RB3 Request a Feature, Bug Report and Suggestion Thread (no song requests)

[bclewis]

If I'm wrong and the players applied a filter and then noticed that the filter was doing its job and scratched their heads, then I have overestimated the community.

I'm constantly surprised to find that I've unintentionally set 1-lighter-reviews on songs (particularly when drumming). My guess is that those who got confused by disappearing songs did similar, even if they intentionally ticked that filter.

[skyp1e]

I'm constantly surprised to find that I've unintentionally set 1-lighter-reviews on songs (particularly when drumming). My guess is that those who got confused by disappearing songs did similar, even if they intentionally ticked that filter.

That would be perfectly understandable (although I would hope you could suss that out on your own eventually without calling support ), but no such error could potentially occur for the proposed filtration concept of "hide uncommon DLC when choosing setlists with other players online".

I mean it's not like you might accidentally not share DLC with another person, can you?

And if someone dictates a scenario where you -could- forget you don't share DLC or other such nonsense, then I suggest that you might just be arguing for the sake of arguing and refer you back to the link I posted just above.

[jibjqrkl]

But you have insinuated yourself into the discussion of a proposition for a filter for hiding uncommon DLC while playing online and siting as an example of why not to do this as, and I am paraphrasing here "because customers would come to the forums in droves and complain that their songs disappeared". I could directly quote you and it should be pretty close to that sentiment.

Then you go on to say that this would be "the majority" of the game's players.

I don't think you are correct in either case, if this is your assertion and I don't think you've said anything to make me think otherwise. If that were so you would have kept your fingers still and not taken this role in the conversation at all.

EDIT:

In other news this is a real place and GNF works here.

i'm gonna agree with you simply because of that video

[bclewis]

That would be perfectly understandable (although I would hope you could suss that out on your own eventually without calling support ), but no such error could potentially occur for the proposed filtration concept of "hide uncommon DLC when choosing setlists with other players online".

Agreed. I was merely attempting to help partially restore your faith in the community you say you've overestimated. For the case of hiding one-lightered songs, I think it's an easier mistake to make than it appears at first glance.

[SenseiLeRoof]

In other news this is a real place and GNF works here.

No he doesn't! :P

[skyp1e]

No he doesn't! :P

You haven't properly introduced your smelf.

[GNFfhqwhgads]

But you have insinuated yourself into the discussion of a proposition for a filter for hiding uncommon DLC while playing online and siting as an example of why not to do this as, and I am paraphrasing here "because customers would come to the forums in droves and complain that their songs disappeared". I could directly quote you and it should be pretty close to that sentiment.

Then you go on to say that this would be "the majority" of the game's players.

I don't think you are correct in either case, if this is your assertion and I don't think you've said anything to make me think otherwise. If that were so you would have kept your fingers still and not taken this role in the conversation at all.

EDIT:

In other news this is a real place and GNF works here.

Well, remember, I couldn't care less if you believe me or not. I'm not even definitely right. You can sit and pout about the stab I took at it, but in the end, you don't have the feature you would like, and they actually went and removed it, so short of accepting my idea or submitting your own, you're just going to be sitting in your 'for ****s and giggles' boat?

Yes, the majority of players don't come on the forums. The forums are, according to Harmonix employees(whatever they know), 1% of the playerbase at the most. Now, the other 99% aren't completely oblivious to support lines, but quite a few people in any given sample just don't bother doing that extra legwork. If you somehow think 50%+1 of the audience DOES research issues they find in the game, go right ahead and try to make that argument. But if you're just going to sit around and say you don't think I'm right, that still doesn't matter, because it doesn't change anything I said, supply anything to make me change what I said, or change whichever person is right.

Have you even said why you think they removed it? Not to my knowledge. You've just sat there saying it should come back. And I'd enjoy it. But it's unlikely to be patched in. People that have enough DLC for it to be an issue can, again, come here and do the research. The same people that have that much DLC are also the core players, who will deal with it regardless. For everyone on the forums that complain about it, how many of them stop playing the game or even online because of it? Virtually none of them. There's a million and one reasons we all cite to not play online, and 'long scroll times' is rarely, if ever mentioned.

So yes, Harmonix caters to the casuals, because those are the sensitive ones that can leave at the drop of a hat, so why make things harder for THEM?

[skyp1e]

Well, remember, I couldn't care less if you believe me or not. I'm not even definitely right. You can sit and pout about the stab I took at it, but in the end, you don't have the feature you would like, and they actually went and removed it, so short of accepting my idea or submitting your own, you're just going to be sitting in your 'for ****s and giggles' boat?

Yes, the majority of players don't come on the forums. The forums are, according to Harmonix employees(whatever they know), 1% of the playerbase at the most. Now, the other 99% aren't completely oblivious to support lines, but quite a few people in any given sample just don't bother doing that extra legwork. If you somehow think 50%+1 of the audience DOES research issues they find in the game, go right ahead and try to make that argument. But if you're just going to sit around and say you don't think I'm right, that still doesn't matter, because it doesn't change anything I said, supply anything to make me change what I said, or change whichever person is right.

Have you even said why you think they removed it? Not to my knowledge. You've just sat there saying it should come back. And I'd enjoy it. But it's unlikely to be patched in. People that have enough DLC for it to be an issue can, again, come here and do the research. The same people that have that much DLC are also the core players, who will deal with it regardless. For everyone on the forums that complain about it, how many of them stop playing the game or even online because of it? Virtually none of them. There's a million and one reasons we all cite to not play online, and 'long scroll times' is rarely, if ever mentioned.

So yes, Harmonix caters to the casuals, because those are the sensitive ones that can leave at the drop of a hat, so why make things harder for THEM?

Well to address your points in this post.

There are people that don't play online and site lack of common DLC as the reason. Perhaps this particular complaint is exacerbated by the constant reminder of a thousand or so greyed out titles they must scroll through before hitting white titles and god forbid the first one they hit is an on disk song. This is probably about the time most randoms drop group.

Less songs in the past all told (we have nearly 4000 now) didn't really illustrate how useful this feature would currently be. That was then this is now. They might have removed it for any number of reasons but convenience certainly wasn't one of them. It might have just meant working longer on the code for the game and they didn't wish to do that.

If they removed it for the "lack of people using it" argument, refer to my first paragraph. I wouldn't hesitate to wager LARGE BUCKS that if this filter were implemented tomorrow nearly everyone that plays online would utilize this feature within the first month of release.

And I still say that you specifically compared this filter to the "reviews filter" and that this was why it wasn't put back. First off the reviews filter is still up and running. It might keep a player from seeing, let's be generous here, maybe 20 titles that they would otherwise have the arduous task of scrolling past when playing the game. How dreary.

Now compare that to the hundreds if not thousands of titles a player needs to scroll past when playing online with someone that isn't quite as avid a DLC collector as they are. Add other players to the mix and the potential for common DLC decreases with every new member.

Such a filter is sorely needed and to refute the usefulness of such a feature via illustration of the "review filter" and subsequent "where did my songs go?" posts on the forums is a dubious comparison in the extreme. It's a classic "apples and oranges" scenario.

There is virtually no way that someone would be surprised when a good chunk of their library vanishes during online play (and during online play only and only for this single session of play) after proactively setting a filter clearly designated for this purpose. Short of misclicking or poor reading comprehension. I will boldly submit such cases would be rare indeed. I mean how many customer support calls do you reckon HMX received this year because "most of my songs disappeared when I selected PRO guitar/bass support = YES"

So, bottom line on this one is:

This feature is a good idea.
It would see plenty of use.
Hardly anyone would be confused by the absence of song titles after selecting such a filter.

I think the criteria stated above in those three lines is enough of a case to plead for a filter for uncommon DLC among online players. If you still have any hypothetical reasons why that wouldn't be so, including "devil's advocate" testimonials, then by all means supply them. If on the other hand you are just a dog worrying a bone because you don't know when to quit or are incapable of just admitting that you're wrong, then spare us. Please.

[GNFfhqwhgads]

If you still have any hypothetical reasons why that wouldn't be so, including "devil's advocate" testimonials, the by all means supply them. If on the other hand you are just a dog worrying a bone because you don't know when to quit or are incapable of just admitting that you're wrong, the spare us. Please.

Wrong? Neither of us is using facts. You're telling me to stop bringing up hypothetical justification after saying it's a good idea(opinion, someone with very little DLC could easily say they'd prefer time be spent elsewhere), saying plenty of people would use it(which you don't know in the least, unless you've done a study you're just withholding), and hardly anyone would be confused(again, you don't know that). Your only problem with this is that my hypothetical reasons are on the opposite end from your hypothetical reasons.

Neither of us is wrong, and you seem oddly hellbent on repeating that there must be some 'mistake' I've made along the line of thought that is my own opinion and explained logic. If you don't agree with that, fine, but you can say it in one post and not need to ***** about it every time I repeat it. If all you can say time after time is, "You're wrong because I think this," then stop. You're not bringing anything new to the discussion.

We've fallen into this AGAIN where I literally have to respond to you just to explain I've not disagreed with you, but you keep replying and saying I'm wrong because you think something else. That's great, but my 'most people don't do research' probably holds more water than your 'hardly anyone would be confused by filters', since they've already been confused by default-off filters that hide songs.

I'm also not sure why you say things like

There is virtually no way that someone would be surprised when a good chunk of their library vanishes during online play (and during online play only and only for this single session of play) after proactively setting a filter clearly designated for this purpose.

as if I can't remove the word 'online' and have it apply to the one-lighter filter people HAVE had problems with.

[skyp1e]

Wrong? Neither of us is using facts. You're telling me to stop bringing up hypothetical justification after saying it's a good idea(opinion, someone with very little DLC could easily say they'd prefer time be spent elsewhere), saying plenty of people would use it(which you don't know in the least, unless you've done a study you're just withholding), and hardly anyone would be confused(again, you don't know that). Your only problem with this is that my hypothetical reasons are on the opposite end from your hypothetical reasons.

Neither of us is wrong, and you seem oddly hellbent on repeating that there must be some 'mistake' I've made along the line of thought that is my own opinion and explained logic. If you don't agree with that, fine, but you can say it in one post and not need to ***** about it every time I repeat it. If all you can say time after time is, "You're wrong because I think this," then stop. You're not bringing anything new to the discussion.

We've fallen into this AGAIN where I literally have to respond to you just to explain I've not disagreed with you, but you keep replying and saying I'm wrong because you think something else. That's great, but my 'most people don't do research' probably holds more water than your 'hardly anyone would be confused by filters', since they've already been confused by default-off filters that hide songs.

I'm also not sure why you say things like

as if I can't remove the word 'online' and have it apply to the one-lighter filter people HAVE had problems with.

The reason you can't apply it to that is because the "lighter scenario", if I may call it that will filter songs that a user may easily forget they downrated to only one lighter or perhaps didn't even realize they had applied a single lighter to. This might cause some panic because a song they hadn't intended to hide would not be showing up.

The "hide uncommon DLC filter" choice is not something that could possibly hide songs based on a forgetful person or a misclicked review of a single lighter. It would simply hide the songs normally greyed out in the set list screen when they are playing online. Exactly what the cognizant player would expect to happen if they chose this option in earnest. It is for that very reason that comparing the "lighter filter" with the "uncommon DLC" filter is a tenuous example at best.

A more realistic comparison would be the "keyboard support" filter. Even this would be a poor choice (although far better than your lighter scenario) because a user might forget that a song hasn't been charted for keys to begin with. "Carry On My Wayward Son" as a possible example. And I've not seen anyone post on the forums complaining about missing songs based on this filter or any other filter. Only the lighter filter has, in my experience, been sited as causing distress of any kind.