modability of a feature is an ability largely independant on discussing a feature before implementation, i.e. if it is relatively easy it is (or should be done) anyway. If they don't have the time for this, how can they have time for discussing a feature in depth, as this costs time as well ?
A dev or a mod makes a post, brief desc of a planned feature, people discuss the pros and cons among themselves. Devs and mods can obviously parttake if they like and find the time (btw, most of us have a job too, and still we find time to write lengthy posts). Relatively few relevant leanings and opinions will crystallize after a while - SHAZAM - valuable input for the devs.
Hey. Make no mistake. I know it's not gonna happen. But it would be a good and reasonable thing and much better than the practise I'm criticising.
Yeates uses the word "speculate" in his definition of thought experiment (see your wikipedia link). And that is exactly the right word. You can speculate. We didn't leave the theoretical sphere, we just plucked some holes in a theory. The most famous thought experiment with a cat did not really give away any secrets of the physical world and it definitely didn't bolster the validity of quantum theory. It just showed to non-scientists how weird the consequences of quantum theory really are.
If I know that I won't have food tomorrow, is it mere speculation and actually uncertain, that I will be hungry?
On strawberrys:
thought experiment 1: You also get a mango to taste. And to your surprise you discover that mangos are the superior fruit by far. Sure you have lost strawberries, but since the game can only support one fruit, without that loss you would never have tasted mangos. Your situation now is better.
thought experiment 2: [something something] mango.
But what if I base my thought experiments on available facts instead of making up fantasy mangos..? And I already said that my playstyle is very rare.
A different interpretation would be that he is trying to sell the feature, even if he knows it won't be universally liked. But I don't know. It isn't really important to me because I prefer following MMs vision to following the vision of the loudest mob on the forum. Because it worked in the past and mob-rule is not democracy and a forum can only accuratly simulate a mob.
Am I that mob you talk about so much..? lol
I don't really know what you mean, and in my (and not only my) opinion, a "good" number of aspects of the game have been developed in the wrong direction. Vanilla has become nearly unplayable for me, and that is a recent development. When a new alpha came out, I used to play a long game on Navezgane, before I turned to modding. Not anymore. The lack of zombies for example. Go back to the old models and animations if the engine can't handle the new textures.
And in all clarity, you so summarily say "as if he was doing us a service" with zombie loot implying he didn't. Please don't just discount me and a lot of other people who specifically said they liked the change. While the backlash was certainly expected it was by no means a clear case. Someone made a poll shortly after the announcement expecting a landslide win for the unhappy and it amounted to a draw.
And that is the normal case: ANY change will bring out the people critical to it announcing their dissatisfaction. Most of the people that are indifferent or ok with a change will NOT post anything, unless the ruckus from critics gets too loud. As a developer you would be mad to listen to the critical voices because they are
1) not an indication of the views of the whole player base
2) more often than not highly emotionally fueled
3) based on thought experiments and incomplete information that really really can't replace the true test of a feature
If a person is indifferent or "ok with" the removal of an option, I don't count them as in favor of the removal. I only count people who are in favor of a removal (or change) if it actually improves their playing experience.
I have not seen anybody explain how removal of zombie loot or backward sprinting improves their playing experience. Roland, for example, just tried to make the case that you need to be afraid and whatnot, so backward sprinting is bad. But you don't need backward sprinting to fight a running horde. You can win by sprinting forward or circle strafing and using the appropriate weapon. You can also just run away, with beer, alcohole and coffee you have infinte stamina. You can jump on your mini bike and drive off. And since A16 you can sneak through the night, while seeing everything with nightvision goggles. Hm... Do you think Roland will notice if I just copypaste the rebuttal..? :-D
What about you? Can you argue for any of the removals? Another point is that noone asked for the changes. Noone ever complained about zombie loot, noone complained about backward sprinting. At least I have not seen it. That's just "another point", mind you. Not a prominent argument. More of an indication, that these two changes don't improve the game.
In regard to discussing plans, I am not advocating that the devs should make it a vote. I am advocating to gather feedback and input from the community BEFORE a change is applied to the game. From people who have strong opinions about the game, and who base their strong opinion on thousands of hours playing it. I mark this, as I refer to it from now on. You seem to misunderstand my suggestion to discuss planned features instead of defending them afterwards.
I'd also like to note that I find it quite a bit sad that you and Morloc and Jedo have so little faith in your ability to contribute something valuable to the game's development. Why is that so?
There is no "the players" as a homogenious block.
Yes there is, they just do not have a homogenious opinion.
Make a change and you make some player happy and some other unhappy. Inevitable.
Probably.
If we listened to blunt criticism on youtube, we would be Nazis now. What was your point? No really, youtube comment section is mob rule
Some youtube comment sections are terrible. Politics, feminism, religion. But the section on Joel's video is just fine. It's only blunt. No name calling, almost no profanity. People are only voicing their opinion. Also: See the bold comment. Over and over you make the mistake of implying I want a "mob" to make decisions. I want the devs to give the mob a chance to discuss planned features and provide feedback and opinions. That's very different.
Because they are confident their change is the right way. And only testing it can reveal the absolute and irrefutable truth. Not a cacophony of voices who are at their loudest when their emotions are blocking out any logic. Mob rule.
In reality, it is perfectly possible to make reasonable statements about changes that one has not yet actually tested, particularly when it's simple removals. Of course I will miss zombie loot, if I enjoyed looting zombies, of course I will miss sprinting backwards, if I enjoyed sprinting backwards. Of course I will miss 1 block ingress, if I enjoyed 1 block ingress. Of course I will miss the old chessboardish hub cities, if I enjoyed the old chessboardish hub cities. Your claim, that one cannot foreknow things, is plain wrong.
Plain wrong as well is your portrayal of people who voice criticism and dislike of certain features as some sort of mindless "mob". I am not a mindless mob, and my logic is not blocked out by emotions, even when emotions are present.
I don't think you bulit a strawman on purpose, but notice you did. I said it was inevitable that protests would happen. That doesn't mean that the mob doing the protests is anywhere near a significant number of players. And even if they were a significant number, there is a german proverb coined by a comedian: "People, eat ♥♥♥♥, millions of flies can't be wrong".
It's a bit of a strawman, but within good manners I think. There aren't any people who really argue for the changes, only people who don't care. But I retract the question, I admit it's more rethoric than an argument.
Still, a lot of people obviously dislike the change and explain why, and once again you declare them an unreasonable mob. That's rethoric outside good manners. I'm not an unreasonable mob.
This is wrong for a different reason: People who have played the game a thousand hours are not anymore a typical new player, with decidedly different tastes and abilities while vanilla has to target the new players.
Really? Can you give a couple of examples? I certainly got better at the game, got the timings right and such, but that did not take me long, and look at me, arguing against the removal of mechanics that make the game easier. My taste has not changed either, it was, btw, a taste I had acquired before 7dtd was ever developed. I also have played a lot with new players, some of which I bought the game for, some people I met on servers, so I kinda know what they like and dislike. One thing, for example, is the many skills and perks, requirements, how to unlock recipes.
Experienced players know the game inside out. They are a great source of feedback. "I mean", that's really a no-brainer, don't try too hard, man.
