So many ideas...

[Lizzie]

I get it - people have ideas on stuff they'd love to see changed in the game.

But when does it become too much? I think this is why I've been so "push-backish" lately on the GDB. I see thread after thread, topic after topic, nothing but "let's change this" and "let's change that" and "let's add this" and "let's nerf that."  Much of the "here's what IS, NOW" is being lost in the "let's change/nerf/add" threads.

It's like some of you don't really want to play Arm. You want to play some other game that you can't find somewhere else, and so instead you want Arm to change to be that other game.

I play Arm because I like Arm. Not because I want to play something else.

Just - I wish people would give it a rest for awhile, and spend more time playing what IS, and less time posting about what ISN'T.

[Pale Horse]

I feel you, Lizzie.

But..we're a community of nerds.  I'm afraid we're always going to say "I LOVE this game, but it would just be better, IF...."

We need an Alpha Nerd to set us strait but we're eternally jockeying for position.

[Miradus]

It drives my wife crazy when she tries a new recipe and I say, "This is great, but it would be even better with zucchini."

You're fighting against human nature.

[Yam]

You're kind of a curmudgeon. That's fine.

[bardlyone]

It occurs to me there is very likely a link between those threads and the 'world too static' thread. Maybe if people felt the world were more dynamic, they would rally less for fewer changes.

/my 2 sids

[Lizzie]

It occurs to me there is very likely a link between those threads and the 'world too static' thread. Maybe if people felt the world were more dynamic, they would rally less for fewer changes.

/my 2 sids

Not sure if this is a joke..but just in case it isn't:

Static: no change
Dynamic: constant change.

People who feel the world is too static are people who always want change.
By definition.

I'm saying - there IS change. The game DOES change. I think some people just refuse to sit back, relax, and experience the changes we have for awhile, before demanding more change. They're not satisfied with the existing changes, and want change for its own sake, it seems. Change is great - gradual, organic, forward-thinking change. Not sweeping change just because "my character is [insert whine here]" and "I can't [insert thing you can't do there]".

[bardlyone]

That's an awful lot of presupposing notions on people, like their motivations, and how they feel, too. I'm not sure how you're coming up with it. Do you think if someone wanted, say, to be able to forage ocotillo at the shield wall, that allowing people to use the symbol command would actually address that? And so what if they do want to forage those bulbs at the shield wall? Seems like you're assuming it's because they want or need ocotillo on this character and can't get it, rather than just listening to it without reading someone's supposed intentions into it. Maybe they just think that ocotillo should be forageable there because in other places where similar things are forageable, it's forageable, but it's not now, and the world is inconsistent due to that, or they're feeling out whether or not the idea would even be entertained to try and decide between 6 different possible plots moving forward, or so on.

What I'm saying is: There have been a lot of mechanics changes, yes. Outside of the near-constant change in Tuluk for years before it closed (No longer a part of the player accessible world, so may as well not ever have happened), and some black/red robes shuffling around (something that directly affects, what, 3 templar pcs, and not because they got to be part of the change, but because the npcs they answer to are different), there hasn't been a whole lot of actual change in a while. Red Fangs have been gone the better part of a decade now, so you can't possibly be referring to that... and wasn't it also years ago now that the gypsy plot happened? Oh... spice is cheaper? What will we do with all these IN GAME WORLD CHANGES. Seems to me like maybe you're more uncomfortable with the code changing than the world, because that's the lion's share of what's changed. I mean, people were still trying to make merchants and player groups long before the changes to make it codedly possible became a thing.

[manipura]

I'm with you, Lizzie, you're just much more vocal about it whereas I grumble quietly to myself.
Honestly I got tired of the fact that openly opposing what I feel are unnecessary changes usually brings about a chorus of:
"You veterans just like to shit on newer players"
"Older players have this -win- mentally and keeping the game very hard is just a way for them to keep winning"
"Vets don't want any changes because then they lose their edge"
...et cetera et cetera.

So now I mostly just shut up and let everyone else yammer about whether everything should be spelled out for every player, whether the things that make the game harsh should be softened so we don't lose a possible new player who doesn't want to deal with the difficulty, and whether code changes should make the game easier because people don't have time to RP (20 minutes) through an obstacle in a...role playing game.

What some people seem to have difficulty seeing is that most of the older players opposed to all these changes aren't at all wanting to keep some sort of edge, they're wanting to maintain the foundations and integrity of how and what the game is supposed to be.

If I have a recipe for Mom's Luscious Lasagna that takes fourteen steps to make, and I change the noodles and the sauce and the filling, and the way it's cooked and the seasonings I finish with and I cut out six steps all together...I'll still end up with dinner, it just sure as hell isn't going to be Mom's Luscious Lasagna by the time I sit down to eat it.

I sometimes, like you, feel like there are a number of players who want some sort of trendy dinner -almost- like Mom's Luscious Lasagna, but they don't really want the lasagna.

[Malken]

I'm very pro-changes because I realize that this game is like 20+ years old and what made a game great in 1990 doesn't make it great in 2016.

By that I mean that back then, we had -very- few choices for entertainment purposes, so sticking to Armageddon was very easy and we weren't tempted by constant and amazing daily new games to take us away from it.

There's also the fact, like it's been stated recently, that we're not getting many "new" players and that most of our playerbase are aging gamers who have either stuck with Armageddon all these years and are now slowly running out of "fun" time to dedicate to the game or are veterans returning to the game only to find that they really don't have that much time/patience left for Armageddon.

The "core" of Armageddon can remain while changes around it to adapt to the realities of today's gamers and non-renewable playerbase is quite possible and even, in my not-so-humble opinion (I've won two trophies, after all), necessary for its survival in the next few years.

Mom's Luscious Lasagna is super tasty except there's fewer and fewer people left around the table to eat it.

Maybe we need to crumble some Doritos atop of it to give it a cool edge, yo! (tm)

[Miradus]

You're kind of a curmudgeon. That's fine.

KIND of a curmudgeon?

Hey, my friend. If you look up curmudgeon in the dictionary you will see my autographed photo.

[LauraMars]

Lizzie/Miradus OTP

I ship it

[bardlyone]

I'm very pro-changes because I realize that this game is like 20+ years old and what made a game great in 1990 doesn't make it great in 2016.

By that I mean that back then, we had -very- few choices for entertainment purposes, so sticking to Armageddon was very easy and we weren't tempted by constant and amazing daily new games to take us away from it.

There's also the fact, like it's been stated recently, that we're not getting many "new" players and that most of our playerbase are aging gamers who have either stuck with Armageddon all these years and are now slowly running out of "fun" time to dedicate to the game or are veterans returning to the game only to find that they really don't have that much time/patience left for Armageddon.

The "core" of Armageddon can remain while changes around it to adapt to the realities of today's gamers and non-renewable playerbase is quite possible and even, in my not-so-humble opinion (I've won two trophies, after all), necessary for its survival in the next few years.

Mom's Luscious Lasagna is super tasty except there's fewer and fewer people left around the table to eat it.

Maybe we need to crumble some Doritos atop of it to give it a cool edge, yo! (tm)

Basically all the stuff Malken said.

I've been playing arm for the better part of a decade. I've seen parts of the game world most people never will. I'm (probably) a big part of the reason (other than the Klestion debacle) why tribes are as restricted as they are when players create them. I know the game world and setting, and I love it. But it's the setting that keeps me coming back, not the code. If altering the code to make it easier for the cool kids (ie: those who have so full a life they don't have 8 hours a day to play) to play and be happy? Go for it. There's a difference in changing the IN GAME WORLD and the codebase. It feels like a lot of the opposition to changes is opposition to code changes, not IC world changes, and it DOES come from people who have learned the game world one way and have every human motivation not to want to learn it another. Which is... understandable... but kind of skews that lasagna analogy. You're not changing the recipe and skipping six steps. You're buying the goddamn lasagna noodles that cook in the oven so you don't have to spend all day preboiling them. That's not a change of recipe, it's a change of brand used for one of the ingredients.

[Patuk]

The people are talking! Pour boiling oil over them!

Snark aside, RAT was removed already, so the gdb is much quieter than it once was. Given that staff don't blindly go along with every idea a person ever comes up with, people talking about the things they'd like to see isn't a bad thing.

[Lizzie]

Yeah let's do lasagna comparisons.

So we switch out from home-made from scratch lasagna noodles to Kraft Frozen Pre-Cooked Lasagna Noodles.
Then instead of grain-fed grass-finished local ground chuck that's been properly aged, we go with the trendy (but nastier-tasting and chewier) ultra low-fat grain-fed grain-finished ground sirloin kobe beef.
Now - we'll just switch out the parmesano reggiano cheese for Stella, since it's less expensive and you can get it in the 7-11 down the street.
Of course - who needs locally-made ricotta cheese from Liuzzi's, when you can get - Stella.
Sauce? Hah. Ain't nobody got time for that. We'll use Ragu.

Yes, it'll be lasagna. Yes, it'll have the same quantity of the same basic ingredients: wheat-based noodles, cow-based meat, cheese, and red sauce.

It'll still taste like shit and you couldn't pay me to eat it.

[bardlyone]

Well, you know, you wouldn't be the first to hate the lasagna, it happens.

But what you're talking about would be tantamount to using coffeemud and importing area files so things still just looked the same. Which is to say: You're being extremely hyperbolic.

I'm going to bow out of the thread now, though. As you're never going to get me on board and I'm only going to wind up snapping if you keep trying to make that point at me, because that point is basically inaccurate. Maybe from your perspective it's accurate. It's not from mine. And if you don't like the lasagna... well... no one's making you eat it.

[WanderingOoze]

I like the game as it is mostly. A few changes here and there aren't the end of the world, but I'm opposed to this trend of
'Lets make Armageddon easy-mode"

I really don't have much else to add. But these Lasagna analogies are hilarious.  

[Miradus]

All I got from this thread is hungry.

[valeria]

I don't mind that people start discussions as much as that some people don't seem to realize how a discussion works. There are people that are going to disagree. I'm disagreeing with the OP right now.

I guess what bothers me most isn't that people want to make suggestions for what they view as improvement, it's the tone that people take when someone dares to disagree or offer constructive criticism. We all want this game that we love to be great, and to attract and keep players. I just wish more people would approach discussion from that direction.

The other thing that drives me mad is that the game isn't actually static. Just look at the change log and staff announcements for the past three months, both for IC changes and OOC changes to code and administration. You don't even have to go a year. The game has been pretty dynamic in my tenure here, and the fact that it changes is part of why I even play here over getting lost in Fallout 4 or something.

Anyway, that's why I disagree in part: I don't mind the amount of discussion, but I'd like to see the LEVEL brought upward.

[Malken]

It'll still taste like shit and you couldn't pay me to eat it.

But I feel like you would still eat it. You are the kind of customers that, when a company makes a big change, they aren't afraid to lose because they know you'll stick around no matter what (I forgot the business jargon for that kind of consumers) - but the company is aware that they have to make a choice between losing a few die-hard customers versus getting the chance of gaining many new ones - The odds are that the die-hard customers will stick around.

There are a few unique players that shouldn't count in the equation because they are too much at the edge of both spectrum (they will keep playing no matter what - baring a huge catastrophic change / those who will bitch and never return no matter what changes are implemented because of some past experience they can't get over)

And I'm saying this with peace and love, since die-hard loyalty is very unique in today's entertainment business.

[Nergal]

Warning - while you were typing 6 new replies have been posted. You may wish to review your post.
*posts anyway*

I think discussions regarding game changes are pretty useful, and provide ideas to staff on what we can do next. We definitely don't implement 100% of ideas posted (wait, let me check... nope, typing 'necksnap' still returns "What?"), but we do use player feedback to add stuff to the game in a measured way. Just looking at the current news feed on the main page currently, 4/5 of those changes are based on GDB posts or request tool submissions. The release notes Nessalin puts out after reboots often cover player-suggested changes as well. There's a practical purpose to this forum: the staff team is small compared to the playerbase and getting ideas from 200+ people is way better than ideas from just a handful of staff.

That said, I think there's a good point to the other side of the coin too. The game is pretty solid as-is. It has survived the test of time, and has survived other RPIs rising and falling. Could it be better? Of course; anything could be better. It's important not to get complacent either, and recognize that we need to change with the times. I don't think the suggestion of change implies that the current game is bad - it's just that tweaks could make the game more enjoyable, or account for more things, or put a fresh coat of paint on an otherwise old way of doing things.

[Malken]

It's important not to get complacent either, and recognize that we need to change with the times. I don't think the suggestion of change implies that the current game is bad - it's just that tweaks could make the game more enjoyable, or account for more things, or put a fresh coat of paint on an otherwise old way of doing things.

Yep!

Mmmmm, doritos-coated Grandma's lasagna.

[Molten Heart]

.

[Lizzie]

What I'm seeing Nergal, is what happens when I click on "show unread posts since last visit."

I'm seeing:

Change this!
Change that!
Non-game discussion about some other game.
Something's going on today.
Change some thing!
Make this change!
Something's going on this week.
Non-game discussion about other games.
Add this!
Nerf that!
Make this easier!
Make that harder!


This is what I see several times every day when I click on "show unread posts since last visit."

I don't like that. I want to see more of:

This is happening today!
This is happening this week!
Player opinion on recent change #1
Player opinion on recent change #2
Nessalin's weekly report.
This just happened an hour ago OMG!
Staff said they're planning on changing this: player input.

Not saying I want to see this exclusively - I'm saying that when I click on "unread posts since last visit" and have to squint my eyes to see anything OTHER than stuff about other games and ideas for making changes, it discourages me. It makes me feel like people don't want to enjoy Arm. They want to enjoy something that isn't Arm, and rather than do that, they want to make Arm into what they want, rather than what it is.

[Chettaman]

I don't want to say that I disagree, because there are a lot of ideas getting thrown out lately. About this thing that we all love. We're not trying to change it to become something we'll all end up hating - even if the game world does end up sucking. We're not trying to avoid enjoying the things that we do have - even if we do take those things for granted.

We talk because we love this game. We want it to be great, and you're right Lizzie. Sometimes if not all the time we take for granted the awesomeness we have and complain about how things could be better, because, if you ask me, things could be better. I'm not saying they're not awesome. I enjoyed this game ten years ago when I didn't understand the mechanics behind everything. I enjoyed the idea that I had to roleplay and everyone else did too and that even though I kind of sucked at it, I could get better. But even while loving this experience there were plenty of times where I would say something like, "What? I can't see someone emoting when I'm watching that direction unless it's a command emote? I wish I could see an emote if I were watching a direction. I mean... that even makes sense."
I get what you're saying, people just want things to change as if they never liked the game, but I haven't noticed that. People just want to talk about these things that have been on their minds or have just popped into their minds and have them discussed at least. Because there are good ideas and there are bad ideas.

If we talk about them we can discover ways to make this world better!
But you're right. Our world is great now too. My favorite thing to do in game is be with other people pretending to be other people. Little code involved in talking and emoting.


(if or if not this is what you meant)
also I also support the idea of inter communications between people about in game and out of game stuff, but I'm not sure about how appropriate that would actually be. Actually. I am sure, and while I would still love to see it, I don't think we can openly chit chat about those things. Though it would be cool to see... I feel like people would devolve from roleplaying for the sake of "this is how it is" to roleplaying for just those sorts of moments.
... which it already kind of has in a way for some players. But we won't get into that conversation.
But I mean... it's fun to talk about all the cool stuff you do, ya know? I wanna say it's even more fun than actually having done whatever, because you get to share it with others. For real.

[Reiloth]

If the game doesn't change, it will die. How change is suggested should be measured and not entitled. Reaction to not having suggestions implemented should be calm. If people don't discuss change, or become afraid of it, ArmageddonMUD will be a ghost town sooner than you think.

[Miradus]

Most of my suggestions and proposed changes I'm not emotionally invested in and I don't care about discussing.

So I use the "idea" command. I spam the heck out of that + bug command.

[BadSkeelz]

I believe the lack of a Random Armageddon Thoughts thread, where people would randomly post about positive as well as negative things, has given the GDB a more critical tone. Intentionally, judging by Staff posts at the time of the RAT's closure. People just aren't going to make threads about how awesome something is. People want to talk about things that irk them, and how they'd like it to be changed.

It is kind of disheartening after awhile to read a bunch of threads of mostly terrible ideas with little positive to balance it. Or at least it makes the GDB less interesting.

[lostinspace]

I think the fact that players are taking the time to think up these ideas and have a discussion on them is indicative not of people disliking the game, but of them enjoying it and wanting to make it better. If they really didn't like it, why would they even waste their time on the GDB to begin with. And just because someone wants to change the lasagna doesn't mean it will be worse after the change, it very well might be tastier, not all changes to a recipe are detrimental, and I'm sure grandma made changes and modifications to an existing lasagna recipe to make hers, and she probably discussed the ingredients with friends and family when she served it and when teaching others to make it. Could be one of those discussions was the reason Grandma's Famous Lasagna ended up so tasty.

[Yam]

Maybe a touch too much venom in there...

[Malken]

The funniest is when someone is against the idea of having helpful commands like the newly implemented casting change and you know for a fact that this person has a file with all of the spell words and skills branching on it 

[Malifaxis]

The funniest is when someone is against the idea of having helpful commands like the newly implemented casting change and you know for a fact that this person has a file with all of the spell words and skills branching on it 

I'm curious about how you would know that for a fact, Malken.... unless this person has shared that with you?

[Malken]

The funniest is when someone is against the idea of having helpful commands like the newly implemented casting change and you know for a fact that this person has a file with all of the spell words and skills branching on it 

I'm curious about how you would know that for a fact, Malken.... unless this person has shared that with you?

Many have shared many things with me - I've never tried to hide that fact. Is there anything you want to know in particular?

I think I've been pretty honest and blunt about what I've done and haven't done in my "Armageddon career" and I know for a fact that many have done the same and it's why I'm VERY pro changes that brings a fair "balance" between having to go and look for secrets and having stuff remained very secret in-game (there are just as many stuff I don't know about Armageddon and I love the fact that they remain a secret to me.)

But skill branching or spell words? Everyone should have access to this basic knowledge.

[Reiloth]

I think we need to stop looking at change like its the bogeyman. Change is inevitable. The game has changed significantly over the years. Often gradually, sometimes sharply. The game is molded by opinions. Staff opinions, which can sometimes be swayed or downright altered by player opinions. This is true of many development communities for video games. We should be rejoicing that Staff is as attentive as it is to player opinions. Many games aren't, try to hold true to developer goals without accounting for their players and their wants, and putter out and die.

A game that doesn't change or foster an environment where change can be discussed will putter and die. Fortunately Armageddon has never had this problem. From "Change Mood" to quitting at gates, sleight of hand alterations to the city of Tuluk and Allanak, played input has served a vital role in how the game is shaped. It's very short sighted and close minded to think the only change should be dictated of requested by Staff. The Staff is composed of players as well. So you could say everything that has changed with the game is affected by player opinions and brainstorming. Staff changes the game for our benefit and enjoyment, not to hinder or harm our gaming experience. Similarly, players aren't suggesting changes to the game to worsen their experience or the experience of others. They are pontificating on how to make the game better, more appealing to old and new players, and a more fun environment.

RAT was a cesspool where ideas where shat out wholesale. People didn't have to put thought into the ideas or their implications. I prefer the way it is now. Nauta for instance has made several well thought out RP threads and started discussions that aim to help improve our game environment.

[Rathustra]

Stop being shitty to each other.

[Malifaxis]

Stop being shitty to each other.

Quit being so fucking quotable, dude!

You seriously trying to get my signature changed every week?  What the fuck is this?!

[Miradus]

Stop being shitty to each other.

In this thread or in general?

[manonfire]

I think we can all agree, irrational posts criticizing other posts notwithstanding, that someone needs to goddamn fix the wagonmaking skill already srsly

[Miradus]

I think we can all agree, irrational posts criticizing other posts notwithstanding, that someone needs to goddamn fix the wagonmaking skill already srsly

What's wrong with it? I've never tried to make anything with it. I did see someone make a wheel once but I have no idea what they did with it. Rolled it down the hill, perhaps.

[BadSkeelz]

I believe you can just make parts, but can't really do anything with those parts other than vendor them. You can't actually build a functioning wagon.

[Miradus]

Well that sucks.

Are there problems with the code, or just staff doesn't want the world filled up with wagons?

[BadSkeelz]

As with most things, it's code.

[Majikal]

Came cause I liked the premise of the thread, I noticed the same trends Lizzie noticed too and when I walk away from those threads they do lessen my excitement about the game for a little bit (so I take mini gdb breaks). I was already thinking about typing up my opinion on the stuff... then saw the shitslinging and dogpiling. That "kills" games too assholes. Healthy community, healthier game.

Don't be dicks.

Everyone on this forum is entitled to an opinion, whether you agree with it or not we can show some decency to our fellow players. whether you've been around for a week or over a decade, you're entitled to your opinion about the game.

[Malifaxis]

Came cause I liked the premise of the thread, I noticed the same trends Lizzie noticed too and when I walk away from those threads they do lessen my excitement about the game for a little bit (so I take mini gdb breaks). I was already thinking about typing up my opinion on the stuff... then saw the shitslinging and dogpiling. That "kills" games too assholes. Healthy community, healthier game.

Don't be dicks.

Everyone on this forum is entitled to an opinion, whether you agree with it or not we can show some decency to our fellow players. whether you've been around for a week or over a decade, you're entitled to your opinion about the game.

Gospel.

And buck up, motherfuckers.  If I can become better about my posting habits, you can be damn sure you can too.  Doesn't take much.  Just step back and ask yourself two things:

"Is what I am going to say here in some way improve the game, or someone's understanding of it"
and
"If what I am going to say might hurt someone's feelings, how can I say it to keep the information and lessen the blow"

Two simple questions with the same premise.

See below-

[Dresan]

I cannot disagree with this thread and the original poster enough. I think it is borderline trollish, at the very least just rude to other people trying to contribute in their own way. Especially when these feelings and ideas are created by people with very high post counts.  

Fun facts about posting an idea:

• You need to make an account.
• You need to give a shit enough about this game and community to want to post.
• You need to be ready to defend your idea against people who didn't even bother to read your post.
• You need to be ready to take abuse without any guarantee people, moderators or staff will come and speak up or moderate.

I don't want to make this thread any more toxic that it is so all I have to say is I'm going to respond by trying to post more ideas when they come to me.

[boog]

I think everyone needs to calm down.

[SuchDragonWow]

[LauraMars]

This thread right now:



I moderated a few posts that were needlessly combative/didn't contribute to a rational exchange of ideas (or...exchange of no ideas, as the case may be). And I will lock it if things spiral into further incivility.

[BadSkeelz]

So what's the point of this thread, again?

I could speculate based on the OP, but it'd probably come across as combative.

[TheWanderer]

stop trying to make us Canadian

[Miradus]

I think the point was "don't bitch about the game so much" but then we bitched about bitching about the game too much.

Oh hell. I don't really know any more.

Gonna go download "This War of Mine". I hear it's a delightful romp.

[LauraMars]

Speaking objectively, I think Lizzie would like people to stop making new threads and play the game instead.

To Lizzie, and to all who would suggest such a thing on a discussion forum (or take umbrage at same), I present this pill, suitable for chilling.

[Malken]

So what's the point of this thread, again?

Mom's lasagna is best lasagna in whole Kazakhstan.

(and there are some of us who don't play the game but enjoy shooting the shit with other members of this esteemed community in a friendly and often frantic fashion)

[Lizzie]

I think the point was "don't bitch about the game so much" but then we bitched about bitching about the game too much.

Oh hell. I don't really know any more.

Gonna go download "This War of Mine". I hear it's a delightful romp.

It was what it still is:

It's great to have ideas for improvement. But when the majority of posts when you come home from work and click on the link to see what you missed reading that day consists of "let's get rid of this" and "this is too harsh let's make it easier" and "this is broken let's fix it" and "this is bad let's change it to make it good" "I don't like when this happens let's change it to do that instead" you lose some of the posts about things that are already working great.

(Pretty much like some people missed what I was saying and only read the parts that were easy to pick apart and insult me about)

[Armaddict]

Didn't read all of it.

I feel what Lizzie is saying, though I think the phrasing is a little off.  But first, for a direct response:

If the game doesn't change, it will die.

Sometimes...changes are what kill things, not lack of change.  We have an entire political ideology based off this in real life, because whether you buy into it or not, there is such a thing as demanding too much change too quickly and giving too much credence to ideas that look good but in reality change a fundamental truth that something is dependent on.

I am -not- against ideas, though I will almost always play the skeptic against them.  I think it's very important to do so.  I think it's less about entitlement or keeping things the same and more about exercising a fair amount of caution to make sure that you, an expert in tweaking things in an engine, don't suddenly make a mistake with confidence and kill the thing when if you'd taken a few steps back to listen to concerns, you could have avoided breaking it.  Because if it gets broken, it's not just players getting old and running out of time anymore.  It's an exodus, it's something that -won't- be recovered from, and it -can- kill the game.  So...people continually questioning your changes to the game can be frustrating, I realize, but that isn't some mentality that harms the game.  It's people working hard to protect it.  Insistence that times change, so Armageddon should too is an argument that will likely fall on deaf ears, because what you're really saying is 'move on, hardcore armers of yore!  Make room for the new guys to have their way, it's their game now!'  It isn't you saying Arm's platform needs to change to survive, it's you saying that the old platform has failed, which it definitely has not.  It's still alive and kicking and every bit as relevant as it was, because it's been purposely kept intact through changes both good and bad.

Which leads to what Lizzie was saying, I think.  You all interpret it as 'stop suggesting changes!', where that's not it at all.  The community at large today, seems largely based on critique and arguments over the things that they feel differently about.  This is not uncommon or irrational, but it's gotten people into the mentality that there is a dire need for <this> to change NOW, or everything will crumble and fall!  Yet if I could explain to you just HOW MUCH THIS GAME HAS CHANGED, based off staff providence and player requests/feedback alike over my time here, you'd be appalled.  There was recently a clone of the game that people fucked around on, and it demonstrated some shallow amount the pace of change of the game.  So I think what Lizzie is referring to is not 'STOP CHANGING MY GAME MOTHERFUCKERS' but rather 'stop insinuating that everything is so terrible that changes are the only thing we're focused on!'.  The GDB culture has shifted in itself so much in just the past couple years because of this false sense of desperation that the game is dying.  But the culture of the GDB used to be much more of a forum about cultures, about histories, about small tweaks and about relationships and the role of this clan and that clan and whether or not this was possible or that.  Today, when you read it, it often reads as a clamor for things to be personally tailored to each of however many hundreds of players we have.  Where everyone is so intent on expressing their distaste for this or that, that we aren't even talking about the same game anymore, it's like a bunch of different empires in different minds that are constantly at war to assimilate the other ones.  It gets tiresome.  It gets more tiresome than ideas shutting down.

The game is clearly doing fine; we pick up new players, we have dedicated veterans, and we have people who have been around.  Don't be so fooled by the more vocal few; changes -are- coming.  Some of them, I'm going to hate, but you're going to love.  Some of them, I'll be a big fan of, and you will not like.  But making everything all about changes rather than appreciating what we -do- get to play in, which is the richest, most time-tested RPI in existence, can exhaust people who just want to keep playing in the same theme as the one that originally drew me here...but with bonus features!

And if I misrepresented things here, I apologize (particularly to Lizzie since I tried to swing in and vocalize a different way to say it), but c'mon.  Claiming that we have it sooooo bad right now is only true if you -want- the game to fail.  There's plenty of dissatisfaction in plenty of things, but the end point is...I'm still here because I enjoy the game.  Change is occurring at a slow, but steady pace.  It's evolving, rather than radicalizing.  And if you realize that but still feel the OP was trying to shit on you, I don't really know what to say other than you're trying really hard to be rabid.

[Miradus]

Screw lasagna. Tonight for dinner I am making ratatouille.

Except I didn't have all the ingredients so it's really just zucchini, okra, squash, chard, and mustard.

Basically everything I could pick out of the garden and throw on the wok.

ETA: C'mon, Liz. It's not about you. It's about me. And my ratatouille.

[BadSkeelz]

But when does it become too much?

Ignoring the rest of the OP (which I personally think is in the best interest of the thread), my answer to the question

"When do [changes] become too much?"

It's when the changes alter the fundamental flavor and character of the game.



As a rambly aside, I do think there's a philosophical split that this thread is only really alluding to - the idea that part of what makes Armageddon Armageddon is the harsh and unforgiving nature of the code, as well as the setting.

Personally I prefer a harsh and well-fleshed out setting with robust, intuitive, and explicit code. I wouldn't play a tabletop game where only the GM has access to the core game mechanics and only they (or anyone who's GMed in the past or has Rainman-like attention to detail) know it. I feel that kind of setup encourages abuse and divides the players between the "has code knowledge" and "has no code knowledge."  I think that's more damaging to the longterm viability of a game and community than the occasional asshat taking publicly-available code and acting on it to the point of of abuse.

If the code is clear, everyone can make a choice whether to stick to the rules or not. Abusers gain a temporary unfair advantage.

If the code is hidden from some but not all, those who know it have an innate, out-of-character unfair advantage over the rest.

[Lizzie]

Armaddict has it, and thank you for your interpretation, it was basically spot on.

Badskeelz, no it's not about the changes. It's about the CONSTANT DEMAND for changes that obscure any praise for the changes we've already experienced, or even the game itself that we already play. Read Armaddict's post. He expresses it well.

[BadSkeelz]

I thought of making a "Change Log Reaction Thread" after the RAT was closed (where people would often comment on Changes that didn't need an entire thread dedicated to the fact). Maybe I should have.

If the constant demand bothers you that much, I dunno. I don't think any of us can help you there.

We can't talk about what we're doing in the game. There's precious little discussion about what we've done in the game. Speculating about the game is the only thing open to us. Couching that speculation in terms of change-ideas is the most common and really only allowable form.

[Miradus]

I'm with BS on this one. I would much prefer the code was more transparent. Not just for my added play enjoyment but also because code is what fascinates me. Not only have I been a coder on several muds, I ran my own from the Diku base. So yeah, I like seeing what people have done with the code, and I particularly like THIS code. I hate having to piece together from guesswork what's happening. HATE IT.

As for the demand for change, it should be flattering. There are a thousand muds out there. Heck, there's 9 others in the top ten.  

If we felt this one sucked then we'd just go on to one of the others. Heck, I'm playing another one RIGHT NOW but it's what I hold in reserve when I'm waiting on a character to be approved. Arm draws me in.

Praise is not generally given but it should be accepted as written when you type "who" and see 50+ people playing.

[TheWanderer]

People put forth ideas and other people discuss them. Is this not the general premise of a discussion board?

I don't even... like, wat is this thread? Can I call it silly without being moderated? I mean, you're upset people aren't discussing things people have been discussing for twenty years and that every change doesn't have a 20 page thread to accompany it? I'm led to believe most of the things that are implemented were discussed previously, hence their implementation. Most ideas don't even become reality.

I welcome you to make a thread intended solely for praising, though.

[nauta]

I use the staff kudos tool to give staff kudos, and this includes giving positive comments on things that are working right.

I use the Code Discussion area to suggest code ideas, provide feedback on changes, or ask questions, as per the description.

Great place to suggest code ideas, provide feedback on changes, or ask questions.

If there's any confusion about the role of the 'Code Discussion' area, there's also a top-post by staff about its function here:

http://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,5.0.html

And I'm not really interested in not suggesting ideas, providing feedback on changes, or asking questions.

[Armaddict]

As I tried to elaborate...

I consider this thread to be less of a complaint about people having ideas, and more of a frustration post of ideas coming across as complaints, as well as a general air of promoting dissatisfaction rather than exploring and elaborating on cool facets of the game .The latter may sound weird to some, which is precisely why I think it's older players who know what it means.  Like I said in my above post, the 'culture' of the GDB has changed pretty drastically in regards to the overall mood of the GDB.  While posts like we're seeing today were always relatively common, they sometimes come across much more forcefully (agree with my idea or you're a shit), and aside from a few consistent posters of really good contribution (of which I am not, this is not a self-puff-piece), we don't really discuss some of the cool aspects of the game anymore like we used to.

If that sounds weird, consider it this way:  How many posts do we get like Taven's hatred post compared to posts about code changes?  How many are meant to guide players or explore roleplay, rather than try to add on another project to be worked on?

[RogueGunslinger]

Since my delicately worded post was removed I'll reiterate. I disagree entirely with the spirit of this thread.

And Armaddict if that's the true intent of the thread, it's very ironic. A complaint thread about complainers isn't really solving the problem. If it's even a problem.

How about we stop discussing the proper way to have a discussion and instead just... discuss.

[Miradus]

Discuss what? There's not a coherent theme to this thread.

[RogueGunslinger]

My whole point is this thread is the discussion of discussion. Which we don't need.

[Miradus]

Possum is the finest of the road kill meats.

Discuss.

[TheWanderer]

Rat's a better meat, but I couldn't open the cage's lock.

Heh. Get it?

[Reiloth]

No extreme is going to be the truth.

Too much change will kill the game, too little change will kill the game. I already think there's a healthy balance of 'TRADITION' and progressive change. Lizzie is an old-school Vet who is perhaps perturbed by the slew of demands for change. I can appreciate that. However, it's no different than any other era of ArmageddonMUD from what i've seen. The GDB has always been rife with it. There's also some decently worded, thoughtful ideas for how to improve the game. You can't let every suggestion get you down. Play the game, idea/bug in game for some ideas when they come up or bugs you notice. Hey, if you think of something worth discussing on the GDB, post it. Otherwise...Just play the game. Tell your friends about it. Make it a cool place to play.

[Armaddict]

And Armaddict if that's the true intent of the thread, it's very ironic. A complaint thread about complainers isn't really solving the problem. If it's even a problem.

So essentially your contribution in the thread that is complaining that people are complaining too much is to stop complaining?

Ironic indeed.

Meanwhile...I've tried to steer it to what it actually was.  Which was a push for adequate discussion and exploration and an appreciation for what we all enjoy playing, rather than what you seem to think it was when you say you disagree with the spirit of the thread, which has you thinking this is an anti-change thread.

As noted above...the spirit of the thread is not 'Stop suggesting changes!'.  It's 'Can we please stop talking about things that are bugging you and talk about cool things about the game?'

Example, even presented in terms of presenting a change:
Me talking about mages:
  --Short post saying I dislike mages and I don't want to play with them and anything that removes them is good.

Wizturbo talking about mages:
  --long, expressive post of someone with far more advancement in this knowledge than me that is exploring what their role is, how this role is being performed, whether or not this fits with the theme of the game, possible scenarios that could be changed, possible things in player mentality that could deal with addressing, and an overall provocative post that I can still readily disagree with, but his purpose isn't to force a change as much as to draw out discussion and inform the rest of us.

Which of those two would you prefer?  The first is me being bugged by something and basically asserting that my way is the best way for the game to go because me.  The second is someone well-versed in the topic, far moreso than me, who comes out with very thoughtful, and more importantly, to repeat the word, -provocative- discussion of the topic at hand.  This is not his pet peeve.  This is not an annoyance that makes him decide he will leave the game.  This is an earnest desire to improve something that doesn't quite fit.

So...I think you're misreading it in a way that's making you feel like it's an attack on change.  I would describe it as an attempt (certainly, this method was obviously not the best, but I view it as well-intentioned nevertheless) to draw people into that impassioned desire to make the game world thrive.  Not to focus on little nuances you dislike (present them as you will, this is not saying to shutup), but draw the community as a whole around what is still an incredibly fucking cool game and game world by all accounts.  We all have our gripes, but hearing about them incessantly is -exhausting-, and this unfortunately leads to that advice that I would rather we never have to say to anyone, which is 'Don't read the GDB'.  We actually tell people that.  -On- the GDB.  We acknowledge that that's what we do with the thing...so someone points that out in a thread to stop making it that way, and eloquently put...we disagree with the entire spirit of it.

[Armaddict]

But you're right.  I'll let it go.

But you wildly misconstrued what I'm pretty sure it was about and basically just tried to bully someone out of the motivation to improve the state of discussion between players by focusing less on little frustrations and code elements and more on meaningful in-depth knowledge of zalanthas AND its code.  I hope you do realize that.

[Dresan]

And Armaddict if that's the true intent of the thread, it's very ironic. A complaint thread about complainers isn't really solving the problem. If it's even a problem.

As noted above...the spirit of the thread is not 'Stop suggesting changes!'.  It's 'Can we please stop talking about things that are bugging you and talk about cool things about the game?'

Once again even if the original poster who I will hence forth call 'lizzie' stated that specifically. The answers would still be NO. As people have stated here (i think in her defense): Everyone is entitled to their opinions.

The only requirement to posting any idea is that you do it in a civil manner. The reasons you feel your idea is good and will make the game better are really up to you as part of your arguement. Again as Nauta mentioned, there is an entire section of the GDB related to this and often very easy to avoid if you don't feel like reading.

Decades ago, someone suggested they felt warriors should have backstab. They were laughed at. I like to think that person might look at the game now and think, well someone was listening. I know I do. 

[RogueGunslinger]

I think Lizzie's first post is very clear, and doesn't need explanation. I understand the desire to make everything come off reasonable, and only see the best intentions in them. Sure, there's a discussion that can happen about excess negativity and talking about the things we like instead of beating the dead horse on things we don't. That's all well and great and nobody would reasonably argue against that. But that's not what Lizzies post was about. There's no room for disagreement with "maybe we should all be nice and get along and talk about the things we like and remain positive and hopeful". So that isn't really a discussion at all.

The gist of my disagreement is this: We shouldn't be stifling good ideas and conversation about those ideas to make the GDB more positive. I don't think I've at all misconstrued Lizzies post when I say that. See:

I get it - people have ideas on stuff they'd love to see changed in the game.

But when does it become too much? I think this is why I've been so "push-backish" lately on the GDB. I see thread after thread, topic after topic, nothing but "let's change this" and "let's change that" and "let's add this" and "let's nerf that."  Much of the "here's what IS, NOW" is being lost in the "let's change/nerf/add" threads.

Just - I wish people would give it a rest for awhile, and spend more time playing what IS, and less time posting about what ISN'T.

[Reiloth]

I think Lizzie's first post is very clear, and doesn't need explanation. I understand the desire to make everything come off reasonable, and only see the best intentions in them. Sure, there's a discussion that can happen about excess negativity and talking about the things we like instead of beating the dead horse on things we don't. That's all well and great and nobody would reasonably argue against that. But that's not what Lizzies post was about. There's no room for disagreement with "maybe we should all be nice and get along and talk about the things we like and remain positive and hopeful". So that isn't really a discussion at all.

The gist of my disagreement is this: We shouldn't be stifling good ideas and conversation about those ideas to make the GDB more positive. I don't think I've at all misconstrued Lizzies post when I say that. See:

I get it - people have ideas on stuff they'd love to see changed in the game.

But when does it become too much? I think this is why I've been so "push-backish" lately on the GDB. I see thread after thread, topic after topic, nothing but "let's change this" and "let's change that" and "let's add this" and "let's nerf that."  Much of the "here's what IS, NOW" is being lost in the "let's change/nerf/add" threads.

Just - I wish people would give it a rest for awhile, and spend more time playing what IS, and less time posting about what ISN'T.

Gotta agree with my boy RGS here.

[SuchDragonWow]

Lizzie, say you're sorry/

[Reiloth]

Hah, I don't think that's necessary (nor do I think Lizzie ever would do that). I think there's appropriate sentiment on both sides of the 'argument', if we need to call it that. People are passionate about the game remaining more or less the same (or at least remaining recognizable in that fashion). People are also passionate about the game updating, changing, and shifting towards a modern era of gaming. I think there is valid truth in both of these sentiments, and only by keeping true to both passions will the game flourish.

Where I agree with RGS is there is a lot of explaining Lizzie's intentions with the OP -- I think you can read the OP and come to your own conclusions.

[Malifaxis]

I  did not read one fucking post on this thread.

When page 3 opens with little Laura posting a massive chill pill, you walk the fuck away.

Get your shit together, guys, and look at my sig.

[RogueGunslinger]

I actually understand what Armaddict is getting at and because I skipped a bunch of posts in the middle fo the thread I misconstrued him. I actually agree and am goign to put effort into being more positive, and kinder with my posts.

[Malken]

I  did not read one fucking post on this thread.

You replied to three posts on page two.

[Malifaxis]

I  did not read one fucking post on this thread.

You replied to three posts on page two.

Holy crap.

I thought I was in the thread about meatcraft.  I was wondering how meatcraft went so wrong.

Still, guys, do some shit-togethering.

I'm going to go get another drink.

[Malken]

I  did not read one fucking post on this thread.

You replied to three posts on page two.

Holy crap.

I thought I was in the thread about meatcraft.  I was wondering how meatcraft went so wrong.

Still, guys, do some shit-togethering.

I'm going to go get another drink.

So many ideas... MEADCRAFT!

[Harmless]

Didn't read all of this thread but I will say that about 90% of the recent changes to player-made clans, everything from who can pursue them, how much each step costs, the availability of NPCs, and the option of having a second character be a backup to keep the clan alive should the founder die.. ALL OF THAT is based, at least as far as I can tell, on the feedback generated on this forum.

And surprise surprise, pretty much the entirety of the changes have been welcomed and received positively. People are talking about the fact that now, elves could build a clanhall in the fucking rinth, for example, and I think what you have is a pretty obvious example of why it's good to have people suggest changes to things on a public forum.

All I can say to Lizzie's OP is it isn't your job, or anyone's job to filter through all the noise on the forum to pick the good from bad. It's also slightly stressful, I agree, to see frequent ideas suggested that you disagree with -- you feel pressured to chime in and voice your disagreement, in case the staff implement the change you don't want, I guess. But here's the thing -- this is just a game, and it's not perfect, and never will be. If a change happens that sucks, hopefully staff will be of the mind to eventually think twice on it, or revise the revision and get us back on track. Luckily there's lots of other people who are highly motivated to look through all the discussion: fresh minds and players, new staff and old staff, people with lots of time on their hands and super busy people who can just drop one good post every week. Altogether we make a community, and by definition communities are not perfectly harmonious

tl;dr, que sera

[valeria]

There's a difference between "let's all get along, be positive, never disagree, and sing songs together" and "let's have an effective discussion with effective disagreements."  Anyone who has studied persuasion, rhetoric, and argument can tell you that flipping out, throwing in a lot of straw men, jumping up and down, and waving your hands does not make an effective argument.  It actually turns people off from listening to you.  I guess if your goal is to vent and make a scene, it might work for you, but if your goal is discussion (hint: it's a discussion board) it's counterproductive.

So I'd like to see more "I disagree because X and Y" than "Your idea is stupid!  You're stupid!"  The second doesn't help anyone and certainly doesn't persuade people to your point of view.  This is a discussion board, not politics.  Shouting louder than an opponent doesn't make a point more effective.

[Reiloth]

There's a difference between "let's all get along, be positive, never disagree, and sing songs together" and "let's have an effective discussion with effective disagreements."  Anyone who has studied persuasion, rhetoric, and argument can tell you that flipping out, throwing in a lot of straw men, jumping up and down, and waving your hands does not make an effective argument.  It actually turns people off from listening to you.  I guess if your goal is to vent and make a scene, it might work for you, but if your goal is discussion (hint: it's a discussion board) it's counterproductive.

So I'd like to see more "I disagree because X and Y" than "Your idea is stupid!  You're stupid!"  The second doesn't help anyone and certainly doesn't persuade people to your point of view.  This is a discussion board, not politics.  Shouting louder than an opponent doesn't make a point more effective.

+2