Leones
Marquis
This bridge does go both ways. Whenever we can be transparent, we will be, but unfortunately not all internal discussion can be made public, and it can sometimes take a while before that discussion even takes place.
-
Dear forum reader,
To actively participate in our forum discussions or to start your own threads, in addition to your game account you need a forum account. You can REGISTER HERE!
Please ensure a translation in to English is provided if your post is not in English and to respect your fellow players when posting.
Feedback Regarding Recent Feedback
- Thread starter Juber
- Start date
As customers we do not ask to know everything, but that we be consulted before any development.
Because it is no longer to be proven that there is a discrepancy between the vision of the developers and that of the players.
You started doing it with the advantages of guilds but since then nothing!
Instead of letting us imagine things, intervene regularly to tell us that such and such a request is unrealizable and so we would better spend our time thinking about other things.
For the benefits of guilds we have had no feedback from you on the suggestions made. As a result, it is difficult for us to propose ideas in the direction YOU want to go.
Because it is no longer to be proven that there is a discrepancy between the vision of the developers and that of the players.
You started doing it with the advantages of guilds but since then nothing!
Instead of letting us imagine things, intervene regularly to tell us that such and such a request is unrealizable and so we would better spend our time thinking about other things.
For the benefits of guilds we have had no feedback from you on the suggestions made. As a result, it is difficult for us to propose ideas in the direction YOU want to go.
Sl8yer
Regent
How can you say there is no change in the way you do things when you have changed ? If that counter shows 8 when 10 votes have been cast it is signifigant support. If it shows 8 after 80 votes, not.
ArklurBeta
Baronet
If you think actual developers need to read player feedbacks...then I have bad news for you. Sure, it's nice when it happens, obviously it can be helpful, but that's on the developer, on an individual level, not something that should be his *job*. As @Leones said, that's exactly what CMs *need* to do.
Pericles the Lion
Emperor
How about letting the Community Managers do their job? I've only been playing FOE for 2 years. During this time, I cannot recall a single instance where a Game Designer participated in a Forum discussion. Perhaps they did "back in the day" when FOE was in its infancy but, afaik, not for as long as I've been playing.
Pafton
Viceroy
The name of TheEnvoy comes to my mind. They were quite active on this forum when GBG was first released, and used to engage proactively with the community. I think they were also there when Egypt was released. It seems their account is deleted now.
Owl II
Emperor
His account has been deleted, but his messages have been preserved in the threads. The curious can see how communication between developers and players was built in the "infant" 2019 for authorship "DeletedUser9523"
mcbluefire
Baronet
It's unfortunate that you cannot see how you are NOT interacting with the community. As Deadpool points out plainly there is no TWO WAY communication. Community Managers filter what is to be provided to the devs and the devs provide you all with some kind of response that then has any information of substance removed and that is given to the forums. We are never given a response that clearly answers why, what, or how.
Obviously we don't need to know every detail that was considered or the process behind a decision, but once consensus is reached within Inno's FOE team and something is posted there can certainly be a "This decision was reached as it was determined to be best for the game going forward BECAUSE ____." Instead what we get is smoke and mirrors or spin. When the smoke and mirrors are called out we get a "rebuttal" from the community managers with nothing to substantiate the original announcement nor specific answers to questions.
This is an ongoing issue that isn't a recent development and unfortunately the GbG SC nerf discussion is only making it more apparent as a major issue for the community. No one in the discussion can decisively conclude what Inno's motivation behind the potential change is so we cannot come to terms with the concept or argue for or against it coherently. Instead we are all grasping at what we think may be the reasons for it. And before it is "pointed out" that Juber DID answer why, the because statements are extremely vague and unsubstantiated. May as well be claims into the wind
. Would be more reasonable to have said, "This is being done because the devs realize we need to try something and this is the idea that was perceived by the devs as the first avenue to attack. Other avenues considered were league rank changes/better grouping (too complex for now), smaller reduction to SC bonus (not enough for short-term testing), reduction/re-arrangement of building slots on the map (major redesign), removal of all gbg buildings (too extreme), etc..."
^^^That's communication, correct?
Instead we get, ~(paraphrase)"...because it is necessary for the long-term sustainability and viability of the feature (which is over 2 years old). Attrition is important and we didn't realize stacking of the buildings could make zero attrition for over two years! This was a naughty behavior and it imbalanced players. Oh, yeah, and there are these chats and polls that identified Watchtowers (really???) and SCs as the biggest issue with GbG, but even though they were a major factor in this decision we can't provide anything that actually substantiates this position."
I'll rebut this nonsense that Juber was given to make as an announcement again:
1) The feature is sustainable as has been proven for 2 years. What is not sustainable is the leadership required in guilds to keep up with 10 day long seasons and guilds burn through good GbG leads regularly.
2) Attrition was definitely mentioned as a part of the feature when released, but SCs were there and ready to go at the beginning as well, it just took us a few seasons to realize what exactly we could do with them. However we don't believe for one second that the devs didn't suspect we could have zero attrition sectors nor that farming wouldn't be a thing (it's been a thing in GvG for years).
3) The only imbalance between players is time invested in their city. Don't have the time your rank doesn't go up as fast as those with the time. Yes, GbG provided a new venue with a lot of avenues to get strength/rank, but it isn't the first feature that provides the ability to work with another guild and make a major jump in ranking points in a short time. If, instead, balance here was to mean "fairness on the battlefield" how is that going to change once the nerf goes into play? The bigger guilds will still dominate, the medium guilds will no longer be able to swap, and the small guilds will still struggle to get out on the map and now they'll have no chance to get some attrition free sectors if they do break out of home.
4) Why bring up chats and polls without substantiating it? The one that was provided later in feedback didn't fulfill the statement.
I get that Juber was trying to be somewhat transparent and I don't fault him. It's unfair to keep community manager's hands tied behind their backs and task them with maintaining a community relationship. Give them REAL information that they can SHARE with us. It could mean the difference between this nerf ripping out the heart of the community or fostering understanding and agreement on why it must be done regardless of
Last edited:
mcbluefire
Baronet
I am a developer. I've worked many projects in my career (quite a few public facing, free to enjoy, with forums) and the one thing I have never turned my back on is reading and (where applicable) responding to my customer's feedback. Direct open feedback is needed to formulate understanding of what the end user is experiencing and how to make the application/process better. Does that mean they need to sit and read every posting ever made? Nope. But it does mean they (dev team leads) should be getting unfiltered feedback on their own at least a couple times a week. For all I know, they do - the forums can be read by guests so some might.
Exactly zero developers respond here. I am thoroughly convinced that has more to do with Inno not trusting them more than it has to do with time/$ management. And while it's fine to make that a rare treat, it shouldn't be something that never happens. On the flip side you have games where the developers AND EVEN the owners are on the forums chatting it up with the players - not saying they are perfect games, but it goes a long way to fostering positive community relations over unpopular design decisions.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not arguing against community managers. They are there to ensure the message is clear, concise, friendly, and doesn't make the company look bad and should be the channel for most announcements and follow-up. I always go through comms before answering a customer about an issue that can detonate or to ensure I got the best tone.
They have responded in the not too distant past (as recent as GBG's debut there was developers around the forum - as well as for the first few settlements)
One of the problems developers have with being directly engaged with the community once it gets large is dealing with hate-mail. Large communities are bound to have some bad apples. And it's counterproductive to have the developer directly exposed to a community determined to tell them what they just spent tons of time on is a pile of dung (even if that's not always the case there will inevitably be some that feel that way). Community managers as a filter help with the developer's sanity by putting people who are better at dealing with such things in the way.
It's the same reason very few celebrities/sports stars will run their own public social media accounts - it's not good for the soul to hear the unfiltered feedback of millions on your work.
Of course the strategy that community manager takes will vary from company to company - ranging from radio silence to openly engaging. Recent practices across various game communities I've followed has more companies leaning towards radio silence apart from official announcements (like what we've seen from inno). Not happy about it, but I'm sure there have been studies that support the practice that caused the trend.
Thunderdome
Emperor
Yeah, it was in 2012 where Inno Games was listening to their players, their staff was interacting/engaging the players, and the game wasn't as sterile as the others. It was a time where I was looking for another game because the developer saw $$ in the so-called booming mobile market that they didn't care about the PC or browser games (that majority were supporting them from). I was very prejudiced towards the mobile market in my early years because nothing beats a PC game played in surround sound (when PC games had a good soundtrack worthy to be played onto) that I didn't want to be a lemming and follow others.
Anyways, Inno had that time where everyone was happy. Hell, to give them more money, Inno has to come up with something that would keep us wanting for more. In that first year, they got the awards that could be read in a monthly gaming magazine.
I left the game the first time because real life got in the way. Not because it bored me or something. When I learned that FoE was on mobile, I thought I would give it a shot since I won't have to lug my laptop around just to play.
Looking back, I am having mixed feelings. Times I want to quit the game after so many failed gimmicks happening that I sometimes say it's pointless to spend for something that doesn't deliver. That could be for anything. And then, there are times I do not want to because of the company I keep; the friends I had made; the rivals I get in my hoods; and the antics in between with other players.
That luster has since been gone. The transparency we seek is no longer present. It's pretty much, throw a bone at the mob and let them fight/fend for themselves.
mcbluefire
Baronet
If you aren't thick skinned enough to hear that you are working on a steaming pile of junk (I completely disagree that this is true for FoE or I wouldn't spend time in it) then developing is likely not for you. However, when I'm saying "developers" I'm meaning lead developers and the folks who determine the course of the product.
Celebrities interaction with public is not about improving their product, but that is their product. Their feedback loop is quite different than developers. Social media is a bane for them and there is little reason to be on it imho.
With you on the last part @xivarmy
Celebrities interaction with public is not about improving their product, but that is their product. Their feedback loop is quite different than developers. Social media is a bane for them and there is little reason to be on it imho.
With you on the last part @xivarmy
Last edited:
mcbluefire
Baronet
...and this game has been floundering quite a bit for two years.
I'll clarify a bit. Yes, the game is still fun. There is plenty to occupy my time and goals I can set, albeit goals that are well beyond what is needed to do "well" in the game. However many of us are confused about the things that the developers have been bringing to us over the last couple of years and the way they've linked certain things together in their execution that appear to be unrelated to us.
((Please note I am not thinking I speak for everyone, just myself, however it is also based on the myriad of feedback I read this year))
A few examples:
1) Copy and paste space ages. Feedback each time is "Hope the next age has something unique or a GB that really takes the game to the next level". Next age comes and it's same as the last with beautiful new graphics and one GB that doesn't assist the player in the new age much at all.
2) PvP Arena. I still can't figure out what need it was meant to fill other than giving me something to hit Mon-Thursday when GbG is closed. For some strange reason they figured this should replace the PvP towers which was a measurement of hood activity (and some fun competition from time to time) and thus not related to the new system. After much feedback the towers were preserved. Oh, sure it could have saved a bit of cycles in where to place the new tower for the next age on the map and removed the weekly tracking from the database.
3) Guild rewards. Here is one that, as @DEADP00L pointed out, should not have had one moment of development time without first consulting with the beta community. "Hey beta testers, what do you think about another reward system that will be a bit of a guild goods and diamond sink that will provide minor boosts like %supply increase, 5% attack for a season, or extra chances to get coins, etc. It will be structured such that the goods spent will be much more than the rewards received. Thoughts? Feedback?" It would have been shot down as a waste of time by almost everyone or constructively restructured so the dev time would be spent on building something the community did want. Then we could have been eager for a few months waiting to see what came of the ideas and test it with a hopeful move to live.
4) Event pier/hub. Need I say more? Okay, I will say that I feel like my feedback was actually heard here when I said that they should remove it instead of letting it sit to save on database calls and bandwidth as it was less than a week later it was gone. Actually made me feel like I helped even though I didn't get a direct response like, "oh, yeah! Good point." But then it matters more to me that efficient things get implemented than receiving accolades.
5) GBG being released in the state it was in. Beta feedback was that there was much to be improved. Then for years after it more and more feedback. Yep, there is finally some action being done about it, but why is it the easiest nerf hammer action possible?
6) Feedback from several are there are too many events. So now there are even more events.
7) Feedback about the 10th anniversary event was that it didn't feel much like a great reward to celebrate 10 years of FOE. I have it in my main city right now cause it's pretty, but soon it will be replaced by more efficient buildings. It should be something that no city would want to be without.
8) What happened to the sprint dedicated to the top player picks?
9) We get ads are good to help support the game. But why did the Tavern load page have to be shifted to "Tavern Boost" if the boost wasn't running when I click on the tavern? Let me decide if I'm interested in applying it? Oops, it's already applied. Well, no loss for me as 5% doesn't do anything for me anyway.
10) Forge Plus - sure if you have money to burn adding a bunch of minor boosts might be a thing. I know some players use it, but a lot more would if it was $3/mo or $30/yr.
Now this doesn't mean that lot's of good things haven't been done for the game.
Aid all. Thank goodness this is finally here! Not quite as many of us envisioned, but it's a reality! Kudos to the team on this!
Castle System. Some good ideas. Just need to figure out how to keep people engaged with it for 13 years when they can actually reach L20.
Antiques Dealer. What a good way to help us unload the database while acquiring some funds to potentially replace a bunch of "junk" with something we actually want. This may be pushing a bit back before the last 2 years, though.
Settlements (the last couple). Not my cup of tea, but good for folks who like checking in every 4 hours or less and rebuild their settlement to get the decent+ rewards!
More expansion land added!
New event buildings with good attack (attack offense over 1.0/sqr) and FP/sqr over 0.5. Great stuff. Of course, attack boost will fall to the wayside for long time players if the GbG nerf goes to live.
mcbluefire
Baronet
Would it be in bad taste to ever share what is filtered up at some point? Just a curiosity thing. I could see a high level post of "recent feedback shared" with not everything you share, but highlights of what was sent to the devs. Could potentially quell repeated questions as folks would see that their concern was added to the bridge.
I get that Inno thinks there are many internal secrets that would be viewed incorrectly in the lens of the players, but I suggest they are holding way too much internal and not sharing enough with the interested group here on the beta forum. And I'm afraid I should point out that your response shows circular logic. While discussions might not take place for quite a while, decisions cannot be made without the discussion having taking place. ;0)
Patience isn't the root issue here (we're happy to wait a while as long as something isn't breaking our game play), it's lack of ever hearing anything "substantial" with the result that is irritating.
Last edited:
crabbyoldman
Squire
Same old same old. Devs have no interest in listening to the players. GbG is a prime example. It is dominated by large guilds. They have made 2 changes, both which give more advantage to big guilds and penalize the small guilds
Pericles the Lion
Emperor
Left up to his own devices, my 3-year-old grandson would not eat the "unpleasant" veggies and would go straight for the dessert. Thankfully, there are adults in the room at mealtime.