Give dev's a break!!!

... and Ironclad ...

FYI, Stardock officers are not your « dev's » of the SINS game : IRONCLAD designers & programmers are !

Stardock is the (very, very involved) American « producer » of the game :
the « development » is done by Canadian Ironclad.

For example, Stardock's « Frogboy » is the genius behind the A.I. programming of Galactic Civilizations (1 & 2) ... but in what concerns SINS, the A.I. coding is done by Ironclad.

Thanks for a great game, Ironclad & Stardock.   

Unfortunately I have to agree with the topic. Most of the changes in v1.03 were a direct result of the feedback on these forums. It did wreck the balance of the game, and that's as much a lesson for the fans as it is for the developers.

I read an interview with a well-known game designer once (I forget his name), where he said: Always listen to your fan base, but not too closely, because they don't really know how to make good games.

Over the years of seeing a lot of, let's say, unpopular patches, or numerous complaints about a particular change in an otherwise okay patch... what I've learned is that when it comes to changes, a developer ought to be conservative. Still, the user base does often make valid points about things that should to be different, and shouldn't be disregarded. So, if the developers make changes that are midway between what the game currently is, and what people are asking for, and err on the side of being conservative, that usually results in a good patch. (i.e. if everyone complains unit x is OP and it's damage should be cut in half, then maybe cut it by an eighth, or at most a quarter.) In small evolutionary steps does one arrive at perfection. Also, I think that units generally should stick to the designers original vision as much as possible. If it's meant to be a kick ass unit it shouldn't be damage nerfed, but rather it's cost or production time or research requirements should be adjusted instead, but not the unit itself. My .02.

@ Eilarais

My bad sorry. Put Ironclad in the main post lol.

I don't' know which of us said we wanted badly nerfed illuminators(besides the newbies) or who said they wanted these market prices so cheap and the credit:resource prices be 3:1 not the 3:2 we had before.

You perhaps meant, rather, @ Sorceresss :
Eilarais was not the one who informed you of Ironclad's role.

Now, I can't edit my reply #1, so it seems a little odd after you edited your OP. Not a big deal.

I liked the siege frigs before all the tweaks, but noooooo, nobody could figure out how to handle them so they bitched for the nerf bat. Now they got it. Now the siege frigs are all but useless. Guess what.. Peeps are bitching about that now too. This isnt the only thing that got messed up due to bitching. There really hasn't been a single useful post on these boards since the beta's. Which is why the original beta/gamma testers dont bother to reply anymore. There is nothing worth replying to. These boards just became like the sup com forums with nothing but post with bitching, whining, and complaining. Instead of the useful feedback during the beta days.

If Sins sucked so bad i seriously doubt it would be getting the reviews it is getting now.

I agree.. dev's should listen to the fan base, but only to a point.

For the fans.. Be careful what you bitch for... You just might get it.

Hey, everyone else ruined this patch. I submitted useful things based on my opinion and screamed and screamed since I knew they were right! Shame on you all.

Perhaps a thread stating suggestions with a disclaimer at the top stating all non useful post will be deleted. That way we won't have to read all the rest of the garbage posts going on.

There is good feedback and bad. Lately. It just seems like the forums are being attacked by 15 year olds with nothing better to do.

In the end. We all want this game to be great. I think people have forgotten that and are only wanting their way. Ironclad and Stardock are game designers who are trying to do something different with their company. Actually listen to their customers. The respect they are getting now is undeserved. I think if things keep going this way. Game developers all over will start thinking Stardock made a mistake and will never listen to anyone.

Message to the Players out there. DON'T abuse the fact that Ironclad and Stardock listen.

No one asked for it, but no one considered whether it would have to be done in order to accommodate their suggestions. That's why you can't achieve design by consensus, and every RTS game forgets this at some point. You end up with DoW every time. (Off topic here, go see The Pentagon Wars sometime, it's a fantastic movie.)

Suggestion for devs: Warcraft 3 tackled the problem the right way by keeping completely separate sets of data for SP and MP. This way the hardcore MP crowd can drive development of one set and you can focus on the other.

The people crying about LRMs and Siege frigates are why we're in this mess. The black market change blame for that lies solely on the Devs.

"Stop Criticizing".

The problem with this is that it is hypocritical. And hence, nobody can take it seriously.

Is it unpleasant when fans are overly harsh? Yes.
Will a thread like this inspire the current generation of fans to clean up their act? I don't think so.

.....

Blame the fans for the patch? That really belittles the judgment of Ironclad. It is their choice, their code, and their job (to whatever extent they want) to weigh the pros and cons of changes to their product. We fans have as much of a role in that as Ironclad want, not as much as we want, or claim to want. It is necessarily always in the hands of the developer to weigh these concerns. When you blame the fans for making changes to the code you have emasculated Ironclad and put a gun in the hand of an infant. Clearly you are mistaken.

Pressure by fans can be tough to deal with, but it is impossible to expect fans to understand the code. It isn't open source. All we can do is make suggestions, comment on our experience of the game, and hope solutions are implementable.

If posts are rude, they may still contain data on experience that is useful. A mature developer will simply ignore the bad and take the good. Nothing one can do with someone being angry or snobbish or otherwise irrational about their feedback. But it is still feedback.

I've seen a few gaming communities mature over the years, and there are things that do lead to polite and/or constructive communities. Rules, example-setting, and a high population of people not enticed by trolling come to mind. Scolding people for scolding other people does not. That plays into the drama-drive of the trolls, and as I said, is hypocritical.

Would you guys prefer they not listen to anyone at all?
That is all I can see coming from constant complaints and no suggestions.

The code is as open source as it comes. all you need to read it is notepad.

lol ppl dont understand what a great steady wonderful game IC and stardock released..

u wanna see major fuck ups? go play et-qw or frontlines fuel of war u will come back to this forum and kiss the toes of IC and stardock...

try and find a game on frontlines...the list refresh takes about 15 min and u cannot stop it unless u unplugg ur computer, and most of the servers dont even show up on the list...why? nobody knows.

try and post bugs on thier forums nobody gives a shit the devs arent there to read it at all...

so stop whining about 1.03 i'm sure the devs will improve , the fact that they actualy read the forums is enough to shut all the whiners up.

its like rich ppl bitching they have only 3 cars....

Okay so it was the devs fault for listening to the whiny babies. But without the whiny babies I gaurantee it wouldn't have been changed was the point. People need to take some responsibility for themselves and not just blame the devs alone. I respect the devs and what they've done - up to this patch. For different reasons. But that's my stance. It's still a great game, but to many of us, this patch was a step backwards except for the AI (Though the save game AI and player controlling the same team was definately a step backwards )

Damn lol srry meant u Sorceresss, dont know why i put Eilarais.Sorry

I see, so how are you going to get people to only give feedback and suggestions that fully anticipate the effects of their suggested changes again?

Frankly, direct posts, even critical ones, are a better signal that it isn't the fan's job to fully understand the implications of their suggestions, nor take responsibility for the product balance (unless you're making a mod, eh?).

Besides,

Is it not true that siege frigates needed some lovin'?

Is it not true that LRMs needed some balancing?

Is it not true that players mostly honestly represented themselves and their experiences?

I really don't see how one can blame the fans here at all, without belittling Ironclad (by assuming that they have no capacity for judgment and just do what the fans suggest). I'd rather simply say: "I don't like the patch Ironclad, and here's why". I think they can take it (or choose not to), and its the plain truth.

I mean, why blame at all? Product --> Consumer --> Feedback --> Maybe some changes, if the Devs want --> New Product. No...Big...Deal. Trying to fault fans for reporting their experience is unproductive I think.

I don't know what this word 'blame' means that I keep reading. The point is that the patch process could be a lot smoother if fans brought more focus into the process. Ideally, I'd like to see forum work out proposed changes among themselves and submit official requests through either modding teams or the forum moderators.