Wurm Player/Management Colaboration

[Wurmhole 3,650]

I've been a very happy member of this community for over a year now and firmly believe it to be the most constructive/supportive community of all the MMOs I have played.  Yes, we have our rough spots, but that is understandable, as we work through combustible issues, like we have today.

 

I've spent some time considering the reasons why we get frustrated with management and they do with us. I've also mapped it to many similar scenarios I've dealt with throughout my business career and believe it all boils down to this core issue:

 

 - WURM may have been developed by CC/Rolf and team, but over the years, this very small, but VERY tight player base has become an integral part of the team, helping cultivate and improve Wurm into the magnificent world we all love today.  Every week, we are seeing something new added or changed and rarely without the player base having active input to refine the results.

 

- BECAUSE of the codependent relationship of players and CC for successful content development, I feel we need to have increased communication in the direction of development and how we manage our assets in this wonderful place.

 

Ideally, I'd like to see more communication from CC about "ideas being considered", rather than "these changes were made", giving the other half of the team (us players) a chance to give constructive input, before tons of effort and cost get spent on something that makes the players unhappy.

 

I have ideas all the time. Can't stop them, but I think every one is awesome and if it were up to me, I'd add them all to the game.  However, when I share them on the Suggestions page, my fellow players jump in and tell me when they suck.  Thank goodness I did not have free reign to implement my ideas into the game, without a sanity check from everyone else

 

I'm not saying everything is push content. I actually think much of what comes to us is inspired by our requests and suggestions, which is a VERY good thing - what I am asking for, is even more of a good thing. More good = more better!

 

The simple reality is this: If 6000 players like pink grass, but CC thinks green grass looks better, do you just push green grass, or ask what the players would prefer?

 

More communication in advance of decision making. I promise it will be a great thing for all. Or is 2am messing with my head again?

 

-Wurmhole

 

 

[Propheteer 7,139]

>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0qJJf7irNGE

 

about pvp, but the concepts discussed (design, where the game should go) apply to every area of the game.

 

starts around 8:40ish, is the part that really applies, where he goes about how people suggest things that usually end up benefiting a very small group of people which is why the developers should design it to their wishes, but balanced for proper gameplay.

Edited November 22, 2014 by Propheteer

[ShadowRonin 407]

Wurm is too small of a game to not listen to its players, it's not out of some benevolence, it's out of pragmatism.  Unfortunately for some time now I feel CC's forgotten that their operation is relatively small, and continuously spit in their players faces.  Yellow potions, anyone?

[Hubert 143]

I've stopped premium on all my accounts until they address key issues with the game. Might not even bother coming back to be honest.

 

It seems as if the only language companies understand these days is that money talks. What happened to the holistic approach where customers were considered important?

[Ayes 3,715]

Wurmhole, I almost agree with your OP. Some player input does contribute positively to the game and in turn is implemented by the Devs when fitting into their development plans and progress. Still, I believe all these decisions ultimately should be theirs and they should not feel the need to consult players on a regular basis in order to proceed with their plans.

 

I much prefer to have the Devs determine the game direction without consulting the players. Then if afterwards player objections to certain aspects are brought up they can be dealt with on that individual basis, which I think is pretty much how it works at present. I think many times players are unreasonable in their expectations and if left up to them little would be accomplished but continued bickering, as each side endorses opposite effects.

 

It is unavoidable that problems will arise in the future and if some can not tolerate the current situation or the future direction of the game they are better off elsewhere, since the game will certainly not be developed according to their own desires. Compromise and patience are more the heart of the enjoyment to this game, I have found. If players can learn to develop this tolerance, I think it will serve them well in life as well. Still learning myself.

 

=Ayes=

[Wurmhole 3,650]

Normally for the big MMOs, there is a huge team of devs, all contributing to the direction of a the game, but with a small team at the helm and our relatively small (but tight) player base, this is uniquely positioned for even tighter collaboration between "us" and "them", ultimately offering a chance for better success through a "we" partnership.

 

Hopeful thinking for sure and certainly always with full veto power at the hands of CC/Rolf, but united, we can achieve much more than we do in the frequently "divided" state we find ourselves in.

 

It might just be me. Every tech company I have worked for, selling their solutions to corporations, I've taken an active role in lobbying hard for the client's desires, which is often directly opposite of the direction the dev team believed was best for the clients.  Catering to the needs and desires of the client can bring fantastic results, as long as it isn't done at the cost of the survivability of the provider.

 

-Wurmhole

[Hackett 26]

I don't think I have seen the majority agree on anything, even with something like BSB its, "More BSB textures please" vs "BSB textures is what makes Wurm great". or "Get ride of the bags of grain on BSBs" vs "there is nothing more important to me then the bags of grain on BSBs". There will always be enough opposition to any idea that if implemented it will create anger to the player base. Just look at the weekly updates posts half the comments are "This is wonderful its everything i ever wanted" vs "don't waste your time on these things, work on the things I want" This is not unique to Wurm.

 

In the end they are not trying to develop a game for todays few hundred active player base they are developing a game they think thousands will want to play one day.

Edited November 23, 2014 by Hackett

[SotG_is_OP 357]

IMO, they need to listen to the players while also keeping the game balanced. PvE and PvP should have different code, but changes are made to both sides that are only needed on one (and most of the time they suck for both anyway). When a huge outcry happens because some feature sucks, just fix it (pet CR nerfs on Freedom, animal ratio, horseshoe imp speed, etc.). At the time time, don't just listen to a small group because that leads to bad things.

[Wossoo 1,915]

I think the developers should always take suggestions and ideas from players, but fundamentally developers should be the one designing the game, not the players. The priorities devs have compared with players are normally incredibly different. Developers focus on making the game as good (technically and entertainment wise) as it can be within the constraints of the overall long term vision for the game (which players do not necessarily know) while players tend to want to enrich their own personal enjoyment of the game, even if that's at odds with what is good for the game as a whole in terms of balance, but also commercially and technically.

 

There are no "right" answers in the overall vision for a game (unless that vision is commercial suicide which leads to the death of the game), so the vision that matters most is the one the developers have, not the players, by virtue of it being just as good as any other. I think allowing outside sources to influence a design vision probably weaken and muddle it. Take what happened to Epic as a kind of example.

[SotG_is_OP 357]

Player suggestions need to be weighed with developer intentions and applied to the future and long-term success of the game. You can't take every suggestion, but some are obviously better than the developers' implementations (and vice versa). Both groups have different visions and interpretations of how the game plays out, and all sides need to be looked at.

[Wess 29]

    For me it has little to do with suggestions but rather information, or the lack thereof.  I spent two days locating cherry to conclude a large structure. I made many BsB's in those two days. Weekend before that I was on an Apple hunt to conclude multiple FsB's. A few days before the change in FsB's and BsB's  I had made so many of the following I had to rearrange the warehouse to stack BsB's and FsB's by color so we knew what we had on hand. Days of work, not one or two, but many for the sole purpose of coloring those two items. 

 

   Two days later a small quiet post states "were changing FsB's to one universal color, sorry". Within one day of that post it was implemented and all that time and effort was for nothing, Absolute waste of time. A couple days later same with BsB's. Don't get me wrong, they look great, was pleasantly surprised when i first seen them in game. However had I known weeks in advance if not months, that same job would have taken me one single day. I would have prepared for the change, and used that information to make that change as smooth as possible for me and mine.

 

  I'm not looking to talk to the Dev's but rather, at bare minimum, I am looking for the dev's to talk to me. I have never played a game in all my years "with the exception of game breaking bugs/hacks or cheats" where a decision to change in-game already implemented items on this scale was not announced officially months in advance. Lets face it, in my humble uneducated opinion, If there not even forthcoming on in-game changes this massive, why in the world would they bother to listen to suggestions as a whole?   "not a hate statement, just my opinion."

[Brash_Endeavors 4,735]

I think the developers should always take suggestions and ideas from players, but fundamentally developers should be the one designing the game, not the players. The priorities devs have compared with players are normally incredibly different. Developers focus on making the game as good (technically and entertainment wise) as it can be within the constraints of the overall long term vision for the game (which players do not necessarily know) while players tend to want to enrich their own personal enjoyment of the game, even if that's at odds with what is good for the game as a whole in terms of balance, but also commercially and technically.

 

There are no "right" answers in the overall vision for a game (unless that vision is commercial suicide which leads to the death of the game), so the vision that matters most is the one the developers have, not the players, by virtue of it being just as good as any other. I think allowing outside sources to influence a design vision probably weaken and muddle it. Take what happened to Epic as a kind of example.

 

I agree very much.

 

It's perhaps not a fluke that the games I have enjoyed the most over the years, have often been the least "democratic." Usually ONE TOP DOG who decides on an original vision (usually unlike anything anyone else is doing) and is the final decision maker for everything. Many many many players and team who provide him with ideas, feedback, suggestions, complaints. Usually asking him to make the game more like every other game out there. 

 

The games I tended to leave with unhappy feelings, were generally those "run by experienced committees," usually by a group of under-devs who  outlasted the original team, took over the reins, and now have their own brilliant so much better ideas on how things should work. Which usually means tinkering and changing core elements of the game because, hey they are professionals and they know better than the players who have been there for years! Players shouldn't resist change so much! Especially when they have this brilliantly smart professional committee making the decisions now! It's no longer the original game anymore but surely that can only be because it is better.

 

Modern Teamwork approach sounds all well and good but 9 times out of 10, I leave the game in utter disgust because it's original vision has caved in to watered down game mechanics so that they do not scare off "new players" who presumably do not like the core vision but WOULD all jump on board if this game was exactly like every other game they have ever played for 1-2 months then left. The most famous example is SWG but there are many other examples of games over time moving away from their beginning vision. It's why I left Asherons Call, why I left Vanguard, and maybe why you have left a game or two in your past also. 

 

A good "I'm Top Dog!" will listen to players, consider it, but still keep his vision as the core central. If 80-90 percent of his players feel VERY strongly on an issue, and express that sentiment very strongly, (hint hint ) well he had better listen!!! He had better be willing to change policies if the players succeed in persuading him he is doing something stupid. Dreamers sometimes do exactly that! And if players are offering a confused babble of suggestions, feedback, ideas, complaints, he should shift through those and consider them as well. But in the end he needs to listen to the voice inside, the one that gave him the idea to MAKE this great and original game, that no one else was making.

 

It's why I fight with Rolf all the time but frankly, I do not want him to sell out to someone else, ever. Not to Notch, not to some professional gaming company, not to private shareholders. He may be crazy and he may drive me nuts but NO ONE else has ever made this game that I love.  Most of us are here today, because no one else is making the game that Rolf has made.  

 

Rolf makes mistakes -- but lucky for him, here we are to tell him so whenever he does!!

 

And he is certainly free not to listen, right up to the day we all grab our wallets and go marching out because he refused to listen to us  

 

I wouldn't have it any other way, myself.  No thank you to committee teams -- I have been there and do not want to go there again. 

Edited November 23, 2014 by Brash_Endeavors

[KaiH 1,126]

...

It's why I fight with Rolf all the time but frankly, I do not want him to sell out to someone else, ever. Not to Notch, not to some professional gaming company, not to private shareholders. He may be crazy and he may drive me nuts but NO ONE else has ever made this game that I love.  Most of us are here today, because no one else is making the game that Rolf has made.  

 ...

Most of the times i don't know what Rolf had in mind with an idea that i disliked at first, but in the end those ideas resolve into what Wurm Online is and hey, i am still here

A few more information trickles would be more than welcome, but keep going on the road of your "vision" Rolf!

[Valdor 1,426]

I think the developers should always take suggestions and ideas from players, but fundamentally developers should be the one designing the game, not the players. The priorities devs have compared with players are normally incredibly different. Developers focus on making the game as good (technically and entertainment wise) as it can be within the constraints of the overall long term vision for the game (which players do not necessarily know) while players tend to want to enrich their own personal enjoyment of the game, even if that's at odds with what is good for the game as a whole in terms of balance, but also commercially and technically.

 

There are no "right" answers in the overall vision for a game (unless that vision is commercial suicide which leads to the death of the game), so the vision that matters most is the one the developers have, not the players, by virtue of it being just as good as any other. I think allowing outside sources to influence a design vision probably weaken and muddle it. Take what happened to Epic as a kind of example.

 

Well said.

 

I strongly agree with this sentiment. While we - the players - have a lot of ideas, ultimately we cannot decide the direction of the game. Our view of the game is limited to what's in front of our noses - the finished product. And while it may be argued that the ultimate goal of any game is the finished product, there is much more happening "behind the scenes" than that. All those factors have to be carefully considred and only the developers are in a position to do so.

 

Granted, the game is judged on the finished product... or the product currently at our fingertips. But that version, the "current" one, is already a thing of the past for the development team. They are usually ahead working on projects yet unknown to us that will be part of the game in near or distant future. Those needs will affect decision making too. And while as players we get very passionate about this game, which to me testifies how good it is, and while we even have a tendency to turn our passions to frustration or anger, our input into the game must be contained to suggestions. While I respect any gaming community, I would shudder to think of playing a game designed mostly by players. There is just no common vision there. That's where the development team comes in.

 

I haven't played many online games, but of those I have, I can safely say that I fully believe that Wurm has one of the most mature and excellent player bases around and a very interractive and enthusiastic development team. In the end, though, the developers develop the game and our choice is either to play it or not and to input ideas and suggestions.

[As_I_Decay 1,592]

>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0qJJf7irNGE

 

Posteh sounds like this kid that used to work for me:

>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0c4deUhkZPU

[Othob Rithol 700]

No, Devin rambles less.

[Torgrim 403]

I agree that Epic would have been more interesting if people were forced to move more often and if you couldn't be really safe anywhere. But then there needs to be a bit less to loose as well. For example traders, that cost 50s and can't be moved, not fun to loose. "Having to buy" rez stones  for RL money, buying deeds for RL money that can be lost etc. It's not really promoting PvP. 

 

Remove the ingame shop, remove pay to win items. PvP should not be about who has most money in RL.  Ok, player sales can't be stopped ofc.  

 

Maybe add more bank space, like 10-20 items.

 

depending how often map resets or disaster event should be, you might also have to lower the amount of materials used to build houses and walls. We spend months to just build stuff when coming to a new spot, it makes it very sad to loose afterwards. 

 

And one of the more important things. Make fighting more interesting and interactive (I know, it's on the list already)

[RockyBalboa 565]

Wurm listen us more then you think.... Many smart ideas out of me was already made this game better for everyone