Re: Thoughts on the 'Feedback Loop'

---

@lzilchetl wrote:
@DuaneDibbleyI'm not going to challenge what you say - you are right, but I don't know what detailed feedback would look like. The situation is pretty toxic, the second they open their mouths posters are going to immediately question their priorities or the detail of what they are trying to do. The opinion of what the final game should be like is so varied that whatever they say they are addressing, someone is going to call them idiots because thy should be prioritising something else. In the other hand, they need to be seen to be listening. Personally, I think they need to lay-out the full scope of what they are trying to achieve, but whatever that may be is going to alienate part of the community. There are still plenty who will be screaming for them to "make it like BF4!" or "bring back Metro or Locker!", when I suspect there was never any intention to go that way. They need to clarify the concept of the game with the community and then describe the tools that they are going to add to make that happen. Not everyone is going to get what thy want, and we all know how those who feel let down can dominate this forum. They just need to get on with it... which I expect is exactly what they are doing.

---

I remember an interview/talk when @PartWelsh asked two Dice managers questions about the game and they explicitly told that they were taking the 'best parts of BF4' ... I can find the video on Youtube that would prove this.

IF there is really the form of a thread, where one should post answers, then I would make that a very heavily moderated one. State upfront that you would only keep replies that are strictly ontopic and move everything else to a 'offtopic' thread and also delete any posts that contain insults towards the CMs. This would keep the thread shorter and the sorting out part could be done by some mod and not by the person gathering the responses to the questions.