Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="sheadunne" data-source="post: 6100178" data-attributes="member: 27570">You are correct, the role of "devil's advocate" is essential in meetings to avoid the common problem of group think.  The role should never be taken by the person in the leadership position, and it is certainly not a role anyone should be playing in PR and Customer Services. And I doubt that's what Mike is doing. I imagine that what we're hearing and seeing is the same conversations that were going on behind closed doors during every edition design. We asked to see this stuff, so we're getting it, whether we like it or not. Transparency is a two-edged sword. We're going to be seeing differing opinions from every member of the design team on any particular design decision. If we weren't seeing it, wouldn't we still be speculating? Personally I don't like the method they're using for playtests. I think it's a poor way to develop the game. I am certainly not seeing any meaningful organization to the playtest system, nor am I seeing any end game. What we seem to be getting are design notes, which I don't find particularly helpful or meaningful.</blockquote>