"More communication" - what exactly?

[SilverSpoon]

What I want developers to communicate is that they should clearly state what their purpose is for each update, change, or depending on the case bug fix. That way we can recognize in the direction the developer wants to go.

On 3/29/2025 at 4:10 AM, DVGMedia said:

It's important because klei doesn't have testers and they do look to us to test updates.

Is that true? Do you have a source? Honestly, It's pretty dissatisfaction for me if so. Seems even sloth.

[Swiyss]

Hmmm we did get a Wes Skill tree tease this april fools..

[Edible Coal]

39 minutes ago, astareus said:

Hmmm we did get a Wes Skill tree tease this april fools..

um care to elaborate?

 

[Swiyss]

20 minutes ago, Edible Coal said:

um care to elaborate?

 

not really.

It's just some balloons and his hand there in the book

 

[Frosty_Mentos]

Conducting polls, showcasing what's being worked on as well as Q&A's slightly before and during beta to get a grasp on the idea of what the players want. Generally a good bundle of 'how to discuss with people' and to tell that they're got a busy schedule and need to finish a thing if they can't develop something further. Honesty is best policy, basically.

It won't be the end of the world for me if they take their time with any of it, really. There's better things to do than harassing Klei for answers.

[Swiyss]

I like little communication. They have to be smart. It's great when they post 1 thing or another per intermission or beta post. But I wouldn't want anything outside of that because it can be very dangerous to their reputation.

[IAmAFurrz]

On 3/28/2025 at 7:48 PM, BezKa said:

Do you want blog-style info posts about certain design choices, methodologies etc?

this would be good, explaining their thought process behind designs and such with counter measures, and how to access them would be cool. makes me think of the old ds posters for updates

[Larael]

Actually the state of the games is more like a released in time (not finished) just in time. I like the decision of limited comunication just as a hot fix give klei time to cook things and deliver them finished or endstate. As someone said before once the forums understand that they are the players and enjoy the game they're not the ones who decide the game direction or how is supposed to be played, suggestions are welcome but not as a must be in the game (something like guille said before :3)

[YouKnowWho142]

On 3/28/2025 at 2:19 PM, Evelo said:

What I want most from Klei when it comes to communication is areas of focus. What do you want to players to focus on and comment on during a beta. It is obvious it is about the content that is being introduced in the beta, but I am more referring to Klei actually stating "Hey, we wants you to focus on X." and give us official polls to gauge feedback. We have always had a very chaotic feedback system that is very very open and broad. Narrowing it down and inquiring from the players what you want specifically is best to fulfill the outcome.

I'll use an example: After somewhat recent Controversy Creative Assembly has received a ton of hell from the playerbase. Most recently one of the major concerns of their is the AI and how it functions. So they opened a beta branch and gave a button for in game feedback poll. It is awesome and a great thing they have done recently which is what I personally look for with effective communication between developers and the play testers (or in this case the player base).

Trying to boil it down to as simple at possible, "How do you think of this?" is a bad question. "How do you think this new thing feels specifically when it comes to that thing?" is a good question.

I love this example, even now they're still on damage control from their controversial Warhammer 3 dlc from 2 years back. I wonder if having polls not necessarily on the forum but connected to the betas themselves would help to get opinions from a more generalized group. Behavior Interactive just tried something really interesting by talking about some ideas they had for a rework and showed some concepts, then linked a poll/survey based on how these ideas sound to see if their ideas on this newer vision would click with people so that they know where to start.

Personally, and I don't seem alone on this, I would just be satisfied by them explaining major changes during the betas, I think that would've cleared up a lot during the beta and would've let people make more focused feedback since a major issue with the Wendy beta was that nobody had any idea what Wendy was really supposed to be which caused a lot of different ideas to be added to her skill tree, a lot of which just didn't really mix

[DVGMedia]

7 hours ago, SilverSpoon said:

Is that true? Do you have a source? Honestly, It's pretty dissatisfaction for me if so. Seems even sloth.

Well I'm only basing it off the fact they have an open beta. The only real testing they probably do is just standard dev testing. Ensuring the idea they want to implement works on a bare bones level. But like actual beta testing to find bugs not really. 

The betas are kind of both though bug testing and opinion gathering. They kind of just throw stuff at the wall and sees what sticks. And sometimes they have an idea they really want to stick to despite how much it may affect the game

[YouKnowWho142]

12 minutes ago, DVGMedia said:

Well I'm only basing it off the fact they have an open beta. The only real testing they probably do is just standard dev testing. Ensuring the idea they want to implement works on a bare bones level. But like actual beta testing to find bugs not really. 

The betas are kind of both though bug testing and opinion gathering. They kind of just throw stuff at the wall and sees what sticks. And sometimes they have an idea they really want to stick to despite how much it may affect the game

To be fair, players know how to break the game way easier than any dev (and thousands of people pushing the limits on updates is probably infinitely faster than a couple people doing it especially since each player plays the game differently), and as you said they just use it for feedback. It’s really two birds with one stone, tester feedback is not that meaningful if it works correctly but just isn’t very popular or fun so it helps to have that feedback from the players too

[SilverSpoon]

38 minutes ago, DVGMedia said:

Well I'm only basing it off the fact they have an open beta.

I don't want and intend criticizing you, but I think that too much speculation and not enough to evidence for not actually testing game. Jeez I'm relieved. Sorry for doubting you Klei.

[DVGMedia]

2 hours ago, SilverSpoon said:

I don't want and intend criticizing you, but I think that too much speculation and not enough to evidence for not actually testing game. Jeez I'm relieved. Sorry for doubting you Klei.

Their team is pretty small so I'm pretty sure they do not have dedicated beta testers. Everyone probably have mixed jobs  we really won't know for sure but as another said beta testing does work better with more people.  And klei doesn't have the funds for that which is why we have public beta builds and they actively request people to opt in. 

It's good for them cause it saves them time and money.  

But that still ties into a fact that we as players have at least some say in the development of the game. 

 

Knowing what type of feedback should be provided. Because we kind of mostly bring up strength and balance discussions more than anything else