Home EN General Discussions & Questions

Join the official Goodgame Big Farm Discord today!Join our Big Farm Discord Server


Are you looking for a community of like-minded farmers to discuss your farming experience with? Look no further than the GoodGame Big Farm Discord Server!


Our server is the perfect place to connect with other farmers from around the world. Whether you're looking to chat about strategy, share tips and tricks, or just make new friends, our community has got you covered.


And that's not all - as a member of our Discord server, you'll also have access to exclusive giveaways and other special events. It's the perfect way to stay up to date on all the latest news and updates from GoodGame Studios.


So what are you waiting for? Join the GoodGame Big Farm Discord Server today and start connecting with fellow farmers from all over the world. Just click here to join the fun!

Feedback: Petition against buying reputation points with gold during co-op event

157

Comments

  • Twiglet (GB1)Twiglet (GB1) GB1 Posts: 1,174
    edited 27.02.2015
    Nafaru wrote: »
    Hey Griffith,

    I have picked up enough basic coding knowledge in my studies to know that it's not as simple as you would like to present it here. Actually it would be a very bad thing to just implement and change numbers like that.

    First of all, numbers should never be hard coded, cause that makes it significantly harder to change them. So you cannot just simply look for the number in the code, you would need to change it in an external file containing several values for the whole game.
    One could argue now that it's the same thing, just copy/paste it there, but....

    ....if you read the announcement again, you will see why such a simple change of 'just a number' is not something we will do haphazardly. A lot of thoughts have to be put into such numbers, in order to make sure that a change works as expected without breaking the game or making it unplayable for you guys.

    What is explained in the announcement is a rough sketch of processes I've been involved in for the last two years. Of course not all of these steps are needed each and every time we make a change, and of course it is a very generalized explanation of things, but it's far from being a lie.

    However, this should not be all about coding and processes, it was just a short excursion that we felt could be interesting, as it explains why changes in general, as well as why implementing suggestions always takes some time.

    As a matter of fact, your feedback has already had a big enough effect to make a change.
    It's just a matter of time for this change to take effect and we would like to take that time in order to try and find a compromise that works best for everyone - with a concept that is well thought-out and not just a change of number.

    Regards,
    Steffi

    Im sorry and the only time i make a fuss is if i see something that is spoiling the game for a lot of people but i just cannot believe that ggs would have put this offer on to buy RP when its supposed to be about working your farms as a co op not just buying your way to the top it is unfair and it spoils the game just answer me one question please What is the point in doing mission after mission to get your co op in good ranking with honest hard work if someone can just come along and buy that to have all your effort and time thrown away. They are still earning money as we buy gold to rush the collection for the mission so why harm a perfectly great thing do you think this was a great addition to the game ?


    will i get a reply ?
  • gizmo22 (AU1)gizmo22 (AU1) AU1 Posts: 1,720
    edited 27.02.2015
    Hot deal also gone from my page but the damage is already done. One group in particular has bought millions of rep to claim the challenge win so the competition itself is now tainted and players that have been working hard in missions have frankly wasted their time. An update that showed promise has once again been ruined by GGS greed, well done!

    As for the claims been made by the mods in regards to changes taking time to implement i call [Please watch your language! | Nafaru]
  • SystemSystem Posts: 106,969
    edited 27.02.2015
    Nafaru wrote: »
    Hey Griffith,

    I have picked up enough basic coding knowledge in my studies to know that it's not as simple as you would like to present it here. Actually it would be a very bad thing to just implement and change numbers like that.

    First of all, numbers should never be hard coded, cause that makes it significantly harder to change them. So you cannot just simply look for the number in the code, you would need to change it in an external file containing several values for the whole game.
    One could argue now that it's the same thing, just copy/paste it there, but....

    ....if you read the announcement again, you will see why such a simple change of 'just a number' is not something we will do haphazardly. A lot of thoughts have to be put into such numbers, in order to make sure that a change works as expected without breaking the game or making it unplayable for you guys.

    What is explained in the announcement is a rough sketch of processes I've been involved in for the last two years. Of course not all of these steps are needed each and every time we make a change, and of course it is a very generalized explanation of things, but it's far from being a lie.

    However, this should not be all about coding and processes, it was just a short excursion that we felt could be interesting, as it explains why changes in general, as well as why implementing suggestions always takes some time.

    As a matter of fact, your feedback has already had a big enough effect to make a change.
    It's just a matter of time for this change to take effect and we would like to take that time in order to try and find a compromise that works best for everyone - with a concept that is well thought-out and not just a change of number.

    Regards,
    Steffi

    Hmmmmmmmmm, no matter what is said or done, two co-op mission challenges have been ruined, and again no matter what is asked, said or done GGS are here to make money, their foremost aim is to make more and more money, the happiness and delight of the players that provide that money to them does not come even a near second. When we are on about GGS earning money, do not forget about the other GGS games, the players in those games complain about GGS and their deceitful ways just as much as Big Farmers. In fact players of a few GGS games can "see" the way a game will probably go by looking at the other games. GGS will use a game to implement changes, if it works out they will implement it across all their games.
  • PaPaw3 (US1)PaPaw3 (US1) US1 Posts: 28
    edited 27.02.2015
    Nafaru wrote: »
    Hey Griffith,


    As a matter of fact, your feedback has already had a big enough effect to make a change.
    It's just a matter of time for this change to take effect and we would like to take that time in order to try and find a compromise that works best for everyone - with a concept that is well thought-out and not just a change of number.

    Regards,
    Steffi

    The only reasonable compromise in this situation is to just completely get rid of the hot deal. OR add an askeriks (*) next to the person who bought RP on the Reputation Leader Board so we all know who cheated.
  • SystemSystem Posts: 106,969
    edited 27.02.2015
    I wish those board moderators would stop moving posts around, are they on a bonus ? Or at least give us a message that its been moved. I just spent ages looking for a post of mine, only to find it in a totally different thread. I was trying to catch up on the "story" that it would take ages and millions of people to alter the "hot deal " and story lines would have to be changed etc, WHY ? WHAT FOR? a hot deal ! simply cancel it. What ever we say in here GGS will find someway to defend themselves and most of the time it is simply to "buy more time" so that their feature ends, with no intention what-so-ever of changing it
  • SystemSystem Posts: 106,969
    edited 27.02.2015
    Arzie3 wrote: »
    The only reasonable compromise in this situation is to just completely get rid of the hot deal. OR add an askeriks (*) next to the person who bought RP on the Reputation Leader Board so we all know who cheated.

    I half agree with you, but if any player wanted to buy gold while the "rep points buy" was on, may have got the rep points, if they wanted them or not. but the best solution is not to run it again, but this will be earning GGS a lot of money, but hopefully they will weigh it up and realise that gold bought for the "rep points" is not then bought at a later date. They are not that ****** they know exactly what they are doing, as with the so called bugs, they are there for a purpose.. to test gold sales
  • CM NafaruCM Nafaru Posts: 1,325
    edited 27.02.2015
    Arzie3 wrote: »
    The only reasonable compromise in this situation is to just completely get rid of the hot deal. OR add an askeriks (*) next to the person who bought RP on the Reputation Leader Board so we all know who cheated.

    As much as we understand where you're coming from in terms of frustration that reputation points can be obtained through another means than missions, please refrain from calling other players "cheaters" for using a game mechanic that is available to everyone.

    If you are not fine with the feature, that is one thing. Labeling other users - players who are using the game within boundaries that are the same for every player - should not be called cheaters as this is very defaming to them and against the Community Guidelines for a reason.

    So please focus your criticism on the fairness of this feature, blame the creators of the game if you like, but also be fair to your fellow players by not calling them names. Thank you.
  • Griffith (INT1)Griffith (INT1) Posts: 768
    edited 27.02.2015
    Nafaru wrote: »
    Hey Griffith,

    I have picked up enough basic coding knowledge in my studies to know that it's not as simple as you would like to present it here. Actually it would be a very bad thing to just implement and change numbers like that.

    yes i understand that there should be those analysis and other processes too, but like i have said before at least it could be changed to a "lower number" like 30k, to not mess the whole event balance at least again. and I'm certain that is very easy to do, developer-wise.
    Nafaru wrote:
    First of all, numbers should never be hard coded, cause that makes it significantly harder to change them. So you cannot just simply look for the number in the code, you would need to change it in an external file containing several values for the whole game.
    One could argue now that it's the same thing, just copy/paste it there, but....

    "One could argue now that it's the same thing" yes I will argue that it is the same thing, or at least not anything hard to do for 1 single developer anyways.
    if what you mean is, "120,000" doesn't exist in the codes and instead an "Y" is defined "Y=120,000 RP", and all it does is if "X" is the variable for the "reputation points of one player" ofc I know that. but then "Y" obviously is just a constant and it can easily be changed to "30,000", or rather tell me how exactly changing it from 120k to 30k can actually damage any other parts of the game or codes anyway, basically all the job that this hot deal does is:
    "X=X+Y" anyway. and its a up to 7-time loop most probably. so yea maybe it be a "little" only more than that process i explained, but seriously are we haggling about whether it is 1 minute or 10 minute work?
    another thing that not even needs much analysis and can easily be done to make things "better" at least, is if you limit the loop, like ok 120k points for 6000 gold let it remain the same, but instead of 7 times loop, make it 2 times only. so that the Total limit be 240k points which can not super harm the event and NOT 840K which can totally ruin it!
    Nafaru wrote:
    ....if you read the announcement again, you will see why such a simple change of 'just a number' is not something we will do haphazardly. A lot of thoughts have to be put into such numbers, in order to make sure that a change works as expected without breaking the game or making it unplayable for you guys.

    Yes I very much understand that there needs to be some analysis and etc involving few groups and teams to decide these numbers, but what if i tell you that I'm saying that "lot of thoughts" was exactly what made the game(co-op event at least) unplayable for us.
    we are talking about Numbers here, and I understand that GGS wants to put a feature for "less-online" players to be able to contribute to their co-ops too with gold instead, but 840K total points or 1.75mil total points?!!! thats not "contribution" thats as much as the best "low/medium-spenders or non-gold-players" can even make in 6 days constant effort in missions and it sabotages the whole event.
    if you guys want to add a feature for someone that cant be online but doesn't wanna bring their co-op down either, then make it a reasonable amount of points, like 30k rp, 210k points total, not 840k or 1.75mil!!! which can ruin the whole event.
    Nafaru wrote:
    What is explained in the announcement is a rough sketch of processes I've been involved in for the last two years. Of course not all of these steps are needed each and every time we make a change, and of course it is a very generalized explanation of things, but it's far from being a lie.

    yes I understand this too, but at least remove that "Artists" part, or define how exactly they need to be even involved in this honestly.
    Nafaru wrote:
    However, this should not be all about coding and processes, it was just a short excursion that we felt could be interesting, as it explains why changes in general, as well as why implementing suggestions always takes some time.

    and that is exactly why i suggested a "temporary change" to a more reasonable number at least so that it not destroys more and more co-op events, till you guys re-analyze again and decide on the final number or if to remove the whole hot deal.
    Nafaru wrote:
    As a matter of fact, your feedback has already had a big enough effect to make a change.
    It's just a matter of time for this change to take effect and we would like to take that time in order to try and find a compromise that works best for everyone - with a concept that is well thought-out and not just a change of number.

    Regards,
    Steffi

    I'm a pessimist when it comes to such cases, specially when i feel the company is rather only trying to "Buy more time" by delaying such easy changes. But still I am glad and appreciate your effort for taking our feedback to the company and bringing back their reply for us at least.
  • SystemSystem Posts: 106,969
    edited 27.02.2015
    Griffith, the old saying "talking to a brick wall " springs to mind here, someone has asked if this hot deal will be run in the next challenge, will we get an answer ? or will it be like the Wheel of Fortune fiasco " lets not mention it for a week,they'll forget" You can see which way the future changes are going to go with the removal of the Goat milk from the Events, many more changes will come in to effect regarding the events.. Oh! it did not take long for them to change over the goats, were the artists and story line effected ? NO, they spotted the use of goats instead of cows in the events and WHAM, changed.
  • PaPaw3 (US1)PaPaw3 (US1) US1 Posts: 28
    edited 27.02.2015
    Nafaru wrote: »
    As much as we understand where you're coming from in terms of frustration that reputation points can be obtained through another means than missions, please refrain from calling other players "cheaters" for using a game mechanic that is available to everyone.

    If you are not fine with the feature, that is one thing. Labeling other users - players who are using the game within boundaries that are the same for every player - should not be called cheaters as this is very defaming to them and against the Community Guidelines for a reason.

    So please focus your criticism on the fairness of this feature, blame the creators of the game if you like, but also be fair to your fellow players by not calling them names. Thank you.

    Ok...so if I called GGS names it would be ok? Maybe I should call those who bought the hotdeal [... or maybe you shouldn't call them names or put them in any derogatory category altogether. Calling anyone names is against the forum rules and you know it. ;) | Nafaru] .
  • CM NafaruCM Nafaru Posts: 1,325
    edited 27.02.2015
    Griffith wrote: »
    yes I understand this too, but at least remove that "Artists" part, or define how exactly they need to be even involved in this honestly.

    Artists could come into play as soon as e.g. an icon is needed for whatever will replace the current offer. I don't know exactly how this offer will be changed yet, but some of the options I can imagine from the top of my head would require a new icon. :)
    yorkydevil wrote: »
    someone has asked if this hot deal will be run in the next challenge, will we get an answer?

    We usually cannot communicate timings of offers in advance. However, we will let you know in the update announcement once the change to this offer happens. Until then it's technically still possible that it shows up again.

    I'll see if I can get a more definitive answer to this question, though.
  • Twiglet (GB1)Twiglet (GB1) GB1 Posts: 1,174
    edited 27.02.2015
    looks like mine is not getting a reply
  • PaPaw3 (US1)PaPaw3 (US1) US1 Posts: 28
    edited 27.02.2015
    Ok...since I have recieved an infraction for my last post, I will change what I said.
    Maybe those who bought the hot deal should get an asteriks (*) for being such a good supporter of GGS and helping line the pockets of the staff.
  • sjw (US1)sjw (US1) Posts: 13
    edited 27.02.2015
    At least you are listening to us to some degree. However, the VAST majority (particularly those who have spent days in this competition) working to help their team HATE this. It makes all our work worthless. Yes, we may win something, but humm....maybe we didn't win it. Maybe we bought it.

    The only reason I participated in this competition after the hot deal last time was for my coop. However, even that could change if this hot deal doesn't go away. I know I'm not the only one who feels this way.

    Please listen to us and get rid of this divisive thing.

    We don't want ANY compromise. We want the hot deal gone. Period.

    Edit by PINJO: merged posts, please use edit button
  • Mina0o (INT1)Mina0o (INT1) Posts: 1,309
    edited 27.02.2015
    Gee, Arzie3.. Time to stop it now?
    No point in harassing player who just use a game feature that's been put there by the developers of the game...

    Concentrate your rage where it belongs! Criticize GGS, they're the ones who implemented this crap and leave the rest of the players alone.

    I'm as unhappy with this rep deal as most but I know where to aim my displeasure.
  • PaPaw3 (US1)PaPaw3 (US1) US1 Posts: 28
    edited 27.02.2015
    Mina0o wrote: »
    Gee, Arzie3.. Time to stop it now?
    No point in harassing player who just use a game feature that's been put there by the developers of the game...

    Concentrate your rage where it belongs! Criticize GGS, they're the ones who implemented this crap and leave the rest of the players alone.

    I'm as unhappy with this rep deal as most but I know where to aim my displeasure.

    I'm not harrassing anyone. Just stating my opinion. And yes, I know opinions are like ******* and everyone has one.
  • debj (GB1)debj (GB1) GB1 Posts: 157
    edited 27.02.2015
    I do not normally comment on these sorts of issues as I think everyone has the right to play this game how they choose and also that GGS as a business has the right to find ways of earning money but, having said that I have a number of criticisms about this reputation points offer, which I am just adding to this thread hoping (foolish I know) that it will be read and taken into consideration by the game developers. I apologise for repeating any points that have been made before and the length.

    My major criticism about this offer is that the description of the event clearly says “play missions to earn reputation points”. This offer consequently overrides the description of the event which I thought would be how it was intended to be played. Is this also not false selling/advertising?

    We are often told that updates are because we are not playing how the game was intended to be played but this is allowing the game to be played not how it was intended to be played. Hypocrisy.

    The award is also called “hard work” award. There is not much hard work involved in charging your credit card.

    By this it also devalues the hard work that people put into this event doing the missions.

    This event created a great sense of cooperative cohesion. Whereas this offer is divisive between those that buy gold and those that don’t because of the volume of points that is awarded.

    It was also upsetting for a member of my coop who bought gold whilst this hot deal was available because of the bonus to the amount of gold she got, not because of the reputation points, as she wasn’t aware that that was the hot deal when she bought the gold. Now she is really upset and distraught because she thinks people will think the worst of her … that she has to buy her way in this task (which she doesn’t because she is a very good player at missions) and she doesn’t know how much rep points she “earned” versus bought.

    I dislike how it alters the rankings. I understand it would be very difficult to separate the bought rep points from the earned rep points, but it makes the table feel a lot less accurate.

    I enjoy missions and do them all the time. The worst part about missions is when they are solo … and you get that a lot. What I really liked about this challenge is that the missions become busy again. That makes it fun. Following this offer most of my missions have been solo.

    By having solo missions that makes it doubly worse for those that didn’t buy the rep points as you get less rep points from the missions you do do … so you can’t even catch up.

    And this is the main crux of my criticism of this offer …. By all means people can use gold …. By all means GGS can give offers … but in this challenge people are supposed to DO missions and this offer completely voids that requirement and benefits them excessively above those that have played the missions and not bought.

    I fear that by having this offer in the end GGS will actually destroy something that was a lot of fun and great for the game as people will stop doing the missions because they can buy it instead.

    Regards.
  • Yon Beast (US1)Yon Beast (US1) Posts: 60
    edited 27.02.2015
    I think debj post (#138 ) is the best written post this whole thread. Well said!



    Edit by PINJO: changed the number after merging a post
  • Mina0o (INT1)Mina0o (INT1) Posts: 1,309
    edited 27.02.2015
    Arzie3 wrote: »
    I'm not harrassing anyone. Just stating my opinion. And yes, I know opinions are like ******* and everyone has one.

    Okay, maybe harassment wasn't the right word to be used in this context.

    So opinions, huh?
    You think it would be a good idea to hang out people because they used an offer that, for now, is a perfectly legit part of the game?
    What purpose could it possibly have to make the game better for anyone? By scaring people off from making use of what the game has provided? Not letting them join your cooperative, or sacking them? Use naughty gifts on their farms? Write mean messages to them?
    But maybe you meant you would just like to know, for the sake of knowledge..

    Well, I'm glad you can't. And that is my honest opinion.
    We are all bound to follow the rules made by GGS when we play one of their games. If you haven't broken any rules you shouldn't be punished. If you haven't cheated according to the rules you shouldn't be called out.
  • Twiglet (GB1)Twiglet (GB1) GB1 Posts: 1,174
    edited 27.02.2015
    debj wrote: »
    I do not normally comment on these sorts of issues as I think everyone has the right to play this game how they choose and also that GGS as a business has the right to find ways of earning money but, having said that I have a number of criticisms about this reputation points offer, which I am just adding to this thread hoping (foolish I know) that it will be read and taken into consideration by the game developers. I apologise for repeating any points that have been made before and the length.

    My major criticism about this offer is that the description of the event clearly says “play missions to earn reputation points”. This offer consequently overrides the description of the event which I thought would be how it was intended to be played. Is this also not false selling/advertising?

    We are often told that updates are because we are not playing how the game was intended to be played but this is allowing the game to be played not how it was intended to be played. Hypocrisy.

    The award is also called “hard work” award. There is not much hard work involved in charging your credit card.

    By this it also devalues the hard work that people put into this event doing the missions.

    This event created a great sense of cooperative cohesion. Whereas this offer is divisive between those that buy gold and those that don’t because of the volume of points that is awarded.

    It was also upsetting for a member of my coop who bought gold whilst this hot deal was available because of the bonus to the amount of gold she got, not because of the reputation points, as she wasn’t aware that that was the hot deal when she bought the gold. Now she is really upset and distraught because she thinks people will think the worst of her … that she has to buy her way in this task (which she doesn’t because she is a very good player at missions) and she doesn’t know how much rep points she “earned” versus bought.

    I dislike how it alters the rankings. I understand it would be very difficult to separate the bought rep points from the earned rep points, but it makes the table feel a lot less accurate.

    I enjoy missions and do them all the time. The worst part about missions is when they are solo … and you get that a lot. What I really liked about this challenge is that the missions become busy again. That makes it fun. Following this offer most of my missions have been solo.

    By having solo missions that makes it doubly worse for those that didn’t buy the rep points as you get less rep points from the missions you do do … so you can’t even catch up.

    And this is the main crux of my criticism of this offer …. By all means people can use gold …. By all means GGS can give offers … but in this challenge people are supposed to DO missions and this offer completely voids that requirement and benefits them excessively above those that have played the missions and not bought.

    I fear that by having this offer in the end GGS will actually destroy something that was a lot of fun and great for the game as people will stop doing the missions because they can buy it instead.

    Regards.

    very well said totally agree
  • Griffith (INT1)Griffith (INT1) Posts: 768
    edited 27.02.2015
    @ Arzie3 & Mina0o:
    as much as I agree with both of you even in your "anger" and "reason" regarding this offer I would appreciate it if you guys try to calm down a bit and not fight eachother specially since you both want the "deal" gone most importantly first.
    the reason I am only friendly asking this from you both is also because the other "thread" regarding this offer was closed by moderators with the same excuse of "fight between players and things getting out of hand".

    @debj:
    very well said :)
  • Twiglet (GB1)Twiglet (GB1) GB1 Posts: 1,174
    edited 27.02.2015
    It is not the players who have bought RP that are to blame the offer was there some not realising it was for RP and some quite aware of it and although i did not buy it as i feel it is morally wrong defeating the whole object of the missions the blame as to go to GGS for putting the offer there in the first place just to achieve more gold sales and should be removed permanently
  • PaPaw3 (US1)PaPaw3 (US1) US1 Posts: 28
    edited 27.02.2015
    Mina0o wrote: »
    Okay, maybe harassment wasn't the right word to be used in this context.

    So opinions, huh?
    You think it would be a good idea to hang out people because they used an offer that, for now, is a perfectly legit part of the game?
    What purpose could it possibly have to make the game better for anyone? By scaring people off from making use of what the game has provided? Not letting them join your cooperative, or sacking them? Use naughty gifts on their farms? Write mean messages to them?
    But maybe you meant you would just like to know, for the sake of knowledge..

    Well, I'm glad you can't. And that is my honest opinion.
    We are all bound to follow the rules made by GGS when we play one of their games. If you haven't broken any rules you shouldn't be punished. If you haven't cheated according to the rules you shouldn't be called out.

    So what you're saying is, is that I'm wrong for stating my opinion or that my opinion is wrong? It seems that most people in this thread do not like this hot deal because of what it allows players to do. Buying your way to the top. Yes it is a legit part of the game but what it actually is, is GGS's way to allow cheating. It takes away from all those who worked hard and EARNED thier reputation points. If you worked hard to get to a high position at your job only to get knocked down because someone paid for the same position, what would you call that? Yes, thats the real world and this is a game but its pretty much the same concept. So in my opinion, someone who does this purposely to get ahead is wrong. Not calling anyone out or trying to ruffle anyone's ponytail, just saying if the shoe fits....
    Griffith wrote: »
    @ Arzie3 & Mina0o:
    as much as I agree with both of you even in your "anger" and "reason" regarding this offer I would appreciate it if you guys try to calm down a bit and not fight eachother specially since you both want the "deal" gone most importantly first.
    the reason I am only friendly asking this from you both is also because the other "thread" regarding this offer was closed by moderators with the same excuse of "fight between players and things getting out of hand".

    Agreed...I've said my peace and I'm done.

    Edit by PINJO: merged posts, please use edit button
  • Mina0o (INT1)Mina0o (INT1) Posts: 1,309
    edited 27.02.2015
    Griffith wrote: »
    @ Arzie3 & Mina0o:
    as much as I agree with both of you even in your "anger" and "reason" regarding this offer I would appreciate it if you guys try to calm down a bit and not fight eachother specially since you both want the "deal" gone most importantly first.
    the reason I am only friendly asking this from you both is also because the other "thread" regarding this offer was closed by moderators with the same excuse of "fight between players and things getting out of hand".

    Yes, you are right. Arguing amongst ourselves will not benefit anyone at this point. I let my emotions get the better of me.

    I would hate to see such an important thread closed because of me!
  • farmerjohn 22 (US1)farmerjohn 22 (US1) US1 Posts: 37,770
    edited 27.02.2015
    I just want to point out that this company itself did not have to BUY it's reputation for greed, but the selling of reputation points demonstrates to everyone that it was earned!
  • SystemSystem Posts: 106,969
    edited 27.02.2015
    Arzie3 wrote: »
    Ok...so if I called GGS names it would be ok? Maybe I should call those who bought the hotdeal [... or maybe you shouldn't call them names or put them in any derogatory category altogether. Calling anyone names is against the forum rules and you know it. ;) | Nafaru] .

    Yeah you get an infraction in your mail box , then if you do it again they come and take your sweeties away, I have hidden my sweets in my stomach. I am sure if GGS did not come up with these deceitful idea's the Big farm players would be happy and nobody would be losing their hair over a game. This is not the 1st time we have complained about GGS and it certainly will not be the last, if they were honest about the buying and usage of Gold it would be ok but all the sneaky ways they go about it ! ! Like the horse ranch, let us buy a lovely gold horse and decorate it but do not give it "super powers" let it have normal breeding values etc, so the gold buys a better looking nag, but you do not suddenly start to win every race.
  • farmerjohn 22 (US1)farmerjohn 22 (US1) US1 Posts: 37,770
    edited 27.02.2015
    yorkydevil wrote: »
    .... I have hidden my sweets in my stomach.

    That's probably a good idea. It foils their cavity search! 8| LOL
  • Gwendolen (US1)Gwendolen (US1) Posts: 1,268
    edited 27.02.2015
    Yesterday someone in our coop bought points. I admit I felt a bit miffed. I was first in the coop by lots of hard work and preparing my farms in advance. And after dinner, someone suddenly had about 3 times my amount of points.

    I like the bit of competition within the coop in this , it's fun to chase one another in points. I think we would've had less points last time if I and one other hadn't been trying to chase eachother to 2nd. For us, that's just a bit of fun.

    But it didn't feel nice that someone could just beat me without having to do the work I put in it.


    I dó understand that it is nice for people to be able to contribute to the coop this way! There are people who work hard at a job all day, having less time for the game, but more money. But the amounts with which this is possible is just absolutely not fun!
  • Maryann57 (US1)Maryann57 (US1) Posts: 90
    edited 27.02.2015
    Well after reading the thread on the rep point Hot deal. I don't think they should offer it at all during a Co-op Challenge. But because they do we will use the Hot deal. We will not be taken out of the top 10 because the other co-ops bought it and we didn't. As for GGS taking so long to fix this issue I say SHAME ON YOU!! If you we're doing your jobs instead of playing GA in the office you would get the work done a whole lot faster. It's seems GGS is all about causing grief in this game. Really we all love this game and would hate to quit playing, I love my co-op and have met a lot of good friends in the game from all over the country. I love the chatting and working together. I would be so proud if GGS would do the right thing, fix all these issues, and fix all the bugs. And please give us a choice on Primeday Sales. Would like to point out that compared to the 1st Co-op Challenge there are a lot less people doing mission races, !st co-op challenge was over 25k people doing missions , now only 12k people doing mission races. Hope this helps GGS see that what they have done is wrong in adding the rep points hot deals
  • paultje19752paultje19752 Posts: 217
    edited 27.02.2015
    Nafaru wrote: »
    Hey Griffith,

    I have picked up enough basic coding knowledge in my studies to know that it's not as simple as you would like to present it here. Actually it would be a very bad thing to just implement and change numbers like that.

    First of all, numbers should never be hard coded, cause that makes it significantly harder to change them. So you cannot just simply look for the number in the code, you would need to change it in an external file containing several values for the whole game.
    One could argue now that it's the same thing, just copy/paste it there, but....

    ....if you read the announcement again, you will see why such a simple change of 'just a number' is not something we will do haphazardly. A lot of thoughts have to be put into such numbers, in order to make sure that a change works as expected without breaking the game or making it unplayable for you guys.

    What is explained in the announcement is a rough sketch of processes I've been involved in for the last two years. Of course not all of these steps are needed each and every time we make a change, and of course it is a very generalized explanation of things, but it's far from being a lie.

    However, this should not be all about coding and processes, it was just a short excursion that we felt could be interesting, as it explains why changes in general, as well as why implementing suggestions always takes some time.

    As a matter of fact, your feedback has already had a big enough effect to make a change.
    It's just a matter of time for this change to take effect and we would like to take that time in order to try and find a compromise that works best for everyone - with a concept that is well thought-out and not just a change of number.

    Regards,
    Steffi

    i am very sorry to say but i really dont think the GGS people are doing this: "A lot of thoughts have to be put into such numbers, in order to make sure that a change works as expected without breaking the game or making it unplayable for you guys".
    over and over again we see that they come with updates which are useless not well thought and disrespectful for there costumers. I said it before and i say it again. It really looks that the developers not play the game themselves because then they would know that many things work different then they thought off.

    this deal was very simple to stop nothing harm would have been done in fact everyone would have been very happy. If the developers are not able to change this in 1 day then i think the boss have really to do some work assesment to see who need to be fired.

    they really ruined the game time by time. This deal is a very poor enetrpreneurship. The GGS studio does not gain any money with it. Players will buy less other deals and are only forced to buy this box to defend there position. NOBODY likes to feel that they are forced into someting maybe they do buy but will be very annoyed by the reason they did and in the end stop playing. People will play less missions because of this box, and in missions the gold is spend by many and so the company earns there the real money. So stupid nobody in the company sees that.

    before the box came in the usa server there was a nice fight for the places 3 till 7 the coops switched every hour. Now after the box it is all settled and no point in working hard for it. so missions getting empty again and much alone missions. again a downside of the box which was not thought off

    The fact that the game didnt care about taking faster an action on this deal is really disrespectful to there costumers and no company can effort to do that.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file