Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 111
04-02-2010, 04:00 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stormstryke
What a crock! We give feedback in the forums. You are using it to hide and just listen to the few.
Oooo-kay. That's completely untrue, Stormstryke.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 112
04-02-2010, 04:01 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivan-Cryptic View Post
But what if we want to know more from people who don't use the forums? What if we want to hear from Star Trek fans who haven't played STO or don't like STO? What if we want to hear from editorial? Should we not read their reviews until they post on our forums?
this is one of the most frightening things i have read in a while (about games) please for the love of all that is holy, don't chance the mythical next cutomer! SOE did this look at them look at the model of failure. Listen to us listen to those whom support your game & company. If you can satisfy us, we can bring in more subs.

Talk to the user through in game means that way you can reach the greatest majority possible of the community, if they can't be bothered to come to the forums they aren't likely to be hitting up hte podcast page.

Talking to those that dislike the game is like asking Terrorists for guidance on the future of america. Its a waste of time and will likely just alienate the people you already have. Stick with the customers you have not the ones that don't want you.

As for editorials well why waste your breath most of what they write is junk anyway.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 113
04-02-2010, 04:01 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jshign
Other than asking every single one of us in game in the middle of a pitched battle what we think of the game it will NEVER be able to get everyone, nor will it be anything other than forum based.
I (and a few others I think) suggested they add feedback surveys for missions that you would see and fill out (optionally) when you completed a mission. I went as far as to say they should have this on Tribble (test server) only, to ensure that the new in-test content is good (for at least a sub-set of the gamer pop. A nice litmus test you could say.

As with all my posts, it was ignored. I think I'm on their permanent ignore list (I don't think they like my constant jabs at their documentation, lol).
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 114
04-02-2010, 04:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivan-Cryptic View Post
But what if we want to know more from people who don't use the forums? What if we want to hear from Star Trek fans who haven't played STO or don't like STO? What if we want to hear from editorial? Should we not read their reviews until they post on our forums?
You should always take the criticism to heart, and see what you can do. But some people will just not like the game ever. That's how it works. If they don't like it, there's nothing you can do to change it. Even with additions and improvements, at heart it will still be the same game. The most you can hope for is that those improvements will bring those on the fence back home. And you know what? Those on the fence seem to be the ones frequenting the forums.

As to those who haven't played, you should really *not* take their views on the game they haven't played into account. Just focus on improving it, and eventually word of mouth may bring them around.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 115
04-02-2010, 04:02 PM
I have been desperately trying to get a response from Cryptic regarding important issues with dozens of posts in several threads, over a long time period and I was far from alone.
The platform was there already, the pleas were being made but ignored. I don't see this as a route to Cryptic, I was already at the destination. I see it as a road block, a detour, an obstacle, something more between me and the destination.
You won't talk to me, why would I think you would talk to someone else or that they would talk to you on my behalf, and say what I want to say, ask what I want to ask. You wouldn't believe how patient I and other people have been here.
It's too late for me and for a lot of people.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 116
04-02-2010, 04:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by exyle View Post
If you are afraid to post on forums, you're position should not be heard, AT ALL.
The only reason I am not afraid to post on the forums is I've got a Celtic argumentative streak that makes Tellarites look passive and agreeable. It is amazing how many people out there won't set foot in the forums because of the vitriol, anger, rants, raves, personal attacks, personal animosity, and down right vulgar behavior goes on in the forums. They're afraid that their ideas and feedback will get drowned out by the din of voices engaging in one or more of the above. If I was less argumentative and less stubborn, I wouldn't be on this forum at all even if I had good ideas to pass along.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 117
04-02-2010, 04:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by GT01 View Post
I propose that, instead of naysaying, we, the players and forum members, propose to the devs and mods to lets us throw some questions at these so-called representatives, to try and get a feel for what's really going on here. Kind of like those "ask Cryptic" questionaire sessions, but these guys instead. See if they're good enough to be worthy of helping represent the playerbase's interests.
Not a bad idea.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 118
04-02-2010, 04:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivan-Cryptic View Post
I doubt that, actually. If we do hear from a select few, it will become very apparent. It's not like we're going to hide what people tell the Advisory Council and what the Advisory Council tells you and what it tells us. It's all going to appear somewhere... Facebook, forums, third-party pages, our site. There'll be no secrecy or politicking here.


I understand that and I approve, but it's kind of not true. I mean, our community managers, GMs and CS reps all speak for you, right? No company can afford to have every one of its employees directly engage the entirety of its user base. It's just not possible. So... Companies assign reps in community, customer support, press relations, etc. We're certainly no different.

Really, the Advisory Council is just another way of getting more feedback from players. And maybe we'll hear from Star Trek fans who don't like or don't play STO? Who knows?
I feel for you. It's like talking to a brick wall sometimes isn't it? :p

I also agree with a post a few back. The release is very badly written. It sounds like a very exclusive council that will not represent everyone. Some took it as if there word means nothing unless they get invited to the council or they know one of these reps.

You could have gone the fleet/house route instead. Letting players know that there will be a council for a rep from there fleet to be a part of. So info that each player cares about will be heard. Maybe it should be re-written or another explanation release should be posted.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 119
04-02-2010, 04:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jshign
Do you mean the majority of players who are not on the forums posting feedback or the majority of the players who are on the forums giving feedback? I mean, i hear time and time again how such and so speaks for "everyone" when they post a rant on the forums, but they certainly don't represent me, and don't represent the players who don't come in and post on the forums. I'd almost be tempted to say that this might end up being a very nice shield from the majority of the minority of the people who are on the forums to do nothing but seethe, rant, rave, yell, attack and try to destroy the game.
Once Cryptic chooses this direction it means they aren't going to listen to anyone not "in the circle" so to speak, be it someone ticked off and ranting OR someone with a well constructed, well supported idea or argument.

Your "representatives" will represent you. Whether they actually do or not. Truth is, even they won't be listened to, which is why the handpicked representatives will end up being those so exalted in their own officially recognized self importance they won't be able to realize they aren't being listened to, since Cryptic is using the "SWG Senate" model for the "council".

When by accident someone picked for it actually has the idea they actually represent something and TRY to actually do it they will be quickly dispatched, banned, silenced, etc, and replaced with a member of the former group. See Tux's saga as a "senator" for SWG. He plays STO. He actually TRIED to do what his job was claimed to be (what SOE always claims when they brag to the press about how they have "player representation) and got that treatment.

Fact of the matter is, I already give this idea a BIG vote of "No Confidence". It hasn't worked, and it certainly hasn't worked in the form that Cryptic is proposing it in. Starting with people not nominated or voted on by we, the players, is starting off with two strikes against it, and your hitter is at the plate, facing Nolan Ryan in his prime, and doesn't even have a bat...
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 120
04-02-2010, 04:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivan-Cryptic View Post
No one pays anything.

Guys, what is up with all the left-field assumptions?
That was my response to the guy mentioning the part about them being sites for revenue like that matters.
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 03:50 PM.