Project Reality - Responding to Feedback, Developer's Intent, Moderation

[Masaq]

Dear Community,

Recently there has been a rise in the number of comments from community members expressing a belief that the development team (Devs) should respond with greater warmth and speed to suggestions and feedback from the playerbase.

Please allow me to explain why even suggestions that have the unanimous backing of the playerbase may not automatically get included in a future release of Project Reality, and why the Devs have rejected the view that they should respond to whatever changes are backed by the majority of the viewpoint. Included in this response will be the role that moderators play in the community and why the Dev team so rarely comment in public as to what they are planning to include in future releases.

First, let me explain where the teams standpoint does not come from. It does not come from a belief that only the Devs 'understand the game', or that the Devs 'know best' about everything. The Devs have made some mistakes before now, and we'll make them again in the future - that's what humans do. Please be aware however that many of the Devs have now been working on PR for several years, playing PR for a couple more, and some of us have been playing on the BF2 engine since release. Some are professional developers, some are studying game design (or have studied it already) at degree level. We don't know everything, but we're not completely green, either.


Armchair Development
Secondly, and let's be clear about this, we don't barr anyone who has the serious intent of helping the mod from doing so. There are a wealth of ways in which people can help develop the mod's future, and as the saying goes - those that can, do. No-one in the current Dev team got their position simply by posting criticisms; each one of us has contributed in some way to furthering and bettering the mod. Whether that's through sitting down with BF2Ed and creating a map or through spending time and energy on behind-the-scenes management or simply through playtesting and stresstesting, everyone here has tried and become involved through graft. This is why the team can appear to be a little bit impatient with the armchair-developer brigade. It can be extremely galling to spend days, weeks or even months' worth of man-hours on a project to have people state that you've done it wrong or badly, without even an acknowledgement of the work that's gone in. If you want to change the mod, learn the skills that are required and come argue your case from inside the team, and show us how it can be done.


Responding to Community Feedback
Let's explore why the team don't immediately leap on every suggestion or item of feedback that garners a large amount of community support and then promise to make the change or introduce what's been suggested.

For a start, had we followed this path some of the features that are most praised by the community now would never have entered the mod had we responded to the feedback we solicited prior to implementing them. Hell, if we'd taken the feedback on board immediately after implementing the changes, many of them would have been taken out in the next release. The removal of the GPS for infantry, the removal of the auto-spotting system, the removal of Squad Leader spawns... people were dead-set against all of these by an overwhelming margin! They're also some of the features that are now most-loved and hailed as being the innovations that really set PR apart from BF2.

So, pretty clearly, the Dev team have to be willing to step outside from the simply majority-verdict and sometimes go with a hunch. Sometimes that decision might still be contentious - the automatic RP destruction by nearby infantry, for example - but sometimes (minimap removal being one) they're just great.

On the other hand, it's not like we completely ignore community feedback either. Look at a system like deviation - an incredibly complex issue for all kinds of reasons, and one that people can either love or hate... but we haven't just implemented it and then ignored everybody. Over the past four-to-five public builds it's been tweaked each time, always in response to community feedback. It's taken a long time but we've finally got to the point where have something that isn't universally hated and seems to be welcomed by most. That takes time!


Responsibility to the Community
This is sometimes bought up in threads, usually by people who have been told that their particular viewpoint isn't the one held by the Devs. It usually runs along the lines of "We play the mod, so you should listen to us".

This is a mixed issue, and one I'm going to try and treat tactfully.

The fact is, any one person's viewpoint is just one person's viewpoint. We can be ignoring you but still be doing "right" by everyone else. For a current snapshot of what I mean by everyone else, for most of this month (June 09) there have been around six thousand individuals playing PR each day. May, the last full month we've got figures for? Just over 27,000 players in total over the month. Over 70 thousand players so far in 2009.

So yes, we have to listen to each individual who makes the effort... and then we have to weigh up their opinion against the 'best interests' of 69,999 other players.

The other point to consider here is that the Dev team have never set out to make a populist mod. What do I mean by that? Well, PR runs on Battlefield 2, and BF2 is aimed at mass-market appeal. We have always tried to be something other than mass-market, and that's a game aimed at a specific kind of player - basically, us. The Devs basically want a game that they enjoy playing because most of us found BF2 to be pretty weak beer in terms of our needs. DICE made a good game, but not for our needs.

It's a weak argument I know, but there it is... in our eyes, games like BF2 are what you get when your development team are asked to make a game that appeals to as many players as possible. We're not after that, we're after a game that we want to play - and if you want to play it with us, that's great. If you don't like the overall direction or new developments that come into the mod, well, we're not claiming that everyone should like it!

This isn't being rude, or elitist, or anything like that. It's simply a statement that not everyone likes the same things, and since we're the guys making it - we get to make what we want to play. If you want to make something different; make it yourself. If you want to play something different; play POE2, AIX, FH2, BF2. If you want to play PR but slightly different to the way the Devs are developing it - learn the required skills, make the changes and show us how you'd like it. We might agree and welcome you on board to make changes elsewhere, too... but we do want to see that effort being made, because that's what we had to do.


Moderation
So having explained a little further where the team are coming from in relation to some of the issues that come with feedback and suggestions, let me explain why the forums are moderated as they are.

First and foremost, as has been said before, a lot of work goes into PR. You don't have to like the work, you don't have to personally like the team's members - but we do ask that on our forums, you show a little respect. Not flaming the team, bitching, sniping, snide remarks or just generally not trolling us is simply courtesy.

It's also the same rule in place on most other online forums. Don't roll up to the Penny Arcade forums, or the BBC message board and troll and expect them to behave any differently. If you post rude or abrasive messages in most forums, you'll either get your posts deleted, some kind of AWS system warning, your account banned or told to shut the hell up by a moderator there, also.

Secondly, remember "netiquette". Posting the same thing over and over in different threads promoting the same point of view isn't good forum conduct. It's repetetive, boring and not helpful when others are trying to discuss certain things. That's why we object to people pushing an agenda across the boards.

Yes, we reserve the right to "censor" your comments. Again - see the bit about netiquette and respect. That goes towards respecting other forum members simply as humans, for a start.

You agreed to us holding that right when you joined the forums. It's in the forum rules, and if you're being blatantly rude and abrasive towards the team, why shouldn't we exercise the right that you gave us to censor you? We have an 'ideal' for these forums - which isn't that all criticism of the mod is banned - but simply that when people are posting their concerns, they do politely and in a constructive way. If you can't be constructive, we don't have to listen to you ranting.

Finally, we 'censor' people for another reason - inflammatory remarks tend to get flamed back, which leads to a spiral of argument between community members. We tend to 'censor' (delete or prune) posts that cause or are likely to cause an argument, because again - these are our forums and we don't like seeing people use them to hurl personal insults and abuse at each other.


Behind the Scenes
What should also be considered is that just because we're not publically responding to feedback or suggestions, that doesn't mean it's not seen and taken on board. There are vast tracts of the forums that are never seen by most forum members, and even stress testers and beta testers see less than half. A great deal of discussion goes in to each new release - the direction it should take, the areas for improvement. More discussion goes into each new build - exactly what needs fixing or tweaking, and what doesn't.

Sometimes, suggestion posts are lifted directly out of the forum and taken wholesale into an area of the Dev forums with "Can we do this?" posted underndeath from an interested Dev. Sometimes it's not that graphic but some posts on a subject are enough to get someone thinking - then the relevent post will usually start with "I've seen a few posts on this, and I've been wondering if...".

What I'm trying to say here is that you shouldn't always expect (or need!) to see a direct response along the lines of "Oh golly, you ARE a smart guy - we'll certainly do this!" in the public section of the forums. We are influenced by feedback, we do take it on board, and it is considered. Sometimes it's considered and rejected - but that doesn't mean that it's been outright ignored.



In conclusion
I've taken about fourty-five minutes to write this post explaining our position, and I shall be copying it across the Feedback, Suggestion and General Discussion forums. The copy in the General Discussion thread will be left open, so that people can discuss and debate the contents. I will endeavour to ensure that some feedback to the debate comes from other Developers as it progresses. I will, of course, be closing the thread if people get out of hand or overly rude.

I will also be asking my fellow developers to take care to look at how they deal with the community and to try and hold themselves to the "respectful and polite" line that we ask of you, the forum-using community. Anything more than that - well, see above. We're not here to make the game you, as an individual community member, want.

[Pure_beef]

well put! im all for what you have said

[Cpl.Small]

Thank you for clearing that up Masaq

[Rudd]

but we do ask that on our forums, you show a little respect.

Indeed, its your house. We are just visiting

[Masaq]

Indeed, its your house. We are just visiting

You didn't even bring cookies

[Rudd]

Come to my house, I'll give you cookies, beer, backrubs....

[Masaq]

Come to my house, I'll give you cookies, beer, backrubs....

We should hold a PR meet in Lincoln!

[RedAlertSF]

Well put indeed, the community is unique here and I love it, but after every release it always goes too far..

[Cpl.Small]

Indeed, its your house. We are just visiting

What a great way to put it

[Masaq]

What a great way to put it

Certainly quicker and easier than a wall of text; but if I'd put it like that then no doubt someone would have called it elitist or something, coming from a Dev

[ReaperMAC]

than a wall of text

Lies

[Fenrir07]

Dear Dev Team, the game is a smash hit - but no matter what you do you will never be able to please everybody (and I have some experiences in this regard having worked for years playtesting and building scenarios/campaigns for two old-school tactical wargames called SP: World War 2 and SP: Main Battle Tank).

Just don't let the whiners get you down!

[Smuke]

Cheers for this long, but insightful read 'M'.

[LeadMagnet]

TL|DR.... j/k

[Spec]

I never thought the moderation here was very strict, and I see a lot of Dev posts on the forums. A lot more than you'd get from a company like dice. Good post, Masaq.

[Tomato-Rifle]

Well said.

[Jigsaw]

Cheers Masaq

[Scot]

so when is 0.9 out?





Seriously though, I have been on the fighting end, and I personally didn't realise how much goes into it until Masaq kindly explained it all to me I'm sure all the DEVs are for criticism, but do it in such a way that it's;

a) polite and nice, it's all well and good saying 'bloody hell you guys are gimps and my dogs arse could do better' but that doesn't really help anyone.
b) offer solutions, I play rugby very competitively, and often we are called upon to say 'mate you're doing that wrong, you should do XYZ to improve'
c) and finally, at the end of the day, for the love of all that is holy, don't post a wall of text

[M.Warren]

A special thanks to Masaq and the PR Team for organizing the above response for the PR Public Community for all to view. I had read Masaq's post several times over to ensure that I had not accidentally overlooked any information and to make sure that the statements that Masaq had made are clear to me.

In relation to the public address made, a large majority of items contained herein are details I'm already familiar with. If the details were not already aware of by myself, they had most likely succeeded in clarifying some of the minor misconceptions. For the most part, my outlook remains consistent as it had previously been.

Now due to the fact of the recent events, the address to the public is still in it's beginning stages. At this moment I'm simply going to make it clear that I'm speaking for myself as it's goes without saying that a large number of individuals have their very own and unique viewpoints and do not specifically express the same amount of concern on the same subjects that I may. This is perfectly natural in the forum world.

I would like to include a beginning quote:

Recently there has been a rise in the number of comments from community members expressing a belief that the development team (Devs) should respond with greater warmth and speed to suggestions and feedback from the playerbase.

The belief that the development team (Devs) should respond with greater warmth and speed to suggestions and feedback from the player base is not specifically my main focus. I am quite satisfied with the developers occasional feedback on certain posts as it has been for several years. With that in mind, increasing the frequency of the Developer feedback will not directly address the concerns that should be confronted.

Under the assumption that I had read Masaq's post thoroughly, the post itself is an address to elaborate and explain the general basis of operation for the PR Team over the past several years in a manner to justify it actions and rationale. It does not appear to include any specific statements within the text on what issues between the PR Team and it's Community has come to adjust or resolve. This is in relation to the recent rise of concern on the PR forums and a general explanation of it's own defense --- Which I will clarify that the PR Team is entitled to defend their own perspective.

My concerns remain as follows:
<Note: This is in reference if the PR Team will attempt to incorporate a voting system on certain major build changes and involve the Community via a Polling event.>

I had spoken to an individual once through PM's about the matter of polling. My suggestion was simple:

1. The PR Developers have decided to make several major changes to gameplay for the upcoming build.
2. The PR Developers and Forum Moderators announce 1-2 weeks ahead of time that a PR Major Build Change Poll will take place.
3. The Forum Moderators create a temporary (or permanent) category in the PR Forums specifically for PR Major Build Change Polls.
4. Only [R-DEV]'s and [R-MOD]'s can add/remove threads within this forum.
5. In these forums each Major Build Change to game play will have it's own thread with it's own Poll with several options to select from. This is in regards to what actions should the PR Team take to game play changes for the next build at a Public Community level.
6. The Public Community can submit their Poll votes to the desired changes they'd like to see in PR for the upcoming build.
7. The Public Community can post replies within each posted Major Build Change Poll thread.
8. After 2-3 weeks of active voting by the Public Community, the polls are closed.
9. The results are considered by the PR Developer team for the next build.

My point being is to incorporate the Community in a more active role in the development of PR rather than submission of passive suggestions and feedback alone.

I understand that the PR Team has made many major gameplay changes in the past. Specifically between the times of:

• PR v0.1 up to v0.5 - It's early stages of realism.
• PR v0.6 - The first step towards a revolutionary change in gameplay realism.
• PR v0.7 and v0.75 - The builds consisting of the most major changes in PR History. This includes the removal of SL Spawn Points, APC Spawn Points and the removal of the Minimap and some major aspects of game play still in effect today.
• PR v0.8 up to v0.86 - A consistent basis of gameplay changes and/or refinement.

Between Masaq's post and my own perspective, I agree that the major changes in PR that he had stated previously as:

Masaq;1066782']So, pretty clearly, the Dev team have to be willing to step outside from the simply majority-verdict and sometimes go with a hunch. Sometimes that decision might still be contentious - the automatic RP destruction by nearby infantry, for example - but sometimes (minimap removal being one) they're just great.

Once again, I perfectly understand and accept the fact that the Dev team will have to make major gameplay changes to builds just as it had in the past. This also includes the fact that it will have to be discreet it to avoid an uproar of opposition before a chance to try it has ever been made. The focus is to try in increase the involvement of the Community at a greater frequency on a more regular basis.

My point once again is that it's attempt to involve the Community in a more active role through the use of polls prior to final decisions made. Not only will this help remove pressure from the PR Team from harsh criticisms but also allow the Community a chance to voice their opinions before any build changes are put into action. The ability to vote in the PR Major Build Change Polls does not directly mean that the decisions made by the PR Community are concrete either. The point of the PR Major Build Change Polls is to be utilized as an accent and a tool to help the PR Developers better gauge their decisions.

Simply put, this will offer the PR Team an ability to make a more in-depth and thorough analysis of gameplay changes; that is before making any final commitments to what will or will not be included in any specific build or patch of Project Reality.

Thank you for your time.

[Jigsaw]

Simply going to edit out the nasty comment this time. No further derailing of the thread please.

Dunehunter