|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Pottsey
Enheduanni Foundation
|
Posted - 2010.03.08 10:51:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Pottsey on 08/03/2010 10:54:41 Why zero mention of the Gallante highly experimental storyline missions that most of player Gallante mission runnerÆs absolutely hate. These missions are destroying PvE and have totally ruined mission running for many gallante players.
The missions are so bad many people bug reported them thinking they are bugs. See http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1228466
CCP said they are highly experimental. The missions failed yet no comment on removing them or fixing them? Are CCP even aware of the problems with these highly experimental missions.
Why where highly experimental missions even put directly on the live server without the test server? Nothing about the broken sound engine thatÆs worse then when the game first shipped? Noting about core broke features like shadows or the juke box? What about all the gfx effects that look worse now then a few years ago?
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1262938&page=1 http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1018419&page=14
______ How to Passive Shield Tank T2
|
Pottsey
Enheduanni Foundation
|
Posted - 2010.03.13 09:36:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Pottsey on 13/03/2010 09:36:50 TeaDaze said "The list of topics that were taken by CSM to CCP were not all discussed during the summit simply because many of them didn't require further discussion" The problem is there is no feed back to us players. Like the major problem of the highly experimental missions that have destroyed Gallente PvE for a large amount of players. It's a major issue but we have zero feedback on if the CSM even gave the problem to CCP and if CCP are doing anything about it or even aware of it.
There is also no feedback on core parts of the Eve engine being broke like the sound engine and shadows.
It feels like CSM skipped over major problems to talk about minor stuff. But a large part of CSM was talking about CSM, not talking about the major Eve problems.
Some things like shadows have been broken over 1 year now. It's just crazy on the lack of feedback we get. I still want to know why highly experimental missions where even put on the live server anyway, when anyway who knows anything about PvE could see they are a stupid idea.
______ How to Passive Shield Tank T2
|
Pottsey
Enheduanni Foundation
|
Posted - 2010.03.13 17:33:00 -
[3]
TeaDaze said "I assume you refer to this proposal which was raised fairly close to the cut off for submissions to the Summit. It wasn't put on any meeting agenda prior to the summit due to lack of support. If it is such a game breaking issue how come only 29 people agree (at this time). If it gains more support we can discuss it with CCP at one of the online summit meetings." That just shows how poor the CSM is. It should not need more support before you will discuss it with CCP. If you come across something that is clearly a large problem but with few votes you should apply common sense and discuss it. Things like why highly experimental missions where skipped from the test server and dumped right on the live server need talking about. You should not dump anything highly experimental straight on the live server without testing. http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1228466&page=1#5
We can have a major game breaking problem which anyone with a little common sense can see is a major problem. But it doesn't get acted on because of how poor the CSM are and how poor the voting system is. If the devs or CSM just read the comments in the dev blog about the missions they would have seen how unhappy Gallante players are.
It only affects Gallente mission runners so it's going to get less support then other problems that affect everyone. But still missing up missions and PvE for one whole race is a major issue. http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1228466
Notice how like 99% ish of people who posted on the topic agree. The player base is not even split about the problem. 99% of posts about the problem are against the missions. The dev blog about the missions was also full of people saying what a bad idea it was and how many problems it caused. Why do devs ingnore player comments on dev blogs?
Only 29 people agree because the vast majority of people who are effect by it do not know about that CSM thread and many do not even know about the CSM. Most of the posts about the problem where done in the missions forums where there is a much longer thread on it and more than one thread. The dev blog about the new missions was also full of people saying how bad it is. The other problem is anyone who bug reported the problem and the problem is that bad many thought it was a bug they get told to post in the missions forum or Issues, Workarounds & Localization forum not the CSM forum. Consequently when there is a major game breaking issue you get long threads in the . Issues, Workarounds & Localization thread not the CSM forum.
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1018419&page=15 is a classic example. People have a major problem with the sound engine. They don't know about the CSM and they bug report it. No response from bug reporting and if they do get a response it's to be told to post in the or Issues, Workarounds & Localization forum instead of CSM. When players are told to post problems some place other then CSM is it any wonder CSM gets so few votes.
You shouldn't judge an issue solely by how many people agree with it anyway. You should use common sense. If something is very clearly causing major problems with forums post all over the place saying how bad it is and people in game all saying how bad it is. You don't ignore is just because it got less votes then something else.
If CSM come across a major issue like the sound engine or Gallante mission threads in the CSM forum they should act on it no matter how many votes it gets. Saying it only got 30 votes is stupid. Ingoing problems due to low voting is silly. Apply of bit of common sense. If the problem is clearly a major problem look into it. ______ How to Passive Shield Tank T2
|
Pottsey
Enheduanni Foundation
|
Posted - 2010.03.13 17:44:00 -
[4]
TeaDaze said " Can I get this straight I get this straight, you accuse us of only talking about minor stuff and ignoring "major issues" like broken shadows?" Ok shadows by themself are not major, but the graphics and sound engine problems as a whole are major. Core parts of the engine being broke like sound and graphics need looking into. Ok it's not as important as account security and some other things but it matters a lot. Having many graphic effects being broke and/or looking worse than 2 years ago is a problem that needs looking into. Or in the case of shadows worse than a 10 year old game. I bought up shadows as they are some of the worse but not only graphics problems we now have. When you have playres saying Isendre said "I just returned after a long break and sound is even worse if that's even possible." warning lights should go off.
Not only do these problems ruin the atmosphere of the game, it hurts sales and puts off new players and irritates older players. Do you know how many new players quit saying this game looks and sounds rubbish? How can you blame them when the sound is as broke, music is broke and many graphics effects have taken a giant leap backwards? Some graphics like shadows are now worse than when the game first shipped. Music is mostly gone and there is just a long list of problems. This looks real good for new playres and makes it look like CCP care for the game .
To me any many people core parts of the game being broken like sound and graphics are far more important then talking about a alliance tournament once a year, battle recorders, logos and other less important things.
What other high end MMORG would live with music being broken, sound engine being broke and parts of the graphics being broken for so long without any comment.
______ How to Passive Shield Tank T2
|
Pottsey
Enheduanni Foundation
|
Posted - 2010.03.13 23:42:00 -
[5]
Of course the CSM cannot be expected to go looking for every problem. But when a problem is a long thread thats been on the first pages for weeks and is repeated in the dev blog thread thread you expect at least one CSM to notice.
Do CSM not read dev blog threads? If a blog thread is full of comments about problems related to that dev blog why not follow up on it? Why do the devs not follow up as well?
"An 8 page thread in the mission runner forum but only 29 supports (at the time I last checked) in the Assembly forum? How hard is it to link that thread to the Assembly forum thread and suggest people support it there?" It was linked but for various reason people didn't use it,I think it might have got linked to different assembly threads, I need to go back and re-read to double check. Anyway that aside people in game who bug reported the problem and other problems don't get told to post in assembly. They follow the GM's advice and post outside the assembly forums. They don't read 8+ pages looking for a link they don't know about. They post on the end of the chat thats already going off. A large amount of players do what the GM's say and the GM cause the players to bypass the CSM forum.
ôSaying it only had 29 supports is an accurate statement, not stupid at all.ö What I meant was, saying a major problem only has 29 supports so its not worth looking at is stupid way to do things. Just because something only got a few votes it does not mean its not worth looking at. CSM shouldn't be just looking at things with high votes. They should read things with a decent amount of votes and use common sense on if it needs reporting. The way you wrote your post sounded like it doesn't matter how major a problem is if it doesn't get x amount of votes you ignore the problem. Which to me seems like a very poor way of working.
ôIf you want to get stuff looked at then please follow the process and refrain from name calling.ö The process is heavily flawed and not working. You get votes split all over the place meaning problems that need looking at don't get looked at as the vote numbers appear low. You get GM's telling people to post problems elsewhere over CSM areas meaning a large amount of the player base do not post the problem in a way CSM will look at it. Then you have a large amount of players not even being aware of the CSM (partly the fault of GM's who should say post in CSM areas not the other fourm section). There is no way to search for and vote for current problems you might have without somehow knowing about 3rd party search pages or geting lucky and finding the right thread. The whole system is sub optimal.
As for name calling I have every right to call the CSM poor. Have you ever stopped to think why a lot of players don't like the CSM? The idea is great, the way its been implanted and its effectiveness is pretty poor. I am not the only one who thinks this. The main problem is not the CSM people. The problem is the way we have to report problems and the website layout being so bad and not setup decently for this. For example in STO when I had a problem it took me 4 ish clicks and 20 ish seconds to find out alist of people with the same problem. I then added my tag onto the end of the main list. A system like they use would be way better for CSM then the current system. I dont have time right now to go into details. But I can post screenshots of there system another day. ______ How to Passive Shield Tank T2
|
Pottsey
Enheduanni Foundation
|
Posted - 2010.03.14 08:56:00 -
[6]
TeaDaze said "I am fully aware of issues such as the experimental missions but without people actively supporting the proposals in the Assembly hall forum we have to assume it isn't actually a major issue to most players." This is where I don't agree and say common sense is lacking. The proposal was actively supported considering the ratio of Gallante mission runners that use the CSM forum area. As the amount of Gallante mission runners who use the CSM forum is so low there is no way to get the problem supported by CSM as they refuse to look at anything that doesn't get high votes. Of course it not a major issue to most players. It only affects Gallente mission runners. That alone means it's going to get less votes then other things but it doesn't mean it's no less a major issue. A major issue that only affects one part of the player base instantly cuts down the votes.
Let's take a more extreme example. CCP remove level 4 missions from the Gallante faction. It's a major problem but it gets few votes as a large amount of the player base do not know about the problem as they run missions for other race's. Those that are affected by the problem bug report it and get told to post it in places other than CSM. The few who know about CSM post in different threads splitting the few votes around. CSM then ignore the problem as it's not major as it got few votes. Even though there are long threads on the problem.
The ratio of players who post on the forums is small, the ratio of Gallente missions runners is smaller, the ratio of Gallante mission runners who know about CSM is even smaller, the amount left who can vote in the same place is even smaller as people end up split voting over threads. By the time you get a down to the group of people able to vote in one place there are so few that the problem cannot get enough votes to be looked at. Even though a very large amount of people are affected by the problem.
Anyway I am not convinced voting works even if we could get enough people. Didn't the sound problems get a ton of votes and didn't get bought up at the meetings?
TeaDaze said " However only threads raised in the Assembly forum can be voted on and taken to the CSM meetings." That seems a bad way to do things. CSM members should be allowed to take the initiative and bring up problem they come across. What is the minimum amount of votes something needs to be bought to CSM meetings?
TeaDaze said " Using my common sense I have instead raised issues that people have spoken to me about and were well supported in the Assembly hall. The other reps have done the same from their areas of gameplay." That's another problem. Unless I am missing something there is no list of reps and what they represent. There is no easy way to contact the rep(s) whose area is PvE. How are we meant to know which rep to talk to? Which rep area is PvE?
TeaDaze said " Number of posts is not a good indication of support which is why the Assembly hall forum has a vote system in it." OK if the number of people posting saying there is a problem is not a good indication of support. Then how on earth can voting be a good indication? To me 15 pages of posts is just as good an indication of support for a problem as votes. Ok it's harder to read and sort out but it's just as valid that there's a problem.
This is where I see common sense as lacking. If someone posts in assembly hall a thread linking to 10 threads each with 100's of posts of support for the problem with 20+ pages of support in the links. The CSM should act on it. Not say it's a bad indication those people should vote.
We are getting into situations where 100's if not 1000's of players are posting about a problem. But as CSM only acknowledge the votes not posts nothing gets acted on. That is a very poor system. ______ How to Passive Shield Tank T2
|
Pottsey
Enheduanni Foundation
|
Posted - 2010.03.14 09:04:00 -
[7]
Edited by: Pottsey on 14/03/2010 09:05:23 TeaDaze said " what I object to is this insinuation that I have no common sense because I've overlooked "major issues" such as broken shadows." I already explained that I didn't mean just shadows. My first post was unclear and perhaps to harsh. I mean a broken graphics engine and sound engine with lots of effects being broken or downgraded over 2 years ago with shadows being an example. Common sense says this is a major problem. The amount of votes should not matter. The amount of posts and the problem itself should be a good indication there is a real major problem that needs fixing. Some things you should read and realise it needs looking into without looking at how many votes it gets.
Sorry if I offended you. But I think the whole system is very poorly implanted and not working very well. Me and a large amount of Gallante mission runners have had our storyline PvE destroyed and ruined. CSM was meant to pickup and fix things like this. But it's not working. Surly CSM are ment to pick up things like a broken sound engine with tons of votes.
______ How to Passive Shield Tank T2
|
Pottsey
Enheduanni Foundation
|
Posted - 2010.03.14 13:52:00 -
[8]
TeaDaze said " There are sure to be more that 30 odd mission runners effected by a "Major" issue, right?" Yes going by all the 100's if not 1000's of posts and threads on the topic.
TeaDaze said " I say again, if this is such an issue surely people can get behind a proposal on the assembly hall forum. Logically if there are hundreds or thousands of people effected by a change I should expect to see more than 30 people support the issue. Right?" No. After bug reporting, posting in the forums related to the problem. Then having a GM telling them to post in a 3rd area. People are now fed up and don't want to waste more time posting a 4th time in assembly that's if they can even find the problem in assembly which most of the time you cannot. That's also assuming after posting in 3 places they even know about assembly. Most people think after the bug report and posting as the GM said they have done enough. Then after all that is you somehow get all the people voting in the same place chances are CSM don't act on it or miss it them self's due to the bad layout of the forum.
TeaDaze said "You think it is bad that we have a process that even CSM members have to follow?" A process that does not allow CSM to take the initiative is a bad process.
TeaDaze said "I'm sorry that I won't ignore issues that people have flagged up to me or have lots of support in favour of issues that apparently I should have raised from a forum I don't read. Apparently they are "major" problems that nobody can be bothered to support a proposal thread about." What about problems which did get flagged up to CSM and did get lots of votes like the sound engine problems?
You are still not getting it either. It's not that no one can be bothered to support the proposal thread. It's that due to the very poor system most of the people with the problem are not even aware of the proposal thread and those that are aware end up splitting votes over different threads about the same thing.
That and if you take one subsection of players like gallante missions runners then well 30 votes on a CSM forum is a lot considering the situation. Something that only effects 1/4th of mission runners is logically going to get 1/4 the votes of something that effects all mission runners. I will follow you advice and try and contact the CSM who has PvE as his area.
TeaDaze said "Those 15 pages could be 15 pages of the same 2 people arguing back and forth, or could be filled with people trolling the OP. There is no way to tell from the outside the level of actual support." Apart from of course reading the threads and seeing it's not the same two people arguing back and forth or full of trolling. Which is why I say common sense is lacking. If a CSM member reads a proposal thread and applies common sense sometimes the amount of votes do not matter. With a little common sense and reading the proposal some things should stand out as need looking at even if the votes are low. Votes alone should not matter on a proposal.
If a proposal links to 100's or 1000's of posts which are not the same two people arguing back and forth or full of trolling it's a good indication there is a problem that needs looking at even if the votes are low.
It's fair enough if you're not a PvE guy or read the missions forums. But there is no easy way for us to know who the PvE rep is and point him towards the problem and posts. There is no easy way to get enough votes due to the poor system and way it's implanted. Even if we did get enough votes chances are it would be ignored or missed like the sound problems.
______ How to Passive Shield Tank T2
|
Pottsey
Enheduanni Foundation
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 17:00:00 -
[9]
TeaDaze said " Discuss features and ideas anywhere you like, but until it hits the Assembly hall forum it cannot be discussed at a CSM meeting and thus it cannot be submitted to CCP. Is that clear enough for you?" We get it, we don't agree with it. It's a limiting poor system that does not allow CSM to take the initiative or raise serious problems they might come across. Not only that but players are told by CCP to post serious problems outside Assembly hall and CSM are told to only use Assembly hall. See the problem?
The procedure players are given by GM's is not to use Assembly hall, but to use features and ideas or Issues or Workarounds & Localization. So players think they are following procedure posting outside Assembly.
______ How to Passive Shield Tank T2
|
Pottsey
Enheduanni Foundation
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 18:19:00 -
[10]
Edited by: Pottsey on 16/03/2010 18:20:44 In that case I apologise for misunderstanding. I was not aware CSM could take our problems they come across outside Assembly and post a proposal. A lot of my negatively about CSM isn't directly at you. It's directed at CCP and the CSM as a whole. Like the tools you are given to view our proposal's is not good enough for the job.
Saying CSM is not working very well while might be our opinion but that does not mean it's wrong. A lot of people don't like the way major things like that sound thread get ignored and instead the CSM seem to bring up there minor in comparison pet proposal's instead.
It's not just our opinion CSM is failing. It's a fact CSM have either been ignoring or missing due to bad forum layout and poor tools major issues and instead bringing up much more minor stuff instead. That's not to say everything CSM brings up in minor. You did bring up some good stuff at last meeting.
But it appears CSM have time to talk about minor things, but no time to talk about core parts of the game being broken. Then say "In your opinion the CSM fails because your pet issues are not being looked at instantly." it's hardly a pet issue. It's a core part of the game that needs fixing and should have been fixed a very long time ago. But instead CSM talked about battler recorder, logos and other minor stuff in comparison. So yes CSM is failing or at least is working at a very suboptimal level. Anyway I don't mean to put the bunt of my complaining on you. From the sounds of it you are doing half the work while the other CSM members are doing little or not enough.
TeaDaze said "However all you have to do is raise it yourself and get support for it (or contact a CSM rep to take it forward)." We have tried that and it has not worked. Lots of votes check, major issue check, well posted proposal check, CSM rep onboard check, action none. ______ How to Passive Shield Tank T2
|
|
|
|
|