We need better comunication with the Community team

[Vhailor]

You say we shouldn't try to silence the people that don't like the content, but isn't that exactly what you are doing to those of us who do like it?

If we don't like it, we are correct, but if we do we are blind fan boys who will take any crap the devs shovel into us, did I get that right?

I think it's more that arguing in support of Eureka is simply more subjective.

From an objective standpoint, Eureka has problems. A number of them. So people who dislike the content - myself included - have an easy basis upon which to make logical arguments for feelings, while also providing constructive improvements. For individuals on the other side of the coin, however, really all there is to say is that "I like the content despite X, Y, and Z."

It's absolutely fine to say that, of course, but it's a vastly more subjective position than those criticizing Eureka. So it can be quite tricky to inject peacefully into most of the threads floating around on the forums. At best, it comes off as sort of an anecdotal note that doesn't really sway a topic; at worst, it comes off as white knighting, usually because someone stated their opinion in a manner that implicitly denies all of the objective concerns people were highlighting previously.

TL; DR: I don't think there's any widespread effort to silence the voices of those who like Eureka. I do think, however, that threads aimed at constructive criticism or venting are the wrong places to post those opinions. It's not that a position of support is invalid; it's that there's very little objective basis on which to support Eureka, whilst there's a lot of objective problems.

[Valkyrie_Lenneth]

I think it's more that arguing in support of Eureka is simply more subjective.

From an objective standpoint, Eureka has problems. A number of them. So people who dislike the content - myself included - have an easy basis upon which to make logical arguments for feelings, while also providing constructive improvements. For individuals on the other side of the coin, however, really all there is to say is that "I like the content despite X, Y, and Z."

It's absolutely fine to say that, of course, but it's a vastly more subjective position than those criticizing Eureka. So it can be quite tricky to inject peacefully into most of the threads floating around on the forums. At best, it comes off as sort of an anecdotal note that doesn't really sway a topic; at worst, it comes off as white knighting, usually because someone stated their opinion in a manner that implicitly denies all of the objective concerns people were highlighting previously.

TL; DR: I don't think there's any widespread effort to silence the voices of those who like Eureka. I do think, however, that threads aimed at constructive criticism or venting are the wrong places to post those opinions. It's not that a position of support is invalid; it's that there's very little objective basis on which to support Eureka, whilst there's a lot of objective problems

.

I'm just tired of people overblowing the amount of time required, and telling those of us who enjoy it that our experiences are wrong and that we are white knights for accepting "garbage no content diadem 3.0 trash, etc."

Could we use more communication? Sure, but we used to get quite a bit more, and as the NA/EU communities pounced on every little miss-translation and changed plan, they started communicating less, and only where there was a confirmed change.

You see this a lot in people signatures, especially relating to housing. This community just does not let go of any perceived slights, or as I've seen mentioned somewhat frequently, "slaps in the face from the devs" over things. It's no real wonder they only come to us when things are real bad to offer bits of info, or when things are confirmed to be added in the next patch/hotfix.

You will not get a plan immediately from the devs on Eureka's improvements yet, not likely until we get closer to 4.3, as anything they say now will be picked over until the final day, and then anything that was mentioned that isn't there will be in rage threads blaming the devs for lying to them. It's happened before.

[Vstarstruck]

I'm just tired of people overblowing the amount of time required, and telling those of us who enjoy it that our experiences are wrong and that we are white knights for accepting "garbage no content diadem 3.0 trash, etc."

and I am tried of people posting flame war bait where it does not belong. You had no reason to post that first post in my thread other then to start flame war with me.

For the time it takes to do something that is very subjective, it takes too long in one sitting, everyone that likes it misses this basic point. I do not care about how much time it takes to complete, now this is not a like vs dislike diadem 3.0 thread, it is supposed to be about devs communicating with us.

The devs did lie to us with this diadem 3.0, they said it was going ot be new, innovative, and solo friendly. None of these where met despite delays, and we got empty content. We did not get the investment in this, we should not be waiting at this point because of the delays. I defiantly expected something more refined after all those delays. We got the start of the relic quest very late, sacrificing content in SB for this, and we still got nothing from it. So trying to go off "it is only beta phase it will improve" is hard to swallow.

For the housing situation, yes they should did better with that too.

[Valkyrie_Lenneth]

and I am tried of people posting flame war bait where it does not belong. You had no reason to post that first post in my thread other then to start flame war with me.

For the time it takes to do something that is very subjective, it takes too long in one sitting, everyone that likes it misses this basic point. I do not care about how much time it takes to complete, now this is not a like vs dislike diadem 3.0 thread, it is supposed to be about devs communicating with us.

I was simply responding to other posts in this thread. I also amended the reply you quoted just not to be on topic, as there is a character limit.

[Ruf]

Could we use more communication? Sure, but we used to get quite a bit more, and as the NA/EU communities pounced on every little miss-translation and changed plan, they started communicating less, and only where there was a confirmed change.

That is a comment with many examples as a counter argument,I have stated examples before & I did not even want to post examples to begin with.That statement Valkyrie just said there sounds false to me, as for years there was a countless amount of 0 communication & ignorance on every side & aspect of this whole thing.I am simply stuck without being able to state examples as this will go bad if I do + ppl are apparently tired of reading what I have to say so I wont make it worst by bringing up 100more examples.

[Valkyrie_Lenneth]

That is something I could use sooooooooo many examples to counter argument,just like I have done before upon something else & I did not even want to post examples to begin with,but I wil say this:That statement Valkyrie just said there sounds false to me, as for years there was a countless amount of 0 communication & ignorance on every side & aspect of this whole thing.I am simply stuck without being able to state examples as this will go bad if I do + ppl are apparently tired of reading what I have to say so I wont make it worst by bringing up 100more examples.

Dev tracker only goes back to 1/18/17 and there are 500 posts stored there. Or rather, it may be limited to the last 500 posts made by the dev/community team, I am not sure which.

Safe to say they do in fact, communicate, maybe not as often or with as much info as people want, but it is there.

[Remedi]

TL; DR: I don't think there's any widespread effort to silence the voices of those who like Eureka. I do think, however, that threads aimed at constructive criticism or venting are the wrong places to post those opinions. It's not that a position of support is invalid; it's that there's very little objective basis on which to support Eureka, whilst there's a lot of objective problems.

No offense but those who like Eureka have pointed out the problems of the zone as much as us that don't like it.

[Vhailor]

I'm just tired of people overblowing the amount of time required, and telling those of us who enjoy it that our experiences are wrong and that we are white knights for accepting "garbage no content diadem 3.0 trash, etc."

Could we use more communication? Sure, but we used to get quite a bit more, and as the NA/EU communities pounced on every little miss-translation and changed plan, they started communicating less, and only where there was a confirmed change.

You see this a lot in people signatures, especially relating to housing. This community just does not let go of any perceived slights, or as I've seen mentioned somewhat frequently, "slaps in the face from the devs" over things. It's no real wonder they only come to us when things are real bad to offer bits of info, or when things are confirmed to be added in the next patch/hotfix.

You will not get a plan immediately from the devs on Eureka's improvements yet, not likely until we get closer to 4.3, as anything they say now will be picked over until the final day, and then anything that was mentioned that isn't there will be in rage threads blaming the devs for lying to them. It's happened before.

A couple of responses to this.

(1) The community team gets paid to have thick skin. While I'm not condoning abusive language or the like, receiving criticism for a variety of little things is an objectively poor reason to wall off community outreach efforts. Housing is a terrific example; the development team, to this day, literally years after implementing Housing, has not managed to resolve player concerns. Not only has this surely cost SE subscriptions they might otherwise have kept, but they can't even find out how many - because there isn't any feedback process. Is this really the proper approach to take?

(2) We don't need an immediate plan from the developers, but we need to feel heard. Right now, many of us don't. There's absolutely no reason why SE cannot make intentional efforts to build a formalized feedback process so people at least feel like their opinions are being listened to.

Finally, as I said - there is a very fine line between white knighting, and voicing approval of objectively unfinished content. This line becomes especially blurred when you're voicing support for content in threads that are predominantly focused on its (objective) shortcomings. You're certainly within your rights to be tired of it, but it's very natural for people to lash out at minority opinions that are voiced for no apparent reason. It's akin to a Red Sox fan rooting against the Yankees in a New York bar. Are you within your rights? Sure. Is everyone going to be pissed at you and give you dirty looks? Yeah, most likely. Same principle applies here, unless posters are exceedingly careful.

No offense but those who like Eureka have pointed out the problems of the zone as much as us that don't like it.

And I very rarely see those types of posts run into problems. There's a massive tonal difference between 'personally, I like Eureka well enough, but I agree that X, Y, and Z are problems and really should have been fixed' and 'I think Eureka is great, if you don't like it don't play it.'

The latter is almost guaranteed to generate anger and irritation.

As an aside: why on earth would I have taken offense? Nothing in my post remotely indicated that I denied this. I actually took pains to identify the difference between saying one likes content while acknowledging its faults, and just saying the content's fine.

[Ruf]

Snip

I wish I was able to express myself as well & as civilized as you,that is for sure.

[Vstarstruck]

A couple of responses to this.

(1) The community team gets paid to have thick skin. While I'm not condoning abusive language or the like, receiving criticism for a variety of little things is an objectively poor reason to wall off community outreach efforts. Housing is a terrific example; the development team, to this day, literally years after implementing Housing, has not managed to resolve player concerns. Not only has this surely cost SE subscriptions they might otherwise have kept, but they can't even find out how many - because there isn't any feedback process. Is this really the proper approach to take?

(2) We don't need an immediate plan from the developers, but we need to feel heard. Right now, many of us don't. There's absolutely no reason why SE cannot make intentional efforts to build a formalized feedback process so people at least feel like their opinions are being listened to.

Finally, as I said - there is a very fine line between white knighting, and voicing approval of objectively unfinished content. This line becomes especially blurred when you're voicing support for content in threads that are predominantly focused on its (objective) shortcomings. You're certainly within your rights to be tired of it, but it's very natural for people to lash out at minority opinions that are voiced for no apparent reason. It's akin to a Red Sox fan rooting against the Yankees in a New York bar. Are you within your rights? Sure. Is everyone going to be pissed at you and give you dirty looks? Yeah, most likely. Same principle applies here, unless posters are exceedingly careful.


And I very rarely see those types of posts run into problems. There's a massive tonal difference between 'personally, I like Eureka well enough, but I agree that X, Y, and Z are problems and really should have been fixed' and 'I think Eureka is great, if you don't like it don't play it.'

The latter is almost guaranteed to generate anger and irritation.

As an aside: why on earth would I have taken offense? Nothing in my post remotely indicated that I denied this. I actually took pains to identify the difference between saying one likes content while acknowledging its faults, and just saying the content's fine.

Completely agree.

For Remedi, that is why my yankee self is staring at this red sox fan you are responding to. It is fine to like something, but then heads are turned when people are making comments that do not belong. You are just trying to simmer down the flames and really props doing so well, I wish I found the words to do so as this is my thread. Remedi's reply was out of place and didn't need to be said. Yes it is true that some people that like it point faults, that is however not your point. Your point is while doing that, people that like it tend to say 1. need play it more, 2. If you dislike it you are *insert insult* (I mean take a look in that pure praise thread, the first reply to it was fame bait to who dislikes diadem 3.0) This also goes back to Valkyrie_Lenneth's first post in recent here that started this mess. It simply did not belong. Any issue they disagree with should be pointed out in the thread that it takes place in, as this is meant purely talking about Dev communication it does not belong here. (I am happy you got them off such course though and I really hope no one tries to continue to being defensive and trying to reply to this)

For everything you said on communication I really have nothing to add, that is the root of the problem. Maybe people feel like they are not being heard and we are not seeing steps taken to improve the situation. If we take housing for example, Why wasn't purchase restrictions implemented on the release of Shirogane? Are the plans, if any putting housing in foundation? considering it for the future? general plan layout of fixes? It does not have to be exact dates but I like a general idea of fixes they are working on so i can say hey what about x, y , and z? they seemed bigger then some issues here and may of been forgotten.

There is 2 reasons why I do not feel heard and maybe others. 1.We do not see the results reflected well in changes in the game and 2 they simply are not talking to us.

Also I really like to know, I really like to know why this diadem 3.0 situation happened. Ho can they release a beta state on something with this many delays? How can this place be released with so many bugs and problems when being bare bones? (fate train nothing else) it is not like there is something amazing here. WoW has been pulling CRZ for years, and we are not talking one small zone. The WHOLE open world pulls all the data center servers in CRZ zones, only the main cities are not CRZ. THEN! when you invite people from different servers you are instantly transferred to the server with the highest members of the party, you see this when you are trying to .. (basically wow version of PF) When you are trying to do rank PvP and you see people phase in and out because you are seamlessly transferred to a different server. So diadem's ability to invite people and send tells and such is not really stunning or a tech achievement.

Now that I think about this, is this from dealing with "1.0 limitations"? don't you think it is time to rebuild the games core? All this wasted time and resources trying to build around these limitations is too much and at some point the development team needs to admit building around these limitations is taking more time and resources then it would take to fix the core.