Career Officer
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 48
# 861
02-15-2013, 04:29 PM
Well, I know I feel guilty for handing my money over freely and allowing myself to be held on by promises of a true Star Trek game that was about the fans first and foremost, and not about the money.

At least I can think back to the first few months of the game when it really felt that way for a little while.
Lifetime subber and former STO player from when it didn't suck.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 771
# 862
02-15-2013, 04:31 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by stoleviathan99 View Post
It means you have somebody or a team of somebodies who does feng shui on the customer experience by being solely dedicated to it. You're describing service providers with an inflexible level of demand, relatively little competition, and high barriers for entry when you talk banks and airlines... although that hasn't stopped many of them from looking at least somewhat beyond the production (ie. "if we build a product or service, they will come") mentality.

Here's a nice summary of the eras, though it uses different terms than I'm used to:


By and large, Cryptic's approach skews towards emphasizing production and tacking on advertising after the fact. They DO use datamining but they use it to coral people back towards expectation rather than in an anticipatory, relationship-building way.

Think for a second about something like Amazon or even airlines. They tailor offers and pricing to the user and generally try to shift the offer to the user. They pursue a sale they think is likely when they put any effort into it. Disney is, overall, a good example of a marketing company. For people who live leisurely lives, Disney targets them frequently while with people on fixed incomes, they may try to get with a more affordable vacation package.

They aren't trying to get the consumer to buy the product their way. They find aspects of the product that appeal to a target market and try to align the consumer with the right offer.

Things like the customer script at Starbucks or those "company values" manuals at service chains are also great. People like it when you ask their name, when you write their name. A good customer experience is like a spell. Subtle. Customers shouldn't necessarily consciously realize they're being influenced by it and may deny being influenced by it. I think it's easy to dismiss this stuff as a cynical Gen X/Millennial but I think it's a profound artform that works and doesn't really require customers believing that it works. There is a wealth of behavioral experiment literature on what works.

And I'll give you an example, a very small one, where Cryptic got one little aspect of this right. The fleet contribution sound effect. There were podcasters and players raving about this, some describing their reaction to those rapid pupil dilation cuts from "Requiem for a Dream." I have a feeling it was almost an afterthought from Cryptic but it greased the gears for a gameplay activity tremendously. That's a really micro example and fairly mechanical but you do it longterm and strategically.

PvP, The Foundry, Klingon play, DOffs, Fleet Actions, STFs... These are all in effect offers or value propositions which, once bought into, are used as a center for soft sells on the C-Store.

Let me toss an article out there:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marketing_management

How much do you think Cryptic does this when designing game systems?

For example, take the Foundry or PvP:



My feeling is that they probably only employed datamining in any kind of systematic way. Anything else boiled down to polling friends and fleetmates.



How much do you see Cryptic doing this? I think Cryptic's iterative approach winds up being a lot more employee driven and hobby-like, to a point where they neither meet needs nor do they do so profitably. (In fact, I think the profit generated is often markedly divorced from the needs being met. To a point where their approach might often be effectively using profit -- whether measured as money or activity -- to underwrite unprofitable game design elements -- whether measured in popularity or revenue generated.)

In general, how much do they manage their brand and the brands they license? How often does anyone say, "What does this do to customer satisfaction?" I'd bet the IDEA comes up but that they don't have anyone primarily concerned with that... and because they don't, it's what gets compromised when the chiefs meet and Al is pushing systems and Jesse/Kestrel are pushing story and the art leads are looking at their workloads. It's a missing voice in the room in terms of having a dedicated voice and because it's a missing voice, it gets compromised.

You need people educated in customer satisfaction strategies to make that a co-equal focus with systems, art, content, etc. If nothing else, to wear a different hat and say, "How will this impact the player?" But ideally armed with behavioral psychology, pertinent questions, and studies and analysis based on more than just staring at numbers looking for patterns.

Above all, asking, "How do we make the game that people want to play?" and not, "How do we make people play the game the way we want them to?"

The minute you start deciding how you want players to play the game, you've lost.

Does that mean letting them exploit clickies? Heck, no. But a clickie exploiter has a desire. You find the desire and exploit it with a strategy. Maybe they like repetitive action. Maybe the activities they enjoy playing are not linked to or consistent with the rewards they want.

Somebody playing a clickie wants something. Dilithium. A weapon. A ship. A costume. And they want to use that in the game somewhere. Maybe they want to spend more time PvPing or more time posing in their new costume on the fleet starbase. Maybe they want to play a big Foundry mission but want to get the reward they think the mission deserves first so they can play that mission with the new guns they want. Maybe they only want to play at length once a month. And the clickie lets them do what they want to do when they get around to playing and lets them avoid doing what they don't want to do.

Every exploiter wants something. You find out what it is they want and offer it attractively in a legitimate way. Shutting them down is just herding them like cattle towards things they don't want to do. You miss out on figuring out what they DO want to do when you just close an exploit.

Designers should not be determining how people play but should be figuring out how to serve the ways people DO want to play.
Well written, but will anyone at Cryptic pay attention to any of it?
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 208
# 863
02-15-2013, 04:31 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by rinkster View Post
As I understand metrics are king.......

857 posts

36190 views

In less than 24 hours


And, apparently, still no answer from Cryptic.

You've had a full working day, how are we supposed to not view this as contempt for the player base?
You're forgetting 735 comments and 28623 views in the thread that got closed
Career Officer
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 953
# 864
02-15-2013, 04:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by icerider1963 View Post
In answer, Black Ops Armada is 5 fleets of 500 players. 2500 in total. we use a full fleet chat channel and vent servers. Guess what, so far not a single player that I have heard supports this change.
I wouldn't even bother replying to someone whose analytical abilities are so slight they can seriously posit the idea that a small fleets drain server capacity through creating extra starbase instances when in reality a fleet of 5 will probably only create an instance once ever week or so if that, I had a fleet of 8 before Season 7 and I think I was the only one who even visited the base more than once in the entirety of season 6 mainly because T1-T3 offers nothing worth turning up for on a regular basis.

He's either a troll or someone with low critical thought capacity
Survivor of Romulus
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,459
# 865
02-15-2013, 04:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by gr4v1t4r View Post
You're forgetting 735 comments and 28623 views in the thread that got closed

Plus the ones that were merged with both threads.
There was a sig here, but I gave up. Thanks {REDACTED}
Career Officer
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 953
# 866
02-15-2013, 04:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by supremeheretic36 View Post
Well, I know I feel guilty for handing my money over freely and allowing myself to be held on by promises of a true Star Trek game that was about the fans first and foremost, and not about the money.

At least I can think back to the first few months of the game when it really felt that way for a little while.
Tell me about it, same here... the unprofessional and frankly amateurish way everything has been handled since I started playing this game really is quite astonishing... I only started playing in August... I wasn't even around for the Year of Hell (2011).
Ensign
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 6
# 867
02-15-2013, 04:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by stoleviathan99 View Post
It means you have somebody or a team of somebodies who does feng shui on the customer experience by being solely dedicated to it. You're describing service providers with an inflexible level of demand, relatively little competition, and high barriers for entry when you talk banks and airlines... although that hasn't stopped many of them from looking at least somewhat beyond the production (ie. "if we build a product or service, they will come") mentality.

Here's a nice summary of the eras, though it uses different terms than I'm used to:


By and large, Cryptic's approach skews towards emphasizing production and tacking on advertising after the fact. They DO use datamining but they use it to coral people back towards expectation rather than in an anticipatory, relationship-building way.

Think for a second about something like Amazon or even airlines. They tailor offers and pricing to the user and generally try to shift the offer to the user. They pursue a sale they think is likely when they put any effort into it. Disney is, overall, a good example of a marketing company. For people who live leisurely lives, Disney targets them frequently while with people on fixed incomes, they may try to get with a more affordable vacation package.

They aren't trying to get the consumer to buy the product their way. They find aspects of the product that appeal to a target market and try to align the consumer with the right offer.

Things like the customer script at Starbucks or those "company values" manuals at service chains are also great. People like it when you ask their name, when you write their name. A good customer experience is like a spell. Subtle. Customers shouldn't necessarily consciously realize they're being influenced by it and may deny being influenced by it. I think it's easy to dismiss this stuff as a cynical Gen X/Millennial but I think it's a profound artform that works and doesn't really require customers believing that it works. There is a wealth of behavioral experiment literature on what works.

And I'll give you an example, a very small one, where Cryptic got one little aspect of this right. The fleet contribution sound effect. There were podcasters and players raving about this, some describing their reaction to those rapid pupil dilation cuts from "Requiem for a Dream." I have a feeling it was almost an afterthought from Cryptic but it greased the gears for a gameplay activity tremendously. That's a really micro example and fairly mechanical but you do it longterm and strategically.

PvP, The Foundry, Klingon play, DOffs, Fleet Actions, STFs... These are all in effect offers or value propositions which, once bought into, are used as a center for soft sells on the C-Store.

Let me toss an article out there:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marketing_management

How much do you think Cryptic does this when designing game systems?

For example, take the Foundry or PvP:



My feeling is that they probably only employed datamining in any kind of systematic way. Anything else boiled down to polling friends and fleetmates.



How much do you see Cryptic doing this? I think Cryptic's iterative approach winds up being a lot more employee driven and hobby-like, to a point where they neither meet needs nor do they do so profitably. (In fact, I think the profit generated is often markedly divorced from the needs being met. To a point where their approach might often be effectively using profit -- whether measured as money or activity -- to underwrite unprofitable game design elements -- whether measured in popularity or revenue generated.)

In general, how much do they manage their brand and the brands they license? How often does anyone say, "What does this do to customer satisfaction?" I'd bet the IDEA comes up but that they don't have anyone primarily concerned with that... and because they don't, it's what gets compromised when the chiefs meet and Al is pushing systems and Jesse/Kestrel are pushing story and the art leads are looking at their workloads. It's a missing voice in the room in terms of having a dedicated voice and because it's a missing voice, it gets compromised.

You need people educated in customer satisfaction strategies to make that a co-equal focus with systems, art, content, etc. If nothing else, to wear a different hat and say, "How will this impact the player?" But ideally armed with behavioral psychology, pertinent questions, and studies and analysis based on more than just staring at numbers looking for patterns.

Above all, asking, "How do we make the game that people want to play?" and not, "How do we make people play the game the way we want them to?"

The minute you start deciding how you want players to play the game, you've lost.

Does that mean letting them exploit clickies? Heck, no. But a clickie exploiter has a desire. You find the desire and exploit it with a strategy. Maybe they like repetitive action. Maybe the activities they enjoy playing are not linked to or consistent with the rewards they want.

Somebody playing a clickie wants something. Dilithium. A weapon. A ship. A costume. And they want to use that in the game somewhere. Maybe they want to spend more time PvPing or more time posing in their new costume on the fleet starbase. Maybe they want to play a big Foundry mission but want to get the reward they think the mission deserves first so they can play that mission with the new guns they want. Maybe they only want to play at length once a month. And the clickie lets them do what they want to do when they get around to playing and lets them avoid doing what they don't want to do.

Every exploiter wants something. You find out what it is they want and offer it attractively in a legitimate way. Shutting them down is just herding them like cattle towards things they don't want to do. You miss out on figuring out what they DO want to do when you just close an exploit.

Designers should not be determining how people play but should be figuring out how to serve the ways people DO want to play.
My god Jim! He's a freaking genius, not a doctor!!!!!!
Career Officer
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 953
# 868
02-15-2013, 04:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by captainoblivous View Post
Plus the ones that were merged with both threads.
Add that to the 100,000's of views for issues with Season 7's introduction and all the other things Cryptic have messed up (Doff grinder etc).
Career Officer
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,303
# 869
02-15-2013, 04:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by gr4v1t4r View Post
You're forgetting 735 comments in the thread that got closed
You're absolutely right.

There can't be many subjects that have attracted this many comments in such a short time.

If we look at the front page of the Federation News Network, this thread alone has outstripped every other one, in far less time.

While a few have supported the changes as is, the vast majority have opposed them vehementally.

There have been numerous, thoughtful suggestions for a fix, it is clear to me that the vast majority of those who oppose this decsion are trying to be thoughtful and constructive.

However, the only 'official' responses were very early on....page 2 IIRC.

Branflakes has not posted even once.

A community moderator did post once, but his statement was fact checked into oblivion is minutes.

Even the standard 'we have/are/will read everything' post has not been issued on this thread.

This is not how to do damage control.
Career Officer
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 953
# 870
02-15-2013, 04:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by icerider1963 View Post
My god Jim! He's a freaking genius, not a doctor!!!!!!
A genius wouldn't need so many words, it's simple.

Find out what people find fun, create something that is fun, make money.

Don't act like and ass and try to force people to enjoy something because you want to make it a certain way and to hell with what paying customers want.
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:46 AM.