Sorry SE, but endgame won't work if you don't fix something.

[carlos777uk]

SE's silence basically says "we're aware of this but cannot solve the problem, either due to the amount of resources it would take or because we simply don't have a clue".

In business launches like this are called a MINIMUM VIABLE PRODUCT. You are aware of the shortcomings of your product but await feedback from your customers as to what they perceive as being most needed as additional features or fixes. Often this feedback is completely different from what the in-house team thought would be important.

Problem being, you have to follow it up with real action - and quickly. Designate the resources to achieving these goals or the product remains MINIMALLY VIABLE. Like now. I've just cancelled my subs and won't re-sub unless this is fixed.

[Goreth]

Problem being, you have to follow it up with real action - and quickly. Designate the resources to achieving these goals or the product remains MINIMALLY VIABLE. Like now. I've just cancelled my subs and won't re-sub unless this is fixed.

They have a few more months to take action, but soon competition will start to get fierce in the MMO market. If they choose to do nothing... well I think the "make the game more like FFXI or 1.0" will suddenly become a lot more relevant.

[Randalthor]

SE's silence basically says "we're aware of this but cannot solve the problem, either due to the amount of resources it would take or because we simply don't have a clue".

In business launches like this are called a MINIMUM VIABLE PRODUCT. You are aware of the shortcomings of your product but await feedback from your customers as to what they perceive as being most needed as additional features or fixes. Often this feedback is completely different from what the in-house team thought would be important.

Problem being, you have to follow it up with real action - and quickly. Designate the resources to achieving these goals or the product remains MINIMALLY VIABLE. Like now. I've just cancelled my subs and won't re-sub unless this is fixed.

MVP, or Minimally Viable Product is when the product and engineering teams KNOW what their customer needs are at a minimum, either through customer studies, feedback, etc., in order to use a product that solves the most critical use cases. It's not a tool to validate whether what you launched is correct or not.

What SE did, or seems to have done, is build a product that THEY thought their customers wanted/needed, and built that functionality to rush a product out of the door. Some things are successful, some are not. That is not how you perform product management.

What I agree with you on is that there are things like this that should have been fixed in a fast follower build (usually 2-3 weeks after the initial launch). It just seems that SE doesn't think that this is a problem, or strongly believes it's "by design".

[Astarica]

What SE did, or seems to have done, is build a product that THEY thought their customers wanted/needed, and built that functionality to rush a product out of the door. Some things are successful, some are not. That is not how you perform product management.

I think there was an article by Ralph Koster just on this subject, where he basically says it doesn't matter what you think the customer wants, if the customer tells you that's not what they want you don't get to argue against them. While it's true a dev probably does know better than an user on a general level, if enough users feel strongly about something to dev they're wrong, then the dev is indeed wrong. If all your users want the wrong stuff, then you better deliver the wrong stuff.