Some Info about Community Relations

Originally Posted by Silly Lily

I would like to know if Andrew Patrick has ever been on a top guild's vent?
Has he played with these guilds that have been around from the start?
Does he play with those who are just starting out?
Does he know who in the community is really knowledgeable about this game?
Does he know the basics to forming a build for gvg?
Does he know how gvg works?
Does he know that pvp isnt limited to RA and TA and that every single pvp arena is different from one another?
Does he even UNDERSTAND why soul reaping needed a fix?
Was Andrew present during Jade map testing?
Was he present during test AT's?
Does he gvg, HA, TA, and RA daily?
Has he done all this from the start?
Does he know what the metagame is without having to read about it?

The CR I want for pvp should know those basics. If you dont play this game like the more dedicated pvp-ers in this community then how do you expect to gain some credibility?

Originally Posted by Silly Lily

Please dont just read the latest page in a thread, there are TONS of posts in here that are very specific. I am leaving Gaile out of PvP since supposedly shes PvE CR, i wouldnt know how she handles that. I assume she is at least very knowledablge about the pve world.

Originally Posted by lyra_song

ZoS' position on the ladder is irrelevant to Andrew's own PvP experience.

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

MistressYichi, I understand your thoughts, and I do see what you are suggesting. You say, "While it is not your job to hold our hand and inform us everytime your team decided to pick up a pencil and write down an idea, it IS your job however to inform us about the status and development of said ideas that are knowingly going to be inplimented into the game," but allow me to comment:

We are the messengers, but we do not create the messages. We cannot provide more information than we are given, and we cannot say more than we are permitted to say. It's not for lack of trying – I ask often "Can I tell players this information?" But the answer may range from "Sure" to "No" (which is not common) to "It's premature to talk about it because we are not sure if or when [this change] [that balance update] [those features] will be implemented."

We've found over time that saying "We are definitely working on that feature," can come back to bite us when the feature takes longer than the players think that it should. (Or, sometimes longer than we said it would. ) A case in point, if you were around long last year, was reconnects. Reconnects was on the boards before release. We made it clear we were planning it, and that we acknowledged that it would be a very vital part of the game. But by talking about it, it became a focus, and players began the "You promised…" comments. Another example is the PvE-only skills, which as you just saw in the Update Notes included more than Sunspear skills after all. They were promised, but the time that they took caused distress, and they became a focal point for frustration. Maybe—and I imagine this won't be a popular idea—we give too much information. What if we'd worked on those without mentioning it—like we did the storage update—and surprised everyone? It's an interesting idea, don't you think?

Your example of the ATS updates is a good one, because both things happened. We talked about it coming, but we also had to delay it. We definitely shouldn't have talked about that until later, and we should have given more information—and a more accurate timeline—whenever one became available. I think that it would have been better to say "We're going to delay this three months" instead of "We're delaying a few weeks" several times. (But in fact the "few weeks" was more accurate, because we really didn’t know that it would take as long as it did.) Anyway, I agree we didn't provide very good information or give a very accurate timeline, and I'll be sure to keep that particular incident in mind and share it in the future, because we can use that as an example of deciding how and when to give information.

The designers decide what changes will be made, when they will be made, and when they can be talked about. We (CT members) can make sure the designers are kept up to date on player concerns, can check back for more information later, and most of all can look forward to being able to provide more info or to give a firm release timeline when it's given to us, and when we're given clearance to share it.

Nytestalker: I understand what you're asking, as well, but posting takes time—more time than reading and assessing posts. Designers could spend time responding to forum posts while they develop the game, it's true. But doing one really does come at a cost to the other. And to which post, of thousands, should the designer respond in a "once a week" situation? And how to not offend the other posters who don't get a response?

Constructive comments welcome!

Originally Posted by Andrew Patrick

I can understand frustration, I can understand concern, I can understand irritation, but I cannot understand the disrespect.

Originally Posted by Andrew Patrick

Even at times when you have the apparent majority on you side on the forums, that is a skewed statistic since (A) Less than ¼ of players in online games generally post on forums and (B) the people with complaints are the ones posting while the people who are perfectly content are in the game, playing it and enjoying it.