BDS
Infinity Challenge
Posts: 202
|
Post by BDS on Jul 22, 2008 16:28:28 GMT -5
BDS slips out of his bunker for a moment.
Yes, Grant, I will make the male/female filtering on the standings happen. Not today, but definitely before GenCon. Because you're awesome.
BDS slips back into his bunker.
|
|
|
|
Post by MonkeyDBain on Jul 22, 2008 16:35:43 GMT -5
Saying I was glad did not make sense did it. I guess for some reason in my mind the simple thought of them being out of sight might have made that statement. But I can't think of why I would care if they were there or not. Bazaar statement on my part I suppose.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fringe on Jul 22, 2008 16:37:08 GMT -5
I liked being able to rank depending on Personalities. My GWF was ranked by the Commissioner's likings and my GWFZ was ranked by the Championship committee. I liked knowing the feds were ranked by different 'personalities'. Huh, I couldn't do this on mine. It only gave me one choice. I though it was a thing for only pre-entertainment aCe. I might have enjoyed the rankings more if I could have done this. |
|
Thunder
Infinity Challenge
Posts: 178
|
Post by Thunder on Jul 22, 2008 16:48:58 GMT -5
Indeed, this was a very versatile tool. I used the 'match tag' section of the add a match feature to flag a match as something like Singles(Galaxian), Singles(Interplanetary) or Singles(Holovision) plus a few others. Then I'd rank my Galaxian and Interplanetary based on the Commish's liking(generating two entirely seperate lists) and then Holovision by Vidtek or the Nemean show. It allowed me to do all my matches on a card without any unrealistic record keeping and still be able to generate entirely seperate and unique ranks for each title.
|
|
|
|
Post by graymar on Jul 22, 2008 18:05:37 GMT -5
Re: Thunder's comments...
I cannot say or even understand the technical reasons for eliminating the Rankings system...but, I would support Thunder's comments about concern about where Online is going.
I do not understand why this decision was just announced today. Why was this not announced ahead of time. With all due respect to Osk, you said our 'feedback, comments, and suggestions are noted and appreciated'...but the way this decision has been handled does not demonstrate that.
As Thunder suggested/commented, it has been handled in a way that suggests a desire to draw additional markets while losing the respect for the 'age-old' market.
For those that do not feel that the loss of the rankings is significant...I ask...what if another decision is handled in the future in same manner. What if the announcement is suddenly that card versions are no longer available? What if pdf files are no longer available? What if the only way to play is through the program? What if the program expands the ability to utilize differing offensive and defensive options so that there are more than 18 offensive and defensive options? This is easily accomplishable in a computer environment but hampering in a 'pen and pencil' environment. And what if these changes are made with no discussion...or no forewarning?
I know that Osk and the others have only the best interest of COTG in their hearts. I applaud their accomplishments. But, I am concerned that in the process of reaching for the 'greener grass', that many of us will be left behind.
With respect,
Graymar
|
|
|
|
Post by squire on Jul 22, 2008 18:39:17 GMT -5
While I understand needing to streamline a system it is never a good idea to take away a feature that your subscription base is using actively. It runs the risk of alienating your base. Pulling the global rankings, I can understand. Pulling the rankings all together without notifying the customers was a bad idea. I don't often criticize the decisions made for the product but this one I feel strongly about as it was one of the things that heavily weighed into my decision to purchase a subscription.
*drops his 2 cents*
|
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Beefy on Jul 22, 2008 18:41:01 GMT -5
As Thunder suggested/commented, it has been handled in a way that suggests a desire to draw additional markets while losing the respect for the 'age-old' market. I thought the 'age-old' market was the people who are still buying the cards and playing with dice and keeping track of things with paper...not playing Online that is why they offer the POW and aCe in pdf only as well, to appease the actual 'age-old' market. And they said that the removal of rankings may not be permanent. Has anyone thought that the choice was made to possibly make quick and easy room for the CaW feature which I'm guessing they will be 'pimping' at the Gen-Con. I think the CaW feature online would be a way to easily draw people in who may not have been interested anyways (for example, I love Fire Pro Wrestling video game, due to the ability to create my own wrestler to play along with the others). And while it is easy to point fingers and say you are looking for greener pastures and that it is bad to do that.....people sometimes forget that it takes money to produce things and keep things running. Hey I liked the Rankings....simple way to make title matches or number one contender matches...but this game has been around longer than any Ranking Online system. If the ranking system was the main reason for going online then yes this is possibly "BIG SUCKY NEWS" for you, but they did say that it might not be permanent. It just is probably an easy way for them to make room for some things that they are wanting to show off for the Gen-Con. |
|
|
|
Post by squire on Jul 22, 2008 18:51:06 GMT -5
I don't doubt there were good solid reasons for making the decision, I'm just disappointed and my opinion stands that it is not a good idea to remove a feature, even if it is temporary, when your users are using it. I will get by without them, it just means I need to port the win-loss back into the spreadsheet I was using before for ranking.
...hmm, How about allowing an export of the win-loss records? It would at least alleviate somewhat having to manually track rankings.
As for the other stuff, I am most excited about the CaW and Battle Royal Sim. Don't take my criticism of the removal of rankings as anything more than that. You can please everyone =)
|
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Beefy on Jul 22, 2008 19:12:17 GMT -5
I understand being disappointed, heck I've never used the Standings option in the Online stuff but I will adjust. I just think we need to at least give them more than 12hrs to explain their ideas/decisions/etc before we start threatening to leave, drop subscriptions, and run away 'peeved off at the world'.
Heck it has not even been a day and people are questioning whether or not Osk is really taking note of our comments and that he appreciates the feedback. I love the Rankings system I will miss it whether or not it is temporary or permanent. I just think some are being a little to 'rash/harsh' in what they are saying about the news, without giving them a chance to explain exactly what is going on.
|
|
Steef
Fighting Titan
Posts: 428
|
Post by Steef on Jul 22, 2008 20:34:34 GMT -5
I just got home and got caught up on reading the 3 pages of posts. I don't post often in here, but since I've gotten back into the game in just over a year, I've spent quite a bit of $ buying back the cards, just renewed my online subscription and was just waiting for some PayPal money to process before I order another 6-7 sets (with all the SE cards, CotG Files, etc.) My issues are #1 I had no time to prep for this. I can't even get my current rankings so I have a starting point. #2 If this was being discussed, why are we hearing about it now, without any input? #3 I understand the point about be patient, etc. but I've read a couple of posts and they all say "sorry, but it had to be done" not why it was done, what is being done about it, etc. I fall into the category of not using the game table (I spend enough $ on this already without rebuying cards, sets, and a game table subsciption, etc. ) and exclusively use the stat tracker. Until I'm caught up to the current sets (or CotG gets caught up with me) then the game table is no use for me. The bootlegs might help that, but if I can't rank them, what's the point? I know wrestlings fake and all and that the #1 contender is whoever the owner needs to fill a story line, but I remember first seeing the Spike Ad in a wrestling mag when I was looking for the current rankings. Obviously I'll probably still play CotG but what's my incentive for keeping the stat tracker. I think there is another option than the ones listed about the old-school people slowly leaving, waiting for subscriptions to expire, etc. are the guys like me who are going to be calling the headquarters saying, "you took away the features that I paid for, I want my $ back or at least apply it to my next order!" I'm not willing to just quietly say, oh, ok, they want things "simpler." I may be in the minority, but I want things more detailed! I've been waiting for the option to include only the current wrestlers (not the ones who "retire" or leave between game years) I'm waiting for the option to sort the win-loss sheet (not just by most wins, but by losses, % last 10 matches, etc.) I'm waiting for the features to get better, not watered down.
That's my 2 cents.
|
|
