[POLL] re-add trekchems with downsides

[Deantwo]

Bottom post of the previous page:

Suggests? Well, you haven't been reading the complaints then. It can be summarized as "I don't like it", rather than "I don't like change".

"I don't like it, because it changes stuff"?

You just said it :^)
Seriously though, it's something that should have been discussed a lot more before being implanted.
And when it was live, we were told it'd just be for a while, that we could always revert if it was broken or no one liked it.
Yet here we are.

It's been said that it won't be reverted. So saying that the best cause of action is to revert it is pointless.

That is the reason I said not to say that the best cause of action is to revert it.

Also:

Code: Select all

if(!broken && number_of_people_who_like_it > 0)
    revert = 0
else
    revert = 1

Have to go buy 6 loafs of bread now.

[dezzmont]

But iamgoodball's opening post didn't clearly state why he wanted to add downsides to the chems, which is why I think people voted no.

We have evidence that players are totally fine with the game changng so that things get harder. Trying to scapegoat this on the players is dishonest. The fact you refuse to recognize how poor this change has gone over and why is your fault. Not anyone else's.

It's been said that it won't be reverted. So saying that the best cause of action is to revert it is pointless.

No, it is honest. And lets be real, it is not pointless, it is very clear that coderbus is being affected by the constant demands and the intense scrutiny they are now under.

Some coders are coming out and making really awesome attempts at being more open and reactive to the playerbase by havign design discussions about their ideas before just settling on them and plopping them in.

And the fact that we got a big banner that basically says "the complaints are affecting us" means people won't stop.

Not to mention the fact that SoS has been getting more involved with looking at the player-coder relationship as a direct result of these requests to revert, and some coders outright leaving the code team because you are chaining them to a nuke over your insane desire to keep this in the game.

[Deantwo]

It's been said that it won't be reverted. So saying that the best cause of action is to revert it is pointless.

No, it is honest. And lets be real, it is not pointless, it is very clear that coderbus is being affected by the constant demands and the intense scrutiny they are now under.

Since it won't happen, it is mostly just annoying that you can't come up with better ideas than that one.

Some coders are coming out and making really awesome attempts at being more open and reactive to the playerbase by havign design discussions about their ideas before just settling on them and plopping them in.

Yeah, plus it is nice to get feedback on your idea.
I haven't made any big changes that I felt needed a huge discussion yet though.

And the fact that we got a big banner that basically says "the complaints are affecting us" means people won't stop.

No, just means we are all tired of hearing the same un-constructive "revert it" comment over and over.

[Deantwo]

And when it was live, we were told it'd just be for a while, that we could always revert if it was broken or no one liked it.
Yet here we are.

Also:

Code: Select all

if(!broken && number_of_people_who_like_it > 0)
    revert = 0
else
    revert = 1

This viewpoint is like most retarded thing ever.

Was just based on what OliveOil said.
I couldn't help my self from writing that.

[dezzmont]

Coders have quit over these complaints. Stop pretending they have not had results, and are just pointless annoyances to you. There is something productive from our perspective in demanding it be reverted repeatedly.

[Deantwo]

Coders have quit over these complaints. Stop pretending they have not had results, and are just pointless annoyances to you. There is something productive from our perspective in demanding it be reverted repeatedly.

From what I was told on #CoderBus, that is not really the case.
But I am not totally sure on that subject.

[dezzmont]

I recall it being mentioned during the roundtable by a high end coder, I believe MisterPerson. That was a while ago and they may have come back however.

Doesn't really matter to me. It is proof that this is affecting coderbus and thus proof that all the complaints are working slowly, even if it is amazingly destructive due to how coderbus has chosen to handle the issue.

[WJohnston]

I actually really like the idea of overdosing and addictions, that's plenty enough of a downside though.

[lumipharon]

Literally no one trusts people when they say 'we can revert it if it's not popular/working' because IT NEVER GETS REVERTED. Slow space was unbelievably awful and no one liked it, and THAT took weeks of screaming and cage rattling before it got reverted. You cannot keep lying to people and spitting in their collective faces and not expect people to get upset.

And making polls with options of 'keep goon chem' or 'keep goon chem with tg chems made into goonchems' when everyone want 'remove goonchem' just makes it worse.

[Saegrimr]

"Just give it some time, it's still new."
"Any knee-jerk remove PRs will be closed."
"It's still being worked on just wait."
"Its too engrained into the code now and removing it would cause more problems."
"Because I said no."

[AnonymousNow]

Why is the coderbase so resistant to the removal of Goonchem? I want to hear reasons. I want to hear all the reasons, no matter how completely ludicrous. I want to understand why this is still a problem.

[soulgamer]

Why is the coderbase so resistant to the removal of Goonchem? I want to hear reasons. I want to hear all the reasons, no matter how completely ludicrous. I want to understand why this is still a problem.

Because the head coders want it. That is the only reason.