An Update on Outfits

Fallen London
21

[quote=Flyte][color=rgb(194, 178, 128)]
It’s also possible that we’ll add more free outfits, either for everyone or as things unlocked in the course of play. We’d expect to make a decision on this after we’ve scaled back the outfit changing restrictions and seen how they affect the game for a wide range of players.[/color]
[/quote]
One idea that just occurred to me is making it possible somehow to earn an extra &quotoutfit slot&quot by success in a storylet. That would be interesting, though it’s admittedly a footnote to most of the issues discussed in this thread.

edited by Catherine Raymond on 7/31/2020
edited by Catherine Raymond on 7/31/2020

22

I’m still not 100% sold on the mechanic, but I’m baffled with this is something so many people are cancelling subscriptions over. This barely makes the top-5 of new annoyances I’ve had this week in Fallen London.

I haven’t posted much because there’s so much heat on this topic and I’d rather just go enjoy the game than wade into the flames. But I do feel obligated to push back against the narrative that &quoteveryone hates this.&quot I don’t hate it. I actually like some aspects of it (which I’ve posted about elsewhere), and I expect my overall opinion will be neutral or tepidly positive by the end of the weekend.

23

  1. While I understand and support the desire to make this system better, it’s causing significant problems right now. This change should be reverted until the issues can be addressed, not left in place.

  2. When fully implemented, this mechanic should not be the default. Freely switching outfits may be narratively ridiculous, but in many locations and storylets, locking outfits is similarly silly.

  3. Dismissing feedback from the most active portions of the community as a minority of players reads as extremely condescending. I am not an extreme optimizer. I would be fine with this affecting grinds and EPA. Hell, I can’t be bothered to change outfits for guaranteed success on the Bazaar card! But as it stands, this change just isn’t fun.

Now, I’m probably being too harsh here. Some of it is frustration with waking up to a response that doesn’t address my main concerns. Some of it is unrelated frustration with poorly-timed railway meetings. Failbetter is a small company; I suspect many of the feedback emails we’ve sent aren’t yet read. But I’m still frustrated and confused that this change was made without seeking feedback or beta testing.
edited by Optimatum on 7/31/2020

24

FBG believes that the number of players expressing opinions is much smaller than silent majority. I can’t refute it. It is indeed the case.
Please note that there are also players who are opposed to this update among the silent players, they just expressed their silence about it. Please don’t misunderstand them as “silent supporters”. I manage a 20-person Chinese discussion group. As far as I observe, all active players are dissatisfied with this game update. (The length of the game for these players ranges from five months to three years)
But in the end, limited by language and other factors, only I, who often use the forum, came to express my opinions.

So do you think my 10 dissatisfied friends are supporting you? Do you need me to let them express their dissatisfaction together?

25

[quote=Flyte][color=rgb(194, 178, 128)]First, this style of play is not as widespread as it might sometimes seem from discussion in our community spaces.
We’ve consistently found that people play and enjoy Fallen London in a wide variety of ways, and that those who’re particularly invested in optimisation are more likely to participate frequently in forum (and now Discord) discussions.[/color][/quote]

In general, this is extremely true and a very good thing to keep in mind.

However, &quotfrequently&quot is the critical qualifier here. The forums are more active than they’ve been in years, if not ever. That means players who don’t typically engage with the community are encountering this change and reacting to it so strongly they need to find the nearest space to vent about it.

This is because seeing a challenge and adjusting your clothes accordingly is not &quota style of play&quot in the same way that, say, deck optimisation is. It’s a style of play in the same way playing Mario and jumping when a goomba is about to touch you is. You might not do it, but then you’re penalised, and that teaches you to do it. And if Nintendo changed your controls so that your jump button is locked when the goomba is right next to you, so you have to adjust in advance–that’s something everyone would notice, immediately, even if they’re not the type to make videos about &quothalf an a press&quot.

Would it make new gameplay possible? Sure, I can see how that would open up new level design possibilities. But it doesn’t make sense to impose that change on World 1-1 before you can redesign it.
edited by aegisaglow on 7/31/2020

26

I’m sorry but making such a major change with no warning or beta testing isn’t been the best idea Failbetter has ever had. I love the new filter and being able to change outfits from the sidebar. I hope the change will turn out to be good fot the game in the long term but the way it was implemented has made things worse for now.

It is all well and good to say that it was intended to make players use different equipment with a view for future content but that content isn’t here yet.

I don’t always bother to change outfits to fit specific challenges but if I am penalised for forgetting to change before hunting in parabola or any of the other new highly challenging content areas it makes gameplay less fun. When a game is based on limited actions it is not good to be trapped somewhere. Maybe it will become natural to change before entering an area but after years of the old playstyle this will take time. Time we were not given.

27

I think this is a fair response, and I will wait and see how the promised changes go before making my mind up.

But I’d suggest that maybe while you sort everything out, at least paid stories could revert to the old system, so that people who play them during that period don’t suffer penalties and miss out on content they’ve put money into for something that might soon be changed to prevent those penalties? I’m certainly holding off on playing them in the meantime, and it sounds like many others are too - and I’d imagine people who are less active in the community or who have less of a strong reaction to the changes might not realize how much it could affect their chances in the story and feel cheated by things they miss because of the new system.

28

Perhaps it’s precisely because FL is already a little creaky and has plenty of annoyances that people are cancelling.

I cancelled earlier in the year after the map changes. But actually, it was the map changes + EF stories that didn’t interest me + lack of anything other to do other than grind for Cider that had made logging in feel like a chore. I then resubbed because of the great new content. I’ve unsubbed again, because the constant clicking out of storylets and wasting actions is sucking the fun out of the game for me. The balance has tipped. If the proposed changes restore the fun, I’ll probably resub again.

29

Just read the new announcement on a partial take back, and it still comes across as “Yeah, we’ve spent the last 10 years selling you on a system where BiS is crucial, but we’ve changed our minds. We’ll modify the lock system a little, but that’s it.” Or am I missing something.

30

My own two cents about this:

Fallen London is a single-player non-competitive game in which the main goal is to experience the story, not reach the highest rank within the player base. While there is a lot of potential for certain stories to prevent changing outfits on the fly, it only works if it is specifically designed for it like the new continuation for the Watchmaker’s Daughter card. Otherwise, like others have mentioned, it completely breaks the balance and way people have been playing the game for the last 10 years.

Even if you were to pay Fate and get extra clothing slots (which should be priced less, if at all), there’s no point if you can’t change outfits in places across the Unterzee or PAID Exceptional Stories, it just makes people angry to be forced to play a certain way, not their way.

People wanted more Clothing Slots for years because it would be more convenient for them and save them time, and while there are improvements in the update such as changing outfits from the homepage or filtering equipment via qualities, it comes at the cost of MASSIVE inconvenience by locking clothing changes.

I’ve spent a lot of money on the game esp. this year and I didn’t mind too much because they were making content that people have wanted for years, with new events and Ambition conclusions, the Railroad, the Lab, etc., and I feel that a lot of people express their appreciation with money as well. Well, making changes that deliberately make it harder to enjoy the game – essentially making a mountain out of a molehill – can hurt the company.

I don’t think the subreddit, the discord, and the community forums are the entirety of the playerbase, but they are the most vocal and devoted to the game runs. A lot of players would simply quit playing the game without providing feedback, while at least with the forums, you can hear the opinions who can provide constructive criticism.

To Failbetter, I highly suggest looking at all the posts and take into account other ways to implement these outfit changes, if at all, because these changes are losing a lot of good-will when it can be avoided.

31

This is a very disappointing response and smacks of PR crisis management.

I very much dislike being told that since I comment here and that I’m against these changes that I’m objecting because I &quotenjoy heavy optimisation&quot. Or that the act of speaking up matters less than the majority of people staying silent.

I play this game for the stories! I purchase game items because I’m interested in what options they might open up for me in stories! For instance, I don’t give a damn what stats Slowcake’s rose has - I honestly don’t even know - but I love that something I acquired years ago just yesterday gave me different text that added, even in a minuscule way, to the lore of FL.

Your three goals are admirable and I hope achievable. But the fact that you’re only actually spelling out the goals after implementing a change that radically affects everyone’s experience leads me to doubt your sincerity when you thank us for our feedback.

32

First, thank you for your reply and long-term work. We appreciate that you listen to our feedback and take our concerns into account.
I’m personally very much looking forward for new things implemented with this system in mind, and new gear. I can see that it opens a lot of interesting territory, and am hopeful for the future here.

Just a few points:

[quote=Tyrconnell]The problem isn’t failing. The problem is the introduction of a new mechanic that adds to frustration, in some cases breaking the game, while not contributing anything appreciable.
Down the line there may be better use of different equipment, but there is no good way that I can think of to eliminate either excess clicking to change outfits or extra need to read the wiki and optimize. And that’s not necessarily about fear of failure either—failing a check is okay. Failing a check you could have passed because you didn’t do your homework, so the right solution is in your inventory taunting you? That’s perfectly orchestrated to feel miserable.[/quote]

I tend to agree with this, though I’ll say that there mostly won’t be a problem with repeatable content written with this limitation in mind. Stuff like &quot220-240 of various stats needed for 90-100% success rate on most challenges&quot will be perfect for this system, and newly introduced items will make the whole strategy much more nuanced. But in a lot of current endgame content, you need BIS outfits to hit 80-90% of success and at times in combination with non-overlapping novelty stats.
One-shot, nonrestartable stories which might have locks based on stat levels are another problem entirely, as you might get locked out of something important for you. Most of these are not signposted for this, since it didn’t use to be a problem, and it may be hard or outright impossible to know what you may end up needing during story progress.

IMO this is unfair to the Forum community. The vast majority of negative feedback here was quite constructive and specifically contributed thoughtful arguments. And we are by no means calling for devs to &quotcater to us at the expense of the other 90% of players&quot. Many of the points made here voice concerns relevant for ALL players, not just the endgame crowd. The main gripe was that at the moment, in vast majority of content, this change only makes you lose more often, thereby slowing overall progression. Arguing that this will most likely be tolerated, rather than welcome, by the majority of players (silent or otherwise, endgame or beginning) is hardly whinging.

Part of this issue is, in line with what you said, that recently, FBG has been giving us so much to do with our actions. For this reason, every extra action (worst case, every extra round of an entire carousel) feels that much worse, because we are constantly juggling many grand schemes. Perhaps that helps explain why the enfranchised players are feeling so salty about this.

Of course, I agree that the devs’ prerogative and indeed very role is to take the game in a direction that fits their vision better. I’m sure most of us here do. We just try to discuss the particulars . People do make some very good points here, even if things can get a bit heated at times. I can’t speak for Discord, though. That platform seems tailor-made for toxicity and jabs rather than reasonable discussion in the first place, to be honest, which is why I stick to the forums.

And for the record, I feel that the price of 20 Fate for an outfit is quite reasonable, if not too affordable (if you plan to buy more than 1-2 outfits, though, that gets steep fast - perhaps there should be a bulk option?). Asking or crying for free outfit slots indeed feels rather entitled, but if FBG were to offer some, that would win a lot of goodwil I think.

TL;DR:
My view is that the lock should be mostly removed from older content, but it will surely create a lot of interesting opportunities for novel design down the line.
It is best suited for either repeatable or well signposted places, and should be kept from one-shot content, especially high-stakes stuff like paid stories or Ambitions.
Canceling subscriptions for this reason seems a bit excessive to me, but I understand why people do it. It is probably a good marker of the level of frustration this change has generated…

Edit: Oh, and I’ve just realized that what I like most about the system exactly corresponds to points 1) and 2) of the stated goals. That probably shows you’ve done good work in those regards…
edited by Aardvark on 7/31/2020
edited by Aardvark on 7/31/2020

33

I, too, just canceled my EF sub. Not out of spite but because I see that this is going to stay and it’s gonna force me to play a lot less anyway.

34

[quote=Flyte][color=rgb(194, 178, 128)]

…[/color]
[color=rgb(194, 178, 128)]Goals

There are three things we’d like restrictions on outfit changing to achieve:

  1. Allowing us to create new gameplay challenges that are more varied, strategic and replayable.

  2. Giving worth to a greater variety of equipment. Previously, equipment with a best-in-slot bonus for a single stat was far more valuable than equipment with multiple good bonuses (with very limited exceptions).
    …
    [/color]
    [color=rgb(194, 178, 128)]
    First, this style of play is not as widespread as it might sometimes seem from discussion in our community spaces.
    We’ve consistently found that people play and enjoy Fallen London in a wide variety of ways, and that those who’re particularly invested in optimisation are more likely to participate frequently in forum (and now Discord).[/color][/quote]

I’m still stumped by what you mean by “strategic.” Random penalties for not having enough of a new quality aren’t strategic, they’re just random and frustrating, since players have no opportunity to foresee or prepare for them.

As for equipment worth, FBG has spent 10 years making BiS equipment valuable.

Finally it seems entirely possible that three things are likely true:

  1. “Those who’re particularly invested in optimization” are particularly invested in the game. They spend time and money playing it. They spend time discussing it and helping other players. They create wikis. Seems like they’re your base, not just a group of vocal complainers.

  2. The people most hindered by the whole possessions system, including the new changes, are lower level players not on an endgame mode. They’re stuck with “Perhaps Not” and heavy wiki use because the penalties for doing otherwise are largely destructive of game enjoyment. They’re the most borked by recent events.

  3. There is no “Silent Majority” out there rooting for the changes.

On a side note, there seem to be at least three Groups of players:

  1. Early stage Fallen London players.
  2. Late stage Fallen London players.
  3. Parabola and Railroad players.

They’re pretty much playing different games.

35

This made me cringe, Flyte.

When I read this, my thought was that this is a &quotsilent majority&quot statement. You know who had been saying that, don’t you?

There is no guarantee that those who have not made a statement here in Disqus, this forum or any other channel that they are okay with this. The only thing that is apparent is an absence, specifically the absence of their feedback.
edited by Rostygold on 7/31/2020[/quote]

I cannot prove it, but I suspect that many, perhaps most players, don’t count how many actions it takes to turn a particular profit. Those players may well not care about many concerns which repeatedly turn up in the Forums, including the effect of the new Outfits setup. Whether those players count as a &quotsilent majority&quot depends upon how many of them there are, of course, which is something none of us know for certain. I, personally, don’t understand why anyone perceives the suggestion that people who have voiced negative opinions on the Forums might be a minority of players is a pejorative remark.[/quote]

They probably aren’t counting echos per action optimisation, but I think a casual player will be less likely to log in multiple times a day. And if they end up wasting all of their actions, like docking at an island or entering a boardroom with the wrong outfit, that will be their entire day’s worth of playtime wasted. Maybe even two days. In fact, waste a boardroom meeting: That’s one full week, wasted!

36

A nice (though unfortunately probably technically too complicated) solution to many of the stated problems has occured to me:

you could make the lock apply only to some pieces of equipment, those that represent mostly physical and bulky stuff. You could call the quality &quottangible;&quot this would comprise most clothing, weapons, companions, velocipedes - stuff like that.

On the other hand, you have a lot of &quotintangible&quot equipment. You know - scars, small rings, certain experience, remembrances of tiger ministers, or you perhaps happen to own half of London, have been named a Cat or whatever.

When you go into a house, enter a board meeting or undertake a journey, you may not take both your Poisoned Umbrella and an Infernal Rifle. But you have still been mentored by the Jovial Contrarian, and you certainly still remain a Cat. So I suggest you should be able to substitute any and all Intangible equipment at any time, but could not grab a new Tangible thing, or revert to it once you’ve equipped an Intangible one.

Implementing something like this would IMO truly add a strategic layer to equipment, new AND old (e.g., do I put down Feducci’s Spear to concentrate on the Contrarian’s rhetoric lessons, even if I later might have to rely on my Brooding Aura of Pain in a fight?). Furthermore, it would serve as a way around situations where you might get locked out of a desperately wanted option just because your outfit is too low on Respectable or whatever. And lastly, it would actually make so much sense from RP and realism perspective! Your equipment would then be a sum of what you actively wield and what you’re focused on with your mind, as it actually is most of the time.

What do you fine gentlebeings think about this concept?

37

Honestly, your subtle reply on a &quotsilent majority&quot hurts me. I feel rightly offended, now.

Sorry to enjoy your game, invest my time in it AND make it clear and loud, voicing it.
Sorry to read and write on the forum and occasionally giving you feedback.
Sorry to buy your content (mostly BiS, thanks again) or to subscribe to it.

Sorry.

Next time I will be silent and let my wallet talk, since - you know - I have a &quotheavily optimized&quot style of doing things, so I prefer too not &quotspend&quot to many actions on things that not works very well.
edited by Frenzgyn on 7/31/2020

38

This responce is… not quite as informative, or remedial, as I had hoped.

So, allow me to voice some thoughs and follow-up questions in regards to the explanation given:

I have no doubt that whatever gameplay changes you planned are going to be exciting but, things being as they are, changes you’ve made beg two simple questions:

[ol][li]If you plan some new content around those new features, why enforce this feature on a content that was not planned aroud it, making said content significantly more inconvenient, i.e. worse?[/li][li]If you plan those gameplay challenges some time in the future, why implement outfit lock now, at a time, where no new content depends on it?
[/li][/ol]
[color=rgb(194, 178, 128)][quote=Flyte][color=rgb(194, 178, 128)]
Second, we think the long term benefits of these restrictions are not yet obvious, because we can’t overhaul all of Fallen London to take advantage of the new gameplay possibilities with our limited resources. Right now, we’re a team of 15 people split across four projects (Fallen London, the Sunless Skies Sovereign Edition, and two Secret Things). When we add functionality to enable new design possibilities, it takes time for us to create new stories that take full advantage of it, or to rework older ones.
[/color][/quote]
[/color]
Again, now that you have that functionality working and load-tested, why not turn it off till you can take full advantage of it without disadvantaging players?
[color=rgb(194, 178, 128)]
[color=rgb(194, 178, 128)][quote=Flyte][color=rgb(194, 178, 128)]
First, this style of play is not as widespread as it might sometimes seem from discussion in our community spaces.
We’ve consistently found that people play and enjoy Fallen London in a wide variety of ways, and that those who’re particularly invested in optimisation are more likely to participate frequently in forum (and now Discord) discussions.
[/color][/quote]
[/color][/color]
While I understand that giving in to vocal minority is what led us to SJW tyranny, suicides in industry, renaming Glassman to Silverer and having Abby in TLoU2, silent majority fallacy is also a thing, and the fact that people do not complain, does not indicate that change they do not complain against is positive. Sometimes a cigar is just a bad design decision, as Freud would (probably not) say. After all people who do complain, do not complain that it is immoral, just that it is chafing and inconvenient.

While I’m not a developer, as an affected party (the lock already feels really, really irritating), I humbly suggest a better (or at least a lot more convenient for average player) way of handling of the situation:

[ol][li]For now add all zones to the &quotcan change outfit in&quot list.
[/li][li]During the next few weeks gradually add zones you absolutely sure need this change to the &quotcan’t change outfit in&quot list, while communicating to players, why this particular zone goes in. Even &quotwe plan awesome new content here later on&quot will do, just not generic &quotbetter narrative&quot argument.
[/li][/ol]Also, the one thing the answer post does not explain, is that locking outfit change reduces utility of additional outfits you introduced. If you can’t change outfits mid-story, utility of changing outfits is greatly reduced, so, profit-wise, is seems a bit like shooting oneself in the foot. You don’t need additional outfits, if you have to go everywhere in your &quotaverage best’ to be prepared for every occasion at once. Wouldn’t it be better, if the lock applied to changing items inside outfits only, but allowed for changing outfits? That way, players would think strategically, what options we would want to have on hand, but will not be locked out of particular check for a quality they treasure most due to being unprepared.

[quote=Flyte][color=rgb(194, 178, 128)]
It’s also possible that we’ll add more free outfits, either for everyone or as things unlocked in the course of play. We’d expect to make a decision on this after we’ve scaled back the outfit changing restrictions and seen how they affect the game for a wide range of players.
.[/color][/quote]

That would actually be awesome, adding an outfit or two at key transition points of the game (becoming PoSI and finishing ambition, maybe?) would make the whole &quotmore outfits&quot update much more wholesome. After all, a lot of people asked for that change for a long time.
edited by Sagrim-Ur on 7/31/2020
edited by Sagrim-Ur on 7/31/2020

39

Take your misogynist Gamergate nonsense elsewhere.

40

[quote=Sagrim-Ur]

While I understand that giving in to vocal minority is what led us to SJW tyranny, suicides in industry, renaming Glassman to Silverer and having Abby in TLoU2, [/quote]
SJWs aren’t a real thing, victims should not be afraid of their abusers choosing to do terrible things because they outed them as such (what is wrong with you), Silverer is cooler than Glassman, and TLOU2 was transphobic so who gives a sh*t.