Cantr II Discussion Forum

Yes, this is going to be one of those goodbye messages, but please bare with me, I might have something interesting to say.

I am leaving now, because I don't want to have to deal with sadness later when I lose all my characters that are like children to me.

The programming department has no idea of what it is doing and why, it has its priorities completely screwed and AFAICT there is almost no communication between the departments to get really important stuff done.

Several things that happened the last months that make me say these things:

• Documentation The documentation has been hideously outdated when I started. Not too long after, the FAQ was started here on the board, by a user. That got picked up by one of the departments and lived a happy life on the forum.
  I asked a couple of months ago why it was not featured on the site, but noone could give me an answer to that. It has now finally happened, but it took a very long while to get done.
  Documentation is the most important thing to get right, even though there are some people who don't read it. They stand out, but a lot of people try to read it, but it was very difficult for them to understand it all.
  
• Data loss It has happened a number of times that a small amount of data and in one case a large amount of data has been lost. I suspect that this will happen more often and with more serious results in the future. Unless some shadow Cantr is reinstated where new features are tried out first, before they are implemented in the game.
  
• New features These have been implemented in the last few months without much input from players. Now sometimes these features are pretty cool (the new editable names for everything), useful (match speed), but sooner or later one change had to come through that almost everyone hated: the BOLD WHITE links for everything turning the history in one huge white blob of text.
  Have any of these features actually been tested? Do players really think they are that important to have? I bet you can ask a bunch of players and they could come up with things that are much more important to them.
  
• Wear of artifacts The wear of tools and weapons is probably a good thing, even though most players were against it, it is probably a good idea that will make this game better. But the programming department should really have learned a lesson from that: don't put something in the game until it is completely finished. First we had wear of things that we couldn't fix, for a very long time and now when the repair function was finally implemented, it was again implemented in a very dodgy way, leading to loss of items.
  Again: Why wasn't this tested?
  
• Disruption It is stupifyingly easy to disrupt Cantr.
  All of my characters have had multiple experiences with newspawns who grab everything and make a run for it. It becomes tedious to hunt them down and get your stuff back. Sure, it's roleplaying, but it's really annoying, especially because there is almost nothing you can do about it in the game.
  Yes, you can store all your stuff in a house, but if almost every town in the game has stuff lying around, that should say something to the programmers.

This post has become far longer than I anticipated, but it all boils down to one recommendation for the departments, especially the programming department:
Have a look at Extreme Programming, you can't do everything in there, but the whole philosophy behind it is something you should take in.

Neelix,

I tend to agree with you on many points, and find this is my #1 frustration in participating in these kinds of websites-- LiveJournal had over a million members before they instituted a fully functioning test environment.

I hope you stick around the forums long enough to play in my WWG VII (which will start after Dragon Slayer's wraps up), but if not, happy trails to you-- hope you post your full character roster so we can all appreciate you now that you're leaving.

--m

You're right with a lot there...
Good speed, and I hope to see you pop bye every now and then
hf

Oh comeone.

Cantr devolopment will stagnate if we don't change a thing.

Bad progress is still progress.

See it as a challange.
Beat the system!

Neelix, since you decided to be very blunt about this, let me be blunt about this, too: You are jumping to conclusions without even reading the facts available to you.

All people working for Cantr are doing so in their free time and especially the Programming Department, which you picked most on, has done night shifts trying to fix things before they would disrupt the game or could be exploited. Very often requests such as moving boats, fixing weapons, uploading pictures etc. are processed within 24 hours, provided you contact the right department. I'm sure that most companies take longer to respond, and they have paid a set of professionals whose only job it is to respond to complaints. Never insinuate that Cantr staff isn't working as much or as responsibly as they should. If something takes longer than expected, it's probably because staff members are overwhelmed with more urgent matters - and imho you mustn't ask others to work harder or sacrifice more of their free time if you yourself don't lift a finger to help.

- the documentation was made available and more is being reviewed but you said yourself there should be priorities, and the first priority is everything related to maintaining the integrity of the game.

- data loss is natural to computer systems accessed millions of times per day. Even your home PC loses data. Only a very small portion is due to mistakes, but mistakes are human. In order to combat data loss, Cantr is now being put on backup once a day, so there will be less loss noticeable to the players in the future, not more.

- of course new features are tested in a "shadow version of Cantr". In fact, debugging before implementation takes up most of a programmer's time, no matter whether he's working on Cantr or commercial software. If there are still bugs, they are likely due to a) hundreds of users trying the same thing at the same time can cause problems that a single programmer can't simulate b) unanticipated ways of using new features c) incompatibility issues between scripts or with the additional data of the real database.

- player input is sought after in the Suggestions forum and on Flyspray, but even when the Programming Department implements something that many people have called for (e. g. skills, deterioration), many people will then complain about it and few will be grateful. If player input can't ensure that people approve of changes, it has little value.

- there is a poll about link colour. And I can't believe you'd quit because of something as trivial as this.

- deterioration was implemented when it was believed that repair would soon follow. It didn't follow soon because of extensive testing and corrections being made. It involved fundamental changes to core game components. You didn't have to fix things before repair was implemented, people took care of that, so that is really a hypothetical point.

- disruption occurs because of players. Cantr staff isn't responsible for the actions of the players. The making of Cantr can't be blamed either. If you ever moderate a chat room, a forum or whatever, you'll see that obnoxious behaviour can't be adverted even if you stand vigil 24 hours a day. The Players Department is quietly and efficiently dealing with people disrupting the game, but it can't baby-sit all of Cantr. Some responsibility also has to be taken on by the players, for example in the form of cooperation in pointing out where abuse is occuring (CRB forum), and in sorting out matters if your own characters are considered a problem by others.

Again, if you think you could do better, put your actions where your mouth is. Join the staff and you'll soon see that there are people more altruistic, more hard-working and more knowledgeable about what they're doing than you are (and I'm including everyone in this "you", myself too). But at the very least you should have the decency to see what is being done before assuming it's not being done.

Judith

Nice post Judith

I couldn't have said it better.

First off, I know that Neelix is going to get flamed by Cantr staff members here. But before you do that, maybe you should consider that his opinions must have some basis, even if they are wrong. If he feels stronglyenough about it to open himself to abuse like this, then all is not right somewhere...

Junesun wrote: - player input is sought after in the Suggestions forum and on Flyspray, but even when the Programming Department implements something that many people have called for (e. g. skills, deterioration), many people will then complain about it and few will be grateful. If player input can't ensure that people approve of changes, it has little value.

Personally, I'm not sure that is true. Or at least not true in the way it should be. Generally (and this applies only to larger or more recent changes) feedback is sought after the event. The best example is the white links. There was a massive outcry against that... if that thread had been posted before it was implemented, the outcry would have been noted, and a problem avoided. It should be noted that the more vocal forum members do not represent every single player... if there are many complaints, then maybe, just maybe, the fault lies with the programming not with the players?

Junesun wrote:- deterioration was implemented when it was believed that repair would soon follow. It didn't follow soon because of extensive testing and corrections being made. It involved fundamental changes to core game components. You didn't have to fix things before repair was implemented, people took care of that, so that is really a hypothetical point.

The fact that there was that belief when it was implemented... does that not indicate the lack of communication that Naeelix was talking about? I don't think it was 100% thought through, as my short essay explains, and I think that's the problem. I would much rather that prog didn't have to work through the night... that extra time was taken, and the small things (like a back button on the clothes main page) were implemented rather than flawed major changes.

Junesun wrote:Again, if you think you could do better, put your actions where your mouth is. Join the staff and you'll soon see that there are people more altruistic, more hard-working and more knowledgeable about what they're doing than you are (and I'm including everyone in this "you", myself too). But at the very least you should have the decency to see what is being done before assuming it's not being done.

Meh. Did that... but I never got the chance to make an impact before I was kicked off for a, admittedly rather serious, mistake I made. Which made no impact on my job as a staff member. And I was not given a single chance to defend myself... so something is wrong somewhere...

Junesun, I really appreciate all the effort you put in. I know you work very hard on Cantr and try to do your best.

I may have been a bit blunt with things, but I feel very frustrated with the game and have a feeling there is something fundamentally wrong that I cannot change.

I read a lot of things (agreed, not everything that is available here) and talked to a lot of people about Cantr, observed effect of changes and talked to Jos as well. I mentioned the use of a shadow Cantr last night and he said something along the lines that it used to be there, but wasn't anymore.

My main gripe is that a lot of changes are being added and end up badly, because people don't seem to want to fix bugs or change the way the system works now, so that it works better and may in the end become easier to maintain.

And about data loss: you have a very different view on that then.
"Data" is not lost on my computer, ever. If something makes data go away inadvertently, I will make very sure that that program is kicked off of my computer for ever.

As for me volunteering: I'd love too, if I had the time to do it right. I only want to do things if I can do them right and that would just take too much of my time, which I don't have.
If you're looking for an advisor, then perhaps I could do that.

And the white text thing: if anyone even tried that seriously for longer than 5 minutes and still liked it over the old system, they're nuts.

Meh i'm not even noticing it anymore.

The game is about the game right?

Not the persentation of the game.

Right?

Neelix wrote:And the white text thing: if anyone even tried that seriously for longer than 5 minutes and still liked it over the old system, they're nuts.

*shrugs* Guess I'm nuts...

Neelix, who did you play?

hallucinatingfarmer wrote:*shrugs* Guess I'm nuts...

And deaf too. Current standing of the poll is now 82 against the new colour to 7 for the new colour (after more than a week) and it has still not changed back.

Surly wrote:Personally, I'm not sure that is true. Or at least not true in the way it should be. Generally (and this applies only to larger or more recent changes) feedback is sought after the event. The best example is the white links. There was a massive outcry against that... if that thread had been posted before it was implemented, the outcry would have been noted, and a problem avoided. It should be noted that the more vocal forum members do not represent every single player... if there are many complaints, then maybe, just maybe, the fault lies with the programming not with the players?

The Programming Department can't ask for suggestions on any topic before the implementation. Some are just too trivial to ask permission for (e.g. white links - nobody could have anticipated it would be this controversial) while others are supposed to be hidden from the players, at least at the beginning. I think the main problem is lack of communication between the players and the Programming Department - I mean serious, constructive criticism and suggestions, not whining, on the part of the players and information about what changes are supposed to be good for on the part of the department.

The fact that there was that belief when it was implemented... does that not indicate the lack of communication that Naeelix was talking about? I don't think it was 100% thought through, as my short essay explains, and I think that's the problem. I would much rather that prog didn't have to work through the night... that extra time was taken, and the small things (like a back button on the clothes main page) were implemented rather than flawed major changes.

No lack of communication there. Deterioration and repairing was created and implemented by the same programmer.
At the moment big things take priority over small things, because big things can make a lot of difference to a lot of people and create more equality in game. Besides, small things such as additional back buttons are left for the programmers in training to do, who get a feeling for Cantr code that way.

Meh. Did that... but I never got the chance to make an impact before I was kicked off for a, admittedly rather serious, mistake I made. Which made no impact on my job as a staff member. And I was not given a single chance to defend myself... so something is wrong somewhere...

Breaking the Capital Rule can mean you lose the privilege to play Cantr, not just your staff position. Because of the possibilities of abuse that a staff position can entail, staff members are held to an even higher moral code than simple players. It's also a question of trust: how can you trust somebody to work for the good of the game with one hand if he's seriously disrupting it with the other? When your application was discussed, we were all convinced that you were past cheating, otherwise you wouldn't have been accepted in the first place.

Neelix wrote:I may have been a bit blunt with things, but I feel very frustrated with the game and have a feeling there is something fundamentally wrong that I cannot change.

I'm sorry to hear that, Neelix. Trust me there is not. I still think the best way for you to see that would be to join the staff and get an idea of how people work and how Cantr works. That would give you a much better understanding of what is going on, why some things happen etc.

I mentioned the use of a shadow Cantr last night and he said something along the lines that it used to be there, but wasn't anymore.

There still is a testing environment, but it has been changed somewhat to protect it against abuse.

My main gripe is that a lot of changes are being added and end up badly, because people don't seem to want to fix bugs or change the way the system works now, so that it works better and may in the end become easier to maintain.

All bugs reported on Flyspray are getting fixed. Some of them very quickly. Some bugs are fixed before they get reported. The system also gets optimised. You obviously can't see when code is optimised, but you could for example notice that tiredness was adjusted a lot of times, because the initial calculations didn't work out as they should.

And about data loss: you have a very different view on that then.
"Data" is not lost on my computer, ever. If something makes data go away inadvertently, I will make very sure that that program is kicked off of my computer for ever.

I'm not talking about programs doing this on purpose. It's just a side effect of usage called corruption. When you open a file, change something and save it, or just copy it, and do that hundreds of times, there will eventually be flaws in the copy that come from the file not being saved 100% correctly. Perhaps a byte on your HD refused to be adjusted. Perhaps the reader jumped over a byte of the original file. That kind of thing. Usually it isn't noticeable until your HD software tells you that there are inaccessible sectors that can no longer be worked with. The same thing happens, on a much larger level, to the Cantr database. There are tables that are accessed and changed millions of times per day, for example the locations table. Finally it corrupts and can no longer be accessed - that's when you get that SQL error message. If some script tries to change something in there while it is inaccessible, that data gets lost and you'll e. g. have ships that stay in the vortex even what the table has been repaired. It's nobody's fault.

As for me volunteering: I'd love too, if I had the time to do it right. I only want to do things if I can do them right and that would just take too much of my time, which I don't have.
If you're looking for an advisor, then perhaps I could do that.

Everybody volunteers as much time as he can. Particularly Programming Department members often wind up spending more time than they expected when signing up, that's why I reacted a bit sharply.
Frankly I don't see how you could advise on matters of implementation, programming style, staff communication or the like without knowing how the system works at the moment. It's more complex and well-thought out than you appear to think at the moment. Your suggestions on what could be added or changed to make Cantr a better playing experience are welcome though.

I hope that you don't leave Cantr forever. Considering that all things you mentioned are either not as you think or are being fixed, there really isn't any reason for leaving.

Judith

Junesun wrote:The Programming Department can't ask for suggestions on any topic before the implementation. Some are just too trivial to ask permission for (e.g. white links - nobody could have anticipated it would be this controversial) while others are supposed to be hidden from the players, at least at the beginning ...

Why can't these 'trivial' changes by posted on the forum before? How would that change anything except the secrecy obsession at the top of Cantr? I accept that major changes will always be kept scret until implementation, that is not the question. Many small problems could be avoided if staff stopped acting like a superior group, whilst hiding behind the title of 'volunteer', and actually discussed things with players. I always try to make valuable contributions rather than just flaming... but do I know that a programmer has read that? My thread about item deterioration, that got a response from Jur - which I appreciate. But how often does that happen? And how do I know he understood what I was saying. Sometimes the staff will have to try and communicate as much as the players trying.

No lack of communication there. Deterioration and repairing was created and implemented by the same programmer.
At the moment big things take priority over small things, because big things can make a lot of difference to a lot of people and create more equality in game. Besides, small things such as additional back buttons are left for the programmers in training to do, who get a feeling for Cantr code that way.

All these changes have an impact on everyone. The question shoul be: 'Are these changes beneficial or detrimental'. I feel that many of the changes have made the game less enjoyable, and there has been no attempt to assuage my fears. Instead, more changes that I am strongly against have been implemented, ignoring my suggestions and opinions.
I understand leaving small things to training programmers. But maybe, just maybe, improving the overall gameplay of Cantr by sorting these little things would have a bigger impact on the enjoyment level of Cantr than making life harder, the game less interesting... just a thought.

Breaking the Capital Rule can mean you lose the privilege to play Cantr, not just your staff position. Because of the possibilities of abuse that a staff position can entail, staff members are held to an even higher moral code than simple players. It's also a question of trust: how can you trust somebody to work for the good of the game with one hand if he's seriously disrupting it with the other? When your application was discussed, we were all convinced that you were past cheating, otherwise you wouldn't have been accepted in the first place.

I'm not sure how much of this should be said in the forums... but if that is the way it has to happen, then fine. First off, did what I did seriously disrupt the game? Or did the heavy-handed response from the PD have a bigger impact? Absolutely no attempt to understand my situation was made. None at all. It was a simple process - I did something wrong, the PD told me the consequences then acted on them. I waited for the email asking for me to explain myself. Did it ever come? No. I evidently overlooked the fact that should be so obvious... the PD and Cantr hierarchy are omniscient, aren't they? They obviously knew exactly why I did what I did, much better than me. I was accused of making no effort to solve the situation, an accusation I refute. But it is an accusation I make straight back at the PD. Maybe if they had spoken to me, this whole thing could have been solved in a more satisfactory way. As it is, the way it was 'solved' is exactly what I wanted to avoid, and exactly the reason I did not talk with the PD.
I knew from the first message I got that I was going to lose my staff status, despite the fact that there is no way to link my mistake to my role as a CD member. How exactly do you think I would have 'seriously disrupt' Cantr as a CD member? Isn't the whole point to work outside of Cantr?

I hope that you don't leave Cantr forever. Considering that all things you mentioned are either not as you think or are being fixed, there really isn't any reason for leaving.

Maybe there is? Maybe the fact that his post has been totally disregarded is the problem he was referring to? If he feels strongly enough to quit, maybe attempts should be made to address his fears, rather than telling him that nothing is wrong when he quite evidently disagrees.

I think there is a problem with Cantr, and I think it's exactly the same problem I have seen so many times in just about every volutneer-run organisation/game/group/whatever that I've ever been involved in. Quite simply, the staff are over worked, the participants don't see a fraction of what gets done behind the scenes, and neither side is particularly good at communicating with the other.

Let's take the deterioration thing as an example. Ok, so when it was implemented, repairing was set to follow soon after. But how soon? The players were left wondering whether it was going to be implemented before things really fell apart, or if there was going to be another re-set, and if so when. Given that a lot of characters, and the players behind them, put a huge amount of effort into creating all the items, it was understandably worrying that they looked like they were going to fall apart. When players start to worry about things like that and don't feel like they're being kept informed, they tend to assume the worst, in this case that nothing was being done about it and their calls for information/fixes were being ignored. I know this is wrong, and I for one try not to, but that's just the way people think.

Tha kind of thing happens across the board, and unfortunately people have a habit of only seeing when things go wrong, and not seeing when things go right or get fixed, or understanding the difficulties the staff are facing. So anyway, I think there is some real reason for criticism, but I don't think it's as bad as some would have it, and I think the main problem is poor comunication from staff to players.

Because I don't just want this post to be a moan, I have a suggestion that would go at least some way to fixing this, and that's to have an Announcements thread on the forums, to which only staff can post, which will include updates about even the little things like link colour changes and players responsible for lots of CRBs being kicked. That way, the players have access to more information about what the staff are doing, which will hopefully let them realise just how much the staff do get up to behind the scenes. And then maybe next time someone feels like having a go because they didn't know that x minor feature was being tweaked, they can be pointed at the announcements thread where they were told all about it. Sometimes a policy of "ask and we'll tell you" isn't good enough - we shouldn't have to ask.