While Salty did comment that the post is extremely long and not easy to read or action, we have saved a copy of the post and have already recommended several things from it officially.
We’ve discussed some of the points - some were already in the schedule before the post, others we think are good ideas, others we totally understand the feedback but for the health of the game won’t be implementing as some things were implemented a certain way on purpose.
We do play our game and enjoy it - I was on there late last night playing my GWs and hanging in global in my spare time, I usually play to and from work in the morning and also while watching tv at home! We were in the office discussing how our GW battles went before we started work this morning too!
Salty did mention that it’s obvious how much thought and effort Starlite put into his post, but it doesn’t change the fact that it’s much harder to process this long form feedback than quick bullet points which Starlite knows we prefer. It doesn’t mean Salty hasn’t been doing her job regarding it and I think Starlite knows what she meant after I was chatting with him in global last week (at least I hope he does!).
I think it’s ok to post feedback about how information is presented to us so that you can all be more easily heard and have your feedback actioned - this way we all benefit!
Hopefully this post helps clear up any misunderstandings.
You’re welcome to be upset with me, but I’ve endeavoured to be honest with you. I want everyone to understand the best way to leave us feedback so that it can be parsed and actioned if necessary.
I also mentioned at several times that we have taken several of the issues and points raised by Starlite and added them to our internal review process.
Kafka is correct, and I did thank Starlite for the time they took in putting together the document, and it was indeed 37 pages long.
It must also be said that there have been miscommunications between players and devs in the past; requests that players thought were extremely clear were addressed in ways that did not resolve the original issue (I can’t remember any specific cases offhand, but I am sure others can). Bullet-point lists are very helpful for avoiding this sort of thing. On the other hand, the long-form style of the OP—and Mithran’s recent “chaos portals are wrong” thread—are useful for motivating change, since they provide more evidence and explanation.
I guess what I am saying is that I want both. Please give me the C-level executive summary for people who have ADD, but also the New Yorker-length articles for when I have better focus.
“Yes, I did say Salty did something no professional community manager should do and everything short of that she is bad at her job, but I also said I liked her diction and that she’s a real hard worker so I think I deserve credit for that.”
Here’s how an apology works:
Say what you did.
Say you are sorry.
Here’s what happened:
Say what you did.
Say something else you did that’s good.
Ask everyone else to focus on that good thing.
Change the subject.
Get somebody else to post 2-4 for you.
Agree with your friend who believes you did nothing wrong.
I do not believe my post was out of line, as I wanted to be as transparent as possible.
I have always acted quite casually with the community, and am always up for a laugh or joke, especially at my own expense. I also do my best to communicate with you as much as I can on these forums, and across all of our various social media platforms. And trust me, there is a lot of feedback and requests across these that is often contradictory in nature.
I replied honestly and tried to tell people the best way to give us feedback while thanking Starlite for what they have done.
I am sorry if this wasn’t what you wanted to hear, and apologise if the way I delivered it was inappropriate. I am often a bit of a joker, and like to play it pretty fast and casual with the community, but moving forward I will stop doing this.
To re-iterate, we are grateful for the work Starlite has done, but have provided our own feedback on the best way to communicate QoL suggestions to us in the future, for the benefit of all involved. We have added several of the issues raised by Starlite to our internal review boards.
EDIT: Moving forward, let’s please keep this on topic as per our Community Guidelines.
This is a book, can you please just break it up into chapters (different topics)? You make many good points in the first 3 or 4 screens that I read. But something this big in one topic is too much to read and too much to comment on.
The Doom room itself is grayed out unless you already have the Unlock scroll. Why would you click on it unless you intended to use the Heroism scroll? The doom room troops don’t change, so I don’t see the need to scout the room…
Let me ask a different question: when elements of a UI are grayed out, that tends to mean they are disabled and you can’t interact with them. So why are you tapping on an element that says “I can’t be tapped”?
This is like, Windows 3.0 style guide information passed down from Xerox PARC in the early 80s. It’s not my fault UX designers of the mid-2000s decided to burn all those books and pretend they didn’t need it.
I hear what you’re saying. While the room is technically greyed out, it’s not as obvious a greying-out as a full-size button. What’s more, greyed-out elements usually do nothing at all, which is not the case here (it shows the room details). So your analogies don’t fully match the situation.
I can’t remember exactly how this happened to me. I suspect I was checking which Doom was in the room, for my records, then walked away, and came back to it forgetting I hadn’t found the Unlock Scroll yet. Of course, that’s just one way it could happen.
In my opinion, the change I propose (always having both buttons visible for the Doom room, variously greyed out) is a simple protection against dumb user errors (which we all make occasionally). It’s not that it’s going to help often, but when it does help, it will feel like a godsend. Also, it’s an inconsistency in the design of the GUI, and those are always bad, as they can establish weird player habits.
Anyway, that’s my thinking, when I have my GUI-design hat on.
