Guild Wars 2

Chris Whiteside.6102:

Sorry I think you misunderstand. My point is we have multiple members of staff who participate in the CDI as well many others who read the threads. Thus my request for us to be more efficient in the manner in which we communicate will lead to the CDI having a higher value impact on the game as a whole due to freeing up more time for both discussion and work.

Chris

I feel it would be really useful to have the team members the CDI effects actually post too. You do a great job at replying, but I feel that they could bring insight, maybe explain why an idea is unfeasable, explain a technical limitation we might not otherwise account for. Don’t be afraid to go technical.

A second thought , though probably out of your hands, would be more substantial answers/less PR response. Theres still a lot of behind closed doors which limits the information players have to use as a base for new ideas.

As an example Warframes developers hold a weekly live-stream, they say exactly what changes they plan to implement at that time (with the subject to change caveat). In addition they show unfinished work, potential new weapons/armours/mechanics some of which never make it into the game are all shown.
They treat the conversation as a casual affair, if a player were to go “X would be cool why not add x”, the answer would be “oh Jack is working on x at the moment but it’s 3 months down the line, heres what we have so far”. Players would also be far more understanding to why something is pushed back if they have all the information.

( I absolutely respect what you’re trying to achieve these are just what I feel may help improve it)

Chris Whiteside.6102:

Sorry I think you misunderstand. My point is we have multiple members of staff who participate in the CDI as well many others who read the threads. Thus my request for us to be more efficient in the manner in which we communicate will lead to the CDI having a higher value impact on the game as a whole due to freeing up more time for both discussion and work.

In terms of efficiency, I echo the sentiment of several posters above on improving the technical aspects of the forum. If we could upvote posts, sort conversations based on their original subject, and filter content by relevant section the CDI process would be incredibly smooth and helpful.

In the meantime, however, I suggest you use the foundation of the CDI threads to help weave the discussion. In particular…

1) Start out with a “state of the game” sort of post that presents the current viewpoint of the developers on the broad topic. Tell us about what you hope to achieve, what worries you, what you found surprising or amazing, any little details that let us see behind the curtain and understand more about the topic from your side of the table. We love that stuff and eat it up like candy.

2) Give us problems to solve. Broad discussions are nice, but it would behoove you tremendously to place a few restraints and allow creativity to flourish within them. This will give you targeted feedback to help you with things you’ve identified as problem areas, rather than an entire thread worth of discordant essays.

3) Split things up when necessary. Several of the CDIs have become hung up on certain issues (subclasses vs. order quests vs. stat swapping all in the same discussion thread), which muddies the waters and prevents clear discourse. When you identify a really good potential topic that requires more investigation, slice it off from the general CDI and create a new thread within a CDI subforum for that particular discussion. The combination of general threads with broad topics and subthreads with specific ideas will be far more organized than a single thread trying to hold twelve different conversations at once.

Arghore.8340:

Now addressing these people themselves. While I can see how a discussion on how to discuss may feel like ‘work’, having a good simple and easy procedural way to go about these CDI discussions is one of the ways to deal with the issues you put forth…

You are less likely to join in on an already lengthy discussion, that is addressing all sorts of things (aka chaos), making your own posts feel like they are being ignored, because the discussion of more vocal others is dominating the ‘issue’ at hand (aka. you post a suggestion about story/lore progression, which feels like it’s being ignored, because the current discussion in the thread is largely about skill progression). And you may also feel somewhat ignored by the dev’s (unjustified in my views => ) who may only have some lunch time available and end up talking to people that happen to be on the forum at that particular time, joining in on the discussion at hand (aka. the skill progression one running, see example in () just above here).

I feel your ‘complaints’ to this thread are justified (as they are on topic), but at the same time I feel they are not entirely fair. To address a few in no particular order:

- I don’t want to talk about, how to talk about things. Understandable sure, but if we come to a good simple structure for these discussions, you will be much more likely to find your way ‘to the fun part’.

- I feel discussion is dominated by a few, understandable just critique, but if we don’t find a way to guide the discussion in a more appropriate format, how will we combat this? Being able to bring this up in this discussion clearly shows this discussion is trying to do you justice.

- I feel like being steered away from the main things, very true! But at the same time, this discussion helps us all to come to a format that may well make sure that we stay ‘on issue’ better. It might make the discussion less chaotic, more easily pinpoint and discuss certain things, and thus, supply a more readily suggestion and with that a possibly faster adaptation of the solution and implementation in the game.

- I don’t like discussing procedural stuff, fair enough, but I like it! So why should your preference be leading, aren’t you just saying you don’t like it when other people dictate the discussion for you? So, your solution is to have yourself dominate what is discussed instead?!? (not meant in an offensive way, but merely mirroring how you seem to contradict yourselves)

- Anet should do this, and not the community | we should see Anet do something with our comments: if you hang around this forum long enough you should know how that will pan out. And this discussion in particular lets the community come up with a way to go about these discussions, and thus be accepted as the way to do this more readily. Also, the feedback from this discussion will more then likely be implemented directly for the next CDI, while any suggestions on the game will likely take a 3months (if not more) implementation cycle.

! So yes! Your comments are justifiable and if this thread wouldn’t have been here, you wouldn’t have been able to voice them. This in itself justifies this thread. More over, the whole idea of this thread is to come to the best procedure that will benefit us all in this discussion, it may not be what you like to discuss right now, but it does give you the opportunity to contribute to how you (and all of us) will discuss things in the future. And resolve the issues you also seem to be having with the way things are going now…

While you may not have the answers to these things, or does not like to discuss this sort of ‘workflow’ discussions. There are others that may well do, and giving them the opportunity to solve these issues for you, should be worth it. In this respect I am reminded of the roles in innovation processes, there are those that see the troubles and those that solve them. More then often these are not the same people, but you need both of them. So this was not an attack on the issues you raised, as I think they are justified! But at the same time, if these are issues for you, give others the opportunity to deal with them, so we can all benefit in the end (this last mainly to the unfair comment that this whole thread shouldn’t be here, which I think just isn’t true)

Your posts definitely show the need for having a format. I would have a much better chance of finding your good ideas if your posts were concise, or if there were a bulleted list or a summary.

Chris, is that also when you will be announcing the next topics?

Chris,

I have a proposal for an alternative structure for CDI that may be helpful. One of the problems that we have with the existing length of the thread is that you have two things mixed together:

1) Suggestions/brainstorming of new ideas
2) Discussion of those ideas

This means that, if there’s a particularly hot topic being discussed, it’s almost impossible for somebody else to come in and offer a new idea.

I’m not sure if we’d be able to self-police well enough to do this, but what do you think about having a few different threads like this:

1) CDI General Discussion thread: most similar to what we have now
2) CDI Proposal Thread: these are proposals suggested by the community for you to read over

From the second thread, you can choose proposals which you think merit further discussion or debate and create a new thread meant to have focused discussion over that particular proposal.

For the last CDI, we might have had threads on Order progression, housing, subclasses, for example.

This would hopefully lead to more focused discussion of proposals and assist in the process of creating a community-accepted final proposal.

Aye.8392:

Arghore SNIP

Your posts definitely show the need for having a format. I would have a much better chance of finding your good ideas if your posts were concise, or if there were a bulleted list or a summary.

Funny that you quote a post of mine that was actually ‘void of any’ suggestion in regards to the topic at hand. It was a response to the discussion going on at the time.

My actual suggestions are one page back, they cover 4 posts and are interrupted by various other people posting their criticism. Unfortunately I am a very detailed writer that tends to have a nuanced opinion, and likes to use examples to clarify myself so more people can understand why or how I mean something. This is largely due to years of internet usage, and being confronted with the limitations of the written word. Being very specific and elaborate reduces the chance of people misunderstanding you.

If you check these posts you will see I use several ways to ‘bullit’ the suggestions I make. By bolding, by numbers, by – , or by a certain number of ! . I also tend to use dividers to separate different topic within one post from another

So that I do not have to make a new post and flood the board with stuff that could also be said in one post and a divider…

So, I am not sure why you quote the one ‘void of suggestion’ post I made, and request a structured approach to my suggestions, where, if you would have read my contributions were full of ways to have people skim the long reads… /shrug

while i think these cdi discussions are great i also find it such a weird dichotomy that you can have a great discussion here while completely ignoring other things like the fractal patch problems which never got addressed or the current problems with the watchwork mining pick. it just seems weird that for someone who is trying to build better relations with the community you aren’t making a more general effort to improve relations and while you are doing amazing work here your colleagues are completely dropping the ball in other areas. It seems like you are laser focused on this cdi threads to the exclusion of community concerns elsewhere and that seems problematic.

going to bump this to put it back on the front page and to remind you no one has to bump the thread with 0 anet responses about the watchwork picks. it is staying on the front page naturaly even with the complete lack of response on anets part.

Chris Whiteside.6102:

Hi All,
The two areas I think we need to work out or improve on are:

1: We need to keep thread and post sizes more manageable. Should we put a limit on the word length of posts?
2: How are we going to chose topics moving forward, for example, by votes or by Anet choosing them etc?

Chris

1. Feedback in this format needs a bit of space to be useful, but I guess some form of limitation is needed.

2. NO VOTES! There’s a place for democratic processes, and game development isn’t that. You guys know what topics you can use input on, this decision is yours.

gidorah.4960:

while i think these cdi discussions are great i also find it such a weird dichotomy that you can have a great discussion here while completely ignoring other things like the fractal patch problems which never got addressed or the current problems with the watchwork mining pick. it just seems weird that for someone who is trying to build better relations with the community you aren’t making a more general effort to improve relations and while you are doing amazing work here your colleagues are completely dropping the ball in other areas. It seems like you are laser focused on this cdi threads to the exclusion of community concerns elsewhere and that seems problematic.

Well, before the CDI there wasn’t that much forum interaction elsewhere either though. The PvP and Balance dev-interaction seem to have picked up fairly well fortunately.

That said, you are right in that community’s concerns should get some more attention. (At the moment the community does not even get the acknowledgement of being heard in many areas)

Which is why it is vital that some of the CDI topics are voted for by the community. I guess I feel that we do not only need to use the CDI to collaborate on future development plans, but also to be heard and hopefully get some meaningful interaction. (The vertical section of progression was a very important one in this regard.)

I guess that with more dev interaction elsewhere, the CDI could be solely about collaborative development in the areas where Arenanet desires it most. (And it would probably be much more effective for it) But for now they’re also a primary interaction channel.

So in a way, more dev interaction outside of the CDI could really help to shape this into the CDI that Chris seems to dream of here.

“My dream one day is that I can step away from the CDI. Really, the idea behind is if the community and developers come together it becomes it’s own area of mind share. An area of it’s own day-to-day discussions at lunch at work, let alone at meetings. My dream is that there is this truly synergistic relationship where we’re truly tapped into how the community feels and we’re working together to pioneer moving forward; and maybe even one day being able to step away from being one of the major posters and just being able to read it like a fan.

We have to have a proper relationship. We need to really get to know the community, and the community really needs to get to know us as individuals and get to know our design philosophy and the individual’s design philosophy is. Then, hopefully, we’ll be able to synergize. It’ll never be perfect, but at least we’ll speak the same language and problem solve together."

I guess there is just not enough time or money available to make more dev-interaction all over the forums doable (yet?). (I really think that Arenanet should hire some extra forum devs with in-depth knowledge of the arenanet design process. Some that are excellent with words and know exactly what they can or can’t share.)

you said what i wanted too much better. i just dont understand how they will meet the lofty goals for the cdi while having 1 thread an hour pop up about those watchwork tools or how they can have a great discussion in a cdi and have the entire fractured subforum have 0 interaction despite a large amount of problems and questions. I look forward to chris surprising me with how he will fix it like he did the 2nd wvw cdi although the wvw communication problem has come back since that cdi.

Arghore.8340:

Aye.8392:

Arghore SNIP

Your posts definitely show the need for having a format. I would have a much better chance of finding your good ideas if your posts were concise, or if there were a bulleted list or a summary.

I am not sure why you quote the one ‘void of suggestion’ post I made, and request a structured approach to my suggestions, where, if you would have read my contributions were full of ways to have people skim the long reads… /shrug

I don’t think he quoted that post for any particular reason. I think he just quoted you.
I do agree with Aye though, your suggestions would benefit alot from being presented in a more concise form.
I don’t really like skipping posts, because I’m afraid I’ll miss a good suggestion, but seeing your first post, I just lost motivation to read through it (even more so when I realised there were more than one).

While it’s true that explanation(s) can be needed sometimes, I think it would be better to start with a concise description of your suggestion (and one at a time), and then let the people who have questions about the suggestion ask those questions.

This way I think you’ll get through to more people in general.

Symph.8407:

Arghore.8340:

Aye.8392:

Arghore SNIP

Your posts definitely show the need for having a format. I would have a much better chance of finding your good ideas if your posts were concise, or if there were a bulleted list or a summary.

I am not sure why you quote the one ‘void of suggestion’ post I made, and request a structured approach to my suggestions, where, if you would have read my contributions were full of ways to have people skim the long reads… /shrug

I don’t think he quoted that post for any particular reason. I think he just quoted you.
I do agree with Aye though, your suggestions would benefit alot from being presented in a more concise form.
I don’t really like skipping posts, because I’m afraid I’ll miss a good suggestion, but seeing your first post, I just lost motivation to read through it (even more so when I realised there were more than one).

While it’s true that explanation(s) can be needed sometimes, I think it would be better to start with a concise description of your suggestion (and one at a time), and then let the people who have questions about the suggestion ask those questions.

This way I think you’ll get through to more people in general.

I agree, I also like the use of spoilers with labels because it breaks it up nice.

That’s my opinion though

looks like this needs a bump again

timmyf.1490:

Chris,

I have a proposal for an alternative structure for CDI that may be helpful. One of the problems that we have with the existing length of the thread is that you have two things mixed together:

1) Suggestions/brainstorming of new ideas
2) Discussion of those ideas

This means that, if there’s a particularly hot topic being discussed, it’s almost impossible for somebody else to come in and offer a new idea.

I’m not sure if we’d be able to self-police well enough to do this, but what do you think about having a few different threads like this:

1) CDI General Discussion thread: most similar to what we have now
2) CDI Proposal Thread: these are proposals suggested by the community for you to read over

From the second thread, you can choose proposals which you think merit further discussion or debate and create a new thread meant to have focused discussion over that particular proposal.

For the last CDI, we might have had threads on Order progression, housing, subclasses, for example.

This would hopefully lead to more focused discussion of proposals and assist in the process of creating a community-accepted final proposal.

I’d totally support this as well. I don’t necessarily know how it would work, though. If people want to discuss said proposals, it might create a sense of favoritism for one and still stifle the introduction of others. If each player had their own thread of proposals, then we’d have the same problem as the suggestion forums, and those with poor intentions/control will just turn their thread into a “wish-list” or “y u no add this anet?!”

I wish we could have a controlled area of the forums to discuss CDI elements and proposals in a high-level, concept style, that wouldn’t degrade into another general purpose suggestions forum/wish-list.

gidorah.4960:

while i think these cdi discussions are great i also find it such a weird dichotomy that you can have a great discussion here while completely ignoring other things like the fractal patch problems which never got addressed or the current problems with the watchwork mining pick. it just seems weird that for someone who is trying to build better relations with the community you aren’t making a more general effort to improve relations and while you are doing amazing work here your colleagues are completely dropping the ball in other areas. It seems like you are laser focused on this cdi threads to the exclusion of community concerns elsewhere and that seems problematic.

I won’t speak to the exact concerns outlined in this post, bur there is an interesting point here. The CDI as it currently exists is all about dealing with the big picture. The topics are big with big consequences and generally larger time lines. That’s perfectly fine, except it does tend to totally leave out hot topics or things that come up suddenly.

Maybe it’s not something that necessarily belongs in the CDI proper, but it would absolutely be nice to have some sort of mini or flash CDI where the hot topic(s) of the day get some attention. These concerns are often just as real as the big picture stuff and yet we’re lucky to get any sort of developer response on them at all. Even if it’s a short (bi) weekly state of the game style post that directly addresses development and decisions (and, mostly importantly, player concerns!) in the here and now it could still be useful.

StriderShinryu.6923:

gidorah.4960:

while i think these cdi discussions are great i also find it such a weird dichotomy that you can have a great discussion here while completely ignoring other things like the fractal patch problems which never got addressed or the current problems with the watchwork mining pick. it just seems weird that for someone who is trying to build better relations with the community you aren’t making a more general effort to improve relations and while you are doing amazing work here your colleagues are completely dropping the ball in other areas. It seems like you are laser focused on this cdi threads to the exclusion of community concerns elsewhere and that seems problematic.

I won’t speak to the exact concerns outlined in this post, bur there is an interesting point here. The CDI as it currently exists is all about dealing with the big picture. The topics are big with big consequences and generally larger time lines. That’s perfectly fine, except it does tend to totally leave out hot topics or things that come up suddenly.

Maybe it’s not something that necessarily belongs in the CDI proper, but it would absolutely be nice to have some sort of mini or flash CDI where the hot topic(s) of the day get some attention. These concerns are often just as real as the big picture stuff and yet we’re lucky to get any sort of developer response on them at all. Even if it’s a short (bi) weekly state of the game style post that directly addresses development and decisions (and, mostly importantly, player concerns!) in the here and now it could still be useful.

I just mostly don’t understand how we have a discussion on how to improve how we talk to each other to make the game better side by side with large numbers of people getting the silent treatment. The silent treatment sends a definite message and that message is at odds with the goals in the cdi initiative and while i think that the discussions for these other issues don’t belong in the cdi i also don’t see how the cdi will succeed long term when the communication channels run so hot and cold.

gidorah.4960:

StriderShinryu.6923:

gidorah.4960:

while i think these cdi discussions are great i also find it such a weird dichotomy that you can have a great discussion here while completely ignoring other things like the fractal patch problems which never got addressed or the current problems with the watchwork mining pick. it just seems weird that for someone who is trying to build better relations with the community you aren’t making a more general effort to improve relations and while you are doing amazing work here your colleagues are completely dropping the ball in other areas. It seems like you are laser focused on this cdi threads to the exclusion of community concerns elsewhere and that seems problematic.

I won’t speak to the exact concerns outlined in this post, bur there is an interesting point here. The CDI as it currently exists is all about dealing with the big picture. The topics are big with big consequences and generally larger time lines. That’s perfectly fine, except it does tend to totally leave out hot topics or things that come up suddenly.

Maybe it’s not something that necessarily belongs in the CDI proper, but it would absolutely be nice to have some sort of mini or flash CDI where the hot topic(s) of the day get some attention. These concerns are often just as real as the big picture stuff and yet we’re lucky to get any sort of developer response on them at all. Even if it’s a short (bi) weekly state of the game style post that directly addresses development and decisions (and, mostly importantly, player concerns!) in the here and now it could still be useful.

I just mostly don’t understand how we have a discussion on how to improve how we talk to each other to make the game better side by side with large numbers of people getting the silent treatment. The silent treatment sends a definite message and that message is at odds with the goals in the cdi initiative and while i think that the discussions for these other issues don’t belong in the cdi i also don’t see how the cdi will succeed long term when the communication channels run so hot and cold.

I definitely don’t think that you’re wrong at all, and you raise a very good point. It’s definitely odd to see a push towards “we’re open to discussing development with players!” on one hand and, simultaneously, a total “No comment!” on others. At best, it sends a rather mixed message, particularly if you’re a player to whom those hot topics are more important than the big picture topic of the moment.

You seriously equate “Let’s have a largely informal chat about the possibilities of design” with “We must have immediate transparency to critique ongoing operations”? Good luck finding a Dev who wants to host that witch-hunt in the making…

Nike.2631:

You seriously equate “Let’s have a largely informal chat about the possibilities of design” with “We must have immediate transparency to critique ongoing operations”? Good luck finding a Dev who wants to host that witch-hunt in the making…

I think we’re simply stating that the lack of responses on other sections of the forum leads to the side-effect of players viewing the CDI as the only direct channel for communicating with the devs. While this is not what the CDI is/should be.

It is not so much the lack of information, it is the lack of interaction. I don’t think that we need or should have immediate transparency. I do think that serious issues deserve a response though, even if they are very vague responses.

Nike.2631:

You seriously equate “Let’s have a largely informal chat about the possibilities of design” with “We must have immediate transparency to critique ongoing operations”? Good luck finding a Dev who wants to host that witch-hunt in the making…

You are clearly misinterpreting what people are saying to make a point and while fun isn’t helpful. I am saying they created the cdi to interact, get feedback, and start a conversation with players, this is good. They are at the same time refusing to interact accept the feedback being given or have a conversation in a decent amount of other area’s where a large amount of players are trying to get their voices heard on very valid concerns, this is bad. Saying we can only have good functional discussions in 1 thread will lead to that good functional discussion breaking down when other issues rise up and aren’t addressed. If you only offer 1 functional channel of communication you have to expect that channel will be used to handle all the communication. If they want the cdi to improve they need to improve the communication outside of it.

or they can just look at the forums and start fixing things ingame.

just go look at subforums, it won’t hurt.

I’m just saying the people who run damage control and the designers tend to be different folks. Its a bit like after being allowed into someone’s office to chat on their lunch break, you go tunneling through a wall looking for the guy who broke your favorite skin… All it’s gonna do is get all the offices made off limits during lunch .

The CDI rules pretty clearly say it’s not a venue to talk about current affairs. ((shrug))

gidorah.4960:

You are clearly misinterpreting what people are saying to make a point and while fun isn’t helpful.

Silly me. I thought I was cutting to the chase – that there are other areas people want to get direct feedback on… and those are NOT issues CDIs are meant to address.

They are at the same time refusing to interact accept the feedback being given or have a conversation in a decent amount of other area’s where a large amount of players are trying to get their voices heard on very valid concerns, this is bad.

Different department. Totally not kidding or being flip.

It wasn’t posted in this thread, but maybe it should have been~

1: This initiative is all about discussion.

2: We will not be disclosing information pertaining to what is currently in development.

3: Anger and emotion will have less impact than intelligent discussion.

4: Together we will share and evolve design philosophies which will impact how we develop the game moving forward.

5: Aggression and disrespect to a fellow community member or developer will not be tolerated, and in the extreme could lead to the shutting down of the initiative.

6: The teams primary focus is work toward the development of GW2 and therefore posting of discussion and commentary may not be as frequent as you like. Please do understand that the initiative is taken very seriously by us all and that we will be reading the discussions and joining in as often as it is possible to do so.

Saying we can only have good functional discussions in 1 thread will lead to that good functional discussion breaking down when other issues rise up and aren’t addressed. If you only offer 1 functional channel of communication you have to expect that channel will be used to handle all the communication. If they want the cdi to improve they need to improve the communication outside of it.

And I think we were just discussing pruning posts that fail to be on topic. So far the CDIs have managed to stay largely on topic, and there is intent to make that even more true. I agree it’s be nice to get more feedback on other issues – I certainly have bones to (watchwork) pick, but believe it or not, this might not be the place for it.

2: How are we going to chose topics moving forward, for example, by votes or by Anet choosing them etc?

a combination of both.

for example, even though a topic may have a lot of votes, but anet may not necessarily choose that topic.

because what the players want may not be necessarily good for guild wars 2.

Nike.2631:

<snip>
The CDI rules pretty clearly say it’s not a venue to talk about current affairs. ((shrug))

And this is the concern that certain posters are trying to have addressed.

If current ‘hot button’ issues are not allowed to be mentioned in the CDI threads and the response to the dozens of other threads popping up about the aforementioned ‘hot button’ is a deafening wall of silence it creates the perception that Anet is going to do whatever they want regardless of the feedback gathered. Chris has stated many times that there are no guarantees about anything talked about in the CDI’s. Devon even came across as quite adamant about that in the world vs. world thread.

This all comes together to create a veil of uncertainty that makes certain posters feel the cliquey~ness of the CDI threads.

Perception is reality. Anet claims they want to be more ‘black and white’ with the playerbase but every time an issue (opportunity) crops up they default back to the ignore it and it will go away behavior. (The flamekissed armor situation is a good example of handling feedback, the only problem with it was the initial response should have come much sooner.)

You really don’t need a thread to help you communicate better. You communicate better just by communicating. It really is that simple.

1) I don’t participate in the CPI process much. Not because I don’t want to but because the whole process seems overwhelming to.

Certain people love their walls of text and trying to read back and review whats been said by the community/devs as well as following a bunch of links all feels very cumbersome and time consuming.

I’d like the CDI process to be easier to follow. Ideas that look to streamline the CDI process is what Id like to see.

Xar.6185:

And this is the concern that certain posters are trying to have addressed.

In a fashion equivalent to “Hey, while you’re talking about fine tuning a wrench, could you also give us a cordless drill and maybe a tablesaw?” They’re all tools right?

Perception is reality. Anet claims they want to be more ‘black and white’ with the playerbase but every time an issue (opportunity) crops up they default back to the ignore it and it will go away behavior.

And while I appreciate the hunt in running them down for doing something stupid (and I view the Flamekissed armor and the Watchwork pick as back-to-back dumb coming out of the gem store team…) what’s needed there is something quite apart from trying to fit all interaction under the CDI umbrella. Trying to hammer every communication issue through a single opening is just gonna clog the hole.

(The flamekissed armor situation is a good example of handling feedback, the only problem with it was the initial response should have come much sooner.)

So you want it faster, but you also want it to go through a round of voting, for it to reach the top spot to be addressed, and then for it to have at least two weeks/weekends of discussion before they can even set to work trying to fix it – because that’s the CDI process and trying to use it for “hot button issues” is like trying to saw boards with a wrench.

You really don’t need a thread to help you communicate better. You communicate better just by communicating. It really is that simple.

And you don’t tackle hot button issues by committee – you send in damage control.
Where committee shines is in not making the mistakes in the first place.

While I prefer that the Devs channel CDI efforts towards places where they know we can contribute and make a difference, maybe we do need to stick with where CDIs started – big sprawling open votes about what ticks us off at that moment, then stack the replies up until we have the three most irritating things in the game, and have at ‘em in more detail. We hope the Developers who will be pushed forward will have grown a thicker skin and we focus on where the game has failed to perform. Its a little antagonistic, but maybe that’s what people feel they need in order to feel like they’ve been heard.

Nike.2631:

<snip>

Nike, you missed my point.

I don’t want them to handle hot button issues in the CDI threads at all.
However if the only thread on a dev can be found in is here, then here is where you have to ask.

And yes damage control is how you handle the problems we are discussing but your damage control should not be timed with a calendar. (there is still no response to the watchwork thread or the debacle that was the fractured! update)

When a response is needed quickly you post where the readers spend the most time. If all of the player facing communication is taking place here, here is where people are going to voice all kinds of concerns creating a cacaphony of back and forth between players that will ultimately get deleted making said raiser of concerns even more upset that hot button issues are being ignored.

Of course all of this could be avoided if the plan was to actually be more ‘black and white’ with the playebase and not just a brainstorming session among a select few.

I am glad you are enjoying the CDI but I do hope you can understand why others are questioning the time spent on it while certain other threads that are certainly more active and affecting the game right this very second languish with no interaction a mere click away…

Nike

Its a little antagonistic, but maybe that’s what people feel they need in order to feel like they’ve been heard.

This kind of approach will not work, because as clearly evidenced both on the forums and within the CDI threads themselves, people don’t know how to control their antagonizing into focused critique, feedback, and most importantly, suggestions for alternatives/improvements.

I feel you summed it up the best, Nike. CDI doesn’t touch hot button issues. That’s for damage control/development/CC/and QA

CDI’s goal is to prevent further damage by collecting feedback from a larger audience and using that feedback to change policies, procedures, or build content that aims to cause fewer issues than that of the past. At least, that’s the way I view it with comparison to concerns in the current game.

The CDI is not your place to air grievances because you know the devs are reading.

Nike.2631:

In a fashion equivalent to “Hey, while you’re talking about fine tuning a wrench, could you also give us a cordless drill and maybe a tablesaw?” They’re all tools right?

great example the person would say no talk to the powertools department and tell you where it is but when you find out that he sent you to an empty room you will of course come back and your next communication will be less than pleasant

Nike.2631:

And while I appreciate the hunt in running them down for doing something stupid (and I view the Flamekissed armor and the Watchwork pick as back-to-back dumb coming out of the gem store team…) what’s needed there is something quite apart from trying to fit all interaction under the CDI umbrella. Trying to hammer every communication issue through a single opening is just gonna clog the hole.

yes this is my point they are making the cdi the only functional communication channel and so it will be used to handle everything that is not its purpose and to prevent it from happening they need to improve communication outside.

Nike.2631:

While I prefer that the Devs channel CDI efforts towards places where they know we can contribute and make a difference, maybe we do need to stick with where CDIs started – big sprawling open votes about what ticks us off at that moment, then stack the replies up until we have the three most irritating things in the game, and have at ‘em in more detail. We hope the Developers who will be pushed forward will have grown a thicker skin and we focus on where the game has failed to perform. Its a little antagonistic, but maybe that’s what people feel they need in order to feel like they’ve been heard.

i completely agree the cdi can be much more than an airing of grievances and what annoys you now that needs to be fixed. This is why i am saying to improve the cdi you must improve the communication channels outside of it.

gidorah.4960:

I completely agree the cdi can be much more than an airing of grievances and what annoys you now that needs to be fixed. This is why i am saying to improve the cdi you must improve the communication channels outside of it.

Its a great thought, now follow it through. How does making Chris & Co. do Danicia’s job help anything? You think that that the designers are going to do a better job of handling agitated customers than the people hired for that purpose? Because all experience from the CDIs is that many of the Host-Devs are very much having to learn how to interact with an irate public starting from scratch. It took two belligerent posters all of 5 posts to send one of the CDI threads off into a ditch that one Dev never came back from. Design and public speaking really are two different skill sets. And even if you did rope them into doing it, you think they’d be any less slow and deliberate in figuring out a response? CDIs have a certain amount of freedom because they do not commit the company entire to action. Discussing gem store policy and what specifically is going to be done about the outrage-of-the-moment is on a whole different level of consequence for the red-name speaking.

The other communication does need to improve, but it needs to be improved by the people who handle those aspects…

…Hmm. Since threads about moderation are routinely annihilated, maybe THAT is a topic for a CDI with potential for improvement: Bring in Danicia as the Host and actually have one designated place where we can share our grievances not with this or that individual kerfluffle, but with the overall responsiveness to flashpoint concerns and moderation tactics.

I see that, once again, we’ve had a CDI hijacked by off-topic discussion.

Probably time to close this and move forward.

videoboy.4162:

I see that, once again, we’ve had a CDI hijacked with by off-topic discussion.

Probably time to close this and move forward.

I thought this too, but someone requested it stay open for 2 weekends. One person did. So here we are.

I was also pretty sure that 4 days ago the conversation had run it’s course.

After consideration in length on the Community voting issue, I would have to say:

No to the players voting on the topics for discussion

I picture the nightmare of seeing the top 3 rated votes being Mounts, Dueling and another set of Wings. At which point I close the CDI and wait for the next one.

Though the player side of the community has some great ideas in the brainstorming area, they are mostly clueless in the viability of potential implementation. Only the Devs have an competent take on:

• cost of development
• human resources available
• constraints imposed by NCSoft
• limitations of the game engine…

I do understand that any limitation of the brainstorming process has the chance of limiting creativity, but there just has to be some channeling of the community’s genius toward the greater good.

So I think the people in the know(Devs), are going to have to be the ones setting the parameters/direction THEN let us loose to explore

I go back and forth… The browbeating unleashed during the earlier phases of the Living Story CDI seem to have lead to some of the improvements in storytelling manifesting in the 2014 LS episodes. “You’re doing it WRONG” might be a little harsh, but sometimes a wake-up call is exactly what is needed to force a little cold self-evaluation. There is also the very real need to not allow CDIs to be seen as purely focusing on the positive or being soft-peddled by Devs to divert attention away from real and present problems. I just don’t have a working suggestion yet.

I still hope we see better use of polling/votes – ArenaNet being more in tune with what is working and not working for large swaths of the playerbase can certainly inform CDI topic selection in some fashion. I just think forum-based votes are both needlessly slow and reach far too small of a segment of the actual audience. The word clique has been thrown around a lot – I think “forumites” is already too small a group for some parts of the CDI process .

((and with my screen-name, it should be no surprise I want another set of wings. I miss City of Heroes- they did wings RIGHT))

Lilith Ajit.6173:

videoboy.4162:

I see that, once again, we’ve had a CDI hijacked with by off-topic discussion.

Probably time to close this and move forward.

I thought this too, but someone requested it stay open for 2 weekends. One person did. So here we are.

I was also pretty sure that 4 days ago the conversation had run it’s course.

I somewhat understood why they were going to keep it open another weekend, but this has stopped being a CDI discussion. Since the discussion is, apparently, over it should just be closed. If people want to participate, they should plan time during the week and not expect this to be scheduled around whenever they feel like showing up.

SoPP.7034:

1) I don’t participate in the CPI process much. Not because I don’t want to but because the whole process seems overwhelming to.

Certain people love their walls of text and trying to read back and review whats been said by the community/devs as well as following a bunch of links all feels very cumbersome and time consuming.

I’d like the CDI process to be easier to follow. Ideas that look to streamline the CDI process is what Id like to see.

This is very pertinent, this thread has run it’s course.
It is not even pretending to be a CDI thread about CDI process any more.
It has been hijacked

Please lock it.

What has been said on topic has been said

I’m confused. Who is hijacking this thread? The recent posts have been mostly about structure of the CDI, what content is pertinent, how discussion can best be facilitated, and ways to keep the discussions in-check from sprawling, off-topic, 70-page posts.

Is that not relevant to improving the CDI process moving forward?

Nike.2631:

Its a great thought, now follow it through. How does making Chris & Co. do Danicia’s job help anything? You think that that the designers are going to do a better job of handling agitated customers than the people hired for that purpose? Because all experience from the CDIs is that many of the Host-Devs are very much having to learn how to interact with an irate public starting from scratch. It took two belligerent posters all of 5 posts to send one of the CDI threads off into a ditch that one Dev never came back from. Design and public speaking really are two different skill sets. And even if you did rope them into doing it, you think they’d be any less slow and deliberate in figuring out a response? CDIs have a certain amount of freedom because they do not commit the company entire to action. Discussing gem store policy and what specifically is going to be done about the outrage-of-the-moment is on a whole different level of consequence for the red-name speaking.

it makes their job harder i agree and is what i am trying to say. If the people who are supose to handle concerns elsewhere don’t do it then the job will fall to chris and the developers. ( 100% agree it is someone else’s job unfortunately if that someone else isn’t there people will come to the only place with functional communication and that will have a poor effect on the cdi process

Nike.2631:

The other communication does need to improve, but it needs to be improved by the people who handle those aspects…

yes i agree i would rather the cdi was about the cdi stuff and other things where handled by the proper channels. What i am saying is if the proper channels outside the cdi don’t function it will come into the cdi making it worse. Thats why to improve the cdi you must improve the channels of communication outside of it.

Nike.2631:

…Hmm. Since threads about moderation are routinely annihilated, maybe THAT is a topic for a CDI with potential for improvement: Bring in Danicia as the Host and actually have one designated place where we can share our grievances not with this or that individual kerfluffle, but with the overall responsiveness to flashpoint concerns and moderation tactics.

you are a brilliant idea man i like this alot

videoboy

If people want to participate, they should plan time during the week and not expect this to be scheduled around whenever they feel like showing up.

Uh…even though a majority of the core suggestions have already been discussed, the ability to just jump in, say a piece/proposal, and come back days later is the exact way CDI was meant to be handled, if I understood Chris’ intent correctly.

People have jobs, families, and lives. We can’t expect them to plan a specific timeslot in their day to contribute to the CDI. Contributors should be free to come and go as they please, and the structure of the CDI delivery and discussion should be that a person can re-enter a discussion at any time, with minimal effort to “catch-up” to the current topic or posters.

Malchior.5042:

videoboy

If people want to participate, they should plan time during the week and not expect this to be scheduled around whenever they feel like showing up.

Uh…even though a majority of the core suggestions have already been discussed, the ability to just jump in, say a piece/proposal, and come back days later is the exact way CDI was meant to be handled, if I understood Chris’ intent correctly.

People have jobs, families, and lives. We can’t expect them to plan a specific timeslot in their day to contribute to the CDI. Contributors should be free to come and go as they please, and the structure of the CDI delivery and discussion should be that a person can re-enter a discussion at any time, with minimal effort to “catch-up” to the current topic or posters.

I think that’s true on conversations that are long and involved, like progression or the topic CDIs, but for this whole “discussion about the discussion” thread seems to run it’s course quickly and get derailed. I just think 2 weeks is a bit too long for this thread. IMO, of course.

Malchior.5042:

videoboy

If people want to participate, they should plan time during the week and not expect this to be scheduled around whenever they feel like showing up.

Uh…even though a majority of the core suggestions have already been discussed, the ability to just jump in, say a piece/proposal, and come back days later is the exact way CDI was meant to be handled, if I understood Chris’ intent correctly.

People have jobs, families, and lives. We can’t expect them to plan a specific timeslot in their day to contribute to the CDI. Contributors should be free to come and go as they please, and the structure of the CDI delivery and discussion should be that a person can re-enter a discussion at any time, with minimal effort to “catch-up” to the current topic or posters.

No, there are 168 hours in a single week. If people choose to participate in these optional threads, then they should set aside a few minutes to speak their piece. They shouldn’t expect everyone else to put things on hold until they feel like showing up.

Personally, I stay quite busy. However, I usually enjoy participating in the CDIs so I make time for it. That time may be late at night or around lunch, but I do it. I don’t ask that the schedule be changed to accommodate me.

If, for some reason, I can’t catch up on all the posts in between my CDI times, then I read all of the Dev posts and catch up that way. There really is no excuse for claiming these threads are too inconvenient to catch up on or participate in.

timmyf.1490:

I’m confused. Who is hijacking this thread? The recent posts have been mostly about structure of the CDI, what content is pertinent, how discussion can best be facilitated, and ways to keep the discussions in-check from sprawling, off-topic, 70-page posts.

Is that not relevant to improving the CDI process moving forward?

The people using this thread to complain about other threads.

@Symph and Aye
Ok after symph’s elaboration i somewhat better understand what may be the case here. Now, hopefully you will understand this is not my job, and I just post my thoughts here while I type, and I do try to keep my thoughts as coherent and well structured as possible. Maybe I could have done a better job at it, I will at least keep this in mind for future posts.

@Videoboy and some others,
I was the one asking to keep CDI threads open for a period that at least includes 2 weekends. This because many of us may well have jobs, family, and other RL issues to deal with during the week. And also, setting a strict minimum timeline for the CDI’s will also give Anet an easier way to plan CDI input into their regular schedule.

Now I understand that this threads topic has been so narrow of scope, that at some point most people said what they had to say. Thing is though, this thread is not about just you. If you have nothing to contribute anymore, then don’t, asking for a thread to be closed while others are not in the opportunity to even catch up and have their say, well that’s by all means just rude. And in all honesty, I am having a hard time staying all nice and considerate.

If you actually wanted to contribute to the thread, and do something useful, you could have made a summary. Check where people agree, and where they disagree, so the thread can stay on topic, or if everything is agreed upon, it can end with a nice summary for all to conclude that all has been said and done.

Then there is nothing else to say, and the thread can just stay as it is. I have already suggested making the CDI thread a special kind of sticky, so that I doesn’t have to get bumped anymore. So that would solve that problem as well.

Back on topic:
From what I read the most disagreement is about having the community vote on a topic to discuss. Where some portray their most fear full outcome of topic they don’t like at all, as the most definite outcome of any system that lets the community set a topic. (the so called ‘strawman’)

I personally think that anything that is called ‘collaborative’ should at least have a two way interaction. A back and forth setting of the discussion CDI topic would be of the most collaborative nature, in my views. And even if it would be to decide that this is not the way going forward, it doesn’t hurt the community nor Anet to find out which topics the community would like to discuss (aka a brainstorm), and which of their own suggestions for topics would rank the highest. If anything it would give ANet feedback on what the community finds the most important about the game, or would like to talk about. And they could match this with their own topics and use both in their decision on ‘the next’ topic…

Another thing that bugs me in this respect, is the attitude that topics that the community would like to talk about are not to be respected, that they should not be talked about, or that it may be a topic that ‘whom ever is against a community input on this matter’ doesn’t like to talk about.

There is no way of guaranteeing that there will be things in life that you rather not do, as a matter a fact, life is full of those things. So why should this CDI be any different, at least you will have a choice to contribute, have your say (in a respectful manner) and give others the right to their say. The most enjoyable part of the CDI process, in this respect, will be that once the topic is over the topic will more than likely NOT see it’s way back on that list again. There is also No guarantee that ANY opinion of the community will see the light of day in the game, as ANet has made clear on several occasions.

So even ‘if’ you are not pleasantly surprized by the interests of the community, the topic will be discussed in a CDI, which you can just ignore, and the next CDI and many there after will not discuss said topic again…

videoboy.4162:

timmyf.1490:

I’m confused. Who is hijacking this thread? The recent posts have been mostly about structure of the CDI, what content is pertinent, how discussion can best be facilitated, and ways to keep the discussions in-check from sprawling, off-topic, 70-page posts.

Is that not relevant to improving the CDI process moving forward?

The people using this thread to complain about other threads.

I’m going to try to phrase this using some techniques often used in counseling.

When people use the CDI thread to try to attract developer attention to a personal complaint, e.g. the Fractal reset, it upsets me. I feel that it distracts from the discussion we are attempting to have. I feel that it is disrespectful of the time and energy many of us put into the CDI thread. I feel that it comes from a place of entitlement: “Developer! I know you are here! Respond to me!”

Because this CDI Process Evolution thread is about improving the CDI topics to be more useful for both ArenaNet and the community, I believe it is a relevant topic that we should discuss here: how do we try to keep the discussion on-topic, respectful, and manageable?

@ Arghore

But the thread is about you right? Because, even though the rest of us with lives find the time to post our thoughts, we’re supposed to add an entire week to the discussion, just to appease YOUR schedule. No.