Steam is going balistic

"

vexorian#9572 wrote:

If there's no rule that feedback should be constructive. It should be added. Otherwise we are just wasting time on emotion and toxicty.

"

LW187#4876 wrote:

"

vexorian#9572 wrote:

If there's no rule that feedback should be constructive. It should be added. Otherwise we are just wasting time on emotion and toxicty.

So feedback to a product has to always be completely rational, well formulated and though through? If you ask ppl at a restaurant if they had a good evening and they say "Yes it was awesome" or "No it was bad" it should be discarded then instantly right?

Emotional feedback - while not giving as much direction what the exact problems are and what to do to change smth - can still be valueable to the creator by just communicating the feeling it creates in the customer. It can at the very least be used as an indicator if things are going in the right or wrong direction in general.

The constructive feedback can then be used to work out the details. But as an initial indication of everything being perfect or somethings not working out as planned, emotional feedback works just fine?

"

Naharez#3496 wrote:

"

LW187#4876 wrote:

"

vexorian#9572 wrote:

If there's no rule that feedback should be constructive. It should be added. Otherwise we are just wasting time on emotion and toxicty.

So feedback to a product has to always be completely rational, well formulated and though through? If you ask ppl at a restaurant if they had a good evening and they say "Yes it was awesome" or "No it was bad" it should be discarded then instantly right?

Emotional feedback - while not giving as much direction what the exact problems are and what to do to change smth - can still be valueable to the creator by just communicating the feeling it creates in the customer. It can at the very least be used as an indicator if things are going in the right or wrong direction in general.

The constructive feedback can then be used to work out the details. But as an initial indication of everything being perfect or somethings not working out as planned, emotional feedback works just fine?

Yeah but it doesn't help when you have a large group of people calling the game "trash" and not even making the slightest attempt at constructive feedback, even going as far as to call witch hunts against the developers.

To be honest, I think you have a point, but at the same time you are missing the essence of the problem. Most people who are giving feedback like review bombing the game or calling it "trash" are probably children. Should the devs listen to those? No. Should they start listening to them if there's a lot of them? Hell no.

Game development needs a lot of analytical data to optimize complex game systems like in this case. Calling the game "trash" is anything, but useful in this regard. It's just hot air and should be treated as such, imo.

It would be the same if I said soccer was trash. Yeah ok, that can be my opinion. I don't have to watch soccer, let alone play it. But then I go to the people who play it and call it trash. I go to the people who host the games and call it trash. I threaten the hosts and call them incapable, because soccer is trash. Should they change soccer, because of me? No. Should they do it when I have a large following echoing my words? No. They should ignore me.

"

LW187#4876 wrote:

Well not everyone can even formulate their thoughts in a way that game developers understand the underlying issue and we cant force ppl to become that way. Still I would argue the average gamer deserves to voice their opinion at one point (not spamming it ofc or writing caps lock swears and what not). But simply saying "To me PoE2 fails" is valid and I think as a developer you might want to not completely discard it but take it as an initial hint that some things might not meet certain expectations. What expectations exactly and how much you care about that as a developer is a different story. But taking a close look and reading through some feedback (both emotional and constructive) can never hurt.

And to your last point:
What about if you were a huge soccer game fan and now you play a game that was advertised as a soccer game and is even a sequel to smth like FIFA but then when you boot it up and play it turns out to not fall in that genre due to various design decisions like players having superpowers or having to play using their hands on several occasions in the game? Would you still call this a soccer game? Has the game even the right to call and advertise itself as that anymore?

Because this kind of identity crisis is the problem with PoE2 atm. Its announced, advertised and to an extent developed as an ARPG with the classic Diablo 2 formula in mind (randomized zones with hundreds of trash mobs, loot based character progression that motivates to do hundreds of hours of farming the same content) only to then go on and implement elements that directly contradict this playstyle (slow, methodical, combo-based combat which stems from slower games like Souls where this works because you fight a handful of mobs and not hundreds per zone, sparser loot than ever before, no big movement speed options anymore, on-death explosions that one shot you, further forcing you to stop, wait and slowing down your farming process, etc.). Now this begs the question is this really an ARPG? Its kinda inbetween at the moment.

And the thing is if they want to make a Souls like game, they can go ahead and Im sure many ppl would like it. But please finally decide it and publicly announce it as such so that everyone knows what game they buy. And had they done that (say that they want to make a slower, souls like game and not an ARPG), many ppl from the PoE1 or other ARPGs community would not have bought it as they would have known that this game is not for them. Thus, much of the current uproar could have been avoided but also player numbers might have not been that high in the first place. From my personal POV they still dont know what game they really want to make. It feels like a clash of visions between Jonathan (the ruthless and souls lover) and even Mark (who seems like a more classic ARPG guy to me) and the rest of the development team. I hope they sort this out soon and commit to one clear direction. Then the ppl that are not happy with that will leave and the ones that are will stay. The dust will settle.

"

LW187#4876 wrote:

And the thing is if they want to make a Souls like game, they can go ahead and Im sure many ppl would like it. But please finally decide it and publicly announce it as such so that everyone knows what game they buy. And had they done that (say that they want to make a slower, souls like game and not an ARPG), many ppl from the PoE1 or other ARPGs community would not have bought it as they would have known that this game is not for them. Thus, much of the current uproar could have been avoided but also player numbers might have not been that high in the first place. From my personal POV they still dont know what game they really want to make. It feels like a clash of visions between Jonathan (the ruthless and souls lover) and even Mark (who seems like a more classic ARPG guy to me) and the rest of the development team. I hope they sort this out soon and commit to one clear direction. Then the ppl that are not happy with that will leave and the ones that are will stay. The dust will settle.

"

dissonance90#3107 wrote:

I like how GGG fanboys trying to say that "these reviews are not constructive". Just come on, guys. Everyone who bought this for 30 bucks have the right to thumb this down after 0.2
These feedbacks don't have to be constructive, they easily can be emotional. No problem to hate this game right now and not writing essays about it.

"

Naharez#3496 wrote:

I think the problem you are not seeing (sorry didn't have the brain capacity to read your whole post) is that there are lots of people who call the game "trash" not, because they really feel that way, but in order to stir things up, create negativity and some chaos. Because there are lots of people who have fun doing that. I feel that a large part of the people who give that kind of feedback fall into that group. There are also doommongers in this community who help stir this up and try to use this for politics in order to change the course of game development. What we have here is a typical case of populist politics in game development and not somebody's feelings not being heard.

"

JakkerONAIR#4902 wrote:

"

Naharez#3496 wrote:

I think the problem you are not seeing (sorry didn't have the brain capacity to read your whole post) is that there are lots of people who call the game "trash" not, because they really feel that way, but in order to stir things up, create negativity and some chaos. Because there are lots of people who have fun doing that. I feel that a large part of the people who give that kind of feedback fall into that group. There are also doommongers in this community who help stir this up and try to use this for politics in order to change the course of game development. What we have here is a typical case of populist politics in game development and not somebody's feelings not being heard.

The exact principle you attach to the "doomers" can be said about the "glazers".

It's not up to us to "filter" that stuff, that's up to the ppl at GGG who view feedback and then decide what's "worthy" to pass to the devs.

"

Naharez#3496 wrote:

"

dissonance90#3107 wrote:

I like how GGG fanboys trying to say that "these reviews are not constructive". Just come on, guys. Everyone who bought this for 30 bucks have the right to thumb this down after 0.2
These feedbacks don't have to be constructive, they easily can be emotional. No problem to hate this game right now and not writing essays about it.

Sadly, you are wrong. Emotional feedback is not useful here, no matter what people say. Game development is a science, especially with games as complex as this. If you want fast food gaming you have to go elsewhere. Then your emotional feedback might be all that is needed. But with a game as complex as this you need to be a little bit more detailed.