devtrackers.gg
I've asked for a feedback job to add a warning to ensure this is the action the player wants to do.
Your loss will be mourned, but will lead to others hopefully not ignoring the warning and clicking yes anyway in the future.
I've asked for a feedback job to add a warning to ensure this is the action the player wants to do.
Your loss will be mourned, but will lead to others hopefully not ignoring the warning and clicking yes anyway in the future.
Read moreSince the "any more feedback" section at the end of the survey has the bafflingly tiny restriction of 200 characters, I'll post this here instead:
Two parts of just this survey forced me to lower my answer for confidence in the direction of the game. For one, including DXP and other copy-pasted events as "updates", but in particular including the idea of in-game ads in the same answer as in-game activities to earn micro-bonds. This kind of underhanded manipulation is not subtle - the Reddit thread on this has many others noticing it too.
Mod Jack's streams, alongside excellent, caring updates from Mod Blkwitch and others, gave me confidence that the game itself is in very competent hands that are looking to a long-term future. This survey has brought me back to the reality that there are clearly decision-makers involved that do not care for that future and want to prioritise maximising short-term profits. It's a damned shame to waste the skill and passion o...
Your comment about the updates section is another bit of feedback we're going to work on with the team on this.
To be clear, we do not see those things as Updates - they are seen as Events. We class Updates as the big monthly content releases, a major overhaul of a system if it's similar in scale of development work / has high demand for change (ie. Death Costs), and Ninja Strikes somewhat.
As I mentioned elsewhere, this is a first survey to all players from the team in quite a long time - including some areas we've usually shied away from asking questions about (ie. Bonds) to get player perspectives.
The next one that gets put together will likely take a lot of what's been said on board and probably feel more akin to it's intent even for this one - understanding players better than we have done.
With regards to the FSOA/AD beta, if enough quality feedback is obtained to warrant further changes to the balancing, will we receive a follow-up beta?
No need for a follow up - we'll be keeping it running and adding proposed changes to the Beta as we go until it feels like it's in the right place.
Is that last page of the survey a joke? You ask for any feedback, but it's limited to 200 characters? AND not only that, it doesn't even mention a character limit until AFTER you try to submit the feedback. I'm glad I actually typed out proper feedback only to be told to 'f**k off' when trying to give it.
We've got that feedback to the team and next time out we'll be making sure that limit isn't there or is much bigger.
The survey was set up to be more focused on the defined question areas and that was just an oversight. It's the first all-player survey we've done for RuneScape in a long time, so there's definitely quite a few learnings to take into the next one.
Main thing is these will be quarterly and they'll keep being refined based on these sorts of comments. Appreciate you taking the time to give us what you could within the limits on this one.
Hey, the beta will initially be the proposed changes so players can try in-game and see if their feelings remain the same - hope to then iterate on that if we want so players can try out further changes
The survey's section on bonds though... Even suggesting them is extremely worrying. I suggest throwing those ideas deep into the abyss and never try to think about them ever again. Cuz wew those are some integrity breaking suggestions. Converting TO ironman? Buying double xp? Please no more.
Moreover, Jagex, you should do the opposite. Make efforts to actually balance the game properly, win back more credebility and trust, and thrive in longjevity. Please let gameplay dictate the course of accounts, not someones wallet. I am here to PLAY your game
I mentioned this on another post but two things:
In terms of Bonds, what that section is in there for is to get a better understanding of Bonds and how people wish they could use them.
The main thing we want to get across is - in an effort to be a lot more focused on bringing player feedback into the team - we want to hear your voice on this. If you feel nothing should be added to Bonds functionality, let us know.
We just want to make sure we ask about Bonds as they are a gameplay-earnable item that some people rely on w...
Read moreI know that this is hypothetical, but please stop asking these questions Jagex, you lose further credibility by even asking about them. https://i.imgur.com/eZVUmf2.png
Other than the Ironman conversion question which was incorrectly worded and has now been fixed (we are categorically NOT exploring the option of converting standard accounts to Ironmen), all of these questions are hypotheticals.
What we're attempting to do is understand how players wish they could use Bonds in ways they currently can't, especially given they are the gameplay-earnable path to premium content by design.
There's some examples in there to get people thinking but we expect most suggestions will come through the open entries. None of these pre-filled entries are direct proposals of things we're working on right now.
Please stop issuing updates during special wildy events.
Updates go out at the earliest possible time, unfortunately due to the rotational nature of the Wilderness events every now and then 1 of the special events will be interrupted.
Still doesn't work
Thank you, gonna chase the status of that change but I imagine its just working it's way through the pipeline
Can I recommend running both the original proposed changes and the changes you guys have in mind after the feedback and then make a poll, asking the community which one they prefer?
Definitely something we could look at!
We've talked to the Research Team and confirmed the 'to' wording in the Bonds section about Ironman accounts was a mistake.
This has been updated in the survey - standard accounts being converted to Ironmen is not something being at all considered by the team.
Read moreOn the newspost here you said this:
Firstly, 'Scapers, you rocked this. Thank you to everyone who provided such constructive, detailed thoughts in response to the changes - the care you put into those responses sparked plenty of conversations on where to go next and some bigger topics beyond (like PvM accessibility through tanking).
With your feedback, we've developed further changes to take on board your comments while still ensuring we do some critical rebalancing to FSOA & Animate Dead. Building on all your great contributions, this time we want to take things one step further by letting you get hands on with this next round of changes for yourself.
On May 4th, we'll be releasing Beta Worlds where you'll be able to test our revised proposed changes to FSOA & Animate Dead. All you'll need to pa...
So this one is on me due to a bit of a crossed wires situation when we were putting together the Development Update - apologies for the confusion. We've updated that Development Update post to be more reflective of where we've landed.
We are going to launch the Beta with the original proposed changes just to verify how people feel when they are put into practice.
If the feedback is similar, we do have some potential next changes ideated out - but for the early phase of the Beta, the team want to get you hands on as is to see if the feedback matches. This also gives the team the opportunity to react to hands-on feedback in case it's slightly different from the on paper responses for the initial tweaks.
The Beta will continue to run to enable us to make changes based on playtesting and get further feedback - things will evolve with feedback as needed.
