This is all good and well, except they have explicitly stated more than once that they will not answer to negative feedback.
Not to insults or uncivil discussions, mind you, but to "negative feedback", because they like to feel good about themselves and what they do. Which is completely understandable, if it wasn't for the fact that if you only answer to "positive feedback"... you aren't answering to feedback at all, but to compliments. And that is an entirely different thing.
My interpretation of "positive feedback" is "constructive", not "Praise".
IMO negative feedback basically boils down to either attacks over a decision or just strait up saying "I don't like this! REMOVE IT!". What useful information can you get from that? Honestly... nothing other than "do not want". But it doesn't answer the question of how to improve or what was done right. And unfortunately sometimes when Cryptic asks for clarification... the interaction tends to turn into something like this:
Cryptic: Ok we heard your feedback. What DO you want?
Response: NOT THIS!
Cryptic: What do you want?
Response: NOT THIS!!!!!!
Literally nothing of worth in terms of feedback other than venom.
Constructive Feedback, on the other hand, highlights what they did right and what needs improvement. So... using the same example:
Cryptic: Ok we heard your feedback. What DO you want?
Response: Well... X was alright, but Y could use some work.
Cryptic: Oh? Tell us more.
Response: *lists off things that could be improved*
Cryptic: *takes notes*
Postive doesn't have to mean praising them for a good job no matter what they do. Constructive Feedback can be just as positive while pointing out things that they could have done better, or was not liked as much. And it gets the message across without the vitriol.
I cannot, for the life of me, why those making these comments think it is helpful. In summary it's basically they are too busy & too cheap to make a game, they feel no obligation to make a game, because they are making a money off the franchise's Good Will. CBS clearly is not paying attention to the deliberate wearing down of good will.
None of this news is new or shocking. But seeing it all in one place genuinely leads me to believe my eleven years in this product has hit shelf date. I'm speaking strictly for myself. I've lost all connection to the game since CBS put new releases behind a paywall (I have too many streaming services as it is), and now it appears we will not see new content moving forward that appeals to the traditional foundation audience that has actual loyalty to the ST universe.
It's probably just as well. I recently found a number of single players games that are quite good, but I found myself thinking it wasn't a "perpetual" world platform so my time had no "future value". I deluded myself. That's on me.
Reading a community relations manager complain that he has a real job besides community relationships was quite stunning. Their own forums are too useless to them, and reddit is too much work. I suppose that leaves sandbox podcasts and giggling inappropriately in staff meetings.
I cannot, for the life of me, why those making these comments think it is helpful. In summary it's basically they are too busy & too cheap to make a game, they feel no obligation to make a game, because they are making a money off the franchise's Good Will. CBS clearly is not paying attention to the deliberate wearing down of good will.
None of this news is new or shocking. But seeing it all in one place genuinely leads me to believe my eleven years in this product has hit shelf date. I'm speaking strictly for myself. I've lost all connection to the game since CBS put new releases behind a paywall (I have too many streaming services as it is), and now it appears we will not see new content moving forward that appeals to the traditional foundation audience that has actual loyalty to the ST universe.
It's probably just as well. I recently found a number of single players games that are quite good, but I found myself thinking it wasn't a "perpetual" world platform so my time had no "future value". I deluded myself. That's on me.
Reading a community relations manager complain that he has a real job besides community relationships was quite stunning. Their own forums are too useless to them, and reddit is too much work. I suppose that leaves sandbox podcasts and giggling inappropriately in staff meetings.
I've streamed Discovery, Picard and Lower Decks without paying a streaming service, anything is possible with a Kodi or Firestick, to think that I'm one of the few people that knows how work both Android Boxes and VCRs as well some tech stuff in between early 90s and 2020s, god I love Machines more than Humans, I may not be able to repair technology but at least I know how it works.
> On topic: > > A lot of good information from the reddit. I wish they would do more info dumps like that. also I think this little nugget... > > "Keep in mind that internet posts like forums and Reddit typically account for something like 2% of the player base: Comments that you see online are not a representative sample. " > > was probably one of the more important things to be said. because especially here on these forums, people think they're more important than they are, and its good to force some humility on here. Other wise, good info on how game development works. Thanks for posting OP.
This brings up a very interesting point that I haven’t seen asked. If they’re not fans of forums and Reddit since it’s only a small fraction (2%) of the player base, then how should we as consumers/players express our thoughts and opinions to you Cryptic that will matter to you? I’m sure you don’t want to sift through a billion emails but I’m also positive in thinking that you need player feedback in some form. So what works for you? What method(s) are you encouraging from the other 98% of the player base that matters to you more? How are you compiling and reaching out? You don’t want (respect?) the 2% that takes their time to keep your game relevant by discussing the pros/cons yet you have no real credible way of attaining the 98%. Makes me wonder…….
This is all good and well, except they have explicitly stated more than once that they will not answer to negative feedback.
Not to insults or uncivil discussions, mind you, but to "negative feedback", because they like to feel good about themselves and what they do. Which is completely understandable, if it wasn't for the fact that if you only answer to "positive feedback"... you aren't answering to feedback at all, but to compliments. And that is an entirely different thing.
My interpretation of "positive feedback" is "constructive", not "Praise".
IMO negative feedback basically boils down to either attacks over a decision or just strait up saying "I don't like this! REMOVE IT!". What useful information can you get from that? Honestly... nothing other than "do not want". But it doesn't answer the question of how to improve or what was done right. And unfortunately sometimes when Cryptic asks for clarification... the interaction tends to turn into something like this:
Cryptic: Ok we heard your feedback. What DO you want?
Response: NOT THIS!
Cryptic: What do you want?
Response: NOT THIS!!!!!!
Literally nothing of worth in terms of feedback other than venom.
Constructive Feedback, on the other hand, highlights what they did right and what needs improvement. So... using the same example:
Cryptic: Ok we heard your feedback. What DO you want?
Response: Well... X was alright, but Y could use some work.
Cryptic: Oh? Tell us more.
Response: *lists off things that could be improved*
Cryptic: *takes notes*
Postive doesn't have to mean praising them for a good job no matter what they do. Constructive Feedback can be just as positive while pointing out things that they could have done better, or was not liked as much. And it gets the message across without the vitriol.
That is precisely why I said "positive feedback" and not "constructive feedback" (or constructive criticism, also known as concrit by some). As you pointed out, there is a difference.
They ain't taking that into account, though, because for them everything that's not "that is sooo cool" it's not feedback... it's simply something negative to be ignored.
Unless - and it's a big unless - that measly 2% of the playerbase is criticizing something that could potentially results in hundreds of dollars being lost (or not sold, whichever you prefer).
Constructive criticism is a good thing that should be allowed always.
Negativism (if that's not a word, forgive me... I've got a headache and my brain is a little fuzzy at the moment) it's bad.
Mindless praise it's just as bad.
As with all things, "in medio stat virtus" so, just as it's wrong to only take into account the bad, it's also wrong to only take into account the good.
Not agreeing with someone doesn't give you the right to be an TRIBBLE.
Ci sono tre tipi di giocatori:
- quelli a cui non va mai bene niente... e vanno sul forum a trollare;
- quelli che sono talmente imbesuiti da credere a qualunque cosa i dev dicano, perfino che la luna è fatta di formaggio... e vanno sul forum a trollare;
- quelli che credono a quello a cui è giusto credere, sono d'accordo con quello con cui è giusto essere d'accordo e sono critici con quello che non va;
Ai giocatori dei primi due tipi, gratis in omaggio un bello specchio lucente su cui arrampicarsi. E una mazzata in testa per la loro poca intelligenza e compassione verso gli altri giocatori che non la pensano come loro.
Agli appartenenti al terzo tipo, invece, dico grazie. Anche se non sempre si riesce a mantenere la calma, siete quelli per cui vale la pena incazzarsi.
As the person to whom several of those comments posted were directed I want to point out that after Kael gave his canned response about my "combative" post, I made some direct comments on issues and asked a few questions - without being combative, at that point he wouldn't respond.
When I specifically asked him why he wouldn't respond when the issues were directly pointed out he said "Hey, I have a job man"
Now - I could be wrong but isn't his job CM, and doesn't that mean he's SUPPOSED to deal with the community?
He gave a lot of canned non-specific answers to comments and wouldn't address one single point made so what's the point in having him doing this.
To be honest I was shocked he actually bothered to post anything as he typically just sticks his head in the sand and I suspect he'll say he was not treated well in that thread and go ahead and use that as an excuse not to post again until someone wants to kiss butt.
Their recent pricing decision to TRIBBLE over console players is what burned away any good will they had with me so I'm done trying to be understanding or treat them with kit gloves.
Trekhead on the other hand actually did try to be somewhat responsive even though his responses along the lines of doing missions because they like them was a load of garbage...no missions, no game and everyone knows it. I tried to point out that they might get more out of trying to give us some long term replayability but they don't seem to see that as a necessity...get the whales in to play now and then and ignore the "casuals" since they don't spend enough.
Comments
My interpretation of "positive feedback" is "constructive", not "Praise".
IMO negative feedback basically boils down to either attacks over a decision or just strait up saying "I don't like this! REMOVE IT!". What useful information can you get from that? Honestly... nothing other than "do not want". But it doesn't answer the question of how to improve or what was done right. And unfortunately sometimes when Cryptic asks for clarification... the interaction tends to turn into something like this:
- Cryptic: Ok we heard your feedback. What DO you want?
- Response: NOT THIS!
- Cryptic: What do you want?
- Response: NOT THIS!!!!!!
Literally nothing of worth in terms of feedback other than venom.Constructive Feedback, on the other hand, highlights what they did right and what needs improvement. So... using the same example:
Postive doesn't have to mean praising them for a good job no matter what they do. Constructive Feedback can be just as positive while pointing out things that they could have done better, or was not liked as much. And it gets the message across without the vitriol.
None of this news is new or shocking. But seeing it all in one place genuinely leads me to believe my eleven years in this product has hit shelf date. I'm speaking strictly for myself. I've lost all connection to the game since CBS put new releases behind a paywall (I have too many streaming services as it is), and now it appears we will not see new content moving forward that appeals to the traditional foundation audience that has actual loyalty to the ST universe.
It's probably just as well. I recently found a number of single players games that are quite good, but I found myself thinking it wasn't a "perpetual" world platform so my time had no "future value". I deluded myself. That's on me.
Reading a community relations manager complain that he has a real job besides community relationships was quite stunning. Their own forums are too useless to them, and reddit is too much work. I suppose that leaves sandbox podcasts and giggling inappropriately in staff meetings.
Anyone remember this multiplayer PvP in a trek universe?
I've streamed Discovery, Picard and Lower Decks without paying a streaming service, anything is possible with a Kodi or Firestick, to think that I'm one of the few people that knows how work both Android Boxes and VCRs as well some tech stuff in between early 90s and 2020s, god I love Machines more than Humans, I may not be able to repair technology but at least I know how it works.
> On topic:
>
> A lot of good information from the reddit. I wish they would do more info dumps like that. also I think this little nugget...
>
> "Keep in mind that internet posts like forums and Reddit typically account for something like 2% of the player base: Comments that you see online are not a representative sample. "
>
> was probably one of the more important things to be said. because especially here on these forums, people think they're more important than they are, and its good to force some humility on here. Other wise, good info on how game development works. Thanks for posting OP.
This brings up a very interesting point that I haven’t seen asked. If they’re not fans of forums and Reddit since it’s only a small fraction (2%) of the player base, then how should we as consumers/players express our thoughts and opinions to you Cryptic that will matter to you? I’m sure you don’t want to sift through a billion emails but I’m also positive in thinking that you need player feedback in some form. So what works for you? What method(s) are you encouraging from the other 98% of the player base that matters to you more? How are you compiling and reaching out? You don’t want (respect?) the 2% that takes their time to keep your game relevant by discussing the pros/cons yet you have no real credible way of attaining the 98%. Makes me wonder…….
That is precisely why I said "positive feedback" and not "constructive feedback" (or constructive criticism, also known as concrit by some). As you pointed out, there is a difference.
They ain't taking that into account, though, because for them everything that's not "that is sooo cool" it's not feedback... it's simply something negative to be ignored.
Unless - and it's a big unless - that measly 2% of the playerbase is criticizing something that could potentially results in hundreds of dollars being lost (or not sold, whichever you prefer).
Constructive criticism is a good thing that should be allowed always.
Negativism (if that's not a word, forgive me... I've got a headache and my brain is a little fuzzy at the moment) it's bad.
Mindless praise it's just as bad.
As with all things, "in medio stat virtus" so, just as it's wrong to only take into account the bad, it's also wrong to only take into account the good.
Ci sono tre tipi di giocatori:
- quelli a cui non va mai bene niente... e vanno sul forum a trollare;
- quelli che sono talmente imbesuiti da credere a qualunque cosa i dev dicano, perfino che la luna è fatta di formaggio... e vanno sul forum a trollare;
- quelli che credono a quello a cui è giusto credere, sono d'accordo con quello con cui è giusto essere d'accordo e sono critici con quello che non va;
Ai giocatori dei primi due tipi, gratis in omaggio un bello specchio lucente su cui arrampicarsi. E una mazzata in testa per la loro poca intelligenza e compassione verso gli altri giocatori che non la pensano come loro.
Agli appartenenti al terzo tipo, invece, dico grazie. Anche se non sempre si riesce a mantenere la calma, siete quelli per cui vale la pena incazzarsi.
When I specifically asked him why he wouldn't respond when the issues were directly pointed out he said "Hey, I have a job man"
Now - I could be wrong but isn't his job CM, and doesn't that mean he's SUPPOSED to deal with the community?
He gave a lot of canned non-specific answers to comments and wouldn't address one single point made so what's the point in having him doing this.
To be honest I was shocked he actually bothered to post anything as he typically just sticks his head in the sand and I suspect he'll say he was not treated well in that thread and go ahead and use that as an excuse not to post again until someone wants to kiss butt.
Their recent pricing decision to TRIBBLE over console players is what burned away any good will they had with me so I'm done trying to be understanding or treat them with kit gloves.
Trekhead on the other hand actually did try to be somewhat responsive even though his responses along the lines of doing missions because they like them was a load of garbage...no missions, no game and everyone knows it. I tried to point out that they might get more out of trying to give us some long term replayability but they don't seem to see that as a necessity...get the whales in to play now and then and ignore the "casuals" since they don't spend enough.