PC Voting system 7 days

I just offered an additional tool for monitoring reviews. For it was embarrassing that the developers themselves said that the community asked to do so. But the community for a long time asked the exact opposite. I did not put forward any obligations
About consumers and products. The game is in alpha version. The essence of the alpha version is that the player buys a raw game, verbally agreeing that he is ready to use the raw product, while supporting the developer so that the developer will improve this product. Using consumer money.

I am a consumer. I bought the game in alpha version. I liked her, I paid money. Waited for improvements and improvements. But the bottom line is that the game went the wrong way. The game went the way of changing the game itself. That is, a good part of the mechanic has become a completely different game. This is the point that consumers buy a raw product to be completed. But in the end, you get not an improved product, but another. It's just the way that you wrote about consumers. p.s. I wrote everything through a translator, so somewhere it may make sense
Click to expand...
The game went the wrong way IN YOUR OPINION.




Personally I think many of the systems such as the skill system and crafting are in a far better place now then they were in A15 or A16 and I know many other people agree. You claim that the community asked the exact opposite yet you don't provide any proof on the matter.

In fact when the devs changed crafting from grinding to the A17 method they made 2 posts. 1 for each method for people to discuss and the majority seemed to approve of the new way, even if it was less realistic because it got rid of the grind

 
If your referring to the old crafting system a TON of people complained about it. The old way while logical was highly unfriendly. It was a horrible experience to craft tool after tool only to turn around and re-smelt it and repeat over and over just to raise crafting. People would spend entire days doing nothing but sitting in their base queing up dozens of workbences with crafting high cost items and going into each one as it finished for the xp and then turn around and destroy what they made.
For combat skills on the other hand it was great, but skills like medicine were next to impossible to level without having to engage in grinding.
Click to expand...
No, I refer to the old skill development system. Where there was no gate of artificial restriction on the level of the character. According to the level of attributes and so on.

I also liked it when the quality of items was from 1 to 600 levels. During the repair, the level fell by a couple of percent, and so on.

I liked the dynamic system for the development of passive skills, like resource extraction. Possession of weapons and so on.

About spam through workbenches. This is bad, something could be done about it. The level of objects also increased through perks. The system was again damp, but it was interesting, it was just necessary to remove spam.

As for the spam shooting at the wall, and so on. This is the choice of players. For example, it was enough for me that I developed dynamic skills moving '' along the plot ''. Spam is already the choice of the players personally, if the player wants to stand still and beat the wall for 2 hours in a row, then he will find a similar occupation anywhere.

Just again, this system needed to be improved. It is possible to fix a little perks of armor, medicine. Well, that is, the bottom line is that it needed to be finalized. The system was raw, it needed a trivial improvement. But she was just redone in some sort of RPG quest for a calculator.

 
The game went the wrong way IN YOUR OPINION.


Personally I think many of the systems such as the skill system and crafting are in a far better place now then they were in A15 or A16 and I know many other people agree. You claim that the community asked the exact opposite yet you don't provide any proof on the matter.

In fact when the devs changed crafting from grinding to the A17 method they made 2 posts. 1 for each method for people to discuss and the majority seemed to approve of the new way, even if it was less realistic because it got rid of the grind
Click to expand...
Oh god. You don’t listen to me at all. I am saying that it would be nice to introduce a voting system so that there is evidence. So that people make clear choices on a specific issue, and we see everything in numbers.

Regarding the discussions, I'm not talking about changing the system with skill. The question was originally about walking street zombies.

The developers said that the players were begging to reduce the number of zombies in the streets, and they reduced them. But everywhere in the comments on YouTube, on social networks, people endlessly started writing that they asked to increase the number of zombies in the streets.

 
No, I refer to the old skill development system. Where there was no gate of artificial restriction on the level of the character. According to the level of attributes and so on.
I also liked it when the quality of items was from 1 to 600 levels. During the repair, the level fell by a couple of percent, and so on.

I liked the dynamic system for the development of passive skills, like resource extraction. Possession of weapons and so on.

About spam through workbenches. This is bad, something could be done about it. The level of objects also increased through perks. The system was again damp, but it was interesting, it was just necessary to remove spam.

As for the spam shooting at the wall, and so on. This is the choice of players. For example, it was enough for me that I developed dynamic skills moving '' along the plot ''. Spam is already the choice of the players personally, if the player wants to stand still and beat the wall for 2 hours in a row, then he will find a similar occupation anywhere.

Just again, this system needed to be improved. It is possible to fix a little perks of armor, medicine. Well, that is, the bottom line is that it needed to be finalized. The system was raw, it needed a trivial improvement. But she was just redone in some sort of RPG quest for a calculator.
Click to expand...
The issue was with how the system was built you couldn't level a skill in a reasonable manner without resorting to basically cheating. Had to sit there and let zombies hit you to gain armor for instance. Or stand on a catcus and spam heal to raise healing. Or craft 5000 Chest Plates that you'd never actually use.

It's an interesting system, but it breaks in many ways as anyone who has played Skyrim or other similar games knows when trying to raise crafting skills, sneak, etc. They don't raise the same as say weapon skills that are used all the time so you have to go out of your way to spam them. There just isn't a good way to do that organic skill progression without grinding for those skills.

 
The game went the wrong way IN YOUR OPINION.
Well that is up for debate. A17 definatively was a wrong step. and 66% seemed to agree. Now it bounced back a bit, but be aware that there are ppl that give games like ATLAS on launch an upvote (33%)




Personally I think many of the systems such as the skill system and crafting are in a far better place now then they were in A15 or A16 and I know many other people agree. You claim that the community asked the exact opposite yet you don't provide any proof on the matter.

In fact when the devs changed crafting from grinding to the A17 method they made 2 posts. 1 for each method for people to discuss and the majority seemed to approve of the new way, even if it was less realistic because it got rid of the grind
Click to expand...
If you are talking about this, you can clearly see that 50% liked the old system and 25% would have liked an even more extreme LBD system. That is the LARGE majority with 75%.

And I know it wasn't you that asked before... but ppl constantly ask for proof... I have posted that like 5 times already.

PPL really loved the old way of playing. It was immersive and perfect for a survival sandbox.

If you like the new way that is fine. But even if the "ultra large majority" (how MM called them) are silent and don'T give reviews, doesnt mean they like the changes put in front. They might just not care enough about the game.

I will give TFPs credit, while looking for this poll, I have seen that they actually DID listen for most of their polls (electricity and stuff) and even though everyone wants more zombies, which they cant fulfill, they lowered the amount inside of POIs even though they were so proud of those dungeoncrawls.

So there. The good: they aren't AS bad as I sometimes make them out to be.

The meh: ppl like you who bring up the same dead argument that because they liked it and they know ppl that like it, its good

The ugly (for me personally): when push comes to shove, they WILL do what they want. No matter the feedback. They will try and patch it... put a bandage on it... but they will do what THEY think is best.

- - - Updated - - -

The issue was with how the system was built you couldn't level a skill in a reasonable manner without resorting to basically cheating. Had to sit there and let zombies hit you to gain armor for instance. Or stand on a catcus and spam heal to raise healing. Or craft 5000 Chest Plates that you'd never actually use.
It's an interesting system, but it breaks in many ways as anyone who has played Skyrim or other similar games knows when trying to raise crafting skills, sneak, etc. They don't raise the same as say weapon skills that are used all the time so you have to go out of your way to spam them. There just isn't a good way to do that organic skill progression without grinding for those skills.
Click to expand...
And I can tell you that you could. Everything but armor in A16 was very well possible to get that skill up to 80+ on day 50.

And since they only gave small % boosts you never needed them, since quality of the weapon/tool/armor was far more important (but not unimportant)

Small fixes (like faster armor leveling and environmental damage not giving xp) would have been MUCH simpler and met with less backlash than reworking basicially the entire game.

 
With 5-10 ppl (maybe 25 at most) and at 2.5 million copies sold (pc only not including consoles and in 2013) at a minimum price of 8$ and 30% for steam, that is still 10.000.000 /25 which is still 400.000 in about 1 1/2 years + kickstarter + most ppl have paid more than reduced prices on 3rd party websites I highly doubt you are correct.
MOST indy games... sure... but 7d2d is definatly profitable.
Click to expand...
Do you think the money in a game company gets split evenly?

 
I just offered an additional tool for monitoring reviews. For it was embarrassing that the developers themselves said that the community asked to do so. But the community for a long time asked the exact opposite. I did not put forward any obligations
About consumers and products. The game is in alpha version. The essence of the alpha version is that the player buys a raw game, verbally agreeing that he is ready to use the raw product, while supporting the developer so that the developer will improve this product. Using consumer money.

I am a consumer. I bought the game in alpha version. I liked her, I paid money. Waited for improvements and improvements. But the bottom line is that the game went the wrong way. The game went the way of changing the game itself. That is, a good part of the mechanic has become a completely different game. This is the point that consumers buy a raw product to be completed. But in the end, you get not an improved product, but another. It's just the way that you wrote about consumers. p.s. I wrote everything through a translator, so somewhere it may make sense
Click to expand...
I get what you're saying but the idea that it went 'the wrong way' is your personal opinion. I love it way more now than LBD.

Any alpha product is going to change, and change significantly. That's in the warning you read through when you buy the game in a development state.

I'm all for a system for people to give feedback to TFP but I just want to make clear that no game company should, or would, make their game based on player feedback. It's not only inefficent but likely to design a bad game overall.

 
The developers said that the players were begging to reduce the number of zombies in the streets, and they reduced them. But everywhere in the comments on YouTube, on social networks, people endlessly started writing that they asked to increase the number of zombies in the streets.
Click to expand...
Could you post the source on this? I'm pretty certain they said they reduced the number of zombies in the streets for performance reasons. I don't recall the reduction of outdoor zombies being a change that was due to player feedback.

I also recall that it was explained that this reduction is the first step in a new "Encounter Mechanic".

But I could be wrong in my recollection and maybe TFP did state that the outdoor spawning reduction was in response to players asking for that.

 
If you are talking about this, you can clearly see that 50% liked the old system and 25% would have liked an even more extreme LBD system. That is the LARGE majority with 75%.
And I know it wasn't you that asked before... but ppl constantly ask for proof... I have posted that like 5 times already.

PPL really loved the old way of playing. It was immersive and perfect for a survival sandbox.

If you like the new way that is fine. But even if the "ultra large majority" (how MM called them) are silent and don'T give reviews, doesnt mean they like the changes put in front. They might just not care enough about the game.

I will give TFPs credit, while looking for this poll, I have seen that they actually DID listen for most of their polls (electricity and stuff) and even though everyone wants more zombies, which they cant fulfill, they lowered the amount inside of POIs even though they were so proud of those dungeoncrawls.

So there. The good: they aren't AS bad as I sometimes make them out to be.

The meh: ppl like you who bring up the same dead argument that because they liked it and they know ppl that like it, its good

The ugly (for me personally): when push comes to shove, they WILL do what they want. No matter the feedback. They will try and patch it... put a bandage on it... but they will do what THEY think is best.

- - - Updated - - -

And I can tell you that you could. Everything but armor in A16 was very well possible to get that skill up to 80+ on day 50.

And since they only gave small % boosts you never needed them, since quality of the weapon/tool/armor was far more important (but not unimportant)

Small fixes (like faster armor leveling and environmental damage not giving xp) would have been MUCH simpler and met with less backlash than reworking basicially the entire game.
Click to expand...
I did not even know that there was such a poll. And I am glad that the leading points were exactly those that were leading for me. Namely the old skill system. Practical training system. And the absence of a gate blocking development.

I’m also glad that you have the same opinion that you just had to modify the system, and not just remake it from scratch. Previously, the truth was felt immersion in the atmosphere of the game.

 
If you are talking about this, you can clearly see that 50% liked the old system and 25% would have liked an even more extreme LBD system. That is the LARGE majority with 75%.
And I know it wasn't you that asked before... but ppl constantly ask for proof... I have posted that like 5 times already.

PPL really loved the old way of playing. It was immersive and perfect for a survival sandbox.

If you like the new way that is fine. But even if the "ultra large majority" (how MM called them) are silent and don'T give reviews, doesnt mean they like the changes put in front. They might just not care enough about the game.

I will give TFPs credit, while looking for this poll, I have seen that they actually DID listen for most of their polls (electricity and stuff) and even though everyone wants more zombies, which they cant fulfill, they lowered the amount inside of POIs even though they were so proud of those dungeoncrawls.

So there. The good: they aren't AS bad as I sometimes make them out to be.

The meh: ppl like you who bring up the same dead argument that because they liked it and they know ppl that like it, its good

The ugly (for me personally): when push comes to shove, they WILL do what they want. No matter the feedback. They will try and patch it... put a bandage on it... but they will do what THEY think is best.

- - - Updated - - -

And I can tell you that you could. Everything but armor in A16 was very well possible to get that skill up to 80+ on day 50.

And since they only gave small % boosts you never needed them, since quality of the weapon/tool/armor was far more important (but not unimportant)

Small fixes (like faster armor leveling and environmental damage not giving xp) would have been MUCH simpler and met with less backlash than reworking basicially the entire game.
Click to expand...
Yes because the A17 system introduced level gates which were WIDELY unpopular. If you were to run another poll with the new system it would show something very different.

Hence why only 10% of people said they liked the level gates. So that is why no one wanted the A17 system.

They did do several changes from that poll including doing away with the level gates, removing the limits to progression, and so on

 
Yes because the A17 system introduced level gates which were WIDELY unpopular. If you were to run another poll with the new system it would show something very different.
Click to expand...
If you could make a followup poll where you are only allowed to vote if you have played A16, then I would bet my hat on it that the poll wouldnt change much... but since that is only speculatory, we can only go by what we have.

 
With 5-10 ppl (maybe 25 at most) and at 2.5 million copies sold (pc only not including consoles and in 2013) at a minimum price of 8$ and 30% for steam, that is still 10.000.000 /25 which is still 400.000 in about 1 1/2 years + kickstarter + most ppl have paid more than reduced prices on 3rd party websites I highly doubt you are correct.
MOST indy games... sure... but 7d2d is definatly profitable.
Click to expand...
No one said it was unprofitable. Nice strawman tho...

Also, you really think income is split between all employees? Speculating about how much is earned and how it is spent is not only in bad taste but iirc it is also against forum rules?

ps. Rick and Joel recently said on stream TFP has approx 25 full time employees and 10-15 part time.

 
Yes because the A17 system introduced level gates which were WIDELY unpopular. If you were to run another poll with the new system it would show something very different.
Hence why only 10% of people said they liked the level gates. So that is why no one wanted the A17 system.

They did do several changes from that poll including doing away with the level gates, removing the limits to progression, and so on
Click to expand...
Again, this is more like a lie. For the level gates were not removed, they simply changed. Now the level gates are attributes. Such as strength, agility, stamina and so on. In the older version, those bonuses that give these attributes separately gave separate skills. Now it’s mandatory individual skills to open the gate of perks.

 
No one said it was unprofitable. Nice strawman tho...
Also, you really think income is split between all employees? Speculating about how much is earned and how it is spent is not only in bad taste but iirc it is also against forum rules?

ps. Rick and Joel recently said on stream TFP has approx 25 full time employees and 10-15 part time.
Click to expand...
I will just leave this here:

I don't know how else to put this -
Anyone working in the gaming industry could make more money elsewhere in private sector with the same skills.

Significantly more.
Click to expand...
Show me a job where you can earn more than 400k a year in the private sector. That is ~35k a month.

And I was extremely nice with my /25 proposal. Since TFPs get the lion share which means they get MUCH more than that.

So telling us this is just about the passion, when MM himself stated multiple times that it IS about the money (and about passion, but more as an afterthought) is silly. That is why I pointed this out.

I do not blame MM or TFPs. Money is nice. I just wanted to show that his statement was big big bullocks!

 
Again, this is more like a lie. For the level gates were not removed, they simply changed. Now the level gates are attributes. Such as strength, agility, stamina and so on. In the older version, those bonuses that give these attributes separately gave separate skills. Now it’s mandatory individual skills to open the gate of perks.
Click to expand...
No that is not a lie.

For instance in A17 you couldn't craft quality 6 tools until level 80 or something like that.

In A18 you craft them at like level 15 if you want, it's just a matter of how you spend your points. There is no gate and you can pump up any stat or skill at any time.

THAT is the exact OPPOSITE of a level gate.

- - - Updated - - -

I will just leave this here:


Show me a job where you can earn more than 400k a year in the private sector. That is ~35k a month.

And I was extremely nice with my /25 proposal. Since TFPs get the lion share which means they get MUCH more than that.

So telling us this is just about the passion, when MM himself stated multiple times that it IS about the money (and about passion, but more as an afterthought) is silly. That is why I pointed this out.

I do not blame MM or TFPs. Money is nice. I just wanted to show that his statement was big big bullocks!
Click to expand...
To be fair there is a massive difference between the company making that money and the employees making that money. You do realize the employees are most likely salary and there could always be bonuses but you don't just give our all your profits to employees....

 
So...voting...polls...so that the devs can see accurately how the playerbase feels about a certain issue...

Tell me, what percent of the total people who bought 7dtd are currently ACTIVE on the forums? How would people off the forums get a voice in these polls?

Do you honestly think that that percentage is an equal representation of all types of players of the game? Or are the active forumgoers going to be the most satisfied? least satisfied? most hardcore? most casual? How would underrepresented people on the forums get an equal voice in these polls?

What about people who are only considering buying the game? How would they get a voice if they aren't on the forums?

You want scientifically accurate statistics...well...you can't have them...not in the form of voluntary polls on a forum.

You cited the LBD poll, where you say that 75% of people favored that system...well that poll was voluntary...people would only seek out an opportunity to voice their opinion if they were unhappy, and the poll was posted immediately after LBD was removed. Of course it was populated by dissatisfaction. Heck, the new system wasn't even fully understood.

Voting...in the form of polls for data collection isn't easy. There's a whole science around it. How many political polls have you seen on facebook where you read them and think "well, these questions are total Bulls***!" Because the people that crafted those questions made the poll to tell them what they WANT to hear. It takes teams of people with blind checks and conflicting biases, with experience and innate understanding of psychology and language to craft a poll. One mistake and the poll, and as a result, ANY data gleaned from it, is completely useless. It doesn't even take intent to screw up a poll. One word, put in a place that wasn't well thought out. One question, asked in such a way as to confirm rather than to give an option, and a poll's integrity is ruined. The LBD poll was answered the way it was because of the delivery method of the poll, the timing of the poll, the wording of the poll - in short, it is completely worthless. People citing it either have no clue what credible sources are or how they're vetted, or are willfully ignoring those factors in the hopes that their audience is too stupid and will be swayed by corrupt data.

 
So...voting...polls...so that the devs can see accurately how the playerbase feels about a certain issue...
Tell me, what percent of the total people who bought 7dtd are currently ACTIVE on the forums? How would people off the forums get a voice in these polls?

Do you honestly think that that percentage is an equal representation of all types of players of the game? Or are the active forumgoers going to be the most satisfied? least satisfied? most hardcore? most casual? How would underrepresented people on the forums get an equal voice in these polls?

What about people who are only considering buying the game? How would they get a voice if they aren't on the forums?

You want scientifically accurate statistics...well...you can't have them...not in the form of voluntary polls on a forum.

You cited the LBD poll, where you say that 75% of people favored that system...well that poll was voluntary...people would only seek out an opportunity to voice their opinion if they were unhappy, and the poll was posted immediately after LBD was removed. Of course it was populated by dissatisfaction. Heck, the new system wasn't even fully understood.

Voting...in the form of polls for data collection isn't easy. There's a whole science around it. How many political polls have you seen on facebook where you read them and think "well, these questions are total Bulls***!" Because the people that crafted those questions made the poll to tell them what they WANT to hear. It takes teams of people with blind checks and conflicting biases, with experience and innate understanding of psychology and language to craft a poll. One mistake and the poll, and as a result, ANY data gleaned from it, is completely useless. It doesn't even take intent to screw up a poll. One word, put in a place that wasn't well thought out. One question, asked in such a way as to confirm rather than to give an option, and a poll's integrity is ruined. The LBD poll was answered the way it was because of the delivery method of the poll, the timing of the poll, the wording of the poll - in short, it is completely worthless. People citing it either have no clue what credible sources are or how they're vetted, or are willfully ignoring those factors in the hopes that their audience is too stupid and will be swayed by corrupt data.
Click to expand...
Well, I wrote. That the polling system would be nice to integrate into the game itself. So that people playing can evaluate each item, etc. etc.

And about the juggling of meaning in the question, well, that's another question. I think people are able to vote in simple polls right into the game. For example, do you think that zombies are very few, do you think that zombies are very many, and so on. This is not a solution. It will simply be statistics, for clarity, no more.

- - - Updated - - -

No that is not a lie.
For instance in A17 you couldn't craft quality 6 tools until level 80 or something like that.

In A18 you craft them at like level 15 if you want, it's just a matter of how you spend your points. There is no gate and you can pump up any stat or skill at any time.

THAT is the exact OPPOSITE of a level gate.

- - - Updated - - -

To be fair there is a massive difference between the company making that money and the employees making that money. You do realize the employees are most likely salary and there could always be bonuses but you don't just give our all your profits to employees....
Click to expand...
Sorry, but reducing the size of the gate does not equal removing the gate.

 
I can’t imagine any poll that would show that people think there were too many wilderness zombies. TFP didn’t reduce them in response to player wishes, they reduced them for performance reasons. Please provide your source for this premise you keep using for your point.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top