[Question] Suggestions for New Features

[Super Catanian]

Ever since the arrival of GBG (and this applies to many new features released in the past as well) new Forum members have come up with suggestions in the Proposals subforum. These ideas wouldn't necessarily get shot down, but they would be closed because, according to the moderators, suggestions for new features belong in the official feedback thread.
Of course, I am not questioning the actions of these awesome people who work hard to maintain the Forum an orderly place. However, the question arises: How much time passes until a feedback thread is no longer live? Does it depend on when the thread was created? Does it depend on the date of the last reply there? Several weeks? A month, or perhaps more? I hope that having this question answered can help both new Forum members as well as Forum veterans know when it is appropriate to start creating proposals in the Proposals subforum for a feature that has been around for some time. Thanks.

 

[DeletedUser]

To me the main thing is that if players want to have input on new features, they should join Beta. That's the whole point of Beta, to test a new feature and see if there are any bugs to fix or any improvements that players can see better than developers. Not that the developers are necessarily going to adopt all suggestions, but it would be easier for them to do it then than after the feature has been tested and released to the live servers.

That being said, in the real world players that don't want to go to the effort of participating in Beta will still want to have their say. And that is why there is a feedback thread on all new features, as well as Events and Changelogs. Properly utilized, they can provide valuable player input. Unfortunately, too often they get bogged down into side discussions of relative progress and tips on the new feature. Or players focus on one or two points and dominate a feedback thread to the virtual exclusion of any other feedback, as recently happened with the Guild Battlegrounds feedback thread.

So, finally, to your question. There is no set time limit on when suggestions should go into the feedback thread rather than stand alone as proposals. Personally, I would say that at least a month for most features. For some, like GBG, that have "rounds" to them maybe two or three rounds at least. Now that's just my opinion, there is no official policy that I'm aware of on the length of time before it is appropriate to start making proposals on new features. It is what they refer to as a "judgement call", I guess you would say. Which is why you need human moderators rather than algorithms.

I'm sorry if this doesn't satisfy your need to know, but it's the best answer I can give.

 

[Super Catanian]

So, finally, to your question. There is no set time limit on when suggestions should go into the feedback thread rather than stand alone as proposals. Personally, I would say that at least a month for most features. For some, like GBG, that have "rounds" to them maybe two or three rounds at least. Now that's just my opinion, there is no official policy that I'm aware of on the length of time before it is appropriate to start making proposals on new features. It is what they refer to as a "judgement call", I guess you would say. Which is why you need human moderators rather than algorithms.

I was expecting that kind of answer. The GBG Feedback Thread was chaos, that I couldn't even bring myself to read all of those pages of "discussion".

I'm sorry if this doesn't satisfy your need to know, but it's the best answer I can give.

It did a good job. Thanks for taking your time to answer it.

 

[DeletedUser37581]

To me the main thing is that if players want to have input on new features, they should join Beta. That's the whole point of Beta, to test a new feature and see if there are any bugs to fix or any improvements that players can see better than developers. Not that the developers are necessarily going to adopt all suggestions, but it would be easier for them to do it then than after the feature has been tested and released to the live servers.

That being said, in the real world players that don't want to go to the effort of participating in Beta will still want to have their say. And that is why there is a feedback thread on all new features, as well as Events and Changelogs. Properly utilized, they can provide valuable player input. Unfortunately, too often they get bogged down into side discussions of relative progress and tips on the new feature. Or players focus on one or two points and dominate a feedback thread to the virtual exclusion of any other feedback, as recently happened with the Guild Battlegrounds feedback thread.

So, finally, to your question. There is no set time limit on when suggestions should go into the feedback thread rather than stand alone as proposals. Personally, I would say that at least a month for most features. For some, like GBG, that have "rounds" to them maybe two or three rounds at least. Now that's just my opinion, there is no official policy that I'm aware of on the length of time before it is appropriate to start making proposals on new features. It is what they refer to as a "judgement call", I guess you would say. Which is why you need human moderators rather than algorithms.

I'm sorry if this doesn't satisfy your need to know, but it's the best answer I can give.

Yes, but there's always those wanna-be moderators who go around yelping that "this should be in the feedback thread". I would think that many times when someone has a suggestion that is somewhat controversial, it would be of more benefit overall to have that discourse in a separate thread rather than cluttering up the feedback thread.

 

[Super Catanian]

suggestion that is somewhat controversial

What do you mean by that?

 

[DeletedUser37581]

What do you mean by that?

For instance, add a guild right that allows someone to plant a flag in Battlegrounds.

 

[Super Catanian]

For instance, add a guild right that allows someone to plant a flag in Battlegrounds.

Ah yes, I remember seeing that one. That one sparked some interesting discussion that would definitely free up space in the Feedback Thread if moved to its own.

 

[DeletedUser]

I would think that many times when someone has a suggestion that is somewhat controversial, it would be of more benefit overall to have that discourse in a separate thread rather than cluttering up the feedback thread.

But again, this gets back to my point about participating in Beta. If someone is that invested in how new features work, they should be on the Beta server where it is the whole point to tweak new features to make them better.

 

[barra370804]

I would think that many times when someone has a suggestion that is somewhat controversial, it would be of more benefit overall to have that discourse in a separate thread rather than cluttering up the feedback thread.

I disagree, I think it is imperative that we give feedback to the people that are giving feedback. If no one says, "I don't like this idea" Inno will think we all agree.

 

[DeletedUser37581]

I disagree, I think it is imperative that we give feedback to the people that are giving feedback. If no one says, "I don't like this idea" Inno will think we all agree.

There are ways to disagree in a feedback thread without arguing the same points back and forth over and over. One way to disagree is to provide feedback that supports an opposing point of view.

Person A: "I think it would be better if only certain people could plant a flag."

Person B: (without quoting person A) "I like that everyone can get involved at any time without having to wait for someone else to initiate an attack on a province"

In such a way, feedback is presented that allows feedback to be given to the developers without 20 pages of unending argument that isn't going to be part of what makes it back to developers anyway.

 

[barra370804]

There are ways to disagree in a feedback thread without arguing the same points back and forth over and over. One way to disagree is to provide feedback that supports an opposing point of view.

Person A: "I think it would be better if only certain people could plant a flag."

Person B: (without quoting person A) "I like that everyone can get involved at any time without having to wait for someone else to initiate an attack on a province"

In such a way, feedback is presented that allows feedback to be given to the developers without 20 pages of unending argument that isn't going to be part of what makes it back to developers anyway.

I agree, but do you actually think that would happen? This is the internet after all, people are going to take shots at each other whether we like it or not.

 

[Graviton]

But again, this gets back to my point about participating in Beta. If someone is that invested in how new features work, they should be on the Beta server where it is the whole point to tweak new features to make them better.

"No game design survives contact with players." -- Sun Tzu.

You can hammer out mechanical bugs in beta but you aren't going to discover all the wonderful and terrifying things players can do, or can't do, with your shiny new feature until it's on live for awhile. Just because a feature graduates from beta doesn't mean it's been perfected.

There are ways to disagree in a feedback thread without arguing the same points back and forth over and over. One way to disagree is to provide feedback that supports an opposing point of view.

Person A: "I think it would be better if only certain people could plant a flag."

Person B: (without quoting person A) "I like that everyone can get involved at any time without having to wait for someone else to initiate an attack on a province"

I agree! My characterization of what you just said: there should be no arguing in a feedback thread. Leave your feedback and shut up. Read other people's feedback and shut up. If you want to argue about it, start a Forge Hall thread.

 

[DeletedUser]

If you want to argue about it, start a Forge Hall thread.

Oh, great! Now we'll have one feedback thread and 47 arguments going on in Forge Hall for us to referee.

 

[Algona]

there should be no arguing in a feedback thread.

Completely disagree.

Multiple reasons, some stupid, some not so stupid.

On the not so stupid side, while I never expect to change anybody's mind once they've posted their opinion, I'm not trying to. I'm writing to players who either haven't made up their mind or haven't really thought through what is being argued about and to bring up opinions, viewpoints and facts that were omitted from whatever I'm arguing about. If there's no argument critical facts can be omitted unconsidered, overlooked.

No matter how passive you are about presenting differing opinions and contradicting facts it's gonna escalate to argument sooner or later.

There's more reasons but since they get increasingly stupid such as I like arguing and telling people they are idiots, I'll leave those out.

NOTE WELL, In no way shape or form do I consider Graviton an idiot. If I think you're an idiot I'll tell you to your face, not through implication.

 

[Graviton]

On the not so stupid side, while I never expect to change anybody's mind once they've posted their opinion, I'm not trying to. I'm writing to players who either haven't made up their mind or haven't really thought through what is being argued about and to bring up opinions, viewpoints and facts that were omitted from whatever I'm arguing about. If there's no argument critical facts can be omitted unconsidered, overlooked.

I don't necessarily disagree, but is a feedback thread the right place for that? One of the things that generates endless back-and-forths is when someone posts an opinion only to have somebody else tell them that their opinion is wrong. I think in a thread devoted to feedback that all opinions should be solicited, whether they be "right" or "wrong" or stupid or genius; and the best way to do that, I believe, is to ban all argument. Your opinion as presented is just as valid as mine, in terms of what Inno wants and needs to know. They don't care if another player thinks I'm wrong. They'll figure out whether my feedback is valid or not, that's not our job as forum members.

I'll reiterate: this applies specifically to an official feedback thread. I agree with you that argument (true argument and not vitriol) is essential. I just don't think an official feedback thread is the place for it.

There's more reasons but since they get increasingly stupid such as I like arguing and telling people they are idiots, I'll leave those out.

Man, I used to have such fun doing that on FB! Then I got tired of everybody else being wrong, and proud of it, all the time.

NOTE WELL, In no way shape or form do I consider Graviton an idiot.

The sentiment is reciprocated.

 

[DeletedUser]

I don't necessarily disagree, but is a feedback thread the right place for that? One of the things that generates endless back-and-forths is when someone posts an opinion only to have somebody else tell them that their opinion is wrong. I think in a thread devoted to feedback that all opinions should be solicited, whether they be "right" or "wrong" or stupid or genius; and the best way to do that, I believe, is to ban all argument. Your opinion as presented is just as valid as mine, in terms of what Inno wants and needs to know. They don't care if another player thinks I'm wrong. They'll figure out whether my feedback is valid or not, that's not our job as forum members.

My view is that it is essential to provide a rebuttal post if you think someone's suggestion is wrong, especially (but not only) if they are factually wrong about some aspect. Where it goes off the rails is when the first poster then takes umbrage (look it up) and the back and forth starts. It is not essential to have the last word in a feedback thread (and I hate that, I have a natural tendency to want the last word, as most humans do). However, it is essential to have all views represented whenever possible. (And I don't think you or @Algona are idiots all the time. I think we all have our moments. Me included. )

 

[Super Catanian]

Most definitely, Steph. Most definitely.

 

[Graviton]

Where it goes off the rails is when the first poster then takes umbrage (look it up) ...

I take umbrage with the fact that you assumed I'd have to look up the word "umbrage".

(And I don't think you or @Algona are idiots all the time. I think we all have our moments. Me included. )

I will say that several posts in some of the feedback threads just today have me wanting to fire back but I'm trying not to compromise my own position. Consistency can be a real PITA.