Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiteDragon
If you pitch an idea, we definitely do consider it, but often people only explain why the idea is good, rather than the downsides that are packaged along with it.
So, we usually respond something along the lines of "okay, but if we use your idea, X will be a downside of it, so we probably won't". If the ups still beat the downs, then we do it.
I think that's perfectly reasonable. Perhaps designing a game is a battle -- but a peaceful battle to a constructive end, rather than an endless war of words only to be won through attrition.
To be slightly more concrete, it is true that providing a shortcut would make travel less annoying. But to what extent do we reduce travel? Two-way shortcut? Horse summoning? Teleportation?
I think travel has the upside of making the quest more dynamic, as long as it isn't too long. You can travel with friends, chat with people, and gain a moment of familiarity in a potentially confusing quest.
The reason we added that one-way shortcut was so you wouldn't have to run the same path twice within like 3 minutes. Instead, you would have a little run through the forest to Master Li's as a moment of relief from the questing, not a 10-minute grudge through a gargantuan overworld.
|
The quest was short so I traveled back and forth through the forest in like 8 minutes because I didn't know a shortcut existed. And the playercount doesn't exist for said friends, chatting, etc.
Also
to be slightly more concrete, you haven't said anything about the "good ideas" such as a the tutorial idea. You only pick the seemingly "bad ideas" to pick apart and don't say much otherwise. That's why it seems like a battle to me.
I don't doubt you need to weigh the ideas, but you should weigh them all with feedback to the player. Not just the ones that are easy to turn down.