So, the answer to my question seems to be "Not much". When I look at what we have now in game compared to what we had at launch, I can see a lot of changes that were implemented, and a lot of those came from here, or, at least, were discussed a lot here. So, the only real benefit would be stroking some poster's egos. That always feels good, I like it when people stroke my ego, but in so far as game development goes, I don't really want it, or need it. The end result will be something I like, and I really hope it is, or it won't. I don't need them explaining why something will or won't be changed, if I can play it, and see that it makes sense. A good example would be the "playersexuality" of the companions. I'm not a fan, but I understand why it's done the way it is, and I don't need a Q&A session to have that question answered.
I mean, maybe. We can't really tell without having a Q&A and seeing the result. Some of it would certainly depend on how well Larian answers the questions: are the answers fairly vague and not satisfactory, or are they detailed with at least understandable reasons?
It's dismissive to assert the only reason for a Q&A is to validate egos for participating in EA and providing feedback (which, fair, is partly a reason). But I'm also honestly curious about Larian's process and reasons, and I do think some of Larian's responses would lead to more useful feedback. And imo, many of the people who would get mad at Larian's Q&A responses are probably already miffed at Larian rn, so I don't think a Q&A would hurt much. It's likely that the mollified people would outnumber the people who get angrier.
I can't say one way or the other. But the "ego stroking" I mentioned is already listed in the "I think they owe us that" posts in this very thread. We already have people that don't like the PFH stuff, I think there was a thread about that the other day, and yet, that's communication about what's going on in development, even if it doesn't address everything, or address it satisfactorily for some posters. I can't say that they're a wealth of information, or insight, but they're fun, most of the time.
The problem is that we haven't been told that the current reaction system IS the final one.
Which affirms my initial post on why Larian has nothing to gain from speaking further on the issue. As long as they don't confirm anything, some people will cling to hope because they haven't explicitly denied anything.
You're technically right they have not confirmed Reaction system won't change, but you can read between the lines. This PFH Swen said that Larian is nearing the end of making the game into what they want it to be and they're going to move on to polishing everything and getting rid of bugs and making everything pretty.
So, if you're playing a game with Reactions the way they are, and someone says what Swen said or along those lines, do you think the game is going to go under a major transformative overhaul? IMHO, if Reactions were going to change into anything like Solasta, this would have been the patch for that to happen.
The problem is that we haven't been told that the current reaction system IS the final one.
Which affirms my initial post on why Larian has nothing to gain from speaking further on the issue. As long as they don't confirm anything, some people will cling to hope because they haven't explicitly denied anything.
You're technically right they have not confirmed Reaction system won't change, but you can read between the lines. This PFH Swen said that Larian is nearing the end of making the game into what they want it to be and they're going to move on to polishing everything and getting rid of bugs and making everything pretty.
So, if you're playing a game with Reactions the way they are, and someone says what Swen said or along those lines, do you think the game is going to go under a major transformative overhaul? IMHO, if Reactions were going to change into anything like Solasta, this would have been the patch for that to happen.
Ah, but does that "clinging to hope" lead to even greater disappointment and anger at Larian in the end? ...honestly probably not, at least not significantly.
Also, we don't really know what we can count on being in/out of the game at final release. Swen has said that they're saving stuff so that even us EA players will have a lot of Act 1 surprises. Now, is it likely that they'll change entire systems? Probably not. These "surprises" will likely be mostly new content (companions, areas, quests, cutscenes) as opposed to modified major mechanics. But it's not impossible. The food and resting system in particular is something Larian hasn't touched in a while, so if there's one big mechanic they might change for full release I'm putting my money on that.
I suspect that they're making decisions based off of data. They know, for instance, how many players are actually using shove as a bonus action, and they're factoring that into the balance of the game without having to rely on Mr.-Forum-Resident-Kruger to explain how it's "objectively" wrong.
If this is the case, then this forum (in which they asked to provide feedback) would be pointless.
We have two possibilities: 1) The forum is indeed pointless, and Larian is just a liar to its customers; 2) The forum has its purpose regarding feedback but Larian is just silently watching without (publicly) acknowledging any of them.
I really think we are facing option number two, so, my answer is the same as before:
Originally Posted by Sharet
I think a Q/A session would be great, for us and for them. We would be able to focus our feedback on where they can make a difference instead of wasting energy debating the usual 4 points, and they would be able to test and collect data for the features they are currently working on.
Sidenote: I agree that we are not entitled to anything. We bought an EA game of our own free will and nobody ever promised us direct responses to our feedback. At the same time, I think is a really poor marketing strategy for Larian to completely ignore those people who have spent premium money to buy an unfinished game just to help them make the best possible product.
I, for example, am pretty sure am never going to buy another EA game from them. Not because I dislike them or the game (I love both, even with their faults), but if I feel like my energies and words are falling on deaf ears, then I really don't want to spend any more time and money on an unfinished game. I know my not buying another EA game from them is not going to make them shiver in fear of bankruptcy (not that I want that from them in the first place) but for them is a source of data less in the development of their next game.
And, again, for "falling on deaf ears" I don't mean they have to fulfil my every wish, just to let me (us) know that they have acknowledged the feedback and what is their standpoint on the aspect of the game they discuss.
I suspect that they're making decisions based off of data. They know, for instance, how many players are actually using shove as a bonus action, and they're factoring that into the balance of the game without having to rely on Mr.-Forum-Resident-Kruger to explain how it's "objectively" wrong.
If this is the case, then this forum (in which they asked to provide feedback) would be pointless.
We have two possibilities: 1) The forum is indeed pointless, and Larian is just a liar to its customers; 2) The forum has its purpose regarding feedback but Larian is just silently watching without (publicly) acknowledging any of them.
I really think we are facing option number two, so, my answer is the same as before:
Nonsense. The inability to perceive more than two possibilities does not preclude additional possibilities.
Likely, the forums exist to provide a sense of community for the players, and, after all, it doesn't hurt to solicit feedback in the hopes of a diamond in the rough. But mostly to get a feeling for the general pulse of the crowd. This, of course, is only useful at peak moments, which is to say when a large sample of folks arrive to share their opinion.
So. First, a forum is expected.
Second, a good idea may surface. Rare, but possible. As such, the wheat must always be separated from the chaff. In other words, everyone knows there's going to be an abundance of know-it-alls descending into the threads. These are the Dunning-Kruger types, the folks who are so sure they know best, the people who scoff and insist the developers are incompetent buffoons who can neither code nor write.
And third, in proper moments--meaning when enough folks contribute--it's possible to get a general feeling from the crowd. Are certain things being well received, ignored, or misunderstood? Unfortunately, we aren't anywhere near the level of traffic necessary to glean anything useful in that regard. These days, the forums are home to the same handful of folks who (largely) keep saying the same handful of things.
I suspect that they're making decisions based off of data. They know, for instance, how many players are actually using shove as a bonus action, and they're factoring that into the balance of the game without having to rely on Mr.-Forum-Resident-Kruger to explain how it's "objectively" wrong.
But relying only on the data would be an error. I'm pretty sure most of those who disapprove of shove as a bonus action still use it all the time because hey its there you may as well do a shove after your attack. Thus the data alone would not give a complete answer as to whether players prefer that option.
I suspect that they're making decisions based off of data. They know, for instance, how many players are actually using shove as a bonus action, and they're factoring that into the balance of the game without having to rely on Mr.-Forum-Resident-Kruger to explain how it's "objectively" wrong.
But relying only on the data would be an error. I'm pretty sure most of those who disapprove of shove as a bonus action still use it all the time because hey its there you may as well do a shove after your attack. Thus the data alone would not give a complete answer as to whether players prefer that option.
I would say that the data should show that EVERY single NPC and PC is using Shove all the time. That should be a clue that Shove is over represented in the game and the obvious point would be because Larian has made the action a Bonus Action.
I would say that the data should show that EVERY single NPC and PC is using Shove all the time. That should be a clue that Shove is over represented in the game and the obvious point would be because Larian has made the action a Bonus Action.
Well, that's one of the main issues of relying just on data without keeping in mind context or listening to what people have to say, isn't it?
Another take could be "LOOK, EVERYONE USES SHOVE ALL THE TIME! This means we managed to make it super-fun!".
Party control in Baldur's Gate 3 is a complete mess that begs to be addressed. SAY NO TO THE TOILET CHAIN
Just data might show that few people are using tadpole in dialog or combat. They might try to change situations in order to force or coerce us to use it.
Balance is more than light and dark, more than sin and virtue.
My guess is that the data shows a reasonable distribution of how people are using their bonus actions. In other words, I don't think shove is being used all the time; rather, I think the suggestion otherwise is hyperbolic, at best.
There are plenty of options to use the bonus action on. Myself, I rarely use shove.
As such, the data would indicate that shove is not broken. Instead, it's just another bonus action option on the table.
*
I also believe the shove distance is fine. In fact, I think it's been lowered from earlier patches, and I *heavily* suspect that at least half the people here complaining about it having played the game at all since circa patch 4.
Since the topic came up, this DOS 2 post-mortem has some interesting clips about the risks of relying on data without looking too closely at context AND of ignoring your user base's feedback under the assumption that they are an anomaly and their opinions don't reflect the state of the game.
Last edited by Tuco; 16/07/2205:20 PM.
Party control in Baldur's Gate 3 is a complete mess that begs to be addressed. SAY NO TO THE TOILET CHAIN
Would you mind reminding me at what time this is discussed ? I watched this video a long time ago, I don't remember all the content discussed and where it was.
Also, in the YouTube video category but much shorter (15 min), I recommend to everyone (players and Larian) this video from GMTK :
Would you mind reminding me at what time this is discussed ?
I allegedly put the timestap as preset in the link, but this forum doesn't seem to work gracefully with them. Anyway, I watched the whole thing more than once as there's plenty to learn over the entire presentation, but I'm specifically referring to the part about the armor system at the 40 minutes mark (and most of what followed it).
Party control in Baldur's Gate 3 is a complete mess that begs to be addressed. SAY NO TO THE TOILET CHAIN
This is an early access. THEY should ask questions to players.
It would be so much fun if Larian was doing an AMA but in which THEY asked us questions. All players could be free to answer or not directly on the AMA. Giving live feedback and eventually suggestions on specific questions raised by Larian. On top of that, there's an upvote / downvote function^^
It could be a good idea for the upcoming new COMA :p
I can't say one way or the other. But the "ego stroking" I mentioned is already listed in the "I think they owe us that" posts in this very thread. We already have people that don't like the PFH stuff, I think there was a thread about that the other day, and yet, that's communication about what's going on in development, even if it doesn't address everything, or address it satisfactorily for some posters. I can't say that they're a wealth of information, or insight, but they're fun, most of the time.
You've used this phrase a couple of times in this thread and since I'm the one who stated posters are owed some engagement by the developer (on the forum that they set up to discuss the game), allow me to explain to you why I find your use of this phrase offensive.
I'm retired from a long and successful career in finance, I've two kids in university who occupy most of my time and energy. I play this game as a hobby. I don't need my "ego stroked" by anybody, never have. If you had read my original post and some following additions it would be clear that I'm asking for the bare minimum of respect from the developers to engage with their customers (the players they profess to care about) on their own forum. I built a thriving practice in no small part due to a commitment to keeping my clients informed and feeling like they mattered to me. Plenty of my competitors took a different can't be bothered view, many of their customers became some of my most valuable clients.
My OP was respectful and simply asked for Larian to engage (again in a format of their choosing on their own forum) after being more or less AWOL since this forum was started.
It's OK for you to have a different view, but please desist from casually inferring that I need my ego stroked (which is a pejorative slur on my motivations) when all I am asking for is respectful engagement. After all you know nothing about me.
I can't say one way or the other. But the "ego stroking" I mentioned is already listed in the "I think they owe us that" posts in this very thread. We already have people that don't like the PFH stuff, I think there was a thread about that the other day, and yet, that's communication about what's going on in development, even if it doesn't address everything, or address it satisfactorily for some posters. I can't say that they're a wealth of information, or insight, but they're fun, most of the time.
Only thing is they DO owe to their customers what THEY chose to advertise, which is healthy communication to those who take the time to give feedback. Which they haven't done ever since... ever. Which makes THEM liars.
I suspect that they're making decisions based off of data. They know, for instance, how many players are actually using shove as a bonus action, and they're factoring that into the balance of the game without having to rely on Mr.-Forum-Resident-Kruger to explain how it's "objectively" wrong.
If this is the case, then this forum (in which they asked to provide feedback) would be pointless.
We have two possibilities: 1) The forum is indeed pointless, and Larian is just a liar to its customers; 2) The forum has its purpose regarding feedback but Larian is just silently watching without (publicly) acknowledging any of them.
I really think we are facing option number two, so, my answer is the same as before:
Nonsense. The inability to perceive more than two possibilities does not preclude additional possibilities.
Likely, the forums exist to provide a sense of community for the players, and, after all, it doesn't hurt to solicit feedback in the hopes of a diamond in the rough. But mostly to get a feeling for the general pulse of the crowd. This, of course, is only useful at peak moments, which is to say when a large sample of folks arrive to share their opinion.
So. First, a forum is expected.
Second, a good idea may surface. Rare, but possible. As such, the wheat must always be separated from the chaff. In other words, everyone knows there's going to be an abundance of know-it-alls descending into the threads. These are the Dunning-Kruger types, the folks who are so sure they know best, the people who scoff and insist the developers are incompetent buffoons who can neither code nor write.
And third, in proper moments--meaning when enough folks contribute--it's possible to get a general feeling from the crowd. Are certain things being well received, ignored, or misunderstood? Unfortunately, we aren't anywhere near the level of traffic necessary to glean anything useful in that regard. These days, the forums are home to the same handful of folks who (largely) keep saying the same handful of things.
Of course the forum exists also for the community, just the presence of the "Helps, Tips and Tricks" proves it. I was talking about what concerns the feedback department.
