We're happy to introduce the Star Trek Advisory Council, where we speak to members of the Star Trek and Star Trek Online community to learn more about what our fans want from the game. Read on to learn more.
Why should we have any more say in the matter than anyone else? LTS is not the end-all-be-all of the community and the whole thing has been blown up out of proportion due to some of Cryptics other odd ideas.
Maybe because they are playing the game for life, Think about it
My concerns with this new development don't seem to be the concerns of the majority so I thought I should post a little.
My issues with this are that it has more potential to be harmful than helpful. You want more input from more sources; good, makes sense, I like it. The issue however is that if nothing changes, visibly or otherwise, a lot of people will think that it serves no purpose and get upset. If aspects of the game start going in a direction that a lot of players don't like, people will get upset. It honestly seems like a no win situation and dropping it on us almost out of nowhere just riles a lot of people up besides.
I guess you could say my concerns are more community based than game based. Up to now I've never questioned my confidence in Cryptic and haven't been let down. So I suppose I'm saying I'd like to see where it goes, but will we 'see' it? If someone posts on the forums then anyone can read it and join in. If you make an exclusive group like this, will the average player see it?
I understand that you need not run a site or any such thing to join the group but you do still have to be approved, and so it is still a sort of private club. This breeds jealousy and possibly animosity (when it isn't even due). One of the central themes in Star Trek was always equality and this goes against that in a lot of players eyes. From the studio point of view it might be just another group to hear from, but from a standard player point of view they're sort of being given more attention by being posted about by name in the announcements.
Overall, I'm concerned for the community. I know sometimes it can be silly and even quite irate, sort of like a group of adopted children that you can never please so I can't help but think about these things.
There's been a lot of "explaining" but the page on the website still very much describes this "Council" (a word that implies some sort of authority or representation) as a group that the company is tapping into for input into game design and plot. Regardless of assurances that their opinion will not be taken as superior to that of little old me, I don't see how that can be. If you believe them to be "ambassadors" then they supposedly have the voice of many and thus they SHOULD have more weight than my one little voice. Also, consulting people in a formal capacity always lends more credence to what they have to say. And if they're only representing their "readers" who is to say that represents the player base? And if not, then how does it supplement the data of what players want?
I feel like a lot of "packaging" is going on without really taking the time to address our concerns. No matter how you slice it, a few individuals have been hand-picked to have a stronger (or at least more formalized) voice in the development of the game. It was not done openly or with transparency and does not bolster or support community or confidence in the process...
EDIT: I do appreciate the compiling of the major questions and answers. It clarifies a few things, but I still have the concerns listed above...
Thank you for that thread Destra. I've, unfortunately read all 100+ pages on this topic today, but your compilation makes it much easier to find answers! Also, your input in the thread is nice to hear. Thank you so much for this. Any word on why the shutupwesley blogger no longer appears on the council (or the internet)?