How do you know that none of those players are KDF players?
I have a Federation and a KDF character. My Federation character is higher. Does that mean I'm not a KDF player? No, it just means that I've played my Federation character more often than my KDF.
Earlier in the thread someone who listened to STOked said some guy on the council named Chris said the KDF should get no content and be shut down. If Chris said that, I doubt he plays a Klingon.
Ivan-Cryptic, I been reading your responses and there's two things I'm trying to understand:
1) If you're doing data mining and we all play the game, why not take the time to implement in-game polling? In game clearly offer rewards such as energy credits or cryptic points for taking the poll. That's how you can reach all players.
2) Reading between the lines, this seems to have a marketing agenda attached. So the other intent of this is to create a 'STO Fan Club' to promote STO?
but then this becomes an elite group. how is anyone to know they are getting a fare invite?
there are no posts or links to suggest or even describe what the qualifications are.
.
That's the main issue caused by the name of this. A "Council", which it really is not. It's merely a group of people going "Hey Cryptic our forums/site/bookclub/whatever" feels that (Whatever) is (Whatever).
That's it.
Cryptics usage of Advisory Council caused people to immediately(including myself) think that these people have significant power or capabilities, something that puts them above or beyond when they're merely Liasons to other groups/sites/what have you.
...y'all have to start to realize that frequency of individual posting in a thread does not make anything overwhelming except the number of posts by one group of individuals.
Sure... just as soon as you realize a small minority of vocal fans handpicked by Atari's viral marketing arm aren't any more representative of the community as a whole either. :rolleyes:
Sure... just as soon as you realize a small minority of vocal fans handpicked by Atari's viral marketing arm aren't any more representative of the community as a whole either. :rolleyes:
Ah, but they represent a potentially different minority of vocal fans who are certainly not represented by the group here and thus might have different input.
Ivan-Cryptic, I been reading your responses and there's two things I'm trying to understand:
1) If you're doing data mining and we all play the game, why not take the time to implement in-game polling? In game clearly offer rewards such as energy credits or cryptic points for taking the poll. That's how you can reach all players.
2) Reading between the lines, this seems to have a marketing agenda attached. So the other intent of this is to create a 'STO Fan Club' to promote STO?
1. Because it would give EVERY player an opportunity to be heard. And we wouldn't want that, would we? /rolling eyes
The STO official forums are the official means of communication for STO. Yeah less than 10% of the community overall posts on the forums but there are other official means of reaching out to them. If people who don't use the forums have something to say let them use a feedback email address. Do the polls be it web, ingame as Aion does it or via email as HiRez does it, whatever. I'd sooner email a feedback email address than some councilperson.
I still think having a rep (Cryptic emp or player) for each major facet of the game who's responsible for compiling the feedback into one thread so devs can go to that one thread for Escorts and browse what's been said will be far more productive.
Good to see that all the feed back we provide on the forums is valued by the Cryptic development team. Seriously I would be less offended had you actually come to my house, rang my doorbell, and slapped me in my face the moment I opened the door. This is an insult, we don't need bloggers, pod casters and other such jackasses stearing the game in the direction they want. I seriously hope this is a late April fools joke.
but then this becomes an elite group. how is anyone to know they are getting a fare invite?
there are no posts or links to suggest or even describe what the qualifications are.
"considered" also means filtered.
i think the idea is a good one. the approach, even though lessened by ivans explanation, was not a good one. nor it a sentence stating "considered"
this is why i think every fleet should have one member on board. regardless.
and if not a member, then you join the auto fleet (for this purpose) and can get picked at random. if you say yes, you get the appointment. if you say no, then another player is picked.
that is more equal representation and openess then a "considered" email request.
Admittedly a little concerned about that myself, I know I'll feel a bit more confident once we know what kind of criteria they've set up. I'm not against this at all, especially now that Ivan has explained it a bit better I understand it's more of an outreach than an advisory council. One from every fleet is a possibility but I'd prefer to see a criteria based on things like forum behavior, in game behavior, participation on the test server (shows an active interest in improving the game), stuff like that.
1) If you're doing data mining and we all play the game, why not take the time to implement in-game polling? In game clearly offer rewards such as energy credits or cryptic points for taking the poll. That's how you can reach all players.
Of course. We will absolutely implement in-game polling. It's a very good idea. This is also not an either / or scenario.
2) Reading between the lines, this seems to have a marketing agenda attached. So the other intent of this is to create a 'STO Fan Club' to promote STO?
Oh, please don't read between the lines. Realistically, that's just another way of saying, "I'm making an assumption."
Certainly, we want to promote STO. What company doesn't want to promote its games? It's not a marketing agenda, though. Every person at this company wants to see the game they worked hard on promoted and successful.
But...
That's not what 's governing this effort. We have distinctions between social, community, PR and marketing. I've explained the crux of the Advisory Council a few times already, but the basic gist of it is: we have over 100,000 active players who do not post on the forums and we have a huge Star Trek fan base that has either not tried STO or does not care for STO. How can we hear from them? The Advisory Council is one such way we can begin to hear from others outside of these forums.
Good to see that all the feed back we provide on the forums is valued by the Cryptic development team. Seriously I would be less offended had you actually come to my house, rang my doorbell, and slapped me in my face the moment I opened the door. This is an insult, we don't need bloggers, pod casters and other such jackasses stearing the game in the direction they want. I seriously hope this is a late April fools joke.
Sure... just as soon as you realize a small minority of vocal fans handpicked by Atari's viral marketing arm aren't any more representative of the community as a whole either. :rolleyes:
Oh, please. That was not even a fun read.
Now what are my responsibilities in this deal? I'm supposed to accept that representation has never been fair in any way because the concept of representation is flawed? That every single person has a say in the way things are done? Oh, I see, you think this is a democracy. Got it. This is a Business. They will do what they need to to keep it running.
It is obvious they want more input form a more diverse group. That is all this Star Trek Online Advisory Council thing is, another method of getting ADVICE not direction of development.
Ok, so...um...given that this probably won't have any impact on you, and given that you seem to already believe that Cryptic is going to ignore our input since you reason that this council will be a shield for them to not listen to us which presumes that they are already ignoring our input, why are you so angry? Your logic is so twisted and flawed I'm not sure I can sort it out.
Basically, you seem to think that Cryptic does not want our input, so they are creating a council to stand between us and them and make it so that the council has to deal with our anger instead of them all the while Cryptic continues to ignore our input.
Given that, why are you playing this game if you did not think that Cryptic did not value our input at least in some level, or why are you on the forums if you believed that?
To answer your first question: Experience, and fear for what this has led to in the past.
Star Wars Galaxies was ruined by an exceptionally (and this is an understatement) unwanted "update" called the "NGE". They got bad press even in the New York Times and on CBS News over the backlash. Their answer was to create a "player council" which the Cryptic one is modeled after and carefully populated with people not only not chosen by the players, but DELIBERATELY chosen to NOT represent what the majority of the players wanted (which was: GET RID OF THE NGE!).
They used this solely to counter the bad PR the NGE got them by claiming that "we're listening now". When, in fact they not only weren't, but it was structured so that they would never have to. This is why the rare "senator" who caught on to the scheme and who tried to actually do their job were all quickly dispatched, slandered, banned, etc. Go read about Tux's saga, and his dealings with a borderline psychotic "community manager". SWG to this day is STILL the NGE version, years after the fact, and after the vast majority of the unrepresentated by the "senate" player base voted with their wallets to quit. The end result of this form of "representation": Half the servers closed and all but one of the remaining ones turned into ghost towns.
To answer your second point: To this point I thought they HAD actually responded well to feedback. If I didn't like what they've said they are going to do, I'd not be here, and I'd not bother to argue against what I see as a game damaging mistake. I think to this point they have done a DAMN good job of listening, but creating a formal "council" and doing it in the most undemocratic, most unrepresentative manner imaginable is a sign that they do not intend to keep listening to any feedback they don't want to hear.
Ivan-Cryptic, I been reading your responses and there's two things I'm trying to understand:
1) If you're doing data mining and we all play the game, why not take the time to implement in-game polling? In game clearly offer rewards such as energy credits or cryptic points for taking the poll. That's how you can reach all players.
2) Reading between the lines, this seems to have a marketing agenda attached. So the other intent of this is to create a 'STO Fan Club' to promote STO?
Come now, you're not seriously implying that this is merely a self-serving move to try and start up another PR engine, are you?
(Hey, Cryptic - you're going to need to tune that engine up, it's backfiring)
Ah, but they represent a potentially different minority of vocal fans who are certainly not represented by the group here and thus might have different input.
Excuse me what? Any player of the game can come and spout off on these forums, and even people who aren't can post in some. The only people who aren't voicing their opinions here choose not to, unlike people who don't have the ear of this appointed, unaccountable council.
It is obvious they want more input form a more diverse group. That is all this Star Trek Online Advisory Council thing is, another method of getting ADVICE not direction of development.
How is this increasing diversity of input? The input was already available to them, now they're just privileging some voices.
Ah, but they represent a potentially different minority of vocal fans who are certainly not represented by the group here and thus might have different input.
And what of this minoritiy is even smaller then the minoritiy here?
The only way to get a decent view is polling. I would go even so far, that not every one can participate, but the participantes are choosen randomly, this would stop certain groups of players to influence a topic.
I decided to post here, which is unusual for me, as I am not the most vocal of people when it comes to the design of the game. However, this seemed like something I needed to comment on.
Let me start by saying I applaud Cryptic's policy on transparency. Being able to read what is coming down the line is always worthwhile. I'm also fairly pleased with the recent additions to content, especially the Special Task Forces, they are quite entertaining.
That said, I am ambivalent about this idea. Potentially, it could be a very good thing, though, having watched the majority of STOked, I worry that perhaps the members of this group are very biased. If this is something Cryptic truly wishes to throw its support behind, it needs to be expanded quickly, and with people who have dissenting opinions as well as the rest. You NEED to hear from those who aren't happy with the game, and who represent those that see the need for significant changes, not just those that want to see a new faction, or a couple new missions, etc.
Hopefully this will work out well, and if not, let us hope it is quickly eliminated.
Just because the same person responds to a topic 20 times, doesn't mean they have 20 other players that feel the same way.
True. I have but only one representative. And he was elected by 100% of the vote. That rep is ME. The election didn't give a rat's backside what anyone else thinks. Therefore, the other reps they appointed mean nothing but wasted web space on their news section here.
Everyone should be represented by the election of one. Not the appointment of Cryptic.
This is rich... they want to get the input of more than just the "forum community"... understandable.. but instead, they pick people from other forum communities to represent us?
How do you know that none of those players are KDF players?
I have a Federation and a KDF character. My Federation character is higher. Does that mean I'm not a KDF player? No, it just means that I've played my Federation character more often than my KDF.
Fair point. I've got a RA alt, don't consider him my main toon though. Maybe the names of their KDF alt should be posted so we know who they are if we want to tell them what we think?
The STO official forums are the official means of communication for STO. Yeah less than 10% of the community overall posts on the forums but there are other official means of reaching out to them. If people who don't use the forums have something to say let them use a feedback email address. Do the polls be it web, ingame as Aion does it or via email as HiRez does it, whatever. I'd sooner email a feedback email address than some councilperson.
I still think having a rep (Cryptic emp or player) for each major facet of the game who's responsible for compiling the feedback into one thread so devs can go to that one thread for Escorts and browse what's been said will be far more productive.
How do you know that 10% statistic? Just curious.
I would imagine that people who don't use the forums probably won't use other methods of feedback either. I mean, in STO and other MMOs I've played, the launcher links generally say stuff like 'check out the forums!' or 'go to the website!' And where else would people who don't use the forums or website go to, if they don't use the launcher's links?
Also, the rep idea is good, but the forums are specialized enough, methinks.
But that's just it. They're TRYING to listen to the community. The ENTIRE community. Not just the ones posting on the forums.
Over 100,000 subscribers WHO DO NOT POST on the forums. Yet many of you just keep saying "just use the forums".
Amazing.
-Forjo
I agree with this, mostly, but as I said above, why would the people who don't use the forums use anything else?
It's interesting that 3 of the 4 websites appear to me to be just general Star Trek websites. While it is useful to know what the Star Trek fan who doesn't play STO thinks of the game, I would think it would be more useful to get info from the people in the game, who are finding bugs and discovering mechanics or missions that they don't like.
Gamers are born with Joysticks in their hands. We played through the golden age of gaming and we all know the Mortal Kombat blood code by heart. We know that Text based MMO's were the first, and not Ultima Online. We understand that headshots are the most efficient way of killing anything, even headless monsters. Regardless of hearts lost, there is allways another fairy around the corner. Finally, when in doubt, jump...
What about people born later? Are you saying that once the people who have lived through this "golden age" all die off, and the gaming industry is left with customers born after 2000, there will no longer be any "gamers"?
We're happy to introduce the Star Trek Advisory Council, where we speak to members of the Star Trek and Star Trek Online community to learn more about what our fans want from the game. Read on to learn more.
This is rich... they want to get the input of more than just the "forum community"... understandable.. but instead, they pick people from other forum communities to represent us?
Yes that sums it up and they also picked those who run those communities too. So who knows what kind of silencing goes on over these places.
And what of this minoritiy is even smaller then the minoritiy here?
The only way to get a decent view is polling. I would go even so far, that not every one can participate, but the participantes are choosen randomly, this would stop certain groups of players to influence a topic.
If we are going to be represented, why not have a vote on who is going to do it, so we can see who the majority and minorities are?
And even at that, being in the minority doesn't necessarily mean that your ideas are bad.
For instance, you'd probably get a majority voting for faster leveling, free stuff, uber powered TRIBBLE.
A minority would disagree with all of the above. But they'd still be right.
To answer your first question: Experience, and fear for what this has led to in the past.
Star Wars Galaxies was ruined by an exceptionally (and this is an understatement) unwanted "update" called the "NGE". They got bad press even in the New York Times and on CBS News over the backlash. Their answer was to create a "player council" which the Cryptic one is modeled after and carefully populated with people not only not chosen by the players, but DELIBERATELY chosen to NOT represent what the majority of the players wanted (which was: GET RID OF THE NGE!).
They used this solely to counter the bad PR the NGE got them by claiming that "we're listening now". When, in fact they not only weren't, but it was structured so that they would never have to. This is why the rare "senator" who caught on to the scheme and who tried to actually do their job were all quickly dispatched, slandered, banned, etc. Go read about Tux's saga, and his dealings with a borderline psychotic "community manager".
Ok, so, IF this ends up being like SWG's debacle, then you can say "I told you so". The problem is that NGE was already ignoring feedback and continued to do so. Cryptic has not been ignoring feedback, and you seem to assume that this now means that they will. The two incidents, while similar, are not exactly alike. I would say, given my experience, to be cautious, wait to see if this works, and if it doesn't, so be it and THEN get angry. What this seems like is borrowing trouble.
To answer your second point: To this point I thought they HAD actually responded well to feedback. If I didn't like what they've said they are going to do, I'd not be here, and I'd not bother to argue against what I see as a game damaging mistake. I think to this point they have done a DAMN good job of listening, but creating a formal "council" and doing it in the most undemocratic, most unrepresentative manner imaginable is a sign that they do not intend to keep listening to any feedback they don't want to hear.
My understanding about this council is that it is not a formal institution, from what I have read. This seems different than what you are use to. I could be wrong, of course, but so could you.
Comments
Earlier in the thread someone who listened to STOked said some guy on the council named Chris said the KDF should get no content and be shut down. If Chris said that, I doubt he plays a Klingon.
1) If you're doing data mining and we all play the game, why not take the time to implement in-game polling? In game clearly offer rewards such as energy credits or cryptic points for taking the poll. That's how you can reach all players.
2) Reading between the lines, this seems to have a marketing agenda attached. So the other intent of this is to create a 'STO Fan Club' to promote STO?
That's the main issue caused by the name of this. A "Council", which it really is not. It's merely a group of people going "Hey Cryptic our forums/site/bookclub/whatever" feels that (Whatever) is (Whatever).
That's it.
Cryptics usage of Advisory Council caused people to immediately(including myself) think that these people have significant power or capabilities, something that puts them above or beyond when they're merely Liasons to other groups/sites/what have you.
Sure... just as soon as you realize a small minority of vocal fans handpicked by Atari's viral marketing arm aren't any more representative of the community as a whole either. :rolleyes:
Ah, but they represent a potentially different minority of vocal fans who are certainly not represented by the group here and thus might have different input.
1. Because it would give EVERY player an opportunity to be heard. And we wouldn't want that, would we? /rolling eyes
2. Yes
U.S.S Shut Up Wesley? really??
That is the plan is it? Listen to "Shut Up Wesley"?
I still think having a rep (Cryptic emp or player) for each major facet of the game who's responsible for compiling the feedback into one thread so devs can go to that one thread for Escorts and browse what's been said will be far more productive.
http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k265/Evil_Coiffio/DoNotWant.jpg
At least I heard of STOked here in the forums but who in the blue hell is Shut Up, Wesley?
Admittedly a little concerned about that myself, I know I'll feel a bit more confident once we know what kind of criteria they've set up. I'm not against this at all, especially now that Ivan has explained it a bit better I understand it's more of an outreach than an advisory council. One from every fleet is a possibility but I'd prefer to see a criteria based on things like forum behavior, in game behavior, participation on the test server (shows an active interest in improving the game), stuff like that.
Oh, please don't read between the lines. Realistically, that's just another way of saying, "I'm making an assumption."
Certainly, we want to promote STO. What company doesn't want to promote its games? It's not a marketing agenda, though. Every person at this company wants to see the game they worked hard on promoted and successful.
But...
That's not what 's governing this effort. We have distinctions between social, community, PR and marketing. I've explained the crux of the Advisory Council a few times already, but the basic gist of it is: we have over 100,000 active players who do not post on the forums and we have a huge Star Trek fan base that has either not tried STO or does not care for STO. How can we hear from them? The Advisory Council is one such way we can begin to hear from others outside of these forums.
lol. Your post: PERFECTION
Oh, please. That was not even a fun read.
Now what are my responsibilities in this deal? I'm supposed to accept that representation has never been fair in any way because the concept of representation is flawed? That every single person has a say in the way things are done? Oh, I see, you think this is a democracy. Got it. This is a Business. They will do what they need to to keep it running.
It is obvious they want more input form a more diverse group. That is all this Star Trek Online Advisory Council thing is, another method of getting ADVICE not direction of development.
To answer your first question: Experience, and fear for what this has led to in the past.
Star Wars Galaxies was ruined by an exceptionally (and this is an understatement) unwanted "update" called the "NGE". They got bad press even in the New York Times and on CBS News over the backlash. Their answer was to create a "player council" which the Cryptic one is modeled after and carefully populated with people not only not chosen by the players, but DELIBERATELY chosen to NOT represent what the majority of the players wanted (which was: GET RID OF THE NGE!).
They used this solely to counter the bad PR the NGE got them by claiming that "we're listening now". When, in fact they not only weren't, but it was structured so that they would never have to. This is why the rare "senator" who caught on to the scheme and who tried to actually do their job were all quickly dispatched, slandered, banned, etc. Go read about Tux's saga, and his dealings with a borderline psychotic "community manager". SWG to this day is STILL the NGE version, years after the fact, and after the vast majority of the unrepresentated by the "senate" player base voted with their wallets to quit. The end result of this form of "representation": Half the servers closed and all but one of the remaining ones turned into ghost towns.
To answer your second point: To this point I thought they HAD actually responded well to feedback. If I didn't like what they've said they are going to do, I'd not be here, and I'd not bother to argue against what I see as a game damaging mistake. I think to this point they have done a DAMN good job of listening, but creating a formal "council" and doing it in the most undemocratic, most unrepresentative manner imaginable is a sign that they do not intend to keep listening to any feedback they don't want to hear.
I suddenly have the urge to visit Boston Harbor and disrupt shipping...
Succinct and accurate.
Come now, you're not seriously implying that this is merely a self-serving move to try and start up another PR engine, are you?
(Hey, Cryptic - you're going to need to tune that engine up, it's backfiring)
Excuse me what? Any player of the game can come and spout off on these forums, and even people who aren't can post in some. The only people who aren't voicing their opinions here choose not to, unlike people who don't have the ear of this appointed, unaccountable council.
How is this increasing diversity of input? The input was already available to them, now they're just privileging some voices.
And what of this minoritiy is even smaller then the minoritiy here?
The only way to get a decent view is polling. I would go even so far, that not every one can participate, but the participantes are choosen randomly, this would stop certain groups of players to influence a topic.
Let me start by saying I applaud Cryptic's policy on transparency. Being able to read what is coming down the line is always worthwhile. I'm also fairly pleased with the recent additions to content, especially the Special Task Forces, they are quite entertaining.
That said, I am ambivalent about this idea. Potentially, it could be a very good thing, though, having watched the majority of STOked, I worry that perhaps the members of this group are very biased. If this is something Cryptic truly wishes to throw its support behind, it needs to be expanded quickly, and with people who have dissenting opinions as well as the rest. You NEED to hear from those who aren't happy with the game, and who represent those that see the need for significant changes, not just those that want to see a new faction, or a couple new missions, etc.
Hopefully this will work out well, and if not, let us hope it is quickly eliminated.
True. I have but only one representative. And he was elected by 100% of the vote. That rep is ME. The election didn't give a rat's backside what anyone else thinks. Therefore, the other reps they appointed mean nothing but wasted web space on their news section here.
Everyone should be represented by the election of one. Not the appointment of Cryptic.
Fair point. I've got a RA alt, don't consider him my main toon though. Maybe the names of their KDF alt should be posted so we know who they are if we want to tell them what we think?
How do you know that 10% statistic? Just curious.
I would imagine that people who don't use the forums probably won't use other methods of feedback either. I mean, in STO and other MMOs I've played, the launcher links generally say stuff like 'check out the forums!' or 'go to the website!' And where else would people who don't use the forums or website go to, if they don't use the launcher's links?
Also, the rep idea is good, but the forums are specialized enough, methinks.
I agree with this, mostly, but as I said above, why would the people who don't use the forums use anything else?
It's interesting that 3 of the 4 websites appear to me to be just general Star Trek websites. While it is useful to know what the Star Trek fan who doesn't play STO thinks of the game, I would think it would be more useful to get info from the people in the game, who are finding bugs and discovering mechanics or missions that they don't like.
What about people born later? Are you saying that once the people who have lived through this "golden age" all die off, and the gaming industry is left with customers born after 2000, there will no longer be any "gamers"?
Then why you didn't have mentioned that from the beginning....
Why do i suddenly see trollface.jpg infront of my inner eye...
Awsome, it's just like Star Wars Galaxies all over again..... Galactic Senators here we come!
Yes that sums it up and they also picked those who run those communities too. So who knows what kind of silencing goes on over these places.
If we are going to be represented, why not have a vote on who is going to do it, so we can see who the majority and minorities are?
And even at that, being in the minority doesn't necessarily mean that your ideas are bad.
For instance, you'd probably get a majority voting for faster leveling, free stuff, uber powered TRIBBLE.
A minority would disagree with all of the above. But they'd still be right.
Ok, so, IF this ends up being like SWG's debacle, then you can say "I told you so". The problem is that NGE was already ignoring feedback and continued to do so. Cryptic has not been ignoring feedback, and you seem to assume that this now means that they will. The two incidents, while similar, are not exactly alike. I would say, given my experience, to be cautious, wait to see if this works, and if it doesn't, so be it and THEN get angry. What this seems like is borrowing trouble.
My understanding about this council is that it is not a formal institution, from what I have read. This seems different than what you are use to. I could be wrong, of course, but so could you.