The Letter is up

[Airlea]

No, they could easily tell us what they are working on without giving any dates.

They haven't been giving us dates. This is the problem. People like you jump the gun and think that when they say "sometime mid-June," that means "June15th!!!!!!!"

They give us an approximate time frame for when they think something may be done. Yoshi always stresses the fact that these timelines are subject to change as the only real deadline they have is when everything is up to par.

[Biggs]

Why would they get our hopes up with even telling us what they are working on? Your logic is that trying to set a deadline is bad because it gets our hopes up to only be dissapointed when they delay it "Even though they said it could be delayed"

So by following this line of logic it would be better if SE just stood up and said "Game will get better, eventually. peace out bro"

Setting deadlines helps them as well as a team focus on working hard to hit those deadlines they set out for us. Unfortunatly it wont always be the case but I'd rather see some dates than none.

You sure do like telling me what my logic is without having actually reading what I said. I am not saying they shouldnt set deadlines, deadlines are crucial to game development and I understand this. But the statement "mid-june at the earliest", whether we want it to or not, is going to make some people believe they said "mid-june you all will be getting a patch". If you need testiment of this, simply scroll up and read the 1000 dissapointed replies above mine. Is it fair to them? No. Is it at all accurate of what was said? Again, no its not. But it doesnt change the fact that people read what they want to. When they make statements like saying "the plan is to have a consistent set of patches for the next few months that will improve the game", then tell people that you are aiming to have an update in june (like they have every month before june) it sets an expectation.

My point was, they are better off not giving any dates or guestimates of dates until they have them locked in and are officially releasing something.

[Jynx]

How can people be dissapointed when they were never givin a date to begin with "Mid June" is pretty broad and they even stated that it was "At the earliest mid june" So anyone who is dissapointed needs to learn how to read.

[Aistaraina]

while(mode== activeMode && target == hostile)
{
Action(classDefaultAttack);
Wait(fiveSeconds*classWeaponSpeed);
};

See what I did there D:

Yep. You created an infinite loop that would crash the client. Grats.

[Lerris]

My point was, they are better off not giving any dates or guestimates of dates until they have them locked in and are officially releasing something.

How can people be dissapointed when they were never givin a date to begin with "Mid June" is pretty broad and they even stated that it was "At the earliest mid june" So anyone who is dissapointed needs to learn how to read.

Exactly. This is what they've done, is NOT given us an exact date. Slippage of a couple weeks for testing the dungeon is actually a pretty good result, given that software development usually takes double the expected time.

[Airlea]

the statement "mid-june at the earliest", whether we want it to or not, is going to make some people believe they said "mid-june you all will be getting a patch".

Yeah, about that. Hopefully they don't procreate before they get Darwin'd out.

[Gramul]

Why did it take so long to do? Well one can only assume it's reasons not fully under there control. Could be the suits upstairs, could be that people don't understand how much work it takes to actually change the battle system, could be a number of things.

I dunno. Maybe they could tell us.

[Naylia]

Software development time is almost always under-estimated. Humans are naturally optimistic when it comes to their ability to complete a task.

Saw an interesting study while I was in school - 80% of people think they are better than average (when polled about pretty much their skill at anything).

[Jynx]

I dunno. Maybe they could tell us.

Why would they tell us any of those reasons? Here is the reality of what those responses would be.

The suits are making it hard: Your all fired
The team is small so it takes a long time: Your all fired
Changing the game is a massive undertaking: "Community" You guys just suck and are slow
Technical explination: I didn't understand that you all suck.

The team can't win for loosing if they try to explain what takes them however long to make the updates. We just have to assume they are all actually working, if we can't believe that then I suggest you look at why your still posting here. Nothing SE could say to us would appease the masses, so why should they bother at this point in time?

[Gramul]

The suits are making it hard: Your all fired
The team is small so it takes a long time: Your all fired
Changing the game is a massive undertaking: "Community" You guys just suck and are slow
Technical explination: I didn't understand that you all suck.

You're jumping to conclusions based on conjecture.

Square has made a mistake and they want to rectify it. If it means a part of them look bad or insufficient, that's one of the consequences they have to deal with to regain trust. It also lets everyone know what they have to work on so they can improve as a company. Admitting they have communication problems was a start and no one got sacked for it.

I just feel Square could stand to be a little more open with communication so we can stop pretending we know what's taking them so long.