Jayce Reinhardt
(?)Community Member
Offline
- Report Post
- Posted: Wed, 01 Feb 2012 22:45:33 +0000
biglanky14
Hi everyone,
I know that we're being a bit vague about our plans at the moment, and that can be frustrating. But we're also doing that intentionally, not because we're not working on it, but because we as a company have been pretty bad in the past about promising stuff and then not delivering. That's something I want to avoid as much as possible because that just sets everyone up for disappointment.
Alchemy was a very ambitious feature, and it's extremely complex. Changing something in one place can cause major ripple effects elsewhere, which is why we're being very careful with our changes. But as Peppertea mentioned, we're focusing our efforts right now on making it easier to get started. Now, "easier" is a subjective word, but we're starting by looking at the early formulas and which components supply/price is out of whack with what you get out of it, and then adjusting them - basically trying to balance it out much better (which will have to be an ongoing process since the marketplace is dynamic). We'll see how those changes affect the system, and then make more based on what we're seeing, as opposed to making sweeping changes all at once and likely making everyone completely upset with unintended consequences.
None of this may make you feel better about Alchemy or where it's going, but hopefully it at least gives you a little more detail on what we're doing - and that we're actually working on it.
I know that we're being a bit vague about our plans at the moment, and that can be frustrating. But we're also doing that intentionally, not because we're not working on it, but because we as a company have been pretty bad in the past about promising stuff and then not delivering. That's something I want to avoid as much as possible because that just sets everyone up for disappointment.
Alchemy was a very ambitious feature, and it's extremely complex. Changing something in one place can cause major ripple effects elsewhere, which is why we're being very careful with our changes. But as Peppertea mentioned, we're focusing our efforts right now on making it easier to get started. Now, "easier" is a subjective word, but we're starting by looking at the early formulas and which components supply/price is out of whack with what you get out of it, and then adjusting them - basically trying to balance it out much better (which will have to be an ongoing process since the marketplace is dynamic). We'll see how those changes affect the system, and then make more based on what we're seeing, as opposed to making sweeping changes all at once and likely making everyone completely upset with unintended consequences.
None of this may make you feel better about Alchemy or where it's going, but hopefully it at least gives you a little more detail on what we're doing - and that we're actually working on it.
Biglanky
Can I ask why proposed changes and suggestions in the Alchemy suggestion thread were not taken more seriously days after after Alchemy was introduced on Thu Aug 18, 2011?
Why did we have a staff member (Pepper Tea) outright tell us no changes at all would be made to alchemy recipes in a thread designed to garner user opinion about alchemy on Sat Aug 27, 2011? Nine days later and everyone was working on alchemy already is very difficult to swallow. What exactly is the point of asking user opinion and suggestion if the staff is unwilling to hear any of it?
Now, six months later we are here at this point. . . . . With user concerns/issues once again being minimized or just outright ignored.
This whole system has nothing at all to do with hard work. Hard work is when I quested for four years to earn a rose corsage. Noone would have a problem if it actually was a lot of work but the fact is, that it is not work at all.
Alchemy is a luck based system and if you have no luck, you have to BUY what you need.
Why does Gaia willfully alienate its users?