advice for a wildcard

[OttoGrunf]

i would suggest that you post topic about planed changes and what they will bring in advance. than have people comment and post ideas about it but in the end you are the one that will read all those ideas and opt to implement some of them or go with your originally planned changes.

lest be hones, players are the ones with better knowledge of state of your official servers and community on them and im pretty sure you would love some of ideas that people will post. that way you would have much better relationship to your player base.

i mean, you dont need to listen to me, but im sure there is not a single ark player that will not agree with what i just wrote.

[Paroxyde]

Sounds good, doesn't work. 

Players have a very different mindset than developers as you pointed out. They have a vision for their game and if they were to propose them to the player base, then apply it, they would be second guessing themselves due to the reaction. Unpopular decision can lead to great changes (flyer nerf, even though it's a pain, it's overall a good change) while popular ones might lead to disaster (Remove tame cap on PvE).

They do their changes, you react, they adapt or not depending on if the results they were expecting are met. 

Only very important changes that heavily impact players should be announced for the players to be ready, not to check their reaction. This should come after the player experienced it. 

[WampoSchampoo]

Something I think would benefit the company and what I think the player base would be really excited for is if they would start updating Ark: Survival Of The Fittest again.

I think it would give the franchise a lot of positive publicity. I would probably play Survival Of The Fittest even more than I play regular Ark.

[ishootpaint]

 They did ask for feed back before they were going to change structure decay again thank god. That would have been a messy rollout.

[ToXiN]

Most of the time they don't even share the patch notes so that won't happen for sure!

[TheDonn]

On 7/4/2018 at 6:31 PM, Paroxyde said:

Players have a very different mindset than developers as you pointed out. They have a vision for their game and if they were to propose them to the player base, then apply it, they would be second guessing themselves due to the reaction. Unpopular decision can lead to great changes (flyer nerf, even though it's a pain, it's overall a good change) while popular ones might lead to disaster (Remove tame cap on PvE).

Definitely disagree.  Maybe for PvP it is a good change, but I personally disagree with you, with regard to PvE ark.  It is definitely simpler nowadays, after it has been here for so long, to just find a reason or way to justify/accept it.  I'm not there yet, and might not ever get there hahaha!

 

That being said, It isn't as if the devs are never reading ideas from the forums, or at the very least getting ideas reported to them from the forums.  It's just that they either have a very specific way they want to shape the game, or they don't really give much thought to the ideas on the forums.  Maybe both.  

[OttoGrunf]

On 7/5/2018 at 2:31 AM, Paroxyde said:

Sounds good, doesn't work. 

Players have a very different mindset than developers as you pointed out. They have a vision for their game and if they were to propose them to the player base, then apply it, they would be second guessing themselves due to the reaction. Unpopular decision can lead to great changes (flyer nerf, even though it's a pain, it's overall a good change) while popular ones might lead to disaster (Remove tame cap on PvE).

They do their changes, you react, they adapt or not depending on if the results they were expecting are met. 

Only very important changes that heavily impact players should be announced for the players to be ready, not to check their reaction. This should come after the player experienced it. 

well you missed the point. i never said that they should put changes to vote, i will simplify it for you. i stated that they should ask for player input regarding changes, as players are wasting a lot of time in game, so they could and im sure they have different and sometimes better ideas how to implement changes

[Paroxyde]

Just now, OttoGrunf said:

well you missed the point. i never said that they should put changes to vote, i will simplify it for you. i stated that they should ask for player input regarding changes, as players are wasting a lot of time in game, so they could and im sure they have different and sometimes better ideas how to implement changes

Asking input IS the problem. While we certainly can have great ideas. This can make the devs waiver on good decisions that has bad side effect at face value for the player. (Turret change for example) 

Which leaves us with two outcome :

-A lot of needed changes are delayed or canceled. PvE could really use a lowering of tribe tame cap to 250.

-Or they ignore us and we feel that it was purely a marketing move. 

Either outcome is not what you wanted, right? 

You want devs to use great ideas along with theirs to make it better for everyone, right? Not gonna happen as long as most players are self-centered. 

[OttoGrunf]

2 minutes ago, Paroxyde said:

Asking input IS the problem. While we certainly can have great ideas. This can make the devs waiver on good decisions that has bad side effect at face value for the player. (Turret change for example) 

Which leaves us with two outcome :

-A lot of needed changes are delayed or canceled. PvE could really use a lowering of tribe tame cap to 250.

-Or they ignore us and we feel that it was purely a marketing move. 

Either outcome is not what you wanted, right? 

You want devs to use great ideas along with theirs to make it better for everyone, right? Not gonna happen as long as most players are self-centered. 

from your example, you never had a good leader that listen to other people ideas but do that he think its right but you are right regarding that most players are self-centered

[velocidad]

You just need to see what they did with the PC bug/support forum to understand that what you ask it's not going to happen.

[Gunner120mm]

4 hours ago, Paroxyde said:

Asking input IS the problem. While we certainly can have great ideas. This can make the devs waiver on good decisions that has bad side effect at face value for the player. (Turret change for example) 

Which leaves us with two outcome :

-A lot of needed changes are delayed or canceled. PvE could really use a lowering of tribe tame cap to 250.

-Or they ignore us and we feel that it was purely a marketing move. 

Either outcome is not what you wanted, right? 

You want devs to use great ideas along with theirs to make it better for everyone, right? Not gonna happen as long as most players are self-centered. 

The problem with a tribe cap is kibble farms. That needs to be changed. But a tribe cap of 250 is unrealistic. I'm irl friends with most of my 12 person tribe. You saying we have to share every single Dino? When we all like to farm and expand our bases? Just because you aren't playing with 10-15 people doesn't mean other people aren't.

[Paroxyde]

2 hours ago, Gunner120mm said:

The problem with a tribe cap is kibble farms. That needs to be changed. But a tribe cap of 250 is unrealistic. I'm irl friends with most of my 12 person tribe. You saying we have to share every single Dino? When we all like to farm and expand our bases? Just because you aren't playing with 10-15 people doesn't mean other people aren't.

My tribe at one point reached over 120 members across 5 servers on Official PvE EU. I don't see your point. 

Never at any point, any child tribe reached 250. Parent tribe went over 500 once due to a merger (All dino above 500 went red and we had to sort them out before they got stolen) but right now, all tribes are below 250 (224 being the highest) 

Then again, most of them were ark bobs that were learning the game. We were like the tutorial tribe. 

[Lucian]

On 7/4/2018 at 8:23 AM, OttoGrunf said:

i would suggest that you post topic about planed changes and what they will bring in advance. than have people comment and post ideas about it but in the end you are the one that will read all those ideas and opt to implement some of them or go with your originally planned changes.

lest be hones, players are the ones with better knowledge of state of your official servers and community on them and im pretty sure you would love some of ideas that people will post. that way you would have much better relationship to your player base.

i mean, you dont need to listen to me, but im sure there is not a single ark player that will not agree with what i just wrote.

From your post it sounds like you haven't been playing all that long. They use to do that, guess what happened? The PLAYERS were the ones that told WC to not publish a roadmap. Players got so wound up about things on the roadmap that had not been implemented in what they considered a timely fashion that they were openly hostile. Never mind the fact that they implemented player suggestions, content changes and fixes. A loud section of the community told them that they didn't want that information. 

Also, WC has implemented a TON of ideas from the community, and consistently asked for feedback for major changes. Not sure if you haven't been around long enough to see, or just one of the players that thinks that because their pet suggestion didn't get implemented think that they don't listen. Just because you suggest something doesn't make it a good idea for the game. Listening doesn't mean that they will implement any particular suggestion, and in some cases implementing player suggestions would actually be the wrong choice.

Take the turret changes for example. There were a substantial number of players who were openly hostile to any changes. It didn't matter to those players that there were technical considerations that made it a necessity to change. They whined and complained on the forums for weeks about the changes, instead of trying to understand why. WC was completely transparent about the technical details and gave us exact numbers. If they had listened to the players who were complaining the server performance would be severely degraded. In fact, WC did listen to the players and implemented a community suggestion in the form of heavy turrets.

So that leaves me wondering. Why you think they need to do something that they have already been doing? 

[OttoGrunf]

On 7/7/2018 at 7:09 PM, Lucian said:

From your post it sounds like you haven't been playing all that long. They use to do that, guess what happened? The PLAYERS were the ones that told WC to not publish a roadmap. Players got so wound up about things on the roadmap that had not been implemented in what they considered a timely fashion that they were openly hostile. Never mind the fact that they implemented player suggestions, content changes and fixes. A loud section of the community told them that they didn't want that information. 

Also, WC has implemented a TON of ideas from the community, and consistently asked for feedback for major changes. Not sure if you haven't been around long enough to see, or just one of the players that thinks that because their pet suggestion didn't get implemented think that they don't listen. Just because you suggest something doesn't make it a good idea for the game. Listening doesn't mean that they will implement any particular suggestion, and in some cases implementing player suggestions would actually be the wrong choice.

Take the turret changes for example. There were a substantial number of players who were openly hostile to any changes. It didn't matter to those players that there were technical considerations that made it a necessity to change. They whined and complained on the forums for weeks about the changes, instead of trying to understand why. WC was completely transparent about the technical details and gave us exact numbers. If they had listened to the players who were complaining the server performance would be severely degraded. In fact, WC did listen to the players and implemented a community suggestion in the form of heavy turrets.

So that leaves me wondering. Why you think they need to do something that they have already been doing? 

im in ark since day 20 of early access and if you read what i wrote, you will see that i stated that wildcard is the one that chose what of those ideas about changes should implement. and yes i know people will complain about changes, but they will complain even if wc dont ask for players ideas, so why not at least get those ideas before implementing changes?

[Brutal69]

Yes i completley agree, in my oppinnion this is a neccessity and will help the ark community now ad in the long run as it contiously grows!