I'm fast approaching 40.
I've played games all my life.
I've even done a bit of development of some games for media campaigns.
I love developer diaries.
And my last job was QA games/apps.
1.3 powerplay has a lot of changes and a lot of feedback that Frontier need to go through methodically.
sadly.
The forum is not the best of project-management tools :)
This isn't Sprintly, Assana, gitHub........
We lack the tools to do a decent job -> polls, Tickets, issues, assignment, milestones and timelines.
Even a simple acknowledgment that dev's can see and are aware of issues, would be of help -
Having access to some project-management tools this is handled at the triage level and people can see which issues are un-assigned or not.
This will will stop people spamming "this issue must be fixed" that keep filling out topics.
This is a two way thing.
A second part of the issue are, some gamers/tester doesn't really know how to QA or constructively help the development discussion. They stand for their opinion and fight for it like a typical forum discussion.
To be fair the majority are being useful but it only takes one troll...you know.....
People are grouping together on issues and having useful discussions, but it's hard (as a new reader to a topic...AND maybe to the devs too)
to read through pages of debate over ideas. Sometimes the Opening post doesn't tackle all the issues and people feel like a new thread is needed.
But we run with what we got, and we can make this work.
Op's & moderators need to take more responsibility.
We all like our opinion to be heard and our specific stories, (none more so than myself).
But please use the search buttons. We had like 4 threads on Collector drones (good), prospecting (need more loving).
At this point I feel that moderators may need to create mandatory topics headings from the dev log?
Currently we allow the FREEDOM, for users to just toss in randomly named topics about issues they discovered along the way. (which is also fine).
BUT If you are sat on a hot topic. PLEASE Curate and moderate the thread.
Go back and edit your original opening post with a summary at the top and date it .
Yes this is a bit of work, but it helps people who are new, see the thread, read the summary and can jump in directly with "I agree" or disagree. The op can then adjust the summary.
(we've done this before in the suggestions forum).
This will help devs keep a quick overview as well.
The blackmarket in the galaxy map issue. If it came to a vote, had a handful who legitmately wanted the information to be removed.
The majority who wanted the information to be visible AFTER you've discovered. (and you can maybe expand that train of though to Wings sharing Galaxy map info).
And a minority of people who loved it the way it is.
But this consensus comes after a number of pages.
When Developers need to balance stats
Stat balancing should maybe not be reserved for big gameplay updates/patches like Wings/Powerplay.
They need to be in the planned and the public informed, in the lulls/aftermath between large patches.
So people know okay Powerplay 1.3 beta changes are in effect (and sure you can add in stat changes here).
However the obligatory stats balancing beta - is booked in 2 weeks from now. To help lift and separate issues. So the dev's can concentrate on the broadstrokes of the new gameplay mechanics.
And Gamers know that when the Powerplay moves into the public version. That it's not the final etched in stone version of how stuff is going to be. That it's not actually released broken.
There is an intended balancing beta a few weeks later (and the public are informed and AWARE of it).
Reading a dev diary for Valve/Hidden Path when testing weapons for Counter-Strike, when it came to balancing, testers we furious that the devs nerfed a weapon and they gave feedback, and the next iteration the weapon was ridiculously overpowered. Yeah the devs "didn't listen".
But there was a method to the madness.
They tested the extremes in the early stages so weapons could iterate radically from over-powered to nerfed.
With each iteration the nerf/overpower was toned-down, helping the devs zero in on the correct balance.
This is counter-intuitive of striving for the obvious mid-point straight off (and not knowing quite in which direction to jiggle the stats and by how much).
Testers need to be aware of such counter-intuitive shenanigans of developers.
Helpful tools here would require simple polls to point where they can indicate where they feel the stats should lean, and fast dev cycles for people to test that.
Be aware of un-intended side-affects
Added Features sometimes have bizzare side-effects -> occasionally we get happy accidents, quirky behavior that improves the game.
but for the most part, there are negative effects.
As a tester, try to not to think all changes are "intended".
For example, using the system map to plot to stations/planets.
Great this feature has been demanded for some time.
Excellent.
Sife-effect -> Un-Scanned planets and stars, that appear partially in the system map can now be targeted by Explorers, who don't need to "hunted down" anymore.
The person who drew attention to this, was rightfully miffed if this was an intended change to the exploration mechanics.
But the question is, was it intended or an unhappy accident. To me, it feels like a un-intentional side effect of including a new feature.
And we have to be aware of testers that these things happen. It's our job to find them and test them, and not to get too emotionally invested if stuff isn't to our liking.