If not via Forum Consensus, how do we effect change in-game?

[mad_ox1]

So, as per our Turbine Community Manager, discussing things on the forums is useless, as forum users are in the minority of the player-base. It is not possible to extrapolate the desires of the player-base using only a sample of players.

However, if some people bug something they do not like in the game (a la Moors KB deeds), it apparently has at least some chance of being changed.

With this in mind, it would seem that the best way to effect change in the game is to send in bug reports about things we find that we wish to have changed. I guess we should be bugging advancing deeds in the Moors w/out actually dealing the killing blow if we do not want this change once the update hits?

[Graycient]

So, as per our Turbine Community Manager, discussing things on the forums is useless, as forum users are in the minority of the player-base. It is not possible to extrapolate the desires of the player-base using only a sample of players.

They may be a minority in the overall game population, but they are the majority of the technical players. The ones that know their classes well. You can tell when they go out of their way to join a forum to reply and make threads regarding specific topics within the game.

However, if some people bug something they do not like in the game (a la Moors KB deeds), it apparently has at least some chance of being changed.

Just keep posting it on the forums. Turbine can pretend to act like a spoiled child and delete/close it, but keep on posting it.

With this in mind, it would seem that the best way to effect change in the game is to send in bug reports about things we find that we wish to have changed. I guess we should be bugging advancing deeds in the Moors w/out actually dealing the killing blow if we do not want this change once the update hits?

Oh you mean this is about that pointless "grind" deed? *sighs*

[Fin.]

Stop paying.

[mad_ox1]

Stop paying.

Can't, I'm stuck subscribing until I die.

Oh you mean this is about that pointless "grind" deed? *sighs*

Nope, that was just the easiest vehicle to create an example for my question.

[Fredelas]

From my observations, suggestions with some of the following qualities seem to get implemented, no forum consensus needed. If a suggestion doesn't have at least one of these, I can't imagine it making the cut:

• They align with Turbine's goals of increasing participation and increasing revenue.
• They utilize existing game systems and technology with minimal or no changes, or they use new systems with a clear potential for new revenue generation that outweighs the development cost.
• They contain an element of inconvenience that can be mediated with Mithril Coins.
• They will appeal superficially to a majority of the game's players and can be trumpeted to the press.
• They are supported with detailed observations from actual testing, or at least a strong theoretical framework.
• They are not based on an emotional reaction to some other change recently made to the game.
• They emphasize a key strength in the game that is also a key weakness in a rival's game.
• They fit within Tolkien's lore, or the lore can be sufficiently stretched to cover it.

[FangtheLucky]

From my observations, suggestions with some of the following qualities seem to get implemented, no forum consensus needed. If a suggestion doesn't have at least one of these, I can't imagine it making the cut:

• They align with Turbine's goals of increasing participation and increasing revenue.
• They utilize existing game systems and technology with minimal or no changes, or they use new systems with a clear potential for new revenue generation that outweighs the development cost.
• They contain an element of inconvenience that can be mediated with Mithril Coins.
• They will appeal superficially to a majority of the game's players and can be trumpeted to the press.
• They are supported with detailed observations from actual testing, or at least a strong theoretical framework.
• They are not based on an emotional reaction to some other change recently made to the game.
• They emphasize a key strength in the game that is also a key weakness in a rival's game.
• They fit within Tolkien's lore, or the lore can be sufficiently stretched to cover it.

I agree with the first 3 points which are really the same point, i.e., more money. The others are ancillary at best. I think you chose the order wisely.

Sincerely,
Lou de Torres

[FangtheLucky]

If not via Forum Consensus, how do we effect change in-game?

If Turbine feels the change would have a negative effect on revenue, we cannot reverse that change under any circumstances I can think of. If we want a change that will increase revenues or be revenue neutral, we can do that via the forums.. We just have to wait until they're sure they won't lose money. And then wait some more until they have the time to test it and so on.

Sincerely,
Lou de Torres

[stoffi]

So, as per our Turbine Community Manager, discussing things on the forums is useless, as forum users are in the minority of the player-base. It is not possible to extrapolate the desires of the player-base using only a sample of players.

However, if some people bug something they do not like in the game (a la Moors KB deeds), it apparently has at least some chance of being changed.

With this in mind, it would seem that the best way to effect change in the game is to send in bug reports about things we find that we wish to have changed. I guess we should be bugging advancing deeds in the Moors w/out actually dealing the killing blow if we do not want this change once the update hits?

This is what we need:

- Players don't like that cheating is allowed. Players leave because of this.
- Too much pay2win is bad.
- "Equality" isn't the goal. Some people work harder to improve stats and in-game performance than others; let them.
----> Don't encourage zerging only. Solo and small group play should be viable as well.
----> Don't give everyone everything without any effort.


Consensus. There you go. Fix the above and much is done. Balance will always be an issue, but the above are fundamental structural things that need to be in place before we can even start discussing balance.

[Yicky]

This is what we need:

- Players don't like that cheating is allowed. Players leave because of this.
- Too much pay2win is bad.
- "Equality" isn't the goal. Some people work harder to improve stats and in-game performance than others; let them.
----> Don't encourage zerging only. Solo and small group play should be viable as well.
----> Don't give everyone everything without any effort.


Consensus. There you go. Fix the above and much is done. Balance will always be an issue, but the above are fundamental structural things that need to be in place before we can even start discussing balance.

I would like to see some different aspects of pvp. And ways to promote each. Raid v Raid, small group, and solo. How tho?

Instanced pvp is one that is brought up. Or a "designated" 1v1 zone that has a protection barrier around it that removes buffs and is protected from the zergs.

Turbines view is obviously moving towards the equality and less effort to close the gap between the ultra casual and ultra hardcore.

The new post talking about changes has a LOT of good stuff in it. Hopefully that will help bring an idea on where players stand in the moors and close THAT gap between players and devs.

[Sapience]

So, as per our Turbine Community Manager, discussing things on the forums is useless...

One of the main suggestions I'd make, and have made many times, is to make sure you aren't misrepresenting the facts or using hyperbole to make a point.

For example. I never said the forums were useless. I've said, and we have said for more than 6 years that the forums are one form of feedback. We use multiple forms and methods.

So I would start with that basic understanding first.

[Firemane0]

So, as per our Turbine Community Manager, discussing things on the forums is useless, as forum users are in the minority of the player-base. It is not possible to extrapolate the desires of the player-base using only a sample of players.

However, if some people bug something they do not like in the game (a la Moors KB deeds), it apparently has at least some chance of being changed.

With this in mind, it would seem that the best way to effect change in the game is to send in bug reports about things we find that we wish to have changed. I guess we should be bugging advancing deeds in the Moors w/out actually dealing the killing blow if we do not want this change once the update hits?

The problem is that some of you do seem to think that insults, belittling, personal attacks on mods and developers is part of their job. It isn't, what it does is show how little respect some of you have for this game, its creators and its community. When faced with an honest response their tends to be a segment of the player base that gets out their pitch forks puts on their tin foil hats and turn into compete idiots which 9/10 results in the post getting closed and deleted and any good constructive criticism or ideas are lost and of course the response is "Oh it was deleted because they are avoiding the issue"

[Frankj45]

One of the main suggestions I'd make, and have made many times, is to make sure you aren't misrepresenting the facts or using hyperbole to make a point.

For example. I never said the forums were useless. I've said, and we have said for more than 6 years that the forums are one form of feedback. We use multiple forms and methods.

So I would start with that basic understanding first.

I would like to know the other forms of feedback there are, because at this point I have no clue what the forums purpose is. And which method is considered over another.

[Khorgrim]

If one wants to effect change via the forum, you speak as you wish to be spoken to and use facts and data.

Think of your reception if during a presentation to your superiors you were to come into the room and go "You're idiots and you have no idea what you're doing!"

Not going to get much further in presenting your ideas, are you?

Try to think of the devs as parents, with many many children (Cheaper by the Dozen, or Yours, Mine and Ours number of kids). Not all of them are clamoring for attention, but those that are, tend to drown one another out with all their screaming. If you want your parents to give attention to an idea, you have to be as patient as your parents. Throwing tantrums does not work. Calling them names does not work. Belittling them will never work. If you demand, you are getting tuned out fairly quick. Telling them what to do tends to get low priority. You have to ask, show reason, and back it up with data and facts. Nothing else will work. If the dev for a moment feels like they are being pushed, shoved, insulted, belittled, or impugned, they will stop reading your suggestion, no matter how good it might be. Yeah, you may think it insulting to have to approach it this way. Guess what? You are in their house and you have to play by their rules. Kind of like when you were a kid, huh?

(This post is not implying the OP approached anything in this way nor is it directed at them. If one takes offense with this post, maybe you need to step back and do a self examination)

[Sapience]

I would like to know the other forms of feedback there are, because at this point I have no clue what the forums purpose is. And which method is considered over another.

No method is considered over another, they're combined. Kind of a 'feedback stew'. They certainly inform one another (ie, Forums say X, Survey Says Y, Bug reports show Z, etc, combined they say W).

In very broad strokes and in no way a definitive list or in any particular order...

• Forums
• Outside comments (we read articles posted on news sites, look at small group of fansites that usually have good feedback, facebook, twitter, etc).
• Surveys (you've probably seen people post asking if a survey they got was legit.We do these from time to time).
• Customer service keeps track of issues and severity and the feedback players give them based on those exchanges.
• In game comments (yes we do actually spend time with the game up and the chat tabs blown up to full screen).
• Data pulled directly from the servers (we track a huge number of data points)
• We have a couple of third party moderators and some other gruops who pull look at international feedback.
• Focus groups.
• And now the players council.

[TellinItAsItIsLately]

The title of this thread says it all.

[Yelloweyedemon]

I would like to see some different aspects of pvp. And ways to promote each. Raid v Raid, small group, and solo. How tho?

Yes i wonder how... Oh wait! Wasn't the new RoR renown/infamy system that destroyed solo play and small group play, but encouraged mindless zerging in massive raids? Sorry, sorry... forgot the OP's the keeps and the relics, that are 100% in favour of those with the most numbers, just to make their zerging playstyle even easier.

Maybe start from there don't you think?

Instanced pvp is one that is brought up. Or a "designated" 1v1 zone that has a protection barrier around it that removes buffs and is protected from the zergs.

This isn't needed. On how many servers you see regular 1v1 zones with many people participating (on a regular basis), AND other action all over the map? It wouldn't be bad, but there are so many other things need fixing before that

Turbines view is obviously moving towards the equality and less effort to close the gap between the ultra casual and ultra hardcore.

There are no rewards for hardcore gamers here in lotro... End game armours can be aquired solo, top-end weapons drop from tier 1 (aka facerolling content), and everything else requires just grinding.

I could log my warden now (after 8 months break) and still pwn in pvp.

The new post talking about changes has a LOT of good stuff in it.

Yes! Like the end of leaderboards, and the annihilation of the killing blow meaning and purpose, for titles people worked 6 years to aquire!

Just thought of two quick upcoming changes that come to mind
Awesome stuff!

[Crell_1]

In very broad strokes and in no way a definitive list or in any particular order...

• Focus groups.
• And now the players council.

Are you strictly referring to the Palantir Private Preview Program when you say "Focus groups", or does Turbine regularly operate other focus groups?

Edit: Distinct from the Player Council, which you already broke off above.

[Exion_Blade]

[*]In game comments (yes we do actually spend time with the game up and the chat tabs blown up to full screen).[/LIST]

Spend sometime on creepside in smaller servers.
You'll see melancholy, dissatisfaction and anger.
And sheer pluckyness from a people who have been shoveled &&&& to eat for ages and learned to adapt.

and the freepsider nubs.

[l4j]

No method is considered over another, they're combined. Kind of a 'feedback stew'. They certainly inform one another (ie, Forums say X, Survey Says Y, Bug reports show Z, etc, combined they say W).

In very broad strokes and in no way a definitive list or in any particular order...

• Forums
• Outside comments (we read articles posted on news sites, look at small group of fansites that usually have good feedback, facebook, twitter, etc).
• Surveys (you've probably seen people post asking if a survey they got was legit.We do these from time to time).
• Customer service keeps track of issues and severity and the feedback players give them based on those exchanges.
• In game comments (yes we do actually spend time with the game up and the chat tabs blown up to full screen).
• Data pulled directly from the servers (we track a huge number of data points)
• We have a couple of third party moderators and some other gruops who pull look at international feedback.
• Focus groups.
• And now the players council.

Thank you for this. Very informative. Though working in a similar place (Engineering Support, Customer Experience, Product Development, etc.) myself, I'm curious as to how these are weighted. Some of the sources provide very, very, different metrics.

For example, which is more important? Conversations here on your own forums, or external media? CS, for example, is likely to give excellent feedback on specific skills and effects that aren't working as intended, but probably won't have a clear insight into how relative damage vs healing vs morale vs etc., is affecting game play in the moors.

[FangtheLucky]

If one wants to effect change via the forum, you speak as you wish to be spoken to and use facts and data.

Think of your reception if during a presentation to your superiors you were to come into the room and go "You're idiots and you have no idea what you're doing!"

Not going to get much further in presenting your ideas, are you?

Try to think of the devs as parents, with many many children (Cheaper by the Dozen, or Yours, Mine and Ours number of kids). Not all of them are clamoring for attention, but those that are, tend to drown one another out with all their screaming. If you want your parents to give attention to an idea, you have to be as patient as your parents. Throwing tantrums does not work. Calling them names does not work. Belittling them will never work. If you demand, you are getting tuned out fairly quick. Telling them what to do tends to get low priority. You have to ask, show reason, and back it up with data and facts. Nothing else will work. If the dev for a moment feels like they are being pushed, shoved, insulted, belittled, or impugned, they will stop reading your suggestion, no matter how good it might be. Yeah, you may think it insulting to have to approach it this way. Guess what? You are in their house and you have to play by their rules. Kind of like when you were a kid, huh?

(This post is not implying the OP approached anything in this way nor is it directed at them. If one takes offense with this post, maybe you need to step back and do a self examination)

Having stepped back and done a self-examination, I still find no good reason to think of the devs as either my superiors or my parents. There are many, many reasons why those analogies are terrible but to avoid psycho-babble, let's begin with saying that when I was a kid, my parents were in charge of me and responsible for me. The devs are neither.

They are not even in charge of what gets into the game. They can dream up stuff and make suggestions and program, but what does and does not get in is decided by the money people. So your entire argument is founded on an incorrect assumption.

Sincerely,
Lou de Torres

[maetamaeta]

No method is considered over another, they're combined. Kind of a 'feedback stew'. They certainly inform one another (ie, Forums say X, Survey Says Y, Bug reports show Z, etc, combined they say W).

In very broad strokes and in no way a definitive list or in any particular order...

• Forums
• Outside comments (we read articles posted on news sites, look at small group of fansites that usually have good feedback, facebook, twitter, etc).
• Surveys (you've probably seen people post asking if a survey they got was legit.We do these from time to time).
• Customer service keeps track of issues and severity and the feedback players give them based on those exchanges.
• In game comments (yes we do actually spend time with the game up and the chat tabs blown up to full screen).
• Data pulled directly from the servers (we track a huge number of data points)
• We have a couple of third party moderators and some other gruops who pull look at international feedback.
• Focus groups.
• And now the players council.

Thank you! This is the type of dialogue I know myself and others have been hoping for. I know your primary objective was not gaining my approval but: Your time, the specificity and candor of your post and the fact that you reinforced this constructive dialogue instead of temper tantrums with your reply and attention are both noticed and appreciated. Sincerely- thank you.

[Almagnus1]

No method is considered over another, they're combined. Kind of a 'feedback stew'. They certainly inform one another (ie, Forums say X, Survey Says Y, Bug reports show Z, etc, combined they say W).

In very broad strokes and in no way a definitive list or in any particular order...

• Forums
• Outside comments (we read articles posted on news sites, look at small group of fansites that usually have good feedback, facebook, twitter, etc).
• Surveys (you've probably seen people post asking if a survey they got was legit.We do these from time to time).
• Customer service keeps track of issues and severity and the feedback players give them based on those exchanges.
• In game comments (yes we do actually spend time with the game up and the chat tabs blown up to full screen).
• Data pulled directly from the servers (we track a huge number of data points)
• We have a couple of third party moderators and some other gruops who pull look at international feedback.
• Focus groups.
• And now the players council.

Assuming you can actually discuss this...

Could you walk us through how feedback goes from the above sources, to something that appears in game? If you could give us an idea on how long certain parts of it take, that'd be awesome =)

[Oldwiley]

I would like to see some different aspects of pvp. And ways to promote each. Raid v Raid, small group, and solo. How tho?

0.- Remove the renown/infamy buffs, scale raid infamy lower, remove heal tagging. Level the playing field by making audacity a moors buff rather than a stat, reduce healing to compensate for audacity, bring back rank brands. Remove op buffs.

Maybe introduce a numer of ranks on your side outnumber buff that reduces audacity for the side with the advantage.

The main point is there was plenty of group and solo play before, as well as raids.... so before it was better for solo and group pvp...

Instanced pvp is one that is brought up. Or a "designated" 1v1 zone that has a protection barrier around it that removes buffs and is protected from the zergs.

Aye i've seen posts asking for instanced pvp. Personally i'm utterly indifferent to it. Stacks of bigger priorities as far as i see, not to mention pre-organised 1v1 fights are massively class type dependent and cannot capture the random/suprise encounter on an open map; but for those interested, they widely happen without wasting resources on it. What we actually lack is Small group and solo action on the real map, not more sparring.

Turbines view is obviously moving towards the equality and less effort to close the gap between the ultra casual and ultra hardcore.

In reality this is, in the case of pve, a massively dumbed down grindfest, which has shifted more and more in that direction since mirkwood era. In pvp rank farming, zerging and rank value reduction.

The new post talking about changes has a LOT of good stuff in it. Hopefully that will help bring an idea on where players stand in the moors and close THAT gap between players and devs.

[/QUOTE]
Long term players I know are leaving this game in droves. That tells me a lot about where players stand on the moors.

[Khorgrim]

Having stepped back and done a self-examination, I still find no good reason to think of the devs as either my superiors or my parents. There are many, many reasons why those analogies are terrible but to avoid psycho-babble, let's begin with saying that when I was a kid, my parents were in charge of me and responsible for me. The devs are neither.

They are not even in charge of what gets into the game. They can dream up stuff and make suggestions and program, but what does and does not get in is decided by the money people. So your entire argument is founded on an incorrect assumption.

Sincerely,
Lou de Torres

*sigh* You are taking the analogies too literal. If you wish to dismiss them, very well. But they illustrate the behavior of many on these forums and explain why they are not listened to. People acting in such a manner causes their ideas to be ignored.

What is put into the game is still a domain of the Devs. "They can dream up stuff and make suggestions and program," Obviously, someone has to propose ideas for forward development. They also are allowed time to work on pet projects. If you wish to dismiss them as well, fine. According to your concept, we (the players) should be writing letters to the money people to get things done. Good luck!

[Fredelas]

We don't have to relate to the developers, designers, and producers as our overlords, supervisors, or babysitters. But we should at the very least relate to them respectfully as peers.

It's okay, and probably even healthy, for peers to debate and argue about issues they're passionate about. However, developers and players aren't members of political parties with diametrically opposed platforms. At the most basic level, we share the same goals. Until we can accept that, it's really hard to start an honest conversation.

This means we, both players and developers, have to step back and look at every issue from multiple angles to reach the best decision, even if that doesn't result in consensus. Sometimes change is going to hurt. Sometimes the wishes of a vocal majority will have to be set aside in favor of a valued minority. (And sometimes that valued minority will be you.)

Turbine employees aren't just faceless individuals who crank out content to earn a paycheck; they're people who take pride in their work and want to see it enjoyed by as many players as possible. I've only ever talked to a handful of employees, but every one of them mentioned that they play the game on their own characters, on their own time, in their own homes at least once a week. They face the exact same frustrations we do.

There's no us-versus-them here. It's just us. All of us.