Uthgard • View topic - Survey Results

Survey Results

80 posts • Page 3 of 6 • 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

vangonaj Alerion Knight Posts: 2497 Joined: Sep 14, 2007 00:00 Location: Galpen	by vangonaj » Jun 07, 2016 12:10 TheKrokodil wrote:Thank you all for participating in our survey. You can find the results from the survey >> over here <<. • No, we didn't delete the database from Uthgard v1; everything new is based upon it. We took what we had, and improved it from there. We do, in fact, still have backups from yesterday down to 2007. Cause this hunter,s pet damage sux XDDDDD Good job. Im happy see how uthgard grows more and more.

kpax Myrmidon Posts: 143 Joined: May 09, 2016 00:55	by kpax » Jun 07, 2016 13:01 honestly most old daoc players, who are more rvr focused even dont care about old/new graphic, they care more about working rvr and everything around it. Template requiered things are the second priority i guess. And pls dont get distracted over the flames. There are some ppl u can never make happy, somehow they will find something to flame.

Miiyomo Gryphon Knight Posts: 486 Joined: Aug 29, 2009 00:00	by Miiyomo » Jun 07, 2016 16:58 TheKrokodil wrote: or (b) they think that it would take us too much work to implement, and they don't care about it at this point. I'm sure we can revisit this decision again once we have relaunched, because then the "omg this shouldn't block relaunch" argument is out of the equation. Minimum viable product to go live. Please Krokodil wear the Product Owner hat for a couple of weeks so that we can release v2.0 Enjoy Life Miiyomo. -DAoC- BIT -WoW- Rock n' LoL -Warhammer Online- Warp Legio -DiabloIII- BIT -GW2- XxX

Trishin Game Master Posts: 5048 Joined: Apr 07, 2010 00:00	by Trishin » Jun 07, 2016 18:31 Miiyomo wrote: TheKrokodil wrote: or (b) they think that it would take us too much work to implement, and they don't care about it at this point. I'm sure we can revisit this decision again once we have relaunched, because then the "omg this shouldn't block relaunch" argument is out of the equation. Minimum viable product to go live. Please Krokodil wear the Product Owner hat for a couple of weeks so that we can release v2.0 So you want someone that isn't even going to use the product to be product owner? sounds like a bad strategy to me. Got any questions? Submit them to me and I will try to get them answered in our grab bag ! Rajnish wrote:Why didn't someone warn me that being GM means lots of boring research, logging, testing and organizing data.... I thought it was all about looking cool.... Uthgard Rules \|\| How to connect \|\| FAQ

ascanet Warder Posts: 24 Joined: Dec 22, 2010 21:14	by ascanet » Jun 07, 2016 20:34 Miiyomo wrote: TheKrokodil wrote: or (b) they think that it would take us too much work to implement, and they don't care about it at this point. I'm sure we can revisit this decision again once we have relaunched, because then the "omg this shouldn't block relaunch" argument is out of the equation. Minimum viable product to go live. Please Krokodil wear the Product Owner hat for a couple of weeks so that we can release v2.0 Second this!

Moondragon1 Gryphon Knight Posts: 379 Joined: Apr 09, 2010 00:00	by Moondragon1 » Jun 07, 2016 20:40 I'm someone who saw the survey, but thought the survey itself was broken, so I didn't answer it. When the survey was A) No map, or B) Map but no player location, I was like "Well, where is option C for map with player?" since that was what I was used to using. Later I find out that option C was intentionally left off the survey, but it looked wrong. Then I went to see what OS people were using, and yes I have an old computer, so I didn't see any option for "Vista" (try not to laugh). There was XP, but no Vista, even though Vista is more recent than XP. I know my individual vote doesn't really matter to the results, but just letting the staff know that while it isn't a democracy, the survey should at least be a bit more complete or let us know that some options are intentionally left out. At least you took a survey, which shocked me.

Sillyfish Gryphon Knight Posts: 268 Joined: Jan 14, 2013 09:56	by Sillyfish » Jun 08, 2016 00:36 TheKrokodil wrote: riad wrote: Sillyfish wrote:I simply don't believe you that there are more people who want Current skins over Old Darkness Falls textures. My issue had enough Yes votes to maintain a total of 105 yes despite all the No's people votes that subtracted a positive. Just look at this thread and you'll see multiple people who had no idea the survey was going on and didn't have a chance to vote. I am CERTAIN that had this been more public you would see vastly different results. I am very disappointed in the Uthgard team regarding their decision on this matter. The evidence in favor of it was incontrovertible and you know it. Your survey sample size was tiny. a feature with which i can punch people in the face via internet is something i'd second before any of that. I don't know what you want us to do. We gave you -- the community -- the option to vote on the matter. I made sure to wait until responses to the survey plummeted, and gave it another few days extra. We can only do what you actually tell us. IMHO the poll was very public -- it was on the front news page for an entire week. And the news page is our primary means of reaching out to players. I purposefully decided to leave the number of responses collected in the graphics, even though I know that someone is going to complain about it. But I also feel like that is something the community should take with a grain of salt: Everyone always says they read all the instructions, all the patch notes, and everything -- but most of them either can't even read through 60% of a news post, or do not care enough to submit a survey result. The question on the poll was "Old Capitols Towns or New Capitol Towns?", and from that you conclude that old DF is not wanted? I hope this is just an error. You can blame me for that. I'm sorry. I realized too late that I didn't add the DF question to the poll. So I was debating on whether we should leave it out and not mention it at all, or cluster it with the capital town options. I briefly surveyed the staff, and decided for the latter. If you care for my reasoning: I'm assuming that most of the players voted "no" for the old capitals because either (a) they don't like the old graphics, or (b) they think that it would take us too much work to implement, and they don't care about it at this point. And if both those reasons are the main reasons, the very same would apply to the DF change. The point of the survey was to get a general feel about how the community feels. If 80% of the people were in favor of something, we'd pay more attention to it. Same goes for the map ("why spend time implementing something if the community doesn't even want it?"). In general, as long as it is roughly split half in half, there is not much we can do. I'm sure we can revisit this decision again once we have relaunched, because then the "omg this shouldn't block relaunch" argument is out of the equation. Replying to the underlined part. I guess I just feel that the survey didn't get near the votes the issue in the Tracker did, otherwise it would have had a different outcome, since the issue had such overwhelming support for it compared to the votes against it. But lastly, as you say, revisiting the decision after relaunch would indeed get rid of the fears of this feature delaying things. I can accept this. Sometimes I forget of the workload the team is under, and while I DO believe that the 'look and feel' of the project is as important as the patch version, I shouldn't have accused the staff of saying something that isn't true. I apologize for saying that. I look forward to trying to get support for this when the team is ready to reconsider the decision.

gn0sis Guardian Posts: 2 Joined: Mar 18, 2013 23:48 Website	by gn0sis » Jun 08, 2016 06:26 I never post but I logged in to say this. More than anything, I really appreciate all the work you are doing to put Uthgard up in a reasonably bug-free and user-friendly form. In the smaller view, however, I also appreciate this post. It was very heartening for several reasons. First, that you are soliciting feedback makes me feel good. Second, that you are actually listening to the feedback and implementing changes based on users' input makes me feel even better. Third, that you took the time to write all that out and put together some really good data on where things are made me very happy. Thanks again for all your work. Ignore the ingrates and myopic fools. I will look forward to joining you in game (with the paltry few hours I have to play per week) some day soon. /gnosis

Filters Gryphon Knight Posts: 258 Joined: May 31, 2013 13:40	by Filters » Jun 08, 2016 12:14 Exploder wrote: Post by Sillyfish » Jun 06, 2016 14:49 I simply don't believe you that there are more people who want Current skins over Old Darkness Falls textures. My issue had enough Yes votes to maintain a total of 105 yes despite all the No's people votes that subtracted a positive. Just look at this thread and you'll see multiple people who had no idea the survey was going on and didn't have a chance to vote. I am CERTAIN that had this been more public you would see vastly different results. I am very disappointed in the Uthgard team regarding their decision on this matter. The evidence in favor of it was incontrovertible and you know it. Your survey sample size was tiny. The staff said, "For now, we will leave the looks of the capitols cities and DF as they are (55% of users asked us to keep this)" i.e. this is something that could change in the future. I don't know why you're freaking about this honestly and I don't understand the fascination with old DF/capitol cities. Shouldn't we be more concerned about bugs that actually affect the game? +++ is Not important at all Now better focus on exp / rvr aspect of the game ! And old graphic is ugly anyway but is my opinion Inviato dal mio SM-N7505 utilizzando Tapatalk there are none so deaf as those who will not hear

hazelhimself Gryphon Knight Posts: 320 Joined: Apr 19, 2015 23:01	by hazelhimself » Jun 08, 2016 14:16 Trishin wrote: Miiyomo wrote: TheKrokodil wrote: or (b) they think that it would take us too much work to implement, and they don't care about it at this point. I'm sure we can revisit this decision again once we have relaunched, because then the "omg this shouldn't block relaunch" argument is out of the equation. Minimum viable product to go live. Please Krokodil wear the Product Owner hat for a couple of weeks so that we can release v2.0 So you want someone that isn't even going to use the product to be product owner? sounds like a bad strategy to me. kroko is carrying your sorry ass to victory and all you can do is posting another 13-yo ";)"-shitpost. you never fail to amaze me.

GreenP Phoenix Knight Posts: 1305 Joined: Sep 07, 2008 00:00	by GreenP » Jun 08, 2016 18:19 relvinian wrote:So 25% don't want map and 75% want a nerfed map? Good survey. What percentage of people want a working map if they had the option? Who knows? How many programming hours went into breaking the map and will now go into making a new nerfed map? How does that compare to say, SI? Thank you, and have a nice day. See I can be nice. 1 less major problem to care about! Formerly known as Touareg- RR10 noobVW on Uth1. Crossfire- RR7 noobAnimist on Uth1. Ohnoes- RR9 noobAnimist on Lolgins. Click this LINK if you want to see the truth about Hibernia

Alphaone Myrmidon Posts: 172 Joined: Nov 21, 2013 00:42	by Alphaone » Jun 09, 2016 06:08 GreenP wrote: relvinian wrote:So 25% don't want map and 75% want a nerfed map? Good survey. What percentage of people want a working map if they had the option? Who knows? How many programming hours went into breaking the map and will now go into making a new nerfed map? How does that compare to say, SI? Thank you, and have a nice day. See I can be nice. 1 less major problem to care about! Epically hilarious, GP!

Zennai Warder Posts: 19 Joined: Feb 16, 2014 23:49	by Zennai » Jun 09, 2016 12:58 TheKrokodil wrote: relvinian wrote:So 25% don't want map and 75% want a nerfed map? Good survey. What percentage of people want a working map if they had the option? Who knows? This isn't a democracy. The Uthgard Staff still decides on the larger direction that the server is heading in, and you are welcome to play on any other server if that does not agree with you. We - as the staff - decided that we do not want the non-classic map showing player positions. That is why this option was not part of the survey. How many programming hours went into breaking the map? Five minutes. How does that compare to say, SI? SI takes significantly more than five minutes. BEST. RESPONSE. EVER. Tilt Zenai 8L5 Healer

Love me Babby Myrmidon Posts: 122 Joined: Jan 11, 2011 08:31 Location: California - Hells Anus Website	by Love me Babby » Jun 09, 2016 16:32 relvinian wrote:So 25% don't want map and 75% want a nerfed map? Good survey. What percentage of people want a working map if they had the option? Who knows? How many programming hours went into breaking the map and will now go into making a new nerfed map? How does that compare to say, SI? Thank you, and have a nice day. See I can be nice. who cares if there is or is not a map. just means Rev can't radar kids who are lvling for free rp's.

dblaha86 Myrmidon Posts: 169 Joined: Jun 19, 2013 11:05	by dblaha86 » Jun 09, 2016 16:46 Scratch that