Player Council to Fdev

I would like to see a player council (council name TBD) drafted that coordinates player suggestions and concerns with the Devs involved with that council. This system has been pretty effective at QC during the process of development with other developers that have tried this method. The Player Council just pretty much voices the validity of our suggestions and concerns with the game's development with a team of players that have knowledge of the game mechanics, play styles and/or exploits. I threw out some guidelines and suggestions and everyone is welcome to add or modify any of the below in their post.

Player Council (name TBD)
  • The Player Council shall be elected by the player community to represent the player community's interest in development.
  • The Player Council shall have at the most, annual term limits. (max number of terms to be served - TBD)
  • The Player Council shall have as many positions available as there are aspects (or offices) of the game with each member of that council occupying each aspect (office). (e.g. C&P, Power Play, third-party devs, etc.)
  • Fdev may dictate the offices to be occupied per their development structure (as needed). I feel this may help Fdev streamline feedback from the council.
  • The Player Council shall communicate with Fdev directly during scheduled council/dev meetings and before scheduled releases of new content, betas and/or features.
Player Council Restrictions
  • Council nominees cannot be; currently employed or formerly employed by Fdev; a moderator for Fdev; relatives or friends of any staff member of Fdev.
  • Council nominees must be active in the community forums
  • Player Council members must have knowledge of the aspect they are representing when nominated and elected.
  • Council nominees must have purchased, at least, Elite : Danergous (Non-horizons) to qualify for nominations.
Maybe council members can have a special in-game tag for their commander like, Counselor BLAH instead of CMDR?!
I hope this suggestion may help the devs and the community communicate better.
 
I'm not sure how this helps Frontier. At the moment they can gather information from the forums, reddit, chat channels, and their own telemetry data. If they want specific information on a topic, they have the Focused Feedback forums.

If a single person is appointed to be the "community representative on C&P" then there are several possibilities, none of which seem to gain Frontier anything:

1) They do the job honestly and effectively to represent and collate the broad spread of opinions, suppressing and being impartial with respect to their own personal views on the matter. In this case, they're basically just acting as a free community reader for Frontier, plus they can say goodbye to their inbox and will get partial community blame for anything in the C&P area not to anyone's taste. Marginal benefit for Frontier over the current situation (cos free labour) but no real new information because all the major viewpoints are already (loudly) seen on the forums, reddit, etc. and the councillor is just as likely as the paid community team to miss minor but important ones. And this is the best case...

2) They take their role as an elected representative to be representation of the opinion of those who elected them only - not the majority (or substantial minority depending on voting system) of the community who didn't. The community as a whole may end up with little confidence in their ability and will continue to make their demands anyway. Frontier can't solely listen to them and have to continue to look for general community opinion - leading to accusations *both* that Frontier don't listen to the Council and it's not worth having *and* that the Council is an elitist mates club focused on one particular play style at everyone else's expense.

3) They take their role as an elected councillor to be a mandate to push their own personal opinions about armchair game design at every opportunity. Frontier end up ignoring their regular rants about how C&P would be better if it was tied to an economy simulated using blockchain and go back to reading the forums.

4) They do some combination of 1-3 but the end result is that they're continually advocating for something that's not compatible with Frontier's vision for the game. Frontier go back to reading the forums to see if there are any suggestions or points which would be compatible instead.

5) They're just plain incompetent (or short of time, or suffer a sudden illness, or something more justifiable that incompetence) because the skills needed to do a job and the skills needed to be elected are very different. Frontier don't get any information at all from them and go back to reading the forums.

And oh my, the amount of bad faith, salt, accusations, counter-accusations, and so forth which would follow the various entrenched factions during the campaigning period for representatives related to controversial topics such as C&P. It'd be great for helping me fill my ignore list but not much else... and we haven't even got into the pre-vote debate on why the voting system chosen by Frontier fixes the result in favour of their preferred candidates!

There are certain very specialist areas - 3rd-party tools development is the only one I can really think of, though maybe certain aspects of Powerplay - where Frontier can benefit from having targeted conversations with particular individuals as a supplement to its existing comms activities. And they do, on occasions, do that.
 
translator,

they could always start a campaign by email, with a system of question answer (form) he could know the general opinion of the players on all or part of the game.. of course, people have to participate, but it's done, he could expand the plan and see what the players think beyond the forums.

or as it exists with the series "assassin's creed", for each mission add in game directly the possibility to note (in view of statistics) and to give a small comment .. in game directly.
 
Last edited:
Lol

We have a player council. It's called the forums.

:p

FD read these ideas, but it's impossible to reply to then all.

And anyway, if there's a council, I need to be on it.

Mainly so I can play my own ideas. I have many. As you're probably all aware. :D

CMDR Cosmic Spacehead
 
Maybe council members can have a special in-game tag for their commander like, Counselor BLAH instead of CMDR?!
I hope this suggestion may help the devs and the community communicate better.
this will only help the board members and BLAH to communicate better .. the others, without interest, can not better communicate their opinion on the contrary.
 

rootsrat

Volunteer Moderator
How do you propose the council communicates with the rest of the community?

Also how do you ensure the council is 100% objective and is not pushing their subjective vision of how the game should work or - worse - lobbying for some player group agenda?
 
Last edited:
Frontier are making a game, and they are taking player input into consideration, not the other way around. Setting up a group of "privileged" players would only lead to animosity.

If a group of players feels they'd be better at making a game they like, they're entirely welcome to do so, it's never been easier.
 
The worse idea i have ever heard of in 17 years online gaming. To suggest introducing player councils into online multimedia Gaming will destroy the game and i know no other game that does it. It would be a disaster for their business and any other company and that is why we never see them.

Any player council would not represent the majority of players by de facto and only dictate their own agenda on the masses.

The majority purchased Elite because of FDs vision of where they are taking it not of a player council vision. FD gets their feedback from these forums and other media outlets and that is the only way they can be effective in gauging a large percentage of the player base. A player council at best would reach 1-5 % of the player base.
 
Last edited:
I read a while back that the forums are getting a full make over soon™.

With any luck, we'll have the ability to up/down vote ideas and suggestions (and only these, not regular posts), so atleast FD can see the general forum consensus on each idea before reading it. Which may save them some time, considering how many duplicate ideas we have posted.

Then we can all get behind good ideas, and ignore or down vote the plain awful ones. Lol

CMDR Cosmic Spacehead
 
CCP have the Council of Stellar Management (CSM) for EVE Online: https://community.eveonline.com/community/csm/

I'd be interested to hear from the OP the reasoning behind the proposed prohibition of past or present Moderators serving on the proposed Player Council?
Because we can literally blame T.J for everything? :p
It'll open the flood gates!


I actually figured part of your job as moderators was to take a look at ideas, for some reason. Lol

CMDR Cosmic Spacehead
 
I would like to see a player council (council name TBD) drafted that coordinates player suggestions and concerns with the Devs involved with that council. This system has been pretty effective at QC during the process of development with other developers that have tried this method. The Player Council just pretty much voices the validity of our suggestions and concerns with the game's development with a team of players that have knowledge of the game mechanics, play styles and/or exploits. I threw out some guidelines and suggestions and everyone is welcome to add or modify any of the below in their post.

Player Council (name TBD)
  • The Player Council shall be elected by the player community to represent the player community's interest in development.
  • The Player Council shall have at the most, annual term limits. (max number of terms to be served - TBD)
  • The Player Council shall have as many positions available as there are aspects (or offices) of the game with each member of that council occupying each aspect (office). (e.g. C&P, Power Play, third-party devs, etc.)
  • Fdev may dictate the offices to be occupied per their development structure (as needed). I feel this may help Fdev streamline feedback from the council.
  • The Player Council shall communicate with Fdev directly during scheduled council/dev meetings and before scheduled releases of new content, betas and/or features.
Player Council Restrictions
  • Council nominees cannot be; currently employed or formerly employed by Fdev; a moderator for Fdev; relatives or friends of any staff member of Fdev.
  • Council nominees must be active in the community forums
  • Player Council members must have knowledge of the aspect they are representing when nominated and elected.
  • Council nominees must have purchased, at least, Elite : Danergous (Non-horizons) to qualify for nominations.
Maybe council members can have a special in-game tag for their commander like, Counselor BLAH instead of CMDR?!
I hope this suggestion may help the devs and the community communicate better.
Here's my thoughts on the subject from experience with the concept from other games and situations.

council.
1: Election, sounds the proper way, but given the internet it rarely if ever falls out that way, those elected are in no way assured to actually have other players interests at heart then their own, thus you can have a subsection of the users, those that for example are loud on the communities, or certain groups in the community group together and get their perspective elected. And silent majority gets no say in it, because the silent majority is often those playing the game, maybe reading the community sites and posting rarely, so a minority with their specific view can quickly affect the game negatively, if it even needs to work, there needs to be some solid checks and balances.
2: Given the nature of gaming, 'terms' isn't really going to work, if you ask me, rather they should be able to be removed if people disagree with their view on the game, so we avoid people getting a role and then misusing it. Of course this opens up to groups 'attacking' each-others representatives, and given the volatile nature of things online it can turn sour, but more then if people get a set term and misuse it which has happened in other games.
3: amount of positions seems a given yeah.
4: course.
5: considering how timing works with RL and people working and fdev, yeah, this seems impractical?

restrictions:
1: if they are a player of the game why would this matter, because they would 'favor' fdev? how? how about the much substantial risk of council/player members misusing their power, given the nature of how many of these discussions go?
2: well yeah, but at the same time, does that make it fair though? I know a ton of players that avoid community sites like the plague due to the volatile nature of such forums/reddit e.t.c. and simply enjoy the game and talk with their friends they play with about it, discuss things there, their views aren't any less valid?
3: how is this even going to be monitored? anyone can read something online about a topic and come up with idea's that ultimately do not take a lot of things into consideration, but "It sounds cool" would just waste time if those kinds of people got in, but again how would you monitor that?
4: well yeah, you need to play and know about what you are dealing with, and not make decisions about stuff that doesn't involve you.

as for in game special tag, no, don't in game rewards would has in the past simply encouraged bad behaviour in such situations, the reward should be in itself, helping a game you love.




That said, I propose an alteration to the idea of the council.

A dedicated feedback pooling page for various subjects involving the game. Think of it in design akin to discords feedback page:
https://feedback.discordapp.com/forums/326712-discord-dream-land
Which seems to be driven by the uservoice platform, something frontier could easily adopt?

A dedicated page like this, where people log in with their game id so it is registered properly, and then they submit their troubles/issues in an orderly manner, and while duplications likely will happen, anyone that wants a topic seriously discussed with FDev will pool together under one thread, and it would rise accordingly to the top of its respective topic.

The forums with suggestions 'could' work like that yeah, and look at page length but that really doesn't work work that well due to forum structure. But the uservoice product manager seems to be focused on exactly this.

This would require far less radical changes, and generally avoid the whole one representative issue and the problems therein, and it should be possible to make it check if a person owns the game before they are allowed to post.
 
Last edited:
The worse idea i have ever heard of in 17 years online gaming. To suggest introducing player councils into online multimedia Gaming will destroy the game and i know no other game that does it. It would be a disaster for their business and any other company and that is why we never see them.
(translator)

thankfully it's not my idea, "assassin's creed" did it, I do not think this is killing the game or the business.. Assassin's Creed Black Flag IV .. the advice and notations of the missions in play did not kill the game .. 10 million sales.

"world of warcraft" also does it in a less direct way than "assassin's creed" .. but it is very easy to make a suggestion or report a bug from its menu or even make a request for assistance while playing .. but it's a subscription game that they can afford.

but I agree with you, Elite Dangerous is too serious a game to deserve that (or not enough to deserve it Lol).
 
Last edited:
This thread is merely a suggestion and I laid out some points and guidelines I thought viable to the post. There is no right or wrong answer to this thread but it's rather a brainstorming exercise to see if a council would be viable or even necessary. A few of you got the point and provided feedback to further the discussion and I appreciate that as that's what this post was intended.

A player council wouldn't be the end-all in the design process because Fdev has total rights to their product but it would be nice to have a voice(s) in a more official capacity to Fdev than thousands of individual posts on often multiple threads. I don't have all the answers and I don't need to because if this idea ever became a thing it would have to be built by the community, not by myself. And the real question would be if we did build a council would Fdev honor the feedback and experience of the individuals we elect to represent us?
 
And the real question would be if we did build a council would Fdev honor the feedback and experience of the individuals we elect to represent us?

And the other real question might be would the representatives honour the feedback and experience of the individuals that elected them?

A council just seems to be a body FDevs could hide behind, and a group ripe for manipulation by unscrupulous types.
 
Last edited:

Goose4291

Banned
We already have it.

It's what happens when the real big deal groups message the team when they're having issues/want bespoke content for themselves.
 
Top Bottom