Feedback Regarding Recent Feedback

[DEADP00L]

@Amdira :

For transparency, although we have asked for it several times, it is Innogmaes who announced it to us without sticking to it. They would have done better not to say anything than to promise things they don't keep.

For the non-silent minority, it's like for the elections, those who don't say anything don't have to complain after the fact and an elected person is elected by those who vote and not by the silent majority.

 

[drakenridder]

Show me one company who is giving full transparency about their developments to their customers. Not to forget we aren't even customers, but just users of free content.

I know 1 game but can't share it cause it's against the forum rules but I can describe how they're doing it. They give an month planner roughly 2 weeks before the next month. In it there are days noted for everything:
Game updates + Beta announcements
Events (often with Beta announcements)
Besides that they announce often what they're up to. Not always giving much details though but they're inviting players to discuss with them on their international forum. In which they do engage with the community and discussing the changes, new features and such. Usually tweaking it a bit with the help of the community.
Unfortunately I can't share the game, cause if I would I violate the forum rules.

 

[Owl II]

Show me one company who is giving full transparency about their developments to their customers. Not to forget we aren't even customers, but just users of free content.
I understand the frustration and I'm frustrated myself from time to time, too - but to be honest, I think, Inno as any other company is under no obligation to lay open all their plans and intentions. Don't forget the forum users are just about 1% of all players and the majority of players (by numbers) hasn't even an idea how we are thinking this game has to be played . Stay humble - we are the minority

Agree. But they should not provoke the players with such topics

 

[Yekk]

Show me one company who is giving full transparency about their developments to their customers. Not to forget we aren't even customers, but just users of free content.
I understand the frustration and I'm frustrated myself from time to time, too - but to be honest, I think, Inno as any other company is under no obligation to lay open all their plans and intentions. Don't forget the forum users are just about 1% of all players and the majority of players (by numbers) hasn't even an idea how we are thinking this game has to be played . Stay humble - we are the minority

So much wrong in this... First not everyone is a free user. I buy diamonds even on beta... Second transparency need not give up what will be added. Just why it was done. Take Railguns. When first released they were by far to strong. Inno released a statement to that effect. Players understood. Third we are not the minority. We speak for our guilds who make the complaints...

As Owl says this thread hurts more than it helps. It is just another fake "we are listening to you thread"...

 

[Thunderdome]

Boys and girls, it seems like censorship is strong in the forum. I've seen rather pressing topics/issues that should have been addressed get the "closed" treatment while others are just running on "dead weight" with no communication after. While this thread can go on like the rest of the "we are listening to you" threads, we can all be assured that our words won't get to them.

One thing is evident, though. We got social media. Unless, they paid Zuck under the table for some "hush hush" and our posts removed or we wind up in FB jail for posting something that is against community standards or some junk that I shake my head on (can't even talk about splitting zombie heads on a game without them thinking I am conveying a threat).

 

[JosefD]

I'm not very happy with the statement made by FoE. The actual problems criticized in several of the threads here are not addressed at all, it's all just formalities, and, as has been said before, bla-bla. There is very little substance in it.

You claim that you listen to us. However, the failure so far to address all the many points of criticism proves this wrong. Well, maybe the moderators and administrators who certainly do not have an easy job do but the developers very obviously don't.

And I'm fed up with hearing the "balance" thing. Actually, whenever I read this "argument" I am in a mind to believe "balanced" means leaning toward Inno's bank account. Don't misunderstand me, of course Inno needs to earn some money in order to pay their employees. But it really seems that the users are supposed ever more to be pressed into buying diamonds. So the gameplay is no longer the most important thing in FoE - profit is.

By the way, I watched the video about the Jupiter Moon age on Youtube today. I was disappointed since the two people in the video didn't address the criticism at all.

 

[Havik79]

So I hate to harp on again, but despite in this thread (which I have already mentioned) about testing stuff internally, somehow you guys announced in the daily beta changelogs you fixed The production carousel in the settlement, but yet somehow managed to break it in live servers because I just tried to do so on 2 worlds, one Aztech the other Eygpt and you can not do several at once.

I promise I am going to stop this now, I feel like I am picking on a special needs kid, but please Inno, put a properly paid staff member on the internal testing stuff yeah, give the work experience kid something else to do, because this internal "testing" line is starting to turn into a self own, if you are not sure what that is, google Will Smith.

 

[crabbyoldman]

It is observable to me that there is a total disregard to our feedback. One glaring example is Guild battlegrounds. The entire activity is geared to favor large guilds. The most recent change to the larger map only benefitted large guilds and did nothing for the smaller guilds. what i find more aggravating is the total lack of acknowledgement for our concerns. I have been playing a little over 6 years and I love the game so much I have spent a few thousand dollars on it. But it is becoming less and less fun to play. Some of the things I see indicate a total lack of connection with the game itself. For example, the new GB for Jupiter. I'm an endgame player. I have a vast amount of special goods, what use is a boost to special goods production to me..
We the players do not feel we are part of the process. You built the game for us. You make your profit from us. But you ignore us. I have seen too many long time players leave the game because they weren't happy. If we aren't happy, you don't make money

 

[DEADP00L]

The parents of little @InnoGames waiting for their child in the Transparency section.

 

[jmtiago]

we are approaching the end of 2 weeks and the feedback from moderators/developers is almost 0

Bots continue to work at full strength, I would like to know why players who were caught with the bots get temporary bans of 2 hours, 24 hours, 3 days and not permanent bans?

 

[xivarmy]

we are approaching the end of 2 weeks and the feedback from moderators/developers is almost 0

Bots continue to work at full strength, I would like to know why players who were caught with the bots get temporary bans of 2 hours, 24 hours, 3 days and not permanent bans?

Ultimately it's not in the company's interest to permanent ban players if any other corrective measure will work (not correcting it has the issue of potentially losing other customers frustrated by it). Escalating temporary bans beforehand is a sensible measure to potentially keep a customer while correcting behavior. Though 2 hours is probably a bit too light - they might not even notice that.

As much as we're all bound by the terms of service, very few players actually know everything in it. It may seem idiotic to think bots might be legal - but such ignorance is plausible - especially with the tolerance of other 3rd party addons that gets promoted throughout many guilds (i.e. FoEhelper). So some effort before a ban to say "stop that!" does make sense. Particularly with accounts that may have been building their city for years before engaging in such behavior.

Now I doubt the people you're complaining about are some poor naive souls that didn't mean to cheat But you do have to apply a similar standard to everyone.

 

[DEADP00L]

Transparency starts with a discussion, not just spying:

 

[drakenridder]

Group chat: Inno started a group chat
Group chat: players react
Group chat: some mods react to a few direct questions
Group chat: some players react
Group chat: Inno is now lurking
Group chat: Drakenridder left the group chat (I've given up any hopes on an reaction from them)

 

[Finkadel]

I am thinking about the meme with guy from pawn shop now: "the best I can do is transparency..." and we haven't even got that...

 

[Kranyar the Mysterious]

Ya, they obviously aren't being transparent enough if you can see them lurking. They should have hidden their status to be truly transparent. Because the definition of transparency according to the Inno dictionary appears to mean you will never see them again

 

[JosefD]

It seems to me, too, that they may mix up transparency with invisibility....

Anyway, they always claim our feedback is "welcome" but so far they have failed to answer to any of the points of feedback we gave them.

 

[DEADP00L]

Innogames will finally answer all our questions and comments.....


April Fool

 

[Nickneck the Lion]

Innogames can save itself such pointless threads where only the community writes. Whoever opens a thread should look after and maintain it, but that also means talking to the community and answering questions (yes, you won't want to answer all questions, but at least 50% should be feasible). What Inno has done so far in this thread in terms of transparency and discussion is 100% bull****.

 

[xivarmy]

I don't think their statement promised to answer more questions - they were being transparent about the process of what they do with the feedback, not about the game itself. They were just expressing their disappointment in the temperature of the feedback of late. But they've earned a good portion of that ire.

There surely is some unreasonable expectations at times for things to be groundbreaking and off the wall or to cater to one particular person's playstyle. So "just listen to us" is never going to happen.

But those voices would be a bit fewer and quieter if at least a consistent bar was being cleared. Rather than a lower and lower bar:

i.e. when it comes to ages:
- Story guides you through interesting branches that reflect the choices you make on maps with multiple directions (starting in industrial) -> story has identical quests with a few text alterations no matter the choices you make providing occasional jackpots of resources while providing minimal guidance (starting in OF)
- At least 2 GBs per age -> 1 GB per age but at least that 1 GB is useful (space carrier) -> it just needs to be there, someone will build it (flying island, ai core)
- Each new age provides a significantly new fighting experience with new abilities of varying quality -> Each age provides a significantly new fighting experience with recycled abilities -> can we copy and paste the units and make a couple small tweaks there too?

 

[Nickneck the Lion]

Let's take Guild Perks as an example, Inno gave us a big shout out on them, asked for feedback and suggestions for more perks. The response to the introduced guild perks was rather negative, there were many good suggestions. Nevertheless, the guild perks were taken out of the game, with the simple explanation "it's not working, we're rebuilding, it'll come at some point". Why weren't the suggestions evaluated by Inno, the best 20 then put to the vote in the community and the top 3 then integrated into the test, that's what the beta server is for, for testing.
Another example of forwarded suggestions, why is there no feedback from the developers? For example: suggestion a cannot be implemented, it doesn't fit into the gameplay. Suggestion b will come in the next update or the one after that, or suggestion c is good, but will come a little later and is difficult to implement.
This is simple feedback that helps us and gives us the feeling that we are being listened to, that suggestions or feedback fulfil a purpose and that Inno is also interested in its community and not just in stupid cash cows that fill their coffers.