modormenace (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
modormenace) wrote2020-10-06 08:30 pm
modormenace) wrote2020-10-06 08:30 pm
Feedback Development (Fall 2020)
FEEDBACK DEVELOPMENT
Welcome to Feedback Development! Note, you do not give feedback on this post, just help design the process. Here, players can watch and participate as China develops player feedback questions and answers. You can also offer suggestions. China will also be determining how to establish player consensus (percentages agree/disagree, abstinence or indifference), while also protecting minorities (who might be outvoted but still need consideration).
Preliminary statistics
- As of October 6, we have 93 individual players.
- 23 of those appeared to actively engage in feedback on the latest OOC post (let us know if the estimate is wrong), which leaves ~75.3% who have not spoken. Anything less than a comprehensive effort won't be representative.
Big picture
- As a general statement: almost every game mechanic or setting detail we change
- make the game easier and less time-consuming to run (by general mod consensus),
- clean up old setting elements that have no consistent underlying lore to make space for new ones supported by fresh underlying lore. This way, characters will be able to dig into small details of the world, investigate, ask 'Why?' and plot to affect change,
- improve accessibility and welcome for new players, based on previous feedback that the existing structures were overwhelming, burdensome, and/or confusing
- make the game easier and less time-consuming to run (by general mod consensus),
- That being said, we realize that elements can be fun and worth keeping even if they are completely disconnected from lore and investigation, and some people may use them. We will include spaces for that in feedback.
- Current ROUGH proposal: polls will be used (in some format or other, most likely DW, possibly Surveymonkey), followed by open discussion and a second round of polls if necessary.
- For now, the default assumption is 'Don't care/mind' and neutral responses will be counted as accepting to mod-proposed changes, unless there are concerns with ableism, accessibility, or similar minority experiences; however exceptions can be made! "Abstains" won't be counted at all.
Commenting guide
- To keep this page readable, do not reply to other's comments, just make a top-level; the page should be totally readable via Flatview (see also: new Rule about representing the opinions of others). If anyone replies to another person's comment, China will notify them this is unhelpful and ask them to delete/move to a top-level within 48 hours, or it will be deleted for them.
- Use subject headers to indicate which stage of planning you're referring to (e.g., Akita, Beagle)! If you forget to, China will remind you via reply then delete her comment so you can edit it.
Previous development phase: Akita
COMPLETED 10/15/2020
- Defunct instructions: Look at the current slate of questions then use this form to make suggestions (side-by-side view recommended). Post the form as a top-level, edit your comment as often as you like until Phase Beagle closes in ~1 week (October 13). At that point, China may reply to your completed form requesting clarifications, preparing for Phase Beagle.
EXPAND 'AKITA' DRAFT QUESTIONS
FW1: How did you feel about the Fractured World plot (multiple choice)?- Enjoyed overall
Did not like the focus and themes
Had a fun time overall
Had some fun, but significant improvements needed
Liked the focus on plotting/intrigue/action
Opt-out was fine for me, but should be changed for others
Opt-out was problematic for me
OOC or log posts were very confusing
OOC or log posts were somewhat confusing
Object to triggering/offensive content (especially in absence of inadequate opt-out)
Strongly/disliked overall
FW2: How did you feel about the FW event frequency (choose one)?- Good
Too few events
Too many events
Don't mind/care
Unsure
Abstain
FW3: Overall, how satisfied were you with the Fractured World plot (Likert)?- 10 Extremely liked it, 6 Satisfactory, 5 Unsatisfactory, 1 Extremely disliked
GEN1: Which October 1 setting updates did you like OR not mind/care about (multiple choice)?- Arrival ceremony/mingle
Nanite tattoos disappeared
Simultaneous (instead of staggered) Port-in arrival
None (abstain)
GEN2: Which of the October 1 setting updates did you NOT like (multiple choice)?- [same options as above]
GEN3: Do you want Mask or Menace to have an in-depth, internally consistent cosmology and metaplot that can be investigated and affected by individuals (choose one)?- Yes
No
Maybe
Don't care/mind
Abstain
GEN4: How much time before the transition would you want detailed information on the new setting (choose one)?- 1 week
2 weeks
1 month
Do not want changes
Other
GEN5: Do you want the refusal of Registration to have IC consequences (choose one)?- Yes, such as not having government housing
Yes, but less 'severe' than removal of government housing
No OR want it to stay the same as now
Maybe
Don't care/mind
Abstain
GEN6: In broad 'genres,' what do you want to see in mod-run plot logs (multiple choice)?- Action
Alternate timelines
Comedic features
Good vs bad (fairly clear-cut)
Investigation, puzzles
Law vs crime (with 'good/bad' on each side)
Light-hearted fare
Moral ambiguity (with opt-outs for triggers)
Politics (some)
Politics (FW level or more intense)
'Slice of life' and personal storylines
Teamwork challenges with skills/powers
Abstain
APP1: Which sections of the new application do you like [basic character/player info not included] (multiple choice)?- Synopsis
Adaptation
Presentation
Psychology
Powers
Power weaknesses
Skills
In-Game Development
Samples (Thread)
Samples (Voice)
None
APP2: What application sections do you not like (multiple choice)?- [same options as above]
FB1: Do you want public post feedback POLLS (choose one)?- Yes
No
Maybe
Don't care/mind
Abstain
FB2: Do you want players to be able to give FREEFORM public post feedback to other players (choose one)?- Yes
No
Maybe
Don't care/mind
Abstain
FB3: If players give freeform public feedback to mods (e.g., on game mechanics but also conduct), do you want mods to be able to return feedback to players (choose one)?- Yes
No
Maybe
Don't care/mind
Abstain
NEW1: Would you enjoy a public, searchable, cross-indexed database of ImPort powers to facilitate plotting and CR (choose one)?- Yes
No
Maybe
Don't care/mind
Abstain
NEW2: Would you enjoy a 'Powers Workshop' OOC thread where interested players help each other come up with superpowers ideas, weaknesses, and other writeup details (choose one)?- Yes
No
Maybe
Don't care/mind
Abstain - Enjoyed overall
Previous development phase: Beagle
COMPLETED 11/22/2020
- Defunct instructions: Look at the current slate of questions then use this form to make suggestions (side-by-side view recommended). Post the form as a top-level, edit your comment as often as you like until Phase Akita closes in ~1 week (October 22). At that point, China may reply to your completed form requesting clarifications, preparing for Phase Chowchow.
EXPAND 'BEAGLE' DRAFT QUESTIONS
FW1: How did you feel about the Fractured World plot (multiple choice)?- Enjoyed overall
Did not like the focus and themes
Had a fun time overall
Had some fun, but significant improvements needed
Liked the focus on plotting/intrigue/action
Opt-out was fine for me, but should be changed for others
Opt-out was problematic for me
OOC or log posts were very confusing
OOC or log posts were somewhat confusing
Object to triggering/offensive content (especially in absence of inadequate opt-out)
Strongly/disliked overall
Abstain
FW2: How did you feel about the FW event frequency (choose one)?- Good
Too few events
Too many events
Don't mind/care
Unsure
Abstain
FW3: Overall, how satisfied were you with the Fractured World plot (10 - extremely enjoyed, 6 - satisfied, 5 - unsatisfied, 1 - extremely disliked, leave blank if did not participate) (Likert)?- 10 Extremely enjoyed it, 6 Satisfactory, 5 Unsatisfactory, 1 Extremely disliked
FW4: How did you feel about the FW plot as a Test Drive Meme (multiple choice)?- Gave inaccurate expectations of the game
Overwhelming/confusing
Good opportunity to get involved
Helped develop ideas for my character
Don't care
Abstain
FW5: Additional thoughts on feedback (freeform)?
GEN1: Which October 1 setting updates did you like OR not mind/care about (multiple choice)?- Arrival ceremony/mingle
Nanite tattoos disappeared
Simultaneous (instead of staggered) Port-in arrival
None (abstain)
GEN2: Which of the October 1 setting updates did you NOT like (multiple choice)?- [same options as above]
GEN3: Do you want Mask or Menace to have an in-depth, internally consistent cosmology and metaplot that can be investigated and affected by individuals (choose one)?- Yes
No
Maybe
Don't care/mind
Abstain
GEN4: How much time before the transition would you want detailed information on the new setting (choose one)?- 1 week
2 weeks
1 month
Do not want changes
Other
GEN5: Do you want the refusal of Registration to have IC consequences (choose one)?- Yes, such as not having government housing
Yes, but less 'severe' than removal of government housing
No OR want it to stay the same as now
Maybe
Don't care/mind
Abstain
GEN6: In broad 'genres,' what do you want to see in mod-run plot logs (multiple choice)?- Action
Alternate timelines
Comedic features
Faction-based
Good vs bad (fairly clear-cut)
Investigation, puzzles
Law vs crime (with 'good/bad' on each side)
Light-hearted fare
Moral ambiguity (with opt-outs for triggers)
Politics (some)
Politics (FW level or more intense)
'Slice of life' and personal storylines
Teamwork challenges with skills/powers
Abstain
GEN7: What broad 'genres' do you actively avoid in roleplay in general (multiple choice)?- [same options as above]
GEN8: Would you like more [optional] PC conflict opportunities (pick one)?- Yes
No
Not for me but for others, sure
Don't care/mind
Abstain
GEN9: Would you want to have more collaborative/player input plots in the future, similar to the Fractured World (multiple choice?- Yes, with the same amount of flexibility as FW
Yes, but with more restrictions than FW
No
Don't care
Abstain
GEN10: Additional thoughts on general topics (freeform)?
APP1: Have you completed the new character application (pick one)?- Yes, and submitted
Yes, but not submitted
No
APP2: Which sections of the new application do you like [basic character/player info not included] (multiple choice)?- Synopsis
Adaptation
Presentation
Psychology
Powers
Power weaknesses
Skills
In-Game Development
Samples (Thread)
Samples (Voice)
Word Count
None
APP3: What application sections do you not like (multiple choice)?- [same options as above]
APP4: How can the application be improved for OCs, if we can increase the manpower to accommodate it (multiple choice)?- History section
Setting section
Higher word count
Acceptable
Don't care/mind
Abstain
APP5: Any specific suggestions for tweaks to the application not covered by the above (e.g., adding another question, renaming an existing section)? (freeform)
APP6: Additional thoughts on applications (freeform)?
FB1: Do you want public post feedback POLLS (choose one)?- Yes
No
Maybe
Don't care/mind
Abstain
FB2: Do you want players to be able to give FREEFORM public post feedback to other players (choose one)?- Yes
No
Maybe
Don't care/mind
Abstain
FB3: If players give freeform public feedback to mods (e.g., on game mechanics but also conduct), do you want mods to be able to respond directly to those players and the feedback provided (choose one)?- Yes
No
Maybe
Don't care/mind
Abstain
FB4: Additional thoughts on feedback (freeform)?
NEW1: Would you enjoy a public, searchable, cross-indexed database of ImPort powers to facilitate plotting and CR (choose one)?- Yes
No
Maybe
Don't care/mind
Abstain
NEW2: Would you enjoy a 'Powers Workshop' OOC thread where interested players help each other come up with superpowers ideas, weaknesses, and other writeup details (choose one)?- Yes
No
Maybe
Don't care/mind
Abstain
NEW3: Additional thoughts on new mechanics (freeform)? - Enjoyed overall
Current/FINAL development phase: Chowchow
- SEEKING 3 PLAYER VOLUNTEERS: Welcome to our final phase of feedback development! We need players to beta test the survey code. These folks need to be detail-oriented and generally available for about 72 hours, possibly checking multiple iterations of the survey, because once the survey is published, it cannot be changed.
If you'd like to volunteer, please contact China on the Mod Contact page with subject header 'ATTN CHINA: Survey Test Volunteer' or comment below. Your identity will not be disclosed to the other players unless you choose to do so!
We apologize for the significant delay. In addition to the impact of RL (including global events), we had to make significant changes to reduce significant misinterpretation of the questions. Items were added and reworded, hopefully preserving the spirit of the concerns. When the post is launched on Wednesday, November 25 (assuming we get enough volunteers), players will also be able to comment freeform as long as they do not reply each to each other and follow the rules. - See this question thread on the balance between mod needs/objectives and player feedback.
- At this point, it is very unlikely we can make major structural changes, additions, or deletions to the survey. All previously suggested questions should be included, though some may have been reworded. If you have concerns about phrasing/structure/etc., please inform us on Mod Contact using the subject header 'ATTN: CHINA, FEEDBACK DEVELOPMENT.'
However, notes on typos and minor errors are welcome!
EXPAND 'CHOWCHOW' FINAL QUESTIONS
FW1: Did you play in the Fractured World? (choose one)
Yes
No (please still try answering the FW questions with what you know about the AU)
Abstain (please still try answering the FW questions with what you know about the AU)
FW2: In the Fractured World AU, how enjoyable did you find the THEMES OF POLITICAL/ACTION PLOTTING? (Likert)
Not at all enjoyable, somewhat enjoyable, moderately enjoyable, very enjoyable, extremely enjoyable
FW3: In the Fractured World AU, what content TRIGGERED you (e.g., race issues, gender issues, violence) and how? If you did not feel particularly triggered, please respond N/A (Free response)
FW4: For the Fractured World AU, what kind of OPT-OUT would be sufficient? If you have an idea not listed here, please tell us in Mod Contact. (choose one)
Original opt-out: PCs go to the "alternate" version of Jeopardy, where life is typical, but are aware of FW events and can come/go
Player-driven upgrade: PCs go to "alternate" Jeopardy, where life is typical, and MAY BE unable to leave and cut off from the network due to temporospatial distortions
Not offered: PCs were 'left behind'/did not apparently have to leave the home universe whatsoever
Not offered: PCs did not apparently have to leave the home universe and did not notice anything happened to FW participating PCs
Not offered: Other (to be elaborated in Mod Contact)
FW5: In the Fractured World AU experience, how CONFUSING WAS THE WRITING IN OOC AND LOG POSTS for you? (Likert)
Not at all confusing, somewhat confusing, moderately confusing, very confusing, extremely confusing
FW6: In the Fractured World AU experience, how did you feel about the FREQUENCY OF EVENT LOGS? (Likert)
Too infrequent, somewhat infrequent, adequate frequency, somewhat too frequent, too frequent
FW7: In the Fractured World AU experience, how would you have felt about A MORE CONVENTIONAL, NON-AU TEST DRIVE MEME? (skip if inapplicable, and please note this is unlikely to occur again) (Likert)
Not at all preferable, somewhat preferable, moderately preferable, very much preferable, extremely preferable
FW8: Based on your Fractured World AU experience, how much did you enjoy the CREATIVE FREEDOM AND PLAYER COLLABORATION/CUSTOMIZATION in writing the type of plot you wanted? (Likert)
Not at all enjoyable, somewhat enjoyable, moderately enjoyable, very enjoyable, extremely enjoyable
FW9: Based on your Fractured World AU experience, how restrictive did you feel the RESTRICTIONS/LIMITS TO CREATIVE FREEDOM were in writing the type of plot you wanted? (Likert)
Too relaxed, somewhat too relaxed, adequately restrictive, somewhat overly restrictive, extremely overly restrictive
FW10: How interested would you be in trying a FUTURE MOD PLOT that is VERY SIMILAR to the Fractured World AU? (Likert)
Not at all interested, somewhat interested, moderately interested, very interested, extremely interested
FW11: Additional thoughts on Fractured World AU applying to FUTURE MOD PLOTS? (freeform)
GEN1: Which October 1 setting updates did you dislike? Anything left unchecked will be considered ‘liked’ or ‘indifferent.’ (multiple choice)
Nanite tattoos disappeared
Simultaneous (instead of staggered) Port-in arrival
None (abstain)
GEN2: We will implement an in-depth, internally consistent cosmology and metaplot that can be investigated and affected by individuals. How much do you want the metaplot to impact day-to-day play/game mechanics?
Some impact (PCs directly affected 1-2x annually by prewarned changes but can otherwise ignore/opt out of serious upheaval)
Moderate impact (PCs directly affected by prewarned events 3+x/year and usually CANNOT IGNORE them, but can opt out of serious upheaval)
A great deal of impact (PCs face frequent prewarned upheaval, only serious injury and major triggers are opt-outs)
Abstain
GEN3: How much time before the transition would you want detailed information on the new setting (choose one)?
2 weeks
More than 2 weeks
Abstain
GEN4: Do you want the refusal of Registration to have IC consequences (choose one)?
Yes, but less 'severe' than removal of government housing
No OR want it to stay the same as now
Maybe
Don't care/mind
Abstain
GEN5: In broad 'genres,' how interested are you in playing ACTION/ADVENTURE events, including war/combat, monster-fighting, dangerous ImPort power effects, and rescue operations? (Likert)
GEN6: In broad 'genres,' how interested are you in playing ALTERNATE TIMELINE events, such as the Fractured World AND CNC 2020? (Likert)
GEN7: In broad 'genres,' how interested are you in playing COMEDIC/SILLY events, such as light-hearted animal transformations, 'stuck in an elevator' (with a friend), and other humorous tropes? (Likert)
GEN8: In broad 'genres,' how interested are you in playing FACTION DRIVEN events, such as the Fractured World OR game canon PC organizations coming into conflict? (Likert)
GEN9: In broad 'genres,' how interested are you in playing MORALLY UNAMBIGUOUS LAW VS CRIME or SUPERHERO VS SUPERVILLAIN events, such as Registered heroes going against organized crime/PC villains? (Likert)
GEN10: In broad 'genres,' how interested are you in playing MORALLY AMBIGUOUS CONFLICT (with opt-outs for triggers), where PC mistakes, differences in understanding heroism and Registration cause substantial grey areas? (Likert)
GEN11: In broad 'genres,' how interested are you in playing SOCIAL/PARTY events, such as FanPort and other PC-hosted parties? (Likert)
GEN12: In broad 'genres,' how interested are you in playing HEAVILY POLITICAL events, such as the Fractured World or previous ImPort 'elections?' (Likert)
GEN13: Would you like more [optional] PC conflict opportunities (pick one)?
No
Don't care/mind
Abstain
GEN14: Additional thoughts on general topics, e.g., you like Ambassador elections BUT NOT Fractured World politics, or prefer to avoid specific comedy tropes (freeform)?
APP1: Have you completed the new character application (pick one)?
Yes, but not submitted
No
APP2: Which sections of the new application do you like [basic character/player info not included] (multiple choice)?
Adaptation
Presentation
Psychology
Powers
Power weaknesses
Skills
In-Game Development
Samples (Thread)
Samples (Voice)
Word Count
None
APP3: What application sections do you not like (multiple choice)?
APP4: How can the application be improved for OCs, if we can increase the manpower to accommodate it (multiple choice)?
Setting section
Higher word count
Acceptable
Don't care/mind
Abstain
APP5: Any specific suggestions for tweaks to the application not covered by the above (e.g., adding another question, renaming an existing section)? (freeform)
APP6: Especially if there are sections you disliked, where can the instructions on the CURRENT APPLICATION FORM be improved or clarified? (freeform)
APP7: Additional thoughts on applications, e.g., not covered by or clarifying your previous answers (freeform)?
FB1: Do you want public post feedback SURVEYS? (choose one)
No
Maybe
Don't care/mind
Abstain
FB2: Do you want players to be able to give FREEFORM public post feedback to other players? (choose one)
No
Maybe
Don't care/mind
Abstain
FB3: If players give freeform public feedback to mods (e.g., on game mechanics but also conduct), do you want mods to be able to respond directly to those players and the feedback provided? (choose one)
No
Maybe
Don't care/mind
Abstain
FB4: Additional thoughts on feedback, e.g., specific concerns or suggestions not covered by or further clarifying your previous answers? (freeform)
NEW1: How likely are you to use a public, searchable, cross-indexed database of ImPort powers to facilitate plotting and CR? (Likert)
NEW2: How likely are you to use a 'Powers Workshop' OOC thread where interested players help each other come up with superpowers ideas, weaknesses, and other writeup details? (Likert)
NEW3: Additional thoughts on new mechanics, e.g., suggestions or concerns not covered by or clarifying your previous answers (freeform)?
(frozen comment) AKITA: PLAYER PARTICIPATION FORM EXAMPLE
ADD QUESTION [WITH QUESTION TYPE & CHOICE ANSWERS]:
FW: Why didn't anyone put a Gate and faction in Fractured World AU Belize? (multiple choice)
It's too hot and no one invented sunscreen
ImPorts don't believe in luxury vacations, only chaos
What's Belize?
N/A
Original: GEN4: How much time before the transition would you want detailed information on the new setting (choose one)?
Proposed change: GEN4: Butts butts butts.
AKITA: MISCELLANEOUS SUGGESTIONS, QUESTIONS
Again, in the interest of organization, do not reply to each other, only directly to this comment.
Re: AKITA: MISCELLANEOUS SUGGESTIONS, QUESTIONS
So, I guess my major disclaimer to start here is that my job is like 50% running surveys for a public sector agency that has a legislative responsibility to serve the entire state (the other half is convincing people that they do not need to do a survey which is maybe why I'm here, lol). Regardless, I really empathize with the whole it's impossible to satisfy everyone thing because it is my life. I am all about the value of participatory and collaborative idea generation, but my first question when designing an evaluation scheme is how do we want to measure success and I am always checking in to make sure that our measures are still appropriate. What are the metrics that the mod team is hoping to compare this against? Making the greatest number of current players happy? What if the desires of a slightly active majority are in direct contrast with the desires a really active minority? Is player tenure or avidity for the game considered?
DWRP games generally have different stakeholders groups too -- current players, potential players, and past players that may return. I often think of things in terms of recruitment, retention, and reactivation. If the game is run by popular vote, essentially we are just aiming to retain the majority of participants. If there is recruitment or reactivation, it's essentially going to be accidental. Are we going to conduct polls of these groups too? Arguably they have interest and stakes in the direction of the game.
I'm sort of exaggerating here, but these are the reasons that even a public sector agency whose responsibility is 100% serving our stakeholder groups does surveys to gather points of information about the social landscape rather than polls of what we should or should not do. Obviously, the stakes are vastly, vastly different here, but there is a lot of power in letting a team that has committed to the longevity and maintenance of the game have creative control, and I personally don't have a problem sacrificing some of my power and influence over game settings to allow a team to implement a bigger, more cohesive vision than a game created by a committee that can feel jumbled.
I also worry about expectations that are created through the nature of some of these questions. Does the modteam have the capacity (and importantly, interest) in carrying out some of these changes? There are also trade-offs in effort and different qualities/attributes of each piece of these which you can't get a valid read on from these questions alone. The nature and scope of this feedback project is really admirable, but I am afraid might actually slow mod operations down and make you guys less nimble to changing conditions.
Sorry I have a lot of thoughts about survey instruments 😬😬😬😬 I'd be happy to chat more one on one.
no subject
For now, our focus is on feedback from the existing players. Recruitment of new players is hopefully a byproduct, and does rank in our priorities (i.e., accessibility, some details below). Reactivation (of players with flagging interest, I think?) will hopefully occur along the way, assuming (perhaps wrongly) that higher satisfaction coincides with reactivation.
For now, we're only using statistics to assess the 'greatest number of current players' that like, dislike, or feel neutral toward a given idea. If the desires of a less active majority conflict with the highly active minority, we frankly have no way of telling that (we have not operationalized 'activity level'). Tenure and avidity will not be considered. This may change in the future, if we find a way to operationalize/make actionable this information. (I'm open to ideas about that.)
Now to expand a bit! The following list of our priorities is NOT exhaustive, but it is intended to illustrate my perspective as acknowledged by the other mods.
Top priorities:
- Real life (RL) resource limits and safety, of mods AND players (i.e., health, no overextending)
- Accessibility (e.g., to new players) and ability (for everyone)
- Basic day-to-day playability (i.e., players can log in and tag)
- A revitalized, basic vision for the game overall (e.g., this is a superhero-themed game with some form of metaplot, which is why this mod team signed up to join period)
Second tier:- Essential efficiency of back-end systems (i.e., that players sometimes can't see at all, but can mean the difference between 'this game is moddable' and 'this game cannot be run unless we totally discard the metaplot, hire 10 more helpstaff, etc.')
Other priorities:- Majority preferences (subjective, individual tastes in genres, AUs, etc.)
- Detailed particulars of the thematic vision for the overall game (mods AND players), such as the frequency of plot-heavy or specific themes in big events vs SOL
- Fine-tuning back-end and front-end (subjective compared to the 'essential,' I know; please tolerate the confusion)
There are currently no specific statistical cutoffs (e.g., 51% defeats 49%) because:In the ideal scenario, mods and players are all approximately on the same page about top priorities and principles. Then, when it comes to practical implementation, we'll be able to compromise/split the differences, and everyone will be happy overall. In the absolute paradise scenario, everybody's needs will be addressed by brilliant, lateral-thinking strategies where zero compromise is required.
However, the ideal is unlikely. Some players may consider one or more of our decisions intolerable, even if we believe they're absolutely necessary. I (China) am happy to personally explain our rationale for changes and do my best to be kind about it, but at a certain point, some differences are irreconcilable and I'll run out of availability to hash it out.
The objective is never to wilfully upset anybody. I mean this in the kindest possible way: the mods may change things because we have important considerations (see above) and some players may be inconvenienced, confused, or stressed about these decisions. If any player is harmed and can't understand where we're coming from, ultimately, I can't help them. I will respect our differences even if I can't accommodate them, and offer apologies for my part of it.
Let me know if that addresses your question. Anyone is welcome to also ask me more about this on Mod Contact.
In light of this new disclosure, I'm also happy to reassess how feedback development happens. For example, if people need a detailed explanation of 'why mods are making this decision now?' before going into polls, I can make that happen.
China.
no subject
no subject
China.
Re: AKITA: MISCELLANEOUS SUGGESTIONS, QUESTIONS
no subject
During this Feedback Development, players can already express dis/interest in suggested feedback questions for the poll. They can do this now in AKITA, and later too. (As of today, it looks like we'll have at least 1 more phase.) If 1 or more players want to remove a question, I will then need at least 3 other people to speak up about keeping it during the next phase (e.g., Beagle). If at least 3 people want to keep a question, it's going to stay, even if all 90 other players adamantly disagree. I understand 3 seems like a bit of an arbitrary cutoff, but I had to start somewhere. In the unlikely scenario that 90 people found the question totally unacceptable, they will have to simply answer with Abstain or another suitable option in the final poll.
When you say 'express (dis)interest in questions or other changes,' I'm not sure what you mean by 'changes.' Feedback questions are a totally separate issue from actual game changes. Please clarify if my answer didn't cover it.
Have a good day,
China.
no subject
and, just to make sure i understand 100%, will you also lean towards automatically including the player-suggested questions and answers from this phase as well? if not, how will you decide whether or not they will be included? (i know there's another phase after this, so a brief answer is fine - i'm just curious to know if they will be available to be discussed or modified by other players, if they have to be 'supported' by 3 people, etc.)
i hope i was able to explain that clearly enough, and thank you for your reply!
no subject
But yes, please be assured, player-suggested poll items will get the same treatment! I hope that helps. (If it doesn't, I appreciate your patience and will want to give it another go.)
China.
no subject
no subject
no subject
To the best of my knowledge, our core, fundamental rules haven't really changed across mod teams for years and years, and they're quite standard in DWRP. Ergo, unless someone raises a pointed issue with one and makes a good case, all of them are here to stay. However, individual opinions and thoughts about what's 'imperative' could inform phrasing or additional details added/tweaks made over time, so we'd be open to your thoughts!
Does that make sense?
China.
no subject
no subject
I hope I understood you correctly. I just posted up Phase Beagle (but haven't had it Plurked/advertised yet) so let me know whenever you can and I'll try to make sure we're on the same page.
China.
no subject
As this pertains to the statistics on the top for player participation: if a greater metric is being sought for this OR the future feedback post in itself -- I'm wondering if there shouldn't be a place where, for the players who DON'T have specific feedback comments, can simply post to acknowledge they've read through and understand the proposals and changes? Or, if the moderation team wishes for more visibility toward these activities and changes, a plurk boost for the players who primarily use that to check news and notices? While I am noticing the same faces on the comments of these posts (respectfully, they do make good points), maybe others feel uncomfortable or discouraged?
Thanks again for your continued hard work!
J
no subject
I'll answer once I have that clear! Best,
China.
no subject
Whichever is deemed most appropriate among those choices. As the note about player participation is prominently at the top, and was made a serious topic in the previous ooc posts, it feels as if it's become a major issue regarding this and future feedback posts (and their overall credibility). Also, seeing the number of current active players also stated here, it drives home the necessity of not only finding ways of involving everyone -- but making them feel welcome in participating in this and future related topics.
I feel hopeful that everything is being done to progress in a way that's healthy and positive for the game moving forward, whatever is decided in this case.
Thank you,
J
no subject
Thank you very much for the further explanation! Thanks to you, we've been talking the past few days more explicitly about how to signal boost the final product. For the development process so far, we've used both Plurk replies and DW announcement for updates so far, but we understand even more visibility would be helpful for the official launch (e.g., top-level Plurk).
We appreciate your thoughts! Hope you're well.
China.
AKITA
ADD QUESTION [WITH QUESTION TYPE & CHOICE ANSWERS]:
APP3: Do you have specific suggestions for tweaks to the application that aren't covered by the above; like adding another question, or keeping but renaming an existing section? (freeform)
With the understanding that the mods can take suggestions into account, but are under no obligation to incorporate them!
no subject
China.
AKITA
ADD QUESTION [WITH QUESTION TYPE & CHOICE ANSWERS]:
Not so much a question to add, but depending on the final format decided, allowing for an extra section to expand on the answers selected (if desired) for each question would probably be a good idea.
Not everything's a straightforward yes or no, and that extra bit of clarity would certainly be more helpful than a black-and-white answer. Like if this were an online multiple-choice survey, I mean something that's less of an "Other" response and more like an "Additional Information" or "Please Explain" text field, if that makes sense.
FB3: IF players give freeform public feedback to mods (e.g., on game mechanics but also conduct), do you want mods to be able to return feedback to players (choose one)?
If this is meant to refer to mods being able to respond to feedback when given, that's fine (and encouraged, but that's beside the point right now). But this is also worded so oddly that it could also be read as proposing a sort of "if you're going to criticize me then I'm going to criticize you," which comes off as unnecessarily tit-for-tat and I'm not sure that was the intention. I don't really have a set rewording to propose here because I'm not 100% certain what's even being asked in the first place, but if it's the first interpretation that's intended, maybe:
"FB3: IF players give freeform public feedback to mods (e.g., on game mechanics but also conduct), do you want mods to be able to respond directly to those players and the feedback provided (choose one)?"
Which is still kinda clunky imo, but at least feels more specific.
no subject
However, we have a bit of a logistical limitation when it comes to allowing 'Please explain' type boxes. The DW Poll doesn't allow freeform spaces to be attached to existing multiple/single choice questions; I have to create a new question for each one. If you (and others) really think it's worth it to have this additional flexibility, I'm probably going to have to move off of DW and use Surveymonkey (or a similar platform) instead, and the inconvenience may feel quite significant.
At this point, I'm adding an 'Additional Information'/'Please Explain' box to each general category of questions only. I'm also going to have to include a disclaimer that it may be difficult for mods to make changes based on individual unstructured/freeform feedback (e.g., dozens of folks might be asking for similar things with different wording, or use similar words to ask for different things, etc.), but we'll read and consider it.
The reality is that I have limited ability to access the nuance of every player's opinion and collate patterns from them or turn them into actionable changes. I don't want to pull the rug out from anyone by opening the floor to longer essays that I can't actually turn into action. In an ideal world, I'd have tons of time to parse the information, but realistically I am going to have to ask players to work on being brief and practical.
If you have other suggestions on how to deal with this, let me know. I'm hoping to get Phase Beagle up tomorrow 10/14/2020 in the evening (Pacific Standard Time), but if you need extra time to think of solutions, let me know and I can push it back a bit!
China.
no subject
I'm really tired tonight so I'll probably put off Phase Beagle til tomorrow. Please get back to me as soon as possible. If I don't hear back by then I'll just proceed. Best,
China.
AKITA
ADD QUESTION [WITH QUESTION TYPE & CHOICE ANSWERS]:
FW: How did you feel about the FW plot as a TDM (mc)?
Too difficult or complicated to get involved
Gave different expectations of the game
Overwhelming/confusing
I TDMed or got samples another way
Discouraged me from apping [entering this as an option in case someone decided not to app 2nd or 3rd characters, or if incoming players had formerly decided against apping]
Good opportunity to get involved
Helped develop ideas for my character
Useful for samples
Encouraged me to app
Enjoyed overall
Disliked overall
Did not use FW as a TDM
Don't care
Abstain
APP: How can the application be improved for OCs (mc or write-in)?
History section
Setting section
Higher word count
Fine as is
N/A or abstain
GEN: Would you want to have more collaborative/player input plots in the future? (mc)
Yes, with the same amount of opportunities to contribute as FW
Yes, but with more restrictions than FW
No
Don't care
Abstain
GEN: In broad 'genres,' what would you strongly prefer not to see in mod-run plot logs? (mc)
[same answers as GEN6]
(let me know if I should change the formatting, but because of the number of suggestions, copy+pasting the original questions and answers plus the changes got very very long and more confusing imo)
no subject
I'm starting to incorporate the changes you suggested into Phase Beagle. Note that I'm going to have to include a disclaimer for some of your suggestions that notes these were player-written questions, and may offer options that the mod team can not implement in the near future.
FW: How did you feel about the FW plot as a TDM (mc)?
GEN: Would you want to have more collaborative/player input plots in the future? (mc)
GEN: In broad 'genres,' what would you strongly prefer not to see in mod-run plot logs? (mc)
[APP] SPLIT the questions into whether or not the surveyee has actually filled out the app. I'm not sure if there is a better way to implement this, but I think it could be helpful to see if there are correlations between preferences and whether someone has actually used the app. Ex: [...]
I have some questions/requests about your specific suggestions-- anything not mentioned here I THINK I got. My plan is to get Phase Beagle questions up and going tomorrow 10/14/2020 in the evening of Pacific Standard Time, but if you need some extra time to get back to me, let me know and I can push it back. Thanks!
China.
no subject
:ok_hand: Absolutely fine and not a problem.
cutting down is totally fine, I just erred on the side of more rather than less. and since it was something that did affect me, I had a clearer idea of what my thoughts were. maybe they could go down to, like:
Gave different expectations of the game
Overwhelming/confusing
Good opportunity to get involved
Helped develop ideas for my character
Don't care
Abstain
? but yeah, if you'd like to modify those in any way too, that's cool!
I meant something like the FW, where players are given a situation or setting by the mods and can basically 'shape' the situation/setting/tone (not necessarily in totally reshaping the overarching plot, but in FW for example, players created the factions and any inter-faction 'subplots,' including controlling much of the possible subject matter and 'tone' of the setting). I'm definitely open to suggestions for making the wording more clear and possibly more applicable to future mod endeavors (if any kind of collab like this may be a thing??).
I do appreciate the desire to address offensive material or triggers more explicitly, and I'm definitely in support of that! I just chose the wording of "strongly prefer not" so that people could voice some choices that may actively alienate them (whether it's because of offense or triggers, or just because it'll be too SOL or too plotty and action-packed) as opposed to just not caring for it and deciding not to participate. I am, however, not super 100% attached to the wording, so changing it is fine with me.
my only thoughts behind this were "I feel like it'd be more informative to see how people who have written apps feel about it vs people who haven't" (since actually doing it might make them feel differently?) so idk what form you'll use and how that will display answers, but if there's an option that'll allow you to see [people who answered 'yes' to using the app toggled these answers: ...], then I'm sure fewer questions work fine. or, again, if you don't feel like you need to know this particular bit, I don't strongly feel the need to have this included haha.
I know some of this is probably still confusing, so I'm more than willing to hash it out more!
no subject
FYI I did check and I/we would be able to see what folks did write apps vs those who didn't. It's not very elegant, but we'd be able to see it!
If you can have a look at the post any time after you receive this reply notification, you'll be able to check and see if I messed anything up. Let me know! I'm hoping to let folks know about the update tonight but if I don't hear back I'll push it til tomorrow.
China.
no subject
The changes look good to me, so thank you for the work, and if you want to open this to everyone else now that's just fine.
no subject
I've streamlined the questions quite a bit since our last discussion, based on quite a bit of feedback that the way I'd structured some of the questions (and that you'd then founded your suggestions on) was less useful for implementing changes or future projects. I really liked your thoughts, however, and I'm hopeful that I'm still getting there with a different wording/structure (particularly removing any phrasing that hints at options that aren't actually viable for the mod team at this stage).
If you wouldn't mind having a look at FW7 to 11 and GEN 6 to 12, I think those are the primary ones that changed. As far as I can tell, most of your other suggestions have been preserved per our last discussion. Best,
China.
no subject
no subject
Also I would super appreciate it if you'd consider helping me in the beta test phase. Best,
China.
no subject
BEAGLE
REPHRASE QUESTIONS/ANSWERS:
NEW1: Would you enjoy a public, searchable, cross-indexed database of ImPort powers to facilitate plotting and CR (choose one)?
I'm relatively certain that you mean this as an OOC database, but it could potentially be read as an IC one; or at least I read it as potentially that way, at any rate. Just maybe a clarification on that-- additionally, maybe break it into 2 questions, because I actually think an ICly public database of ImPort powers could be interesting (but it may not be everyone's jam, so would def need opinions).
Though, I realize the IC option of a database could be pretty polarizing, and it may even need further in-game explanation; would characters have to be complicit in adding their powers to this database (maybe it could even be part of being Registered, like the fine print of "by accepting these terms and conditions, you agree to having your powers listed in a public-access database" sort of thing), or is the government just putting it out there regardless of characters' want/not of having their powers listed out there in the public, and updating it any time someone ports out/back in with updated paperwork?
So, I'm thinking something like:
NEW1a: Would you enjoy a public, searchable, cross-indexed database of ImPort powers for OOC use to facilitate plotting and CR (choose one)?
Yes
No
Maybe
Don't care/mind
Abstain
NEW1b: Would you like for the database above to also be available for characters to access in-game (choose one)?
Yes
No
Maybe
Don't care/mind
Abstain
NEW1c: How would you prefer an IC database be implemented (choose one)?
ICly chosen, as part of Registration
ICly chosen, separate from Registration
ICly unwilling, as part of arrival or porting back in from an update
I don't want an IC database at all
Don't care/mind
Abstain
NEW1d: If the IC database is implemented do you want it to be retroactive for characters that have been in game?
Yes
No
Don't care/mind
Abstain
no subject
We wound up utilizing your critique but streamlining the end product, so as not to accidentally imply any options that are not actually available. For now, it's strictly an OOC database for player plotting. Any IC database is outside the scope of what we plan to do in the next few months, though we appreciaet your idea.
Can you have a look at question and let me know if it fundamentally addresses your concern, when you consider the information I just mentioned?Thanks,
China.
no subject
Beagle
ADD QUESTION [WITH QUESTION TYPE & CHOICE ANSWERS]: N/A
REMOVE QUESTIONS/ANSWERS: N/A
REPHRASE QUESTIONS/ANSWERS:
GEN6: In broad 'genres,' what do you want to see in mod-run plot logs (multiple choice)?
Action
Alternate timelines
Comedic features
Faction-based
Good vs bad (fairly clear-cut)
Investigation, puzzles
Law vs crime (with 'good/bad' on each side)
Light-hearted fare
Moral ambiguity (with opt-outs for triggers)
Politics (some)
Politics (FW level or more intense)
'Slice of life' and personal storylines
Teamwork challenges with skills/powers
Abstain
Good vs Bad: possibly Superheroes vs. Supervillains, to reference the specific theme of the game? Otherwise it feels slightly too vague & could encompass nearly anything associated with a bad outcome.
Law vs Crime: Similar to above, possibly Registered vs. Unregistered, as that pits characters who follow the law versus characters who are more chaotic.
Invesigations/Puzzles: and/or Cooperative Mystery-Solving.
Faction-Based: Superhero/Villain faction building?
Comedic-based + Lighthearted Fare: could be consolidated.
Moral Ambiguity: does this refer to plots with complex moral choices and outcomes or a darker themes/grimdark overall (such as Justice League vs The Boys)? Basically, would this be categorized as an tonal setting shift or just options inside of other plots?
Politics: politics - societal-based or import vs native based, or politics - city governments and leadership role options?
Slice of Life/Personal: player plots option?
Teamwork challenges with skills/powers: could be consolidated with superhero/villain faction building or group mystery solving.
(Overall suggestion: keeping them simplified to minimal words/phrases, but specific enough via the game setting to give a better idea of what the change or emphasis is implying.)
Beta
ChowChow