Ok, so to clarify what I meant. I am not telling the devs how to make the game. They decide what to implement, they write the code, they sit all night to make it work, they make the graphics, etc. The main idea of my post, is to propose a system where our opinion's quality is higher. As VicenteC wrote: there are many players' opinions, and many of them are contradictory or of low quality (for example proposals that change the game so much, that they would be impossible to implement).
Frogboy & Co. decided to listen to their customers (much more than any other company I've heard of), so I want our suggestions to be as good as possible. My biggest fear about the current system (if I am right), is that many of our suggestions may be about things that for sure won't be in the game. In other words: we talk about turn-based (HoMM-style) turns, while devs think about real-time battles.
The last clarification. We have a farmland. There are lords (devs), who wish to listen to workers (our) opinion. Lords ask: "What should we plant?". Workers answer: "Strawberries!", "Potatoes!", "Onion!", "Apple trees!", "Let's breed some chickens!" (That would mean: "Screw Elemental, you should make GalCiv 3!"). After a few weeks workers get an order to plant only orange trees...
How many of them proposed any of fruit trees? 25%
How many of them suggested one of the 3 trees lords were thinking about? 15%
How many workers proposed a meaningful suggestions? 12%
How many suggestions were taken into consideration? 5%
How many proposals were part of the final decision? 1%
Assuming that there are 10,000 "Walls-of-text" on this and other forums, we end up with 100 useful (implemented) suggestion. That's quite a success, in my opinion. The problem? I doubt that there will be anywhere near 10k suggestions, more like 1k. 1% * 1000 = 10...
The last, final, definitive clarification (in this post ):
Gamer wants to play a game ---> Gamer goes to a shop/visits a e-shop page ---> Gamer buys a good game*
- Game that he can run on his machine.
- Game that has an acceptable price.
- Game that is of high quality (graphics, music, balance, etc.).
- Game that he feels is fun.
All humans need money & All game developers are humans ---> Game developers (devs) need money ---> Devs find a producer ---> Devs try to write a good game
How does a dev write a good game? Two scenarios.
Dev takes a look at the best-selling games ---> Dev copies big chunks of successful games ---> Dev makes a few changes, so that his game won't be called a X's clone* ---> Dev adds some boobs ---> Dev releases the game ---> Game is a failure/success
Dev takes a look at good/innovative games ---> Dev chooses the best ideas of these games ---> Dev wonders about these ideas and decides which to implement ---> Dev adds he's own (and some of user base's) ideas to the game ---> Dev releases the game ---> Game is a total failure / game becomes a new standard
OK, screw the lengthy explanations. You don't need player suggestions to make good games, but it never hurts to listen to their opinions, especially when there are so many players that can give valuable opinions.