Robin-Yann Storm

the purpose of a pilsner is what it does

Subtext, cowards, etc.

I remember a commentary node for HL2:EP2 where they explained Alyx used to say the car you get was 'a wreck'

It just made players feel bad about the car.

So they changed the car to be cooler and changed the line.

Turns out sometimes you can just tell the player how to feel

Hell yeah, exactly. Players can't phrase their feedback in 'correct' game design terms, so it's on the game dev to interpret the feedback, so how it can apply to their vision, and then make the changes they feel are best to both cover their target audience and their vision.

Also I think putting the qualifications at the top, without the header, would be good as an intro. Sparking the interest quickly. Because that section sounds super impressive, and yet it's the last thing I read!

Yeah with 21 years of experience I think 2 pages is fine! Some folks will always hate that though, and you could probably squeeze the info into the current format, but imo it's fine with that pedigree

imo the CV and portfolio are for seeing if there is interest in an interview, and then kindle for the interview itself. So does it spark enough to warrant an interview, and does it leave room to ask more, without being too vague?

It's a tough line to straddle

Or for the VO system design: How long did it take to build, how many lines did it service, etc, just to get a sense of scale. E.g. is this for smaller games with hundreds of lines, or huge games with hundreds of thousands of lines.

Loving the single column black and white structure. Simplicity and readability are great

I think some of the bulletpoints could use more detail. 'Production' for example is tough to gauge. Did you organize weekly meetings? Daily? Organized the roadmap on Jira? For all the engineering departments?

Due to a bunch of demand, and many system designers preferring to read rather than watch, here is a text version of my analysis of the Trial System in ARC Raiders (and other incentives in game development) rystorm.com/blog/the-sys...

I hope this clarifies a bunch of the threads from this morning.

There’s so much nuance to the sentence ‘listen to players’, and text version of the video is up now, so that should hopefully contain the detail required for this subject: bsky.app/profile/ryst...

The full text version of the video is up now, so hopefully that contains enough nuance for the point to be clearer: bsky.app/profile/ryst...

Such an insanely good talk that I saw it live twice

Thank you for appreciating it! It's more work to get both right at the same time, but I know folks really prefer one way or the other, so I am happy to provide them both.

Thankfully the vast 99.99% of folks have commented about their own experiences and their own feedback, suggestions, and my shirts, which has been fantastic.

Just as when I critique tools, editors, and workflows: This is a place to discuss interesting systems, find out where there are issues, and build towards solutions.

The youtube video had some folks make hateful comments towards devs, but thankfully they're very quick and easy to block and remove!

That was in there initially, but I had to cut it for time!

Due to a bunch of demand, and many system designers preferring to read rather than watch, here is a text version of my analysis of the Trial System in ARC Raiders (and other incentives in game development) rystorm.com/blog/the-sys...

I hope this clarifies a bunch of the threads from this morning.

Which is why that article is exactly about that. I can't do much here without folks reading up on the existing material. It's not like character limited posts are the best place to discuss these complex systems.

Did you see the original video I posted, at the top of the original thread?

That ‘Skateboard to Car’ image really grinds my gears — Robin-Yann Storm, Product & UX Designer for Tools The idea is great, but only if used correctly. And most of the time, it is not being used correctly. We can do better!

That feels very strange to say, could you elaborate? I've been in many playtests where users said they wanted an old feature, an old system, etc.

It comes up so much in feedback and UX design that I eventually had to write a larger response to it to fully explain it: rystorm.com/blog/skatebo...

Yeah that’s it: You should absolutely talk to users to find out what’s wrong (my arm is broken) but you should not implement their suggested solution directly (duct tape it), instead find out how to really resolve it until their feedback disappears. (A cast, for example)

So in essence, only to fit into very few characters:
1. Inferring user feedback to be entirely different to what they want, and saying users were wrong in saying what they want, is bad.
2. Inferring user feedback so as to aim at what they are asking for, while adjusting to fit better, is good.

The practical sense around that phrasing is that players kept asking for classic WoW, a dev on stage said the quote and inferred they would not build that and stick to retail, directing their feedback towards that, but eventually they relented and delivered on the actual ask, with some small changes

I think I may see the difference you intend, but correct me if I'm wrong: I mean to say that players know what they want as in they will like or dislike depending on their feelings. The way they then frame those feelings is vague and needs interpretation.

But the players are right in their feelings

A worrying trend over the last few years is that I’ve seen folks say “To avoid listening to a vocal minority, we’re only going to trust our data”, which is a McNamara fallacy

Which is why the Wolfenstein ET example is in my video: We have to listen to what users say, look at data, and interpret

Yes, they are different examples in that regard. I only meant that in both cases there is a need to reinterpret the feedback that users give.

Lots of folks also like reading instead of watching though, so I’ll try and release a text version of the script today so folks can read at their own pace.

Oh jeez that would very much explain it yeah. Please watch it and let me know what you think! It contains way more examples and nuance to the statements than what a character limited post can do.

Hell yeah, exactly!

I’m still not quite seeing it, I’m sorry. Throughout the thread I say that we should find the underlying issue instead of blindly listen.

I really value your opinions and thoughts, and I will keep thinking about this. Maybe it’ll just take sometime, and during a walk outside I’ll see what you mean.