Thoughts on Realistic changes and lack of communication from Coders on Big Changes

[Ed Venture]

Hey hey this item is really slow to pull! Fix it!
This thread should be seen as a side discussion to the thread linked above.

So I don't really know how to word or present this topic to you the Community and Administration. It may be a mess and I'm sorry in advance because of it. This is also going to be very opinionated but also concerns I have myself.

I want to hear thoughts on everyone's feelings regarding realism, it's place on our sever and how far it should be taken.

Let me just make my opinion clear as day. If we get more realism changes like the one we just got yesterday it will lead to the undoing of this server. I think we can all agree we all want changes that are fun. A Bad idea is a bad idea even if you try your hardest to make it playable it may not be enjoyable and that issue will never change when the base of the idea is centered around forcing us to use things we never needed or asked for.

I've said countless times that realism has it's place in this game if it's fun and not annoying or makes the game worse. A good example of a realistic addition to the game in my opinion is the blood system. That added in some realism without taking anything away. That's super important for changes with realism as a goal. They should take very little to nothing from the game while adding to it if not you risk bringing the game down because of it. Most importantly no change realistic in nature or not should not force every single player to use items they never needed before or force drastic change in their playstyle.

A example of a mixed bag realism change is the new lighting and darkness we have now. Granted I did not care for it at first and I still don't but all issues I have with it can be fixed if flashlights received a tiny buff to make them slightly brighter. Other then I see the pros over the cons with the change despite how I feel about it I see what it adds to the game and can enjoy it. The suspense of chasing a traitor though a dark tunnel not knowing how far he is ahead of you or if he is planning a ambush can't be matched.


Now for the next topic and harder one to convey properly currently.

I'm asking yet again that more effort goes into discussion over big gameplay changes with the community before they get added into the game. I am fine if the coder with the idea for a huge change will add it in regardless but having some people give them good feedback and foresight before they add it in can only be a good thing for players and coders. We get a heads up and Coders get tons of feedback good or bad and they can take the time to use that feedback to give a change a good start with good performance. You can't tell me that would be a bad thing. Having things added in with our limited feedback before hand would make performance better, tweaking easier and make some players less angry and annoyed over it. I see it as far better then having it added in broken and not having fun for a few days till it is made somewhat playable.

Now I have noticed that ZeWaka has done that recently where he discussed changes to Meson Goggles be it a little change for one item but he still deserves a thank you for discussing it with the players anyway as for such alittle change he could have said nothing. Little changes I have no issues if they give us a heads up but for big changes I think it should at least be attempted. EDIT: This goes for Nerfs as well that have huge implications for the game and it's players.
Meson Goggles: To change, or not to change?

Now I will repost in quotes points I made in the other thread for the hell of it.

I really, really wish coders would talk with us on big changes they have planned before throwing them in without much thought. They added this in after changing three lines of code. That right there shows how much they thought about it. We could give feedback and add our thoughts to the idea so their ideas and changes are better integrated into the game at the start instead of having it start off awful and slowly get better.

---

I mean the idea forums are there for that purpose. We throw out our ideas in there in hopes of getting a coder to work on it, but we would love to talk to coders who are going to try something out even if it's not a user idea. Please discuss your ideas with us even if you already know you will add it to the game just to see how it pans out. It could get a better start and perform much better at release.

I think there needs to be more discussion on how this benefits gameplay before moving towards accommodating its implementation.

I Agree with this statement.

To be honest, if there was some kind of place where coders were supposed to tell us what they're working on before they do anything, you'd probably end up with too many people trying to tell them how they should do it or that the idea was bad in general. It would be very disheartening

It's better this way, where they can work in peace, drop in their work, and then get the feedback based on actual game play

Those people would make little difference in the grand scheme of things as when a coder wants to do something they do it, and I'd think they'd get good feedback before and after they add it into the game. Hindsight is 20/20 after all. It would be great if hindsight could be avoided altogether.

[lambskin]

I do wish there was more discussion on how certain new mechanics would effect everything, at least with the community. I love goonstation but it can be frustrating to see how many changes seem to happen behind closed doors. Of course that's what happens with a closed codebase like goon but that in my opinion is a disadvantage of the code being private.

[Mageziya]

My only comment on the whole thing is that it seems to be vastly more difficult to remove a feature than it is to add a feature. This is probably a factor in why people get annoyed at some changes, because if they're bad enough for removal, it'll take anywhere from a week to 4+ months to remove.

[CameronWoof]

It was explained that, this change being a nerf, it would be fruitless to discuss it with the community. A balance change like this is going to be resisted, so putting it in the game just to test it out seems like the right thing to do imo.

I think the timing was poor, though; making a big change on Ass Day makes it awfully difficult to test it.

[Frank_Stein]

I agree that fun should always be a priority, but whether or not realism is or isn't fun is subjective.

I personally find the idea of moving objects and people around being more difficult fun, because it creates more problems to solve, and is more rewarding to work around successfully.

I'm also fine with things not being talked about ahead of time with players, for various reasons. One big one is that feedback can be a lot more valuable once a divisive change has been put into action, rather than beforehand.

I think as long as coders take into account the criticisms and the praise, a middle-ground can be found that satisfies everyone.

[poland spring]

Since there was a nice explanation posted after people grumbled a lot maybe next time a change like this is rolled out, also post a thread explaining the reasoning!

[Vitatroll]

They just need to be careful of loss aversion. The pain one gains from sticks tends to exceed the pleasure one gains from carrots. This is why a lot of community games wind up as all carrot-no stick bloat: they give people exactly what they want.

Basically, highly divisive changes need special attention to avoid poploss.

- Even context given after the fact can change how someone feels on something they experienced. Context is a big thing for humans. Just look at kids asking 'Why?' all the time. It's a silly magic pill that people need.

- We could use beta testers for major changes. Fire up a test server and invite the IRC people. People are used to getting finished products, so when a new feature is added they think it's finished. They whine. They ragequit. It's better to keep that localized and deemed 'unfinished'.

- Say you listened to the community and made changes, even if you planned those changes before the community suggested them. If you don't agree with anything the community offers, take the least invasive suggestions and roll them in. Sometimes people just want to know they matter, even if they don't.

- Try to sell sticks as carrots. Example: Always avoid realism as an explanation; even if it is the explanation. Context is a placebo either way. That is, you wouldn't be lying; carrots and sticks are subjective thing.

Now reading these, you might think I'm a horrible person. Well, I am - but I have very few people problems when I don't want them.

[Sundance]

I like your line of thinking Vitatroll.

I think on a personal level there's an element of hurt when drastic changes are implimented. A lot of people tend to point the finger, somewhat wrongly, of there being some form of admin echo chamber / comfirmation bias and with a community this long in the tooth with players dating back 6-7 even 8 years it can saddening when changes are rolled out without informing those aforementioned players, as they feel their experience have been essentially glossed over.

Except me. I'll constantly spitball until something sticks.

[babayetu83]

i think this would be a good idea

i think it would be a good idea to design features and new things to service not only us the community but to  also factor in pubbies who have either never played ss13 before or have never played on a different server before (imagine going from colonial marines to goon)

things should be simple and easy to pick up so that your average pubbie feels right at home and doesnt go "well this is difficult/annoying and i dont want to invest time into learning this" and stop playing here after being unable to figure out how to perform surgery or change out a cyborgs powercell/module

[atamusvaleo]

UNPOPULAR OPINION

Eh. Firstly, I don't see this as being that terrible of an implementation. Sure it's a change -- a drastic one at that -- but it's one meant to turn things on their heads. Eventually, this will be refined and tweeked until folks grow accustomed and it reaches a place where one can't remember what gameplay was like beforehand.

Secondly... *sigh. I'm going to say this as nicely as I can and please know that it's not my intention to offend anyone. It is not directed any any person in particular and I apologize in advance if someone is hurt by this.

People are stupid. Someone will always be offended or upset. Someone will always hate something while the person right next to them loves it.

Plain and simple. I've been working in design, marketing, and communications for about a decade now and that is one fact that doesn't change. That being said. While it's nice that people in this community are so connected and engaged, it can be a hindrance to change sometimes. I can vouch that any time a project I've been a part of has been opened to the public for opinions, things went south immediately. People have differences in opinions and views on what's good or bad. Just look through any of the threads on these forums and you'll see it right away.

Person A posts thread with single idea.
Person B maybe comments on that but more than likely adds their two cents about another cool feature that is loosely connected to Person A's idea.
Person C comes in thinking I'll do the same off of B's idea, getting even further from the original idea that started this thread.
Person D... hey folks! Cycle repeating

It's hard enough getting people to agree on one thing and stay on topic. I just think that opening every change for discussion is a big ol' can o' worms.

Thirdly, we can assume that these changes are discussed: amongst the coders and administrators. And they are people entrusted with maintaining and monitoring the game. They do a great job and don't often get the well deserved appreciation for doing this all on their spare time. If a change that is discussed amongst that team makes it to the implementation stages, we should explore it fully and work with the team to refine it instead of fighting every step of the way.

You'd think someone repealed Obamacare by reading the "slow to pull. fix me" thread.

[Ed Venture]

I just think that opening every change for discussion is a big ol' can o' worms.

Well it's like I said I would like to only see big and drastic changes to be discussed for feedback before they get implemented. The Coder can still ask for feedback even if they already know they are going to add it to the game. It's still their choice whether or not they talk about it. It's important to know that I don't want them to be forced to do anything they don't want to. It's simply a request to attempt it in the future, but the feedback they get could lead to better performance when it's added and make the overall progress of updating it faster. I mean it took about seven pages just to get a detailed reason to why the pull nerf happened and when it comes to huge drastic changes I do think regardless if we know it's coming or not we should be told why said drastic changes happened at the start of the thread rather then later. You got valid points though but I still feel like more communication should be attempted.

[atamusvaleo]

I just think that opening every change for discussion is a big ol' can o' worms.

Well it's like I said I would like to only see big and drastic changes to be discussed for feedback before they get implemented. The Coder can still ask for feedback even if they already know they are going to add it to the game. It's still their choice whether or not they talk about it. It's important to know that I don't want them to be forced to do anything they don't want to. It's simply a request to attempt it in the future, but the feedback they get could lead to better performance when it's added and make the overall progress of updating it faster. I mean it took about seven pages just to get a detailed reason to why the pull nerf happened and when it comes to huge drastic changes I do think regardless if we know it's coming or not we should be told why said drastic changes happened at the start of the thread rather then later. You got valid points though but I still feel like more communication should be attempted.

For my response, read the rest of my post. Namely, where I say how opening these things to discussion when in the development stages is a bad idea.

[Ed Venture]

I did and that post was a response to all of your post. What I quoted was what I wanted to open up on.

[ZeWaka]

I dunno. Working with the code to make crazy cool features is really a labor of love for all of us who code (atleast that's my opinion, I'm only speaking for myself!!!). We only really work on projects that are our babies, ones we really love, or maybe when we want to help another coder with their project. Or just stuff like fixing bugs and helping out in general.

Most ideas get filtered out right away because we don't even start them. After that, they might not ever get completed, or they might be stuck at 90% complete (but actually 10% of the work) forever. There are so many projects that players don't ever get to see.

Also to be perfectly honest, I only posted the thread about the mesons because someone else wanted to remove them because they didn't work rather than making them all different like I did, so I posted the thread to let the players decide on what should happen.