I passed my Driving test today. I got only 3 minors too which I was happy about. The first minor I got from straightening up in a bay parking (not sure how that’s a minor but there we go), one for indicating and changing gear for pulling away in the wrong order and then one for swerving slightly coming off a roundabout.
Ever since the first world there have been a slew of creative ideas. The first would be the giant metal robot called the Decimator, it was followed by floating cities, guns the size of skyscrapers and fortress ships to name just a few. These “crazy” ideas started to dry up around World 7, possibly even before that. Here in World 9 we’ve had a few metal suits but nothing brilliant.
I chatted to Zorg about this and he said that automation was preventing it. This threw me somewhat and my first response was going to be “you moron, it doesn’t stop it at all”. Then I remembered to look at things from his perspective and it occurred to me that the problem was that people think that automation prevents creativity. I can see why such a thought exists and in their place may well have my mind set on it myself.
The thing is, automation doesn’t stop creativity (though I fully agree it can curb it a little sometimes), it for the most part doesn’t affect it at all because it doesn’t deal with it. Things like the Amarrian submarines and Zeroth Order metal suits fit nicely into the system because it was specifically designed to be flexible in that way.
It would of course be wrong of me to sit here and say that it’s the fault of players for not being creative. I have not created a 2nd Jaegis riddle and keep banging on about automation which I can only assume is like saying “you cannot be creative”. Thus I’ve now added a page to the site that explains how to go about starting crazy projects, I hope that it will increase the number of crazy things created.
Oddly enough not everybody liked the idea of not letting some people vote. I have however come up with a new policy inspired by the practices employed by web designers. Here is the list of what several designers I know do:
- Get information about what the client wants/likes
- Present a concept/design
- Client gets 1 round of changes where they say what they do and do not like
- Final design is created and client accepts it
I figured that this could very well be adapted to WoA.
- I work out what needs to be changed
- I post up a copy of what I suggest as the rules
- Players post up feedback
- I post up a final version, those that posted specific feedback then vote on it, if at least 50% like it then it is added
Of course, those that chat to me on MSN and read this blog get advance warning of what I am thinking of and can make suggestions before and after the posting up of the first suggestion but then that’s the advantage of talking to the GM.
I recently posted a large number of new rules up and updated the site to use the new look that this blog started to use recently. One of the things I was surprised to see was that some people didn’t like the new rules but failed to specify what about them they didn’t like. I find this upsetting, am I not important enough to warrant a specific complaint or are they just trying to make me feel bad and cannot find actual faults in my work?
The people that complained most and suggested least were those that never comment on the blog and never talk to me on MSN except to get information on mid-turn events. Those that suggested most were those that always suggest and always chat to me about rules, they may not have agreed with all the changes but they cited reasons why and generally also a suggested solution.
I’ve taken two things from this; firstly I need to stop taking vague negative feedback so personally, I simply need to care less about about. Secondly, I’ve implemented a new policy that only those that chat to me about rules, suggest things, comment on the blog or are in some way interested in the development process of the rules get to vote on new rules.