/tg/Station 13

Bottom post of the previous page:

https://discord.com/channels/326822144233439242/808425762217656330/873235156029300836 wrote:It is time for head coders accept a new paradigm where they sit under the host, as head admins do.

Things can not continue as things once have. I will continue to get frustrated at feeling powerless in matters involving coderbus until that frustration leads me to abandon all protocol, as it did today.

The solution is obvious.

?

where did all the people who haven't played in 6 years crawl from

ardentarclight wrote:where did all the people who haven't played in 6 years crawl from

im still friends with a ton of people who still play this game and talk about it and retain some hope i'll enjoy it again so i make myself unpopular on the forums until that happens

technokek wrote:

Anuv wrote:

terranaut wrote:

Anuv wrote:Wow this definitely is the cooler drama thread (*said with a sarcastic tone as I snicker to myself and smirk at poster next to me*)

emoting your thoughts is fail RP because other characters can never be privy to them, fucking loser.

*Chuckles under my breath while reading this post, as I think upon how much of a newb terranaut is and how everyone knows it (which is now known by others on account of my powerful psychic domination over those nearby)*

stop rping. fuck you

Gonna cry? Gonna piss your pants maybe?

Rohesie wrote:So nowadays I'm aware that no matter what change you do to the game, some people will hate you for it and won't be shy about it. It comes with developing.
If there's a hundred players there will be a hundred and one opinions on how the game should be, it is how it is. If you want to do what you consider be improving the game, be ready to face the reaction.

Very helpful post understanding the history. It's worth adding here though that there is a difference between the usual pissing and moaning greeted to any large-scale change (i.e., combat mode, hardstun removal, etc.), and a change being universally hated by pretty much everyone. The former might be a great change (I think combat mode was an amazing change despite the hate it got when it was merged) while the latter could be a change almost everyone dislikes except several members of coderbus who okayed it.

The sentiment "players don't know what they want" is true to an extent. Beestation has a democratic vote on most features and large code changes, yet this holds them back in many ways - they are still on intent mode since players are stubborn and don't want to change the status-quo. But when there are 100 down-thumbs and 10 up-thumbs on a PR, with a very weak "why it's good for the game" section, it could be worth taking the playerbase sentiment into consideration or giving it greater thought before merging.

Usually the "bad" changes are the ones which are forced through all the dislike as a "necessary medicine" to something that is considered problematic by coderbus. But it's usually judged as problematic based on some theoretical reasoning, i.e., not matching the design doc or someone's vision for the game, as opposed to how it actually affects gameplay round-to-round. I'm not sure why it's seen as taboo for coders to add features or things which are fun, yet it's much more acceptable to remove features or things which are fun.

I think the confusion is that players know what they "like" and not necessarily what they "want". Knowing what kind of game you enjoy doesn't mean you can design one for example. And likewise, just because a game contains something that you dislike doesn't mean it is bad/must be removed. Sometimes it is actually intentional.

As for why players hate coders so much, I can think of a few possibilities:

They are seen as some sort of intellectual elite, and therefore arrogant and self-important.
Players seem to see coders as insubordinate employees when they are unpaid volunteers trying to contribute in their free time, with different priorities.
Game Design influence the code structure, but the opposite is also true and aspects of the game are sometimes tied up by the infrastructure beneath, which can make some changes seem arbitrary and/or infuriating to players.

errorage was never the server host, he was a forum host and he never had any power over coders.

Anuv wrote:

terranaut wrote:

Anuv wrote:Wow this definitely is the cooler drama thread (*said with a sarcastic tone as I snicker to myself and smirk at poster next to me*)

emoting your thoughts is fail RP because other characters can never be privy to them, fucking loser.

*Chuckles under my breath while reading this post, as I think upon how much of a newb terranaut is and how everyone knows it (which is now known by others on account of my powerful psychic domination over those nearby)*

*Snap*

You wake up in a first class suite of a victorian era train. In front of you is a table, with a train ticket on top of it. You reach for the ticket, but notice that you are handcuffed to the chair you are sitting on. The train shakes continuously. You can grab the ticket still, and inspect it. Stamped. On the backside is an inscription: It is your full name. You look out to a window, and notice that you are travelling on a very high bridge, above a large ocean. You also notice the incredible speed with which you are travelling. You hear deafening loud metallic screeching. The train is trembling, sheer force is catapulting you around the cabin. You lose your sense of gravity. You manage to glimpse out of the window, and notice the ocean moving closer to you. The train has derailed.


With warm regards
-BONERMASTER

oranges wrote:errorage was never the server host, he was a forum host and he never had any power over coders.

the man himself risking permanent damage to his right hand to remind us that the host will never outrank the coders

sinfulbliss wrote: The sentiment "players don't know what they want" is true to an extent. Beestation has a democratic vote on most features and large code changes, yet this holds them back in many ways - they are still on intent mode since players are stubborn and don't want to change the status-quo.

This is not "the playerbase doesn't know what they want". This is "the playerbase doesn't agree with what I want". Ask in OOC, and the overwhelming sentiment will still be that combat mode is shit.

BONERMASTER wrote:

Anuv wrote:

terranaut wrote:

Anuv wrote:Wow this definitely is the cooler drama thread (*said with a sarcastic tone as I snicker to myself and smirk at poster next to me*)

emoting your thoughts is fail RP because other characters can never be privy to them, fucking loser.

*Chuckles under my breath while reading this post, as I think upon how much of a newb terranaut is and how everyone knows it (which is now known by others on account of my powerful psychic domination over those nearby)*

*Snap*

You wake up in a first class suite of a victorian era train. In front of you is a table, with a train ticket on top of it. You reach for the ticket, but notice that you are handcuffed to the chair you are sitting on. The train shakes continuously. You can grab the ticket still, and inspect it. Stamped. On the backside is an inscription: It is your full name. You look out to a window, and notice that you are travelling on a very high bridge, above a large ocean. You also notice the incredible speed with which you are travelling. You hear deafening loud metallic screeching. The train is trembling, sheer force is catapulting you around the cabin. You lose your sense of gravity. You manage to glimpse out of the window, and notice the ocean moving closer to you. The train has derailed.


With warm regards
-BONERMASTER

My Shadowrun GM sometimes did things like this where the players, isolated or in groups, would wake up in odd situations happening to them without any clue why and we'd have to figure out what was going on. I woke up in a hotel bathroom with a gun once and a body in the stall next to me. Good stuff.

sinfulbliss wrote:

oranges wrote:errorage was never the server host, he was a forum host and he never had any power over coders.

the man himself risking permanent damage to his right hand to remind us that the host will never outrank the coders

It wouldn't even make sense anyway, the official servers are a downstream like any other, I'd argue that there is very little difference outside concurrency & staffing with Jonny random git cloning his own to play with friends, that's the spirit of the AGPL license right there.

Yenwodyah wrote:Ask in OOC, and the overwhelming sentiment will still be that combat mode is shit.

This hasn't been my experience whenever I see combat mode mentioned in ooc, but I suppose that could just be because we play on different servers or at different times of day ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Yenwodyah wrote:

sinfulbliss wrote: The sentiment "players don't know what they want" is true to an extent. Beestation has a democratic vote on most features and large code changes, yet this holds them back in many ways - they are still on intent mode since players are stubborn and don't want to change the status-quo.

This is not "the playerbase doesn't know what they want". This is "the playerbase doesn't agree with what I want". Ask in OOC, and the overwhelming sentiment will still be that combat mode is shit.

Combat mode changes 4 buttons into 2 buttons with no loss of functionality while simultaneously getting rid of the most complex and wonky part of TG's interface to the new player. That's pretty amazing in itself.
The only downside I can even think of is that now shoves are right-click instead of left-click, which is pretty insignificant. Control-click to grab is objectively easier than "3-click," and "4-harm" is still "4-harm." Besides its objective superiority I'd say there are lots of players who never even played with intents much less prefer them.

EDIT: I suppose another downside is that "ctrl-click" is harder to get on a moving player who's cuffed than a single click in grab intent would be, but that's a very sec-specific issue and honestly is totally solved with a baton (as most things are solved).

Changing off of the old intent system was a little disorienting but the change itself is good. I have difficulty imagining why someone would think, or how they could justify claiming, that the old 4-intent cycle was better design.

sinfulbliss wrote:Combat mode changes 4 buttons into 2 buttons with no loss of functionality while simultaneously getting rid of the most complex and wonky part of TG's interface to the new player. That's pretty amazing in itself.

Wrong. 4 buttons are now 4 button-combos: lclick, rclick, combat-lclick, combat-rclick. It's exactly as complex, but without the natural hints of named intents.
Let's say I want to whack a dude with my stunbaton and deal damage to him. On intents it's easy - harm harms, help just stuns. And you can't accidentally beat someone if you attack on help intent with no charge.
With combat mode, do I right-click or left-click? Well, most weapons attack on left-click. Left-click is usually used for standard interactions while right-click is usually for specialized functions. Think main fire vs. alt-fire in an FPS - left-click shoots, right-click does each gun's specialized function. So to smash a tider's skull, something that any item with force can do, you'd think left-click would be more appropriate, right? Wrong, fucko, it's right-click! Unless your baton is off and you're in combat mode, then it's both! There are plenty of other examples of stuff like this, e.g. hitting a machine with a tool vs. interacting with it.
You see what I mean? With combat mode the only natural indication of which of your four actions you want to take is "Is this a combat action, or a non-combat action?" There's no indication of what left-click and right-click do. With intents, sure, disarm and grab saw some questionable use-cases, but in general you knew that help would be the least-violent action, harm would be the most-violent action, and the other two would be some specialized use.

sinfulbliss wrote:Control-click to grab is objectively easier than "3-click," and "4-harm" is still "4-harm."

Do you have three arms? That's the only way I could imagine holding down a button for the entire time you're trying to grab something being easier than just pressing a button to turn on grab mode. Or have you never tried to grab a cuffed prisoner away from a tider dragging them away from you down the hall?

sinfulbliss wrote:Besides its objective superiority I'd say there are lots of players who never even played with intents much less prefer them.

Oh, of course, It's good because people are used to it. Why didn't I think of that?

Yenwodyah wrote:

sinfulbliss wrote:Control-click to grab is objectively easier than "3-click," and "4-harm" is still "4-harm."

Do you have three arms? That's the only way I could imagine holding down a button for the entire time you're trying to grab something being easier than just pressing a button to turn on grab mode. Or have you never tried to grab a cuffed prisoner away from a tider dragging them away from you down the hall?

Jesus christ this.

Grabbing people who are moving is so fucking hard. Especially since holding down ctrl often stops all movement for some God forsaken reason.

sinfulbliss wrote:I'm not sure why it's seen as taboo for coders to add features or things which are fun,

What? Why do you think that?

Rohen_Tahir wrote:

sinfulbliss wrote:I'm not sure why it's seen as taboo for coders to add features or things which are fun,

What? Why do you think that?

You currently have a negative Fix/Feature pull request delta of -4. Maintainers may close this PR at will. Fixing issues or improving the codebase will improve this score.

Yenwodyah wrote:4 buttons are now 4 button-combos: lclick, rclick, combat-lclick, combat-rclick. It's exactly as complex, but without the natural hints of named intents.

lclick and rclick are not "button-combos," they are single clicks. Combat mode allows you to harm and disarm without button presses to switch. Hence it changes 2 button presses into one button press, "4," to switch into combat mode (and that's assuming it's off).

Yenwodyah wrote:Let's say I want to whack a dude with my stunbaton and deal damage to him. On intents it's easy - harm harms, help just stuns. And you can't accidentally beat someone if you attack on help intent with no charge.

You can't do this now either. Hitting someone on help mode with an uncharged baton does nothing and gives you the alert "you prodded [x] with the baton. luckily it was off"

Yenwodyah wrote:With combat mode, do I right-click or left-click? Well, most weapons attack on left-click. Left-click is usually used for standard interactions while right-click is usually for specialized functions. Think main fire vs. alt-fire in an FPS - left-click shoots, right-click does each gun's specialized function. So to smash a tider's skull, something that any item with force can do, you'd think left-click would be more appropriate, right? Wrong, fucko, it's right-click! Unless your baton is off and you're in combat mode, then it's both! There are plenty of other examples of stuff like this, e.g. hitting a machine with a tool vs. interacting with it.

It's a specialized function for the baton, sure, but the baton is a pretty fuckin' special weapon. I'm hardpressed to think of other items that have dual functions like this. Besides, harmbaton is a terrible weapon to "beat tider's skulls in" with anyway, actually it's pretty hard to do worse than 10 brute/melee hit, so that's on you if you try to use it for that. Likewise if you have an uncharged baton on you, what are you even doing? Uncharged batons are essentially useless so again I fail to see the great loss.

Yenwodyah wrote:You see what I mean? With combat mode the only natural indication of which of your four actions you want to take is "Is this a combat action, or a non-combat action?" There's no indication of what left-click and right-click do. With intents, sure, disarm and grab saw some questionable use-cases, but in general you knew that help would be the least-violent action, harm would be the most-violent action, and the other two would be some specialized use.

Yeah, left-click and right-click have specialized use in combat mode. I see this as no different than any videogame where you test out buttons to see what "moves" you have. People easily connect right click to shove and left click to harm, and it's never a problem again. Grabs are completely separate and again are the sort of thing that, once you learn it's control-click, you never have to think about it again. Meanwhile intent mode forces you to switch intents for every single specialized action. My main point is just that changing which side of the mouse you click is way, way easier than having to use a button-press to cycle intents whenever you want to use a different one.

Yenwodyah wrote:Do you have three arms? That's the only way I could imagine holding down a button for the entire time you're trying to grab something being easier than just pressing a button to turn on grab mode. Or have you never tried to grab a cuffed prisoner away from a tider dragging them away from you down the hall?

I already mentioned this was harder to do in combat mode. Clearly a bad faith point saying "do you have three arms" then just repeating what I already said since I explicitly mentioned it as a weakness. And once again, it is quite literally only an issue in this specific scenario mentioned, and is solved, again, by a single baton click (one button press). To be sure, this weakness is the tradeoff for eliminating an entire button press for an intent, which is something you had to do constantly in intent mode. It is still significantly easier to "ctrl-click" than "3-click" someone, aside from this scenario.

Yenwodyah wrote:Oh, of course, It's good because people are used to it. Why didn't I think of that?

I'm sure you did think of that, as did pretty much every player who advocates for intent mode. I simply mention the new players as a suggestion that the OOC opinion is clearly not with intent mode anymore.

terranaut wrote: Why do you think it is this way? Are other projects the same, or is this a /tg/ only issue? I keep hearing "fuck coders" even from friends who haven't been involved in any way with /tg/ for several years. When they think back to their time on /tg/, this is the response I get. I don't feel like this was an issue remotely as strongly when we were on TGMC. I might just be wrong but in my impression, aside from a few outliers, people were much more chill. Is it because the project was smaller and everybody was more involved with each other? Because nobody preached this whole "the seperation of codebase and administration is absolute" nonsense?

I can't speak for TGMC, but as someone who works professionally on games--no, this is not a /tg/ only issue. A belief that there is a disconnect between developers and players is something that is extremely common in games as a whole. In fact, it's very much not uncommon to hear game designers openly talk about players "not knowing what they want". It's true, in a sense, though the wording of that is of course fairly hostile.

Player feedback is important, but not in the sense that you might think. Players know what problems they have--if swaths of people say "the shotgun isn't fun to use", then they're right. However, where it starts to break down is with regards to solutions. If players say "the shotgun isn't fun to use, it doesn't do enough damage"--the implicit (and sometimes explicit) suggestion there is "make the shotgun do more damage". Suggestions like this are pretty much always thought up by designers first, but pushed away for more complex reason. For example, maybe your analytics show the shotgun does more damage than anything else, so that's obviously not the right answer.

Furthermore, a lot of controversial changes are made because developers think it will contribute to the overall health of the game. The cloning removal was despised when it came out, but over time medical doctor is now one of the most developed jobs on the station, and has THE most players aside from Assistant.

Nothing I said in the above is specific to SS13. What might make it feel different is because in games in general, you have a faceless company/studio that produces it. In SS13, and in my opinion--especially on /tg/, every coder who works on any controversial feature has a face directly attached to them. A voice. A voice that, after being surrounded by hostile players and worse, other hostile developers, eventually gets sick of it and realizes that blatantly saying "I don't care what you think" doesn't actually have any consequences at the time. Compound that with the fact that professional game designers tend to be taught, or learn through example, some basic strategies on how to talk to communities, etc (or of course, have a pay check relying on it!).

terranaut wrote: Most importantly, what can be done to get rid of this absolutely mindstaggering resentment players seem to have for coders? Of course you're not wrong, some people are just gonna complain and whine no matter what. What about valid complaints? I made a snarky comment somewhere, I think in the deleted quote chain, asking if the new ui still randomly dies and crashes, forcing you to restart the game (and sit through the 30 second wait if you're not a byond member). That's terrible for any number of reasons for all kinds of people interacting with the server in any capacity. I don't recall how long ago it was added nor do I really care how long exactly it has been, but we're talking about years. Why is this ok?

As I said before--I believe this resentment from both sides comes from a cycle of players react hostile to developers -> developers react hostile back to players (because there is no obvious consequence) -> players react even more hostile to developers -> developers react even more hostile to players, etc. The answer to this is one that would very likely never actually hit a server like /tg/--actual hard enforcement of rules against toxicity on both ends. I think everyone would say they don't want this because it's a dramatic shift of culture (and would feel like censorship to some), but it's reasonably the only way to get both sides to stop hurling shit at each other.

terranaut wrote: Why wasn't whatever broke it reverted (or if it was the original PR, why wasn't that reverted until it was fixed)? Why do coders, in turn, get pikachu faced when players end up thinking all coders are assholes when you get called an entitled pissbaby for bringing stuff like this up or salting in deadchat because you died in the random 30 second timeout you're forced to sit through occasionally, or any other number of existing problems?

I don't have any comments about UI, but no coder is surprised when shit is flung at them, that's why shit gets flung back. If anything, it's the exact same feeling players feel--exhaustion. Players are exhausted when they feel like they are not listened to, that the game is being dumbed down and made less fun, that their favorite features are being removed, and whatnot. Coders are exhausted because it feels like nothing they do gets anything but abuse hurled at them, that they can't make any changes they feel are beneficial to the health of the game if they are controversial, etc. We're all humans in the end!

As per the whole drama--I don't have any interesting thoughts. Personally, I don't care that much about the power dynamics of a host leading coderbus--MSO is a smart person, treats adminbus well, and in practice already has a pretty large say on what happens (it's why slips were fixed as quickly as they were). I simply care that the person who wants to lead us is someone who constantly gets frustrated and ends up ruining morale on the coderbus side, which will only exacerbate problems of hostility between coders and players. Like that one comic I can never find of a husband screaming at his wife, the wife then screaming at her kid, and the kid screaming at their pet. Oh, I'm also a tad annoyed that I can't run playtests as easily anymore or update the servers.

Jaredfogle wrote:Like that one comic I can never find of a husband screaming at his wife, the wife then screaming at her kid, and the kid screaming at their pet. Oh, I'm also a tad annoyed that I can't run playtests as easily anymore or update the servers.

The husband being MSO, the wife being the coders, the kid being the admins, and the pets being...?
Uh oh.

I like coders ?

Jaredfogle wrote:

terranaut wrote: Why do you think it is this way? Are other projects the same, or is this a /tg/ only issue? I keep hearing "fuck coders" even from friends who haven't been involved in any way with /tg/ for several years. When they think back to their time on /tg/, this is the response I get. I don't feel like this was an issue remotely as strongly when we were on TGMC. I might just be wrong but in my impression, aside from a few outliers, people were much more chill. Is it because the project was smaller and everybody was more involved with each other? Because nobody preached this whole "the seperation of codebase and administration is absolute" nonsense?

I can't speak for TGMC, but as someone who works professionally on games--no, this is not a /tg/ only issue. A belief that there is a disconnect between developers and players is something that is extremely common in games as a whole. In fact, it's very much not uncommon to hear game designers openly talk about players "not knowing what they want". It's true, in a sense, though the wording of that is of course fairly hostile.

Player feedback is important, but not in the sense that you might think. Players know what problems they have--if swaths of people say "the shotgun isn't fun to use", then they're right. However, where it starts to break down is with regards to solutions. If players say "the shotgun isn't fun to use, it doesn't do enough damage"--the implicit (and sometimes explicit) suggestion there is "make the shotgun do more damage". Suggestions like this are pretty much always thought up by designers first, but pushed away for more complex reason. For example, maybe your analytics show the shotgun does more damage than anything else, so that's obviously not the right answer.

Furthermore, a lot of controversial changes are made because developers think it will contribute to the overall health of the game. The cloning removal was despised when it came out, but over time medical doctor is now one of the most developed jobs on the station, and has THE most players aside from Assistant.

Nothing I said in the above is specific to SS13. What might make it feel different is because in games in general, you have a faceless company/studio that produces it. In SS13, and in my opinion--especially on /tg/, every coder who works on any controversial feature has a face directly attached to them. A voice. A voice that, after being surrounded by hostile players and worse, other hostile developers, eventually gets sick of it and realizes that blatantly saying "I don't care what you think" doesn't actually have any consequences at the time. Compound that with the fact that professional game designers tend to be taught, or learn through example, some basic strategies on how to talk to communities, etc (or of course, have a pay check relying on it!).

terranaut wrote: Most importantly, what can be done to get rid of this absolutely mindstaggering resentment players seem to have for coders? Of course you're not wrong, some people are just gonna complain and whine no matter what. What about valid complaints? I made a snarky comment somewhere, I think in the deleted quote chain, asking if the new ui still randomly dies and crashes, forcing you to restart the game (and sit through the 30 second wait if you're not a byond member). That's terrible for any number of reasons for all kinds of people interacting with the server in any capacity. I don't recall how long ago it was added nor do I really care how long exactly it has been, but we're talking about years. Why is this ok?

As I said before--I believe this resentment from both sides comes from a cycle of players react hostile to developers -> developers react hostile back to players (because there is no obvious consequence) -> players react even more hostile to developers -> developers react even more hostile to players, etc. The answer to this is one that would very likely never actually hit a server like /tg/--actual hard enforcement of rules against toxicity on both ends. I think everyone would say they don't want this because it's a dramatic shift of culture (and would feel like censorship to some), but it's reasonably the only way to get both sides to stop hurling shit at each other.

terranaut wrote: Why wasn't whatever broke it reverted (or if it was the original PR, why wasn't that reverted until it was fixed)? Why do coders, in turn, get pikachu faced when players end up thinking all coders are assholes when you get called an entitled pissbaby for bringing stuff like this up or salting in deadchat because you died in the random 30 second timeout you're forced to sit through occasionally, or any other number of existing problems?

I don't have any comments about UI, but no coder is surprised when shit is flung at them, that's why shit gets flung back. If anything, it's the exact same feeling players feel--exhaustion. Players are exhausted when they feel like they are not listened to, that the game is being dumbed down and made less fun, that their favorite features are being removed, and whatnot. Coders are exhausted because it feels like nothing they do gets anything but abuse hurled at them, that they can't make any changes they feel are beneficial to the health of the game if they are controversial, etc. We're all humans in the end!

As per the whole drama--I don't have any interesting thoughts. Personally, I don't care that much about the power dynamics of a host leading coderbus--MSO is a smart person, treats adminbus well, and in practice already has a pretty large say on what happens (it's why slips were fixed as quickly as they were). I simply care that the person who wants to lead us is someone who constantly gets frustrated and ends up ruining morale on the coderbus side, which will only exacerbate problems of hostility between coders and players. Like that one comic I can never find of a husband screaming at his wife, the wife then screaming at her kid, and the kid screaming at their pet. Oh, I'm also a tad annoyed that I can't run playtests as easily anymore or update the servers.

As a person who rose to a prominent community figure in a modding scene, the stupid fucking idea that the community should have little say in the development of a game/mod they frequently enjoy should be tossed aside. The players know what they want, and they will frequently say it. There is a difference with how coding works in this community that ends up with code maintainers having this view of "The player doesn't really know what they want" so they toss it aside frequently because they spent time on a feature without really testing the waters first. I built a popular mod off of what I found the community wanted and consistently rated upwards from the feedback of other community members, and I frequently take into account comments and critique from people that use my mod as helpful to see what avenues I can improve my mod. This codebase has much to learn in the way of that, the community should have say or sway because there are times where a vision by the coder may be boring as fuck and their colleagues will only circlejerk them.

I've generally only seen feedback get accepted if it is somehow accepting of a feature said coder made remaining in.

If there's any place you want to talk about "the community having little say in the development of a game they frequently enjoy"--the game where we accept hundreds of community contributions a month and discuss everything behind absolutely zero closed doors is the last place to do it.

Jaredfogle wrote:If there's any place you want to talk about "the community having little say in the development of a game they frequently enjoy"--the game where we accept hundreds of community contributions a month and discuss everything behind absolutely zero closed doors is the last place to do it.

You act like I haven't been part of the contributor base here. I speak specifically having been a contributor to this codebase, and related to the code maintainers it is a coinflip if a feature gets accepted or denied. Catch oranges on a day that he's been drinking? PR Closed. Some Maintainer doesn't like your opinion somewhere on the discord? PR either closed or sits in limbo long enough for it to be considered stale. Create a big feature overhaul that you had the approval of the current headcoder? Oh, they're wanting to dick waggle all of a sudden because their buddies are around, so now they threaten to not allow your feature to go through. This is what contributors outside of bugfix or maintainer started design trees will face. I've heard the phrase continuously in the coderbus when I was active that "The players don't know what they want" when it comes to incorporating community feedback. Often times the code maintainers would make fun of people that had ideas but no coding ability for a language that is now nearly two decades old as if they were lesser. I've heard it from the same code maintainers when they created controversial "balance" PRs that other maintainers pushed through despite reception. I can tell you that this still happens frequently given how PRs are closed for the most minimal fucking reasons still.

sinfulbliss wrote: lclick and rclick are not "button-combos," they are single clicks. Combat mode allows you to harm and disarm without button presses to switch. Hence it changes 2 button presses into one button press, "4," to switch into combat mode (and that's assuming it's off).
Meanwhile intent mode forces you to switch intents for every single specialized action. My main point is just that changing which side of the mouse you click is way, way easier than having to use a button-press to cycle intents whenever you want to use a different one.

Oh, you're talking about how many keystrokes it takes? Who gives a shit about that? Yeah you have to press one button right next to WASD to switch between types of attack, but you have to use hotkeys all the time in this game anyways. Do you never try to switch between hands in combat? In my experience that's at least as common as switching intents. Or pressing E to quickly put an item away? That's an essential part of combat in the delayed-baton-stun era. Or, have you never played a video game with multiple weapons? Where you have to press number keys to switch between them? It's not a hard concept. My point is, if having to press a button to switch your attack mode is too aerobically intense for you you're going to be shit at combat in this game anyways.

It's a specialized function for the baton, sure, but the baton is a pretty fuckin' special weapon. I'm hardpressed to think of other items that have dual functions like this. Besides, harmbaton is a terrible weapon to "beat tider's skulls in" with anyway, actually it's pretty hard to do worse than 10 brute/melee hit, so that's on you if you try to use it for that. Likewise if you have an uncharged baton on you, what are you even doing? Uncharged batons are essentially useless so again I fail to see the great loss.

All tools
Syringes
Beakers
Health analyzers
RCD/RPD (I think?)
Anyways, the number of items that have dual functions doesn't matter because intents only matter for items with dual functions! If it's a shitty system, it doesn't matter what percent of the game is made shitty, it's still shit! And unless you want to see every sec officer crafting a spear at roundstart, stunbatons will remain one of the most-used melee weapons.

Yeah, left-click and right-click have specialized use in combat mode. I see this as no different than any videogame where you test out buttons to see what "moves" you have.

And you don't see how having "Move 1 / Move 2 / Move 3 / Move 4" is simpler than "Mode 1 left-click / Mode 1 right-click / Mode 2 left-click / Mode 2 right-click"? Executing any action you want with intents is simple if you know it: Press the button for the intent -> click. You don't even have to remember what intent you're currently in, it can all be muscle memory. And each intent generally maps on to similar actions for every item with specialized actions. With combat mode, left/right click actions can vary wildly across different items, and you have to remember whether or not you're in combat mode before deciding whether to switch it on or off.

I already mentioned this was harder to do in combat mode. Clearly a bad faith point saying "do you have three arms" then just repeating what I already said since I explicitly mentioned it as a weakness. And once again, it is quite literally only an issue in this specific scenario mentioned, and is solved, again, by a single baton click (one button press). To be sure, this weakness is the tradeoff for eliminating an entire button press for an intent, which is something you had to do constantly in intent mode. It is still significantly easier to "ctrl-click" than "3-click" someone, aside from this scenario.

Okay, I see you addressed that in an edit after I read your comment. But you can't stunbaton e.g. a borg, dragging away the ion gun; and you should know if you've chased someone literally a single time in this game that every tile of distance you have to gain on someone is a struggle; it's immensely easier to get within grabbing distance of what they're dragging than it is to get within striking distance of the dragger.
And again: Literally when has been taking a single one of your fingers off of WASD to press "3" been a challenge? It's not even the same hand as the one on your mouse! You can switch intents and left-click almost simultaneously!

sounds like you have a communication problem, are you maybe autistic?

Jaredfogle wrote:If there's any place you want to talk about "the community having little say in the development of a game they frequently enjoy"--the game where we accept hundreds of community contributions a month and discuss everything behind absolutely zero closed doors is the last place to do it.

None of that matters if no maintainers listen to what we have to say.

Jaredfogle wrote: I can't speak for TGMC, but as someone who works professionally on games--no, this is not a /tg/ only issue. A belief that there is a disconnect between developers and players is something that is extremely common in games as a whole. In fact, it's very much not uncommon to hear game designers openly talk about players "not knowing what they want". It's true, in a sense, though the wording of that is of course fairly hostile.

I really really like a metaphor Mark Rosewhat once said in a GDC talk; he said player feedback is like a patient comming to a doctor. The patient knows what the problem is more than the doctor, but only the doctor knows how to fix it. Same is true for game design - the players are really good at finding the problems in your game, but really bad at solving them.


Actually, I should link that GDC talk - <- link. It's about 20 lessons he learned over the 20 years he designed Magic. He says right at the start he has a unique perspective due to being the head developer of a single game for 20 years - a situation very similar to the one we have here, at /tg/. It's also just 1 hour and it's very entertaining and informing; def worth the watch. Eitherway, back on topic.

Jaredfogle wrote: Furthermore, a lot of controversial changes are made because developers think it will contribute to the overall health of the game. The cloning removal was despised when it came out, but over time medical doctor is now one of the most developed jobs on the station, and has THE most players aside from Assistant.

Life would be fantastic if everyone was aware of anchoring bias - that is, the bias to anything old.
The only reason why people like Intents as opposed to Combat Mode is purely anchoring bias on top of rationalizations of the hate. It speaks volumes that the strongest argument against Combat Mode is that it's harder to grab a moving target while the strongest argument for it is the massively increased player usability and UI cleanup.
On all fronts - gameplay-wise, gameflow-wise, UI-wise, it is a noticeable increase in quality for everything.

Nothing I said in the above is specific to SS13. What might make it feel different is because in games in general, you have a faceless company/studio that produces it. In SS13, and in my opinion--especially on /tg/, every coder who works on any controversial feature has a face directly attached to them. A voice. A voice that, after being surrounded by hostile players and worse, other hostile developers, eventually gets sick of it and realizes that blatantly saying "I don't care what you think" doesn't actually have any consequences at the time. Compound that with the fact that professional game designers tend to be taught, or learn through example, some basic strategies on how to talk to communities, etc (or of course, have a pay check relying on it!).

This. This is why, in my opinion, ss13 in general is such a mess. Any and every change will bring a bad reaction by few or many - your example about cloning was fantastic; it was undoubtly great for the game but due to anchoring effect its removal was despised, and is still hated on even today.

Talking about this... Remember how I briefly talked about Magic: The Gathering?
Some parts of their team are specifically trained to talk to the public and to be pointed at for problems.
Those members of the team are the ones that appear in public, do talks, talk on Twitter, etc. What that means is that most of the people that actually do Magic aren't constantly screamed at and have names called on them. Wizards still have the ability to get direct feedback and a sense of comunity with the staff members that are trained to talk to the public while not having the constant criticism thrown at them.

We could take a piece or two off that; a way to make an anonymous PR, for example, would be fantastic. Of course admins would be able to see who did it, but that knowledge would be strictly admin-only. It would remove "I hate that guy!" biases while preventing more of that biases from appearing.

I really really like a metaphor Mark Rosewhat once said in a GDC talk; he said player feedback is like a patient comming to a doctor. The patient knows what the problem is more than the doctor, but only the doctor knows how to fix it. Same is true for game design - the players are really good at finding the problems in your game, but really bad at solving them.

Very good analogy! I forget if I watched that talk but I'll definitely give it another look either way.

Some parts of their team are specifically trained to talk to the public and to be pointed at for problems.

My kingdom for a community manager!

We could take a piece or two off that; a way to make an anonymous PR, for example, would be fantastic.

If this wasn't the norm, and with the culture we have now, everyone would just see it as someone being too cowardly to face the community, I think. It also wouldn't really work because all coderbus operations are done in public view, meaning you could figure out who made it just by whoever was talking about it.

EuSouAFazenda wrote:

Jaredfogle wrote: I can't speak for TGMC, but as someone who works professionally on games--no, this is not a /tg/ only issue. A belief that there is a disconnect between developers and players is something that is extremely common in games as a whole. In fact, it's very much not uncommon to hear game designers openly talk about players "not knowing what they want". It's true, in a sense, though the wording of that is of course fairly hostile.

I really really like a metaphor Mark Rosewhat once said in a GDC talk; he said player feedback is like a patient comming to a doctor. The patient knows what the problem is more than the doctor, but only the doctor knows how to fix it. Same is true for game design - the players are really good at finding the problems in your game, but really bad at solving them.

It's more like the patient getting forced into the clinic because a doctor decided he didn't like his nose and it needs to be removed instead of doing plastic surgery on it.

You won't know if he likes being Voldemort until he wakes up with his nose removed.

Yenwodyah wrote:Oh, you're talking about how many keystrokes it takes? Who gives a shit about that?

I do because amount of button presses directly affects how quickly you can perform an action in combat. Same reason you keep your baton on while stored, because it saves you from pressing "Z" to turn it on whenever you want to use it. Likewise combat mode saves you from pressing 1-2-3-4. It's simply quicker.

Yenwodyah wrote:And unless you want to see every sec officer crafting a spear at roundstart, stunbatons will remain one of the most-used melee weapons.

There are several options way better than a spear and infinitely better than a stunbaton. Hell, even a welder I'm fairly certain is better than a baton for pure harm.

Yenwodyah wrote:With combat mode, left/right click actions can vary wildly across different items, and you have to remember whether or not you're in combat mode before deciding whether to switch it on or off.

This is a good point to bring up. But with intent mode you still had to remember that items had a different action for the various intents, which is in my view no harder than remembering that left/right click have different actions for various items. Once you learn the left/right action items, you never have to wonder about it again, and it saves you time while you're playing. I would rather a slightly higher learning curve if it makes gameplay smoother once the curve is met. Not that intents have a lower learning curve - I still think combat mode is, overall, much more straightforward and clear than the 4 little colored men in the box at the bottom of your UI.

Yenwodyah wrote:But you can't stunbaton e.g. a borg, dragging away the ion gun; and you should know if you've chased someone literally a single time in this game that every tile of distance you have to gain on someone is a struggle; it's immensely easier to get within grabbing distance of what they're dragging than it is to get within striking distance of the dragger.

If someone is dragging an item away from you (I guess that's only borgs usually), you can simply click the item to pick it up. You would never get in an epic drag battle over an ion gun... You would just get within clicking distance and click it to pick it up. Maybe for crates there can be drag battles, but now there are gloves specifically for crate-moving if you really have an issue (should only be needed for cargo tekkies anyway).

Yenwodyah wrote:And again: Literally when has been taking a single one of your fingers off of WASD to press "3" been a challenge? It's not even the same hand as the one on your mouse! You can switch intents and left-click almost simultaneously!

Here I'll just repeat what I said initially: it is not more of a challenge, it is simply more keystrokes and therefore slightly more tedious to perform. Same reason some people always keep internals tanks in their pocket - it's easier to click the "on" button in a pinch than clicking your bag, box, tank, pocket, and then the "on" button. Less keystrokes/clicks = smoother and easier to perform.

thats a lot of deleted posts

All feedback is important, not all feedback requires a reaction

Beyond that, you can't please everyone

The fact that server is still very popular and whenever someone tries to make a "tg station but only with the GOOD CHANGES" server it generally fails miserably seems like an objective indication that something's working

Mickyan wrote:The fact that server is still very popular and whenever someone tries to make a "tg station but only with the GOOD CHANGES" server it generally fails miserably seems like an objective indication that something's working

Because of all the things you need for a server - code, admins, hosting, rules, and a playerbase - 4 out of 5 are still very good on /tg/, and the best of any LRP server.

mfw mso implements the august feature freeze for me

Get well soon oranges

you people are confusing the fact that there were 2 changes in same pr: freeing up right click and combat mode itself

combat mode is completely useless and should just be replaced as currently it has ONLY these uses:
making people not walk through you
if empty hand shakes or punches

the most annoying shit is that grabbing people running away is annoying as you have to shift click while having a hand on mouse and other on wasd

intents with right + left click is a better model than ""combat mode"""

Combat mode good

Combat mode bad

I played a station without combat mode recently and it really cemented my feelings of "4 intents was nice, I was fluent, but holy crap I could not go back man"

Fix grab and combat mode is golden

otherwise its complete and fucking aids and anyone who tried cqc with it will probably share my opinion

Kyrah Abattoir wrote:You guys need to see the writing on the wall and get a new host who understands the limitations of his role. People forget that this already happened (Errorage), and it will happen again.

Me no longer being host wouldn't mean I'd stop dmcaing projects that break AGPL by going closed source and refuse to comply or see reason. (like some of the ones I've seen you associated with.)

I'm not surprised you would try to piggy back off of the drama for your own gain, Given that you're constantly trying to piggy back off of our code without being willing to give anything in return, but its still disappointing.

that's the spirit of the AGPL license right there.

If only you truly believed that.

And before you go and stalk my LinkedIn profile like you did the last time we exchanged words could you do me a favor and use incognito mode so I don't get a notification for it.

oranges wrote:mfw mso implements the august feature freeze for me

You're cool, don't go to the codebase tomorrow.

Flatulent wrote:Fix grab and combat mode is golden

otherwise its complete and fucking aids and anyone who tried cqc with it will probably share my opinion

What's your idea?

Armhulen wrote:

Flatulent wrote:Fix grab and combat mode is golden

otherwise its complete and fucking aids and anyone who tried cqc with it will probably share my opinion

What's your idea?

make the grab hotkey changeable or bring back intents as legacy mode

Tlaltecuhtli wrote:you people are confusing the fact that there were 2 changes in same pr: freeing up right click and combat mode itself

combat mode is completely useless and should just be replaced as currently it has ONLY these uses:
making people not walk through you
if empty hand shakes or punches

the most annoying shit is that grabbing people running away is annoying as you have to shift click while having a hand on mouse and other on wasd

intents with right + left click is a better model than ""combat mode"""

The biggest issue is there are two seperate points.

Was intents good?

Is combat mode good?

They are unrelated to each other.

I haven't used combat mode, but its not that hard to see how it was created.

intents:
help.
harm.
pull 2 the sequel.
The one that i forgot entirely. (harm2 the sequel)

Combat mode:
help, basically
harm, basically.

Flatulent wrote:

Armhulen wrote:

Flatulent wrote:Fix grab and combat mode is golden

otherwise its complete and fucking aids and anyone who tried cqc with it will probably share my opinion

What's your idea?

make the grab hotkey changeable or bring back intents as legacy mode

I agree the instant grab is the only functionality lost. Maybe a hotkey to enter "grab" mode. It would be noninvasive for new players but also very helpful for those who know about it. I remember hearing that bringing back intents as an option full-stop was next to impossible or extremely difficult though.

MrStonedOne wrote:

Tlaltecuhtli wrote:you people are confusing the fact that there were 2 changes in same pr: freeing up right click and combat mode itself

combat mode is completely useless and should just be replaced as currently it has ONLY these uses:
making people not walk through you
if empty hand shakes or punches

the most annoying shit is that grabbing people running away is annoying as you have to shift click while having a hand on mouse and other on wasd

intents with right + left click is a better model than ""combat mode"""

The biggest issue is there are two seperate points.

Was intents good?

Is combat mode good?

They are unrelated to each other.

I haven't used combat mode, but its not that hard to see how it was created.

intents:
help.
harm.
pull 2 the sequel.
The one that i forgot entirely. (harm2 the sequel)

Combat mode:
help, basically
harm, basically.

help, more
harm, more.

Flatulent wrote:

Armhulen wrote:

Flatulent wrote:Fix grab and combat mode is golden

otherwise its complete and fucking aids and anyone who tried cqc with it will probably share my opinion

What's your idea?

make the grab hotkey changeable or bring back intents as legacy mode

as sinful said, having intents as a legacy mode is an incredibly difficult thing to set up and then maintain for the future, from a key binding but also functionality writing perspective. I'd rather have combat mode be better than intents in every way anyways, letting people disable a possible system they don't like is a bandaid for fixing a bad system. And i'm not saying combat mode is bad, but I do think grabbing on ctrl click... could certainly be better!