SI's input on the forums

[wwfan]

Smac's excellent post sums up how I think. However, there are certain things that people seem to be glossing over.

1: Asking something and getting an answer requires two-way respectful communication. Many of the communiques recently addressed to Miles have called for his resignation, questioned his competence and work ethic, insulted and abused him, and then had the temerity to accuse him of being too immature to respond. When the people involved were pulled up, they then disputed the action taken. As it stands, we are in a vicious circle in which each decision by an SI member to communicate risks greater and greater abuse being thrown at them. If that situation continues, then we have nowhere to go.

2: The group of five-six people that generally initiate this type of conflict base their positions on personal, long-held grievances that mean next to nothing to the majority of posters on the forums. They believe their own personal agendas to be more important than the wishes of the majority. Unless this stops, there is only going to be one outcome. No matter how badly you feel you have been treated, you have to let it go. Forgive, forget and post politely.

3: There have been a number of occasions in which users have explicitly told Miles how he should be running SI games, based on highly subjective opinions of the world. Miles position is very clear and extremely modern. We live in a choice based society and he explicitly states that you can choose not to buy his product. The common response is the customer is always right. Well, if so, then Miles should quit, because this customer who is 'always right' thinks he should. It is a cliched and meaningless argument. The only thing it achieves is to upset the people making the game enough to not to want to respond. Talk about the game, by all means, but questioning the business decisions or abilities of those involved in its production must be off limits as it too often descends into personal abuse.

From my own perspective, every direct communique I have had with SI staff has been courteous.I provide a lot of feedback, much of it critical, and pretty much 100% gets a response, even if it is to tell me that SI don't agree with the critique. It doesn't cost anything to be polite and doing so will get you listened to.

[DaveRH]

To be fair wwfan, while your points deal with the events in the recent announcement thread, they have little relevance to the thread at large - general communication with SI and making it better for everyone.

In fact, you're so far off topic I think you ought to give yourself a warning.

[Confused Clarity]

Take the confidence issue for example, where it was highlighted as a flaw even before release, but afaik (and I could be wrong on this), I never once saw SI even acknowledge that it was a problem, at least not on the public forums. While I would never expect someone to come out and say ‘yeah we know, confidence is crap but there’s nothing we can do about it for now’, but I don’t think it would damage their reputation at all to come out and say something like ‘we’re aware that the confidence system has some flaws, but unfortunately it would be too complex to fix this in a patch so we’re hoping to rectify some of these issues for the next instalment of the game’. As long as it was nothing major (like the morale bug from way back) then I think people would be more understanding rather than not hearing anything at all.

That’s not giving away anything to competitors and is letting the userbase know what’s happening wherever possible.

I'd agree with this to be honest.

Most people who buy the game know that it's very much an ongoing work in progress and that it is bound to have flaws. I would be far happier living with the flaws were SI to acknowledge them. I'm not saying they should turn around and say "yeh, sorry, it's crap" but saying "sorry, it's flawed, the issue wasn't spotted until very late on and despite us trying hard, we were unable to get it resolved for this version of the game, but rest assured we are sure we've found where the issue is occuring and are sure it will be sorted for the next version of the game" would be very appeasing.

[Powlay]

Admitting that there are flaws would go a long way to help fans, customers and the forum users understand that things are being looked into for sure.

Even adding them into the known issues thread qould be a start.

[Kriss]

You're off topic really, this thread is about how best SI can respond to the forum, not what they should be saying.

There's a difference.

[glamdring]

I don't see really that acknowledging flaws would be overly beneficial. Anyone who knows anything about programming software knows that every software has flaws in it and that a game whose main purpose is simulation is never going to be perfect so every aspect of the game has flaws, just to a differing degree. Confidence is a new module - everyone knows that and everyone knows its flaws perfectly well. What purpose would be served by someone from SI coming to the forums and confirming what everyone already knows?

As for the being a paying customer argument, I paid for what came in the DVD case and that is all, unless what is stated on the packaging is blatantly not what is in the game. Any feedback at all is a bonus as far as I'm concerned and none is perfectly acceptable.

[N^G]

If SI's lessened interaction with the forums means that the next iteration of FM is going to be far superior to 08, then I'm all for it. I do remember a time however where there was a lot of interation from SI with the forum community and in my opinion the negative reaction to the quality of 08 is what has caused the aparrent shyness.

Now to justify my point: I know a lot of people enjoyed 08, but it was poorly realised compared to what it should have been given the features that it contained, with some really basic errors before the first patches like scottish league fixtures non generation after the first season, stuff that really should never have made the retail version.

So, if 09 is of superior quality to 08, with no out of the box showstoppers as a result of worrying less about community interaction and more about the game, then it's been a good strategy, and I'm sure that is the minimum that people expect of 09 when it is released.

[earmack]

I don't buy this whole 'what if we give our seeeeeeecrets away?' business, unless the answers feature ACTUAL code what secrets are being given away? the only thing this applies to is new features (which are generally announced months ahead of the game anyway). The problem with SI's interaction (lack of) is being highlighted by those people who are SI and those people who are their most ardent supporters in this thread, i.e: 'people are too childish to appreciate our jobs difficulties/the complexities of answering questions'. If you view your consumers so negatively what do you expect them to do in turn???

[Confused Clarity]

You're off topic really, this thread is about how best SI can respond to the forum, not what they should be saying.

There's a difference.

They're really not. The forum get frustrated at the lack of communication. Therefore, any discussion on how they can best respond to the forum is always going to include discussion of the kind of thing that forum members would like as a response compared to the kind of response they currently get that gets them frustrated and riled.

[Powlay]

I don't buy this whole 'what if we give our seeeeeeecrets away?' business, unless the answers feature ACTUAL code what secrets are being given away? the only thing this applies to is new features (which are generally announced months ahead of the game anyway).

What you mean the same as the new features that as of yet have not been released yet for FM09?

Months ahead, probably. But it wont be long till the beta testing takes place. Its not like they can just throw a new feature together next month and get it into the game for Oct.

[earmack]

What you mean the same as the new features that as of yet have not been released yet for FM09?

Months ahead, probably. But it wont be long till the beta testing takes place. Its not like they can just throw a new feature together next month and get it into the game for Oct.

Thats because fm2009 will be released later than every other version of Fm, because of FM Live, which you almost certainly know.

[Confused Clarity]

Thats because fm2009 will be released later than every other version of Fm, because of FM Live, which you almost certainly know.

It won't be that much later and other games SI have released in the past have been later than this one will be.

[Sir_Liam]

Compared to my experiences with EA Sports in the past I've actually found SI to be active contributors on these forums. Certainly in the Bugs forum whenever I raise an issue I nearly always get a response which I appreciate.

As for GQ I think its unrealistic for SI to respond to every thread for several reasons such as they have jobs to do, the same old moans being made in yet another new topic, the overly aggressive attitude of some posters.

Just look at the announcement of the FM2009 announcement thread for a prime example of the aggressive nature of some posters. I could not believe a simple announcement descended into a lot of people having a go at Miles.

I believe that if the average quality of posting increased, with repetition of common moans decreasing we'd get more posting from SI. Certainly in the past I think they may have posted more, but as the forums quality has declined so has the posting.

Finally Dafuge's idea of tagging threads seems a good idea to me. Would certainly keep SI away from some of the repetitive threads on here.

[Powlay]

I dont think Neil (Opening post) or anyone would want SI to answer ever single thread in GQ.

SI on the forums id say are not as active as when i first became a lurker before i registered.

[wwfan]

To be fair wwfan, while your points deal with the events in the recent announcement thread, they have little relevance to the thread at large - general communication with SI and making it better for everyone.

In fact, you're so far off topic I think you ought to give yourself a warning.

I really don't think I am. I'm just looking at the issue from a different perspective. People want SI to give out information or explain things. As soon as the answer isn't exactly what someone wants, and with so many people on the forums there will always be someone feeling ill-done by, that person feels they have the right to say whatever they want about the SI employee. A few other people join in, the thread spirals into idiocy and the SI employee thinks 'why on Earth did I bother. I certainly won't again.'

If you can illustrate that this doesn't happen I'm happy to apologise. However, from where I'm standing, I feel that type of user attitude is the driving force behind SI's lack of communication. It largely comes from a small but highly vocal group of people whose actions and communication style spoil the forums for the vast majority. These actions also seem to be underlaid by the belief that their critiques are of greater intellectual worth than everyone else's and that they are speaking for a significant segment of the fan base, neither of which have any groundings in reality. Once again, I may have mistinterpreted the attitude and I will apologise if there is evidence against me. I admit that my viewpoint is largely drawn from recent events. However, these events are indicitive of the current forum attitude (amongst some people). SI have already taken steps to limit this and if successful their presence in the forums will grow again.

If the perspective remains narrowly focused on SI's behaviour and fails to reflect on one's own, then this thread becomes pointless. SI aren't posting as much becasue of the negative attitudes on the forum. These attitudes become explicit everytime SI post. So they post less. I agee that it would be for the good of the majority for SI to post as much as they used to. In order to do that, then the vocal minority need to control themselves, or be controlled.

[Kriss]

They're really not. The forum get frustrated at the lack of communication. Therefore, any discussion on how they can best respond to the forum is always going to include discussion of the kind of thing that forum members would like as a response compared to the kind of response they currently get that gets them frustrated and riled.

It's not up to the forum members to dictate what SI should respond to, they've made it clear enough so many times that certain things (new features are the best example) won't be discussed by them.

I see two good examples of why SI staff become more and more reluctant to even appear on the forums.

Firstly the release thread and it's hijacking by an insulting minority to belabour Miles with questions which he clearly stated would not be answered in that thread.

Contrary to the apparent popular belief on the forums, you don't buy a piece of Miles Jacobson when you pay £18 for FM, you buy a game not the right to insult anyone who works for the developer or happens to be more satisfied with the product than you.

Secondly the mindless refusal, once again by a minority to accept any other point of view but their own and their continuous failure to report issues in a reasonable and constructive manner but rather to use ridiculously emotive language and insults to any who disagree with them.

[Neil Dejyothin]

Thanks to everybody for all your feedback so far on this. It's an interesting topic and it's been really good for us to hear your thoughts and views.

We appreciate and understand that we need to do a better job managing and maintaining these forums and that's something we're striving towards.

The first raft of improvements included moving to vBulletin, hosting the forums on our own servers and giving them a facelift. Now that these are complete, we hope they've given us a good starting point and foundation to build upon some of the issues discussed here.

[Confused Clarity]

It's not up to the forum members to dictate what SI should respond to, they've made it clear enough so many times that certain things (new features are the best example) won't be discussed by them.

I see two good examples of why SI staff become more and more reluctant to even appear on the forums.

Firstly the release thread and it's hijacking by an insulting minority to belabour Miles with questions which he clearly stated would not be answered in that thread.

Contrary to the apparent popular belief on the forums, you don't buy a piece of Miles Jacobson when you pay £18 for FM, you buy a game not the right to insult anyone who works for the developer or happens to be more satisfied with the product than you.

Secondly the mindless refusal, once again by a minority to accept any other point of view but their own and their continuous failure to report issues in a reasonable and constructive manner but rather to use ridiculously emotive language and insults to any who disagree with them.

I've not said that either of those issues are right. That side of the communication issues has nothing to do with the attack on Miles during the announcement, so why bring it up in response to me?

My point was in relation to BigWigs post about how they privately acknowledged there were issues with the Confidence system but publicly maintained a stance of "there's absolutely nothing wrong with it." I don't see how i'm dictating how SI should respond to their users either.

I was merely giving an example in terms of what would generally be a way to explain to people who have bought the game why there is a problem with a part of the game. People who have spent money (and it is usually more than £18) deserve to have an explanation as to the fact that their product is flawed at the time they have the game and then make the judgement on whether they want to purchase a still playable game and live with the issues that are there or choose not to purchase it.

It is far more frustrating, for me anyway, to see SI deny any issues are there with a part of the product all year, only then, when the new game is announced for them to admit there are issues, but hey, they've been fixed for the new release. It's an annoyance SI could easily alleviate. How anybody could actually think that it is acceptable behaviour from them, I don't know.

[Smac]

Thanks to everybody for all your feedback so far on this. It's an interesting topic and it's been really good for us to hear your thoughts and views.

We appreciate and understand that we need to do a better job managing and maintaining these forums and that's something we're striving towards.

The first raft of improvements included moving to vBulletin, hosting the forums on our own servers and giving them a facelift. Now that these are complete, we hope they've given us a good starting point and foundation to build upon some of the issues discussed here.

As far as I'm concerned, its up to you what you want to do with your forums. IE, there is no 'need'. There are fan desires, there are probably SI desires. Work towards something you want Niel. As otherwise it will manifest as the burden some are trying to put across your shoulders, and I don't think anyone wants that, despite their projections.

Even if you abandon the forums, the community will reform itself in unofficial forums (not to suggest that you are planning that, but for illustration). The product is good and is fun to talk about whether there be official forums or no. Certainly every fan in this thread enjoys hearing from the developers, but we'd survive without it. So take that freedom and make the forums something you want them to be, for yourself and for what you think is possible.

I used to run forums for a Creative Assembly product with a similar # of active members and I do know how heavy the responsibility can seem. Focus on self-organizing principles and things will pan out. Good luck! Break an IP table.

[zimmerquinn]

I can't really decide what to think about these issues. I personally got pretty mad when reading the "announcement of announcement"-thread and saw the way in which some people were behaving; craving attention and being very aggressive. I also personally think that SI is acting just they way they should in these forums and I am happy with their activity here.

Having that said, I still think that "the other side's" arguments are perfectly legitimate and that the FM-community as a whole would benefit from solving their concerns. Everyone, regardless their opinion in these matters would probably prefer a forum with a better atmosphere, right?

I think that this forum's biggest problems, and maybe the reasons why SI isn't as active here as some want them to be, is the repetitiveness and the aggression shown by some users. We can find countless threads dealing with the same questions, some of them in a very unpleasant and aggressive way. Isn't there some way to solve this?

For example; would it work to have a sort of "Don't ask before reading this"-sticky thread at the top of the forum? THe thread could summarize the top issues and threads and provide links to them. Everyone could go in there to se what has been said and be certain that these are the correct threads to go to if you want to take part in a constructive discussion about the game. Also, it would be easier for SI to keep track of these threads. I'm not sure how to implement it, but maybe it could look something like this:

Transfer module thread:

Summary: User Y raised the issue of X. SI replied Z. Discussion and suggestions followed. To read or add something to the discussion, click here.

It would of course have to be well thought through, but I think you would be able to find a working format for this.

One last thing, this hit me last night: doesn't it say a whole lot about the game and it's users that even though some people have massive complaints about the game, even though some are mad and disappointed, noone seems to leave the game for a competitor? Sure, some pessismists will claim that this is because the competitors suck, but I don't buy that. Even with all the complaints some people had with FM2008, the same people are still in this forum day after day waiting for FM2009. That loyalty just has to impress me. So, hats of to an amazing game and to it's extremely loyal users!

[homerjnick]

I honestly think that SI should not release the game and then release a patch to fix the bugs.

If they postpone the game until all the bugs they have caught and release the game then these forums would be less aggressive.

I understand that they need to release the game at a time so as to make money and yes they may miss certain small bugs but in the last 3 releases SI have released the game with some pretty huge bugs that must have been caught by there internal testers but deemed to be fixed in a patch and not in the release build, bad move as it just gets the back up of the consumer.

I really hope lessons have been learned from SI's point of view in this manner and they release FM09 with no issues that stem from FM08 or any major obvious bugs or these forums will get swamped at time of release and I hate that.

I'm still playing FM08 with a passion, for me best game ever but SI, for FM09, please release it when it is ready to avoid the horrendous forum activity on release!

[Asjo]

I'm glad to see that SI are so forthcoming discussing this. SI members have always helped provide some warmth, clarity, perspective and a voice of reason on these forums. When they SI members drop in a thread, people have also seemed so glad about it.

My favourite contributor on these forums has always been Marc Vaughan. I have always been obsessed about the tyniest when playing these game and have therefore also focused on a lot of the quirks that made things happen. Marc has always been great at answering these things - very involved, detailed and open when discussing.

[Confused Clarity]

I honestly think that SI should not release the game and then release a patch to fix the bugs.

If they postpone the game until all the bugs they have caught and release the game then these forums would be less aggressive.

I understand that they need to release the game at a time so as to make money and yes they may miss certain small bugs but in the last 3 releases SI have released the game with some pretty huge bugs that must have been caught by there internal testers but deemed to be fixed in a patch and not in the release build, bad move as it just gets the back up of the consumer.

I really hope lessons have been learned from SI's point of view in this manner and they release FM09 with no issues that stem from FM08 or any major obvious bugs or these forums will get swamped at time of release and I hate that.

I'm still playing FM08 with a passion, for me best game ever but SI, for FM09, please release it when it is ready to avoid the horrendous forum activity on release!

If they waited until all the bugs were fixed, we'd never have a game released at all. No game is bug free. No game will ever be bug free.

I buy the game knowing there will be bugs with the game. I always hope that they won't be too problematic and lately that has largely been the case. However, i would like a bit of honesty and acknowledgement of the issues at the time as opposed to a year later.

[Just-Wool]

I think what people fail to appreciate is there are many forums here which SI are a little more active in. The bugs forum is always checked out by SI, so is the graphical forum.

The devs checking these forums cannot be expected to check all the of the bugs forum, then the sheer volume of posts and flaming in here as well. Say for example there are two posts about the confidence bug, one in the bugs forum, one in here and the guy who works on the confidence module checks the bugs forum where he naturally assumes any issues would be, why would he reply to the one in here?

As far as I am aware, this GQ forum is about questions about the game, general banter about the game and such like, even speculation about future releases. Not for putting bugs in, or graphical issues in, or technical support in. Yet people use it as a one stop shop for everything and expect SI to respond, then get mardy when someone points out "go to the appropriate forum."

I agree with someone who said earlier, a regular Q&A with a SI official would be nice, but that, if it was forum/chat based would probably turn into chaos.

What would actually be better is the podcast or blog that they already do be more tailored to issues in game maybe with/instead of general football chat. Say a 5 minute skit saying, "we know that the forums have been mentioning x, y and z, this is what we have done/what is happening" during the podcast/blog if they resurrect it.

Then again - they do have a "known issues" sticky at the top of the forum which it seems is ignored anyway.

[MunkD]

I'm more of a rader than a poster on these forums mainly due to the type of people who post here and the way the forums are run. There's another developer forum for a different set of games I use to play that aren't really highly moderated but have a good strong team of fans of the game moderating the forum, all reporting to a head moderator, and a good set of rules/regulations set up. The fact there are strict rules is highly advertised and the consiquences of breaking them are set in stone, your warned once then get your posts restricted for a period of time and finally you get banned.

The place use to be like the chaos you find around here but a small group were allowed to have a go at fixing it by the developers and since then the place has had a big 'community' feel to it. Now heres the point that finally gets this post on topic, the developers became a lot more active on the forums after this because they weren't pounced on everytime they made a post. They could answer someones question about this bug, why this wasn't included etc. and answer any follow up questions. They will even help people out if they are having trouble making an addon/mod for the game.

I think if a group of people were to do this here this place could be completely turned around by the time FM09 is out and I would be willing to put sometime in to make it happpen.

[Confused Clarity]

The "known issues" sticky makes no mention of issues with things like the Confidence module. It's a basic sticky to advise of known issues with running the game, not playing the game.

[Just-Wool]

The "known issues" sticky makes no mention of issues with things like the Confidence module. It's a basic sticky to advise of known issues with running the game, not playing the game.

I know, that's what I am saying. It seems to be put up with installation problems, then ignored for the rest of the year. It would be better if it was updated with problems highlighted on here that SI have noticed with status updates and things.

[DaveRH]

I really don't think I am. I'm just looking at the issue from a different perspective. People want SI to give out information or explain things. As soon as the answer isn't exactly what someone wants, and with so many people on the forums there will always be someone feeling ill-done by, that person feels they have the right to say whatever they want about the SI employee. A few other people join in, the thread spirals into idiocy and the SI employee thinks 'why on Earth did I bother. I certainly won't again.'

Sorry, my comment was supposed to be a little tongue-in-cheek rather than a deadly serious point.

Still, you illustrate an area which I agree is a major issue from the point of view of SI. I'd suggest remedying it from two angles: SI only communicate on their own terms - preferably in heavily restricted forums, and moderaters should be far more heavy handed in dealing with the trouble-makers, whether it's those of the "persistantly aggressive" or "persistantly stupid" variety.

As far as I'm concerned, its up to you what you want to do with your forums. IE, there is no 'need'. There are fan desires, there are probably SI desires.

I feel that's an area which everyone loses sight of from time to time. There are not our forums. SI and moderators are actually under no obligation to explain anything at all. We don't put our hands in our pockets (barring buying the games of course) to keep them running.

I think what people fail to appreciate is there are many forums here which SI are a little more active in. The bugs forum is always checked out by SI, so is the graphical forum.

...

Then again - they do have a "known issues" sticky at the top of the forum which it seems is ignored anyway.

Personally, I'd like SI to get more involved in the posts which discuss and suggest specific improvements to the game. A lot of time and efforts goes into those from the users concerned, especially when they go into great detail into how and why things would work the way they suggest. I appreciate that it's more likely that those threads have been read, but feedback would both encourage the user and encourage people to make other well-thought out suggestions.

Re: The known issues thread, it only deals with the technical aspects of the game (installation etc) which isn't actually helpful in the context of discussing the game and its features.

[wwfan]

Still, you illustrate an area which I agree is a major issue from the point of view of SI. I'd suggest remedying it from two angles: SI only communicate on their own terms - preferably in heavily restricted forums, and moderators should be far more heavy handed in dealing with the trouble-makers, whether it's those of the "persistently aggressive" or "persistently stupid" variety.

I think the second needs to come before the first. Currently, SI simply can't communicate on their own terms. Fortunately, the new forum systems allow the mods much more control over abusive members and much less gets missed. That should allow SI to slowly but surely increase their presence.

[Bigwig]

I’ve had the chance to read through this and have a few comments.

wwfan is absolutely correct that the userbase need to change their attitudes if they wan to engage in dialogue with members of SI. However, it’s never going to be as simple as just hoping they’re going to do this of their own accord. The new forums might make a difference, but that brings me on to another point about the interaction…

We were told for months that The Changes© were coming into effect, so everyone better behave because when the changes happen… well just wait and see (kind of felt like the ‘wait until your dad gets home’ speech). Anyway, we moved forums and then…nothing. The forum has a host of new features which people don’t know about, the infraction system came in but it was left to people to figure out for themselves and so on. Is it an unreasonable request to ask for SI to give an update ton the changes? Is this it? Will we see more changes in time, like the Super Mod, Suggestions Forum etc?

As for the structure of the forums, I’m confused over the purpose of GQ (or GD as it is now). Originally it used to be for people asking questions, but now it seems to be for any chitchat, which seems a bit strange. Is it worth looking at dividing it into sub-forums? Something like:

General Questions (ask questions about the game)

General Discussion (talk about the game)

Suggestions (suggestions for later version)

Features discussion (discuss features of the game)

Not that those would necessarily be the right headings, but it would give a bit more structure for people to talk about what they want.

I don’t want to go too much into the rubberducky situation, because it’s probably best left to die out, but all I want to add is that while I can’t condone him badgering Miles, it doesn’t detract from the point that he was asking questions which aren’t being answered anywhere else. Please feel free to correct me, but if there are posts about the forum from SI discussing the confidence system and transfer module then they’re very well hidden, because I just can’t find them.

I’m not saying that SI have to respond, as it’s entirely up to them how they want the forums to operate, but when they’re getting involved in certain parts of the game which is seen as good practice I can’t understand why they wouldn’t want to continue that theme throughout.

I also wouldn’t expect SI to get involved in every thread asking the same old questions, but when there’s a 12 page thread on transfers which has some reasoned discussions and theories, it seems a pretty logical choice to use that thread to talk to the community and anyone starting up new threads gets pointed in that direction.

There was talk about SI being involved in the bugs forum, which is all good if true, but there are parts of the game which are flawed, but are not necessarily bugs. I’ll give a couple of examples…

On the confidence system the board expects you to reach the quarterfinals f the FA Cup. You get drawn away to Man Utd in the third round and promptly go out at the first hurdle. As you haven’t met your goal then the board are unhappy as they don’t take into account the opposition along the way.

In match flow you’re winning the game and want to hold on so take off your main striker for a centre half and switch to a defensive formation. However, while waiting to make these changes the opposition score and when in reality you would just tell the defender to sit back down, there’s no option in FM to do this so you end up making a baffling substitution.

Now I wouldn’t class any of these as bugs, because it seems to be more of an oversight when creating the feature, rather than them just not working as they should, because they are working as they were programmed to. So the question is where can you highlight these and have a good chance of them getting picked up?

There also seems to be the theory that people who want questions answered will only accept them if they’re the answers they want to hear, which I’m not sure I agree with. Personally, there are a host of questions which I would like to ask on how I see the game should be, but if SI respond and say ‘thanks, but we prefer to do x, y & z’ then I’d be happy enough with the answer, even if I disagree with it (can’t say that for others though).

[Confused Clarity]

I'd tend to agree with the last point there - Some people won't accept the answer unless it's "yes, sorry, we were clearly wrong to do it this way, you are right". But i think they'd be few and far between.

If it could be argued that it should work in that way and SI can give a reasoned response as to why the game works in a certain way, most people, i'm sure would be happy with it.