Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 11
06-30-2010, 03:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monopolist
I see no reason why GMTyshen needs to lock pretty much ALL OF THE THREADS that criticize Cryptic's move? I thought only Funcom/Age of Conan would do such things. I guess I was wrong?
But do we need 10 threads about the same thing. that is what I saw when she was locking threads. it's because we have more then one thread on the same topic.

also it could be, because she is new.... maybe what she needs to do is combine threads instead of closing them.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 12
06-30-2010, 03:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monopolist
Thanks for specifying the rules of conduct?

Have you not read any of the threads locked by GMTiyshen yet?

Most of the threads never had any personal bickering/trolling/flaming. They were mostly threads about STO fans showing outrage over recent actions regarding "exclusives" and other equally STO loving fans, defending STO's decisions.

I see no reason why GMTyshen needs to lock pretty much ALL OF THE THREADS that criticize Cryptic's move? I thought only Funcom/Age of Conan would do such things. I guess I was wrong?
Exactly like the one where people were asking for compensation since the galaxy x people were compensated we want this to go away so we'll just lock it up
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 13
06-30-2010, 03:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monopolist
Thanks for specifying the rules of conduct?

Have you not read any of the threads locked by GMTiyshen yet?

Most of the threads never had any personal bickering/trolling/flaming. They were mostly threads about STO fans showing outrage over recent actions regarding "exclusives" and other equally STO loving fans, defending STO's decisions.
But doesn't this fall under the definition of...
Quote:
"Flaming" is defined as posting content that is deliberately hostile. "Spamming" is defined as repeatedly posting unwanted content. "Trolling" is defined as posting content that is deliberately intended to provoke a vehement response from other users;
???
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 14
06-30-2010, 03:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zodi-emish
But do we need 10 threads about the same thing. that is what I saw when she was locking threads. it's because we have more then one thread on the same topic.

also it could be, because she is new.... maybe what she needs to do is combine threads instead of closing them.
True. Or perhaps it might be the combination of both. Nonetheless, it would've been nice if GMTyiyshen closed duplicate threads and refer us to one with quote on quote, "more constructive feedbacks," as opposed to locking most of the threads that criticize Cryptic. I hope that GMTiychen understands. We only criticize because we care greatly about the game =(
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 15
06-30-2010, 03:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monopolist
True. Or perhaps it might be the combination of both. Nonetheless, it would've been nice if GMTyiyshen closed duplicate threads and refer us to one with quote on quote, "more constructive feedbacks," as opposed to locking most of the threads that criticize Cryptic. I hope that GMTiychen understands. We only criticize because we care greatly about the game =(
oh I agree, and as I said I think it is because she is new, and she is still learning how this community works.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 16
06-30-2010, 03:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grouchy.Otaku
Did you ever read the 'Rules of Conduct document???

Rules of Conduct | Star Trek Online Official Site:
You may want to email cryptic and atari reagarding their policy. The comments posted in game and on the forums by GM's, Dev's, Mod's and other cryptic employee's; it is clear that they "Troll" and "flame" these forus with their policy changes, snied comments, and simple belitting of customers.
I think that they forget that we ARE customers AND do pay money for acces to their products. As cryptic is quick to note that "we are a communnity", communication needs to go both ways. Partial answers, off topic answers, poor explinations and sneid remarks do not constitute communication. This has been an ongoing issue since day 1. it has only marginally improved. Atleast now we get a sentence or two of some sort of explination and 3 posts later, the thread is closed.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 17
07-01-2010, 06:44 AM
We have to criticize in order for things to change. I don't like to complain, but I also don't like being put in a position where I have to complain. I also don't like supporting a company that engages in unethical behavior just to make a quick buck. This whole subscription and micro transaction model was an experiment that I am now opposed to. It's completely out of control and makes me wonder how long before STO goes free to play.

I also think a lot of these threads could have been avoided if Cryptic had communicated its intentions sooner and been much clearer. It's so transparent to me that if you use words like "exclusive" and "unique" there's an implication there that they will in fact be unique and exclusive. It's like they want it both ways, use these promos to move a lot of product and once that's been milked dry, put those items up for sale separately for even more money.

I know I tend to repeat myself in these posts but until I get a satisfactory explanation or even just an apology I'm going to keep on complaining and I encourage those of you with the same issues to do the same.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 18
07-02-2010, 10:56 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DES_SNIPER View Post
You may want to email cryptic and atari reagarding their policy. The comments posted in game and on the forums by GM's, Dev's, Mod's and other cryptic employee's; it is clear that they "Troll" and "flame" these forus with their policy changes, snied comments, and simple belitting of customers.
I think that they forget that we ARE customers AND do pay money for acces to their products. As cryptic is quick to note that "we are a communnity", communication needs to go both ways. Partial answers, off topic answers, poor explinations and sneid remarks do not constitute communication. This has been an ongoing issue since day 1. it has only marginally improved. Atleast now we get a sentence or two of some sort of explination and 3 posts later, the thread is closed.
Actually, it's gotten WORSE over time. They used to be more open and communicative at the beginning.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 19
07-02-2010, 08:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack_Armstrong View Post
Actually, it's gotten WORSE over time. They used to be more open and communicative at the beginning.
Today is a prime example of your post. The Galaxy X became available on the C-Store. People discovered that you cannot unlock the ship for all accounts. Cryptic places a simple message that states the Galaxy X has been removed from the C-store due to a bug that is currenly being fixed. (NOTHING FOLLOWS)

It wasnt until hours later that Cryptic announces the Galaxy X is once again for sale in the C-Store.
During those few hours, the doom threads started with all of them saying that the Galaxy X was a rip off since you could only unlock it for one account. People's issue with this is reasonable since it costs $25 (2000 CP).


Is it really so hard for Cryptic to say "We are having an issue with the Galaxy X. There is a bug that only allows the ship to be unlocked for one account. We have removed the Galxaxy FOR THE TIME BEING until we fix this issue. We will inform everyone when the bug is fixed. Thank you, Cryptic."

Is that really so hard?

Is it Cryptic policy to be CRYPTIC?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 20
07-03-2010, 12:02 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DES_SNIPER View Post
Today is a prime example of your post. The Galaxy X became available on the C-Store. People discovered that you cannot unlock the ship for all accounts. Cryptic places a simple message that states the Galaxy X has been removed from the C-store due to a bug that is currenly being fixed. (NOTHING FOLLOWS)

It wasnt until hours later that Cryptic announces the Galaxy X is once again for sale in the C-Store.
During those few hours, the doom threads started with all of them saying that the Galaxy X was a rip off since you could only unlock it for one account. People's issue with this is reasonable since it costs $25 (2000 CP).


Is it really so hard for Cryptic to say "We are having an issue with the Galaxy X. There is a bug that only allows the ship to be unlocked for one account. We have removed the Galxaxy FOR THE TIME BEING until we fix this issue. We will inform everyone when the bug is fixed. Thank you, Cryptic."

Is that really so hard?

Is it Cryptic policy to be CRYPTIC?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
Ifpeopel could learn to use the search function it would help but the second they think something is wrong they post instead of checking first
Reply

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 04:33 AM.