Issues with the suggestions website

0 favourites
  • Deleting suggestions after 6 months or 3 months... I don't feel that I understand. Does it mean that every suggestion with 50+ votes gets a response? What if you amassed 100 votes over the 6 months, gaining new votes every couple of days, but suddenly its deleted because its been 6 months and 10 other suggestions reached 150 votes, therefore you have to start over? Then all the discussion in the comments of your suggestion is deleted? I don't like the sound of it.

    I do like dop2000's idea, it almost makes me curious how it'd go if a /r/c3ideas subreddit was created and promoted by Scirra, since Reddit has all the systems in place, and the suggestions website right now is a 3rd party product anyway. At least your suggestion that you spent time and effort into writing won't be deleted (then again, reddit archives after so many months right?)

    Anyone want to chime in on my suggestion from earlier in this topic? Even if its a con or to say "lol that'll never work"? My suggestion covers popular suggestions and more "minor" suggestions, and I think the pros to my suggestion would be that it gives confidence in everyone that stuff WILL get done, and even Scirra can cherry-pick suggestions themselves, so it's a win win for everyone. I also think it would attract people to the suggestions platform more because of a consistent "monthly" social media poll - consistency is key, unlike currently where its random what's produced next in C3, it's random when the suggestions platform is checked (which seemed to have spawned this topic in the first place) etc.

    I get that Scirra can't make accurate judgements on the feasibility of a new idea, but if that's the case, then ANY method of handling suggestions is fundamentally pointless (e.g. Let's go with Ashley's idea: 6 months pass, everything deleted, a reasonable suggestion rises to number 1 which Scirra takes on, but turns out during development that Scirra discover its very complicated, then they pause/change focus/etc.)

  • Scirra can cherry-pick suggestions themselves, so it's a win win for everyone. I also think it would attract people to the suggestions platform more because of a consistent "monthly" social media poll - consistency is key, unlike currently where its random what's produced next in C3

    If a monthly poll like this existed that would be pretty awesome! at least from a C3 User perspective. focusing the list to a few idea (that scirra is willing to implement) would make it feel awesome when one of the ideas you voted for was implemented, it could also drive up excitement for future feature, just knowing that something new could be coming in the future. don't get me wrong Suprise feature are also awesome.

  • Jase00 About a year ago I also proposed conducting monthly polls of best ideas (most upvoted and picked by Scirra), but here on the forum, not in social media. Ashley was against it.

    I really don't see how deleting all suggestions every 6 months will be any better than the current situation. Surely Ashley can't commit that N most upvoted ideas at the end of 6 months period will be implemented, there are too many unknowns.

  • I think if we do a 6-monthly reset, we could take the top 10 or so ideas at the end of that period, and permanently archive them somewhere, so the fact they got a lot of votes is recorded and isn't lost right away.

    The whole point of this discussion is to figure out how to avoid people inundating us with a mountain of work that is literally impossible to implement. Then people get disappointed that what they suggested isn't being worked on. If people can post unlimited suggestions, we'll be inundated. If people can have unlimited votes, then one person can vote on an impossible amount of work for us, and they are guaranteed to be disappointed. If ideas are left behind forever, then gradually it builds up to an impossible amount of work.

    So I do think that if you want to avoid disappointment, then we need limited idea submission and limited votes. If you are OK with being disappointed, then the current system is working fine. But the general view here is it's not working fine, which is why we're having this discussion. We probably need to make a significant change. If you want to post 100 suggestions, I can see how a system that resets every 6 months is annoying. But it's more realistic. It's probably far too much work to do all 100 ideas that you want to submit, especially taking in to account all the other ideas other users are submitting. So resetting the system acts as a filter. If you are willing to keep reposting your ideas, then it's another signal it's something you really want, rather than a throwaway idea someone made a couple of years ago but nobody really cares about it. If you know the ideas will all be deleted in 6 months and so you post your top 10 ideas instead of 100, that is actually much more useful to us.

    I get that Scirra can't make accurate judgements on the feasibility of a new idea, but if that's the case, then ANY method of handling suggestions is fundamentally pointless

    No, that's not the case. When we take on a big feature, we both investigate the feasibility and figure out what it will involve, and plan assuming there will be unexpected complications, follow-on feature requests, and a long tail of associated bug reports. The problem arises when we think something will take say 2 days, and it ends up taking 2 months when we never planned for that. We'll have full-time work already lined up for those 2 months. So then we end up with the stress of unexpectedly having more work than we intended, and other projects get delayed or postponed as we scramble to sort out the things that have gone wrong.

    On a positive note, there are lots of big improvements that came from the suggestions platform. For example, I doubt we'd have done the scene graph feature by now, without having a user submit the suggestion and lots of other people vote it up in to one of the most popular ideas. Taking that from initial design to completion was about 6 months though, and when starting it, I expected it to take about that long. So naturally we can't exactly do that every day. But the fact lots of people voted for it was a useful signal to us. That's the main purpose of the system: it's a way to give us feedback on what most people want.

  • I missed a few posts while writing that, so I'd add: the problem with polls is they are only things we think of. Going back to the scene graph suggestion again, I'm not sure we'd have ever added that to a poll. It was user submitted and loads of other people voted on it, and we spotted that, realised the importance, and started the work. If we only do polls with pre-approved features, we might miss that kind of thing, even if lots of people want it. How would everyone show that an idea we're not considering is important to them? Voting on the suggestions platform is meant to be the answer to that.

  • A bi-annual reset with a vote threshold that invites a comment from Scirra (similar to how the petitions feature works for UK parliament), with a light exposure of the development roadmap via feature polling every quarter would be a massive improvement in my opinion.

  • All I ask is to know in a timely manor if my suggestions are either accepted or denied.

    And also I would really really really like to know what is actively being developed since part of the subscription model is paying for further freaking development.

  • I think it's not so much black and white as accepted or denied.

    For my own projects I have more ideas that I would love to implement than I have the ability to do so. Add outside suggestions onto that... And with the immense volume of suggestions possible from the interwebs, all the time spent triaging suggestions is time not spent implementing them.

    Even if I see an amazing suggestion/idea I didn't have before, I don't know how long it will take or how feasible it is to complete in a reasonable amount of time (especially for the more involved, big suggestions - the ones that have a lot of popularity). I wouldn't want to promise something that I wasn't ready to deliver on.

    Same for denied. If I love the idea, but I'm not going to do it ahead of everything else I'm doing at the moment, I wouldn't want to straight up deny it. Also if it can gain traction and more and more people down the road are interested in it, I'd want to leave it there for that possibility and not just say denied.

    The idea of promising something I am (or not) ready to deliver is related to disclosing what is actively being developed, which can actually be seen pretty clearly in the betas. Often there are many things being worked on a time, which may gain or lose priority, but if something like the 3d object is ready to be committed to, it will show up in a beta. And if it's in the beta, that's prooooobably what they are working on right now to get it ready for release.

  • The new system Ashley proposed sounds great to me; definitely worth a try! Keeping the ideas manageable for Scirra to be review, explore, and implement is priority one - otherwise there's no point to any of it.

    The number of votes question is interesting. Having unlimited votes swings it all in favour of users who take the time to review every idea, or constantly check in on the ideas. But too few votes means we can't support everything we believe in, or have to spend time vote-managing, which likely drives people away. That might take some testing. Or maybe there's a voting window, say the last month, where everyone gets invited to vote for any number of ideas they like.

    Anyway, super interesting conversation and I'm excited to see this progress!

  • Try Construct 3

    Develop games in your browser. Powerful, performant & highly capable.

    Try Now Construct 3 users don't see these ads
  • I think this is a great idea taking a top ten list while purging all other ideas after 6 months, though lol what about if someone submits a suggestion one day before the 6 month period and it gets erased with no chance to be seen? I know if you make the suggestions being purged per suggestion rather than the whole list being deleted all at once that it makes the top 10 idea impossible then which I think is the best part of this whole idea.

  • Thanks for feedback piranha305 and dop2000 - I asked, and I received! Yeah even if it's on the forums here (I don't even have social media beyond Reddit, tbh I'd actually make an account just to vote if it was only social media, that's how eager I'd be for some form of influence for C3), and it doesn't need to be "monthly", it could be once a new beta cycle starts and it could gauge what to make in the next beta cycle for 2 months into the future perhaps (of course not at the start of a new beta cycle and then expecting to have the suggestion made within the next few releases).

    It's a shame it didn't come to be though when you suggested it a year back.

    I think if we do a 6-monthly reset, we could take the top 10 or so ideas at the end of that period, and permanently archive them somewhere, so the fact they got a lot of votes is recorded and isn't lost right away.

    I mean, I'm not 100% against the idea, but I guess I don't know exactly what you had in mind - if you archived the top 10 or something, would this be public, or tucked away at Scirra...and wouldn't this build up suddenly over time?

    The whole point of this discussion is to figure out how to avoid people inundating us with a mountain of work that is literally impossible to implement. Then people get disappointed that what they suggested isn't being worked on. If people can post unlimited suggestions, we'll be inundated.

    With the "monthly poll" idea combined with dop2000's "upvote once on all suggestions" idea, then you don't need to worry about the hundreds of new ideas that only get 6 upvotes, and you don't have to worry about being inundated with a huge amount of suggestions, nor worry as much about disappointing people, because: If the casual C3 user browses the suggestions website, and they know that they can upvote whatever they like, then they'll probably check out "Recent" and will hand out upvotes and comments to whatever they feel is a good idea, and ignore (or downvote?) the ideas that are poorly written, bad, pointless, or even defend Scirra on suggestions that go against Scirra's philosophy (e.g. The community will defend Scirra if someone's trying to attract attention to a "native export" idea - We care about C3 and we understand its mission and we would explain this to anyone trying to scream about native exports).

    Once suggestions start reaching a high amount of votes, then it's up to Scirra to set boundaries on what they will acknowledge or not, maybe Scirra would only acknowledge & write a comment on the top 20 suggestions, which doesn't mean Scirra will immediataely work on the suggestion, but Scirra could at least provide feedback, even if a suggestion gets to number 1, Scirra can dish out the facts and say "Sounds great, this is feasable" or "That's impossible I'm afraid, [maybe a quick reason why it's impossible, just to soften the blow]".

    I think it needs to be accepted that a fair amount of people will have to be disappointed, it's impossible to cater to all suggestions, but I guess I'm trying to focus on how to make the disappointment lower, as well as change the "reason" for disappointment. If people are competing to get their suggestion noticed, then yes disappointment exists, disappointment will always exist regardless of the solution to this topic, but where now we have people thinking "Does Scirra randomly check up on this website? Or not? Is it alive? Should I even bother?", we could instead have a busy suggestions platform with unlimited upvotes, and people would be thinking "Damn I need to write something well-written and spark discussion on my suggestion to encourage people to vote for it, because if I do, then it will rise and then there's a guarantee that it will be acknowledged by Scirra". This would happen primarily because the suggestion-creator knows the community has unlimited voting power, and would be thinking "The community are upvoting based entirely on how I write my post and the idea itself (and not voting based on "Hmm I only have 1 spare vote to give, I'll use it elsewhere"), so I better write this out well so I attract maximum attention".

    This all relies on the suggestions website being a busy website, but I really do think that the consistency of a monthly/bi-monthly poll of 5 highly-rated suggestions (that Scirra picked from the top 10 highest-rated ideas) would surely attract people to the suggestions website. With the existence of these polls, people will know that the suggestions site is alive and thriving, which attracts more visitors, more votes, more participants - I mentioned doing these polls on Social Media; wouldn't this boost Scirra's visibility too when more people engage on your Social Media posts?

    The absolute key point about being inundated with a mountain of work: The 5 suggestions that are in the poll will be voted on, and once the poll is over, those 5 suggestions will then be filtered down into one ultimate suggestion, which then Scirra could then work on. All said and done, this leaves Scirra with 1 suggestion to implement into C3 between each poll, and maybe commenting on like 20 suggestions. That's it for Scirra. The rest is the community curating the suggestions and essentially doing most of the admin work with votes and comments. A consistent pipeline like this just sounds really ideal to me, I wish I could articulate why.

    I'm hyper-focused and passionate about the poll and "unlimited upvotes" concept, but to comment on the "minor suggestions" thing - I'd say keep this section! Or, can you do "tags" and make it so people can tag things as a "minor suggestion", therefore keeping categories tidy? If Scirra could then browse via "Highest-rated minor suggestions", then this can be another poll at a different rate to monthly (considering they are MINOR, this shouldn't become a huge addition to Scirra's workload), and maybe only acknowledge the top 5 instead, or however Scirra would want to handle the numbers and workload. Keeping in mind that these should still have the strict "This isn't exactly a minor suggestion, sorry" judgement from Scirra - because otherwise it WILL waste your time.

  • How about this:

    You (The Scirra team) make a list of ideas that could be implemented, and let us vote on those?

    I never use the vote system, since i think you should have a roadmap and tons of ideas yourself. Features you folks at scirra should add at your own pace, that way nobody get's disapointed, just happily suprised.

    You might scrap the vote system and ideas, and just make a blog of the latest feature you are working on! That way all of a sudden from the users perspective: "Ah, a new blog post from scirra" "Oh! Cool stuff!"

    A smaller manageable blog, is less work also. Than a cluttered site full of ideas.

    Have a good one!

  • How about this:

    You (The Scirra team) make a list of ideas that could be implemented, and let us vote on those?

    This was addressed in Ashley's last post...

  • No. Im talking about a voting system without that site. The scirra team is coming up with the ideas (since they know best what is feasible for them), then we get to vote on those.

    For me personaly, i think they should scrap the voting system. People will just get upset. They should just add new features at their own pace without the risk of dissapointing people.

    Random new features from the users can be talked about on the forums. They can read about those without feeling like they are letting anybody down!

    Just a thought...

  • If people can have unlimited votes, then one person can vote on an impossible amount of work for us, and they are guaranteed to be disappointed.

    Ashley Why? I really don't understand! It will make your job easier, not harder!

    Some ideas will receive 1000 votes, others 50 votes. It will clearly show which idea people care about more. This system works well on Reddit and thousands of other platforms, so what's wrong with using it here?

    With 10 votes limit you are forcing us to make impossible decisions. How do you choose between a hammer and a screwdriver? Which is more important to you - a dog or a lawnmower?

    Also, let's imagine it's the last month of the 6-month period. Someone posts a really good suggestion and it currently sits at 1 vote. With limited votes almost nobody will vote on it, because (A) by this time they have no votes left, and (B) even if they have a spare vote, they see no point upvoting that idea because the top leading ideas are pretty much already decided, and their vote will go to waste.

    I think it would be best to remove the "minor suggestions" category, so we stop pretending we know what is and isn't easy, because in truth we don't know.

    I believe "Minor suggestions" category was misunderstood from the start. It's not about ideas which are easy for you to implement (we can't possibly know that), it should be for ideas which are minor for us. Like adding a new keyboard shortcut, or a small change in some behavior.

    Obviously, this category can't compete with other ideas from "big" categories. And that's why judging ideas only by votes count is wrong, the right thing to do would be picking top N ideas from each category.

    .

    I almost regret starting this thread. If as a result of it you cut the votes limit from 25 to 10 and remove "minor suggestions", this will be a huge step back to what we had 3-4 years ago.

Jump to:
Active Users
There are 1 visitors browsing this topic (0 users and 1 guests)