The purpose of this forum

I've noticed a rather disturbing trend here. This is the Feedback and Suggestions forum, which makes it arguably the most appropriate place to talk about aspects of this game that don't work so well. I am seeing a lot of threads that go like this:

Player A: I think X is in need of improvement.
Players B, C, D, etc: You're wrong! Here's why I think that X is fine!

I'm really failing to see how that kind of reply is constructive.

No player is wrong when they express that something about the game bothers them. The most likely reason they are taking the time to make a complaint on the forum post is because something genuinely bothered them. It's useful for developers to know when something is disliked, because that means they can think about changing it, and potentially increasing the rate of retention for players that dislike that particular thing in its current state. Just as importantly, I'm not sure what persuading any particular player that their opinion isn't valid could possibly accomplish.

Thanks for reading. <3

 

Suggestions should be open to any and all of those, but if you value your own time as well as the OP's, don't try to call an opinion invalid. That's all I'm trying to say.

Example:
Player A: This game is too random!
Other players: No, it's not!
(Typical Interweb argument follows)

The above is bad, because what Player A is really trying to say is "this game is too random for my personal tastes," and there's simply no arguing with that. There's literally nothing to prove or disprove. It could be that you disagree, or that Player A phrased things in a way that annoys you, but Player A is definitely not wrong: unless he's got way too much time on his hands, the purpose of his post is to let developers know that he doesn't like the amount of RNG currently in the game.

 

Down Vote.

I see this forum as a democratic access to the devs.
You are most welcome to post your views. And anyone is entitled to disagree and comment.

If I see something I disagree with, I definitely will post my dissent.

Otherwise devs will see bad ideas that are unwelcome and unopposed and see them as community requests. Which it isn't if it is only one voice

 

The purpose of this forum is the same as that of any forum: to facilitate discussion. If the developers wanted to receive suggestions from players in isolation, they wouldn't have chosen an open forum as their preferred method of reception. Occasional disagreement in a community is not "disturbing", but in fact a healthy sign that good ideas are being selected upwards.

 

@Kogi: The exact point I'm trying to make here is that this forum should be democratic access to the devs, rather than a place for players to butt heads over opinions. Silly arguments do not contribute to this, and they don't prove whether an opinion is popular or not -- they only prove who speaks loudest.

 

@Melzidek: Most of the disagreement I see here, unfortunately, serves no purpose, as explained above. I don't see a lot of good discussion here. I don't see two parties get into an argument and both come out a little wiser and more informed. I see an established community eager to shut down those who don't share their views.

Once again, GOOD:
"I don't like the amount of RNG in this game!"
"What do you think could be done to decrease it without losing the good aspects it brings to the game?"
(Healthy dialogue occurs)

BAD:
"I don't like the amount of RNG in this game!"
"You're wrong! All card games have RNG! You're not playing hard enough! Taking out RNG would kill game!"
(Time-wasting argument occurs)

 

If your idea cannot stand up to argument. Then your are probably better off not posting at all.

Allow me to explain democracy


(1) OP posts idea. (A bill if you will)
(2) post 1. I agree because
Post 2. I disagree because
Post 3. I disagree because
(2) heated discussion. Add cat videos for comic relief.
(3) more votes

(4) bill passed on to Devs (the senate)
(5) Senate promptly files bill in round filing cabinate.
(6) Senate goes off to lunch

 

I think it's fair to say that people should be free to express whatever it is that bothers them about the game. But I think it's also fair that other people can then explain why that same thing is not a problem for them.

It's true that a lot of suggestions and comments on this forum get criticized and rebutted, but that seems like a helpful and healthy thing to me; not a bad thing. I think it would be pretty pointless if the forum just consisted of a bunch of gripes with no discussion or debate.

Besides, often people's problems with the game can be solved without any changes to the game itself. For example, some people post to say things like "trog armour is too strong. Nerf please" - and the response is usually "you should try using different cards to remove their armour or pierce through their armour. The strength of the trogs' armour is like a puzzle to be solved. That's part of the game." -- In threads like that, it's true that the original player has a legitimate opinion, and that they aren't enjoying some particular part of the game, but that doesn't mean their suggestion should be adopted. The problem can be understood in a different way and overcome by changing the way they play the game rather than by changing the game itself - and in that case I think the core idea is that if the player overcomes the challenge by changing their strategy rather than by changing the game - the game will become more rich an enjoyable for them and for everyone else in the future.

All opinions are 'valid', but not all suggestions are suitable for the game. Debate and criticism are healthy aspects of a suggestions forum.

 

The purpose of this forum is to post your thoughts and your ideas for suggestions and refinements of Card Hunter...and have an open discussion for them. If you want to just mail your ideas in privately, e-mail is awesome for that.

 

So glad you said something about this Ghelas. I have had the exact same impression.

The community here is very defensive of the game.

I imagine it came from lots of people being involved in the Beta heavily and they feel some ownership. So now they're defending what they helped test. But it's quite off-putting to people to who are coming to the game now.

 

I found this thread a bit late, and at first didn't want to bump negativity from the second page, so I waited. Now it's back, so . . .

No one wants to feel "lectured." I know this all too well. The problem is manifold: sometimes people ARE wrong, and anyone trying to engage in conversation has to contradict them; sometimes people DO misinterpret the intentions of others, especially when they are already upset (projecting their anger); and sometimes people are plain-out inexperienced with communication on the internet, and don't realize that the first two problems are happening.

Then suppose I came by and tried to explain "no, there is literally nothing wrong with this part of game code, you're just focusing on how upset you are, and I can tell you how to correct your mistakes." Some people will feel relieved; some will feel lectured.

But then there are the situations where none of that happens, and people have completely normal discussions and debates.

. . .

Django Hawkins, a look at your messages shows that you are predominately involved in the gender debate. I've spent years trying to convince people in my company to treat gender better; and, as a writer, I could suggest specific solutions that Blue Manchu might implement. This is all practical and I totally understand you. However, you are concluding that "these forums are negative--just look at all the negativity." Okay, go ahead: look. You are ignoring the dozens of threads (currently visible!) where people new and old agree "that's a good suggestion" or "yup, this game has problems that need fixing."

We have been told, repeatedly, that we are a friendly forum.

. . .

Ghelas, just take a skim at my essay. I wrote it for several people: those who ask the same questions multiple times, those who quit the game because it wasn't what they expected, and those very few people who post something like you did right here. We are listening to people who post. When people say "I don't want to play this game; I want to play a different one" (like here), what can we do? The only response is "cool, but Blue Manchu won't code that." When people say "it is literally impossible for a human being to pass level X," what can we do? The evidence is against them (because some "humans" have succeeded), so the only response is to help correct their strategy (or tease out any bugs).

Then when people say "I have this suggestion for the game," like trading, or new character types, or new play modes, you get discussion and disagreement like any internet forum whatsoever.

Again, you are taking the individual threads which have absorbed you and concluding that everyone else has a problem. But we are doing everything in our power to solve "the problem," whether it's in the game or in your understanding. Again, just look at other threads: go on, do a tally of situations where someone says "X needs improvement" and literally no one else supports is. What will you do when we get to the thread where you and I spoke for awhile? Conclude that every word out of my mouth was negativity to silence disagreement, just because it didn't give you what you wanted? Conclude that my every point or suggestion or offer of help was an insult?

How the forum works today is how forums are supposed to work. Players needing advice are given advice, and players who want to debate and disagree are disagreeing.

This forum is meeting its purpose.

 

Sir Knight - I appreciate the thought that went into your post, but I actually think it illustrates the problem.

You started with a list of justifications for way people are treating others on this section of the forums:

- people ARE wrong
- people misinterpret others' intentions
- people are inexperienced with internet communication

Those all come from the "I know better than you" camp.

Then you encourage us to read a fairly lengthy post you wrote in which you explain why people are wrong about not liking the game.

There is a lack of self-awareness here coupled with a very strong confidence in your own evaluation of things. It's what creates a Melvin-like character. Course that's funny in the game, but irritating in real life.

Or to put it more succinctly I have read quite a few posts from people with high IQs and low EQs. That dissonance creates the forum you have here. I'm a member of many other forums online where that is not the case.

 

. . .

Now I'm "the bad guy" because I listed those points in the wrong order?

I am now patronizing, and explicitly saying "I'm better than you," because I've spent months and months and months and months trying to help people?

I am now in a trap. Do you see this? I cannot defend myself without giving you a reason to call me patronizing. I cannot imply you are "wrong" . . . without you saying "look, this person always tries to tell people they are wrong!"

Yes, you and I both have been on other forums before. That means you know "other posts that aren't negative" exist, you know that my posts are actual efforts to help people, and you know that you are DECIDING I am the problem.

I wouldn't even go so far as to say you "are a problem," but now I'm literally a living Melvin!

I spend too much effort keeping the peace in my daily life AND career already. And, of course, I'd better not explain that any more because then I'd be "pulling credentials" to support my "importance" here. But if you literally just want to be angry, I can't help you.

 

Sir Knight - I'm sure that you have helped many people. I mean that sincerely.

I'm suggesting that this may lead to some defensiveness or just being a bit terse with new folks to the game. Not just you, but other folks who have been heavily involved in the Beta.

 

Meh, the people on this forum are saints. I have seen plenty of posts that deserve a flame sandwich. Yet time and time again people are patiently explaining the issues.

 

I'd just like to say that I'm a bit aggravated by the fact that you're referring to the IQ and EQ. Even at the best of times, IQ and EQ are deeply flawed metrics. And not only does your reference to IQ and EQ here imply that you think that those things are relevant to our discussion, but you're implicitly asserting that you're skilled enough to estimate those things based on a forum post and that your detractors are poor at understanding emotions. I don't like that.

 

A lot of stuff in this thread has been misinterpreted and twisted around a bit. I feel like the point has pretty much been missed entirely, and I think all of the counter-arguments have had, err, nothing to do with the original argument. (Probably my fault for not being clear enough.)

Let's go over some example statements, and I will explain which I feel are good fodder for discussion, and which are not.

1) "The font on the Card Hunter logo at the top of this page is colored green."
This is a statement of fact. It's simply either wrong or right. In this case, it happens to be wrong, that color is blue.
Beyond correcting this kind of statement IF it's wrong and providing proof, in-depth discussion is likely to be off-topic and not good use of anyone's time and effort.
Other examples: "Melivin is meant to be unlikeable." (Correct.) "Wizards have comparatively high durability." (Incorrect.)

2) "The Card Hunter logo at the top of this page needs more flames!"
For lack of a better term that I am aware of (although there probably is one) let's call this an informed opinion.
The author of this statement saw the logo and is using whatever experience he has with graphics in general, logos, dragons, etc. as basis for their analysis.
This is the kind of thing that is TOTALLY worth discussing, simply because each of us have a unique wealth of experience to offer on the topic.
Other examples: "Lava should do less damage." "Blocked tile art should be made uniformly darker than the rest of the game board so that it's more recognizable." (These are both worth discussing, as experience with different games and how they handle similar things, working knowledge of game or interface design, etc. could bring some new information to the discussion, and all parties could walk away more knowledgeable. Heck, maybe someone's initial opinion could even change!)

3) "The Card Hunter logo at the top of this page is too drab, and doesn't covey the sense of excitement I feel it should."
Wait, Ghelas. Stop right there. How is this different from 2?!
Because it's highly subjective.
It is an opinion that is based primarily on information that's not shareable. If you read that and think, "I don't feel the Card Hunter logo is drab at all! I must debate this with OP" you are well and truly missing the point.

You cannot accurately quantify the excitement generated by the logo in OP.
There is literally NO ground for debate here.
You can point to other logos and talk about their design and color choices, but that is not going to impact how OP feels about the Card Hunter logo. In fact, this discussion is not relevant to what was expressed!

The really tricky part is that the things that tell us an opinion is highly subjective are sometimes implied, rather than just hanging out there.
The reason I keep bringing up the "there's too much RNG in this game" is, it's a good example of that sort of implication. The actual statement someone is trying to make when they say that is "I personally find the amount of RNG in this game is so high that it is detrimental to my enjoyment of this game." And, again, there's no way to accurately quantify this statement. What, then, is there to debate? Any discussion of whether the RNG in this game is good or bad is off-topic. The entirety of the suggestion is that the RNG is high enough to bother this particular player, and the developers could benefit from knowing that. The only discussion to be had here is "How might we modify this thing so that it is satisfactory to more of us?"

So, I do see a lot of people on these boards making arguments against statements of the third type, which is generally not a good thing. It does make the community seem unwelcoming at times. Nobody who makes that sort of statement and then have several people speak up against it is going to feel welcome.