open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked The problem with CSM crowd sourcing.
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Author Topic

Ghoest
Posted - 2011.08.07 14:02:00 - [1]
 

**Please dont move this to the CSM forum its not about a particular suggestion its about the program.**

Its possible - even likely that the most popularly requested changes are also the least popular with the general player base. This is especially true with any change concerning space ship combat mechanics.

Any change that is popular with one type of PVPer is probably going to be unpopular with another type of PVPer and extremely unpopular with people who dont directly PVP.

The problem with respect to crowd sourcing is you hear a great deal from people who want a change and hardly a word from people who like the status quo - until you "ruin" the game for them..


Judge Ment
BOOM BOOM POW
Posted - 2011.08.07 14:33:00 - [2]
 

CCP got lazy and doesn't want to answer to people with serious reply's bud. So they created CSM (later on CSM) found out that their answer or question arnt being resolved.

Can you see a trend?

I hope they shoot a hole in CSM project like every other project EVE ONLINE has created. Maybe they can fix the real Issues? Very Happy

Valor D'eglise
Gallente
Red Cross Of Gallente Federation
Posted - 2011.08.07 14:34:00 - [3]
 

It's true, but that's the way it is. Everybody had the chance to voice his/her opinion and this time even to vote against things they didn't like.
That's how democracy works (although I wouldn't exactly call this a democratic process). If you don't vote, chances are higher you get a government you don't like.
"Every nation gets the government it deserves.", Joseph de Maistre.

Naomi Wildfire
Amarr
Spricer
Raiden.
Posted - 2011.08.07 14:34:00 - [4]
 

I passed my votes as a solo pvper and long time zerospace holder on the stuff i found important and was suprised i only found one of them in the list. Some suggestions placed high on the list would just enhance the blobbing value and some are really unimportant at all.

Docking games fix (CSM) - Only used if you try to fight multiple targets or similar (aggroless RR would be the issue which is on #5)

AFK/Busy/Available Indicator (CSM) - another thing against the solo man

More Control Over Medals (CSM) - More important then Drone Improvements or the balance of self destruction ..

not to talk about "Add the feature of switching characters without relogging. (CSM)"

Its clearly game breaking like some other issues are.



But i'm drifting off.
I aggree with the OP, people dislike stuff and dont know how to find a solution -> Cry for fix. The more people you can anoy and the better you are the more people will vote against this mechanic which isnt wrong at all.

Ghoest
Posted - 2011.08.07 15:07:00 - [5]
 

Originally by: Valor D'eglise

That's how democracy works.


No - the crowd sourcing thing is nothing like democracy.

If it was democracy, issues would be defined in one step then we would have an opportunity to vote on the issues with finite choices.



Lu'Marat
Posted - 2011.08.07 15:29:00 - [6]
 

Edited by: Lu''Marat on 07/08/2011 15:34:58
I disagree with the OP.

If you base your priority list on the forum threads of a bunch of loudmouths and their social circles then yes, what's requested most may not be what's needed or wanted most by all. But that's exactly why you have polls like the CSM crowdsource, where the loudmouths get just as many votes as everybody else (yes, alts, but everyone can do those).

It's not like you had to be a certain type of player or in some in-crowd to stumble across the poll. It was announced both in and out of game, I don't think any platform I frequent did not at least mention it, the banner in the login-screen was up for quite a while.

Chances are, anybody who wanted to vote did vote, barring some few unfortunate individuals who were stranded in some digital wasteland with no interwebs for the entire time. And since you could cast negative votes, the poll not only shows what people want changed, but also what they do not want changed (or not so much), i.e. PVP-type 1 did get to say they disagreed with PVP-type 2. If you ask me, they did a pretty good job setting up that poll. [Edit:] Yes, I do wonder how they came up with those items in the first place.

Plus, it's not like the votes in this poll built a priority list that will automatically override CCP's work schedule for the next year. It's just a list for the CSM (reason check 1) so they know what to say when CCP (reason check 2) asks for input on what players want changed the most.

That said, I know there will be plenty of people who will complain about not getting what they want, even though they didn't bother to respond when asked what they want. That's democracy.

Tuggboat
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.08.07 17:02:00 - [7]
 

Edited by: Tuggboat on 07/08/2011 17:11:49
Its a PVE game, CCP is the environment, crowdsourcing is a blob attack on CCP. CSM just took some opinions on primaries. If your not in assembly hall your not in the fleet If your not in the fleet, your just watching youtube vids and reading the news.

Sample size is important and the voting proportion is rising. Blocs are being defined, what looks like blobs are actually stakeholders. Crowdsourcing is still a democratic attempt in a stratifying community. One of the things crowdsourcing showed numerically is that this stratification is real and not an anomaly like many people on the opposite side of an issue would suggest.

The stakeholders need to be further defined. At this point the lines are blurry and not shaped as we commonly accept them. For instance we usually separate people by security space they play in, but this line is probably false as Many null characters are also in high and low. This old assumption probably wouldn't stand up to testing. If you try to balance against false divisions or fabricated divisions, attempts to create a better game will diverge from our perceptions of a good game.

Alternatively, people try to divide the game into PVP and PVE activities. In reality nearly all have to engage in PVE to play PVP or are dependent on others PVE. If people don't see their reliance on one anohter in a player run world, things go downhill also.

I think CCP's game theory is onto some things but the playerbase's perception is too shallow and CSM reflects this. The loud ones are a minority, but they represent a bloc also. Recognizing all the correct blocs can change this but not in their currently perceived forms.

What these divisions really represent, instead of polar forces opposed to one another, we probably play in a matrix of 4 divisions. If you imagine a plus sign, each of us probably fit in one of the four boxes/quadrants. I guess its really a four party system. IN general we have selfish opposed with helpful players on one axis, and another axis we have solo players versus group players.

When CCP created 4 races they saw something like this. The long story lines as we picked our characters guided us into the divisions we fit in. Unfortunately all this went out the window on our second character as we instead chose deceptions and advantages with genders, races and cross training that does not really represent us. This to was intended but now game balance becomes a guessing game..Here's how I think the original 4 races fit into my quadrant system.

If you want to follow me SKETCH a big plus sign +. on the left label it selfcentered, on the right altruistic (group caring). On the vertical axis at the top is something like isolationist or solo. Bottom is crowd or fleet oriented. Pick your own words if you don't like mine.

Simply, upper left Gallente being the free race trends toward solo/smallish gangs andisk driven. Bottom left is Minmatar. Free but recognizing the need to group. Bottom right is Caldari, we have the military fleet structured Caldari which by role, play fight and work for the better of the whole. Finally in the upper right are the AMarr, Whats more important than their whole empire even though they isolate in smaller religious splinters. They got some great Solo ships and a lot of small gang industry which also fits them into the altruistic side.

So there ya have it, my idea of crowdsourcing's limitations. I does not recognize blocs easily and unless it defines them correctly the results will still be false. I noticed a lot of 25% votes near the top of the results, that's why I think this four party system has validity.

How do you implement it? People could pick their own blocs to identify themselves for starters. This is the easiest. Some additional social networking mathematics could also be applied to the voting data to put people in groups. After a person votes, they might identify better the group they really tend to fit into. I might be Minmatar but find I vote Amarr :)

Dusty Warrior
Posted - 2011.08.07 17:54:00 - [8]
 

Edited by: Dusty Warrior on 07/08/2011 18:07:49



Actually I think the crowd sourcing is as useless as the CSM itself.

It took me over a year to even become a part of the forums? I knew they were here but never bothered. WHY? Because the first time I came to the forums and asked a question I was flamed, called noob and every other name in the book. That was over 4 years ago and until the other day I haven't been back to the forums.

Now...

The crowd sourcing and CSM serve a very few and select crowd and that's it!

If CCP really wanted to do a fair and equal survey of what is important to the whole community they would ask all of us through our login screen with 1-3 question survey periodically insuring EVERYONE... not just the forum trolls a voice of what interests the whole, not the few.

Judge Ment
BOOM BOOM POW
Posted - 2011.08.07 18:03:00 - [9]
 

I'm not in fleet Im playing rift, as if it was incursions. I often play EVE and read the forums for NEWS and to keep updated on spam. Trolling the forums is opinion of nonsense that people do not comply. Whateva!!!

CCP created CSM because they couldnt keep up with everyone! I think..
So Im not in fleet again..
Im still on the side lines playing RIFT. Oops I mean Incursions

Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
Posted - 2011.08.07 18:08:00 - [10]
 

The only problem I see with the crowd sourcing initiative is the amount of whining about the results from a bunch of people that couldn't be bothered to vote.

Mr Epeen Cool

Ghoest
Posted - 2011.08.07 18:14:00 - [11]
 

Originally by: Mr Epeen
The only problem I see with the crowd sourcing initiative is the amount of whining about the results from a bunch of people that couldn't be bothered to vote.

Mr Epeen Cool


But youre ignoring the structural issue or expecting people to show up and vote for what already exists. It makes no sense. Normal people dont operate that way.

Judge Ment
BOOM BOOM POW
Posted - 2011.08.07 18:18:00 - [12]
 

Originally by: Ghoest
Originally by: Mr Epeen
The only problem I see with the crowd sourcing initiative is the amount of whining about the results from a bunch of people that couldn't be bothered to vote.

Mr Epeen Cool


But youre ignoring the structural issue or expecting people to show up and vote for what already exists. It makes no sense. Normal people dont operate that way.


CCP Isn't Normal Laughing

Bezket
Posted - 2011.08.07 20:36:00 - [13]
 

The whole "crowdsourcing" thing was lame. It was headed by one guy from the CSM while the rest of them (rightfully) ignored it. They way in which the votes were collected was stupid and a tiny fraction of active players even bothered with it. The whole thing was meaningless.

Tuggboat
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.08.07 20:50:00 - [14]
 

I disagree

Ghoest
Posted - 2011.08.08 11:21:00 - [15]
 

Originally by: Tuggboat
I disagree


With what?

Mylor Torlone
Posted - 2011.08.08 14:22:00 - [16]
 

It's the CSM, so who actually cares?

fgft Athonille
Posted - 2011.08.08 14:33:00 - [17]
 

the problem with the crowd sourcing is that wardecs were considered a priority but only because wardec exploiting carebears of eve university formed a block to spam it.


Ghoest
Posted - 2011.08.08 15:57:00 - [18]
 

Originally by: fgft Athonille
the problem with the crowd sourcing is that wardecs were considered a priority but only because wardec exploiting carebears of eve university formed a block to spam it.




Basically "crowd sourcing" amplifies the problem now recognized to be common to all MMO forums.
The loud minority.

"Crowd Sourcing" is taking a small sub set of the forum population(already a subset of the players) and then giving them a huge microphone and pretending they speak for everyone.

Bustin Jieber
Posted - 2011.08.08 19:14:00 - [19]
 

Originally by: Ghoest
"Crowd Sourcing" is taking a small sub set of the forum population(already a subset of the players) and then giving them a huge microphone and pretending they speak for everyone.

That's exactly what happened in this case. A tiny percentage of active players even bothered with it. Nobody on the CSM but Trebor cares about it. Unless anybody thinks that docking games is really the number one concern of the Eve Online population...

Valei Khurelem
Posted - 2011.08.08 19:25:00 - [20]
 

I took one glance at the voting system that was being used and I immediately though it was even worse than proportional representation, that's how bad it was.

CCP have even less idea of how to do democratic voting than make an expansion with very few bugs and problems in it.

Marwood Ford
Posted - 2011.08.08 19:29:00 - [21]
 

Originally by: Valei Khurelem
CCP have even less idea of how to do democratic voting than make an expansion with very few bugs and problems in it.


*CSM

Valei Khurelem
Posted - 2011.08.08 19:35:00 - [22]
 

You mean CSM are actually an independent governing body not merely created as marketing and PR tools for CCP?

GASP! O_O


 

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only