New Content? Cool Story Bro.

[stevewastaken]

Last update, we got bug fixes. That's great, and really important. The game should function as intended. I understand prioritizing that. (though many of the bugs still seem to be happening. Could be my imagination)

Next update, we're getting new content, including a new team.

Hang on, hang on. You missed a step. What about some of the problems with the game? Not bugs. Things that are working as intended, but that intention was imperfect. Design flaws, if you will. Are these ever going to be addressed?

The two major and obvious ones are First Turn Advantage, and Action Confirmation checks (making sure you actually wanted to hit "Done" for example). People are not happy at all about these problems, as you can find multiple threads about them going on for 8+ pages.

New content is a lot of fun, but I can't even get excited about it while these design flaws are plaguing the game.

There are fairly simple fixes for these problems. When will we see them? Let me know so I can get excited about a new team.

[CombatEX]

I could be wrong, but I feel like adding a new team doesn't take as much time away from fixing these 'design flaws' as you may think. Why? Because a lot of the work that goes into making the new team is done by Adam. All the art assets for the new team. What does Alex have to do? Code a new super-unit and that's pretty much it (I don't mean to trivialize the work, but rather saying that it's not like Alex has to do all the work when it comes to team creation). Yes, he does also have to do little things here and there when it comes to updating the menus to accommodate the new team and other minor things, but a lot of the work is done by Adam. In the mean time who is to say Alex isn't working on game improvements? Also, keep in mind that OML is a business and as such actually has to make money. The game is more than playable after the bug squashing update (and even before). As much as I'd like to see all these improvements you are requesting, it makes sense that OML would like to release a team to help fund future improvements (as well as, you know, pay themselves so they actually profit from their work). OML has an obligation to make the game playable, and especially with their latest patch they have shown they intend to fulfill this promise to their consumers, but once playable it seems more than reasonable that they'd like to do something fun like making a new team and profiting in the process before going back to improvements.

[stevewastaken]

@CombatEX

You touched on two general ideas.

1. Adam makes the teams (new content), Alex writes the code.

Even if this is totally true, is this a creative vs. programming issue? No. I mentioned the solutions are relatively simple.

What's the easiest way to combat FTA? Start the player with first turn with only 3 wits. It doesn't require much/any programming. This was a near flawless fix in Hero Academy, and there's no reason to think it wouldn't work here. Do you have to play-test this before making the change? Sure. Do you also have to play-test a new team? Yes.

What's the solution for checking actions? A pop-up that asks "Are you sure?". This already exists for move confirmation. I mean, I don't know everything about coding, but I know creating a new pop-up when code for pop-ups is already there, is not hard.

The issue here is not the time it takes to implementing solutions. The issue is whether OML acknowledges these things are real problems, and whether they value the solutions. You might think to yourself "obviously they see the problems. It's all the community talks about." Well, on many occasions I have seen game developers ignore the most obvious problem, or they acknowledge the problems, but claim that there is no viable solution, using roundabout logic to discredit the simple solutions presented.

So I'm not going to assume these problems are getting fixed, until they explicitly say they are (and how).

2. They need to make a profit.

Sure they do. How much profit will they make when they release a new team? Well, I'm guessing not a crazy amount. I imagine most players either don't pay, or they buy the Uber pack because of its obvious value.

So what's the best way to maximize profit? Probably to ensure the players are as happy as possible and continue to play. In my own opinion, fixing the problems of FTA and Action Confirmations will actually make players more happy than a new team. But this is all speculative.

[Harti]

(09-23-2012 05:48 PM)stevewastaken Wrote:  You might think to yourself "obviously they see the problems. It's all the community talks about." Well, on many occasions I have seen game developers ignore the most obvious problem,

OML is definitely not ignoring them.

Quote:or they acknowledge the problems, but claim that there is no viable solution, using roundabout logic to discredit the simple solutions presented.

It's a mixture of this and "they don't like to communicate much", which is perfectly understandable and justifiable. They're a company after all, and not our first grade buddies. (Which is somewhat unfortunate.)

Quote:In my own opinion, fixing the problems of FTA and Action Confirmations will actually make players more happy than a new team. But this is all speculative.

I completely share your desire for FTA balancing but on this I would rather disagree. Missing confirmation pop-ups are sometimes really frustrating but they don't actually kill the game. The only thing is that you'll be upset with yourself making a stupid misclick. Probably you will blame the game for it, but eventually you'll keep on playing.

Same applies for FTA. If you got FTA, you're all like "yeah I just beat the crap out of 20 Super-Titans" and totally happy. If you're the one being beat by stupid first turn stackers who even got to choose their friggin map (by resigning games they just started and nobody yet joined), you'll be very discouraged to start new games, but you'll probably try at another time of the day, hoping that someone got into all of these games of that retard.



Out of our 60 beta testers, only three or so are still active on the beta forums. The rest somehow vanished after they got the Über Pack for free. I bet they're gonna return beta testing the new team, and once it's released go away until something else that's cool is released.
That situation doesn't really allow for high-level discussions about FTA and possible solutions. The only way left is for me to try to communicate with Alex who seems to make the final decisions on gameplay changes.
However, the communication is really a concrete one-way road and there is basically no way to get a meaningful response on the shitload of feedback or ideas I gave.

I'm into programming myself and, despite not having seen their code, I can't imagine that it is too hard to implement any of our suggestions towards fixing FTA. I got one that is slightly better than letting P1 start with 3 wits (because that would induce clear STA!), but it requires a lot more programming and map altering. And the last time we altered the maps during beta, the game kept crashing over and over. It appears to be very complicated.

However, if we got feedback like "no, this is too hard to program" or something, we could find better or more viable ideas to get rid of FTA.

[garcia1000]

Right, the nirvana fallacy is where people reject an improvement because it's not perfect.

[CombatEX]

(09-23-2012 05:48 PM)stevewastaken Wrote:  @CombatEX

You touched on two general ideas.

1. Adam makes the teams (new content), Alex writes the code.

Even if this is totally true, is this a creative vs. programming issue? No. I mentioned the solutions are relatively simple.

What's the easiest way to combat FTA? Start the player with first turn with only 3 wits. It doesn't require much/any programming. This was a near flawless fix in Hero Academy, and there's no reason to think it wouldn't work here. Do you have to play-test this before making the change? Sure. Do you also have to play-test a new team? Yes.

What's the solution for checking actions? A pop-up that asks "Are you sure?". This already exists for move confirmation. I mean, I don't know everything about coding, but I know creating a new pop-up when code for pop-ups is already there, is not hard.

The issue here is not the time it takes to implementing solutions. The issue is whether OML acknowledges these things are real problems, and whether they value the solutions. You might think to yourself "obviously they see the problems. It's all the community talks about." Well, on many occasions I have seen game developers ignore the most obvious problem, or they acknowledge the problems, but claim that there is no viable solution, using roundabout logic to discredit the simple solutions presented.

So I'm not going to assume these problems are getting fixed, until they explicitly say they are (and how).

Yes, so? I never said that Alex shouldn't be fixing these because they're too difficult to fix... Rather, I was stating that your idea that they are jumping the gun with the implementation of a new team instead of improvements is just an assumption. Since, as you put it, these are simple fixes, the fact that they are releasing a team shouldn't be taking away so much time such that Alex can't work on these improvements. I was just bringing attention to the fact that this is especially the case since Adam does a lot of the work in releasing the new team.

Quote:2. They need to make a profit.

Sure they do. How much profit will they make when they release a new team? Well, I'm guessing not a crazy amount. I imagine most players either don't pay, or they buy the Uber pack because of its obvious value.

So what's the best way to maximize profit? Probably to ensure the players are as happy as possible and continue to play. In my own opinion, fixing the problems of FTA and Action Confirmations will actually make players more happy than a new team. But this is all speculative.

You mention that the new team probably won't bring in that much money. Maybe, maybe not. As for keeping people playing, here we need to consider only those players who will quit permanently as a result of FTA and action confirmation being delayed due to adding the new team. How many players will really quit permanently because these additions are delayed a few weeks? How much money will OML make from retaining this select number of players who quit because the fix comes out a few weeks to a month later? Not much more (and probably a lot less) than they would from releasing a team.
Note: When I saw 'a few weeks to a month' I'm considering purely the amount of time Alex has to spend implementing the new team instead of adding these fixes. Not the amount of time it takes as a result of Alex deciding these issues aren't high priority which would be a HUGE mistake.

Firstly, how does retaining players make OML money if (according to your assumption) most of these players already purchased the Uber pack or won't spend money on the game in the first place? The way OML makes money off these players is by them convincing their friends to play who will then hopefully make purchases. These players who quit permanently since the improvements are delayed a little are far less likely to be the ones who would rush out and tell all their friends to play Outwitters since apparently the game wasn't even good enough to warrant waiting a while longer for the improvements. In fact, it is even possible that these kinds of players who don't feel Outwitters is worth the wait actually lose OML money since they're just taking up server space and are unlikely to bring in any more money by reaching out to their friends or from future add-ons (according to your assumption that new team packs won't bring in much cash).

Anyway, the underlying point here is that I don't see the issue with releasing a team now as long as it doesn't mean Alex has suddenly decided to cease work on gameplay improvements (which would be a critical mistake).

- A short delay on these additions due to adding a team is fine since only a few players who can't have enjoyed the game much in the first place will quit due to a brief delay. *
- A long delay due to OML deciding these issues aren't high priority is not fine since then even the most ardent Outwitters players will eventually lose interest.

*This ties into the idea that the delay is made shorter as a result of Adam's contribution to adding a new team.

[stevewastaken]

(09-23-2012 07:28 PM)Harti Wrote:  

Quote:or they acknowledge the problems, but claim that there is no viable solution, using roundabout logic to discredit the simple solutions presented.

It's a mixture of this and "they don't like to communicate much", which is perfectly understandable and justifiable. They're a company after all, and not our first grade buddies. (Which is somewhat unfortunate.)
...
Out of our 60 beta testers, only three or so are still active on the beta forums.
...
That situation doesn't really allow for high-level discussions about FTA and possible solutions. The only way left is for me to try to communicate with Alex who seems to make the final decisions on gameplay changes.
However, the communication is really a concrete one-way road and there is basically no way to get a meaningful response on the shitload of feedback or ideas I gave.
...
However, if we got feedback like "no, this is too hard to program" or something, we could find better or more viable ideas to get rid of FTA.

I personally don't see that situation as "perfectly understandable and justifiable." Yes, they are a company, but a company should not waste feedback or potential feedback due to lack of communication (especially from beta testers, who's precise job is to generate feedback).

It would be one thing if the problems were found and solved and they didn't need to really discuss it. But that isn't the case.

Quote:Missing confirmation pop-ups are sometimes really frustrating but they don't actually kill the game. The only thing is that you'll be upset with yourself making a stupid misclick. Probably you will blame the game for it, but eventually you'll keep on playing.

You and CombatEx both make this point, so I'll respond later when I respond to him.

Quote:I got one that is slightly better than letting P1 start with 3 wits (because that would induce clear STA!)

Was the second turn advantage shown with evidence, or just believed in theory? Because many people speculated that FTA with 3 AP(wits) in Hero Academy would create STA, but months of testing afterward showed that they were wrong and that First Turn still held a small advantage, but drastically smaller advantage than with 5 AP.

CombatEx Wrote:Rather, I was stating that your idea that they are jumping the gun with the implementation of a new team instead of improvements is just an assumption.

I'm not assuming anything. I really hope they are working on fixes for these things. All I'm saying is that until they actually say "We have a fix for x coming in update 1.x" I can't find myself getting too excited about new content.

@Combat and Harti

Will the new content make more profit for the game than fixes? I think we at least semi-agree that max profit comes from max player happiness (and not max number of new teams, like it does in Hero Academy for example). This is because of the value of the Uber pack.

So what makes players most happy? Content or Fixes? Well all 3 of us love this game, and probably wouldnt quit either way. But put yourself in the shoes of someone who is on the fence about whether they keep playing or not. What has the bigger effect on their happiness?

I feel pretty confident that accidentally tapping Done when they didn't mean to, or seeing FTA never getting addressed is a much greater negative than the positive they experience at seeing a new team. Because (like the whole point of this thread is suggesting) How can you be excited about something new when the existing game still has major flaws that show no signs of getting fixed?

[worldfamous]

I personally would rather see a new team than the fixes. I do want these fixes, but if I opened the App Store to see an update, I'd be much more excited to see a new team than I would fixes. Over the long run, FTA fixes are vital. For now, gimme teams and maps!

[Harti]

(09-24-2012 08:02 AM)stevewastaken Wrote:  

Quote:I got one that is slightly better than letting P1 start with 3 wits (because that would induce clear STA!)

Was the second turn advantage shown with evidence, or just believed in theory? Because many people speculated that FTA with 3 AP(wits) in Hero Academy would create STA, but months of testing afterward showed that they were wrong and that First Turn still held a small advantage, but drastically smaller advantage than with 5 AP.

Just imagine you're playing on a big map. You'll be using 2 wits to step on your respective bonus spaces. You got 1 wit left. You can either move a predeployed unit or deploy a Runner that does... nothing.

Both options induce the situation that Player 2 can do "the original P1 opening" without fear.
Granted, the STA wouldn't be *as* big as the original FTA was. P1 will have 7 wits and a Runner to respond to P2's opening which is actually quite a good deal. However, limiting P1's actions on the first turn feels wrong and usually makes openings too predictable.

The 'better' solution (not my idea), as presented in another thread, is simply giving P2 8 (or maybe 7) starting wits. Because that's more or less the same situation as theorycrafted above. Except that P1 and P2 are reversed; that P1 has a LOT more options than only to spawn a Runner; and that we save ourselves one "standard turn 1" (step on two bonus spaces, build Runner).

Either has to be tested for sure. But I'm clearly against limiting P1's options so harshly.

[garcia1000]

The current FTA is not actually 5 wit + initiative, btw.

It's 6 wit + initiative on small maps, and 7 wit + initiative on large maps.