Lack of player input on changes

For feedback on the game code and design. Feedback on server rules and playstyle belong in Policy Discussion.
User avatar
Steelpoint
Github User
Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2014 6:37 pm
Byond Username: Steelpoint
Github Username: Steelpoint
Location: The Armoury

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by Steelpoint » #65246

Bottom post of the previous page:

Miauw wrote:yeah i mean the players said that all coders are literally hitler and that they want us all to go fuck off in a hole on page 1 so what else is there to discuss right
To be fair Miauw the fourth then eighth post in this thread was from HG saying that the Codebase and Playerbase are separate and nothing we say can change that.

So what did we expect people to say after that?
Image
Miauw
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2014 11:23 am
Byond Username: Miauw62

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by Miauw » #65249

i just prefer people not to put words into my mouth.
<wb> For one, the spaghetti is killing me. It's everywhere in food code, and makes it harder to clean those up.
<Tobba> I stared into BYOND and it farted
User avatar
cedarbridge
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 12:24 am
Byond Username: Cedarbridge

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by cedarbridge » #65331

Not-Dorsidarf wrote:forking the codebase will Not Work(tm).

We tried it.

it was fun as hell.

Results are in: The codebase on the less-popular server will die.
Forking to run two different codebases again was never suggested. IIRC Hippie runs off a private fork of an older version of /tg/ code. They depend on the bus as much as /vg/ does.
User avatar
paprika
Rarely plays
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 10:20 pm
Byond Username: Paprka
Location: in down bad

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by paprika » #65963

I think a lot of people misinterpreted what HG said and instead of applying their thought process to it, got really butthurt because it confirmed what a lot of coders (namely me) have been saying all this time (which a lot of morons called a 'scapegoat' we were hiding behind)

It's not like HG is saying that /tg/ isn't the primary server that runs the /tg/station codebase. This will literally never not be the case. What HG is saying is that the player feedback of /tg/ station does not necessitate code changes at all. /tg/ coders do not work for you, we all do it for free, we code what we want, we do it as a hobby to improve the game. Nobody actively makes code changes and thinks 'hey, this will kill the server' or 'hey, this will upset the players'. This isn't the primary motivation in mind for ANY coder. Dissonance between the players in feedback forum and some coders' vision for the game does not necessitate change. Your best chance for getting changes you want are either a) doing them yourself or b) asking a coder nicely.

Why would you go to someone who volunteers their time to improve the game, act as volatile as most feedback is in this forum, and then expect any sort of change? I didn't come out of the gate swinging and neither does any coder. We don't come to feedback and go FUCK YOU PLAYERS LOL HERE'S OUR FEATURE, you guys leave shitty feedback and we respond in turn. Coderbus has standards about etiquette and tone in regards to holding some bit of professionalism, but outside of that, it's the wild west.

What I'm trying to say here is that we aren't Bioware, you didn't pay for our product and we're actively shafting you despite that. You aren't our customers, we don't have an obligation to listen to you, you're a tool for us to use to change our code should we decide to use it. But that tool needs to actually be effective at helping the progress of code and game balance instead of yelling at us for literally everything.
Oldman Robustin wrote:It's an established meme that coders don't play this game.
miggles
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 9:02 am
Byond Username: Miggles
Contact:

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by miggles » #66153

the fact of the matter is that if you want to code for fun you shouldnt do it for a large group of people because you are inevitably going to piss them off with something you do
or if you do, you listen to them
"he does it for free" is not an excuse for anything and has never been an excuse for anything, not on 4chan and not here. you shouldnt have to be paid before you will listen to your consumerbase. and that IS what it is, a consumerbase. acting blase and claiming you have no requirement to do anything for the people who play the game you help create is the exact opposite of how game design works. you need a reality check so you can realize that yes, you do have a responsibility to these people at least to some extent. if the players did not play on servers using your codebase, your code would all be for naught.
the reason people yell at you for literally everything is because they feel like you listen to literally nothing. its a symbiotic relationship. you are blaming the "tool" for your own mistakes. and it's not like you can easily replace that tool.
no, you don't have to bend over and become an input-output machine of ideas and code. but just listen when people are upset; there is a reason for it and it's probably not only because players whine about everything.
dezzmont wrote:I am one of sawrge's alt accounts
dezzmont wrote:sawrge has it right.
Connor wrote:miggles is correct though
Bombadil
Joined: Wed Apr 23, 2014 12:23 am
Byond Username: Kromgar

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by Bombadil » #66157

Paprika " i could revert goonchem, but i have too much resistance from #coderbus. a lot of people are shilling that it's better than what we used to have, and they're right"

The coder council has spoken. The plebians do not know what is best for them
Planet Station Best Station

Vote Planetstation and Kor Phaeron 2017
User avatar
Saegrimr
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2014 4:39 pm
Byond Username: Saegrimr

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by Saegrimr » #66178

Bombadil wrote:Paprika " i could revert goonchem, but i have too much resistance from #coderbus.
Because a little bit of chafe from a group of people has stopped him before, right?
tedward1337 wrote:Sae is like the racist grandad who everyone laughs at for being racist, but deep down we all know he's right.
User avatar
paprika
Rarely plays
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 10:20 pm
Byond Username: Paprka
Location: in down bad

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by paprika » #66181

Saegrimr if it's so easy why don't you take the time out of your day and the 3 hours it would take the meticulously replace every chem goonchem has replaced and readd old chems/remove new chems as well as the OD systems, etc

When the group of people giving me 'chafe' is LITERALLY ALL THE OTHER CODERS, and the HEAD CODERS AND MAINTAINERS, it's just a little hard to do this

Goof's chem is here to stay. That being said, it's a good system. Goon chem is interesting, more realistic, and fun.

The IMPLEMENTATION here is what's the problem. I'm glad goof tries to shake things up with chemistry and cooking. Some things need to be shook once in a while. But there's a difference between shaking something's shoulder to wake it up and slapping it in the face.
Oldman Robustin wrote:It's an established meme that coders don't play this game.
User avatar
Deantwo
Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2014 6:57 pm
Byond Username: Deantwo

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by Deantwo » #66203

Bombadil wrote:The plebians do not know what is best for them
Players don't like to see their power-gaming get fixed.
User avatar
Steelpoint
Github User
Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2014 6:37 pm
Byond Username: Steelpoint
Github Username: Steelpoint
Location: The Armoury

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by Steelpoint » #66204

Deantwo wrote: Players don't like to see their power-gaming get fixed.
Your insinuating the entire playerbase only cares about "power-gaming" in relation to goonchem and startrekchem, that is insulting if that's truly what you believe.
Image
Malkevin

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by Malkevin » #66209

paprika wrote:Nonesense
miggles wrote:Goodsense
Deantwo wrote:Fursense

"I do it for free" only flies for a game that you are making for yourself by yourself for yourself.

No one can complain when Toady makes a change for dwarf fortress because its a game he wants to make in his own vision, and its the type of game that he and his brother wanted to play. The fact that a lot of people also wanted to play that type of game and that they enjoy whats already there is just a fantastic bonus.
DF is Toady's game and will always be Toady's game, we play DF because we want to play Toady's game


That does not apply to SS13 because its an established game, with established communities, with established rulesets, with established playstyles, with established game mechanics.
You coming in and changing whatever you feel like only because its what you want without consulting and seeking approval beyond an incredibly small subset of people is going against the grain of the community, and thats why people get pissed off with coderbus and you - because you've got it in your head that just because you can type code that somehow makes you experts on game design and that your vision for the game is the correct one - thats called delusions of grandeur.
SS13 is not your game and it will never be your game, it belongs to the communities. We play SS13 because we want to play SS13, we don't want to play Paprika-Station or Cheridan-Station or MrPerson-Station or even Malkevin-Station or Steelpoint-Station (even though those two would be totally bitching).


If you want to do your own thing thats fine, fork the code and make your own codebase.
Whats not fine is forcing yourself on the rest of the community without hashing things out with them first, what you basically are is a leech - a parasite - thats feeding off a larger host body because you need an audience to validate your existence.
User avatar
Deantwo
Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2014 6:57 pm
Byond Username: Deantwo

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by Deantwo » #66223

Steelpoint wrote:
Deantwo wrote: Players don't like to see their power-gaming get fixed.
Your insinuating the entire playerbase only cares about "power-gaming" in relation to goonchem and startrekchem, that is insulting if that's truly what you believe.
Haven't seen complains about the hardsuit helmet change, so not all power-gaming.
But yeah I do believe it is part of the reason a few people dislike the chemistry changes.

Some of the new chemistry feature were suppose to fix power-gaming as far as I have been told.
Overdose mechanic prevents you from pumping your body full of chemicals, like for example Epinephrine (Inaprovaline) would make able to walk in oxygen-less environments without internals.
Malkevin wrote:Deantwo: Fursense
What.
User avatar
Saegrimr
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2014 4:39 pm
Byond Username: Saegrimr

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by Saegrimr » #66226

paprika wrote:Saegrimr if it's so easy why don't you take the time out of your day and the 3 hours it would take the meticulously replace every chem goonchem has replaced and readd old chems/remove new chems as well as the OD systems, etc
I never implied it was easy, just that people giving you shit in the past hasn't stopped you from pushing anything.
paprika wrote:When the group of people giving me 'chafe' is LITERALLY ALL THE OTHER CODERS, and the HEAD CODERS AND MAINTAINERS, it's just a little hard to do this
So this is "HG says no, everybody else can take a knee and start suckin" to the point even you couldn't get away with something like this.

Don't get me wrong, i'm all in support for chemistry to get something to make it less stale. This is just a half-assed attempt and MrPerson level of "B-BUT YOU'LL LIKE IT. JUST TOUGH IT OUT. I'M NOT GONNA REVERT BECAUSE :effort:"
tedward1337 wrote:Sae is like the racist grandad who everyone laughs at for being racist, but deep down we all know he's right.
soulgamer
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 9:21 am
Byond Username: Soulgamergod

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by soulgamer » #66238

If anyone at any point thought we were getting rid of goonchem when it is supported by HG then they are fucking delusional
User avatar
cedarbridge
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 12:24 am
Byond Username: Cedarbridge

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by cedarbridge » #66247

paprika wrote:<sound and fury signifying nothing>
This is pretty arrogant considering that the dependency is reversed. As previously stated, uncontested, the server needs the coders far less than the coders need the server. To even imply that the playerbase is a "tool" entirely misses the point of the relationship. The playerbase does not exist to provide feedback for you to ignore. The playerbase exists to play a game that has already existed for a time period that far exceeds your contact with it. You own nothing but your own minute modifications to the greater whole which also absorbs those changes into itself. As a coder, your privilege to modify the code for a serverbase that will actually use is granted functionally at the whim of the host and the players who use it. This was already illustrated in the very simple concept that if the server just stopped updating to the latest commit, the "project" would dry up and turn to dust. There is no project without the server to run it, and the server persists without the "project." (a bizarre term since the whole thing is entirely rudderless and without real direction in the first place.)

Its the same arrogance that people have been protesting this whole time that is reflected in your post and the infamous HG post on page one. "I do it for free" or "I'm a volunteer" assumes that intention or personal vision trumps all when thrust onto something in a community space. You cannot walk up to city hall, paint the thing red and then turn around to the angry crowd and complain that you paid for the paint and they didn't so they should just shut up or buy their own paint. Nobody cares what your intention was when the result is lousy. People doubly will not care what your intention was if your response to "We don't want this." is "Too bad, its already there deal with it." If your contributions are voluntary then there's also no obligation from the userbase to accept those changes and allow them to remain. The cumbersome nature of a change is a pretty awful excuse for why it can't be undone also. That's a failing of the code management team and not the fault of the players for not liking an overly involved change. If any change is so involved and so convoluted that it can't be rolled back when something goes wrong, or it isn't wanted, then its time to step back and figure out what your standards are for coding and data structuring.

And seriously, the "reverts are a slap in the face" thing has got to stop too. If you're so personally involved in your changes than any revert of those changes is personally insulting to you (no matter the time put into the code, literally doesn't matter), then you need to step away. If something you worked on is something that people don't want, you should have the maturity to realize that, and back off. You can volunteer all the changes you want. You cannot then turn around and obligate the players to like them and want them to stay. Pretending the response to previous cases wasn't "too late already merged lol" is just lying.
Bombadil
Joined: Wed Apr 23, 2014 12:23 am
Byond Username: Kromgar

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by Bombadil » #66261

I do it for free so the things me and my friends do is free of criticism.
Planet Station Best Station

Vote Planetstation and Kor Phaeron 2017
dezzmont
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2014 6:07 pm
Byond Username: Dezzmont

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by dezzmont » #66268

As other people have said "I do it for free" isn't an excuse and the logic that the playerbase services coderbus is outright hillarious.

But I also want to point something else out.

If it is actually too hard to remove goon chem individually, and I know for a fact it isn't hard so much as boring and involved, you have a greater problem on your hands. It would mean that in theory the only way to revert goonchem would be to revert the entire project to pre-goonchem, which would be a slap in the face to every coder who worked on something after goonchem.

But that isn't the playerbase's problem in the slightest. That is a coderbus problem and coderbus shouldn't, in this hypothethcial where we recognize that goonchem sucks but can't individually revert it, expect any sympathy from anyone over it.

Essentially what I am saying is that it is a non-argument that only really serves to make you look even less professional or compinent than you already do, because the excuse rings utterly and completely hollow. Using this as a defense reveals an actual and total lack of respect for not only the playerbase but your own craft. I am not saying you have to agree goonchem is shitty, but if your only defense is "Hard to revert" that means you need to do something to revert it.
User avatar
AnonymousNow
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 1:41 pm
Byond Username: AnonymousNow
Location: Neptune

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by AnonymousNow » #66282

Honestly, looking at the other code changes since Goonchem, I'm wondering if some things were slammed onto the server in order to add weight to the excuse of "there's more to revert due to coding done since". The longer we wait, the more difficult it's going to be to fix it.
Hornygranny wrote:It's not your codebase. It's our codebase. You can imply soft power as much as you want, but you don't have it. Division between the server and project is absolute. I'm not interested in reading dezzmont platitudes for the billionth time and won't be checking back in this thread.
Image

Image
Spoiler:
~Simplified for the sake of Wyzack's delicate feelings~
Fuck anti-roleplay suggestions and fuck Bay.

Xenomorphs a shit.
Bombadil
Joined: Wed Apr 23, 2014 12:23 am
Byond Username: Kromgar

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by Bombadil » #66287

In theory we could put a code freeze until it gets reverted. But i'm not a head coder
Planet Station Best Station

Vote Planetstation and Kor Phaeron 2017
User avatar
MisterPerson
Board Moderator
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 4:26 pm
Byond Username: MisterPerson

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by MisterPerson » #66409

I think the real crux of the issue is that some coders make changes to the game that other people don't like and they don't like it when they get ignored. That's fine, it's to be expected that everyone won't like every single change to the game. I like seeing people talk about systems that do or don't work and why they don't work. I like people talking about features in the game they think are cool and should be expanded and ones they think are shitty and detract from a fun experience. I like it when people express their opinion on what makes the game fun, what drives them bonkers, what their view of the game is, and what the game should try to be. That kind of stuff is valuable in determining what kind of game this should be.

Having said that, there is no obligation whatsoever to act on those expressions. Nobody is going to, nor should be expected to, change the game in a way that they personally dislike, no matter how many people may disagree with that decision. We're all here to make and play a game we want to play, nothing more, nothing less. That's what I'm doing, all the coders are doing, all the players who leave feedback or ideas, everyone is arrogantly trying to make the game they want to play. Why should I listen to what anyone has to say over my own opinions? If I was getting paid, sure, that'd be a good reason, but other than that? There isn't one.

I'm going to make changes I want to make, and the only thing that will stop me is leadership over the code project choosing to reject those changes. If you don't like that, tough shit frankly. You can leave all the feedback you want, I'm still free to ignore it. Of course if the leadership changes to be some sort of popular opinion-based acceptance-rejection mechanism, then yes I'd have to keep that in mind when making changes. But as of right now, if I have to choose between the opinions of others and my opinions, I'm going to go with me every time.
AnonymousNow wrote:Honestly, looking at the other code changes since Goonchem, I'm wondering if some things were slammed onto the server in order to add weight to the excuse of "there's more to revert due to coding done since". The longer we wait, the more difficult it's going to be to fix it.
Yes, -clearly- people decided to make improvements to the game to cover for goonchem and not, oh I dunno, a desire to improve the game that had no bearing with goonchem, right? Nah, that would make too much sense. It must be a CONSPIRACY! Based on your propensity to see crazy conspiracies everywhere, you must be the same sort of fool who thinks the gubment puts mind-altering chemicals in the water and reads your thoughts from microwaves.
I code for the code project and moderate the code sections of the forums.

Feedback is dumb and it doesn't matter
Alex Crimson
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 1:05 pm
Byond Username: Dazbuzz

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by Alex Crimson » #66415

What a load of rubbish. You accept positive feedback, you accept negative feedback if it helps you improve your ideas, but you reject any feedback that could result in your change being reverted. Unless it contains some kind of server-destroying bug or a headcoder forces you to, you will never back down on your precious code.

If you think that is ok, then you deserve the hate that is spewed at you.
User avatar
MisterPerson
Board Moderator
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 4:26 pm
Byond Username: MisterPerson

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by MisterPerson » #66434

Alex Crimson wrote:What a load of rubbish. You accept positive feedback, you accept negative feedback if it helps you improve your ideas, but you reject any feedback that could result in your change being reverted. Unless it contains some kind of server-destroying bug or a headcoder forces you to, you will never back down on your precious code.

If you think that is ok, then you deserve the hate that is spewed at you.
"People who disagree with me deserve to be hated!"

If Cedarbridge really wants to talk about arrogance...

Never said I wouldn't listen to feedback, I simply said that volume of feedback doesn't intrinsically mean anything. And I don't think anyone deserves "hatred". This is a game. Cool the hyperbole. Nobody "hates" anyone here. Dislike, sure, but hatred? You hate the guy who threatens your livelihood. You hate the guy who threatens your life. You hate the guy who makes your children cry. You don't hate the guy who wants to change a videogame to be different than how you want to change it.
I code for the code project and moderate the code sections of the forums.

Feedback is dumb and it doesn't matter
Alex Crimson
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 1:05 pm
Byond Username: Dazbuzz

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by Alex Crimson » #66448

Depends on how you measure hatred. I doubt anyone here seriously hates coders, but you all sure as hell deserve to be on the receiving end of all the bad attitude when you actively ignore the playerbase unless they praise your ideas.
Incomptinence
Joined: Fri May 02, 2014 3:01 am
Byond Username: Incomptinence

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by Incomptinence » #66451

MisterPerson wrote:
Yes, -clearly- people decided to make improvements to the game to cover for goonchem and not, oh I dunno, a desire to improve the game that had no bearing with goonchem, right? Nah, that would make too much sense. It must be a CONSPIRACY! Based on your propensity to see crazy conspiracies everywhere, you must be the same sort of fool who thinks the gubment puts mind-altering chemicals in the water and reads your thoughts from microwaves.
Conspiracy strawman is getting out of control. Would waiting for a while after a game change of this significance before merging other features be too difficult? Not like code goes stale if left out for a while or anything, code freezes are planned and useful it would not be much different.

I shouldn't even mention trial periods though, been so abused that it is difficult to believe such things were ever being judged instead of riding an assured permanence based off confirmation bias so strong even using the word "trial" was a total falsehood.
Incomptinence
Joined: Fri May 02, 2014 3:01 am
Byond Username: Incomptinence

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by Incomptinence » #66465

Well I know he isn't paying attention but he stated it so poorly I just had to respond partially.
User avatar
paprika
Rarely plays
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 10:20 pm
Byond Username: Paprka
Location: in down bad

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by paprika » #66466

Really though I don't necessarily blame goof for shilling like THIS FEATURE IS DONE MERGE PLS PLS ADD because honestly coding big features and then waiting months for them to get accepted means you have to make constant conflicting-code merge resolutions and it's a pain in the ass

If our current climate for coding wasn't so terrible I'm sure goof's chemistry changes would have been more polished, just saying

Though, it is goofball, and his features are really hit-or-miss with me. Cooking was really, REALLY gimmicky on NT and on /vg/, it's not even funny after the 500th DEEP FRIED BURGER LEL, cooking should require SOME effort to make robust foods and stuff.
Last edited by MisterPerson on Fri Feb 06, 2015 2:22 am, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Removed some hostile douchebaggery: Calling someone a "fucking retard".
Oldman Robustin wrote:It's an established meme that coders don't play this game.
Incomptinence
Joined: Fri May 02, 2014 3:01 am
Byond Username: Incomptinence

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by Incomptinence » #66495

Since the crew are tasteless literal cannibals I don't think effort should be required to make most foods beyond subjecting it to some form of heat, not sure how just making big meals is robust doesn't really modify the cooking <<< just bashing with extinguisher or anything dynamic.

Also the ridiculousness of hyper specific recipes where 1 unit of water can ruin every thing utterly, even stews. Specific recipes are fine for bartender where extra ingredients just sit in the glass and may not even be enough to change the name of the drink chef loses everything for the slightest variation the chemist heating up a seconds death/life pill across the road don't deal with that.
Alex Crimson
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 1:05 pm
Byond Username: Dazbuzz

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by Alex Crimson » #66501

The coding environment isnt that bad. If you code something good then you will generally get good feedback. If the whole goonchem thing had worked as intended and been implemented much more slowly, then there would not have been such a massive outcry. The main reason people are pissed off is because the player polls literally do nothing to affect change. Their opinion counts for nothing unless its ass kissing or points out something obvious the coder forgot.
User avatar
paprika
Rarely plays
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 10:20 pm
Byond Username: Paprka
Location: in down bad

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by paprika » #66528

Alex Crimson wrote:The coding environment isnt that bad. If you code something good then you will generally get good feedback. If the whole goonchem thing had worked as intended and been implemented much more slowly, then there would not have been such a massive outcry. The main reason people are pissed off is because the player polls literally do nothing to affect change. Their opinion counts for nothing unless its ass kissing or points out something obvious the coder forgot.
Player polls SHOULD do nothing to accept the change. Polls are crap feedback. You're not millions of people voting for a president or laws, you're a small group of individuals that can leave thoughtful feedback without being douchebags.
Oldman Robustin wrote:It's an established meme that coders don't play this game.
Alex Crimson
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 1:05 pm
Byond Username: Dazbuzz

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by Alex Crimson » #66539

and when a big game changer like goonmed is added and the players do not like it? Are you saying we should just do nothing?
dezzmont
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2014 6:07 pm
Byond Username: Dezzmont

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by dezzmont » #66540

When an issue is so primary in the player's mind for a month that it floods feedback because people feel like you don't want to listen to others, it is an extremely poor choice to make a banner at the top of the feedback forum telling people they don't want to hear it. We get it, it is painfully obvious you are so out of touch with your userbase that it is a wonder you are allowed to have one, please don't rub salt in the wound.

As to MisterPerson, I know you mean well but you are actually saying some things that read in a rather disgusting manner. There is a lot wrong with what you put out, but here is my highlight reel.
MisterPerson wrote: We're all here to make and play a game we want to play, nothing more, nothing less. That's what I'm doing, all the coders are doing, all the players who leave feedback or ideas, everyone is arrogantly trying to make the game they want to play. Why should I listen to what anyone has to say over my own opinions? If I was getting paid, sure, that'd be a good reason, but other than that? There isn't one.

I'm going to make changes I want to make, and the only thing that will stop me is leadership over the code project choosing to reject those changes. If you don't like that, tough shit frankly. You can leave all the feedback you want, I'm still free to ignore it. But as of right now, if I have to choose between the opinions of others and my opinions, I'm going to go with me every time.
The take away here is that you think that /tg/station exists to in any way service the coders, and that as a coder you should have the right to do what you want regardless of the outcry as long as the leadership does nothing.

Both of these attitudes are awful and no sane person should hold these standards as ideal. This is the fundemental disconnect between the playerbase and coders. Yes, you are right that nothing but the project heads can force you to do anything, and that you have no real obligiation to care at all about the players, and you can code whatever you want just for fun. But the playerbase is frankly sick of that attitude and coders pretending they are owed anything.

Admins don't pretend they are owed anything and they frankly are way more important to the actual continuation of the server. By every metric they work harder than you and have a much harder, and more vital job. But when they do something for personal gain at the detrement of the playerbase no one tries to gloss it over and say "Oh well they do it for free and lol are you going to step up and take charge?"

No. They get deadminned for doing something as little as spawning a stamp. And then are presented to the playerbase and asked openly and honestly "Do you want this guy around?"

Administrative policy and rules are discussed openly, and players have a lot of input on what goes down without having total control. They are a pretty good model of leadership because the entire culture is set up around servicing the playerbase. You don't become an admin and twist it to be fun for you, you become an admin because you find the role fun, and if the restrictions, responsibility, and duty to the greater server makes you unhappy it kinda sucks and means you really shouldn't be in that position.
MisterPerson wrote: Yes, -clearly- people decided to make improvements to the game to cover for goonchem and not, oh I dunno, a desire to improve the game that had no bearing with goonchem, right? Nah, that would make too much sense. It must be a CONSPIRACY! Based on your propensity to see crazy conspiracies everywhere, you must be the same sort of fool who thinks the gubment puts mind-altering chemicals in the water and reads your thoughts from microwaves.
When I was an admin and the primary go between for the administration I was exposed to much worse misbehavior and indiscretions than this, but at least then headcoders, who by the way were primarily muskets and erro and thus were not exactly the model of leadership, recognized there was a problem, did something about it, actually took corrective action, and made the process very public and trasnparent, which is literally the textbook way to handle that sort of crisis even if you didn't actually do anything wrong.

Considering how heavily you and for lack of a better word your orginization is being criticized you need to do much better than just trying to play the conspiracy card, these alegations are in everyone's mind because to them you would sink that low. If you would or not is irellevant, what matters is you have gotten to the point where people will believe it. Eespecially because it matches a consistent pattern of behavior up to a fundemental failure in logic and one of two ways to handle how utterly moronic the logic behind avoiding reversion has been:

"We can't revert now! The change isn't done!"

"Well now that the change is done we can't convert!"

Neither of these excuses are good, but using both means that coderbus is either corrupt, knowingly forcing stuff they can't really defend from a game design standpoint on people, or incompitent because they lack the orginization and leadership to prevent people from crossing wires this hard and letting it stand. I personally think it is a little of collum A and B, the kinda poor behavior that springs up from normally decent people because they are made sure that it is no harm no foul.
MisterPerson wrote: Never said I wouldn't listen to feedback, I simply said that volume of feedback doesn't intrinsically mean anything. And I don't think anyone deserves "hatred". This is a game. Cool the hyperbole. Nobody "hates" anyone here.
It is funny how strong emotions can get when one side with all the, real or perceived, power seems to treat other people like dirt. People are being hyperbolic but I do think the attitudes displayed here make it only just so.
paprika wrote: Player polls SHOULD do nothing to accept the change. Polls are crap feedback. You're not millions of people voting for a president or laws, you're a small group of individuals that can leave thoughtful feedback without being douchebags.
Yeah one problem, you don't recognize the validity of any feedback, no matter if it is a poll, post, or whatever, and that information is public knowledge. I think polls suck too, but I don't think that in any way excuses how this went down.
Incomptinence
Joined: Fri May 02, 2014 3:01 am
Byond Username: Incomptinence

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by Incomptinence » #66544

paprika wrote: Player polls SHOULD do nothing to accept the change. Polls are crap feedback. You're not millions of people voting for a president or laws, you're a small group of individuals that can leave thoughtful feedback without being douchebags.
So it would take millions to make you pay heed?

Also ignoring the ample mud slinging in real political elections ahahaha.
User avatar
cedarbridge
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 12:24 am
Byond Username: Cedarbridge

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by cedarbridge » #66560

MisterPerson wrote:If Cedarbridge really wants to talk about arrogance...
Your whole post previous to this outlined the basis for why you feel justified in holding an arrogant position. You feel that because the players can't reach into the code and revert a change you made that they don't like without going over your head, that it makes it just fine if the change stays when only yourself wants it. That's the definition of being arrogant. The players are justifiably unhappy about that position and the things it allows.
MisterPerson wrote:Having said that, there is no obligation whatsoever to act on those expressions. Nobody is going to, nor should be expected to, change the game in a way that they personally dislike, no matter how many people may disagree with that decision. We're all here to make and play a game we want to play, nothing more, nothing less. That's what I'm doing, all the coders are doing, all the players who leave feedback or ideas, everyone is arrogantly trying to make the game they want to play. Why should I listen to what anyone has to say over my own opinions? If I was getting paid, sure, that'd be a good reason, but other than that? There isn't one.
Literally "I like the change so deal with it." The game is not yours for you to dictate its contents. You don't have to like the game not containing your sacred cow of a code project, but you have all the obligations inherent to a social project. You make a mess, you are responsible for everything up to and including removing said mess. I know you don't really get that since your last feature that nobody wanted (slowspace) had to be reverted and fixed by somebody else because you couldn't be bothered. Drive by contribution is an awful system for any open source or open community project and this is exactly why.
User avatar
paprika
Rarely plays
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 10:20 pm
Byond Username: Paprka
Location: in down bad

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by paprika » #66566

Can someone make a collage of the thoughtful feedback given in regards to goonchem being merged? I really want to know what you forum warriors consider thoughtful feedback that us coders should be taking into consideration (which, again, isn't actually a requirement for contributing)
Oldman Robustin wrote:It's an established meme that coders don't play this game.
User avatar
MisterPerson
Board Moderator
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 4:26 pm
Byond Username: MisterPerson

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by MisterPerson » #66578

I don't feel like making a big quote tower so all these are just random points that apply to dezzmont's post. And maybe a little of cerdarbridge's because my memory sucks.

I wasn't saying how I want things to be, I was saying how things are. You can be dissatisfied with that, which is fair, but I'm not going to debate the merits of the system as it stands since that's a complete waste of everyone's time. Feel free to keep making points about the system if you'd like, but hg doesn't read this thread and Cheridan avoids feedback entirely unless absolutely necessary. Even if I did have some authority on the subject, I've stepped down from the code project except for forum moderation because I actually like doing that part right now.

The banner about keeping the goonchem stuff into one thread was something MSO did. I said I wished people would keep things together in one thread, he merged them and made a banner. I wasn't actually planning on merging them (or else I would have already), but whatever, it's a good thing I guess. Some of the extras were superflous and served only to unnecessarily split up the conversation.

I'm ok with changes I don't like going in. I'm ok with changes I've made being reversed even. All I meant was that you can't force me to act counter to how I want because nobody has that kind of leverage here. Even the headcoders couldn't do that if they wanted. Just like I can't force you to keep playing, I can't force you to like something you don't like, nor can I force scaredy to use any changes enacted, you can't force me to like something I don't like. It's a very simple concept, really.

I'm not engaging the conspiracy argument because it's really fucking stupid. It may be a poor PR move, but I don't care about public relations anyway, so moot point. You could argue that there's a conspiracy amongst the leadership to keep goonchem even if it was awful. What I was laughing at was the claim that all the coders were making extra additions in order to put more distance between the current revision and the one that added goonchem to make it harder to revert, which is just ridiculous on its face.
cedarbridge wrote: Your whole post previous to this outlined the basis for why you feel justified in holding an arrogant position. You feel that because the players can't reach into the code and revert a change you made that they don't like without going over your head, that it makes it just fine if the change stays when only yourself wants it. That's the definition of being arrogant. The players are justifiably unhappy about that position and the things it allows.
Never disagreed about me being arrogant about how my vision for the game > your vision. My entire point was that I was doing that and so are you. Whenever you or anyone else leaves feedback, you're all trying to get the game changed to how you want it to be. And assuming there's a conflict between my opinion and your opinion, you want your opinion to trump mine solely because it's yours and you think it would make your play experience funner. The only difference between the two situations is that I control who wins the fight when I do it. Also I'm admitting that's what I'm doing, which doesn't make it any better, but at least I'm not being disingenuous about my intentions.

Do you want me to back down and bend to everyone else's whims? How do we determine what those whims are fairly, accurately, and quickly? Does this metric apply to everything or just big things? How big is "big" then? What if the split in opinion is even, should we make sweeping changes because of how 4 people voted in a poll? How do we determine when to seek player feedback on a subject? I hope you can see the perils here. I would love to have a system in place for this, but feedback isn't it and neither are polls on the forums in general. And in any event, this player input gathering would require authority to really matter or it'll probably just get ignored anyway wholly because it can.
I code for the code project and moderate the code sections of the forums.

Feedback is dumb and it doesn't matter
Malkevin

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by Malkevin » #66592

I dont know, maybe instead of hashing things out in a closeted IRC channel you could use the more open forum?
That'd be a start.
User avatar
MisterPerson
Board Moderator
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 4:26 pm
Byond Username: MisterPerson

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by MisterPerson » #66594

I wasn't aware a public IRC channel was "closeted".
I code for the code project and moderate the code sections of the forums.

Feedback is dumb and it doesn't matter
User avatar
Saegrimr
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2014 4:39 pm
Byond Username: Saegrimr

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by Saegrimr » #66596

paprika wrote:Can someone make a collage of the thoughtful feedback given in regards to goonchem being merged? I really want to know what you forum warriors consider thoughtful feedback that us coders should be taking into consideration (which, again, isn't actually a requirement for contributing)
Yeah dude, you even posted there. https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=2822

I think its a pretty fine assessment.
tedward1337 wrote:Sae is like the racist grandad who everyone laughs at for being racist, but deep down we all know he's right.
User avatar
paprika
Rarely plays
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 10:20 pm
Byond Username: Paprka
Location: in down bad

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by paprika » #66601

I don't get how this is an issue with #coderbus and the contributors instead of just Goofball.
Oldman Robustin wrote:It's an established meme that coders don't play this game.
Malkevin

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by Malkevin » #66602

MisterPerson wrote:I wasn't aware a public IRC channel was "closeted".
Compared to a forum it is.

IRC requires you to idle in the channel
Be there when the discussion on a change happens <^ These two points are a major factor given everyone's different time zone.
When you want to discuss things you need to hope that other people are active and that they want to discuss that thing.

When you discuss something the channel ends having to be dedicated to that topic of conversion
If someone wants to discuss something else they can't unless they can convince people to switch the topic of conversion, this is annoying the new discusser or equally annoying to the original discusser if their discussion wasn't done with.
The alternative to this is to switch to a secondary channel or use some third party site like piratepad, which are unlikely to attract additional discussers due to them not knowing about them.
The other alternative is that you have two convos going on at the same time, this becomes a blurry chaotic mess of confusion.

IRC also has a complete lack of long term discussion, and its basically restricted to casual conversion as theres not much room to go into depth with stuff.


Forums on the other hand allow people from all the different time zones to join the convo, because the convo is persistently visible for years, and they can do this at their convenience.
You can join a conversion whenever you feel like or even start a new one whenever you feel, then you can go off and do something else whilst other people join the convo.

The conversions are separate and compartmentalized yet still are index centrally which allows many convos to take place whilst still allowing anyone to join in without having to track down the piratepad link.

Because of its persistence and the convo not being in real time, forums allow us to going into far more detail and hold discussions for far longer times than an IRC channel ever will.
Do you think I'd be able to write the above level of detail on an IRC channel without some assclown interrupting me or bored people telling me to shut up because they're not interested in what I'm saying?
lumipharon
TGMC Administrator
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2014 4:40 am
Byond Username: Lumipharon

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by lumipharon » #66604

Yeah, IRC is pretty useless for serious discussions, as stated above. It's good for having a conversation with someone, over one session, but anything else you need something persistant... like a forum thread.
User avatar
cedarbridge
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 12:24 am
Byond Username: Cedarbridge

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by cedarbridge » #66605

paprika wrote: (which, again, isn't actually a requirement for contributing)
You got us. Professionalism is not a requirement for contribution to an amateur coding project.
Scott
Github User
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 1:50 pm
Byond Username: Xxnoob
Github Username: xxalpha

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by Scott » #66614

dezzmont wrote:
MisterPerson wrote: We're all here to make and play a game we want to play, nothing more, nothing less. That's what I'm doing, all the coders are doing, all the players who leave feedback or ideas, everyone is arrogantly trying to make the game they want to play. Why should I listen to what anyone has to say over my own opinions? If I was getting paid, sure, that'd be a good reason, but other than that? There isn't one.

I'm going to make changes I want to make, and the only thing that will stop me is leadership over the code project choosing to reject those changes. If you don't like that, tough shit frankly. You can leave all the feedback you want, I'm still free to ignore it. But as of right now, if I have to choose between the opinions of others and my opinions, I'm going to go with me every time.
The take away here is that you think that /tg/station exists to in any way service the coders, and that as a coder you should have the right to do what you want regardless of the outcry as long as the leadership does nothing.

Both of these attitudes are awful and no sane person should hold these standards as ideal. This is the fundemental disconnect between the playerbase and coders. Yes, you are right that nothing but the project heads can force you to do anything, and that you have no real obligiation to care at all about the players, and you can code whatever you want just for fun. But the playerbase is frankly sick of that attitude and coders pretending they are owed anything.
If you think your vision of how things should work is better, you should actually put in some effort to make it reality. That's what coders do, they think the game should be different in some way and they go and make that change or addition or removal. Coderbus is not some exclusive club, if you want to contribute people will help you and your changes will be accepted unless they are too shitty.

This is what happened with goonchem, goofball wanted it in and the people in charge of the codebase supported it, so it got in. Maybe goofball should have asked the players, maybe some sort of approval process should have happened besides coderbus, but no system is in place for this. It's up to the headmins (one of which is headcoder) and sos to do something about this, or do nothing.

There is no conspiracy.
Jalleo
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 1:27 pm
Byond Username: Jalleo

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by Jalleo » #66617

All this thread did was to point out the flaws in our openness.

We are way more open than EA or Ubisoft or any other huge games company nobody on this forum gets paid anything yet people complain we arent open as a community....
We have almost everything open. IRC and forum usage together is forever a issue look 2 years ago it was the issue then. This is a fucking cycle.
All you have done is help get most maintainers to step down reducing the quality we have.

"Mission Accomplished APC destroyed!!!!"

Seriously though this thread is a joke and destroyed what morale there was for most people to code.
Bombadil
Joined: Wed Apr 23, 2014 12:23 am
Byond Username: Kromgar

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by Bombadil » #66620

All you had to do was revert goonchem. Thats all you had to fucking do.

So which maintainers left?
Planet Station Best Station

Vote Planetstation and Kor Phaeron 2017
User avatar
paprika
Rarely plays
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 10:20 pm
Byond Username: Paprka
Location: in down bad

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by paprika » #66621

I don't mind goonchem but us not reverting it in its broken state sets a really bad precedent, and now goofball will continue to commit terrible, buggy garbage
Oldman Robustin wrote:It's an established meme that coders don't play this game.
Incomptinence
Joined: Fri May 02, 2014 3:01 am
Byond Username: Incomptinence

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by Incomptinence » #66622

I would argue most severe drama relating to coderbus comes from within.

Biggest drama event? Errotanty, ex coder acting on animosity against the rest of the team. Runner up? NT splitters, coders lower in standing (?) using the former as a prompt to do their own thing.

Coders have posted about being frustrated with each other and their own system.

A miracle could happen and paprika would descend from the mount with tablets etched with the best pull ever that brought players to their knees bowing at his feet and that too would be as irrelevant as "reducing morale" because our positive feedback is also pretty much a non entity in final decision making. Even if we wanted to help you we can't without chipping in code and worming up, which is a long term thing not dealing with whatever trouble has brewed today.

By your example we fit in as what play testers? Should I too stomp around proclaiming I do it for free?
Bombadil
Joined: Wed Apr 23, 2014 12:23 am
Byond Username: Kromgar

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by Bombadil » #66626

If we're doing it for free can we get hot pockets?
Planet Station Best Station

Vote Planetstation and Kor Phaeron 2017
User avatar
Deantwo
Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2014 6:57 pm
Byond Username: Deantwo

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by Deantwo » #66645

Malkevin wrote:
MisterPerson wrote:I wasn't aware a public IRC channel was "closeted".
Compared to a forum it is.

IRC requires you to idle in the channel
Be there when the discussion on a change happens <^ These two points are a major factor given everyone's different time zone.
When you want to discuss things you need to hope that other people are active and that they want to discuss that thing.
Set up a bot that records the IRC channel and posts it on the forum every hour then.

Could even make the bot post forum posts posted in the thread to the IRC channel, but at that point it would be easier if you just join the IRC channel.
Alex Crimson
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 1:05 pm
Byond Username: Dazbuzz

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by Alex Crimson » #66683

Deantwo wrote:
Malkevin wrote:
MisterPerson wrote:I wasn't aware a public IRC channel was "closeted".
Compared to a forum it is.

IRC requires you to idle in the channel
Be there when the discussion on a change happens <^ These two points are a major factor given everyone's different time zone.
When you want to discuss things you need to hope that other people are active and that they want to discuss that thing.
Set up a bot that records the IRC channel and posts it on the forum every hour then.

Could even make the bot post forum posts posted in the thread to the IRC channel, but at that point it would be easier if you just join the IRC channel.
and even easier if you kept important discussion on the forum.
User avatar
paprika
Rarely plays
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 10:20 pm
Byond Username: Paprka
Location: in down bad

Re: Lack of player input on changes

Post by paprika » #66689

or we could not do that and you could deal with the fact that we like to discuss code with other coders and not uninformed fucktards
Oldman Robustin wrote:It's an established meme that coders don't play this game.
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot]