|
Post by Scrub_of_Menoth on Mar 17, 2017 16:56:02 GMT
Good points, I definitely see where you're coming from. Though I will have to admit we are never going to agree on this as we're both basing our arguments on opposite assumptions: 1) That PP as a company only really cares about the bottom line and to that end they actively will eliminate player-to-creator communication while putting up a facade that says otherwise in order to maintain the playerbase. OR 2) That PP as a company, while doing all they can to maintain revenue and remain a viable corporation, will still do their best to obtain quality feedback, implement said feedback while maintaining the integrity of a product, and maintain interaction with the playerbase, all within those restrictions. So yeah, who knows where the truth is? We'll never know. Either way, thank you for bringing out your points with civility.
|
|
Nyxu
Overseer
NaCl Elemental
Posts: 119
|
Post by Nyxu on Mar 17, 2017 17:15:47 GMT
Be that as it may, if the community speaks with a resounding voice, it doesn't matter if one segment influenced another. The community still has spoken. The community can't complain about its own results now can it? The larger issue of the secrecy is that you don't know if they are using anything we say. None of us do. The community could be speaking with one voice and they could simply ignore it and say they did what we asked. We won't know, will we? They could already have the final stats and cards done on those models and the stuff they have given us is purposely wrong, and all our supposed input (done in secret) will in turn lead to the stats which they have already printed out. In short, they COULD have already finished the faction, gave us different stats to play with to feel part of the process, and then give us the product they did already. Conspiracy theory? Perhaps. It is basic Marketing 101 in regards to community outreach. This has been done before. Do I know for certain that Privateer is doing it? No. Do I think they are doing it? Yes. All the other bells and whistles are there. I'm a firm believer that in business the shortest distance between two points is a straight line. Heh. It isn't a very big faction and it isn't part of the issues of the META that players are talking about (or were) now is it? It is a new page, something that isn't even a problem yet. I'm sure there are people playing certain factions that would really rather have seen the CID tested on their faction to get them going a bit sooner don't you? You don't? First, I want to point out again that we don't know that they are devoting a lot of effort into anything. We just know they setup a suggestion box and told you what they want suggestions about. Most offices have one too. Do you need me to point out how rarely they are actually used by the people who set them out for you to put things in? The CID is a virtual suggestion box just like one in an office environment. The safeguards in place make it impossible to know if anything we say is actually part of the process, but it certainly makes us feel like we are part of the process. You don't "see why" that would be important to them as a company? That too is Marketing 101 and goes to the very heart of PR stunts. No it isn't. This is not the first time this has been attempted. This is the first time it has been attempted by them with the rest of us wearing blinders. This is the first time they called it the CID and didn't let us know what everyone else is saying. The Community Game test from MK-1 to MK-2 was in essence the same thing. The difference was we all talked to one another and knew what the others were suggesting. We thus knew what ideas they were adopting and who put them forward and why. You don't find it odd that the only thing they would change is letting us know what each other are saying? [Citation needed]
|
|
|
Post by redoctober on Mar 17, 2017 17:17:52 GMT
Without overly simplifying the opinions of the people posting in this thread, I feel that the major divide is largely caused by trust, or a lack of, with Privateer Press right now. Some people are placing a certain level of trust in PP that they will ultimately do the right thing by their customers. Others do not share that level of trust and believe that the game of WarmaHordes is heading in the wrong direction. I'm not sure where I land on that spectrum of trust. On one hand, I would like to think that PP has more skin in the game than just the bottom line. On the other hand, when their paying customers pointed out real issues in MK3 such as flank/gang, charging knockdown model, laser targeted throws, etc., they at least appeared less than communicative with the customer base. They even went so far as putting a flag down in the dirt and claiming that some of those things were working as intended which sounded flat and false. They later changed some of them but there wasn't a lot of mea culpa involved. A simple, "Our bad, things slipped through but we fixed them. Thanks for your feedback" would have earned them some good will. Honestly, I don't know what to think right now. I think that Jackson was a little cavalier about PP's customer base. I guess I will have to wait and see what this game looks like in 12 months.
|
|
Lanz
Junior Strategist
Posts: 685
|
Post by Lanz on Mar 18, 2017 0:38:15 GMT
CID could be a publicity stunt, but as someone who has worked in development and worked in testing, there HAS to be some control and direction in focus test groups. It's not the same as just asking for 'feedback'. CID isn't asking for feedback in the first place, it's asking for playtesting. Everyone on CID is basically a volunteer playtester, and that's how CID is structured.
PP doesn't effectively accept 'feedback' anymore in any public form. Feedback assumes a product exists and the customer already has it and has thoughts of it, which is not the case in CID because it's stuff that isn't released yet and is getting tested by players prior to release. It's very different.
|
|
|
Post by Rowdy Dragon on Mar 18, 2017 0:42:59 GMT
Seeing thought processed in Cid from the developers I get this....Chummy feeling from them. Like the developers are overly attached to their creations.
|
|
|
Post by Permutation Servitor on Mar 18, 2017 11:13:07 GMT
Seeing thought processed in Cid from the developers I get this....Chummy feeling from them. Like the developers are overly attached to their creations. You mean the product they have spent years developing and represents their professional reputation and a source of revenue for the company that employs them so they can continue to be employed? Why would they be overly attached to that?
|
|
|
Post by Rowdy Dragon on Mar 18, 2017 13:08:54 GMT
You mean the product they have spent years developing and represents their professional reputation and a source of revenue for the company that employs them so they can continue to be employed? Why would they be overly attached to that? True but its also your job. Writers who get overly attached to their characters in-work, can make them indestructible mary sues. People who get attached to something in games, can refuse to make alterations for the better of the game because a concept was their darling. Im not saying I don't know WHY, Im saying its not a good thing.
|
|
|
Post by Permutation Servitor on Mar 18, 2017 14:44:57 GMT
True but its also your job. Writers who get overly attached to their characters in-work, can make them indestructible mary sues. People who get attached to something in games, can refuse to make alterations for the better of the game because a concept was their darling. Im not saying I don't know WHY, Im saying its not a good thing. Are you in the CID? They are already making changes based on the battle report feedback as well as what people are not taking, to make it more viable.
|
|
|
Post by sideshowlucifer on Mar 18, 2017 15:01:39 GMT
On some things they are, on others they are staunchly holding their ground on conceptual reasoning. The Dreamer phantasms and the Witchwood are two things that come to mind that need some work and they are holding ground on conceptually. I reserve judgement until I see how they handle this week. It isn't in a terrible spot currently though.
|
|
|
Post by Permutation Servitor on Mar 18, 2017 15:13:02 GMT
On some things they are, on others they are staunchly holding their ground on conceptual reasoning. The Dreamer phantasms and the Witchwood are two things that come to mind that need some work and they are holding ground on conceptually. I reserve judgement until I see how they handle this week. It isn't in a terrible spot currently though. It's week 2. Give it time.
|
|
|
Post by Rowdy Dragon on Mar 18, 2017 16:13:35 GMT
I just mean I was surprised by how attached they were. The CID is ultimately proving very very good because the crowds can produce massive evidence quickly (The Ask the Audience Option in who wants to be a Millionaire is Right 91% of the Time), and overwhelm their grouchiness.
If anything I wish they did Cid sooner and for everything.
|
|
|
Post by gunmageintraining on Mar 19, 2017 21:10:53 GMT
They are cherry-picking their arguments and ignoring any contrary evidence or logic. Closing the forums will hurt new players more than having a few bad seeds. There were other things they could have done to handle the forums in a more productive fashion while still keeping them in place. Better, stronger moderation would have helped, but they made quite a few missteps with Mk3 and that was going to take awhile to filter out.
As for PGs, no. It's clear that the WotC decision was the strongest reason they cut the program, regardless of what they say publicly. Admitting that they've thought about the WotC decision means that they think they are in the same place legally and can be construed as admission of fault. Granted I don't know how detailed their interactions with the PGs were, but 1-2k peeps? That's not exactly a huge amount and it shouldn't be a problem to keep track of that many for even a single person. Even if it was getting harder to manage them, thats probably a good thing for the company as a whole. In any case, it would have been worth it to keep the program alive (ignoring the legal side) because it generates loyalty and sales.
|
|
|
Post by Aegis on Mar 20, 2017 2:08:37 GMT
Guys, let's try to stay into the limits of reasonable opinions and discussion.
1) Don't go rampart on conspiracy theories. Yes, it's evident that PP didn't liked the way feedbacks were given to them in the old forum, and tried to make changes to be able to receive feedbacks in a different (more limited-focussed-constructive) way. Does those changes make the situation better or worse? That is up to debate. I think that closing the discussion forums was an error, but suggesting that the changes were made with the clear intent to harm the community or that CID is a fake and they have already everything finished and they are just trying to make us think that our feedbacks are used is really paranoid, even if you are just suggesting it as a possibility. They did what they tought it was best for the game. Many people think that was an error and the thing will not beneficial as they tought, and I mostly agree with that sentiment. That said, making PP figure like an evil syndacate of treacherous and spregiudicate businessmans is not going to help at all, and actually gives points to the ones that said that forums can't be constructive. Let's try to prove them wrong and avoid such statements.
2) Don't attack each other. This is an heated topic, and all of us are very invested into the game and so very touched by these decisions. That said, if another poster has different ideas than yours it doesn't mean that he is stupid, or that his posts are bullshit, or that you are free to attack him for that. We have different opinions, this is fine, and we can discuss them freely here, but you have to do that respecting the other people posting. We have been pretty lenient on these topics since we know that we are all hurt and being bitter in a situation like this is normal, but if people take that as a free pass to insult others we will start to close topics and give sanctions to the offenders. Please, do not force us into that. Continue to express all your opinions as you want, but if you really must attack something, attack the points other people make, not the person expressing them.
|
|
|
Post by skathrex on Mar 20, 2017 10:48:28 GMT
So first things first I think there where a lot of misunderstanding in this post so I will try to clear it up wherever it occurs. But for the future could you please refrain to use emoticons in these posts? To me it always comes off that you don't take my (or other) arguments seriously or that some part of this discussion is redicioulus to you.
Here starts the first misunderstand or to be more precise I feel we don't talk about the same thing. The Problem is that we have a diffrent perceptions of how "bad" the game is. To stay in the metaphor. You are saying the cheese is bad, I am saying you just don't like the way it tastes, because for me it isn't bad. And we are also disagreeing on what the "community" is/thinks. Because I don't see "enough" people unhappy about MK3. And I also don't really see parts of MK3 that are "defective". To the point that I think your metaphor is STILL off: Imo you are oversimplyifing things. Mechanics, Restaurants and Hobby Companys ARE vastly diffrent in the way they opperate. It is true that if something doesn't work/taste etc. they should listen to the feedback of their customer base. The question is just what does it mean "something doesn't work", is it just not your taste or is it plain defective (overcooked, car not driving etc.). You think something is defective, I don't think so because in a Game this question isn't as binary as it is with a mechanic.
Well... I am sorry to say it this way, but that doesn't sound like someone working with the customer, rather like something written in the training book for customer service and sounds a bit detached from reality. In its core I totally agree. Concerns of you customer should always be heard and learned from, but things like "I used my cellphone in the bath and now it isn't working anymore" are not valid concern about the cellphone. And for PP saying "unit x is bad, fix it" comes to an equal level of input. They can't use it because for every unit you can find someone that says its either broken or trash. This type of feedback becomes valid if it is voiced in mass. And since its often linked with rants and insults towards PP you can imagine not a pleasent form of feedback. So I will not blame them for trying to get the same feedback in a orderly fashin. Because if you look in the past, when the "outraged" feedback was heard, there where always people who delivered the same feedback in an orderly fashion, with playtesting results and suggestions how to fix it etc.
I honestly can't understand where you got the impression that the feedback was constructive. I mean for sure they where constructive posts on the Forums about problems, but the majority where rands and vents. As mentioned before in the Rants they where always the constructive posts hidden somewhere, I believe those where the ones they listened too. Naturally they got influenced by mass outrage about stuff, and I agree that I am concerned where they will get the input from what needs to be tested in CID next but many people already pointed out whats the problem with the system of listening to those who cry the loudest. If you saw the General Discussion forums in the last month the mob with pitchforks just ran from one OP Unit to the next.
Here we can agree to disagree. The move from GW as a whole was vastly diffrent imo. But I explained that before. Funny thing is, you can still talk to them. I wrote PPS_Jackson an Email and got a response a day later, so we can still talk, but maybe the anonymity is gone now. Here we have a complete misunderstanding. I will try to clear it up. NO ONE was unhappy with the PG program...well actually I know a few who where, but most where pretty happy with it. What I meant to say was NO ONE was happy seeing it go, not even PP. But that aside, where did you get that PP isn't concerned with balance? All I hear and see is that they are very concerned with it. Also where did you get that they are stepping away from WM/H being a competetive game? With SR2017 around the corner it seems they are very well aware that competetiv is what drives the game. You just have to be sure to attrackt new players as well.
Well thats the point where it gets tricky for me. Again I think your view of the oppinion of the community is heavily obscured by your own oppinion about PP and the game. There are, lets call them pesimestic people like in GWs community, but there are far more "optemistic" people, who see small problems that will probably be fixed over time.
You may be right that I am a bit naive, that maybe because I am an optemist. But I have to tell you that I think your assesment of you being a pragmatic is well to be quite honest...wrong. The points you raise and the way you word it paints you not only as a person who believes in the worst possible outcome, it also paints you as somewhat of a conspiray theorist. If you truly believe what you are saying there is only way for you. Jump ship before your minis aren't worth anything anymore. Its the only logical conclusion I can gather from your statements. Or you are willing to wait 10-15 years till PP turns back like GW is doing now.
|
|
|
Post by kallus on Mar 21, 2017 4:01:07 GMT
I'm concerned about the future of Warmahordes, I like many of you was left disillusioned by GW after many years and $1,000s invested in 40k and I'm really worried about the decision to shut the forum.
A bit of context, I'm that one super competitive player in my meta. I spend huge amounts of time theory crafting lists, I play 2 factions but I religiously read every detail of every other faction (bought them all on war room 1 and 2). I love watching battle reports and was guilty of bringing ridiculous cheese to the 40k table.
I am also the primary organiser and convinced my local meta to switch from 40k with the promise of a cheaper, faster and more balanced game.
I haven't played warmahordes in 3 months.
My promise of balance didn't really pan out and the meta is moving back to GW, the overwhelming feedback I get is "if I'm going to be playing an unbalanced game I want to play with the cooler models and fluff"
Then PP close their awesome forums (because people complain about imbalance) and disband their pressgangers... the guys who arrange the competitive play... so what am I supposed to tell my mates who see 40ks new and glorious models (with incredibly unbalanced rules)?
I know 40k is far less balanced than warmahordes but for my circle playing friend who has only won 1/10 of his last games because he simply bought the wrong models it's a tough sell.
I still love warmahordes but it's starting to look like if I want to play a war game I'd better break out my 40k models.
|
|