Console W.A.R.S. Mods (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
consolemods) wrote in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
consolewarriors2018-02-05 09:30 pm
consolemods) wrote in consolewarriors2018-02-05 09:30 pm
BETA TESTING COMPLETE! (aka feedback post)
Hey, all! We hope you had a great time with the Mock Trial, and I'd like to thank everyone who participated! If you didn't really have the energy to or if your character didn't work out, don't feel bad about it. Mock Trials are basically, like, really intense TDMs that you sign up for, so it happens.
We would, however, like to know if there's anything we could improve upon! There are things we know didn't really get off the ground, like the Thursday Challenge and the boss battle. In the case of the latter, we couldn't really get to it because of time, which we kind of regret. We... also kind of regret the timing, since there was definitely a lot going on this weekend that we should have accounted for! And there was a little bit of bad luck for all of us too. So we'd like to ask your opinions on the experience as a whole, but especially the following:
1. The schedule. Did you guys like the Saturday/Sunday schedule as opposed to the Friday/Saturday schedule, or would you prefer something a little more traditional? Also, do you think a time limit built into trials (like, say, 6 hours) would be a good idea, or do you think that'd make things too stressful?
2. The challenge. Was it posted at a bad time? Would more direction have been helpful? Do you think the challenge should be built into the motive somehow?
3. Anything else? If there's anything else we could improve about the game, we'd like to hear it!
So, what's next? Well, Round 1, the Nintendo round, of course! For all first party, second party, and third party Nintendo games, whether they originated on a Nintendo system or not! So like you could totally play Night in the Woods characters. Just so you know. We don't have a definite timeframe for that yet, but it's definitely going to be in the spring after Airlocked and R3 of Foolish Mortals wrap up. We're thinking possibly late March-early April?
We would, however, like to know if there's anything we could improve upon! There are things we know didn't really get off the ground, like the Thursday Challenge and the boss battle. In the case of the latter, we couldn't really get to it because of time, which we kind of regret. We... also kind of regret the timing, since there was definitely a lot going on this weekend that we should have accounted for! And there was a little bit of bad luck for all of us too. So we'd like to ask your opinions on the experience as a whole, but especially the following:
1. The schedule. Did you guys like the Saturday/Sunday schedule as opposed to the Friday/Saturday schedule, or would you prefer something a little more traditional? Also, do you think a time limit built into trials (like, say, 6 hours) would be a good idea, or do you think that'd make things too stressful?
2. The challenge. Was it posted at a bad time? Would more direction have been helpful? Do you think the challenge should be built into the motive somehow?
3. Anything else? If there's anything else we could improve about the game, we'd like to hear it!
So, what's next? Well, Round 1, the Nintendo round, of course! For all first party, second party, and third party Nintendo games, whether they originated on a Nintendo system or not! So like you could totally play Night in the Woods characters. Just so you know. We don't have a definite timeframe for that yet, but it's definitely going to be in the spring after Airlocked and R3 of Foolish Mortals wrap up. We're thinking possibly late March-early April?
no subject
but even though i had a ton of fun theres a few things i noticed that maybe didnt work as well as they could have or needed some tweaking.
1. the schedule! i dont know if i missed when you guys said the trial was going up or not. i looked in the faq and if i misread something or it was there then im sorry, but i dont remember you guys ever saying when it was supposed to go up. it seemed like there was no concrete schedule for events and you would put them up sometime during the day when you had the time or felt like it. a more concrete schedule with times would probably be better for people so if theyre interested they can make sure theyre available during that time or they know when something starts. setting a schedule and adhering to it is very important!
as far as setting a time limit for trials, i dont mind them! ive been in a lot of games where trials would run for about nine hours and there was a strict time for votes. i dont think its bad to do things this way! since theres a time limit people try to get things done and push themselves more. however, a time limit also means people start getting very stressed the closer it gets to voting time and it can make things more hectic. i think when theres a set timetable some people try harder to stick around for the full period to try and make the most of their time rather than taking breaks and pacing themselves. whichever you choose, i think six hours is too short a time for a murder game. some cases are easy and will be solved in three hours. some are harder and will take twelve hours. it just depends!
2. the challenge! im honestly a little confused on what we were supposed to do with the challenge. i looked at it when it went up and ended up not tagging out because i wasnt positive what the goal was. i think the intention was for it to be a way to interact and to promote CR but it was maybe a little too loose and aimless? having too many rules and strict guidelines is just as bad, but there not being a reward or point is just... confusing. ymmv though because i did see people were able to thread with each other and have a good time!
3. boy, anything else... i dont know how to phrase this so ill be upfront. i think you guys need to trust your playerbase a little more than you do. i didnt mind really and i wondered if it was a problem with the doc or me not relaying what i wanted enough (which is another thing! dont be shy with players, if theres a problem with the doc or people arent being clear enough or something just doesnt work, feel free to tell them to either rephrase it all or condense it! youre allowed to ask people to give you less and youre allowed to ask people to give you more! theres no shame in asking questions if something is incomprehensible too) but i still noticed a few things in the investigation that were... questionable. specifically, giving out the gimmick of there being two weapons. if sin hadnt brought the body, that would have been important information to give out but she did and they later compared the pitchfork to the wounds. that was them deducing on their own and figuring it out! they solved it by thinking about it, checking things, and pursuing their theories. as a casemaker that made me really happy because they put in the effort and found the right conclusion!
there was another moment with the rope where you guys seemed to use the doc almost word for word but added in a line that, frankly, told everyone what happened. the difference was something like...
"Bruising all around his right wrist, this is from the rope. There’s some blood smeared on his wrist but there aren’t any other wounds here."
vs the investigation which was:
"Anyway the wrist has some bruising on it. In fact, it looks almost like someone tied a rope to it, it's like rope burns. Also there is a tiny bit of blood smeared here but no wounds other than the bruising."
i have no problem with you guys adding the rope burns part. it seems fair to me! there would be friction, rope burns are pretty obvious, but you guys also outright told them what happened by specifying that "someone tied a rope to it." i noticed other descriptions given during the trial that were similarly transparent. you were giving people conclusions in your narrative rather than being ambiguous. it can be very difficult to be ambiguous, to be fair! i think its something you guys can work on though, and it wasnt a big deal cause it was a mock trial and we had a lot of new players!
but i also have to say that i think by being so straightforward, giving conclusions, and making the outline so transparent you actually made it difficult for players to discuss things during the trial. because the timeline was obvious and because the gimmick was obvious, people lept to trying to find decisive evidence rather than thinking critically.
other than that, i think you guys might need to figure out when to step in and give hints and when to let players figure things out for themselves. i was really surprised when you guys had the sheriff give out a hint without consulting me because every other game ive been in, ive been consulted before mods gave out hints or tried helping. i wouldnt have minded and wouldve said yes, but i was still very surprised to see it! communication is very important and if you think there are potentially problems with a case or it cant be solved, its a good idea to tell the culprit to go back over it before the investigation and make sure everything works. in uki what i did was i did a mini-investigation with a mod who was blind to the case to make sure it was solvable. if it wasnt, i told people to go back and add more evidence and if it was i left it! since you guys have three mods i think you could try something similar! o/
lemmie think... oh! kind of along the same lines, i think if you want to have scapegoats you might need to back away a little sometimes and let things play out how theyre gonna play out. i dont know if things wouldve been different if this were the game. if they were, thats fine! again, this was a mock trial so theres absolutely nothing wrong with wanting the players to succeed! but when you allow scapegoats you need to be prepared for the possibility of someone actually getting scapegoated. if you want to make sure every case is solved, i think thats fine! but i also think you need to have the rules reflect it a bit better. again, i really didnt mind dito getting voted off! i was ready for it at about 4:00 or 4:30PM EST. hes also a jerk so he got exactly what he deserved!
thats really all i have to say though! i hope my input helps, and youre free to take all of this with a grain of salt! every experience is different and everybody sees things differently! because i was on the culprit side i might be too biased to what i saw in the investigation rather than what the players saw 'cause i knew what went down. either way, i wanna repeat that i had a really good time and you guys were very helpful and fun when we did speak in the plurk! you gave fast replies and i never felt awkward asking you any questions! you were all very approachable and energetic, which i deeply appreciated!