Guild Wars 2

yes -that was very useful and I have suggested this too.
It made us feel like we were contributing to the game back then
If nothing else it is actually in the game instead of on the forums

They might need an option to enable/disable it first.

Because it appeared way too often for me when I was playing

I really wonder how a tool of this sort was/would be used. Think about it. It asked people who were new to the game, a game whose combat mechanics deviated from the MMO norm that those people were accustomed to, to judge content difficulty.

Ashen.2907:

I really wonder how a tool of this sort was/would be used. Think about it. It asked people who were new to the game, a game whose combat mechanics deviated from the MMO norm that those people were accustomed to, to judge content difficulty.

Good thing each account could be separated into “/Age” Parameter. Any good statistic analysis, would take in consideration deviations to it’s mean distribution. Also, the amount of new accounts to older accounts is imho way smaller to affect negatively the outcome!

/cheers

LHound.8964:

Ashen.2907:

I really wonder how a tool of this sort was/would be used. Think about it. It asked people who were new to the game, a game whose combat mechanics deviated from the MMO norm that those people were accustomed to, to judge content difficulty.

Good thing each account could be separated into “/Age” Parameter. Any good statistic analysis, would take in consideration deviations to it’s mean distribution. Also, the amount of new accounts to older accounts is imho way smaller to affect negatively the outcome!

/cheers

Right, but back at launch we all would have had the same /Age, and were all new accounts, right ? In theory any content (intended to represent some degree of challenge) is more difficult when it is new.

LHound.8964:

Ashen.2907:

I really wonder how a tool of this sort was/would be used. Think about it. It asked people who were new to the game, a game whose combat mechanics deviated from the MMO norm that those people were accustomed to, to judge content difficulty.

Good thing each account could be separated into “/Age” Parameter. Any good statistic analysis, would take in consideration deviations to it’s mean distribution. Also, the amount of new accounts to older accounts is imho way smaller to affect negatively the outcome!

/cheers

On top of that new account owners wont be able to evaluate content they cannot participate (e.g. content that is higher their level) but evaluate only content for their level.

And they will evaluate stuff they are able to play and in time as they level up and get more familiar with the game will be able to evaluate more content.

Additional to that I don’t think that Anet is so poor Analyst wise to not be able to re-seed community in different groups and calculate the results this way.

Luna.9640:

I think that it’s time to put this BETA features back.

After reading Chris Whiteside’s Post where he stated that they read what community says and hear our feedbacks (while they called us – “vocal minority” of the community which feedbacks don’t represent the community in general) I’ve decided to offer Developers and the Company to put back the “Content Evaluation Tool” – CET which they used in betas and make the results Public this time ! (Let’s see what community thinks since you said you care so much for our feedbacks – Let’s make things crystal clear once forever.)

Fantastic idea, and I mentioned it recently over on this Youtube video from the developer meet.

“Best way to hear from the players is to have In-Game survey engine. Not to listen to Forums etc. That’s really the only way.? When a player logs in, or at some point, they can fill out a survey In-Game. Otherwise, all the dev team will be hearing is a specific subset of the player base, or just looking at numbers”

I don’t know why they took it out. I guess if it is in there, though, someone would actually have to sort through the data.. so there would be a cost attached to it.

It may be easier just to listen to those with the loudest voices on the forums . Or to just look at numbers in isolation or in concert with those voices to make decisions.

Although in my experience, that never really works out too well. :-\

There is that built-in Bug feature, though, that I have used once or twice. Most people don’t know about it, though, which limits its effectiveness as a feedback tool.

Luna.9640:

I think that it’s time to put this BETA features back.

After reading Chris Whiteside’s Post where he stated that they read what community says and hear our feedbacks (while they called us – “vocal minority” of the community which feedbacks don’t represent the community in general) I’ve decided to offer Developers and the Company to put back the “Content Evaluation Tool” – CET which they used in betas and make the results Public this time ! (Let’s see what community thinks since you said you care so much for our feedbacks – Let’s make things crystal clear once forever.)

Fantastic idea, and I mentioned it recently over on this Youtube video from the developer meet.

“Best way to hear from the players is to have In-Game survey engine. Not to listen to Forums etc. That’s really the only way.? When a player logs in, or at some point, they can fill out a survey In-Game. Otherwise, all the dev team will be hearing is a specific subset of the player base, or just looking at numbers”

I don’t know why they took it out. I guess if it is in there, though, someone would actually have to sort through the data.. so there would be a cost attached to it.

There is that built-in Bug feature, though, that I have used once or twice. Most people don’t know about it, though, which limits its effectiveness as a feedback tool.

I had a thought a while back- What if you could give ANet a report card for each of the features of a living world release? An in-game beta tool makes the game feel like… Well, a beta, and this is supposed to be a finished product.

This will NEVER happen. The game is for people playing it and not for those trying to be part of its development.

This is a fantastic idea!

I find it very odd that something that they’ve already implemented, has not been improved upon and integrated back into the game.

That said….

I think the questions asked need to be considered as to make sure they’re not providing conflicting or worse excessively favourable feedback. What I mean is that, if you look at any scientific study, you’ll see that the way questions are asked make a huge difference on the results.

All n’ all this is a great idea.

Sarrs.4831:

, and this is supposed to be a finished product.

Supposed to be….. indeed.

I would rather have the option to provide feedback that leads to ANet finding something that works, than not have it and just take what they give us.

I’m not opposed to providing feedback if it improves things. Hell, I spend enough time on these forums voicing my opinion, only to have them fall to page 403.

I don’t trust these kinds of things.

Anyone who has ever created and run public surveys/polls, knows how easy it is to get the results you want by creative wording of questions, deciding which questions to ask, and even stacking the order of multiple choice response choices.

I think what would improve player trust in the company is knowing who there is responsible for each decision on issues of interest to players, plus regular feedback that addresses player concerns and explains the basis for controversial decisions that is fact based, and not spin. For a company that claims to have massive data collection tools in place, they should publicize more of this data instead of keeping it hidden.

This tool will go unnoticed. Everyone just does Queensdale trains anyways.

I fully support that. We need that tool back, forums and reddit DO NOT represent the community and its not only “the people who care” which post there. I love the game and care a lot for it, but i dont use reddit and forums. I prefer to send ingame/support mails. So this tool will be easier to get feedback and (i hope) will gather better data about our likes and dislikes

Sarrs.4831:

I had a thought a while back- What if you could give ANet a report card for each of the features of a living world release? An in-game beta tool makes the game feel like… Well, a beta, and this is supposed to be a finished product.

Well Guild Wars 2 feels like beta all the time for me with all the bugs they introduce with every release.

They’re yet to publish their 1st bug free release…and it’s been more than 1 year now.

I didn’t mean the same BETA Tool but a similar Survey tool will provide tremendous amount of feedback data and this time they wont be able to make the excuses – Forums/Social Media don’t represents the vast majority but vocal minority.

I don’t think it’d work to have it back into the game, unless it’s a limited 1 week only thing announced in advance, and even then I’d doubt its usefulness.

If it wasn’t optional it would disrupt gameplay, taking you out of the game after the end of every event or bit of content asking for feedback, specially if there’s a set of rapid events follow ups (frozen maw, claw of jormag, champion trains, invasions and so on), there would be a high risk of results becoming skewed by people voting anything just to get the window out of the screen (not to mention the annoyance of it).

If it was optional, then I’d see a higher risk of skewed results, would be about the same than what happens on forums and simmilar, most of the people that participate are the ones that already have have their mind set on how good/bad things are, results will probably end up being too positive or too negative.

Maybe they could add another way to suerveyr results… maybe as an achievement, go to an NPC, answer some questions (a disguised survey) for achievement points or maybe for a prize (a mini or skin or something like that)..

Not in favor of this at all. Well, not in this context at least.

The tool is usefull for evaluating individual events. I didn’t read Chris’s post to be about that, but about having discussions about the games design and direction on a much larger scale, something this tool should not be used for at all.

Also, the original post here (“Let’s see what community thinks since you said you care so much for our feedbacks – Let’s make things crystal clear once forever.”) kinda carries this vibe of “lets all vote on this to prove we’re right and Arenanet is wrong”. Maybe I’m just reading to much into that post, but that’s not a position to base a constructive discussion on. Game development by majority vote is a terrible idea.

Naqaj.6219:

Not in favor of this at all. Well, not in this context at least.

The tool is usefull for evaluating individual events. I didn’t read Chris’s post to be about that, but about having discussions about the games design and direction on a much larger scale, something this tool should not be used for at all.

Also, the original post here (“Let’s see what community thinks since you said you care so much for our feedbacks – Let’s make things crystal clear once forever.”) kinda carries this vibe of “lets all vote on this to prove we’re right and Arenanet is wrong”. Maybe I’m just reading to much into that post, but that’s not a position to base a constructive discussion on. Game development by majority vote is a terrible idea.

Its not the majority vote its total votes.

And you didn’t only read Cris’s Post but many other where we was called Minority and not Majority so you’re way off topic.

I liked that tool as well. Unfortunately, many people (including myself) gave limited or rushed feedback at the time because it was Beta and we were just rushing to play the game with the limited time we were given.

Not sure they would consider implementing it again because they would need to hire more employees to sort through the feedback…

256 characters is not enough.