Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.

19 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

633
[WAG]
Members
1,633 posts
9,122 battles

Why? 

Why WG did you change the saved game number? What crisis pushed this action?
Why did you not ask the user base what a good number would be?
Why did the latest patch revert that number BACK to 30 after we changed it?
What can you not think to communicate about simple issues like this?
Why not add a section in the config menu to accommodate a user easily changing this number?
whjy continue to ignore the user base on issues that you create with your own actions? ( we didn't make this issue, WG did)


Here is a simple little change that alienated so many people, caused all kinds of confusion and angst and it is 100% a WG fault and not only was and is there no explanation, there is no real apology or acknowledgement that you screwed up.

WG, you really need to take a look at HOW you do things..... There was absolutely no need to have done this action, not only the way you did it, but was there really a need to do it at all? You have communicated nothing about why you made this change, but it is a perfect example of how your thought process towards the user base functions, somehow no one thought to ASK the user base what they think about changing the replay saved qty and as a result we have chaos....  and then, once you having accomplished this feat, you ignore it as if nothing had happened and the user base is not upset. 

*I* so want WG to respect the user base and work with us, but too often we are boxed out and not given a chance to interact with the WG staff to avoid situations like this, and the  x-server battle cluster that you still haven't addressed.

  • Boring 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,039
[WAIFU]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers
13,372 posts
5,428 battles
30 minutes ago, Elo_J_Fudpucker said:


Why did you not ask the user base what a good number would be?
 

The user base would never agree on a number anyway, since a 'good number' is subjective. For me 30 is perfectly fine since I don't mess with replays much.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
633
[WAG]
Members
1,633 posts
9,122 battles
2 minutes ago, Super_Dreadnought said:

The user base would never agree on a number anyway, since a 'good number' is subjective. For me 30 is perfectly fine since I don't mess with replays much.

Of course not.. that is not the point.. do you not think they could have asked? Just because you do not care about this issue, does not mean no one else does.  Many have just given up trying to communicate to WG as they perceive that it just ends up in the round file.

The point is not so much about the number of replays, but the thought process that goes on at WG when issues/changes  like this are contemplated.  This change DID make alot of people upset. This change did make many people lose replays they hoped to save. Not every one is in the game every day. Not every lives and breathes the game the way some of us do.

I am trying to help WG change the way it does things for the betterment of all of us....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,039
[WAIFU]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers
13,372 posts
5,428 battles
1 minute ago, Elo_J_Fudpucker said:

Of course not.. that is not the point.. do you not think they could have asked? Just because you do not care about this issue, does not mean no one else does.  Many have just given up trying to communicate to WG as they perceive that it just ends up in the round file.

The point is not so much about the number of replays, but the thought process that goes on at WG when issues/changes  like this are contemplated.  This change DID make alot of people upset. This change did make many people lose replays they hoped to save. Not every one is in the game every day. Not every lives and breathes the game the way some of us do.

I am trying to help WG change the way it does things for the betterment of all of us....

No, I don't. Start asking the user base what they want and they'll come up with multiple answers and cause chaos. I'm afraid I take a far dimmer view of the average WoWs player than you do. In fact I think most players are dumber than a box of rocks.

As far as I'm concerned players at this point should be aware that new patches tend to break every mod and setting they have, and take the necessary precautions to move the replay file to a different folder.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,984
[PVE]
[PVE]
Members
8,193 posts
14,334 battles
15 minutes ago, Super_Dreadnought said:

The user base would never agree on a number anyway, since a 'good number' is subjective. For me 30 is perfectly fine since I don't mess with replays much.

I agree that as a rule we can't all agree on much but they could have asked, seen what the range of #'s was, and come up with a middle of the road # to try and satisfy all. You know, take the average of what people suggest.

Also, at least on this replay issue, I fail to see why they did it at all? Why do they care how many replays we have saved on OUR computers? How does this impact them and how is this any of their concern or business? If somehow it impacts them on their end that is different. I just don't see how it does. I honestly don't understand why someone there would A) - even think about it to begin with and then B) - think it warrants a change and a # limit? Makes no sense to me?

And FWIW I have always taken a replay and moved it to a separate folder with the screenshots of games that I want to have the replay of so it didn't impact me. Just speaking in general terms. I don't understand why this was done? SO MUCH they should/need to worry about was the # of replays on OUR computers really one of them?

Edited by AdmiralThunder
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
776
[-BRS-]
Members
1,038 posts
29,954 battles
9 minutes ago, AdmiralThunder said:

I agree that as a rule we can't all agree on much but they could have asked, seen what the range of #'s was, and come up with a middle of the road # to try and satisfy all. You know, take the average of what people suggest.

Also, at least on this replay issue, I fail to see why they did it at all? Why do they care how many replays we have saved on OUR computers? How does this impact them and how is this any of their concern or business? If somehow it impacts them on their end that is different. I just don't see how it does. I honestly don't understand why someone there would A) - even think about it to begin with and then B) - think it warrants a change and a # limit? Makes no sense to me?

And FWIW I have always taken a replay and moved it to a separate folder with the screenshots of games that I want to have the replay of so it didn't impact me. Just speaking in general terms. I don't understand why this was done? SO MUCH they should/need to worry about was the # of replays on OUR computers really one of them?

^^ This^^  Cant figure out why they did it.  Dose anyone know if there is a reason?

If WG had come to the player base and said "We need to limit replays because of (X), then I think we would all have basically said "Sure, why not, but I don't like it" or some such mindless complaint.

Just take it to heart that if WG or a player says something in the forums, there is going to be another player that will mindlessly disagree just to disagree.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
344
[CSALT]
Members
921 posts
Just now, Turbotush said:

^^ This^^  Cant figure out why they did it.  Dose anyone know if there is a reason?

If WG had come to the player base and said "We need to limit replays because of (X), then I think we would all have basically said "Sure, why not, but I don't like it" or some such mindless complaint.

Just take it to heart that if WG or a player says something in the forums, there is going to be another player that will mindlessly disagree just to disagree.

Honestly I think it is down to cut and paste scripting/programing.  Like how the "Resupply using in-game currency if unavailable " to auto resupply ended up checked or enabled again even if you'd already deselected it in previous versions.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
776
[-BRS-]
Members
1,038 posts
29,954 battles
10 minutes ago, Gunga_Dinner said:

Honestly I think it is down to cut and paste scripting/programing.  Like how the "Resupply using in-game currency if unavailable " to auto resupply ended up checked or enabled again even if you'd already deselected it in previous versions.

Soooo, maybe Aslan can mod it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
162
[TFLT]
[TFLT]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
695 posts
9,072 battles
1 hour ago, Elo_J_Fudpucker said:

Why? 

Why WG did you change the saved game number? What crisis pushed this action?
Why did you not ask the user base what a good number would be?
Why did the latest patch revert that number BACK to 30 after we changed it?
What can you not think to communicate about simple issues like this?
Why not add a section in the config menu to accommodate a user easily changing this number?
whjy continue to ignore the user base on issues that you create with your own actions? ( we didn't make this issue, WG did)


Here is a simple little change that alienated so many people, caused all kinds of confusion and angst and it is 100% a WG fault and not only was and is there no explanation, there is no real apology or acknowledgement that you screwed up.

WG, you really need to take a look at HOW you do things..... There was absolutely no need to have done this action, not only the way you did it, but was there really a need to do it at all? You have communicated nothing about why you made this change, but it is a perfect example of how your thought process towards the user base functions, somehow no one thought to ASK the user base what they think about changing the replay saved qty and as a result we have chaos....  and then, once you having accomplished this feat, you ignore it as if nothing had happened and the user base is not upset. 

*I* so want WG to respect the user base and work with us, but too often we are boxed out and not given a chance to interact with the WG staff to avoid situations like this, and the  x-server battle cluster that you still haven't addressed.

You can set the number yourself...

Go to your game folder and edit the 'engine_config' file in your res folder.    <maxReplaysToSave>500</maxReplaysToSave>

There are a few things in the file that I update that allow the game to play more smoothly.  You just have to remember to make your changes whenever WG puts out a new update.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
171
[AAA]
Members
498 posts
8,183 battles

If the user base means those few 100s that come on forums regularly and WG decides everything based on their opinion, I would prefer them not taking one at all. WG would be having better data about this and they would be knowing what needs to be done. They wouldn't have arrived at the 30 count randomly (at least in places I have worked such numbers are backed up by data and research) and would have based it on the user data (remember not everyone has those nice machines with SSD and lots of space).

If they really wanted to do this they could have alerted the players a patch in advance and educated them about how to change it to whatever count they need. I am not sure if they did but I saw someone  explaining about this in some video. 

Edited by sansfaille
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
633
[WAG]
Members
1,633 posts
9,122 battles
1 minute ago, Viper069 said:

ou can set the number yourself...

Yes .. yes you can.. but *that* isn't the point of the message....

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
633
[WAG]
Members
1,633 posts
9,122 battles
1 minute ago, sansfaille said:

They wouldn't have arrived at the 30 count randomly (at least in places I have worked such numbers are backed up by data and research). 

If they really wanted to do this they could have alerted the players a patch in advance and educated them about how to change it to whatever count they need. I am not sure if they did but I saw someone  explaining about this in some video.  

I am not so sure they put any thought into it... and again to make the point it would have been very very simple to ask...

..and yes.. they could have done so much more in the the way of explaining... as it is a user had to jump in and help everyone... a user , several, had to create and explanation... the same way we have had to do with replays... why?

There was no perceived problem, but they applied a fix to it anyway??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
162
[TFLT]
[TFLT]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
695 posts
9,072 battles
8 minutes ago, Elo_J_Fudpucker said:

Yes .. yes you can.. but *that* isn't the point of the message....

 

Well, I could have gone with there are too many stupids out there that don't know how to perform regular disk maintenance and wonder why there HD is full.  That's the answer to your question right there. :Smile_Default:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
171
[AAA]
Members
498 posts
8,183 battles
4 minutes ago, Elo_J_Fudpucker said:

I am not so sure they put any thought into it... and again to make the point it would have been very very simple to ask...

..and yes.. they could have done so much more in the the way of explaining... as it is a user had to jump in and help everyone... a user , several, had to create and explanation... the same way we have had to do with replays... why?

There was no perceived problem, but they applied a fix to it anyway??

You don't see a problem because you might know your replays might be eating lots of your disk space and eventually hampering the game performance. As I stated before many don't have beefier machines with big hard disks (don't quote me on this but someone told, in Russia people still run this game on decade old machines). That would have definitely impacted game performance and they would have promptly raised tickets about this. WG might have resolved such issues in a good number and that is why they wanted to 'fix' it. Else why would they even bother to fix something that is not broken (yeah yeah WG sometimes tries to fix things which aren't broken) and never hurts them one bit? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
633
[WAG]
Members
1,633 posts
9,122 battles
11 minutes ago, sansfaille said:

You don't see a problem because you might know your replays might be eating lots of your disk space and eventually hampering the game performance.

Replays do take up some space, but not a lot, and even many of them, hundreds is not going to slow down a computer. The files are very small. You would ned 10's of thousands to have an impact. As far as decade old machines goes, they are jumping to a 64 bit platform in a bit and that will leave all those old computers behind..

As far as this being a crisis, I doubt that totally... again.. WG did not explain why they did this... you are guessing.

The point is still that it was something that they did not communicate effectively about and that is the issue as much or more than the change itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
633
[WAG]
Members
1,633 posts
9,122 battles
18 minutes ago, Viper069 said:

perform regular disk maintenance and wonder why there HD is full.

The replays files are too small to have a real impact on HD space... this is not an answer... if 60 games saved = 5Mb then  it is one MB for every 12 games saved so even if you had 5000 games saved it would only be 60,000MB.. which is just not a lot of space.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
162
[TFLT]
[TFLT]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
695 posts
9,072 battles
45 minutes ago, Elo_J_Fudpucker said:

The replays files are too small to have a real impact on HD space... this is not an answer... if 60 games saved = 5Mb then  it is one MB for every 12 games saved so even if you had 5000 games saved it would only be 60,000MB.. which is just not a lot of space.

I don't remember where, but I do believe I saw where that was one of the reasons WG gave.  I've currently got 30 games saved using >36Mb.  I have plenty of space, but always dump mine once a month.  I can see where this can be an issue for older computers with smaller drives.  The Russian playerbase runs quite a few of the older platforms.  And lots of ppl who only know where the ON button is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
633
[WAG]
Members
1,633 posts
9,122 battles
22 hours ago, Super_Dreadnought said:

Start asking the user base what they want and they'll come up with multiple answers and cause chaos.

OH that is complete pooo... asking people to give a number would not result in chaos... my goodness how to mountain a molehill...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×