1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Greetings Guest!!

    In order to combat SPAM on the forums, all users are required to have a minimum of 2 posts before they can submit links in any post or thread.

    Dismiss Notice

Should all changes/additions to Uo be made by the players?

Discussion in 'UHall' started by ZippyTwitch, Sep 26, 2008.

?

Should players get to choose via login server poll?

  1. Yes

    20 vote(s)
    23.5%
  2. No

    65 vote(s)
    76.5%
  1. ZippyTwitch

    ZippyTwitch Lore Keeper
    Stratics Veteran Stratics Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2006
    Messages:
    924
    Likes Received:
    19
    Now my idea is for a login server poll. Each account gets 1 vote per change or addition to the game. This way the players get to decide what gets nerfed. What gets added and what gets changed. I keep seeing alot of changes to UO and a common reason they state is because players have been asking for this and that. They keep saying the players shape the world and what not. But yet we get no say in what gets added to the game.
     
  2. Maplestone

    Maplestone Crazed Zealot
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2008
    Messages:
    3,657
    Likes Received:
    9
    I voted "yes", but with a big asterisk. I think players should vote on what areas of the game deserve attention. However, specific changes: no.

    Players are not unbiased and (quite naturally) a little greedy - you'll always get more votes for a buff than a nerf - it sets up a cycle where an overpowered template will get more players and thus vote itself more power. So I think players should be able to vote for "skill balance" as a priority, I would oppose players voting up or down specific techniques for balance.

    Also, I would restrict voting to accounts at least 6 months old (to cut down on spamming new accounts)
     
  3. Setnaffa

    Setnaffa Certifiable
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    1,537
    Likes Received:
    0
    Should we? No. Of course not.

    The game belongs to Electronic Arts. It's their decision where they want this game to go and where they want to spend resources to improve or change it. Our only part in this is whether we like the game enough to pay to play it each month.

    On the other hand, if EA decided to poll me on what I like or don't like about the game or what I'd like added, changed, nerfed, or removed, I would definitely take the time to answer.
     
  4. I voted no. As an IT member, I still have cases where users insist they are right, I implement something and I get the "Oh $%^&%R$ I didn't want that!" line.

    We - the players, EA customers - are too fickle and wear blinders on too much to make rational decisions for the greater good. Especially if it goes against their playstyle grain or personal preferences.
     
  5. kelmo

    kelmo Old and in the way
    Professional Stratics Veteran Alumni Dread Lord

    Joined:
    May 12, 2008
    Messages:
    17,379
    Likes Received:
    4,698
  6. Maplestone

    Maplestone Crazed Zealot
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2008
    Messages:
    3,657
    Likes Received:
    9
    I find the collective lack of faith in the power of democracy a little disturbing, especially with all the elections going on right now :)
     
  7. Uvtha

    Uvtha Grand Poobah
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 24, 2008
    Messages:
    6,526
    Likes Received:
    2,914
    Thats idiotic. No. Many players are complete nincompoops who coulnd game design thier way out of a paper sack.

    Should devs listen to player input? Absolutly, assuming that the input isnt stupid.
     
  8. kelmo

    kelmo Old and in the way
    Professional Stratics Veteran Alumni Dread Lord

    Joined:
    May 12, 2008
    Messages:
    17,379
    Likes Received:
    4,698
    Did you ever play D&D? If your GM gave into democracy... Well, that leads to a pretty boring game.
     
  9. Maplestone

    Maplestone Crazed Zealot
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2008
    Messages:
    3,657
    Likes Received:
    9
    I play every other week (well, not exactly D&D but a homebrew game system with a superficial compatibility). The players have complete control over where they go on the map of the land, what edges they cross, what plotlines they explore, what topics they want to research (ie: what parts of the game map, history, ecology, economy or rules mechanics I flesh out). For over 20 years, I've had no problem in finding a steady stream of eager players by word of mouth.

    Ironically, you choose the perfect example of why I think democracy in game-design priorities works :)
     
  10. EnigmaMaitreya

    EnigmaMaitreya Crazed Zealot
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 12, 2008
    Messages:
    3,402
    Likes Received:
    0
    Your premise is completly flawed.

    You assume that every account equals a unique person.

    I can assure you that is not the case. I have 2 accounts, there fore I would get two votes.

    I have seen people here claim to have 50+ accounts and some claim to have 100+ accounts.

    If your intent is to design by democracy (hint larger than design by committee), then your intent is seriously undermined by the many to 1 relation ship expressed by Many Accounts : 1 Person.

    I some how think with the millions of dollars that the Scripters and Gold Sellers make of UO, that they would key in to the Many Accounts : 1 Person and exploit the living daylight out of it to make it even easier to Script and Sell Gold.

    I think your Democracy would be bought and paid for by the Scripters and Gold Sellers, lock stock and barrel.

    If you think you can key it into something to identify the one, well all I can say is welcome to UO's world in specific and MMORPG's world in general. I can make a yahoo mail account faster than I can make a UO account, I can get a credit card nearly as fast as I can get a UO account. I can fabricate a unique Address way faster than I can do any of the preceding. You have ZERO chance to uniquely identify me. Edited to add: Well when millions of real life currency is involved :)
     
  11. Oriana

    Oriana Babbling Loonie
    Stratics Veteran Alumni

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2003
    Messages:
    2,172
    Likes Received:
    4
    Enigma is right, between the family we have 8 accts in this household, of which, hubby and I maintain the "votes". It would be unfair for us to have 8 votes against a person that has fewer. Just cause we pay more money doesn't necessarily mean we or any other multi-account holder should be able to overrule the lone account holder.

    Oriana
     
  12. Aran

    Aran INFRACTION INFRACTION INFRACTION!
    Stratics Veteran Stratics Legend -A-

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2000
    Messages:
    14,717
    Likes Received:
    1,021
    The masses are asses.

    No.
     
  13. Aran

    Aran INFRACTION INFRACTION INFRACTION!
    Stratics Veteran Stratics Legend -A-

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2000
    Messages:
    14,717
    Likes Received:
    1,021
    While this is a subtopic for OT....


    Take a look at the last eight years with our current CiC. That could have been prevented if certain elements didn't have the same say as, say, someone with a valid worldview.
     
  14. Maplestone

    Maplestone Crazed Zealot
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2008
    Messages:
    3,657
    Likes Received:
    9
    Doesn't that fall under the golden rule?

    edit: I do sympathize (a lot) with the one player one vote view and "block voting" gives 2 accounts a little more power than 2 votes, but I'm not a huge fan of the current feedback system either which smells like "loudest clique spamming their demands wins" ... even though I'm sometimes a pretty loud clique of one all by myself
     
  15. EnigmaMaitreya

    EnigmaMaitreya Crazed Zealot
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 12, 2008
    Messages:
    3,402
    Likes Received:
    0
    *Shrug* (for those that dont get it, The Golden Rule = Those that have the Gold, Rule)

    I am 100% with Oriana.

    BUT that is really not the issue.

    If this were to happen, you can bet the farm on it would be less than 1 week and the process would be owned, lock stock and barrel by the Scriptors and Gold Sellers.

    And I am 100% confident that would not be within the spirit of the OP or the majority of UO players.

    I mean, I would never go for the design by committe, let alone design by democracy. I could go for such a system as a means to express opinions. BUT that is still going to be perverted by the Scriptors and the Gold Sellers.

    I honestly do believe the majority of players would be right in line with Oriana, the sheer dollars involved will simply silence them.
     
  16. Maplestone

    Maplestone Crazed Zealot
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2008
    Messages:
    3,657
    Likes Received:
    9
    Well, if the majority votes against democracy on the poll, I think our debate ends with a logical contradiction :)
     
  17. Viper09

    Viper09 Grand Poobah
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 16, 2008
    Messages:
    6,680
    Likes Received:
    824
    :hahaha::hahaha::hahaha:
    Lol, your post wins the prize Maplestone!
     
  18. EnigmaMaitreya

    EnigmaMaitreya Crazed Zealot
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 12, 2008
    Messages:
    3,402
    Likes Received:
    0
    :)

    Assuming that polls have any value anyway.

    I suspect that if one dug through the history, I think one might find that the majority if not all polls are a means for venting ones spleen and is not reflective of what one will do in reality.

    Just for Humor, what President *chuckle* had the shortest term? Hint: I did not say he was sworn in.
     
  19. Uvtha

    Uvtha Grand Poobah
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 24, 2008
    Messages:
    6,526
    Likes Received:
    2,914
    Majority rule in a nut house is a scary prospect....
     
  20. Ummmmmmm I think they call those FreeShards. :coco:
     
  21. Farsight

    Farsight Crazed Zealot
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 12, 2008
    Messages:
    3,191
    Likes Received:
    36
    I was going to give a lengthy version of my opinion, but given the current voting and the explanation for the other no's, I feel I would be preaching to the choir.

    So just no.
     
  22. FrejaSP

    FrejaSP Queen of The Outlaws
    Professional Stratics Veteran Stratics Legend Campaign Patron The DarkOutlaws, TDO

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2001
    Messages:
    17,280
    Likes Received:
    3,230
    A big NO, as not everything players ask for is healty for the game.

    It's fine with a poll to give the devs an idea of what we would like to see of changes but EA/Devs would always have to evaluate if it's good for the game.

    Players comes back after playing other games and miss features they had in other games and ask to have them added to UO.

    In my opinion, the last year had been good for UO, we are going the right way now.

    The last year, Devs refused to debat changes before they was ready for TC, I think that's a good thing.

    It do not mean they do not listen to us, I had seen them pick ideas posted here on Stratics or from focus groups and add them to the game.
     
  23. Blesh

    Blesh Sage
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 12, 2008
    Messages:
    743
    Likes Received:
    6



    ^what he said^
     
  24. Mitzlplik_SP

    Mitzlplik_SP Guest

    I didn`t vote yes or no because while I think the devs should rely on log in polls ALOT more than websites and forums,I don`t think players should have the right to choose what gets added and what does not.I don`t know why there isn`t more log in polls.If the dev`s want accurate infor from their active players its the best way to go.Gettin their info from forums is ******** since the very smallest percentage of players actually go to these or other forums.

    Only thing I`ll add to needing a log in poll is the ability to write maybe 200 words WITH the log in poll.That`d be nice IMO.That way they`d get feedback from actual players and not bitter peaple who don`t even play anymore.
     
  25. the 4th man

    the 4th man Lore Master
    Stratics Veteran Stratics Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2005
    Messages:
    1,088
    Likes Received:
    45
    Name one other service, people pay for, that they as customers can change or nerf as you put it.

    You can't.
     
  26. Aran

    Aran INFRACTION INFRACTION INFRACTION!
    Stratics Veteran Stratics Legend -A-

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2000
    Messages:
    14,717
    Likes Received:
    1,021
    I work for a security firm, and all of our clients can customize the services they receive from us 100%.
     
  27. Setnaffa

    Setnaffa Certifiable
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    1,537
    Likes Received:
    0
    So if a customer asked for your firm to deliver an M1A1 Tank, 20 M16's, and a truck load of RPG's to their front door, your security firm would do that 100%? If they asked you to take out (kill) all their neigbors and confiscate the guns from all police officers your firm would do that as well?
     
  28. Viper09

    Viper09 Grand Poobah
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 16, 2008
    Messages:
    6,680
    Likes Received:
    824
    This is an online game, not a security firm...
    They are two completely different areas of work. We are subscribers and we all receive the same services as everyone else in this game, we can't each customize the game to our own liking, that would be completely impossible for an online game. Why would you even try to compare the two?
     
  29. Rainforest

    Rainforest Guest

    Definetely NO. Players are bias, this is human nature.
     
  30. Oriana

    Oriana Babbling Loonie
    Stratics Veteran Alumni

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2003
    Messages:
    2,172
    Likes Received:
    4
    This may be true. But I am certain there are limits even to that. There are only so many options any company can give and stay with their means and the law.

    UO is customizable to a point, in that you can choose what you want to do and when. The poll would be an ok idea if coming from EA for them to get general information. ie color options, vet rewards, how armor displays for certain races (sorry Jeremy). Coming from players, while interesting for conversation and discussions, polls are very biased and mostly from people that haven't a clue as to how things in the code work. But it's definately not a bad thing, having polls, as it may spark ideas the devs never thought of or give them new approaches to older systems.

    Oriana
     
  31. Emil Ispep

    Emil Ispep Sage
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2006
    Messages:
    643
    Likes Received:
    126
    No.

    Weve seen how well democracy works.

    Time to try something else already...
     
  32. Gildar

    Gildar Babbling Loonie
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2004
    Messages:
    2,354
    Likes Received:
    4
    Should EA be asking the playerbase more questions through login polls to get more statistics about how players feel about different aspects of the game? Definitely.
    Should EA assume the playerbase knows what they actually want? No.
    Even if the playerbase did know what they actually wanted, and EA knew that, should EA ignore factors such as development time, risk of bug introduction, marketing opportunities to non-players, etc? No.

    What players think they want is important, but so are many other things.
     
  33. Capricious

    Capricious Guest

    I don't believe UO should be decided by polls (i.e I voted no). While UO has a lot of great players, it also has a lot of kids, cheaters, etc.

    However, I would love to see some random login feedback session/questionnaire of course with the option to "opt-out" should you choose. I really believe if EA doesn't want to mess with forums because of the negativity than they need to find another way to implement a feedback system that prompts us, not that we have to hunt down as players. Our opinions, ideas should be important... just not godly.
     
  34. Fink

    Fink Guest

    No.

    In your scenario, large lobby groups full of twinks would decide the fate of the game. When faced with a choice that's "for the good of the game" or "gimme gimme gimme", which way do you think they'll vote?
     
  35. Harb

    Harb Guest

    Oh my, as someone with a military, security and government background with very strong political views over the last 30 years, there's so much "bait" here I can hardly restrain myself. Democracy is what we defend, not what we practice. Well, sort of. :)

    I vote "No." Most of the pertinent terrain has already been covered.

    Dev, past and present, provide a great product. Despite "eaches," it is a diverse game, very complex, carefully balanced, and well integrated. When dev adds/ deletes/ modifies, it is done without individual bias, as it should be. Additions we see today, are already integrated into known features upcoming over the next year, which we don't see. So there are aspects of development we can not have a valid opinion of. Sure, you can make a case that it forces "blind trust," but in a game, we reward or penalize via our subscriptions and continued participation.

    The area of development that is neglected is player input, and while unfortunate, I don't believe it's done with any sort of malice and likely is not "intentional." There is a lot of room for improvement here. Jeremy, or any community coordinator as a single person, can not capture all thought on public boards. A team should be able to, but a "team" costs money. "Polls" have tended not to work, but with better focus and concentration could play a more beneficial role. As posters and players, we could do a better job of becoming more subjective, detailed, and less biased. I sincerely believe that if a partnership could be established between players and the dev folks, it would be groundbreaking within the industry and most beneficial over the long haul. I just haven't seen it work - so far!
     
  36. Violence

    Violence Lore Keeper
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 27, 2008
    Messages:
    875
    Likes Received:
    0
    Uh-huh.. As if players haven't already whined PB, Profs etc etc out of the game.

    Needless poll. :loser:
     
  37. Anakena

    Anakena Seasoned Veteran
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2008
    Messages:
    324
    Likes Received:
    2
    A poll is a kind of direct democracy and i don't think it would be a good thing for a game as we need consistency in the decisions taken. You could end up with Gargoyles, riding etheral chickens, with a laser gun in the left hand.