Historical Question

Beelzebud (Satanas) said:

You just can't help yourself can you? You read a whole lot into what I wrote that wasn't there. You are the textbook definition of fanboy. So according to you, even talking about how Epic was 10 years ago is "subbing" them?

Click to expand...

No, it's not, but let's be honest... you're not repeating that memory for only memory's sake. And even if you are, you're saying it in a way that makes your displeasure with how Epic currently is clear: You think they're terrible because they're not like other companies. Guess what? They don't have to be. That's their choice and their policy.

Also, with so many of your posts otherwise overwhelmingly antagonistic towards either them or the game, you got a reputation as a Epic basher. With that, something so simple can easily be taken in a whole different direction. If you genuinely meant it as a simple memory, fine, but I'm pretty sure the subtext is how Epic isn't "as good" because they, in your opinion, no longer care about the feedback.

Also, comparing a company to how it was 10 years ago is silly. If that were the case, we should worship Microsoft because they had an even more dominant market share 10 years ago. That was then, this is now. 10 years ago id was undoubtedly the FPS king. Does that mean they have to be that now? 10 years ago Valve had just put Half-Life out. 10 years ago Epic was a small company. Should they act now like they did then? No.

Don't get me wrong, I would love to play a game I helped create and see people's feedback on it. But policy is policy... you can't begrudge them now because it changed. And besides, any hope of UT3 being "fixed" (I use "fixed" because the game is still very playable to me - there's issues, yes, but none that make the game completely broken for me) went out the door the second the expansion was announced. If there's going to be fixes, it'll be in that, and I have confidence that it will contain what people want. I'm quite sure they've heard and seen enough to know what people want out of it, and the fact that they said the UI was "****ed" is a pretty good sign that that'll be overhauled. Though, then again, I think people not playing the game for having a bad UI is utterly ****ing stupid.

GreatEmerald said:

Strange that Epic doesn't do that as often - even WarTourist is rare...

Click to expand...

WarTourist left Epic months ago. He's no longer affiliated with them.

Dark Pulse said:

What that was was the exception, not the rule. Not even Blizzard asks how people like the new WoW expansion, or Valve asks people how they liked Left 4 Dead.

Quit using what was done as a way to snub Epic. They were a smallish company then; they are a big-name player now. Corporate policy changed. Just because you don't see them in servers asking "how's our game?" doesn't mean they're an inferior company.

Frankly, if they did that now, I'd think it was actually kind of childish.

Click to expand...

I am kind of new here but even i can tell that you are wrong.

oakz said:

I am kind of new here but even i can tell that you are wrong.

Click to expand...

Not ingame. Which was my point, even though it wasn't written as such, because he made a point of mentioning how they went into public servers at that time.

Of course Valve, Blizzard, Epic, etc. have forums for their new products when they come out - nearly every company does that.

Companies should always consider their customer's thoughts while creating something imo. Of course they are now a big company but think about Google, Fiat. Why does Google make contests about logos, or why does Fiat want to use their customer's design?

http://thenextweb.com/2008/03/06/utilizing-the-wisdom-of-the-crowd/

Because creating something good doesn't enough to sell. I know i am talking about innovation. But imo feedbacks are almost same priority like innovation. Especially in this situtation.

In Epic's case they have great advantage. They should have great knowledge and experience about this when considering "Make Something Unreal" contests. But this is good for marketing the engine, not the game. What they can do now is collecting feedbacks from forums and in-game, and more importantly they need to show people who bought their game that they really care about their opinions.

For example, whenever i go Epic Forums i was looking WarTourist's posts. Because he was the only way to learn latest news about Ut3. When he quote someone and say something about game it makes me think that Epic really cares about us. Now he left Epic there is no one.

So long story short, Epic's coming in-game and asking about lag or something else wont be childish after all. It will be a mature reaction and they must do imo.

Ps: Sorry for my language i am always bad at English, thats why i dont write here much. I hope somebody can understand a sentence what did i say, writing this took 5 years from me

Even when Jeff posts here now, after he has left Epic, it still starts a massive trolling/flaming spree.

Click to expand...

Is that really surprising considering the forum policies over at the Epic forums as soon as people twigged that UT3 wasn't what had been promised ?

[edit]

On topic : I can only speak about 2k3->2k4 but my impression was that 2k3 was not healthy but it was very much more so when 2k4 came out than Ut3 is now.

Tho to be fair. As Sir_Brizz mentioned, that could have been because of demo servers.

Since there are many players there will always be trollers/flamers. So (general) forum discussion is a bad idea, i agree with that. But UT has many skilled, experienced players. People play Ut since 99, therefore Epic is able to find some of these guys for gameplay tests etc easily. I remember well, one pro guy said that bio was so overpowered while its in beta. Doesnt Epic had a chance to balance Bio in final state? I'm not saying that Bio must be balanced. I just wanted to say experienced players can see game's flaws better than casual gamers, Epic should give an ear to those voices sometimes.

Another thing, think about ID. I dont know if you've signed up Quake Live Beta, i did almost a year ago i guess. I never liked Quake's gameplay before and i still dont like it, but i really respect ID on this subject. Let me quote some messages from my mailbox.

Quake Live said:

Dear QUAKE LIVE tester,

Thank you to everyone who continues to help us test QUAKE LIVE. Once again, we've made a number of very large changes to the QUAKE LIVE infrastructure, and would appreciate your continued help testing. This new site still does not represent the final graphic design for QUAKE LIVE, but it is the framework that the final site will be built upon. Providing this to you now allows us to begin adding and testing intended functionality and features (like the friends list, automated events, matchmaking, and streamlined game selection) at the same time we move over to the final graphic design. Over the next few weeks, not only will we be adding many new features to the site, we'll also be dramatically increasing the beta player pool. We've made a link available on the site where you can invite trusted friends and fellow players to participate with you in the QUAKE LIVE beta. Please continue to join our arena test events every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday at 4pm central, and provide feedback in the forums or through our IRC channel. Much of the work we're doing on the arenas is a direct result of your comments and we'll need your continuing feedback on other arenas, site features, interface functionality and many other elements over the coming weeks.

Click to expand...

Quake Live said:

Dear QUAKE LIVE tester,

Thank you for your continued participation in the testing of QUAKE LIVE. Wednesday's prior update included three significant changes that we want to make you aware of:

1. Revised Movement/Physics System - The changes to the movement and physics system may feel subtle, and even unnoticeable to some, but to those familiar with Quake 3 movement, you will find that you can now jump slightly higher and farther than before, allowing for greater freedom of movement.

2. A New "Gib" Effect - This work is still underway; however, the effects/sounds included in today's update demonstrate our new direction.

3. Improved Mouse Input Code - This change allows for higher polling rates, common in gaming mice, and should provide improved performance when these mice are used. Our Focus Tests continue every day at 1pm, 4pm and 8pm CDT. We would like to encourage everyone to attend the tests today and this weekend to further test this weeks changes. Today beginning with the 4pm test, we will be testing QZDM6 - The Campgrounds, QZDM19 - Terminal Heights and QZDM10 - The Nameless Place. When the Focus Test begins, our servers will launch with specific maps and gametypes that we would like more feedback on. Your job is to play and have a good time for the duration of the event (probably an hour or so). Please report back to the forums with any impressions you have of the map in the Map Feedback Forum [3], including positive and negative gameplay experiences.

Click to expand...

I have many mails like these. I just wanted Epic to do the same thing.

Sir_Brizz said:

I agree with WarTourist gone the situation seems abysmal. However, there are a number of Epic employees that read BuF and the official forums, they just don't get involved much for a simple reason: flame wars.

Click to expand...

Oh right, there's still Flak. But she rarely comes here, to BUF.

It'd be great if they made a developer's blog while they are working on the UT3 expansion. I believe Valve has a had a good amount of success with the ones they've done for TF2 and L4D, plus it seems to be a growing trend with smaller developers as well.

Sir_Brizz said:

I agree with WarTourist gone the situation seems abysmal. However, there are a number of Epic employees that read BuF and the official forums, they just don't get involved much for a simple reason: flame wars.

Even when Jeff posts here now, after he has left Epic, it still starts a massive trolling/flaming spree. This kind of treatment of Epic employees (or ex Epic employees) certainly just reinforces to them that getting involved in forum discussion is, in general, a bad idea.

Click to expand...

If that's true, then that's their problem. More than anything it's WarTourist's general smugness and arrogant tone when he does visit here (at least recently) that drives threads into embarrassing flaming spree status. You'd think him to be the responsible one in the room, and be able to interact while still remaining above the fray. But sadly, not so much anymore, apparently.

To the issue of Epic's overall involvement: in their place, I don't see why they can't go back to feeling free to directly participate in forums, etc., just while continuously adhering to a policy of rewarding the insightful posts with responses and simply ignoring those that are thoughtless or poorly considered. Then you foster an environment in which the public folks compete with each other to be most constructive in order to draw out a dialog with the devs. As an ancillary benefit, too, you get to leave the admin hammer sheathed more often, saving yourself the damage to your time and image. Win-win-win.

(And if you really want to get down to business, formalize the interaction with a reputation point system, have Epic employees quantifiably reward those who contribute insightful posts, and invite those who've amassed a certain threshold of rep points into an "inner circle" of community members who get slightly increased access to some of the internal discussions and goings-on. Having a controlled but permeable environment like that is a huge asset to a company if leveraged correctly.)

However, when a developer doesn't make community dialog a priority, eventually people start getting the sense that, no matter how well formed their ideas and concerns are, they have essentially zero chance of ever interfacing with them about anything. IMO this has been precisely the tack Epic has been taking for quite some time now, and WT's "your opinions don't matter" comments in the last few weeks very much bear that out.


The "Epic are the victims" argument is a bunch of tripe. Epic has total control of how their community interacts with them; they just have to be smart, assertive, and forward thinking enough to know how to use that control and leverage it to their (and everyone's) advantage.

Sir_Brizz said:

It's easy to say this is all Epic's problem and they can combat it easily, but, frankly, the people with well thought out criticism and ideas DO GET listened to.

Click to expand...

We have their word for that, as opposed to any appreciable amount of feedback to actually prove it, other than the token "yes we listen" line repeated every few months.

No one's expecting constant attention from them. But it should be some manner of dialog, and that can't happen when only one side's really doing any direct talking.

Sir_Brizz said:

It's the other groups of people who don't do that who are complaining about their posts being deleted or their concerns ignored, and rightly so.

Click to expand...

In countless cases this is absolutely true. But there have been dozens of threads deleted or otherwise squelched at EF over the past year+ that were most certainly well thought out and constructive, but also critical, and thusly fated just for bearing the mere potential to develop into a so-called flame fest—completely irrespective of how reasonable the content itself and its author were.

Sir_Brizz said:

Epic being more than scarcely involved in the community is just not a realistic expectation. I think they dip their hands in enough to see that they can't dip their hands in much more. It's OUR responsibility to treat them with respect, regardless of how this game or that game turned out. Until that happens, Epic won't see any reason to be more directly involved....

This is what Epic's forums and even here largely have turned into, giant cesspools of "Epic Sucks a Big One" and we are being treated just like anyone ought to expect to be.

Click to expand...

Pardon the repeat, but, seriously, Epic ... reputation points.

First make it clear what qualities garner the recognition (construction, originality, etiquette, general lack of ritardudnis, etc.) ... then give silent proof that people at Epic really are listening, as evidenced by the points awarded ... let bake for 2-3 months, and watch the overall tenor of the forums change for the better.

Will there still be problem people? Of course. But let the cesspool dwellers roil in their own juices and be ignored all they want ... and allow the more evolved set an avenue by which to freely rise up from there and gain Epic's trust and respect. People do want that, and will respond favorably if given the chance.

Raging volcano of win.

Poker said:

To the issue of Epic's overall involvement: in their place, I don't see why they can't go back to feeling free to directly participate in forums, etc., just while continuously adhering to a policy of rewarding the insightful posts with responses and simply ignoring those that are thoughtless or poorly considered. Then you foster an environment in which the public folks compete with each other to be most constructive in order to draw out a dialog with the devs. As an ancillary benefit, too, you get to leave the admin hammer sheathed more often, saving yourself the damage to your time and image. Win-win-win.

Click to expand...

Agreed. I think at one point I had two front and back handwritten pages of a list full of bugs and other things I wanted to bring to Epic's attention, or offer suggestions on. (As an outline, by the way, fully written out would have been substantially longer.) But why bother spend my time testing, thinking of solutions (or implementing solutions via custom script), and writing out analyses when it's just going to drop down the memory hole in the flood of "how do u become manta" posts and requests for GamerTags or clan recruits?

Penalizing the unhelpful posts is something that I encourage, but there does need to be another side of that coin to achieve anything worthwhile.

Sir_Brizz said:

Reputation points would be nice, but they would be difficult to manage.

Click to expand...

You think? I don't know, the only "difficulty"—a mere hurdle, really—that I can imagine would be the possible desire to separate reputation points by major forum grouping, i.e. GoW/UT3/UT2/etc., and then only if deemed necessary (a decent argument could be made that it wouldn't be).

I fail to see any obstacle beyond that. The system's already built into vBulletin of course. As far as administration just limit rights to disburse rep points to whomever they already have as supermods (all Epic employees iirc), and they can establish whatever usage guidelines they want internally—my suggestion would be to keep rep points relevant by dealing them deliberately and relatively infrequently; it should take months not days for anyone to build them up to any significant degree.

And bing bang boom. It's dead simple and a sure success IMHO. Only boils down to whether Epic (a) really does listen to good ideas, *ahem* , and (b) really does want to reestablish the relationship it once had with its community.

Well, respectfully, maybe a shift in perspective is in order—it's an "annoyance" only if one fails to recognize the payoff out the other end. If approached positively, I would imagine the overall experience to be interactive, social and enlightening, for both the responsible public and the Epic folks.

I'd certainly hope that despite the flack they've had to absorb over the last year, Epic still have enough wisdom and strength of character not to have become completely disdainful toward any real amount of direct discourse with the public, or blind to its benefit to their own self-interests.