Forums » Suggestions
So, "/ignore" is ineffective cuz noobs don't know how to use it? Easy peasy. Education. Just modify the tutorial to include a section on how to handle the chat system. Removal of 100 and other dramatic extreme measures are not needed.
Sorry guys but you are not the majority or the larger community.
As to Incarnate, He has already locked one thread on this topic and had you actually read the be nice thread you would know he doe not appreciate a new thread being started,
100 will not get any attention from the devs until such time as Incarnate decides it is in his interest to do so. He has stayed out of 100 for over a decade and I suspect it will be a decade more before 100 does become an issue for him.
Good luck - yer gonna need it.
As to Incarnate, He has already locked one thread on this topic and had you actually read the be nice thread you would know he doe not appreciate a new thread being started,
100 will not get any attention from the devs until such time as Incarnate decides it is in his interest to do so. He has stayed out of 100 for over a decade and I suspect it will be a decade more before 100 does become an issue for him.
Good luck - yer gonna need it.
PaKettle is so dead on, in an unbelievable and amazing way.
"As to Incarnate, He has already locked one thread on this topic and had you actually read the be nice thread you would know he doe not appreciate a new thread being started."
Incarnate asked for ideas to be posted here, so Smittens has done that.
"Sorry guys but you are not the majority or the larger community."
The majority here in the forums are salty vets. The larger community is not well represented on these forums or on 100.
I don't really make suggestions for the community to consider as much as I do for the developers. That said, there are probably more absent voices than there are salty vets. And by absent voices, I mean players that have left the game due to toxicity. A guy from my work left for this very reason. Vendetta's community is not conducive to noobs. Its very elitist vet-centric roleplay.
Unsavoury reviews citing toxicity have negatively impacted the sales of the game and the population in the 'verse. I don't know about you but I've always wanted a bigger population.
Incarnate asked for ideas to be posted here, so Smittens has done that.
"Sorry guys but you are not the majority or the larger community."
The majority here in the forums are salty vets. The larger community is not well represented on these forums or on 100.
I don't really make suggestions for the community to consider as much as I do for the developers. That said, there are probably more absent voices than there are salty vets. And by absent voices, I mean players that have left the game due to toxicity. A guy from my work left for this very reason. Vendetta's community is not conducive to noobs. Its very elitist vet-centric roleplay.
Unsavoury reviews citing toxicity have negatively impacted the sales of the game and the population in the 'verse. I don't know about you but I've always wanted a bigger population.
joylessjoker; Tutorials are read & remembered by a tiny portion of players, and should not be counted on to convey important information (like how to make the global chat palatable). This is well researched. Thanks for now actually offering concrete ideas though
PaKettle; Are you reading my posts? You're the only one here trying to speak for "the majority or larger community" Maybe I missed when you were appointed as Arbiter for all of us.
No one in here, not you, not me, speaks for the community. All any of us can do is post an idea, a +1, or a -1 on the forums, & if enough people support it, then the devs weigh in. That's how this works.
I'm sorry that so far the majority of people who have chimed in so far disagree with you... for some reason you seem to be taking that extremely personally.
As for Inc's post, with a closer reading you might realize that he was criticizing the idea of a thread telling everyone "just be nicer".... posted to the General forum... as a way to do any meaningful good
Or, with the most barebones of readings, you'd have seen what Ore pointed out-- Inc invited us to post any concrete ideas on this forum (as has been the method for user-dev interaction since the inception of VO). I'm not sure why you're so shocked at this, and seem so insistent that the devs don't want & won't listen to unsolicited community input
So again, to put it simply for you
• No one here, me or you, speaks for the community. All we do is post here with our +1s and -1s and debates around those.
• Your -1 is registered, and so far outweighed by the number of +1s to "change Global chat in some manner"
With that in mind, if you'd like to discuss your beliefs about specific aspects of the suggestions in here please do... but repeatedly posting "it's fine as is", "/ignore does the job", "the devs don't want to change it" is just a verbose way of reiterating your -1 personal opinion
PaKettle; Are you reading my posts? You're the only one here trying to speak for "the majority or larger community" Maybe I missed when you were appointed as Arbiter for all of us.
No one in here, not you, not me, speaks for the community. All any of us can do is post an idea, a +1, or a -1 on the forums, & if enough people support it, then the devs weigh in. That's how this works.
I'm sorry that so far the majority of people who have chimed in so far disagree with you... for some reason you seem to be taking that extremely personally.
As for Inc's post, with a closer reading you might realize that he was criticizing the idea of a thread telling everyone "just be nicer".... posted to the General forum... as a way to do any meaningful good
Or, with the most barebones of readings, you'd have seen what Ore pointed out-- Inc invited us to post any concrete ideas on this forum (as has been the method for user-dev interaction since the inception of VO). I'm not sure why you're so shocked at this, and seem so insistent that the devs don't want & won't listen to unsolicited community input
So again, to put it simply for you
• No one here, me or you, speaks for the community. All we do is post here with our +1s and -1s and debates around those.
• Your -1 is registered, and so far outweighed by the number of +1s to "change Global chat in some manner"
With that in mind, if you'd like to discuss your beliefs about specific aspects of the suggestions in here please do... but repeatedly posting "it's fine as is", "/ignore does the job", "the devs don't want to change it" is just a verbose way of reiterating your -1 personal opinion
-1 to changing 100 to local/system chat. This was actually done at some point in closed beta, and it was a freaking nightmare. At least back then we had the APL so we could see who was online and make an educated guess at where said players would be. But outside of this, nobody could find anybody. Advertising for things like guilds and groups was also none existent and made getting together just too hard. Of course, if there were 1000's of players online at a time, this would not be so much of a problem (in fact 100 might actually be a problem then), but in a game where peak is more like 40 players, nope. (and no, it would not be *hard to code*, it was already done so although I do not like this option, it is something that can be done without too much work)
+1 to more moderation, and possibly more of "role play chat" only rules. Being subject to recent moderation I can say that the current moderators do in fact had out punishments and they do so without much fuss. Of course they are not currently online all the time and GS should really consider either inviting more game mods from other (none-US) timezones, or hiring mods (whatever). Historically all mods tend to be state-side which does leave gaps where the mods must sleep or work or live.
I have to admit, I'm on of the biggest in game trolls. But at least I keep my trolling to in game chats. I do not do political rants or bring up that RL game much (I do get dragged into the odd debate...). I just like to call characters as I see them and I do like to stir up drama. But again, at least I use the game as my outlet. All the RL rants and polytickle debates and the likes really does hurt chat generally.
+1 to more moderation, and possibly more of "role play chat" only rules. Being subject to recent moderation I can say that the current moderators do in fact had out punishments and they do so without much fuss. Of course they are not currently online all the time and GS should really consider either inviting more game mods from other (none-US) timezones, or hiring mods (whatever). Historically all mods tend to be state-side which does leave gaps where the mods must sleep or work or live.
I have to admit, I'm on of the biggest in game trolls. But at least I keep my trolling to in game chats. I do not do political rants or bring up that RL game much (I do get dragged into the odd debate...). I just like to call characters as I see them and I do like to stir up drama. But again, at least I use the game as my outlet. All the RL rants and polytickle debates and the likes really does hurt chat generally.
Tutorials are read & remembered by a tiny portion of players, and should not be counted on to convey important information
As far as we know, the tutorials are just poorly implemented. Well implemented tutorials would be easier to interact with and remembered better.
This is well researched.
Citation needed.
As far as we know, the tutorials are just poorly implemented. Well implemented tutorials would be easier to interact with and remembered better.
This is well researched.
Citation needed.
In the end these are all viewpoints for incarnate to take into consideration on the subject. It is his call what action if any should be taken based on his understanding of what is in the long term best interest of the game.
I think it's worth comparing to other MMOs. Does WoW have a global chat? If no, how do they parse out the conversation. Does anyone play other MMOs like Eve, Elite Dangerous or WoW that can weigh in on this?
yoda;
Very interesting, thank you for the history. I think you're right that the playerbase is just a little too small for only-system chat, although it would probably do better than it did back in the beta. Also let me caution you on the most important rule of user-dev interaction-- never guess how long something takes to code. You're better off telling an artist "I just want a simple picture, it can't take that long to draw" :P
Specifically for something like this, you may be right that the specific switch from global-to-system may not be complex, but there are a lot of other logistical considerations-- like maintaining /1 and /11 as global
All that said, it may actually be easy. Especially if the devs have done it before. But that was a long time ago, and the code base has likely changed a ton since then, so I thought it was worth pointing out that we don't know which 'fix' would be more resource intensive, so it's not worth conjecturing based on that
Also I really doubt you've done any trolling that would cross the line. I'm not saying all /100 chat must be delivered 100% in-character, in-universe. That's limiting & unfun. Some ooc talk, some trash talk, should definitely be allowed. But it's the political and RL rants you identify that should be curbed.
Finally, thanks to the insight to the mod process. It does seem like the truth of the matter falls somewhere between "we never see them on, so they don't do anything" and "they review and handle every line of chat ever said, even if they aren't on 24/7"
joylessjoker;
Well implemented tutorials work. Large blurbs of text that need to be read & memorized are not "well implemented", but they are at least a convenient and resource-efficient way to get that information somewhere into the game. Just don't count on it for critical information
If you need a citation for that, you should bow out of this thread as you're apparently missing some very basic conclusions from the last decade of video game research. But just this once, I took the time to google something for you. So enjoy it, because from here on out I'm not gonna waste my time explaining basic things that most developers and gamers should already know
"Since players seem to learn more from exploring than from reading text, we believe that it is important to design early levels in a way that maximizes a player’s ability to exper- iment and discover game mechanics. A key question that arises is how to facilitate this experimentation while ensur- ing that the player learns how to play and does not become frustrated. We found little evidence to suggest that restrict- ing player freedom to focus attention on a particular interface object or game mechanic is beneficial. Although it may be tempting to provide help on-demand, we found that adding a help button was only effective in Foldit, and actually reduced player progress by 12% and play time by 15% in Refrac- tion. Future work is needed to understand how to break down a complex game into smaller “chunks” that can be learned through exploration, how to detect when a player is confused or frustrated, and how to intervene, if necessary, in a way that causes learning without negatively impacting engagement."
From the very first result on google, specifically the conclusion. (Take note that this specific paper doesn't even waste time explaining the notion that "reading based tutorials aren't helpful," because it's such established common sense)
Fluffy;
Well said. But it's getting frustrating that now across 2 threads with 5 pages of discussion supporting idea that The main ingame-chat is an unwelcoming experience for NEW AND OLD PLAYERS, the devs don't seem interested in chiming in
Very interesting, thank you for the history. I think you're right that the playerbase is just a little too small for only-system chat, although it would probably do better than it did back in the beta. Also let me caution you on the most important rule of user-dev interaction-- never guess how long something takes to code. You're better off telling an artist "I just want a simple picture, it can't take that long to draw" :P
Specifically for something like this, you may be right that the specific switch from global-to-system may not be complex, but there are a lot of other logistical considerations-- like maintaining /1 and /11 as global
All that said, it may actually be easy. Especially if the devs have done it before. But that was a long time ago, and the code base has likely changed a ton since then, so I thought it was worth pointing out that we don't know which 'fix' would be more resource intensive, so it's not worth conjecturing based on that
Also I really doubt you've done any trolling that would cross the line. I'm not saying all /100 chat must be delivered 100% in-character, in-universe. That's limiting & unfun. Some ooc talk, some trash talk, should definitely be allowed. But it's the political and RL rants you identify that should be curbed.
Finally, thanks to the insight to the mod process. It does seem like the truth of the matter falls somewhere between "we never see them on, so they don't do anything" and "they review and handle every line of chat ever said, even if they aren't on 24/7"
joylessjoker;
Well implemented tutorials work. Large blurbs of text that need to be read & memorized are not "well implemented", but they are at least a convenient and resource-efficient way to get that information somewhere into the game. Just don't count on it for critical information
If you need a citation for that, you should bow out of this thread as you're apparently missing some very basic conclusions from the last decade of video game research. But just this once, I took the time to google something for you. So enjoy it, because from here on out I'm not gonna waste my time explaining basic things that most developers and gamers should already know
"Since players seem to learn more from exploring than from reading text, we believe that it is important to design early levels in a way that maximizes a player’s ability to exper- iment and discover game mechanics. A key question that arises is how to facilitate this experimentation while ensur- ing that the player learns how to play and does not become frustrated. We found little evidence to suggest that restrict- ing player freedom to focus attention on a particular interface object or game mechanic is beneficial. Although it may be tempting to provide help on-demand, we found that adding a help button was only effective in Foldit, and actually reduced player progress by 12% and play time by 15% in Refrac- tion. Future work is needed to understand how to break down a complex game into smaller “chunks” that can be learned through exploration, how to detect when a player is confused or frustrated, and how to intervene, if necessary, in a way that causes learning without negatively impacting engagement."
From the very first result on google, specifically the conclusion. (Take note that this specific paper doesn't even waste time explaining the notion that "reading based tutorials aren't helpful," because it's such established common sense)
Fluffy;
Well said. But it's getting frustrating that now across 2 threads with 5 pages of discussion supporting idea that The main ingame-chat is an unwelcoming experience for NEW AND OLD PLAYERS, the devs don't seem interested in chiming in
Ore; It's different because of the different player base sizes though. That said, I believe WoW has some kind of general/global chat? I've only spent 10 minutes in that game, but I do recall some chat window that was constantly buzzing with trade/spam offers, seemingly from all around the server
My shining example of good general chat is in a Mount & Blade server. Which is a bit different-- that's basically a medieval FPS with player-hosted servers. But many servers host active player counts of 50, 100, or even 200 players, in that sense it's pretty comparable to VO. My favorite servers are ones that basically just use the rule, "don't be a child." It's a very fuzzy policy, entirely up to the judgement of mods, but it works extremely well at creating a community chat that is relevant, constructive, & not-exceedingly-immature
My shining example of good general chat is in a Mount & Blade server. Which is a bit different-- that's basically a medieval FPS with player-hosted servers. But many servers host active player counts of 50, 100, or even 200 players, in that sense it's pretty comparable to VO. My favorite servers are ones that basically just use the rule, "don't be a child." It's a very fuzzy policy, entirely up to the judgement of mods, but it works extremely well at creating a community chat that is relevant, constructive, & not-exceedingly-immature
Well implemented tutorials work. Large blurbs of text that need to be read & memorized are not "well implemented", but they are at least a convenient and resource-efficient way to get that information somewhere into the game. Just don't count on it for critical information
So, why are you not arguing for improvement of the existing subpar tutorial system? If tutorial system can be improved to the point that most noobs can use chat system at a satisfactory level, that should fix it. Why does removal of 100 have to happen?
It's really not a lot of information. It doesn't take a whole dissertation to explain to a noob: "hey there, here's useful tidbits. Did you know you can type /ignore <playername>, as well as /leave 100?" I'm sure Incarnate can find a place to squeeze this into that isn't likely to be ignored or disregarded.
So, why are you not arguing for improvement of the existing subpar tutorial system? If tutorial system can be improved to the point that most noobs can use chat system at a satisfactory level, that should fix it. Why does removal of 100 have to happen?
It's really not a lot of information. It doesn't take a whole dissertation to explain to a noob: "hey there, here's useful tidbits. Did you know you can type /ignore <playername>, as well as /leave 100?" I'm sure Incarnate can find a place to squeeze this into that isn't likely to be ignored or disregarded.
You know what-- joylessjoker, I'm sorry for the harshness in my last post. I'll go back and edit it in a second
It's pretty rude of me to be a dick just because you didn't know something about video game theory/research. I'm pretty tired this morning and always get grumpy when someone asks for a source on basic things. But that's no excuse, and for most people this probably isn't a "basic thing," so my snarkiness was definitely uncalled for. Sorry about that
In addition to the source in the last post, I'll also just give the ELI5 breakdown;
1. New players get into a new game because they want to play it
2. If you pop up a bunch of text that gets in their way, most players immediately skip it. Even if that info would help them, and let them get more enjoyment out of the game... most people aren't patient enough to realize that "delay playing now => better playing later." Rather, they just had to wait X hours for this new game they're hyped about to finish downloading, and they wanna play it NOW!
3. Among the people that DO stop to read it (which I'd imagine is you, and me, and most of us on the forums-- we're here because we don't mind a little extra reading/writing if it's gonna increase the enjoyment of a game), you're requiring them to understand everything written,
4. Among people that do stop to read your tutorial, and do understand it, you still need them to memorize everything written
And that's a real roadblock-- Humans just suck at plain memorization. The normal ways to help memorize (repeat information, or get the person to write it down) don't work in a video game
FURTHERMORE, the more info you put into your tutorial, the more text is there to (a) be skipped, (b) be misunderstood, or (c) be forgotten
So while a text-heavy tutorial may be the cheapest and easiest way for the devs to get a lot of information into the game... I hope you can see a little better why they shouldn't count on it to convey the really important stuff to everyone.
It's pretty rude of me to be a dick just because you didn't know something about video game theory/research. I'm pretty tired this morning and always get grumpy when someone asks for a source on basic things. But that's no excuse, and for most people this probably isn't a "basic thing," so my snarkiness was definitely uncalled for. Sorry about that
In addition to the source in the last post, I'll also just give the ELI5 breakdown;
1. New players get into a new game because they want to play it
2. If you pop up a bunch of text that gets in their way, most players immediately skip it. Even if that info would help them, and let them get more enjoyment out of the game... most people aren't patient enough to realize that "delay playing now => better playing later." Rather, they just had to wait X hours for this new game they're hyped about to finish downloading, and they wanna play it NOW!
3. Among the people that DO stop to read it (which I'd imagine is you, and me, and most of us on the forums-- we're here because we don't mind a little extra reading/writing if it's gonna increase the enjoyment of a game), you're requiring them to understand everything written,
4. Among people that do stop to read your tutorial, and do understand it, you still need them to memorize everything written
And that's a real roadblock-- Humans just suck at plain memorization. The normal ways to help memorize (repeat information, or get the person to write it down) don't work in a video game
FURTHERMORE, the more info you put into your tutorial, the more text is there to (a) be skipped, (b) be misunderstood, or (c) be forgotten
So while a text-heavy tutorial may be the cheapest and easiest way for the devs to get a lot of information into the game... I hope you can see a little better why they shouldn't count on it to convey the really important stuff to everyone.
Ack you saw my meanpost before I edited. Sorry. Want me to clean it up still, or leave it?
"So, why are you not arguing for improvement of the existing subpar tutorial system? If tutorial system can be improved to the point that most noobs can use chat system at a satisfactory level, that should fix it. Why does removal of 100 have to happen?"
If the devs had unlimited time and money, I'd be all about a more interactive & subtle tutorial! But given their extremely limited resources, I'd rather they focus on other things
Also I'm not specifically advocating removing 100; I'm more in favor of just more heavy moderation for 100. Ore & some others are the ones suggesting removing 100, but I do think it's worth discussing as an alternative solution to "100 is bad for the community" even if I don't personally think it's the best solution right now
"It's really not a lot of information. It doesn't take a whole dissertation to explain to a noob: "hey there, here's useful tidbits. Did you know you can type /ignore <playername>, as well as /leave 100?" I'm sure Incarnate can find a place to squeeze this into that isn't likely to be ignored or disregarded."
You're right in that the channel/ignore/mute commands themselves are very basic. But the tutorial itself is a ton of information, and even something as basic and digestible as "There's four commands; /join, /leave, /ignore, /mute" can easily get lost in all the other information
"So, why are you not arguing for improvement of the existing subpar tutorial system? If tutorial system can be improved to the point that most noobs can use chat system at a satisfactory level, that should fix it. Why does removal of 100 have to happen?"
If the devs had unlimited time and money, I'd be all about a more interactive & subtle tutorial! But given their extremely limited resources, I'd rather they focus on other things
Also I'm not specifically advocating removing 100; I'm more in favor of just more heavy moderation for 100. Ore & some others are the ones suggesting removing 100, but I do think it's worth discussing as an alternative solution to "100 is bad for the community" even if I don't personally think it's the best solution right now
"It's really not a lot of information. It doesn't take a whole dissertation to explain to a noob: "hey there, here's useful tidbits. Did you know you can type /ignore <playername>, as well as /leave 100?" I'm sure Incarnate can find a place to squeeze this into that isn't likely to be ignored or disregarded."
You're right in that the channel/ignore/mute commands themselves are very basic. But the tutorial itself is a ton of information, and even something as basic and digestible as "There's four commands; /join, /leave, /ignore, /mute" can easily get lost in all the other information
The information related to chat system doesn't have to appear during the tutorial at all. It could flash once every ten minutes for about 3-4 times after 100 is joined for the first time (while the noob is flying around the capital system exploring the game on his own), then never appear again.
Some people never read at all, but at least this would reach the majority of the new players who can grudgingly read a single short sentence.
Some people never read at all, but at least this would reach the majority of the new players who can grudgingly read a single short sentence.
Long term, what really needs to happen is for the chat system to let you click or right-click on names to pop up a menu or window with ignore, vote mute, and maybe report buttons.
In the meanwhile, I'd like to point out that besides /ignore, there's also a GUI option in the Comm tab of the PDA. I find /ignore to be less cumbersome, but perhaps mobile newbs would have an easier time with the Comm tab.
In the meanwhile, I'd like to point out that besides /ignore, there's also a GUI option in the Comm tab of the PDA. I find /ignore to be less cumbersome, but perhaps mobile newbs would have an easier time with the Comm tab.
I've actually experimented with a GUI that allows you to interact with keywords in the chat window. The main problem with my implementation is that these keywords need to be bounded by some sort of delimiter.
The fun/problem with chat that uses delimiters embedded in the chat is that you can make your own keywords and insert them with arbitrary results.
The fun/problem with chat that uses delimiters embedded in the chat is that you can make your own keywords and insert them with arbitrary results.
joylessjoker;
That would work. But fundamentally I still think the current commands don't solve the problem. Why should the impetus be on the 800 active players (there you go, Phaser) to /ignore anyone who spouts off about politics?
Pizzasgood;
That is a very good idea. Although I still point you to my response to jj above. /ignore etc are good tools, and do solve a number of problems... but I don't think they're especially effective for the problem we're in here to discuss
Draug;
Let's get that ingame! With a little dev help, and just keeping it limited to player names (at the beginning of the string, & probably it's own piece already)... you should be able to solve the delimiter problem, no?
That would work. But fundamentally I still think the current commands don't solve the problem. Why should the impetus be on the 800 active players (there you go, Phaser) to /ignore anyone who spouts off about politics?
Pizzasgood;
That is a very good idea. Although I still point you to my response to jj above. /ignore etc are good tools, and do solve a number of problems... but I don't think they're especially effective for the problem we're in here to discuss
Draug;
Let's get that ingame! With a little dev help, and just keeping it limited to player names (at the beginning of the string, & probably it's own piece already)... you should be able to solve the delimiter problem, no?
Some people just like to see themselves talk. Who are we to say they can't?
Can't say I blame them. I /ignored myself once, and it was a very disorienting experience.