Thoughts on the 'Feedback Loop'
I don't want the risk of being called 'toxic', so I will refrain from saying that I consider this current 'feedback loop' to be a joke. Well, maybe it's not even that. So I rather say that I am very ...
Forum Discussion
@filthy_vegans wrote:
Nevertheless, it is evident from the general tenor and content of your response that you have not worked with large qualitative datasets, and 600, even if 25% is cruft, is still a very large qualitative dataset - I generally work with groups of less than 20, admittedly larger as they are interviews, sets of responses when I work with qualitative data and it takes a great deal longer than you are clearly willing to appreciate.
I am pretty sure you won't want to play the 'my data set is bigger than you data set game' as this is one that in all likelihood you CANNOT win. I cannot reveal more as this would point out who I am working for I guess and I am not willing to share those details on a BF forum, so you either have to trust me on this or ignore this part of the post. Which of the options you choose, I do not care. 😉
As far as the other parts of my initial post are concerned, instead of trying to mock my understanding why not point out any concrete flaws in my logic if you find any and I will tell you why I think I am right and then we can have a civilized conversation, based on facts and deduction.
Straatford87
DICE Team
DICE TeamThere are a few questions and comments on the Feedback Loop that I can definitely clarify.
Why aren't we hosting more feedback topics at the same time?
From our end we believe that a focused discussion is a better discussion. However, that doesn't mean that we suddenly stop reading feedback on other topics , or that we've ignored those previously. We've received plenty of feedback from the community from before, throughout and post launch. My team has been consistently collecting and reviewing that feedback and providing it to our teams in a digestible format. We will continue doing that. But we also want to have the open discussion that you see now with the Feedback Loop. In this case, for Maps.
The work on other areas of the game does not stop while we are having this focused discussion. It's an ongoing process, and development takes time.
How much time will this Feedback Loop take?
We're not just reading comments here on these forums, but also on other Social Media spaces such as Reddit, Discord, and Twitter. There are thousands of comments out there right now. It will take some time for us to read, format, deliver and then reflect on what we've learned in a follow-up post for you. That means it won't be a matter of a few days.
- @Straatford87
Thank you for reply! I appreciate the response, even though this more or less confirms that there are not many developers working on BF2042 anymore.
And fully understand the restrictions you have in communicating this or confirming this fact directly.
What I don't understand is why certain measures that take basically NO effort on your end as far as developer hours are concerned and for which you have clear and unambiguous demand from the community are not implemented.
You must have gathered the feedback that basically EVERYONE here as well as on the 'other media' prefers persistent servers with clear map rotation over match making for every round. You have proven to be able to bring this in an instant if you wanted.
What exactly prevents you from doing that? Why are you not giving the players at least persistent servers (like you did with Rush for instance, but just for the CQ64 and CQ128 game modes)? This is NOTHING that you need a dedicate additional feedback loop on. You read this everywhere and still refuse to do that. WHY?- @DuaneDibbley Definitely a question we would all like an answer too.
MM is one of the most frustrating things I hate about BF2042.
A Server Browser / Persistent Servers is the only way to go.!!@RayD_O1
The most frustrating thing is, that basically EVERYONE (I honestly don't know of any exception) would be happy with MM into persistent and official Portal servers, running a map rotation of the current BF2042 maps with BF2042 vanilla settings as an intermediary workaround. Analogous to what we had with Rush -- and with full XP of course.
Yes, it is not the perfect long term solution. But it is FAR superior of what we have now and we know for a fact that this would take them not even one day of work to implement (literally 10 minutes for the mode to be created in Portal).
Everyone agrees this is better, it is of no effort to EA/Dice -- what better guarantee can we have that this will NEVER be done?So, @Straatford87 , why the beep not do that?
Hello Staatford87. To my knowledge two separate surveys were sent out which asked for feedback on several areas. Namely maps, movement, teamplay, and especially specialists.
At the end of the beta the DICE team doubled down on specialists after what I perceived to be a largely negative response to such a foreign system in Battlefield
This response was again observed in the next survey that was sent out
I'm confused as to why such such a largely negative response to ideas such as specialists, map design, and missing features that are somewhat mockingly called "legacy features" are being asked in surveys so close to launch and also after launch when these things should have been analyzed, discussed, and polled well before this product was in the hands of the public
Why does it take basic multiplayer fps features such as a scoreboard and voip not only not included at launch but being delayed months after launch? Surely those things were not forgotten about, right?
We know that the team has seen the large list of missing features after being spammed by it on several platforms. The response from the team has seem to be insultingly called "legacy features". Do you consider the absence of features that benefited previous games to have been an oversight? I'm just confused why previous games offered much more than 2042 does
Do you think that having so few weapons (22) at launch was an ideal decision? For example, if somebody such as I liked using LMGs in previous installments, I only have the option of two LMGs when in previous games I had the option to choose one out of many weapons
- @Straatford87 quick question, why did I have to pay $120 to then have to spend my time telling you how to make a BF game?
It's a 20 year old franchise at this point, this seems embarrassing. I've owned every single game, expansion, etc and this feels like something a small indie team would be doing for an early access game.
@GamrGirlBathwatr wrote:
@Straatford87quick question, why did I have to pay $120 to then have to spend my time telling you how to make a BF game?
It's a 20 year old franchise at this point, this seems embarrassing. I've owned every single game, expansion, etc and this feels like something a small indie team would be doing for an early access game.And the top-20 dramatic terrible design decisions that the vast majority of players have complained about in BF2042 have been consistently the same since the very first technical playtest until this very day! Its not like EA/DICE had no clue until just now this week when starting a (so far BROKEN) feedback loop.
Honestly sick and tired of the never ending tirade of bad excuses.
Wake up EA/DICE. You are killing yourself and this franchise.
You are standing at the very bottom of a deep pit already.
So stop digging it any deeper.
Just a couple of dedicated folks in the Cx team could trawl through the customer feedback across all channels and quickly triage them into relevant buckets for getting order and magnitude of them all. And this should in any case have been in place long before launch anyway, so no excuse of any sudden backlog...
Get to work and get it done.
Be serious.
Be honest.
Is that too much to ask?
@GamrGirlBathwatrIt honestly feels like they've left the interns running live-ops for this game at this point, and those interns are doing their absolute best but are just inexperienced interns. I cannot see any evidence that a AAA studio with hundreds of developers is actually putting any effort into this game.
