[Reminder] Are you ready to cry again? (2° Wave of Alpha invites tomorrow, 3 dec.)

[Spectre]

didn't read the link did you? Here it is again, and highlighted.

That's exactly what they said.

Greetings everyone,

I know the alpha tester selection process is a hot topic, and while I cannot disclose the selection process, I do want to pass on some additional details to help you better understand the situation. To ensure a broad scope of testing for the Alpha Test, we did accept users with specific types of machines, setups, connection types, ISPs, geographical locations and other configurations that we need to test that may, or may not, meet every requirement on the application. Alpha is an important first step for testing and we need to make sure we have a wide breadth of users testing it.

We appreciate your understanding, and we look forward to further expanding our selection in the future. In fact, there are a few Yoshida posts that we're working on today that go into further detail on this.

It's not a theory, it's a quote.

[vax]

didn't read the link did you? Here it is again, and highlighted.

That's exactly what they said.

Well... SE it says that Alpha is only for NA, EU and JP, but i know some people from Uruguay (EU account) and Chile (NA account) that got an invite. So... i started to believe that is pretty random.

[Nix]

Well... SE it says that Alpha is only for NA, EU and JP, but i know some people from Uruguay (EU account) and Chile (NA account) that got an invite. So... i started to believe that is pretty random.

I don't think the person's actual address comes in to play here, just the type of account^^. Say for instance I had a Japanese account and I was living in Iceland (I know, nuts right?), I am pretty sure I'd be eligible for the Japanese Alpha based on my account type and not my place of residence.

I hope this makes sense!


Quick edit! - Due to time differences between Japan and the USA I wouldn't be surprised if we only saw one wave of invites as when the invites go out on say the 7th, it is still the 6th over here in the states. (Though I hope this is not the case! I would like to see more people get in that want to test!)

[vax]

I don't think the person's actual address comes in to play here, just the type of account^^. Say for instance I had a Japanese account and I was living in Iceland (I know, nuts right?), I am pretty sure I'd be eligible for the Japanese Alpha based on my account type and not my place of residence.

I hope this makes sense!


Quick edit! - Due to time differences between Japan and the USA I wouldn't be surprised if we only saw one wave of invites as when the invites go out on say the 7th, it is still the 6th over here in the states. (Though I hope this is not the case! I would like to see more people get in that want to test!)

Yes, i know now that is about the account, but if you look at the Bayohne post:

To ensure a broad scope of testing for the Alpha Test, we did accept users with specific types of machines, setups, connection types, ISPs, geographical locations and other configurations that we need to test that may, or may not, meet every requirement on the application. Alpha is an important first step for testing and we need to make sure we have a wide breadth of users testing it.

For SE, there are ocean down of North America, i don't think they want to look of countries from South America for the alpha, this is why i think it's a little random.

[Abriael]

didn't read the link did you? Here it is again, and highlighted.

That's exactly what they said.

It's not a theory, it's a quote.

I did read it. And nowhere it says "we had to accept people that didn't have an active account". That snippet could be referring to anything and everything.

The little (actually enormous) flaw in your reasoning is that for most of the application period users with inactive accounts could not even apply. They would be bounced as soon as they logged in with an "your account is inactive, you can't apply" message.

Even assuming that the opening of the application to inactive accounts has been intentional (and it's a rather big assumption), when you do that kind of thing and change the rules you *need* to communicate it.

Not only because of the fact that active subscribers may rightfully feel cheated out of something that was initially reserved just to them, but also because a lot of inactive subscribers tried to apply initially, were bounced, and then obviously never retried, because no one actually told them that they could.

I have quite a few friends that tried to apply, got refused because their account was inactive, and never tried again. When they learned that other people with an inactive account got accepted, they obviously weren't anywhere happy about it.

Even assuming that your theory about them intentionally opening to inactive accounts is somewhat founded, their communication on the matter has been extremely lackluster, and when you deal with customers communication and transparency are always the key.

Doing this kind of things on the hush hush never works too well. If people notice, they won't be happy, and on the internet people *always* notice.

[Spectre]

I did read it. And nowhere it says "we had to accept people that didn't have an active account".

Why does it have to spell that out when most reasonable people would be able to get that from the "may, or may not, meet every requirement on the application" part?

The little (actually enormous) flaw in your reasoning is that for most of the application period users with inactive accounts could not even apply. They would be bounced as soon as they logged in with an "your account is inactive, you can't apply" message.

Even assuming that the opening of the application to inactive accounts has been intentional (and it's a rather big assumption), when you do that kind of thing and change the rules you *need* to communicate it.

So, they didn't mean to let people without active accounts apply? That just makes them incompetent, not so sure how I feel about that... But making that big assumption, how would you have handled it then?

Even assuming that your theory about them intentionally opening to inactive accounts is somewhat founded, their communication on the matter has been extremely lackluster, and when you deal with customers communication and transparency are always the key.

Doing this kind of things on the hush hush never works too well.

It really does amaze me how you don't see your responses as over-reacting.

I wonder how well it would have worked out for them to annouce that same quote BEFORE first round of acceptance emails went out. How many people would have assumed that they were going to get shafted from the get go? Managing that would have been way easier then addressing the few people after the fact that got bent out fo shape right?

What I'm most curious of, since we are talking about lies, and such...

Honestly, if you would have gotten an invite in the first round, would you still be championing this cause for all those other people that the company has so greiviously insulted with this?

[Abriael]

Why does it have to spell that out when most reasonable people would be able to get that from the "may, or may not, meet every requirement on the application" part?

You're making an assumption. It may or may not mean that.

So, they didn't mean to let people without active accounts apply? That just makes them incompetent, not so sure how I feel about that...

Incompetence is a big word. It may very well have happened that when they allowed everyone in the game for the dalamud event that also inadvertantly unlocked alpha application. Mistakes happen, and even competent people make them.

But making that big assumption, how would you have handled it then?

It's not really an assumption. The fact that for the largest part of the application process inactive accounts could not physically apply at all is indeed a fact. Any number of people tried and can easily confirm it.

That's really pretty simple. When you make a mistake the best way to address it is simply a "we made a mistake, sorry about that. It won't happen again".

Owning to a mistake and making amends is normally the simplest and easiest solution.

It really does amaze me how you don't see your responses as over-reacting.

Really? I'm not here insulting people or ripping my hair off. I'm offering some criticism in a rather mild way, mind you. Unless you see any kind of criticism as an overreaction.

I wonder how well it would have worked out for them to annouce that same quote BEFORE first round of acceptance emails went out. How many people would have assumed that they were going to get shafted from the get go? Managing that would have been way easier then addressing the few people after the fact that got bent out fo shape right?

If it was intentional, that should have been announced as soon as the rule was changed. Giving people notice upfront is definitely the less damaging way as opposed to letting them find out by themselves.

Honestly, if you would have gotten an invite in the first round, would you still be championing this cause for all those other people that the company has so greiviously insulted with this?

Now who's exaggerating? No one talked about grevious insults. What SE did is a PR blunder. No one here is feeling insulted. Criticism doesn't imply that.

And yes, this "cause" is simply a matter of principle for me. My criticism comes regardless of me participating into the alpha or not. You're very free to disbelieve it, of course.

[Tomoken]

You're making an assumption. It may or may not mean that.



Incompetence is a big word. It may very well have happened that when they allowed everyone in the game for the dalamud event that also inadvertantly unlocked alpha application. Mistakes happen, and even competent people make them.



It's not really an assumption. The fact that for the largest part of the application process inactive accounts could not physically apply at all is indeed a fact. Any number of people tried and can easily confirm it.

That's really pretty simple. When you make a mistake the best way to address it is simply a "we made a mistake, sorry about that. It won't happen again".

Owning to a mistake and making amends is normally the simplest and easiest solution.



Really? I'm not here insulting people or ripping my hair off. I'm offering some criticism in a rather mild way, mind you. Unless you see any kind of criticism as an overreaction.



If it was intentional, that should have been announced as soon as the rule was changed. Giving people notice upfront is definitely the less damaging way as opposed to letting them find out by themselves.



Now who's exxaggerating? No one talked about grevious insults. What SE did is a PR blunder. No one here is feeling insulted. Criticism doesn't imply that.

[Abriael]

It's funny how some people on the internet can't resist the temptation to be massively childish.

Much less funny to see how this forum is becoming more and more similar to 4chan and somethingawful. I guess it's a matter of boredom, some might need to widen their horizons and find some other games to play.

It'll be educational, no doubt about that.

[Scherwiz]

It's funny how some people on the internet can't resist the temptation to be massively childish.

Much less funny to see how this forum is becoming more and more similar to 4chan and somethingawful. I guess it's a matter of boredom, some might need to enlarge their horizons and find some other games to play.

You must be new to the internet. WELCOME!