Goonhub
05-08-2021, 09:50 AM
(This post was last modified: 05-08-2021, 09:52 AM by Mordent. Edited 1 time in total.
Edit Reason: Typos
)
To bring the tone back a bit: devs don't have to ask for, take into account, or listen to player feedback. That doesn't mean they never do, it just means they don't have to.
For every change there will be some percentage of people who do not like it, some percentage who like it, some percentage who don't have a strong opinion, and some percentage unaware that the change ever happened.
The changelog is good and is meant to communicate changes to the players. It doesn't always get used. I think wanting it to be used more is a reasonable desire, and one that could viably be acted upon if we think it's worth the extra effort.
To loop back on my earlier post with more substance rather than an off hand comment: before open source even less changes were announced in the changelog, and there was significantly less grumping about "significant" changes being made. You now have a window into the game to see the changes via looking at the public repo.
We've (okay, ZeWaka and I think it was Pali?) put a lot of time into making the changelog automation better as part of open sourcing, reducing the effort required to add changelog entries as part of the PR process and to give the changelogs more detail via icons and whatnot.
Essentially: we are at probably the most transparent we've been with regards to changes developers make to the game. I am personally of the opinion that not every change needs a changelog entry - it would just drown out the more important ones with noise - but I could see people wanting every change added to the minor changes panels.
Realistically, it's unlikely to happen. The more you're a slave to the process the more this becomes a job rather than a hobby, and my tax returns don't show anything about SS13 on them. Developers are selected based on a nebulous set of criteria, but "make game better" is probably pretty universally one of them.
The staff trust devs to make good changes and that is why they are able to make changes directly, without even internal oversight for the most part. Sometimes a change is contentious and we try to resolve that internally. Sometimes a change isn't well received by the players at large (there's always a couple people who don't like basically every change), and follow-up changes can and do take that into account.
You are welcome (and encouraged) to give feedback on changes. In order for many of us to enjoy doing what we do we're not going to broadcast every little change to be scrutinized and yelled about. It isn't worth it for us, and while listening to player feedback is healthy, so is having devs able to make small tweaks to make the game better (in their opinion) without being subject to an inquisition.
For every change there will be some percentage of people who do not like it, some percentage who like it, some percentage who don't have a strong opinion, and some percentage unaware that the change ever happened.
The changelog is good and is meant to communicate changes to the players. It doesn't always get used. I think wanting it to be used more is a reasonable desire, and one that could viably be acted upon if we think it's worth the extra effort.
To loop back on my earlier post with more substance rather than an off hand comment: before open source even less changes were announced in the changelog, and there was significantly less grumping about "significant" changes being made. You now have a window into the game to see the changes via looking at the public repo.
We've (okay, ZeWaka and I think it was Pali?) put a lot of time into making the changelog automation better as part of open sourcing, reducing the effort required to add changelog entries as part of the PR process and to give the changelogs more detail via icons and whatnot.
Essentially: we are at probably the most transparent we've been with regards to changes developers make to the game. I am personally of the opinion that not every change needs a changelog entry - it would just drown out the more important ones with noise - but I could see people wanting every change added to the minor changes panels.
Realistically, it's unlikely to happen. The more you're a slave to the process the more this becomes a job rather than a hobby, and my tax returns don't show anything about SS13 on them. Developers are selected based on a nebulous set of criteria, but "make game better" is probably pretty universally one of them.
The staff trust devs to make good changes and that is why they are able to make changes directly, without even internal oversight for the most part. Sometimes a change is contentious and we try to resolve that internally. Sometimes a change isn't well received by the players at large (there's always a couple people who don't like basically every change), and follow-up changes can and do take that into account.
You are welcome (and encouraged) to give feedback on changes. In order for many of us to enjoy doing what we do we're not going to broadcast every little change to be scrutinized and yelled about. It isn't worth it for us, and while listening to player feedback is healthy, so is having devs able to make small tweaks to make the game better (in their opinion) without being subject to an inquisition.