Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Damiac]

Further gamification (do x task, receive x benefit, always) will never lead to a more 'realistic' simulation of this universe.

we'll have at least some way for books to help limit the penalties it you lack a proficiency as well.

This game has become an accurate representation of a post-apocalyptic bureaucratic hell, where the only thing between you and survival is a paperwork certification that yes, you are allowed to make thing.

I assume from your answers that you don't actually know anything about how proficiencies work in game.

If someone plays stable, proficiencies aren't in game. I assume from your answers you don't know anything about how basic respect works in real life. 

Complaining about changes in games is like 80% of game forum activity. The other 20% is complaining about things that aren't changing. Even if your change were not objectively useless and terrible, you'd get a lot of pushback, and a lot of people not understanding how it works (Since their only source of knowledge on that is you, unless they proactively keep up with all the changes). 

You never answered, why does the current system need an overhaul? What is fundamentally broken in the skill system, as you say? We'd need to understand that to have any chance at understanding why it needs a big change to slow down its progress.  And if there's really a gameplay improvement, is it great enough to justify the extra work now required by anyone else who interacts with this new system, in a coding sense?

Asking those questions is not an attack and seems like a basic first step if you want to explain your change, rather than just decree it's great and we're wrong for not getting it.

[Erk]

Mate, read the posts you've made to me in the last week and see if you can work out why I'm not paying attention to you.

Regardless, I've already answered the questions you're asking.

[Random_Dragon]

Attitude like that is why this forum devolves into complaining. If you're going to answer a request for clarity with smartassery, you have no right to gripe that the thread is so salty.

The crafting system has its flaws, and I understand that the main issue is that skills are really hard to divide up in a way that accurately reflects what kinds of knowledge might be needed to train. A good example is the olden days when just being good at marksmanship were much more important for handloading ammunition than the fabrication skill is now, which apparently led to stuff like archer characters being masters are making handloaded ammo. Proficiencies add a second dimension to making crafting reflect complexities that would otherwise require a fuckton of skills that do one thing and one thing only.

The mechanics are by no means feature-complete enough to ship with stable, but despite my complaints I agree it has potential to make things interesting once it's fleshed out properly.

[Erk]

Man, as has been previously pointed out, I am not paid sufficiently to sit around being sniped at and still pretend I'm here for customer service. I haven't said anything particularly rude to you nor damiac, but I am also not obligated to politely address your every concern when you don't show me the same basic courtesy. I'm not here to debate you, either: this will (again) be my last response to either of you for the foreseeable future. I have no interest in having a boring, unpleasant conversation explaining myself to people who don't actually want to hear the answer, and are in fact only looking for further ways to take digs at me. This is my hobby time, and you actively work to make it less fun.

[Iceblaster]

insert response that cataclysm:dda should honestly get someone who's sole job is to do community work bc the devs for better or for worse are not the best at handling it

i mean this completely cordially of course not directed at your or anyone in particular, just the team as a whole.

[Erk]

It's a nice idea, but there's no way anyone would ever want to do that, and we have no real incentive to pursue someone to do it. Ultimately, the dev team only answers to ourselves, we're making a game with our own resources on our own time, and if anything we have more contributors and players than we can easily handle... We're definitely not having a publicity or engagement problem, and aside from GitHub and discord we rarely get much actionable feedback from forums/reddit. When we engage with the community it is because we enjoy it, not because we have any specific need for it.

That's why I prefer to just not talk to people that are making it un-fun. For comparison, although you and I clearly don't see eye to eye on everything, I've enjoyed our conversation. I don't mind people disagreeing with me or asking about my plans, I just don't really enjoy people passive aggressively sniping at me (or just aggressively) and then acting like I'm a villain because I don't put on a cashier smile and offer to supersize their game in response.

[Iceblaster]

I mean, it's kinda obvious the team does desperately need someone or some people to handle community interactions, because of what you said, even though most internet feedback is complaints most people aren't able to handle it in a way that's constructive or builds a good image.

I myself think the dev team especially on Reddit is overly snippy at people regardless of the response that initiated said response, and that compounds on top of other perceived slights.

Again this kinda ties in my critique of the dev structure, that being a guideless(outside of Kevin and his singular vision) development cycle, which makes it hard to both A: Control what gets done and how fast it gets done and B: Keep the community in on what's going on and respond when the community dislikes something.

And honestly the reason for the Github and Discord stuff being more 'actionable' is bc of the format and the dedication.

If someone's on Github complaining, they likely already are in the know on how coding and th elike works and can more accurately help pinpoint what needs to be done or at least provide enough info, and with Discord with how quick responses can be even amateurs can be better.

Meanwhile the majority of engagement on social media is simply people either A: Showcasing their own stuff or B: Being normal people discussing the game and their thoughts.

It's honestly turned me off the community as a whole when the official subreddit snips at anyone who dislikes a change that they should open an issue on github or post about it there, bc the past has shown that the majority of people don't have the skills required and those who can both post an issue and get their changes past Kevin is much smaller.

This is a bit of a rambling post but the main point is:

I think the cataclysm dev team would really benefit if it got more structured even in terms of organization, because with the size of the project laissez-faire leadership doesn't really work out with the size of the fanbase.

[Erk]

What do you consider a fail state requiring change here?

[Arbinire]

the levels of gaslighting here is astounding.

People asked for an explanation for the changes.  Constantly avoiding answering that is obviously going to illicit more negative responses the longer you refuse to answer.

When someone starts out respectful and asks how the changes actually provide a benefit to the players over the old system, and you ignore them to the point where they start posting in anger, you don't get to go around and say "see, I'm not answering you because you're now being mean".  That just comes off as "It really doesn't provide a benefit, again it's just more tedium for tedium's sake, which we then call 'realism'."

"If you run into an asshole at the beginning of the day, you may have run into an asshole.  If you're running into asshole's all day, YOU'RE the asshole." - Raylan Givens

[IonMatrix]

what

I personally think he explained it pretty well, unless an "explanation" has to include exact numbers or something.

[Iceblaster]

What do you consider a fail state requiring change here?

Consider:

NPCs have been a topic that has been around for quite a while that have been slowly worked on as contributors come and go with motivation, with work going slow over the many years for things that would in other games be settled prior to them being put out.

Things like NPC AI being dumb. While AI is hard and I understand, a focused development cycle solely to develop NPCs without having a million other systems introduced in between -I can only assume the hell NPCs are now dealing with due to the nested container.

It's armchair leadership and shit I know, but as someone who has followed the game literally since it was a game by whales, I really want the game to be good, and tbh I'm at the point where for the game to Be Good, it needs to tighten up its development.

[Erk]

I don't mean to sound harsh but that's really not how it works. Bear in mind that we have very few tools to motivate people to do things. Currently we do set development goals, and mark them out as "tentative release blockers". This tends to work a bit, those projects get pushed more, especially by a few core contributors that are less about individual passion projects. It's been said that my main role in the project is to cheerlead certain core issues to get developed, because apparently I'm fairly good at getting people hyped about things. And occasionally our most effective tool is to fully break something that works badly, forcing it to get fixed. However, none of these are iron clad: using proficiencies as an example anothersimulacrum had to go do real life stuff, leaving only me and my pathetic coding abilities to work on the outstanding bits (to everyone's surprise I've actually managed to do a bunch of it).

If we were to, for example, declare that a given release was going to focus entirely on NPC AI, then we'd only have about three contributors with the necessary skills to do what needs to be done properly. Kevin and Mark both have full time jobs, which is the real reason AI stuff moves so slow (in addition to the massive infrastructure changes we are gradually putting in to improve how it will work). You wouldn't get AI any faster, but everyone who happily contributes other things over time would leave the project, and it would stagnate and die. That isn't an exaggeration: like I said earlier, nobody in the core contributor group would support a change like this. I would leave in a heartbeat.

The system we have does allow things to sit untouched for a long time, but it also provides almost all the things that make cdda what it is. The enormous breadth of play and content is the result of allowing people to add what they know to the game. Sometimes things sit untouched for longer than we want (I'm a huge guilty party for that, I'm a classic adhd project starter. Sorry refugees and beggars, ilu). However, the alternative would be *all* the projects hanging without getting fixed for a much longer time.

[Damiac]

Man, as has been previously pointed out, I am not paid sufficiently to sit around being sniped at and still pretend I'm here for customer service. I haven't said anything particularly rude to you nor damiac, but I am also not obligated to politely address your every concern when you don't show me the same basic courtesy. I'm not here to debate you, either: this will (again) be my last response to either of you for the foreseeable future. I have no interest in having a boring, unpleasant conversation explaining myself to people who don't actually want to hear the answer, and are in fact only looking for further ways to take digs at me. This is my hobby time, and you actively work to make it less fun.

That's fine, you don't usually get devs to come into forum threads for most games, and the few that do show up just spew marketing garbage. So it's nice, in a sense, to see the real mindset of the dev team is just as toxic as suspected.

If someone were passive aggressively punishing the community for not properly enjoying Kevin's perfect creation, they couldn't do it much differently than you guys are without being plainly obvious. I can't get into your head and determine your actual reasons, and you obviously aren't interested in sharing them.

Hopefully this kind of display leads people to understand that this isn't a worthwhile branch to contribute to, and working on cataclysm doesn't have to be like this.

You've been nothing but disrespectful and arrogant your entire time here. Do you think we're too stupid to pick up the condescension? Don't be surprised when it comes back your way, and feel free to make liberal use of the ignore function.

[Iceblaster]

-snip-

Honestly I've spent way more time trying to write a post before realizing that I'm basically going to restate a point about a restructuring of development.

Let me instead digress into another topic.

your attitude is really turning me off of wanting to continue, it's a real obvious trend with the cataclysm 'devs' that shows up anytime negative critique happens, one that boils down to:

• I'm not paid
• I'm doing this for fun.
• Stop being mean.

And yeah that's maybe not 100% accurate however that's what it seems to be and it all gives the impression that any critique of the game is by people who just want to be assholes to be assholes.

You really aren't helping this image, like I've been generous in my readings of your words but you just... You seem to be taking things too personally based on your written language. If you're not enjoying this and don't want to act as the liason of the devs implicitly, then... no one's forcing you dude

I've mentioned before that catadda really needs dedicated community outreach people BECAUSE of issues like these, where the devs feel a far more intense response to critique to their own work when they go into the community at large. It's a common issue in a lot of indie devs, I'm sure you can find any number of examples of indie dev lashing out at fans who dislike their game bc instead of having a neutral -company- person handle the community stuff.

[Erk]

-snip-

Honestly I've spent way more time trying to write a post before realizing that I'm basically going to restate a point about a restructuring of development.

That's fine, I don't have much else to say on the matter either. We're not obligated to come to an agreement or anything.

Let me instead digress into another topic.

your attitude is really turning me off of wanting to continue, it's a real obvious trend with the cataclysm 'devs' that shows up anytime negative critique happens, one that boils down to:

• I'm not paid
• I'm doing this for fun.
• Stop being mean.

I'll admit I'm puzzled and a bit unhappy that you feel that way. I was under the impression we were having a fairly interesting talk. Is there something I've actually said that you're responding to here?

And yeah that's maybe not 100% accurate however that's what it seems to be and it all gives the impression that any critique of the game is by people who just want to be assholes to be assholes.

Your first two points are completely accurate and are like 95% of what's relevant. The last point is a bit of a misrepresentation. I don't care if people are mean, I'm just not under any requirement to be nice back, or to offer any response at all.

For example, as I said a post or two ago I am still here talking to you because I thought we were having a good discussion. I don't expect you to agree with me or to come to a point where you share my opinions, but reading your concerns and addressing your questions was pleasant, which is why I'm still here talking to you. For some reason I don't fully understand, you're interpreting this as me thinking that only assholes would disagree with me, which confuses me as it's literally the opposite of what I'm saying. If I felt only assholes disagreed with me I wouldn't bother with any of the communities outside GitHub and discord.

You really aren't helping this image, like I've been generous in my readings of your words but you just... You seem to be taking things too personally based on your written language. If you're not enjoying this and don't want to act as the liason of the devs implicitly, then... no one's forcing you dude

Again I'm mostly just confused by this. About the only thing I take personally in this conversation is being accused of being an alt, or told I don't know anything about the game. Again: I just told you I was here because I was enjoying our conversation . That's not code for anything.

I've mentioned before that catadda really needs dedicated community outreach people BECAUSE of issues like these, where the devs feel a far more intense response to critique to their own work when they go into the community at large. It's a common issue in a lot of indie devs, I'm sure you can find any number of examples of indie dev lashing out at fans who dislike their game bc instead of having a neutral -company- person handle the community stuff.

So first, again: there is no fail state here. In fact this is the only community i would say this is even a problem in, and I don't mean to be unkind when I say that's a complete non-issue. No aspect of cdda development revolves around how salty the Bay12 thread gets, I am literally the only contributor that still checks in here.

Second, I wonder if you are confusing me being irritated at a particular posting style for being irritated at critique. I have changed proficiencies quite significantly since implementation based on criticism, moved project aspects up and down in priority, etc. What I dislike is the kind of bullshit only seen here, the kind you appear to be defending. Consider:

Ah, the Kevin style of cata development: "I've implemented all the downsides to my weird changes that literally nobody wants. Good enough, everything is broken now, which is realism!"

Are you SURE you're not kevin's alt?

Kevin and his crew have a history of driving away anyone who doesn't agree with his vision of a fun free and tedium infested "game".

seriously though, it's like Kevin is Brian Griffon in that episode of Family Guy where he takes Stewie's ADD meds

You code first implementation yourself, ignore the prerequisites, then demand other people finish it.

Erk's code diving skills seem a bit sparse for a dev. I mean, I haven't asked about anything in ages because I don't expect them to have the answer for anything that isn't just surface code.

And on. Most of that is in the last four pages alone, where I had the audacity to misspeak and suggest a feature was nearing completion when in fact it has a fair bit of work to do, which I clarified almost immediately. Then I stuck around because despite the constant personal attacks on me and my friends (although when they say Kevin we both know they mean me, since I have been quite open about proficiencies being my pet project) there is sometimes an interesting thread, although I seriously wonder at this point why I bother.

In fact I think I just talked myself out of it.

We have around half a dozen major communities, none of which are universally pleasant, but all of which generally offer a net positive "fun and chat" to "digs about your personality and competence" ratio. This is one thread (and there are as with any other community lots of good players and good conversations here) is just exhausting. I don't know why Bay12 is so intensely, personally, and relentlessly negative, but I've decided I don't really care to figure it out.

We had a nice time for a while, and I did really enjoy that talk about proficiencies, but I can get the same talk anywhere without having to defend myself against people that only want to insult me, or people that want to defend the people trying to insult me. Despite the really pleasant majority of the players here, the assholes have successfully made it just not worth anyone's time.

Congratulations, now no developers check this thread. Have a cool day.