Lost Isle creature contest

[CaelumNL]

"The recent voting process for the Lost Island creature submission was not only fun and engaging for the community, we engaged and had fun with it internally as well. With that said, we'd love to do it again!"

This is copied out of the latest community crunch. For as much as I know, the first statement is very untrue. The voting process was not very fun for the community and far from engaging for the community. Youtubers and other influencers gave some submissions an unfair advantage while Wildcard did nothing for low vote submissions that got lost in the latter parts of the subforum, which is a natural process with so many submissions and only the first pagers getting views. 

I also participated, and while I am far from mad I didn't won, the Daspleto submission I did submit, along with lots more other submissions, I humbly dare to say were far more interesting and useful for the game than a few of the submissions that got boosted by either influencer votes or being first pagers. 

Now you can't get rid of influencer influences these days, but as a company organizing something important for the game, you might try a little bit harder to make the PROCESS a bit more fun an engaging for the whole community instead of just doing a "no effort event" like this and then like an oblivious dev announce the process was things it in reality wasn't

 

 P.S. Thanks for that one person that did dig through all the submissions and thought the Daspleto idea was well thought out  That already made my day.

 

[ph3var]

This is what I found very weird as well. Surely they are not that far detached from their community to know how toxic the whole process was.

[Joebl0w13]

1 hour ago, ph3var said:

This is what I found very weird as well. Surely they are not that far detached from their community to know how toxic the whole process was.

It's only "toxic" to the people whom are losing the vote.

[Kodking194]

3 hours ago, Joebl0w13 said:

It's only "toxic" to the people whom are losing the vote.

obviously you didn't see the full affects of this vote in the ark community. there were supporters of all the top ideas such as the dinopith and carchar who were attacking each other but also other ideas. smaller ones. not only that but they then took it further and attacked people on other platforms such as discord, twitter etc etc. this vote was toxic to everyone. it didn't matter whether they were supporting a winning submission or a loosing submission. just look at the nexus fans and their comments in that submission he went and promoted. same for LC when he done his videos on the acro. this vote was a poorly made, poorly moderated and poorly executed.  we're only lucky that in the end a creature ended up winning that won on fair terms.

[Ganelon]

2 hours ago, Kodking194 said:

obviously you didn't see the full affects of this vote in the ark Community. 

The all mighty mythical "community" has their panties in a bunch??? Dogs and cats... LIVING together!!!

Oh my stars and garters. Where IS my fainting couch?! Bring me my 'clutching pearls'. APARRENTLY, people are upset about a computer game monkey winning a vote over a computer game lizard!!!

It is so unfair!!!! It is un just!!! It was rigged against what people REALLY wanted!!! There must be a recount!!! The Shadow Community subverted the vote!!! Q was right!!!!

This is a SERIOUS issue!!!!! Something MUST be DONE. Validate! Validate!! VALIDATE!!!

The feelings matter!!!!

[Kodking194]

So with the latches community crunch WC have confirmed they will be holding another creature vote later this year. now WC is known for repeating the same mistakes over and over again. They are incompetent and seem to be ignorant to their own mistakes. but holding another creature vote. after all the stuff that went down with the first one. This is a new level of idiocy for WC. if you've been living under a rock. Or have been lucky enough to not know what happened during the vote then here is a recap. call it a highlights if you will.

The vote started off with a bang not long after beginning. the Ark youtuber Loaded Crysis made a video about the Acro submission. the issue with this was that he was advocating for the one from the ark additions mod to be added to ark. without the Developer Garuga's consent. that's the basics of it. shortly after this a Spanish youtuber by the name of Nexus decides to use his influence over his army of brain dead children viewers to increase the votes for some small small shoulder pet thing. there were a few issues with this. the uses he wanted for it were quite frankly pointless. reducing the weight of items. basically stuff a lot of creatures already do. what's more is that his oh so loyal followers then proceeded to attack other submissions along with anyone who didn't support Nexus's chosen candidate or even just not supporting the ideas he advocated for the creature.

to make matters worse. Nexus had practically taken over someone else's thread. resulting in a lot of the comments on it being a flood of his followers. many of which were not even related to the creature of ideas for it but rather them just posting there because nexus was. then there's the issue of conflicts between supporters of different ideas. this was quire noticeable in the final stretch of the vote when some supporters of the dinopith and carchar went and attacks those who didn't vote for their desired creature. now thankfully this was not everyone's reaction, nor did everyone do this. there were those out there who had the integrity to actually respect the other submissions and even support them. I was one of these people. while i had my own submission. i actively supported many other submissions. whether they were popular ones or lesser known ideas that got lost in the flood of submissions.

this brings me to another issue. the way the submissions were designed to operate meant that new submissions or ones with not as much support as the more popular ones were eventually lost and eventually forgotten. this meant that so many interesting and unique ideas were never even looked at by the ark community. though with this next issue it probably would not have mattered much. there were those who would attack, criticize and put down others submissions simply because they did not like them or did not agree with them. many of these issues could have been avoided or dealt with adequately had WC followed the right precautions. there were many actions they could have taken to make this vote run smoother. below is a small list of actions they could have done to make the vote operate more smoothly.

 

1. deal with negative influencers such as youtubers abusing their influence over others to increase votes for their own personal submission choice

2. remove or reset submissions that have gained popularity and votes by a content abusing their influence

3. advertise multiple submissions that are not in the top 1-2 pages of the votes. this can be done by doing streams where someone like Ced scrolls through the submissions and reads some out. further more doing small community posts every few days or even daily showcasing different submissions would also increase awareness of submissions other than the top 10. 

4. this is more aimed towards youtubers and other content creators. if your going to make videos focusing on the submissions during the voting. then show different submissions. ones that are not on the first few pages, take the time to look through and read the smaller threads. use your influence in a more positive way. if you use your influence on your viewers to help multiple lesser known submissions gain some support then your helping the ark community.

5. this is more based towards members of the community. dont be an ass. if you see a submission you dont like. then ignore it. you are not entitled to go around and attack other submissions that you don't like. not everyone has the same opinion when it comes to thinking what should be added to the game. that's ok. difference in opinion is what allows for diversity. what's not ok is when you then go and attack and try to force and oppress others simply because you don't like the submission they have made or support. i know this is hard some some of you people. but surely if you have the basic intelligence to be able to communicate then surely you can tell when not to be a douchbag.

 

For WC to see the final result of the vote and then decide its a good idea to hold a second one later on this year is absolutely absurd. Now if WC were to implement these changes then maybe just maybe. the vote won't be as big of a sh*t show as it was before. yet again this is WC and the Ark community we're talking about.

PS: a big thank you to all the ark youtubers out there who didn't abuse their power to rig the votes. your all true content creators. 👍

[maxplanck58]

I thought it was a great idea and good execution.  I am aware that some people found it toxic.  The only thing on this forum that is remotely related to something toxic are posts from people claiming that a difference in opinion is toxic.  Granted, I am not a twitter user, and I don't read every post on these forums.

Regardless, I would like to see another contest like this one.

[Martellus]

@Kodking194, I wish I could use a reaction like "read it" or "seen it".

I do like longer and more elaborate texts and I can see you gave it some thought regarding the issue presented, you went beyond the "upset" and actually proposed something, this is worthy of recognition. It is not enough to complain, people should bring in ideas and proposals more often I would say. Please note that I to could do with a bigger focus on this myself.

With that said, there are 2 things that I cannot fully onboard with your opinion, though I do align with what you are trying to accomplish. 

1.) I am not known to be a Wildcard advocate, but in general terms, ever since I switched to Private pve they have been nailing the tone for me and all content they released. They did make mistakes, releasing a DLC before the game left early access was strange and how the Ovis was introduced are 2 examples that could have been handled better I recon. I did enjoy both additions mind you. With that said, I disagree Wildcard is composed of "imcompetent and ignorant" people, and reading your own text it seems you are intelligent and you really don't believe that, you are upset with this event in your own way and in your right. That is all. I am thankful to the now "Wildcard generations" that delivered this awesome game to me and this community. Some devs have moved on, new have joined but they all drove this game to where it is today, I thank them for that and I am pretty sure you are onboarded here as well. 

2.) The proposed solutions, some are actually interesting and I can agree upon, others seem to over complicate things and make matters even more challenging to the moderators and community management. They did remove duplicate accounts from votes and other seemingly illegitimate votes, they did their part to the best of their ability. Credit were credit is do. The new submission is perhaps not the way I would have handled this matter, but it is another chance to add something cool, so why not, right?

Something I should have written a long time ago, Cedric is an incredibly positive addition to the team and being here for as long as I have, they have improved much since (no demerits to previous staff but Cedric did bring guidance to the table and it shows, its a team effort and I appreciate them trying to improve this community everyday. The internet provides many opportunities for disagreement, I would recommend focusing on things we can agree upon more often that the things we can not. Starting a conversation with disagreement is going to be more costly over the course of a dialog and waste more energy than needed. Start with things in common, then try to engage positively with the disagreements, obviously some cases are beyond us and should be ignored and moved on. 

Lastly, I made clear to all my fellow survivors here that the Dinopithecus was lackluster to me. Because I play on a private server, the community voted and I will be customizing the experience for myself based on that result, so for me that is ok, no worries. I just love dinosaurs and I recently went to the zoo and saw a smaller, more energy efficient version of Dinopithecus, still clearly a threat if it could reach me, make no mistake, lol. So, because this new addition feels too "modern" for me, it kinda defeats my escapism from reality. I am trying to perceive it in a similar way I did for the Equus, at first I was disappointed with the horse, over the months I did started liking it more however and I even have a few now.

As I said, I am appreciative of your contribution. Also I knew there was something about streamers and your text was the first more detailed context I read about this, so I feel a bit more informed than before. Thanks and take care!

[Kodking194]

5 hours ago, Martellus said:

@Kodking194, I wish I could use a reaction like "read it" or "seen it".

I do like longer and more elaborate texts and I can see you gave it some thought regarding the issue presented, you went beyond the "upset" and actually proposed something, this is worthy of recognition. It is not enough to complain, people should bring in ideas and proposals more often I would say. Please note that I to could do with a bigger focus on this myself.

With that said, there are 2 things that I cannot fully onboard with your opinion, though I do align with what you are trying to accomplish. 

1.) I am not known to be a Wildcard advocate, but in general terms, ever since I switched to Private pve they have been nailing the tone for me and all content they released. They did make mistakes, releasing a DLC before the game left early access was strange and how the Ovis was introduced are 2 examples that could have been handled better I recon. I did enjoy both additions mind you. With that said, I disagree Wildcard is composed of "imcompetent and ignorant" people, and reading your own text it seems you are intelligent and you really don't believe that, you are upset with this event in your own way and in your right. That is all. I am thankful to the now "Wildcard generations" that delivered this awesome game to me and this community. Some devs have moved on, new have joined but they all drove this game to where it is today, I thank them for that and I am pretty sure you are onboarded here as well. 

2.) The proposed solutions, some are actually interesting and I can agree upon, others seem to over complicate things and make matters even more challenging to the moderators and community management. They did remove duplicate accounts from votes and other seemingly illegitimate votes, they did their part to the best of their ability. Credit were credit is do. The new submission is perhaps not the way I would have handled this matter, but it is another chance to add something cool, so why not, right?

Something I should have written a long time ago, Cedric is an incredibly positive addition to the team and being here for as long as I have, they have improved much since (no demerits to previous staff but Cedric did bring guidance to the table and it shows, its a team effort and I appreciate them trying to improve this community everyday. The internet provides many opportunities for disagreement, I would recommend focusing on things we can agree upon more often that the things we can not. Starting a conversation with disagreement is going to be more costly over the course of a dialog and waste more energy than needed. Start with things in common, then try to engage positively with the disagreements, obviously some cases are beyond us and should be ignored and moved on. 

Lastly, I made clear to all my fellow survivors here that the Dinopithecus was lackluster to me. Because I play on a private server, the community voted and I will be customizing the experience for myself based on that result, so for me that is ok, no worries. I just love dinosaurs and I recently went to the zoo and saw a smaller, more energy efficient version of Dinopithecus, still clearly a threat if it could reach me, make no mistake, lol. So, because this new addition feels too "modern" for me, it kinda defeats my escapism from reality. I am trying to perceive it in a similar way I did for the Equus, at first I was disappointed with the horse, over the months I did started liking it more however and I even have a few now.

As I said, I am appreciative of your contribution. Also I knew there was something about streamers and your text was the first more detailed context I read about this, so I feel a bit more informed than before. Thanks and take care!

its nice to see fellow STA users who can actually communicate without being toxic. I understand your stance on WC. While i will admit that they are partially competent. they can't seem to take the most basic of actions to ensure the vote didn't spiral out of hand. it honestly seemed like they just went "here's a creature vote, send in your submissions and vote what you for what you want, we're off to sit back, relax and watch this whole thing burn while eating popcorn." they done very little to actually moderate or keep things fair. Its just this constant process of WC making screw ups that could have been avoided quite easily had they taken the time to put measures in place. I guess its not that they  aren't incompetent. but rather that they just dont have their priorities straight. Though you could say that not having priorities straight could be considered incompetence. point is WC done a very poor job on managing the creature vote.

I did hear about how they had removed the acro and simo threads. however they only done this after a lot of people including Garuga (the dev of the mod that people were wanting the acro to be taken from) himself tore into them about the BS they were allowing to happen. this showed they were either being lazy or ignorant to what was going on. either is not excusable. WC can be decent developers when they choose to be. they can actually do things really well when they put in the effort. Over all i really don't see WC holding another creature vote being a very smart idea. after the result of the last one. I will acknowledge that not everything that happened during the vote is WC's fault. content creators and normal community members also done their fair share. I think that in general having a community vote in a community like arks is a terrible idea. the majority of people that make up this games community are just incapable of allowing a vote to operate smoothly. 

I understand your point and i greatly appreciate having someone give a response that does not consist or narcistic, toxic, sarcastic or just down right negative content.   

[Kodking194]

19 hours ago, Ganelon said:

The all mighty mythical "community" has their panties in a bunch??? Dogs and cats... LIVING together!!!

Oh my stars and garters. Where IS my fainting couch?! Bring me my 'clutching pearls'. APARRENTLY, people are upset about a computer game monkey winning a vote over a computer game lizard!!!

It is so unfair!!!! It is un just!!! It was rigged against what people REALLY wanted!!! There must be a recount!!! The Shadow Community subverted the vote!!! Q was right!!!!

This is a SERIOUS issue!!!!! Something MUST be DONE. Validate! Validate!! VALIDATE!!!

The feelings matter!!!!

what was the actual point of this post of yours. Or did you simply post this so you can be toxic?

[Ganelon]

7 hours ago, Kodking194 said:

what was the actual point of this post of yours. Or did you simply post this so you can be toxic?

I am mocking the seriousness of your contention. I am mocking false entitlement. I am mocking the feelings behind them as they are the real toxic.

What I post is medicine. Chicken Noodle Soup for the Soul.