Some Constructive Criticism about the Community Developer Relationship

[Fluffy Fishy]

To be blunt its that the developer team are paying too much attention to too many people loudly airing some of the niggles they have with the game, I applaud and admire the community integration but I feel like the team are taking too much notice of what the every man says, I believe there needs to be more of a detachment to produce a healthier cycle, there are a few areas that this seems to really stand out, for example the ahistorical toughness of the Santissima, It seems to happen on and off too much, the team nerf the ship a little to make it more historical and enhance gameplay in the top tier ships then the community is outraged that their ship is no longer the outright best ship and the team seem to back down and let mob rule happen. This kind of attitude hurts progression and really there should be more focus on variety. I admit this whole point seems somewhat ironic where a community member is telling you not to listen too much to the community but I feel like there needs to be more of a safe step between people like me in the community mob and the decisions that get made, perhaps its to do with player retention but you have to be bold to make the right game for everyone's sake.

 

Sadly I am seeing more and more open frustration with this game, both on these forums and in the game chat too. I think this is partly caused by people knowing this is a potentially ground breaking game, the combat is solid but there are many other areas that currently need love and attention, it really depresses me to see the game still bleeding players. I struggled to think where to put this or how to name it but I figured I would do this openly to allow others to scrutinise what I am saying and hopefully steer some positivity back to the community.

The team are doing a fantastic job here, they just need to take more from that step of removal, I would say similar to the way paradox tend to talk about their expansions, not everyone will love it at first but its something worthwhile and enhances the game to attract new people. Thank you for reading.

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

We are at the "crisis discussion point" of any game based on history - facts vs arguments in the realism credibility vs easy gameplay.

[Vernon Merrill]

The trouble with this game will ALWAYS be the tug of war between the REALISM crew and the GAMEPLAY crew.  Without some appeasement to GAMEPLAY, the numbers will not be as high.  Without some appeasement to REALISM, the game turns in Call of Duty pew pew with slow ships.  Trying to find the right balance will be tough and I'm hoping that the addition of some mechanics of diplomacy and stuff like being able to develop ports/defenses as a faction will provide enough good content for both crews.

 

I have ~700 hours in the game.  $40 divided by 700 is about 5 cents an hour.  To me, I've already gotten my money's worth, but it would be great to see people come back when future patches hit.

 

Honestly, since I gave up caring about useless ports, my enjoyment has skyrocketed.  

[Crayon]

I agree with this. However there is only 1 solution.

 

Create a list of goals.

 

The developers need to stir away from listening to the community to develop goals. They need their own. Once they meet their own goals. Launch the game.

In the process of developing these goals (I'm expecting transparency which this team struggles with, probably due to their small size and documentation is lamentably time consuming) 

They can listen to the community and add what they think will work and be cool, as long as it will fit with their future goals.

 

The devs have not shared any sort of transparency in their goals they want met before the game is launched. The only thing they have said is its not ready and theres things to come.

[Fluffy Fishy]

We are at the "crisis discussion point" of any game based on history - facts vs arguments in the realism credibility vs easy gameplay.

Personally I believe that there should be a sensible mix of both sides in that, then again I did just say to hold off taking advice from the mob. A good between point of history/realism vs gameplay is one that would satisfy me, I would say frigates have it right at the moment, line ships not so much but then again my balance will be different from what other people like, some will want more arcade, others will want super realism. Its a very difficult balancing act for any studio to produce the right point where it takes in community advice but isnt ruled by it but I do think there needs to be a move away from people like me who haven't proved themselves towards people like you who are the more trusted testers.

[Crayon]

Personally I believe that there should be a sensible mix of both sides in that, then again I did just say to hold off taking advice from the mob. A good between point of history/realism vs gameplay is one that would satisfy me, I would say frigates have it right at the moment, line ships not so much but then again my balance will be different from what other people like, some will want more arcade, others will want super realism. Its a very difficult balancing act for any studio to produce the right point where it takes in community advice but isnt ruled by it but I do think there needs to be a move away from people like me who haven't proved themselves towards people like you who are the more trusted testers.

They just need to set a goal and what they expect from it. Once the goal is met (especially once it meets rudimentary expectations), launch it and let us test it. While we test, they document. Publish what works and doesn't work so we know what we need to test and what was broken. 

Edited June 6, 2016 by Crayon

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

They just need to set a goal and what they expect from it. Once the goal is met (especially once it meets rudimentary expectations), launch it and let us test it. While we test, they document. Publish what works and doesn't work so we know what we need to test and what was broken. 

 

Yes.

Feedback, especially in written form in the forum must be more than - game is broken.

Some of us are good at mathematics and describing with exact values, others better at describing how it feels.

[mikawa]

 

They just need to set a goal and what they expect from it. Once the goal is met (especially once it meets rudimentary expectations), launch it and let us test it. While we test, they document. Publish what works and doesn't work so we know what we need to test and what was broken.

Yes, that's exactly what I mentioned here. They should let us know what gameplay goals should be reached. Then we can give much better feedback about the game's mechanics, instead of spinning around in an endless circle.

[The Spud]

I think we are all talking about the damage model here, and I was probably one of the many that thought the damage model was great and in my opinion balanced in relation to the ship. So we might all agree we had a "good" or even "perfect" model that is less historical and more arcady. The devs probably can easily reimplement this feature at any time in the future.

 

I think whenever the release comes, and numbers rise and we have a soft reset. We might have both a realism server (with the damage model the way it is going right now) and a more arcady server where we reimplement the old damage model we all loved and most of us miss. As I expect this damage model can be tuned by changing sertain numbers and values, its probably possible both "modes" can use the same core mechanics, just tuned differently. I don't know nothing about programming, so don't shoot me, but I think this is not totaly impossible (a bit like some games have a hardcore mode).

 

This way this game could cater to the needs of both the historical, realism people and the people who feel it might stay a bit more arcady for gameplays sake. This will be the most beneficial for every party involved in this game, both the devs as they will sell more copies (these people also need to provide for their family at the end of the month) and the players will be able to play the game mode they very much enjoy. Unfortunatly at this we only have a perfectly fine "arcade" mode, and we still need to refine the historical side.

 

Like the devs said, we need to try stuff out so we know it works or doesn't work, so whenever in the future people request a tested feature we can tell them it was tested and found to be flawed.

Edited June 6, 2016 by LanderD

[Rramsha]

I think people are looking far to much into this game in this stage of early ALPHA development. This is the stage where the game can Swing wildly from one direction to another, from one feature to another, and also have features appear and disappear at will. This is the true reality of open development and I am having a blast watching this game change, while experiencing different iterations of combat and game mechanics as I ride (sail) along on this wonderful development. Where the developers will finally end up after a 1.0 release is still open, and We must keep reminding ourselves how far from feature completion this game is. Frustration is going to happen as the games iterations change and morph into what may be the final version however we must also realize that some frustration comes from the fact that the final outcome may not be the game that one personally  thought it would be. However we must also acknowledge that for many others, this game may be their dream game where their level of Game/realism is finally met. So everyone has to keep an open mind and contribute as much as possible in hopes that the games final outcome is both enjoyable, yet represents some level of actual naval combat of the period.

[Anolytic]

I agree with this. However there is only 1 solution.

 

Create a list of goals.

 

The developers need to stir away from listening to the community to develop goals. They need their own. Once they meet their own goals. Launch the game.

In the process of developing these goals (I'm expecting transparency which this team struggles with, probably due to their small size and documentation is lamentably time consuming) 

They can listen to the community and add what they think will work and be cool, as long as it will fit with their future goals.

 

The devs have not shared any sort of transparency in their goals they want met before the game is launched. The only thing they have said is its not ready and theres things to come.

 

They have said more than that.

 

 

Awesome!)))

 

yes. somewhat like that

 

Guaranteed features

• UI rework and guides - will be done last
• Localization into promised languages - will be done in parallel with UI
• New ships

Features for continued testing - they might continue to suck even after improvements

• RVR rework
• Officers and crew finalization
• Accel/Decel finalization
• Crafting trading and resources distribution improvements
• Combat tuning

Probable

• Boarding improvements

 

[Vernon Merrill]

Personally, I would would love a smidgen of Civilization in the development while we're talking about things we'd like to see...  

[HarryButpain]

devs are adults and i've also been sniffing around admin's steam account like Jessica Fletcher xD. He's playing a lot of games so I'm pretty damn confident they can separate the 'I want to be OP' guys and the ones which have legit concerns instead of being isolated, deep down the earth in a world of code all day.. Just look at the penetration thing, after a lot of rage, complaining and threats to leave the game here on the forum it later turned out that a bug was causing it.. If devs would have ignored us they maybe would not have found the cause of the issue..

Edited June 6, 2016 by BACk ALLEY ShENANiGANS

[Crayon]

They have said more than that.

 

No thats nothing in the way of expectations. Thats features they want to add/include or tweak. Not what they expect. 

 

Think more...

Why do they want those features.

 

 

For example: Why do they want to tweak and improve UI. Whats missing from it now? 

 

                      What is wrong with combat specifically? Why does combat need to be tweaked?  

 

                      Is accel/decel where they want it to be? Is finalization graphical changes in nature? Is acceleration and declaration expected to be tied into the game in a more dynamic sense?

 

Give me details what you expect and I can help you get there far better than saying, "this sucks fix it please" compared to "This sucks! X is broken because y affects in z ways".

Edited June 6, 2016 by Crayon

[Babble]

The Devs need a road map something along the lines of this > http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/12696-the-road-map-table-of-contents/

 

 

In my opinion you decide where you want to go.  then you go there.  Once your there you review what works and what doesnt and you make changes.

 

It probably was a bad idea to release it on steam before the game even had a UI or any type of tutorial.  All it did was bring new people into the game who saw an ugly undeveloped game with a steep learning curve and no instructions and they uninstalled never to be seen again.   Steam is the populous.   You dont let the populous play your game until atleast  beta.

 

Also Pre-steam release everyone was basically okay with combat.  So in my opinion the devs should have moved to working on other things and left the minor combat tweaking that has been going on for the past few months until later.  Combat is workable so what do we develop now?

 

Early access:

1. UI
2. Nation Selection mechanics
3. basic loot system
4. Tutorial Missions
5. Standard Player missions
6.  basic PVP  mechanics
7. Expand EA

Expanded EA:

1. Resource Distribution (Complex)(Must be done this early and in depth to make RvR or anything the player does meaningful. Economy is based on it)
2. Basic Economy
3. Player Crafting basics
4. In depth economy and crafting
5. Add a very few ships
6. Quick review of combat
7. Setting up an Admiralty
8. more in depth loot system
9. Group Missions
10. Land in battles
11. Port conquest mechanics
12. Review combat mechanics
13. Alternate mission types (Exploration, PVP missions, crafting missions.)
14. Changing Nation Mechanics
15. add a few ships
16. review combat
17. review port conquest mechanics
18. review UI (Add polish )
19. Expand playerbase for  Early Access

Final EA period:

1. Diplomacy options
2. RvR mechanics
3. Victory Mechanics (The map needs a conquest period with a determined victory and map reset. Stops the steam roll of smaller nations)
4. Review Economy mechanics
5. Release a few boats
6. review combat
7. review conquest
8. Monitor and review an entire conquest period (Identify problem areas)
9. Make any major changes if needed
10. limited Release Beta on Steam

Limited Beta:

1. Player built port upgrades (Economy / RVR)
2. Crew / Officer mechanics
3. add a few ships
4. Review Combat mechanics
5. review RVR mechanics
6. Review economy mechanics
7. review diplomacy
8. Quality of life improvements (Birds, graphics ,etc.)
9. Monitor entire conquest period (Address any glaring issues.)
10. Minor marketing campaign (Mailers, etc.)
11. Expand Beta to all on Steam to stress test server infrastructure

Expanded beta:

1. Monitor Server stability for 2 weeks
2. Introduce optional subscription model
3. Enhanced loot system
4. Ship Flag / Sail customization (At Least color select)
5. Port Governance
6. Stock Market and banking
7. add a few ships
8. Review combat
9. Review Port Conquest
10. Greater Marketing Campagin (Adds on gaming sites, etc.)
11. Release game

Post Game Release:

1. Monitor server infrastructure
2. Major Ad Campaign (TV Spot)
3. Add a large ship pack
4. Review Combat in Depth
5. Review Conquest in Depth
6. Review Economy in Depth
7. Review Diplomacy in Depth
8. Deeper theater immersion mechanics (port generated culture, port unrest, *Gasp* religion .)
9. PVP Tournaments
10. Expanded Customization
11. Premium Ship Customization
12. And so on

[KrakkenSmacken]

A person who can tell the difference between good advice and bad advice, possibly doesn't need any advice to begin with.

[Thomas Sailaway]

I dissagree.

 

The devs can't make their own game in their own ways. We've seen how they want it to be as realistic as possible. If this game gets to realistic, battles will last too long, crew management will be too complicated, Teleport will be removed etc etc etc.

 

What I believe they should do, is to have a goal on what this game should look like in the end, always struggle for that goal, but with input from the majority of players. There is a balance there, wich I feel is not good at this moment. Too many players raise their voices on different things, and the devs often chooses to listen to them too much. And together with this, it's being combined with the realism the devs wants for the game, wich might be too realistic at times in my opinion.

 

- What I don't get.. still.. is all the time spent on tweaking and adjusting the battle mechanics. Why? It was already good a month ago. Tweak it later then.

- Crew management... whaaaat? It's very nice as it is now. Tweak it later if so must be.

- Why don't move on to more important stuff, wich is more game breaking, like "pointless" Port Battles? Tutorials? Better UI? Overhaul the Pirate Faction? Politics and democracy? and so on..

 

If people are happy with the gameplay, realistic or not, or both, don't mess around too much with it, move on, make the game evolve. Don't go forth and back on figures and numbers and tweaking already good mechanics.

 

Still, I like this game a lot. But it seems like people don't want to hang around for the longsome tweak-ride, and that's bad. I would say if players stay cause the game is evolving in more important matters, that's a good thing. Numbers are always needed with tweaks later on.

[Rosebud]

 

The Devs need a road map something along the lines of this > http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/12696-the-road-map-table-of-contents/

 

 

In my opinion you decide where you want to go.  then you go there.  Once your there you review what works and what doesnt and you make changes.

 

It probably was a bad idea to release it on steam before the game even had a UI or any type of tutorial.  All it did was bring new people into the game who saw an ugly undeveloped game with a steep learning curve and no instructions and they uninstalled never to be seen again.   Steam is the populous.   You dont let the populous play your game until atleast  beta.

 

Also Pre-steam release everyone was basically okay with combat.  So in my opinion the devs should have moved to working on other things and left the minor combat tweaking that has been going on for the past few months until later.  Combat is workable so what do we develop now?

 

Early access:

1. UI
2. Nation Selection mechanics
3. basic loot system
4. Tutorial Missions
5. Standard Player missions
6.  basic PVP  mechanics
7. Expand EA

Expanded EA:

1. Resource Distribution (Complex)(Must be done this early and in depth to make RvR or anything the player does meaningful. Economy is based on it)
2. Basic Economy
3. Player Crafting basics
4. In depth economy and crafting
5. Add a very few ships
6. Quick review of combat
7. Setting up an Admiralty
8. more in depth loot system
9. Group Missions
10. Land in battles
11. Port conquest mechanics
12. Review combat mechanics
13. Alternate mission types (Exploration, PVP missions, crafting missions.)
14. Changing Nation Mechanics
15. add a few ships
16. review combat
17. review port conquest mechanics
18. review UI (Add polish )
19. Expand playerbase for  Early Access

Final EA period:

1. Diplomacy options
2. RvR mechanics
3. Victory Mechanics (The map needs a conquest period with a determined victory and map reset. Stops the steam roll of smaller nations)
4. Review Economy mechanics
5. Release a few boats
6. review combat
7. review conquest
8. Monitor and review an entire conquest period (Identify problem areas)
9. Make any major changes if needed
10. limited Release Beta on Steam

Limited Beta:

1. Player built port upgrades (Economy / RVR)
2. Crew / Officer mechanics
3. add a few ships
4. Review Combat mechanics
5. review RVR mechanics
6. Review economy mechanics
7. review diplomacy
8. Quality of life improvements (Birds, graphics ,etc.)
9. Monitor entire conquest period (Address any glaring issues.)
10. Minor marketing campaign (Mailers, etc.)
11. Expand Beta to all on Steam to stress test server infrastructure

Expanded beta:

1. Monitor Server stability for 2 weeks
2. Introduce optional subscription model
3. Enhanced loot system
4. Ship Flag / Sail customization (At Least color select)
5. Port Governance
6. Stock Market and banking
7. add a few ships
8. Review combat
9. Review Port Conquest
10. Greater Marketing Campagin (Adds on gaming sites, etc.)
11. Release game

Post Game Release:

1. Monitor server infrastructure
2. Major Ad Campaign (TV Spot)
3. Add a large ship pack
4. Review Combat in Depth
5. Review Conquest in Depth
6. Review Economy in Depth
7. Review Diplomacy in Depth
8. Deeper theater immersion mechanics (port generated culture, port unrest, *Gasp* religion .)
9. PVP Tournaments
10. Expanded Customization
11. Premium Ship Customization
12. And so on

 

This. These thoughts are about as close to mine as I have seen.

[jodgi]

Sure combat was great before, it has been great pretty much since the start.

Last patch and fix made already solid combat mechanics truly spitzenklasse fantastic.

It's inspiring!

[jodgi]

If you're playing PBs and higher level battles that I am not into yet then that is very good to hear

Actually, no. I only do 1v1 or smaller groupfights. I came to this game because of the skill based fighting. Forming a line and running downwind is so engrained in PBs that, out of personal taste, I avoid them entirely.

Not saying no forever, tho.

[Arvenski]

On a similar note, I bit of constructive criticism that I've wanted to give to the devs for a while is this: Please, for all our sakes, don't take players' criticism of the game or development personally. I know this game is the devs' pet project, and they're a small team and their work matters to them a great deal, and I know it's easy to get upset when someone doesn't like something you say or something you've worked hard on (the blunt and often crude/vulgar ways in which people say such things on the internet doesn't help, either), but it's not good when devs take offense at having their game or their actions criticized. Criticism means that the person delivering the criticism believes something to be wrong. Now, I'm not a dev, but it seems to me that the professional approach when receiving criticism is to take another look at whatever it is that's being criticized, because that other person (or people) may be right, and what at first seemed fine may actually be flawed. I think everyone sometimes needs someone else to point out the mistakes that that they're making. Also, listening to player feedback not only can make for a better game, but it can make for a happier playerbase that is happier to recommend your game to other people. On the other hand, becoming upset when your game or your methods are criticized only serves to tarnish your reputation, and by extension, tarnish the reputation of your game. Not only that, it alienates your community, and I'd say the reasons why that's a bad thing should be fairly obvious. 

[Hyperion74]

I can understand why the Dev lads take some offense to what some of the posters say. Every time a patch comes there are a lot of "You broke this game!!! I quit you @#!(^&$ stupid @*%%#&%. I hope you ^^%&$ die." O.K., I'm getting a little extreme, but every patch there are far too many rage quit threats. That is not anything near constructive criticism.The devs are good to listen to us. We have seen that they listen to us. That makes me feel like I am contributing here. I do agree with Fluff and you others. We need players/testers to keep this game in business. To keep and attract more players, I guess that there needs to a bit more attention given to the things mentioned in the above posts.

 

I am waiting for RvR to get a bit more like POTBS was(when it was good). When RvR gets worth it I will start sailing on the PvP server. It will take incentive for me to have to put up with the player drama generated in a MMO.

 

This whole post is nothing more than how I feel. I wish to thank the devs for building this game. I think that they are doing a fine, fine job. When ever a patch is released I log in with anticipation of what new things I will notice. This alpha stage, to me, is like Christmas. Opening presents and playing with them. Sometimes we get socks. Oh well. 

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     .

Some players can't seem to grasp the ALPFA thing. I wish that they would take a minute to let that fact sink in. I posted that we're alpha in another thread and got quoted  and told that ALPFA is just an excuse. WTF, instant gratification should be a bag of potato chips which one opens and enjoys, not a game you know is still in development. If ye like something, stick with it. Great things take time and effort and experimentation. It took a long time to get from the first crappy light bulb to LED's.  

 

I love wooden war ships. I like the added feature of being able to sail in a realistic manner. I like that you need some skill to sail and shoot while in game. This is close the game I have always wanted. There is so so much that keeps me playing. There is also a lot that I still want to see. I ain't giving up and I wish that other players would take the same attitude. Take a break but don't quit. Stop crying doom and gloom when there is something you don't like. Open your presents when they come and ask nicely for batteries if it doesn't work for you.

 

I will suggest to the devs that with the addition of the OS spy glass, you put scantily clad people on the beaches that we can ogle. Oh, one of them birds shit on my deck. Unacceptable! I QUIT!!!!!!!!

Edited June 7, 2016 by Hyperion74

[Admiral_Of_The_Fleet]

 

 

Oh, one of them birds shit on my deck. Unacceptable! I QUIT!!!!!!!!

Yeah one shit on my ship the other day, I think it fell on the poop deck