on Steam is hardly what TW really deserves.

The average review rating for EA games on Steam (and that includes abandoned ones with **** reviews) is 81%. So I wouldn't call 82% a success, it's just "okay" and not quite what Steam hypes as "Very Positive".

 

[Keldar]

I will say this, IF the devs of this game did more than give out warnings for people DARING to criticize their game and GOT ON THEIR OWN FORUMS to discuss people's concerns I would have a much more favorable view of them. My biggest problem well one of them is that they just don't seem to have any direction in what they want to do with the game. Now maybe I am in the minority about thinking that Sieging/castle taking should be or is one of the bigger parts of the game. The devs did such beautiful and incredible work on the castles, the siege setup etc but then took a MAJOR dump on the actual AI, won't climb ladders, won't move while getting destroyed by arrow fire, go right past people attacking them to get to other enemies. Those are ALL things I have witnessed over and over again. To those attacking me for daring to post I just posted SPECIFIC ISSUES, would you care to respond because the devs sure won't.

 

[Apocal]

I will say this, IF the devs of this game did more than give out warnings for people DARING to criticize their game and GOT ON THEIR OWN FORUMS to discuss people's concerns I would have a much more favorable view of them.

The devs don't give out warnings. I've also never seen someone warned just for criticizing the game; the mods here rule with a light touch and you can get away with a lot.

 

[Calabanar]

As much as I want more interaction between Taleworlds and the community, Apocal brings a valid point when it comes to attacks.

However, it is something bound to happen on a game forum... Plus I am sure after a few weeks of more intensive communication overly harsh critics would start to decline. This would surely make the forum a more fertile soil for constructive feedback for the rest of the EA duration.

 

[Keldar]

The devs don't give out warnings. I've also never seen someone warned just for criticizing the game; the mods here rule with a light touch and you can get away with a lot.

You must be joking. I have been given multiple warnings for just saying stuff they consider "trolling" which is such a perfectly vague word that means anything they don't like. Keep defending the devs though, they should pay you for doing the work they refuse do to like what the modders are doing, unpaid work but in their case they make the game better... you are just a brown noser.

 

[Rbtparker13]

@Keldar, I don't think Apocal is being a brown noser. Throughout all my time on this forum either from lurking or actually being active. The actual devs have talked only a handful of times. while it's the mods (volunteers and fellow fans) who deal out with the warnings and such.

Are you sure you're not confusing the red banner with the yellow one?

 

[Apocal]

You must be joking. I have been given multiple warnings for just saying stuff they consider "trolling" which is such a perfectly vague word that means anything they don't like. Keep defending the devs though, they should pay you for doing the work they refuse do to like what the modders are doing, unpaid work but in their case they make the game better... you are just a brown noser.

You don't realize that the developers aren't the ones moderating the forum.

For anyone else who might think that Keldar is right and "devs" (read: mods) will give you warnings for criticizing the game alone: I posted a thread titled "Pillaging sucks, don't do it" after tagging the CM in the thread, had an actual dev say the title wasn't cool but literally nothing happened to me. I straight up said the army campaign AI was dumb, using more or less those words, in a thread with the dev responsible for that AI posting in it and literally nothing happened to me.

So I'm pretty sure if anyone goes and looks at what got him warned, it is gonna be something more than just criticizing the game.

 

[Ananda_The_Destroyer]

You don't realize that the developers aren't the ones moderating the forum.

For anyone else who might think that Keldar is right and "devs" (read: mods) will give you warnings for criticizing the game alone: I posted a thread titled "Pillaging sucks, don't do it" after tagging the CM in the thread, had an actual dev say the title wasn't cool but literally nothing happened to me. I straight up said the army campaign AI was dumb, using more or less those words, in a thread with the dev responsible for that AI posting in it and literally nothing happened to me.

So I'm pretty sure if anyone goes and looks at what got him warned, it is gonna be something more than just criticizing the game.

Yeah I've been informed my attitude was unappreciated too, although I feel the squeaky wheel gets the grease and grease was wanted and obtained so.....

Mods will also delete a comment without warning you (no punishment) when you're quoting someone breaking the rules, where they could punish you too if they really wanted to, since technically you did cause a display of something that's not allowed and you should have not. The only time I've ever been warned was for giving hygiene advice to an entire country and speculating a certain disease came from that country. Just don't talk about not-M&B.