My dear 'a player',
Thank you for your insightful and well-written account of our total lack of
interest - be it in accepting ideas from players, or altering code when it's
found to not work as well as desired. I must, however, point out that
player-supplied ideas do get implemented, even though you appear to believe
in a logical fallacy with respect this matter. The full list, since the
implementation of the system, can be found at
http://www.outland.org/design/ . Ideas supplied before the tracking came
on-line in 2003 obviously won't be listed. A random handful of player ideas
that have been implemented include
* Configurable channel colours
* Group diversity xp bonus
* Buddy channel
* Funeral lore
Moreover, a large chunk of the Avatar world is supplied by the player base,
usually through the area competitions.
As for your praise of our rejecting ideas, please consider the following:
* We have an end-goal vision for where the game engine should be,
* We have finite time - ideas can either be rejected with a multi-page report
for each idea, or rejected succinctly,
* Some ideas have been presented in different guises multiple times before,
and rejected multiple times before (and some with detailed reasons).
I must say, I do not see you praising the fact that we accept ideas just as
succinctly - surely if we are too brusque in manner of rejections, we are too
brusque in the manner of acceptions?
If Immortals respond, they do so of their own will and impetus, not because
Snikt orders it to be so. This may also be contrary to your reality, but
such is life.