Community Relations Archive
Thread: Communication Breakdown: TEF Removal
Animi wrote:
jphillips1868 wrote:
AndI am sure you read the many post that feel TEFs need to remain in the game as well, but I guess those weren't given as much weight.
Why in the world would you say that? Do you think the Devs just had some secret desire to remove TEFs? Why would they care one way or another, other than because it was something the vast majority of feedback suggested should be changed? Amini your right, that was a cheap shot and I've deleted it.
That being said, the system is still in development and can (will?) be changed based on feedback here and after it gets published on test center. You want communication about the issues? Well, what do you think is happening right now?
This is certainly communication.Andthe type of communicationhere is very appropirate. What I have a problem with is that a month ago (or whenever they decided to work on this) the Devs didn't say hey guys this is something we want to do. What do you think about this goal?Now according to the correspondents they did that with them andaccording Calandryllthe Devs read our postsgenerally, including on thisissue. Most of you apparently feel that is enough. I disagree. I think forreally big controversialchanges, there needs to be more notice and discussion of the goal, without the Devs havinginvested lots of coding and development time in the change. Once things get more fully designed, they have a way of taking on a life of their own.An organization inertia so to speak.
But that being said, as several of you have pointed out, my rating in this thread have been fairly low so I guess you would rather SOE cook upmajorchanges with consulation with the correspondece in secret and tell us about when everything is essentialy done and ready to go.Your entiteld to your opinion atlhough, when the next change comes down the pike that you don't like and is sprung on you , perhaphs you will change your mind, perhaps not.
As for thediscussion of whether or not TEFs should be removed,I respect everyone that feels differently than me on the TEF issue. There are arguments for and against. If it appeared that I didn't I apologize. It wasn't my original intent to discuss that here, but it kind of degenerated into that, which was partly my fault I guess.
Message Edited by jphillips1868 on 02-03-2005 02:21 PM
Question for Calandryll_SOE
Still waiting to hear how the TEF changes are going to effect milita or if milita will just be changed?
jphillips1868 wrote:
I am very dissappointed that the community was not given advance notice that SOE was considering removing the TEF and thus an opportunity to give feedback on that possibility.Wheneverthe Dev team decidedthis was somethingit wasinterested in doing,there should have been a post to the effect that SOE is considering removing the TEF and seeking the community's input on that propsal. The TEF is a fundamental game mechanic. And while I understand, but don't necessarily agree with, the Dev reluctance to release details until they are all but set in stone, you could have at least giveus notice of thehigh level concept. I consider thisa tremendous step backward in the effort to improve player-dev communications. For a change this fundamental and controversial, feedback from the correspondents simply isn't enough. This is in stark contrast to the way you have handled the CURB. I hope this type of communication will not be the trend. Regardless of how you feel about removing the TEF, more discussion is needed for such a high level change. Calandryll, I would appreciate your commenting on this as it really casts a shadow on your effort to revamp player-dev communications.
Had there been an in concept post and discussion a month agothehigh level concept of removingTEFs could have beendisucssedeither the Devs could have conviencedthose for TEFsor we could have convinced the Devs. At the very least we would have had some time to digest this change.
Message Edited by jphillips1868 on 02-03-2005 09:59 AM
Message Edited by jphillips1868 on 02-03-2005 02:02 PM
err..ummm...I'm going to have to disagree with you there...
Theteam communicated with everyone before it hit TC. From the feeback we give, they are able to make changes before it hits TC. I would say that this is a case study in how it should be done. We should all be thankful it happend this way - as it was not this way in the past.
That said, and it's not really the point - The removal of the TEF system and replacing it with the new system is a very good design choice. It supports multiple playstyles and still gives everyone the opportunity to feel part of the GCW. Not only that, but it has been commonly accepted that the TEF system is too easy to exploit and creates lots of situations that are simply not fun.
This is only good news for us from my position....good decisions & commmunicating prior to TC....I would say this is far from the meltdown you describe.
/thank soe team
jphillips1868 wrote:
This is certainly communication.Andthe type of communicationhere is very appropirate. What I have a problem with is that a month ago (or whenever they decided to work on this) the Devs didn't say hey guys this is something we want to do. What do you think about this goal?Now according to the correspondents they did that with them andaccording Calandryllthe Devs read our postsgenerally, including on thisissue. Most of you apparently feel that is enough. I disagree. I think forreally big controversialchanges, there needs to be more notice and discussion of the goal, without the Devs havinginvested lots of coding and development time in the change. Once things get more fully designed, they have a way of taking on a life of their own.An organization inertia so to speak.
I think what everyone is trying to tell you is this:
The discussion about TEFs (pro and con) has been going on for a long time. If the Devs said "Hey guys this is something we want to do. What do you think about this goal?" then they would most likely simply get another rehash of all the TEF arguments and discussions which havealready choked the Forums. They would get no more (or better) feedback thanthey currently have access to, so why start yet another thread to discussmaking changes? It wouldn't be very productive, and I believe the Devs recognized this. Allthe feedback they needed (good and bad) and all the communitiesviews (all sides) on this issue have already been stated multiple times in various ways throughout the Forums.
In other words, the Devs sawthat the current system needed to be addressed, ifno other reason than it created so much discord between the players. They also sawall the suggestions and opinions on how it should/should not change. They then took all those pieces (which were already out there and being discussed) and put them together to try and improve the system. This was a far more logical and efficient approach than asking for the system to be discussed all over again.
I'm sorry that your post got such a low rating, but I think everyone (on both sides of the issue)is tired of the endless battles over TEFs, and cannot understand how someone can criticize SOE for not giving us enough notice that they were trying to respond to our outcry...especially when the outcry has gone on for so long without being addressed at all!
I hope that sheds a little light on things, and maybe makes you feel a little better
Calandryll_SOE wrote:
Decisions are rarely final unless they are already in the game...and even then, things can change. If we get overwhelming negative feedback on an idea, we change it or reconsider it. We do our best to avoid proposing ideas that we know will be hated by a large majority of our players and our Correspondents do an excellent job helping us with that.Very few, if any, changes are ever universally liked.
jphillips1868 wrote:
Calandryll_SOE wrote:
Actually, we spent a lot of time reading threads about TEFs on the various boards when deciding to do this. The removal of TEFs is something that many players have been talking about for quite some time.
The updates are posted now so players can see the designs and give us feedback. The TEF changes are still in development and won't appear on Test Center until after Publish 13.0.
AndI am sure you read the many post that feel TEFs need to remain in the game as well, but I guess those weren't given as much weight.
Butmy question is then, is at this stage of the process, are you open to reversing the high level concept decision to remove TEFs or is the purpose of the feedback just to work out how the details will work? If you aren't open to that kind of feedback at this stage, my point stands. But if as I fear, the decision has already been made and set in stone, this is a situation that needs to be improved upon for future changes. Otherwise, you are just going to alienate more and more of your playerbase, but not giving them meaningful input.
Message Edited by jphillips1868 on 02-03-2005 12:01 PM
Calandryll_SOE wrote:
jphillips1868 wrote:
Barb-Wire wrote:
i wouldnt worry too much about the negatives on this one. the only folks who hate this are the G-Tef griefers. and far as im concerned if they quit over this the game is better off without that source of grief.
While whether or not we should get rid of TEFs isnt' the topic of this thread, theadequency of the communciation on the change is theissue here.
Hey folks, I just want to reiterate that jphillips1868 post is not about whether TEF Is good or bad, rather how we communicate it. While I don't agree that we communicated it poorly, I would appreciate it if people kept their comments to communications, rather than debating whether TEFs should be removed. Let's keep that discussion to the In Development thread.
Thanks.
i find the way your communicating now compaired to 3 months ago top notch. it hasnt been in a higher more informative state than when the gme began. my comments were directed at those who would nay-say CTD fixes no matter how they are communicated.
what your doing now with giving us info in a timely fashion with massive follow up is very very very good. sometimes it just seems that the negative posts are dwelt on more than the positive.
Message Edited by jphillips1868 on 02-03-2005 04:06 PM
Message Edited by jphillips1868 on 02-03-2005 04:07 PM