Guns Of Icarus Online
Info => Feedback and Suggestions => Topic started by: xXxYoloSwagNoScopexX on December 31, 2016, 10:20:57 pm
-
Hi everyone, this is YoloSwagNoScope here with some sage advice. Better put on your thinking caps and fasten your seatbelts, becuase this is gonna be one hell of a ride!
As we "all know" glares at devs it takes an engaged and diligent group of hard workers to make a game succeed. From bug testing to 3d modeling to client support to well, you get the idea. But very recently for over a year this game has been struggling. Now, I'm not going to point fingers here on whats to blame, as that would break this lovery facade of sarcastic caring, no, ill just let you use your imagination on that one. But for your convenience, ill add this wonderful diagram.
People like diagrams. They make the people making them feel smart, and the people reading them feel informed.
(https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/245005518202994688/264950534958481408/pro_list.PNG)
While i put that super duper list together, i cant quite understand what it means... It's almost as if we the end users are getting screwed over by money hungry developers who only care about sales numbers. Maybe, just maybe, we can fix this. We just need to seize the memes/means of sales. Because quite frankly i like skirmish mode. Well like theres only so many shit patches one can take. Here's what if propose.
(Spoiler Alert! its another diagram!)
(https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/245005518202994688/264955211355914240/list2.PNG)
Tl;DR
Muse is too fixated on alliance to care about us in skirmish, hold alliance sales hostage and get their attention.
inb4 mod takes this down: None of the Forum Rules, nor the Community Guidelines were broken in this masterstroke of a post. This is simply a suggested course of action to the community.
I use community vaguely here, as there's so few of us left.
-
o7 Well said soldier. I doubt change will come until Alliance is a full release and it may be too late by then. Hopefully this game can last long enough for focus to be switched to Skimrish Mode.
-
I agree with the jist if not the tone of the OP.
But, to be fair, we did get the mine launcher and the minotaur cannon, the mobula, skyball made a late appearance and now #adaptthemaps is getting some traction.
It does seem like the core community and the devs are not on the same page when it comes to skirmish mode, however, as the above things added get little follow-up from the devs when the long-term feedback rolls in. The attention the community is getting with #adaptthemaps is the quick-feedback-to-communication-to-action that is nice to see. The only thing that I consider really stellar and got the attention it needed after-release is the mobula.
Now, I hope at least some of the alliance content can be ported to Skirmish. Such as VIP ships being the alliance ships, or the heavy mine launcher being added as a heavy gun.
-
While there is nothing wrong with this post, I feel like there's a little too much salt and pepper in the dish. So far, very little has been done in Alliance for quite some time, this is coming from someone who has been testing alliance for a year and a half. The latest focuses have been:
1). New UI for future Console Support and overall its not that bad, they're improving it (new Profile Pictures were recently added along with a few other interface changes [Still need to work on the button actions... you need to hit the centre of any button to get it to work])
2). New Weapons have been added, they're delightful in some aspects and there have been suggestions within the most recent Fireside Chat to potentially experiment with their usage in Skirmish (Praise Photos, I want that grenade launcher to kill those infernal *£!@#$%* VETERAN METAMIDION PILOTS *cough* sorry... sidetracked.. inb4 those pilots get salty...
3). One Flowchart mentioned hats... there is a new hat! Problem Solved! 8)
4). Quite some time ago, the was a Dev Chat where they mentioned a project where you could have your own private lobbies where you can customise factors like weapons, ships and more. Im not sure whats happening with that currently that it was a feature they wanted to make. [Fully Automatic Mine Launchers anyone?]
5). Atrujedi. Do I need to say more? That guy has been doing a tonne of action to get new maps and even managed to get the devs to do a week of stat changes. Next one being focused on Spires in the new year.
6). Theres like 2 months left until release of Alliance so once it passes, we will see more Skirmish Content, They are currently working on the Yeshans and the Arashi are already in game unless they want to redesign them... [I hope not, the Brawler, Hunter and Ravager ships are EPIC!]
7). Has no one seen the effort the design team put into the themes for all the ships? [The Valentines Theme has little bird / children sized cages on it! pretty cool!]
I think I have made a few points but overall, while I agree there has not been much Skirmish content, they is still a lot of work being done behind closed doors
-
Not arguing with you the Mann, just going to comment further about the points you raised.
While there is nothing wrong with this post, I feel like there's a little too much salt and pepper in the dish. So far, very little has been done in Alliance for quite some time, this is coming from someone who has been testing alliance for a year and a half. The latest focuses have been:
A little salt, sure, but OTOH this community by now is the die-hards that just refuse to let this game die. A consistent population of 100-300 players four years on an indie multiplayer-only game is nothing to sneeze at. I think it's less salt and a bit of resignation, as many of the old vets and active clans are completely gone. I enjoyed watching the glowater thralls, and briefly tried my hand in competitive as a duck. Those two clans are buried by the dunes by now.
2). New Weapons have been added, they're delightful in some aspects and there have been suggestions within the most recent Fireside Chat to potentially experiment with their usage in Skirmish (Praise Photos, I want that grenade launcher to kill those infernal *£!@#$%* VETERAN METAMIDION PILOTS *cough* sorry... sidetracked.. inb4 those pilots get salty...
YES! I was pleasantly surprised by the heavy mine launcher. It genuinely felt that it was balanced enough to belong in skirmish and was well balanced in comparison to the other heavy guns.
6). Theres like 2 months left until release of Alliance so once it passes, we will see more Skirmish Content, They are currently working on the Yeshans and the Arashi are already in game unless they want to redesign them... [I hope not, the Brawler, Hunter and Ravager ships are EPIC!]
Here's to hoping, but in the orignial kickstarter, the dev's overall vision of the game isn't a well-balanced, teamwork-based skirmish moba. It's a open-world teamwork-based MMO? Nothing really like it.
Still, they did do an excellent job on balancing the skirmish mode. So being good at developing one type of game doesn't preclude one from developing another. The problem is that these goals conflict to a certain extent. Ships that must fend off four NPC ships at once are going to be a little higher on the power-curve than ships balanced for 1v1. Still, i think that the new ships can be usable in skirmish under the right ruleset (alliance ships as the VIP in VIP-mode, anyone?)
7). Has no one seen the effort the design team put into the themes for all the ships? [The Valentines Theme has little bird / children sized cages on it! pretty cool!]
Furthermore, the pricing on cosmetics is really fair, and the steam workshop is a good idea and gives a lot of good cosmetics.
I think I have made a few points but overall, while I agree there has not been much Skirmish content, they is still a lot of work being done behind closed doors
Yeah, but I think there may be a feeling of dread among some of the vets. I, for one, am worried that alliance will split the community and divide the small player-base into two smaller sections. I'm also worried that the skirmish mode I've come to really enjoy will be forgotten entirely for the sake of alliance mode. I think that's where this worry comes from. We'll see once alliance launches.
This past year and a half it's been a kind of a spiral. The devs laser-focus on alliance, so the vets feel like their skirmish feedback is ignored. So the vets offer less skirmish feedback. The devs hone their focus on alliance because less feedback is coming in for skirmish. So, the skirmish-feedbackers feel ignored and offer less feedback, causing the devs to continue focusing on alliance because no news is good news for skirmish, and on and on it goes.
-
1). New UI for future Console Support and overall its not that bad, they're improving it (new Profile Pictures were recently added along with a few other interface changes [Still need to work on the button actions... you need to hit the centre of any button to get it to work])
I think we've made it very clear we could care less about UI and as Swag Yolo has been saying its not a real change to the game. Nothing is actually being contributed.
7). Has no one seen the effort the design team put into the themes for all the ships? [The Valentines Theme has little bird / children sized cages on it! pretty cool!]
One theme from a few years ago is not only just another cosmetic we don't care about but its also from a few years ago. Uninterested.
2). New Weapons have been added, they're delightful in some aspects and there have been suggestions within the most recent Fireside Chat to potentially experiment with their usage in Skirmish (Praise Photos, I want that grenade launcher to kill those infernal *£!@#$%* VETERAN METAMIDION PILOTS *cough* sorry... sidetracked.. inb4 those pilots get salty...
New weapons don't matter to us unless theyre actually implemented in skirmish. Idle chatter has been happening for years but nothing ever gets done. A dev mentioning the possibility of a new gun holds no weight at this point among the community. We've heard things like this before and nothing new ever comes, they just play with mobula gun arcs and call it a day.
I love this game and i'll play it till its dead. I'd just rather it die later rather than sooner. Please do something real to skirmish.
-
inb4 mod takes this down: None of the Forum Rules, nor the Community Guidelines were broken in this masterstroke of a post. This is simply a suggested course of action to the community.
"money hungry developers who only care about sales numbers"
"my hope is for this to devolve into a flame war and just be a toxic mess*"
Code of Conduct #2 Harassment: No insults..harass[ment]..intimidating or threatening [behavior]...or engaging in other activities intended or likely to cause disruption
Community guidelines say lot about things not being able to be threatening which this posts nature seems quite well to be.
also this violates number 3 Intolerance, as it seems rather intolerant of a certain group of people :/
shit
#1 Profanity...
also the Community Standards state: "Children under 13 years of age should not play Guns of Icarus Online." so like yeah. I think you were wrong about the not violating community guidelines part. but who knows
*Now, I'm not going to point fingers here on who said this quote, as that would break this lovely facade of sarcastic innocence, no, ill just let you use your imagination on that one ;) [lol see how I said what u said but a little differently right there, glares at YoloSwag (golly i did it again)]
-
Hey guys,
Just wanted to hop in.
No plans to take down this thread. Do I like the idea of people trying to use Steam's Review system to attempt to hold us hostage? Of course not, but if you feel like the state of this game is not worth the money or you didn't get value out of it, you get to leave that review.
The big thing is we have to make a new product. Guns of Icarus is 4 years old and to keep our doors open, we have to continue to produce new things to sell (not to mention to fulfill the kickstarter where we promised the things we're making.) This does mean that Skirmish content is not first as we finish up Alliance, upon its release though both products will be combined for new purchases (and a price increase.) Which means we get to support alliance and a new product by supporting skirmish again and we won't have trying to get alliance stuff just working in the way (retrieve glitch runs, broken world stuff, crazy UI bugs or anything)
That being said, I would like to give a big thanks to the #adaptthemaps movement for a couple reasons. It gave a unified idea of what a large amount of the playerbase wanted and very importantly it took into account development time. I'm sure everyone who supported #adaptthemaps also has 100 other things they'd like to see in the game (we do as well!) but #adaptthemaps is an obviously easier thing to do. Allowing us to do a couple every patch providing content people we know will care about (because of the mass of emails) and doesn't demand a massive split of attention.
-
Stuf he sayd.
Ur the raisin people cant hav ea good conversion.
-
I was going to make a flowchart of people buying the game on sale and getting their full monies worth, then demanding more value and winging when they don't get exactly what they want....
But I won't. Instead, I will say this:
There is nothing wrong with Skirmish to fix, other than bugs that pop up. Report them, then report them again. But we all know that is not what you mean. You don't mean "Muse, fix these bugs or we will boycott you." You mean "Make the game PLAY the way I want it, or I will try to take your entire livelihood down."
Stop and think for a moment about that. You are willing to potentially destroy an entire business because a game does not play the way you want it.
Personally, I like the way it plays right now. I liked the way it played before. And from what I have seen, I am liking (mostly, looking at you Retrieve) what Alliance will be bringing, as well as what will bleed into Skirmish. There are a lot of things I don't like as well, but there are much better ways of going about making changes that will actually make changed without poisoning the dev/player relationship.
This chart you have made is poison. Pure, toxic, poison. If this little plan actually came together, the dev/player relationship would be destroyed in in irreparable way. Right now, even though you don't seem to see it, the devs care very much about what people think. They don't always agree, but they care. You think this is about money? Any one of them could easily get an industry job making a ton more cash. I know for a fact that they turned down some monetary things in the game to stay true to their vision.
About that feedback for changes that "everyone wants". That is naive. I have one of the strongest voices in this community, and I am often at odds with others with just as valid an opinion on how the game should play. There is no "everyone wants". Who should the devs side with in your rebellion? Which 'everybody' do they go with? The ones that have the highest number of negative reviews?
I want more KotH maps. Others hate KotH. I like 3v3. Others think 3v3 and 4v4 should be removed. The list goes on.
Tantrums will not help anyone.
-
Am I one of the few people with an embarrassing amount of hours on this game that think its fine? Like, fine as is? The devs could literally not do anything to skirmish mode and I would still log a stupid amount of time into skirmish mode. Perhaps there are many of us, but we are content so normally don't complain very often unless we ate too much salt for the day.
My only legitimate request is more maps for skirmish and alliance. I don't necessarily even want new maps. Just take the maps that already exist and convert them for 2v2, 3v3, and 4v4 by altering the borders and spawns or whatever (for all game modes).
Also, be nice if the playerbase grew a tid more. I hope Alliance helps with the initial shock of the mechanics of this game. It is less cumbersome to teach a player (and for a player to learn) in a co-op environment compared to pvp.
-
I will unfortunately always log a stupid amount of hours in this game. I hate myself for it. Because I'm tired of the endless glitches each patch, beta, or w/e that keep popping up. The ladder gltich currently makes me wanna walk my own plank. What really irks me though, is why I have to convince new players these glitches they experience on the ships have to be overlooked. I keep having a harder time explaining why Muse hasnt fixed these same bugs for months/years and exactly why Alliance is a priority over Skirmish. I don't want to inadvertently excuse the devs for this stuff to new people but yet forced to if I don't want to turn people off of the game thus decreasing player base.
Endless vicious cycle.
-
Greetings guys, just wanted to say that the whole PLRS clan has stopped playing because the skirmish had no real content updates since the implementation of Hades. The repurposing 4x4 maps for 2x2 does not count and new gamemodes are ridiculous. We see a lot of great ships and guns in Alliance all of which can be ported to Skirmish after some readjustments and I don't know why you Muse people refusing to do so. The game is almost dead today and I can't see a way out without a real content boost. Alliance definetely will not save the day and I doubt that it was worth it to kill Skirmish for it.
-
Greetings guys, just wanted to say that the whole PLRS clan has stopped playing because the skirmish had no real content updates since the implementation of Hades. The repurposing 4x4 maps for 2x2 does not count and new gamemodes are ridiculous. We see a lot of great ships and guns in Alliance all of which can be ported to Skirmish after some readjustments and I don't know why you Muse people refusing to do so. The game is almost dead today and I can't see a way out without a real content boost. Alliance definetely will not save the day and I doubt that it was worth it to kill Skirmish for it.
^
echoes a lot of vet clans
-
There is nothing wrong with Skirmish to fix, other than bugs that pop up. Report them, then report them again. But we all know that is not what you mean. You don't mean "Muse, fix these bugs or we will boycott you." You mean "Make the game PLAY the way I want it, or I will try to take your entire livelihood down."
Stop and think for a moment about that. You are willing to potentially destroy an entire business because a game does not play the way you want it.
Yeah, that's how a free market works. Companies with better products have failed because they tell people what they want instead of giving them what they want. You cannot be successful in a competitive market by constantly saying 'YOU CAN'T HAVE THAT, WE DON'T LIKE IT". If a company is unwilling to give into consumer demand they deserve to fail.
We have no obligation to support Muse, by the very nature of us being their customers they are obligated to serve us. They forget that to their own peril.
-
You, I and the clans are no longer the consumer base. We are the old fogies yelling at kids to get off our lawns, when we are sitting in a public park. How you want the game to play does not matter, unless it is representative of the main flow of income. Muses focus has to be on attracting more players and keeping the larger part of those, not on satisfying the old salts. They need to figure out what those players want. I doubt if the OP is that altruistic.
That is how business works.
-
No, a game like this is dependent on having a regular player base online. If people buy the game and find 25 people online at any given time the game will fail. Muse's problem is not getting people to buy the game, its getting people to stick with the game. The only way to do that is new content and catering to the people who do stick around.
-
The Steam forum is flooded with questions if it's worth buying, and low player base is the overwhelming reason cited. It's important to attract new players, but it's equally important to retain regular players - many of whom quit and wrote negative reviews after incidents like 1.4.5
-
Remind me, what was going on with 1.4.5, now that you mention that? Feel like I missed something.
-
Remind me, what was going on with 1.4.5, now that you mention that? Feel like I missed something.
loch was ruined?
-
Testing for 1.4.5 occurred over an unprecedented three weeks, with each week met by unanimous negative feedback about two topics in particular: mobula gun arcs and the changes to loch. After the feedback, the mob nerf was increased and loch was made more unbalanced. The release of 1.4.5 showed a complete disregard of player feedback and lack of game knowledge
To be clear, there's an important difference between a bad change and a broken change. Remember the contentious pyra nerf? Truth was, the pyra needed a nerf in pub matches. The forthcoming change was too harsh and took way too long to be addressed, but there was at least a modicum of thought behind it. The mobula gun arc nerf was asinine and broken. It had no effect on the meta, hades art/banshee, and only hurt non-meta builds and pub players whose 50 degree bottom guns no longer worked. Similarly, loch was changed so that it deals higher dps than greased on some guns, and is useless on all heavy weapons - where it was previously vital
Muse was well aware of all these facts as they were flooded with feedback from the three weeks of testing the same failed changes. There were plenty of good alternatives offered for the mob and loch, but week after week nothing changed. I'm unaware of any other patch that took three weeks of testing, or was so overwhelmingly negative
-
Hmmmm, thanks. Recently I'm slightly out of touch and kind of lost the grip on updates.
-
Testing for 1.4.5 occurred over an unprecedented three weeks, with each week met by unanimous negative feedback about two topics in particular: mobula gun arcs and the changes to loch. After the feedback, the mob nerf was increased and loch was made more unbalanced. The release of 1.4.5 showed a complete disregard of player feedback and lack of game knowledge
To be clear, there's an important difference between a bad change and a broken change. Remember the contentious pyra nerf? Truth was, the pyra needed a nerf in pub matches. The forthcoming change was too harsh and took way too long to be addressed, but there was at least a modicum of thought behind it. The mobula gun arc nerf was asinine and broken. It had no effect on the meta, hades art/banshee, and only hurt non-meta builds and pub players whose 50 degree bottom guns no longer worked. Similarly, loch was changed so that it deals higher dps than greased on some guns, and is useless on all heavy weapons - where it was previously vital
Muse was well aware of all these facts as they were flooded with feedback from the three weeks of testing the same failed changes. There were plenty of good alternatives offered for the mob and loch, but week after week nothing changed. I'm unaware of any other patch that took three weeks of testing, or was so overwhelmingly negative
So freaking depressing, and I know I'm a broken record, but I'll take any opportunity to post about how I'd revitalize Skirmish (https://gunsoficarus.com/community/forum/index.php/topic,7462.msg132602.html#msg132602).
-
Half the problem with the loch testing was that the third week was just testing the second weeks changes again after they forgot to actually put the latest changes into the dev app (the testing notes had the stats for what was put into main, but it wasn't actually in the dev app for testing). The final changes didn't get tested, at least not on the saturday when I can make it. Even then it wouldn't have taken 10 minutes of math (2 with a spread sheet pre built) to see that loch gatling with only -40% ammo was enough to make galleon armor look like tissue paper. Instead they found that out in the main game and put out a hotfix putting it down to -60% and ruining it for all the other guns it had become useful for while only moderating the stupidity of loch gatling.
-
This topic is filled with a lot of things. I read this forum a lot but I hardly ever post ¬_¬
That loch change was fucking awesome. Killing galleons in one clip with a gat mortar pyra was sweet as shit. Prolly OP but pretty entertaining.
There was a hotfix to alter it.
I do remember a big fuss about the devs stating they would not release the exact stat numbers to the changes they were testing to try to keep the testing neutral or whatever. That shit is stupid. How do you know what to test? With a playerbase of about 30 people testing, how the shit do you expect them to test what you have changed with so many damn variables in this game?
That was my only gripe with testing. . .
No other game has blind testing. It makes sense on paper but makes no sense in execution - especially with only about 15 people testing the game.
My other gripe with the entire controversy on the balance change was that only about 10 people were posting feedback on the forum.
I wish I knew how many people emailed them during testing. Probably like 5.
Honestly the biggest problem with this game is that there is only like 1 player that influences the devs decisions on content and balance changes.
-
That loch change was fucking awesome. Killing galleons in one clip with a gat mortar pyra was sweet as shit. Prolly OP but pretty entertaining.
That's not a good thing. Buffed greased can already one-clip buffed galleon armor while being repaired with mallet. There's a tentative agreement among vets not to use loch in matches, and I've seen players called out for using it. It's objectively broken
-
This topic is filled with a lot of things. I read this forum a lot but I hardly ever post ¬_¬
That loch change was fucking awesome. Killing galleons in one clip with a gat mortar pyra was sweet as shit. Prolly OP but pretty entertaining.
There was a hotfix to alter it.
I do remember a big fuss about the devs stating they would not release the exact stat numbers to the changes they were testing to try to keep the testing neutral or whatever. That shit is stupid. How do you know what to test? With a playerbase of about 30 people testing, how the shit do you expect them to test what you have changed with so many damn variables in this game?
That was my only gripe with testing. . .
No other game has blind testing. It makes sense on paper but makes no sense in execution - especially with only about 15 people testing the game.
My other gripe with the entire controversy on the balance change was that only about 10 people were posting feedback on the forum.
I wish I knew how many people emailed them during testing. Probably like 5.
Honestly the biggest problem with this game is that there is only like 1 player that influences the devs decisions on content and balance changes.
Comon man, that's not true. Eric does whatever he wants with balance. I doubt Eric even listens to what Howard says.
Oh and the blind testing thing is an Eric thing. Right before he quit the forums, he got really, really nasty about feedback and decided to make it all blind testing. It's been that way ever since.
-
Eric does whatever he wants with balance.
You know I ever once asked in a fireside: "how do you guys (i.e. Muse) make balance changes?". The exact answer I got (from Eric): "gut feel." Sadly, the intricacies of competitive balance is lost on them.
Can't fault them for making a game they enjoy. Can give them a negative review though. :D
-
"Not recommended for people that expect to get more than a few years and thousands of hours of enjoyment out of the game. 1/10. Would only buy again for the first few thousands of hours. After that, its a slog."
-
skirmish is not finished.
You won't get high retention until it is.
Instead muse releases dlc that is entirely different but in a state of even more disrepair than the base game since all the work went into the new content (that no one asked for btw-you'd think the failed kickstarter is kind of a hint).
This is the core of the issue. The logic behind this is insane, because to make a new broken game instead of taking the time fix your decent one with FORUMS UPON FORUMS OF SOLUTIONS GIVEN TO FIX THE DAMN THING...
it makes no sense to just redo everything into another broken game mode.