Lets us vote for changes!

[Fallen_Echo]

As most people have noticed the forums are not the best places to ask for the communities opinion on certain game changes.

People tend to be toxic and salty as the dead sea and honestly that does not help the discussion.

I could point out some horrible examples of this terrible mentality but i believe thats against the rules of the forum.

My suggestion is simple, instead of listening the smallest possible minority here, DE should hold votes/fcollect feedback ingame.

When you log-in the lotus could ask you to fill a small feedback data or vote on incoming changes to decide if its needed or not.

This way the entire playerbase could access a platform where they could show their opinions. Before someone says that thats why we have forum please tell me when was the last time a big gamechanging patch came and you seen over 10 thousand players actively commenting on what should change, what is good, what is bugged?

What do you guys think?

[Husla]

Haven't seen them do a survey-esque feedback in awhile actually, then again last time they did that, they ignored the input anyways. Yes, it would be nice but the answers would be from DE themselves and we know they usually don't have good ideas and if its from players then a forum thread would be enough..

Edited April 4, 2017 by Husla

[(PSN)Magician_NG]

Mass polls usually don't end in results.

[Dhrekr]

We do vote with our actions: DE collects statistics and metrics that are perfectly representative of the playerbase feelings.

 

For instance, instead of sending an in-game question asking "do you think that the Synoid Simulor is overpowered?", they collected data about gun usage, established that the Synoid Simulor was used way too often and its mere presence was damaging weapon variety in the game, and nerfed it.

So, you see, DE listens to the masses. The masses quickly identified an overpowered weapon. DE listened and did something about it.

[YUNoJump]

The problem is that people don't always vote with the best interests of the game in mind, and they don't always make an informed vote. Ask everyone in the game "does the Telos Boltace need a change" and you won't just get "yes/no because of these informed reasons", you'll get "yes/no because some YouTuber or my buddy said so", "yes/no because enjoy a toxic playstyle", and of course your votes cast at random. We are also very limited to the actual end result of voting if we don't openly discuss what we think needs to happen.

It's safer to just detail your feedback, show your agreement with viewpoints that make sense to you, and try to be constructive. That way we avoid the application of dumb ideas like "new Saryn is useless, revert", "remove any form of power-spam prevention", and my personal favourite "there is never a good reason to nerf anything, only do buffs instead of nerfs".

[Mcl_Blue]

8 minutes ago, YUNoJump said:

The problem is that people don't always vote with the best interests of the game in mind, and they don't always make an informed vote. Ask everyone in the game "does the Telos Boltace need a change" and you won't just get "yes/no because of these informed reasons", you'll get "yes/no because some YouTuber or my buddy said so", "yes/no because enjoy a toxic playstyle", and of course your votes cast at random. We are also very limited to the actual end result of voting if we don't openly discuss what we think needs to happen.

It's safer to just detail your feedback, show your agreement with viewpoints that make sense to you, and try to be constructive. That way we avoid the application of dumb ideas like "new Saryn is useless, revert", "remove any form of power-spam prevention", and my personal favourite "there is never a good reason to nerf anything, only do buffs instead of nerfs".

This, all the way. All the upvotes to you.

[Rekkou]

The irony when someone suggest voting is that, there are usually more people against voting. So the plea for voting will be nullified by the voting itself.

[AdunSaveMe]

Democracy balance does not work.

27 minutes ago, Dhrekr said:

So, you see, DE listens to the masses. The masses quickly identified an overpowered weapon. DE listened and did something about it.

What people need to realize is that DE doesn't just do things because people say so. They do them because they want to.

[Tsukinoki]

39 minutes ago, Fallen_Echo said:

My suggestion is simple, instead of listening the smallest possible minority here, DE should hold votes/fcollect feedback ingame.

When you log-in the lotus could ask you to fill a small feedback data or vote on incoming changes to decide if its needed or not.

Sorry but a few problems with this would be crippling:
-First: How would DE be able to get actual feedback and not just random noise of people who just click the prompts randomly to make them go away and never bother them again?
-Second: How many questions would DE be realistically able to ask in a way that gets good feedback from a majority of the player-base?  I mean if you're presented with "Should X weapon be changed and if so how?" with the answers "Buff, Nerf, Don't change, Complete rework" how many people are just going to mindlessly spam "buff" or "nerf" because someone (their friends or a youtuber) said Y about weapon X?  And how many people would just click "Don't Change" because the answer they want isn't in the list?  And even if they supplied a text-box to edit good luck actually being able to parse the answers from those...

Further: DE doesn't just change things because a small minority asks for it.  They actually have in game statistics and numbers to look at.  Sure the forums when they get loud enough can prompt DE to look at something but DE doesn't just change it without looking at statistics from the entire player base.

[ashrah]

best way is  wen devs playing game like hideo kojima did in hes office..and wen notice someting is wrong just give  others devs what must be changed...

[Zeyez]

they already know how to search it, after all, they know what mods are more used, what warframes, weapons, companions... are used, our mission preferences, what kind of alerts have the best presence, the moments that we are online, how many missions we did...

 

DE don't need an poll to know what's wrong in Warframe, they need an discussion to know what's the changes they need to make and why (without any simple justifications, like: "because its my favorite weapon/warframe", "it's too weak, buff it", "i hate the way it steal my kills" or  "it could be fun if you put this")

Edited April 4, 2017 by Zeyez

[TrickshotMcGee]

43 minutes ago, Fallen_Echo said:

What do you guys think?

Gonna have to give that a strong 'No' vote. 

The vast majority of people want powercreep and uber-tier guns to exist in the game in droves. Most people would only EVER vote "yes" to weapon buffs, and that's a very big problem for balance. 

Also, I'm not sure you know precisely how development teams make changes to their games, do you? They use less player feedback and more telemetry, which in Warframe's case is the spread use of equipment that players use. If they see something is being used 10x more than everything else, then they can easily tell that it's a problem and it needs to be changed. 

Player feedback tips them off to exploits more than powercreep, anyways. They know how strong the guns in the game are. Calls for action to balance always helps, though. 

 

To put it another way; players want strong things and if we're given the option not to ever make anything weaker, do you think for a second that people won't jump on that? If we're given that much choice, then nothing would ever get nerfed or changed in ways that rub the majority the wrong way. Tonkor and Simulor never would have been changed were that a thing, and they were clearly too strong. 

Things that the community likes are not necessarily good for the game, and that's the problem with it. If the larger portion of players had a balanced game in mind then it wouldn't be an issue. However, most do not and they want Warframe to be a power trip and an easy time, and thus would simply elect to avoid changes.

[(XBOX)ATLongshot]

Frankly it doesn't matter what you, me or anyone thinks about this game. It's DE's baby, if you read a book and dislike it do you petition the author to change it?  If a movie doesn't go the way you want, do you demand changes?  Games are art, they are the creative and technical expressions of those who make them. Let them own their creation, play it if you like it, stop if you don't. 

[ChuckMaverick]

7 minutes ago, ashrah said:

best way is  wen devs playing game like hideo kojima did in hes office..and wen notice someting is wrong just give  others devs what must be changed...

Just like Steve has been doing with his Sunday streaming.

While I don't think it's the best way, it's certainly good that lead designers have hands-on experience with the players' view of the game.

[ashrah]

2 minutes ago, ChuckMaverick said:

Just like Steve has been doing with his Sunday streaming.

While I don't think it's the best way, it's certainly good that lead designers have hands-on experience with the players' view of the game.

yes its good way...every game have something better devs leave that to players have more fun...u cant perfectly balance game cz that would be boring..

[oneforsaken]

Currently DE is doing a fine job, after the introducing rivens, titania, nidus and octavia game is somewhat interesting. The thing is *at least for me: Currently there is no item (besides the vaulted ones that you can't get and it's easy. When we had void keys and stuff was more rare there was more platinum and the game was more competitive. Now when i go to play there are so many possibility but northing is "worth it" like really wroth.On the other hand New players are quite overwhelmed and i need to take up to 10 min minimum to get in squad with them and explain stuff, aka how vault runs work, why MR lock, and how general mechanics works. It's just that i feel there need to be some "Ultra Rare things" because the only Mod that is kinda like that is Condition overload everything else is nearly common, and more tutorials I'm MR 23 and there is one thing that i can't get totally that's elemental DMG it's just rocket science for me, because when i need a 2 elemental build it needs 4 mods in specific order and i take about 5-15 min to get it right.
Because since the focus and war within release i see here and there people complaining how game is not good, and they changed it like few million times i guess. But for now it's not bad, it's just warframe, you either enjoy playing it or you need to switch to hallo or whatever.

[DeMonkey]

DE = Game Developers.

General Public = Not Game Developers.

Game Developers asking non Game Developers to decide changes for them = Laughable.

[(PSN)ghinellil]

Better use common sense then pools.

[Volinus7]

Do you know that people can mass ID to vote? 

Even with time filters, are you sure that there're no multiboxers?

Edited April 4, 2017 by Volinus7

[KingOfHearts]

How many would actualy vote to make the game better, how many would just troll and how many would ask for more mindenumbing things?
I want to say that the game has to be improved in many ways without expense to anyone. Is it possible? Not likely yet there are many ways to mitigate one way or the other.

Yet DE is makeing the game easyer and easyer to play at the  expense of players who want more challengeing aspects. Yet so far i see zero crying about that.(threads with 1 or 2 pages of replays is just bs) whos gonna take that seriously?

[Xion]

1 hour ago, Fallen_Echo said:

My suggestion is simple, instead of listening the smallest possible minority here, DE should hold votes/fcollect feedback ingame.

When you log-in the lotus could ask you to fill a small feedback data or vote on incoming changes to decide if its needed or not.

This way the entire playerbase could access a platform where they could show their opinions. Before someone says that thats why we have forum please tell me when was the last time a big gamechanging patch came and you seen over 10 thousand players actively commenting on what should change, what is good, what is bugged?

Except you can't just flat out ignore the minority. Imagine if minorities in the US were constantly being ignored or oppressed. You'd just get like minded people screaming in what is effectively an echo-chamber.

You'd get too many fake votes or even half assed ones that people have made just to get the prompt to go away. It also has the problem of people with alt accounts being able to vote more than once. What's stopping me from creating 100 new accounts just to get 100 more votes?

And yes, that is what the forum is for. To discuss what's happening in the game and be able to voice their opinions. The reason most forum threads don't impact the game is because why would DE, the devs who love their baby, listen to strangers spewing nonsense changes to the game that WF doesn't need nor will it benefit the game as a whole. 

Edited April 4, 2017 by Xionyde134

[Vox_Preliator]

The thing is, people don't know what they want, or what they want is not the right decision.  When a parent tells an eight-year-old to eat their vegetables, brush their teeth, and go to bed at a reasonable hour, it's for their own good.

Plus, if you simplify things that should be discussed openly, honestly, and without judgement on an open forum into a mere yes/no vote, you end up making no progress.  Maybe things would change, but people are not encouraged to expand their thoughts, explore other opinions, and take a chance to change their own stance.

[Fallen_Echo]

2 hours ago, Tsukinoki said:

Sorry but a few problems with this would be crippling:
-First: How would DE be able to get actual feedback and not just random noise of people who just click the prompts randomly to make them go away and never bother them again?
-Second: How many questions would DE be realistically able to ask in a way that gets good feedback from a majority of the player-base?  I mean if you're presented with "Should X weapon be changed and if so how?" with the answers "Buff, Nerf, Don't change, Complete rework" how many people are just going to mindlessly spam "buff" or "nerf" because someone (their friends or a youtuber) said Y about weapon X?  And how many people would just click "Don't Change" because the answer they want isn't in the list?  And even if they supplied a text-box to edit good luck actually being able to parse the answers from those...

Further: DE doesn't just change things because a small minority asks for it.  They actually have in game statistics and numbers to look at.  Sure the forums when they get loud enough can prompt DE to look at something but DE doesn't just change it without looking at statistics from the entire player base.

1. Reprupose the ducat kiosk for this? Place in a "timed quest" what you can activate whenever you want? Theres plenty of ways.
2. They show us what they want to change and give us a yes/no/more/less answer. For example braton prime buff, base idea is slash damage at 25 (+4) do you agree with this? Yes. No. It needs more. It needs less.

 

Sidenote you cant fix stupid, if people only vote or spam nerf X weapon here because someone told them, then you cant do anything. Also usage data only shows that a weapon is popular it shows nothing about how powerful it is.

1 hour ago, DeMonkey said:

DE = Game Developers.

General Public = Not Game Developers. Player who play this game and might leave it along with their paycheck if they are not satisfied

Game Developers asking non Game Developers to decide changes for them = Laughable.

I have seen enough games die because the game developers decided that they know better thgen the players.

 

1 hour ago, Volinus7 said:

Do you know that people can mass ID to vote? 

Even with time filters, are you sure that there're no multiboxers?

Thats simple to fix, only players above mastery rank 5 could vote and the whole voting period would last 4 days.

But even if they do how is that more different then coming up to the forums and crying for nerfs on certain weapons with multiple accounts?

1 hour ago, KingOfHearts said:

How many would actualy vote to make the game better, how many would just troll and how many would ask for more mindenumbing things?
I want to say that the game has to be improved in many ways without expense to anyone. Is it possible? Not likely yet there are many ways to mitigate one way or the other.

Yet DE is makeing the game easyer and easyer to play at the  expense of players who want more challengeing aspects. Yet so far i see zero crying about that.(threads with 1 or 2 pages of replays is just bs) whos gonna take that seriously?

See my upper comment, we cant fix stupid. If someone only makes threads to troll or vote to troll, then what could you do?

 

1 hour ago, Xionyde134 said:

Except you can't just flat out ignore the minority. Imagine if minorities in the US were constantly being ignored or oppressed. You'd just get like minded people screaming in what is effectively an echo-chamber.

You'd get too many fake votes or even half assed ones that people have made just to get the prompt to go away. It also has the problem of people with alt accounts being able to vote more than once. What's stopping me from creating 100 new accounts just to get 100 more votes?

And yes, that is what the forum is for. To discuss what's happening in the game and be able to voice their opinions. The reason most forum threads don't impact the game is because why would DE, the devs who love their baby, listen to strangers spewing nonsense changes to the game that WF doesn't need nor will it benefit the game as a whole. 

I havent ignored them, furthermore everybody who play this game is included in this voting system and not just the people who came here.

 

2 hours ago, TrickshotMcGee said:

Gonna have to give that a strong 'No' vote. 

The vast majority of people want powercreep and uber-tier guns to exist in the game in droves. Most people would only EVER vote "yes" to weapon buffs, and that's a very big problem for balance. 

Also, I'm not sure you know precisely how development teams make changes to their games, do you? They use less player feedback and more telemetry, which in Warframe's case is the spread use of equipment that players use. If they see something is being used 10x more than everything else, then they can easily tell that it's a problem and it needs to be changed. 

Player feedback tips them off to exploits more than powercreep, anyways. They know how strong the guns in the game are. Calls for action to balance always helps, though. 

 

To put it another way; players want strong things and if we're given the option not to ever make anything weaker, do you think for a second that people won't jump on that? If we're given that much choice, then nothing would ever get nerfed or changed in ways that rub the majority the wrong way. Tonkor and Simulor never would have been changed were that a thing, and they were clearly too strong. 

Things that the community likes are not necessarily good for the game, and that's the problem with it. If the larger portion of players had a balanced game in mind then it wouldn't be an issue. However, most do not and they want Warframe to be a power trip and an easy time, and thus would simply elect to avoid changes.

According to this using the carrier is a gamebreaking issue, since its the most used companion.

Also they dont have to blindly ask the players what needs buffs. They could use up their usage data, find underused gear and held a vote on which one of its stats should grow by the amount they want and just after that they apply the desired changes.

[Volinus7]

30 minutes ago, Fallen_Echo said:

Thats simple to fix, only players above mastery rank 5 could vote and the whole voting period would last 4 days.

But even if they do how is that more different then coming up to the forums and crying for nerfs on certain weapons with multiple accounts?

You admitted that it's not different.

There're quite a few posts demanded voting before, do you really think they will do it? 

They ignored even the most logical thing like parallel PTR in which everyone can compare old/new before/after of each important change prior to full implementation.

Keep on pressing then. [even I think it'll be ignored and buried like other threads]

[Fallen_Echo]

14 minutes ago, Volinus7 said:

You admitted that it's not different. The difference is its harder and more time-consuming to create and level multiple accounts to rank5 than creating multiple forum accounts.

There're quite a few posts demanded voting before, do you really think they will do it? 

They ignored even the most logical thing like parallel PTR in which everyone can compare old/new before/after of each important change prior to full implementation.

Keep on pressing then. [even I think it'll be ignored and buried like other threads]

Well honestly what else could i do? I keep pressing and hope for a change.