Regarding the discussion about one thread at a time. The advantage for us currently is that the team could concentrate on one topic at a time rather than having three threads to keep up with and therefore have more time to get involved. It would also allow me to enter the discussion of the threads in different areas. Note i am still undecided about this particular discussion. I to am very worried about the time it would take to rotate between topics and for this reason alone that could be a big enough con to not move forward with the above proposal.
about those threads and how you should approach them (1 week pve, 1 wvw, 1 pvp or whatever you end up with): are we talking about only discussing one specific area at a time or does it mean you are discussing AND developing only one area for that specific time?
i believe it’s about discussion only, but just to be sure
i think the cons on 1 by 1 are legit, but the pro is so uber (plus the bonus pro of having an amazing discussion leader) that i’m voting for the one after another version.
another argument are ‘multi area players’ – they are also able to focus on one discussion and maybe some of ‘the others’ will join the discussion which they won’t have done in the other way and may come up with good suggestions.
Hi Kito,
In this proposal it would mean 1 discussion at a time in a rotating cycle.
I think there needs to be a variety of involvement from ANET people in the WvW thread. You have a lot going on. So does everyone else. Would be good to see more ANET presence though.
Comments such as this are not phrased properly though. “To be clear, this initiative is about discussion and not necessarily about action. When we find ideas that fit within our scope and the core philosophies of the game we do take them further, but that isn’t the goal of the whole thing, nor should it be the expectation that we will take action on any and all ideas.”
The D in CDI stands for development. If all that will happen is discussion, there isn’t much point for these threads.
Hi Style,
CDI is designed to create mind share and effect design philosophy and therefore will effect development. Personally i think DC covered that pretty well in his post. I would have worded the first sentence slightly differently though:
‘To be clear, this initiative is about discussion and not necessarily about action.’
‘To be clear, this initiative is focused around discussion which in turn will effect how Guild Wars 2 is developed moving forward.’
We will and do talk about ideas put forward to or created by the CDI that we intend to take further, however we won’t be talking about timing around feature deployment etc.
Um, thanks, Nike. I think we shouldn’t have to resort to ‘formatting schemes’ to have our posts read, but whatever works. I get the feeling it may be all for naught, anyway. The other threads are like ghost-towns. I will leave it in your more capable hands. =)
I somewhat disagree. There have been posts in the cdi that were a bit obnoxious with overly large bolded font that was formatted more than the usual post. Whether or not these are attempts to illicit developer response, i dont know. Obnoxious regardless.
I’m not sure I understand. You disagree that we shouldn’t have to resort to ‘formatting schemes’ to have our posts read? I would think every post that is polite should be read (but not necessarily responded to – that would be silly). If only certain ‘eye-catching’ posts are read by the Devs, what exactly is the purpose of these CDI threads? Just a place for the favored few to ‘represent’ us? Sounds like the ‘rep’ idea without a vote, even.
Twice, if not more often, it has been brought to attention that it seemed certain posts (posters) were granted more attention. I hope it just appeared that way, so everyone can be heard. I would not have thought, previously, my beloved ArenaNet would do otherwise.
Note: Effort in terms of formatting (in keeping with forum rules) do not improve or decrease the chances of a post being read. Personally i read all the posts unless it is clearly unproductive. Good formatting just makes it easier to read.
While I would love to have an interesting and innovative idea to progress the development of the CDI as a tool for players and devs to stop hating each other come to a greater and more thorough understanding of each other’s needs and vision, I’m afraid I don’t. No Chris Whiteside reply for me. :’-(
What I do have is a caution, and in fact something of a plea, for players to not expect the impossible out of these threads and to remember that the developers do not simply often have to strike a fine balance between completely contradictory and mutually exclusive player desires; they always have to, and expecting the developers to weigh your personal pickin’ bone more heavily than someone else’s is a recipe for frustration, disappointment, and thread-derailing diatribes.
A fantastic example is Ascended gear. There are many, many, many players (among them myself) who feel that Ascended gear was a mistake – it’s too hard to get, it’s too unforgiving for players with acute altitis, etcetera. There is also a significant number of players who feel that Ascended gear wasn’t enough; that it’s too easy to get, that it doesn’t have enough advantages over exotic, etcetera. Any initiative to ease the pain of one group is an initiative which will be almost certain to incite and anger the other, and what so many players forget from their places hip-deep in their own camp’s vendetta is that each player’s viewpoint is as valid as any other.
Nobody wants something specifically to be mean and cruel to other people who want not-that-thing. They want something because they feel it will make the game better, or because they feel it will cure a deficiency the game is currently suffering. Arguments, anger, and rustled jimmies arise when players forget that what seems like a blindingly obvious problem with an equally easy solution to them is, in fact, no such thing to someone else.
If we can – pretty please - keep this sort of thing in mind, I think we’ll have a much better time discussing normally-incendiary things like rewards, gear and progression in CDI topics. Which is important since it seems to be a hot-button issue in all three CDI areas and is very likely to pop up in the next phase of the initiative.
This post has excellent intentions and good reasoning behind it and i would say that it does indeed (ironically) build toward CDI evolving in a productive manner:
‘While I would love to have an interesting and innovative idea to progress the development of the CDI as a tool for players and devs to stop hating each other come to a greater and more thorough understanding of each other’s needs and vision, I’m afraid I don’t’
Please see below something i just posted on the WvW CDI evolution area that i think is worth discussing here to:
’I also think i made a mistake by starting three threads about the process evolution of CDI. The goal of this particular thread type is to raise issues, discuss solutions, and brainstorm new opportunities.
I think this goal could have been better served by just having a single thread where all contributors could have discussed the global evolution of CDI together bringing up relevant examples for their specific areas.
I also think i made a mistake by starting three threads about the process evolution of CDI. The goal of this particular thread type is to raise issues, discuss solutions, and brainstorm new opportunities.
I think this goal could have been better served by just having a single thread where all contributors could have discussed the global evolution of CDI together bringing up relevant examples for their specific areas.
go read the pve CDI and write how you think future WvW CDI should be. Chris is doing a fantastic job and said he will work with the other CDI to help them improve. he read everything there and reply to a lot of the posters.
I’m not sure why you say that. The community managers still handle thousands of threads each day. Moderators will still be needed even (maybe especially…) in CDI threads to comb out off topic and abusive posts. Community managers also serve an important function in identifying and forwarding along specific concerns, but in this case that’s unnecessary as there is a Developer-Owner present to do that directly.
I say it because from what interaction they have with the community (and from what you’ve also described), it feels like it’s closer to a alternative title of Moderator.
I stated in an earlier post when i first asked the question, why is it that I see the community managers never really communicating with the community, and when it is, it’s often to give a warning, tell someone they’re incorrect and present them with fact, or closing a thread.
Even my single interaction with a community manager came from asking why threads were being deleted/closed on a ‘shoot first, ask questions later’ policy way back earlier this year. First I got an infraction for bringing it up, then I got a response from a community manager, and I even Thanked them for responding, then the thread was closed.
So much for communication.
I sincerely hope you, or Anet don’t think community managers should just sit back, collect info on what’s bugging us, but never reach out to us?
I understand this is a dev owned thread, but does that make them exempt from adding to the discussion, or visibly assisting, and hell, maybe they may even communicate…with the community.
I suppose I’m just alone in thinking this.
Hi Nethy,
I am going to reply. I am just having a very busy day.
FYI if we go with the next topics from the initial call for topics threads (Global) then they are as follows:
PVE: Ascended Gear
PvP: Rewards and Progression
WvW: Skill Lag
These are all pretty focused topics which means we will be able to enter into the discussions more readily in terms of time. The bigger the topic the more divergent the discussions and this makes it harder for us to give them our full attention.
Chris
Can we see a complete list of the next 3+ topics?
Hi Whyme,
Here is the data you requested:
PvE Request for Topics Results
1 Living World
2 Ascended Gear/Ascended Items
3 Class Balance
WvW Request for Topics Results
1 Population (Imbalance)
2 Skill Lag
3 Commander (functionality, system, tag)
PvP Request for Topics Results
1 Game Modes
2 Rewards (progression)
3 Build Diversity
Each thread has an owner, I am the owner of the PVE thread. My plan is to work with each of the owners to help them grow to better handle the topics moving forward. I want the individual owners themselves to reply and connect in a meaningful and relevant manner, thus it is disingenuous for me to go in and own another thread (never mind taking into account the time that would eat up for me). However this does not preclude me from working with the guys and girls to build a better path to success in this initiative.
Thanks for clarifying that you are not the owner of each thread. It is good to know you do not have to manage all of them.
One question after looking at this post from you and other posts on the thread, does this mean that you will have a CDI question in each area (PvP, WvW, and PvE) going on at the same time or just one at any given time. Or am I reading this wrong and nothing about that has been decided yet?
And dude!!! Huge props for handling some of the beating you get here. It is pure class the way you compose yourself on the thread.
Hi Jheryn,
Regarding your question we haven’t decided yet.
And thanks for you feedback, i am really enjoying working with everyone.
No idea how to do that…or that double quote thing, Nike. I just read the ‘summary’ three pages back in that still open thread. Lol. You are very popular. It was also about 10 Dev posts back. It did reference some people’s ideas, but no clue what those ideas were. It also said there would be more summarizing, I hope that gets taken care of.
What I got most out of it, was that ArenaNet were already doing most of the things suggested, and if they were not readily recognizable, they would be in the future.
Taking Nike’s suggestions to get posts read, perhaps.
That appears to have worked out for you .
((Though, were it me, I would have trimmed the quoted text down considerably. It makes it easier to draw a direct line between what they said and what you’re inquiring about.))
In fact the percentage of Dev posts that start with ‘Nike.2631 quotes’ has plummeted in the last few hours .
One final thing i wanted to mention to the group before heading of to bed is to note that whilst i have been posting relatively frequently over the weekend, this is not something i expect from the team. It is my choice to spend my free time this way and not something i would promote in regard to how the team spend their weekends.
I am mentioning this in order to set expectations around my interaction this weekend (which by the way i have very much enjoyed) in regard to my ability to interact moving forward.
This comment is not intended to diminish the value of the problem solving around the issues we have discussed about team member engagement on threads during work time however.
Thanks a lot for taking the time to share your thoughts.There is a lot to think about in regard to your points, so i will respond tomorrow so i can have more time to think about your proposal.
I don’t want to derail the thread but i would also like to know how everyone would like the next topics to be chosen. Simply would you like to vote again or would you like us to pick the second topics on the respective lists?
Finally i have said this many times so for those that have seen it repeatedly please forgive me for the repetition, but once again i want to make it clear that the only ‘feedback’ i have asked the team not to spend their time on are those comments which are not productive. Specifically comments with no actionable substance. Whilst it is nice to see positive commentary we spend a lot more time discussing and negative criticism so we can learn more and improve the game.
Again for the feedback on how to improve the CDI,
Chris
Voting is fine for choosing topics, as long as previous ones are off limits for a certain time to prevent the same thing from coming up repeatedly. Which is common sense and I expect you do anyway.
As for how to improve CDI, most of my feedback will be below. However I want to emphasize and agree with what others have said about solid guidelines from the devs- an initial post with your thoughts, vision, goals, what have you. This is important to direct the discussion toward areas that you, the devs, actually feel are actionable.
That we only have one thread per area open at one time, for example, the next PVE one then PvP and then WvW?
I have been thinking about this for a few days and believe the major issue would be the overall velocity of the CDI, and the main Pro being that we will have more time to enter into discussions due to only having to focus on one at a time.
Thoughts?
Chris
I think that’s fine, and I might even extend it. A 1 month cycle would allow for a massive amount of time and discussion- probably too much. UNLESS!!! On a roughly weekly basis, the devs come in and comment with their own thoughts, responses, and a proposal of changes. This means that any given area will get worked over several times by all parties, and in theory (if everyone behaves!) get more of what we want done, in the way that you need to do it.
Now, actually 1 month is probably too long for a discussion cycle, but some kind of extended discussion should be used. I’m going to steal from CCP and EVE Online for this idea, because I think they have the best player/dev interaction currently in the industry. At least after Monoclegate happened :P (every EVE player reading this just laughed and groaned at the same time, producing a sound not entirely unlike the bleating of a drunken walrus). Now, they don’t interact as directly as you are attmepting to with CDI, but they do seem to have a really good format going and it’s given some amazing results over the last year and a half since they started it. Anyway, format break for the big idea:
Use an iterative development cycle, perhaps 3 months long. That is Discussion > Testing (side note: open tests would be HIGHLY beneficial! get you one) > Delivery > wait 3 months > Review Results and adjust the original changes as needed. If a pass didn’t have the desired results, or has major flaws, this quick re-pass lets you tune it up. It also shows that CDI is for real when you come back and directly revisit things, and that will pay off in a big way after a couple cycles.
This means you ensure that not only are you working on what the community needs via CDI topics, but you are revisiting it at regular intervals to make sure it turned out right. It’s better for the players, because when a big change happens there is recourse to fix the problems, and it’s better for the Devs because you can think big and potentially make major changes without major community meltdowns (guarunteed review = constructive outlet). Obviously details and timelines would need worked out and that’s up to you guys and how you run your studio. Even flexible timelines are fine, as long as you keep everyone up to date so there’s no flipping out.
Keep this process up for a year or two and GW2 could become incredible. You may truly be able to make a living MMO that grows with it’s players. So far, only EVE has even come close, and based on how you’ve handled the CDI discussions so far I think Anet may eventually be able to beat them. I’m not going to derail this into a business discussion, but take a look at EVE’s subscriber history over the past 10 years and it should become clear that none of this is about QQ or marking fire hydrants, but about the kind of benefits there are for both sides. You’ve had a very rocky start in the first year (I myself got a refund in protest when Ascended gear was released, and only re-subbed last month when the game went on sale), but I truly hope you succeed.
The next topic for WvW after skill lag is: Commander mechanics and Commander tag functionality.
Then when is WXP cause that is a definite hot button topic and has been for a long time?
Hi Morrolan,
I am only aware of the top three in each area and WXP wasn’t one of them. I would imagine WvW progression was pretty high up though. It is certainly a discussion i would like to see.
- as mentioned by Chris only one CDI overall at a time (if this means more and better participation from Anet)
- for each new CDI Anet should send out an ingame mail announcement, something like “our new CDI is about [topic], we are going to discuss this because of [concerns], if you want to help improve the game come visit [forumsection]”
- the devs from Anet that will take part in the CDI should introduce themselfs in extra posts following the starting one (their thoughts on the topic, what they have to do with it)
- for a better overview as the thread grows i would suggest linking every dev reply in the first post, e.g. http://forum.tibia.com/forum/?action=thread&threadid=4015891 (it think you need to copy&paste the link manually to work)
even if you are late to the party, just by checking the first post you get an easy overview what topics have already been addressed
I think we should continue to discuss the CDI cadence for example 1 at a time or a hybrid of this and the original model.
The rest of your points are really good and i think we should probably do them unless anyone has any concerns?
Note i would have to check the logistics around the email idea, but more exposition of the initiative would be great.
Chris
Taking Nike’s suggestions to get posts read, perhaps.
I still do not understand the purpose of having one CDI thread at a time, when you have stated a few times that each thread is ‘manned’ by different Devs. I thought you had stated previously the reason for ‘one at a time’ was to allow more time for Devs to focus their attention on each thread and not be spread too thin over the three. If each thread has its own Devs, why would they be spread over the three threads?
I’m not sure there is a lot of advantage in having to wait 3 to 6 weeks for each topic. (So far, each thread of this type – those created by Devs for feedback – has seemed to stay open longer than originally intended.) The length of some threads also may discourage participation from those ‘coming late to the party’, or even those who haven’t ‘kept up’.
I noticed that at the beginning of this thread when we were discussing which topic would be next, it seemed most replies favored ‘Dev choice’, but ‘next in line’ was chosen (by a Dev). I guess that worked out, in an odd way, but when Devs choose to implement something other than popular-demand, it would be nice to hear the reason why…if possible.
Oh, and for those of us who have missed it, or failed to understand, could you give a synopsis of what we (Devs and players) have learned and/or decided on so far from all the previous and current CDI threads. I, personally, feel a little lost. Thank you for your time.
Hi Inculpatas,
Regarding the discussion about one thread at a time. The advantage for us currently is that the team could concentrate on one topic at a time rather than having three threads to keep up with and therefore have more time to get involved. It would also allow me to enter the discussion of the threads in different areas. Note i am still undecided about this particular discussion. I to am very worried about the time it would take to rotate between topics and for this reason alone that could be a big enough con to not move forward with the above proposal.
Regarding topic choice, no decision has been made yet as to whether we will move ahead with the next topic in line or that the team picks the next topic.
There is a summary of each CDI resident near the end of each topic in their pertinent parts of the forum.
- as mentioned by Chris only one CDI overall at a time (if this means more and better participation from Anet)
- for each new CDI Anet should send out an ingame mail announcement, something like “our new CDI is about [topic], we are going to discuss this because of [concerns], if you want to help improve the game come visit [forumsection]”
- the devs from Anet that will take part in the CDI should introduce themselfs in extra posts following the starting one (their thoughts on the topic, what they have to do with it)
- for a better overview as the thread grows i would suggest linking every dev reply in the first post, e.g. http://forum.tibia.com/forum/?action=thread&threadid=4015891 (it think you need to copy&paste the link manually to work)
even if you are late to the party, just by checking the first post you get an easy overview what topics have already been addressed
I think we should continue to discuss the CDI cadence for example 1 at a time or a hybrid of this and the original model.
The rest of your points are really good and i think we should probably do them unless anyone has any concerns?
Note i would have to check the logistics around the email idea, but more exposition of the initiative would be great.
As you have read in point three i have expressed the issues that i think were core to that CDI not being more successful. Each thread has an owner, I am the owner of the PVE thread. My plan is to work with each of the owners to help them grow to better handle the topics moving forward. I want the individual owners themselves to reply and connect in a meaningful and relevant manner, thus it is disingenuous for me to go in and own another thread (never mind taking into account the time that would eat up for me). However this does not preclude me from working with the guys and girls to build a better path to success in this initiative. Thus i would ask you to remain patient, see how things improve and continue to feedback in a manner that is productive to the evolution of CDI as a whole.
Chris
Not to dwell on this too much, but perhaps there’s a case here for setting up rules for yourselves as well as us. We currently have to comply with a few ground-rules before starting the discussion, and we (mostly) adhere to them. Maybe we should have a few set ground rules for the Anet team to make sure it’s not lopsided.
For example a single one to start off with that isn’t going to break the CDI overall would be:
- If an Anet employee “owns/coordinates” the thread, they are expected to participate in it too, or it will be designated to someone better suited.
That way, we and you know where we both stand on this. You don’t contribute to a discussion you start; you’re in the wrong….if we don’t give constructive feedback/put out personal attacks; we’re in the wrong. Simple.
I know, it sounds a little patronising, but I think it’s fair game, if you set up a big initiative, and can’t follow through on one section at the very start, it’s not likely to progress in a positive manner from there on. However, I did notice this:
Third, i am sorry that the WvW thread wasn’t more like the PVE one. This is my fault in that i underestimated how busy the guys were
You honorably take the fall for time mismanagement but, strangely won’t jump into the WvW thread to relay that over to them, and discuss those failings? (I can’t say if you have, i’m only taking yours and gidorah’s word for it)
Not sure if I completely follow that logic, (but hey, I can’t complain I watched and participated in the PvE thread) but it’d be nice to see some of that newly created disdain for a WvW CDI disappear, so you can actually move forward.
Hope that all made sense!
Hi Nethykins,
Your post does make sense and i very much appreciate this section in particular:
‘but it’d be nice to see some of that newly created disdain for a WvW CDI disappear, so you can actually move forward.’
Chris, when you return could you comment on the response and implimentation trnaround for some of the ideas we have put forth? Im not talking about exact timeframes but for things like adjusting the amount of achievement grind, for example…is that something that could happen relatively quickly like a mon or two…or are we looking at many months before we see and result of these discussions.
I know internal discussions need to happen, coding, etc… But on some of the topics we talked about for living story, the amount of my playtime may be determined by how quickly some of thisgetsput in. Thanks
Hi Cesmode,
Generally when we agree on a point it means that we will discuss it with the team and go from there. Reducing the "grind’ in achievements is something we have been working on for a while and the last topic discussion has only furthered our commitment to get the balance right sooner. We can’t give a timing cadence on specific features but we can talk about changes or evolutions to our design philosophy.
In my summary i listed the points we agree with and those that we will look into again. I hope this helps?
Chris
Well i was looking for something like…when you agree on an idea internally does it take months to become reality? My interest has been waning because of the things we have been discussing and i was looking to see if there is light a the end of the tunnel sooner rather than later.
It depends on the particular area, some can be almost immediate and others could take months. In future i will be sure to give more explanation about what goes into the development of features or areas we are discussing.
First of all i was listing the next topics and asking everyone’s thoughts on choosing the original topics. I made no comment on whether or not that discussion was valid.
Secondly there is certainly value to discussing this issue being that any ArenaNet dev is welcome to post.
Third, i am sorry that the WvW thread wasn’t more like the PVE one. This is my fault in that i underestimated how busy the guys were, and also that they feel anxious around posting due to not being a 100% percent sure about what they can discuss and secondly their trepidation in posting which can be a pretty difficult environment for them sometimes.
Fourth, be under no illusion that these guys work very hard, play the hell out of WvW and are excellent at their jobs. Please note that i also (like many others at Arena) play WvW.
Finally my proposal around the next topics for discussion was to hear folks opinions. Please don’t assume what my personal opinion is around those individual topics.
I appreciate your patience and hope that this makes some sense.
Chris
Hi Gidorah,
I would suggest reading this post again, specifically point three. I am at a loss as to how better explain to you that there was an issue with the WvW CDI and the areas we will be concentrating on to fix any issues.
You are starting to waste my time and the time of community members contributing to bettering the process through problem solving and evolving discussion.
Chris
I think the problem is I haven’t seen any real effort to fix it yet. You havent stepped into the wvw thread to talk about how the wvw thread in particular went with the actual wvw community. Instead you stay here and make them come to you and derail this thread because you won’t adresss the concerns they are having in their thread. Which to be honest is pretty similar to how you handled the actual cdi.
Hi Gidorah,
I think this section is fair and deserves some more insight:
‘I think the problem is I haven’t seen any real effort to fix it yet. You havent stepped into the wvw thread to talk about how the wvw thread in particular went with the actual wvw community. ’
As you have read in point three i have expressed the issues that i think were core to that CDI not being more successful. Each thread has an owner, I am the owner of the PVE thread. My plan is to work with each of the owners to help them grow to better handle the topics moving forward. I want the individual owners themselves to reply and connect in a meaningful and relevant manner, thus it is disingenuous for me to go in and own another thread (never mind taking into account the time that would eat up for me). However this does not preclude me from working with the guys and girls to build a better path to success in this initiative. Thus i would ask you to remain patient, see how things improve and continue to feedback in a manner that is productive to the evolution of CDI as a whole.
First of all i was listing the next topics and asking everyone’s thoughts on choosing the original topics. I made no comment on whether or not that discussion was valid.
Secondly there is certainly value to discussing this issue being that any ArenaNet dev is welcome to post.
Third, i am sorry that the WvW thread wasn’t more like the PVE one. This is my fault in that i underestimated how busy the guys were, and also that they feel anxious around posting due to not being a 100% percent sure about what they can discuss and secondly their trepidation in posting which can be a pretty difficult environment for them sometimes.
Fourth, be under no illusion that these guys work very hard, play the hell out of WvW and are excellent at their jobs. Please note that i also (like many others at Arena) play WvW.
Finally my proposal around the next topics for discussion was to hear folks opinions. Please don’t assume what my personal opinion is around those individual topics.
I appreciate your patience and hope that this makes some sense.
Chris
Hi Gidorah,
I would suggest reading this post again, specifically point three. I am at a loss as to how better explain to you that there was an issue with the WvW CDI and the areas we will be concentrating on to fix said issues.
You are starting to waste my time and the time of community members contributing to bettering the process through problem solving and evolving discussion.
Chris, when you return could you comment on the response and implimentation trnaround for some of the ideas we have put forth? Im not talking about exact timeframes but for things like adjusting the amount of achievement grind, for example…is that something that could happen relatively quickly like a mon or two…or are we looking at many months before we see and result of these discussions.
I know internal discussions need to happen, coding, etc… But on some of the topics we talked about for living story, the amount of my playtime may be determined by how quickly some of thisgetsput in. Thanks
Hi Cesmode,
Generally when we agree on a point it means that we will discuss it with the team and go from there. Reducing the "grind’ in achievements is something we have been working on for a while and the last topic discussion has only furthered our commitment to get the balance right sooner. We can’t give a timing cadence on specific features but we can talk about changes or evolutions to our design philosophy.
In my summary i listed the points we agree with and those that we will look into again. I hope this helps?
B) Have time freed up on the their schedule to host the topic for the week/10 days/whatever fixed length you want it to run. Give them 45 minutes each day their expected by ANet to read and comment during the thread’s run. You’ve been the voice of several of these and might be again in the future, but for some of these more tightly themed topics ANet needs a spokesman who literally knows it better than anyone AND is clear that they are being pushed forward to listen and consider ideas that might be outside their comfort zone.
Fo’ real.
Chris!
Put those Project Managers/Production Managers to use!!!!
Get them to factor in time for the CDI without fail. The main thing here, is you should be treating the CDI as a must-have component of your working day. You clock in, you start work on project X, break for lunch, come back from lunch and do your short CDI time (or do the CDI during lunch if you’re that eager!), have a meeting/status update etc, then continue with your projects till closing.
The sooner you take it on board as a factor of your timetable, the less “sorry, don’t have much time” situations will arise.
Agreed and we absolutely are working toward getting more time for the CDI. However work in a live environment can still be difficult to manage even with a studio as well organized as ours. This said i agree more can be done here and this plus other ideas that have been put forward should certainly lead to better interaction on the next set of topics.
I will probably be swatted down, and infracted, but….
It’s almost always Nike. Even if someone else proposed nearly the same ideas…..it’s Nike.
I give up. =(
Hi Inc,
Not sure exactly what you mean but i am going to assume that you think there is bias toward Nike’s comments? If so then please note i have both agreed and disagreed with Nike’s commentary over the past few weeks. There is absolutely no bias from my point of view but i apologize if it feels like there is and i will try to do better to keep this in mind moving forward.
Also it just occurred to me that this week is Thanksgiving and some of the team will be out for a number of days this week to spend time with their families. Thus we should probably start the next CDI Topic/s the Monday after next.
Chris
P.S: ‘How could he forget it’s Thanksgiving this week!!!!’ Because i am British and still not used to US holidays (-:
While i agree that the topic may not be suitable as a CDI topic, it is worth noting that there is a lot more to this topic than performance optimization. Opportunities and evolution on this area are also impacted by Game Design quite heavily.
Ok, now this is interesting. From just that little snippet I realize I’d like to know more about it ((“Impacted by Game Design” you say? Hmm…)). I accept that my initial understanding of WvW skill lag issues is simplistic, and that such a thread might actually be very informative… which suggests something that applies to CDIs in general: It might be VERY useful for the one of the Devs associated with the nuts and bolts of each topic to~
A) Write a strong opening post for the CDI topic that lays the groundwork – sort of a primer so that readers have a little more grounding in the topic being addressed – put this right up front, either as post 1 (followed by the rules in post 2) or post 2 (following the rules in post 1). If you put it in post 1, you can also use the Q/A toggle to ensure this primer appears at the top of every page when viewing the topic .
B) Have time freed up on the their schedule to host the topic for the week/10 days/whatever fixed length you want it to run. Give them 45 minutes each day their expected by ANet to read and comment during the thread’s run. You’ve been the voice of several of these and might be again in the future, but for some of these more tightly themed topics ANet needs a spokesman who literally knows it better than anyone AND is clear that they are being pushed forward to listen and consider ideas that might be outside their comfort zone.
Yep i think we should action point A. I agree with the intention of Point B.
The next topic for WvW after skill lag is: Commander mechanics and Commander tag functionality.
Chris
Allow me to use my powers of true prophecy to sum up the “CDI – WvW Skill Lag” thread in its entirety before it even happens:
Players: We hate skill lag. It makes us look like incompetents. ANet: We hate it too. We’re working on it right now.
Now its possible that on this side of the fence there are some amazing network coders who have torn apart your engine in far more detail than the EULA allows and can offer some amazingly detailed and cogent suggestions for managing your packet handling and who would risk bans for revealing they know that much about your engine architecture… And your coders might love to meet and chat with them on a level 99% of us reading will never understand… But I’m not sure its a bet I’d be willing to take, investing your single CDI WvW ‘slot’ for the week or two it would require to bear fruit or prove fruitless.
While i agree that the topic may not be suitable as a CDI topic, it is worth noting that there is a lot more to this topic than performance optimization. Opportunities and evolution on this area are also impacted by Game Design quite heavily.
However like you say more value could probably be derived from other topics such as Commander functionality.
FYI if we go with the next topics from the initial call for topics threads (Global) then they are as follows:
PVE: Ascended Gear
PvP: Rewards and Progression
WvW: Skill Lag
These are all pretty focused topics which means we will be able to enter into the discussions more readily in terms of time. The bigger the topic the more divergent the discussions and this makes it harder for us to give them our full attention.
Chris
I agree that these seem pretty focused and also sound interesting to discuss.
I think Uttar is right about the WvW topic though. I think that skill lag is a huge hot button for WvW, but if they can’t provide meaningful discussion and vice versa, is it really a good topic for CDI? If you do not go with the topic, you could indicate that it was the second topic and link to the post mentioned so that they at least know it isn’t being ignored.
Can you post the next topic for WvW? That might give a better indication as to whether this one should be discussed anyway or if the third could create a better dynamic.
The next topic for WvW after skill lag is: Commander mechanics and Commander tag functionality.
If your going to split it by weeks – so one week is pvp, one is wvw etc, make it to each week two topics are discussed. So you have two threads, each for a seperate topic. One thread could be based on player vote, the others based on something the devs would like to discuss.
That would make it far more meaningful – having 1 topic rotate on a three week basis is slow. Two topics could cover more ground and make it more meaningful to the player base as it’s more likely to bring about a topic players want to discuss.
For example, if you did your current system, the next topic for wvw would be skill lag. This is a pointless topic, as there is nothing players can really do or say to change it. So having a topic on skill lag and a topic on rewards would allow for far more discussion instead of the ‘oh, this weeks is not relavent to me, now I have to wait three weeks before something comes up. Anet really doesn’t care about wvw’ opinion and posts that may occur.
Asuka i am chilling at the moment and will reply to your comment in the morning, but i just wanted to say i absolutely love your sig. John is a great guy, a real character!
Chris
Some good ideas. I think at the moment the priority for me is to make sure the team is able to have enough time to contribute appropriately. Focusing the topics and a potential reduction in concurrent threads would also help.
If your going to split it by weeks – so one week is pvp, one is wvw etc, make it to each week two topics are discussed. So you have two threads, each for a seperate topic. One thread could be based on player vote, the others based on something the devs would like to discuss.
That would make it far more meaningful – having 1 topic rotate on a three week basis is slow. Two topics could cover more ground and make it more meaningful to the player base as it’s more likely to bring about a topic players want to discuss.
For example, if you did your current system, the next topic for wvw would be skill lag. This is a pointless topic, as there is nothing players can really do or say to change it. So having a topic on skill lag and a topic on rewards would allow for far more discussion instead of the ‘oh, this weeks is not relavent to me, now I have to wait three weeks before something comes up. Anet really doesn’t care about wvw’ opinion and posts that may occur.
Asuka i am chilling at the moment and will reply to your comment in the morning, but i just wanted to say i absolutely love your sig. John is a great guy, a real character!
And on that note i am going to spend some time with the family. I will get back to the discussion either tonight or tomorrow morning.
Heehee. One of the parts of the process proven to work: The ‘catch you later’ note.
Sorry Nike, i would love to carry on but i have been floating around on the discussion for the past three hours, and i would rather not be strangled by my wife Simpsons style (-:
That we only have one thread per area open at one time, for example, the next PVE one then PvP and then WvW?
I have been thinking about this for a few days and believe the major issue would be the overall velocity of the CDI, and the main Pro being that we will have more time to enter into discussions due to only having to focus on one at a time.
Thoughts?
Chris
Personally, I’m not a fan.
I can understand that it would allow the higher ups who have their hands in a number of areas to participate in each as they became active. I think one issue that the CDI faces right now, however, is momentum. The current threads have already been something of a wasteland for meaningful interaction. Perhaps I’m not the normal player, but I play PvE nearly exclusively (I’ve popped into WvW a few times and haven’t touched PvP at all). I’d imagine many players are in the same boat as me, except maybe they focus on WvW or PvP instead. By alternating areas of focus you’re basically going to be leaving the players not interested in that area of the game in the lurch for two weeks at a time.
There’s already a problem with a lack of interaction, and not really addressing entire subsets of players at all for certain periods is just going to make that worse.
Yep this is definitely the major con in the proposal.
Chris
Perhaps a compromise. Establish a schedule ahead of time. Maybe state ahead of time the focus will move in a 3 day rotation. Not to say the devs wouldn’t continue to read all the threads but the community can expect more interaction within the thread on these days, much like you are doing now.
The result would be a micro cycle within the thread of the devs coming in and commenting and asking question new questions expanding the current discussion and then the community has the next 2 days to discuss amongst themselves before the devs come back to talk about where the discussion has gone into the last couple days. This staggering would give all involved time to interact across as many threads as they like. Plus those interested in only taking part in one or two sections wouldn’t have to wait weeks.
Wouldn’t there be an issue then with the team keeping up with the flow of discussions? I found it very hard to keep up even though i was reading all of the posts.
Chris
For example i really wanted to discuss the Dominance idea and probably will revisit it but i didn’t have time during that particular CDI.
This said by focusing the thread topic this issue would be mitigated to an extent.
That we only have one thread per area open at one time, for example, the next PVE one then PvP and then WvW?
I have been thinking about this for a few days and believe the major issue would be the overall velocity of the CDI, and the main Pro being that we will have more time to enter into discussions due to only having to focus on one at a time.
Thoughts?
Chris
Personally, I’m not a fan.
I can understand that it would allow the higher ups who have their hands in a number of areas to participate in each as they became active. I think one issue that the CDI faces right now, however, is momentum. The current threads have already been something of a wasteland for meaningful interaction. Perhaps I’m not the normal player, but I play PvE nearly exclusively (I’ve popped into WvW a few times and haven’t touched PvP at all). I’d imagine many players are in the same boat as me, except maybe they focus on WvW or PvP instead. By alternating areas of focus you’re basically going to be leaving the players not interested in that area of the game in the lurch for two weeks at a time.
There’s already a problem with a lack of interaction, and not really addressing entire subsets of players at all for certain periods is just going to make that worse.
Yep this is definitely the major con in the proposal.
Chris
Perhaps a compromise. Establish a schedule ahead of time. Maybe state ahead of time the focus will move in a 3 day rotation. Not to say the devs wouldn’t continue to read all the threads but the community can expect more interaction within the thread on these days, much like you are doing now.
The result would be a micro cycle within the thread of the devs coming in and commenting and asking question new questions expanding the current discussion and then the community has the next 2 days to discuss amongst themselves before the devs come back to talk about where the discussion has gone into the last couple days. This staggering would give all involved time to interact across as many threads as they like. Plus those interested in only taking part in one or two sections wouldn’t have to wait weeks.
Wouldn’t there be an issue then with the team keeping up with the flow of discussions? I found it very hard to keep up even though i was reading all of the posts.
That we only have one thread per area open at one time, for example, the next PVE one then PvP and then WvW?
I have been thinking about this for a few days and believe the major issue would be the overall velocity of the CDI, and the main Pro being that we will have more time to enter into discussions due to only having to focus on one at a time.
Thoughts?
Chris
Personally, I’m not a fan.
I can understand that it would allow the higher ups who have their hands in a number of areas to participate in each as they became active. I think one issue that the CDI faces right now, however, is momentum. The current threads have already been something of a wasteland for meaningful interaction. Perhaps I’m not the normal player, but I play PvE nearly exclusively (I’ve popped into WvW a few times and haven’t touched PvP at all). I’d imagine many players are in the same boat as me, except maybe they focus on WvW or PvP instead. By alternating areas of focus you’re basically going to be leaving the players not interested in that area of the game in the lurch for two weeks at a time.
There’s already a problem with a lack of interaction, and not really addressing entire subsets of players at all for certain periods is just going to make that worse.
On the other hand, it means they can focus entirely on your issues when it comes to your turn. By ‘your’ I of course mean the area of the game you’re interested in.
The real draw back I see is the potential that, with the 2week release schedule of the living story, some of the PvE CDIs could miss entire patches. Alternatively a WvW CDI or PvP CDI might not match up well with the timing of a patch that focuses on one of those aspects if they adhere to a strict rotation of topics.
And this i think is the biggest pro for the proposal:
‘On the other hand, it means they can focus entirely on your issues when it comes to your turn.’
I think it could work to change the CDI area (PvP/WvW/PvE) every week, but I wouldn’t set the boundaries in stone.
Some topics might develop in ways we cannot anticipate. Some may need more than a week, others could be exhausted in days.
If a topic clearly demands more discussion then it would be nice to keep it running a bit longer. This would mean that there may be multiple CDI’s running at a time though. (Since it wouldn’t be right to keep the purely PvP folks waiting for a month before it is their turn again)
And perhaps a change, or broadening of the topic if it hits a dead end. (Like what Uttar mentioned: Skill Lag could be a difficult topic to keep going for a week) It could become discouraging if the CDI on WvW went sour again, since it would be weeks before a new WvW topic comes along.
Also: Perhaps it could be an idea to rework the suggestions subforum (it says in the sticky that it’s temporary, and it has been saying that for a year).
A CDI-based sticky with an inspiring dev question
I imagine something like:
’The CDI on the Living Story offered us some great insight in how the playerbase experienced what we designed. These insights already have an impact as we are starting our designs for summer 2014. The responses in the thread seemed to indicate that you are ready to take on another elder dragon. How do you envision this?
Think of things like:
What type of event should it be? Instanced, like a dungeon and if so – how many people? Open world, like Tequatl, but more massive? A new personal story, like Zaithan, but with a better ending?
What would you like to see? Don’t forget to hit those +1’s on the ideas that you like!
(Please do try to make it easy for us to read!)’
This could keep the initiative going with focused in depth ideas and suggestions. Then later on, when there is a bit of spare time, the devs would round up the topic with some highlights and observations.
Not only would this allow the CDI to go over time, it would also give the eager brainstormers some guidance as to where their efforts would be most useful.
(Instead of the current implementation of the suggestions forum that feels very much like a place where ideas go to be lost forever.)
Lots of good points. It does still boil down to the communities tolerance of what would be 3 week area cycles.
I do agree with being flexible on summarizing and moving on from a thread or extending one where appropriate and this works regardless of the model we move forward with.
That we only have one thread per area open at one time, for example, the next PVE one then PvP and then WvW?
I have been thinking about this for a few days and believe the major issue would be the overall velocity of the CDI, and the main Pro being that we will have more time to enter into discussions due to only having to focus on one at a time.
Thoughts?
Chris
Personally, I’m not a fan.
I can understand that it would allow the higher ups who have their hands in a number of areas to participate in each as they became active. I think one issue that the CDI faces right now, however, is momentum. The current threads have already been something of a wasteland for meaningful interaction. Perhaps I’m not the normal player, but I play PvE nearly exclusively (I’ve popped into WvW a few times and haven’t touched PvP at all). I’d imagine many players are in the same boat as me, except maybe they focus on WvW or PvP instead. By alternating areas of focus you’re basically going to be leaving the players not interested in that area of the game in the lurch for two weeks at a time.
There’s already a problem with a lack of interaction, and not really addressing entire subsets of players at all for certain periods is just going to make that worse.
Yep this is definitely the major con in the proposal.
First of all i was listing the next topics and asking everyone’s thoughts on choosing the original topics. I made no comment on whether or not the discussion was valid.
Secondly there is certainly value to discussing this issue being that any ArenaNet dev is welcome to post.
Third, i am sorry that the WvW thread wasn’t more like the PVE one. This is my fault in that i underestimated how busy the guys were, and also that they feel anxious around posting due to not being a 100% percent sure about what they can discuss and secondly their trepidation in posting which can be a pretty difficulty environment for them sometimes.
Fourth, be under no illusion that these guys work very hard, play the hell out of WvW and are excellent at their jobs. Please note that i also (like many others at Arena) play WvW.
Finally my proposal around the next topics for discussion was to hear folks opinions. Please don’t assume what my personal opinion is around those individual topics.
I appreciate your patience and hope that this makes some sense.
Chris
sure it makes sense but it doesn’t fix the problem. Go check out the wvw version of this discussion and see how poorly it is being received because of the poor job the wvw dev’s did and fix it. I will be more impressed by you fixing the problem and not terrible concerned about the excuses for why it went wrong.
HI Gidorah,
I have not put forward a single excuse. You seem to be quite upset about this, so perhaps it would be worth taking a time out and re-reading my posts.
The CDI is in its infancy.
The whole point of this thread is to discuss and evolve what went wrong after every topic discussion.
Please don’t expect everything to run perfectly and i would suggest, if you cant wait, coming back in a month or so by which time the community and dev interaction will have better synergy and experience.
Please don’t take my comments as anything personal. Many of your posts have been awesome, but i have seen you becoming more and more frustrated. I get that, but please have a little more patience or take a break from the initiative for a few days.
Finally lets not derail the thread anymore than we already have done.
First of all i was listing the next topics and asking everyone’s thoughts on choosing the original topics. I made no comment on whether or not that discussion was valid.
Secondly there is certainly value to discussing this issue being that any ArenaNet dev is welcome to post.
Third, i am sorry that the WvW thread wasn’t more like the PVE one. This is my fault in that i underestimated how busy the guys were, and also that they feel anxious around posting due to not being a 100% percent sure about what they can discuss and secondly their trepidation in posting which can be a pretty difficult environment for them sometimes.
Fourth, be under no illusion that these guys work very hard, play the hell out of WvW and are excellent at their jobs. Please note that i also (like many others at Arena) play WvW.
Finally my proposal around the next topics for discussion was to hear folks opinions. Please don’t assume what my personal opinion is around those individual topics.
I appreciate your patience and hope that this makes some sense.
That we only have one thread per area open at one time, for example, the next PVE one then PvP and then WvW?
I have been thinking about this for a few days and believe the major issue would be the overall velocity of the CDI, and the main Pro being that we will have more time to enter into discussions due to only having to focus on one at a time.
My thoughts are that there are different devs on different teams responding to feedback on each of these three areas. Would you be able to respond to WvW feedback? If my understanding is right and different devs would respond to the different areas, I think that we should have three threads open for each area at a time.
Unless the lead time would allow you to set aside more time when your week comes around? Then I’d be all for it.
Yep it means i would be able to contribute both the WvW and PvP threads.
That we only have one thread per area open at one time, for example, the next PVE one then PvP and then WvW?
I have been thinking about this for a few days and believe the major issue would be the overall velocity of the CDI, and the main Pro being that we will have more time to enter into discussions due to only having to focus on one at a time.
Those are still all very much relevant hot button topics that people want to hear about – after all, not much time has passed for things to ‘marinate’ and shift since the original call for votes.
Notwithstanding my personal bias to some of those topics, I do think respecting the original vote’s tallies would give the people who voted in that thread a good dose of confidence in the CDI’s intentions to really hit the hot stuff.
This to is a very good point. And i have to say something that i am currently leaning toward.
Still plenty of time for further discussion though.
While a CDI on skill lag could be very interesting, I’m not sure what you expect the community could really contribute, and what responses/feedback the dev team could give? Thanks!
That is a good point. Let’s see if there is anymore commentary about that Topic proposal and then go from there.
FYI if we go with the next topics from the initial call for topics threads (Global) then they are as follows:
PVE: Ascended Gear
PvP: Rewards and Progression
WvW: Skill Lag
These are all pretty focused topics which means we will be able to enter into the discussions more readily in terms of time. The bigger the topic the more divergent the discussions and this makes it harder for us to give them our full attention.
.
.