Well it's just as much in the amount of not posting at all.
I'd say it's not really even about giving any actual solutions as much as it is at least acknowledge the other person is talking to you.
Because when no one is saying anything it becomes "what it feels like", "how it seems" - how you interpret it and what you imagine.
Just like I imagine more often than not the feeling of being ignored is a way bigger insult than they actual problem in-game.
"We read your posts, we doing what we can but no promises" standard reply I see nothing terrible about it.
"Yes I can see how this or that issue has to be frustrating because x or y".
I am not expert on american corporatism but I thought it specialized in having consultants exactly for those type of jobs. Community manager or whatever they call it?
Anyway, I'd say you can defuse a lot just by posting nearly anything no matter how thin it is rather than letting it go
/edit
ps. That together with the tacofangs quote, "we no longer include the players or the forums", pretty much set the tone, at least for me, for like the last half year or so.
Anyway, I'd say you can defuse a lot just by posting nearly anything no matter how thin it is rather than letting it go
I agree with this. It's the reason that good companies don't just let the phone ring and ring and ring if they're busy. They have an automated "your call is important to us" message. It stops the caller from hanging up and going to another company instead.
See the point I'm making there? It's deliberately not subtle.
I agree with this. It's the reason that good companies don't just let the phone ring and ring and ring if they're busy. They have an automated "your call is important to us" message. It stops the caller from hanging up and going to another company instead.
See the point I'm making there? It's deliberately not subtle.
The *best* of those automated systems not only get you into the queue, but every so often give you an estimated hold time (or at least have a special message if there is a high call volume that means you will have a longer-than-usual wait time...helpful since you can't see, just like you can't see on the forum, if they're swamped) rather than just saying "your call is important." Hearing you have a 60-minute hold may not be what you want to hear and it doesn't fix your problem but it is an action that shows respect even before the solution itself.
Which is kind of the principle I pointed out in commanderander's recent communication, where he provided a "wait time" AND what he planned to communicate if the fix got behind the original estimate. That IMO is a good way to demonstrate respect for the customer.
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-) Proudly F2P.Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
First of all, I agree with gulberat that Commanderander deserves props for grace under fire. And I appreciate Taco not only posting here but his candor.
I'm not often looking for the specifics of what you will be doing. I understand that can and does change. I am not one of the posters who considered the engineering reports as being promises.
What I appreciate immensely and would like more of is not what, specifically, you will be doing. Rather, it's insight into your motivations behind why you have done what you did. It's not specific features I'm looking for. It's your strategy.
And keeping strategy hush-hush implies that we would not like it if we knew the strategy. I think that's wrong, frankly. If strategy has to be concealed, it seems manipulative or dishonest.
By all means, conceal specifics of how you expect to accomplish your strategy. Avoid committing to things that you do not know how you will do. Set reasonable expectations. Under-promise and over-deliver.
But it is disappointing that so many of your goals seem to be things that it feels like you (speaking of Cryptic in general; the general "you") seem to think would be unpopular if you explained what your goals and broad level strategy were. I don't think it's fair play if you are setting goals that you would not be comfortable expressing the philosophy behind. That to me is a breach of trust if there are goals for customers that customers would not cooperate with if they knew what those goals were.
I think equating this with a retail environment is specious at best.
1) Face to Face communication will ALWAYS be drastically different than text on a screen
2) Dev interaction is a bonus. It is not our job to communicate, and if we all disappeared tomorrow, that would be our right. This is not the case for a retail employee. Unfortunately, some people are better at dealing with customers than others.
"..no longer include the forums or players in general".
Except you removed the other half of the sentence, which tells you the context:
"to see the process, talk about what we're planning on doing, or what's up coming."
It's not that we "No longer take player feedback," it's, "We no longer tell people what we're planning on doing in the future."
That whole post was in response to the idea that Cryptic should be sharing more on future plans, and my explanation of how badly that went for us in the past. (See: "You promised us, Cryptic!") I even state later in that same paragraph that "We'll take feedback on how something was put in, and tweak some stuff" I'm saying we aren't including the forums int he early decision making process, not that we aren't taking or using their feedback.
What I'm saying is that there is a compromise. If there is an issue that's plaguing the community like for example the skill point update and you know that it's being looked at, it would just be nice to know that someone is looking into it. I wouldn't ask you to promise anything, just the occasional 'we hear you' post would help a lot. It doesn't have to promise anything, I'm not asking you to post in threads and say you'll fix it right away, just the occasional 'we're looking into it,' or 'We're aware of the issue, if we decide that a change is needed here we'll post it in the patch notes.'
Well . . . we do post "we hear you" posts, and "We're aware of the issue." sometimes. In fact, we have apparently posted such things enough that when we post them now, all I hear back is, "Standard Craptic Reply. . . "
And even posts that specifically say they are not a promise seem to have the ability to transform into promises after a month or two.
I'll remove my sig banner, there is no need to fuel negativity. I'm here trying to encourage you to communicate with us while taking shots by using a sarcastic signature. In the interest of hopefully fostering a better relationship between the dev team and the community, I'll make the change.
I apologize if I offended you.
Cool, thanks.
Not offended, just doesn't feel like a joke when every post you read includes a jab at your company/product (even if not directly at you).
Anyway, I'd say you can defuse a lot just by posting nearly anything no matter how thin it is rather than letting it go
This is patently false.
I have ended up with my foot in my mouth more times than not, when I tried to be the guy to post SOMETHING in a thread that was on it's way off the deep end. (See above "no longer include the forums" bit)
And Leviathan, that's essentially what we used to do. We'd tell you all of the things we had planned out. And when any of them got cut, or pushed back, or altered, we were met with a chorus of "Cryptic Lied!"
And Leviathan, that's essentially what we used to do. We'd tell you all of the things we had planned out. And when any of them got cut, or pushed back, or altered, we were met with a chorus of "Cryptic Lied!"
While also being met with a chorus of appreciative players who suggested to disregard those who were being unreasonable...
This really isn't a valid reason as you will find both positive and negative feedback on every issue... You could just as easily justify shutting down the game and say that it was based on positive feedback from some players suggesting that course of action.
I [as just some TRIBBLE playing the game] actually think it is.
Feedback is best handled as an objective process. You leave it for the devs and if its actionable the game may change. What need is there for a dev reply. What does it actually do? Simply put it appeals to one's sense of self-respect. You request a change and the applied social force of that request triggers a response in the target entity. It doesn't particularly matter what that response does in fact lead to, its just an exercise of social power.
It may be a perfectly human thing to want (see. EO Wilson's theories of group social evolution), validation for one's time/opinion, but its entirely unproductive and very often detracts from the feedback process via arbitrary arguments that co-opt said process to reinforce within-group status and exert authority over the dev and correspondingly the game's population (which you can take as a technical explanation of forum whining).
Bipedal mammal and senior Foundry author.
Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
I think equating this with a retail environment is specious at best.
1) Face to Face communication will ALWAYS be drastically different than text on a screen
In some ways this can be very true. Losing nonverbal cues does have a tendency to lead to situations escalating more quickly (wellllll I say that and then I think about some of the real nutballs I had to deal with that came into my store looking for a fight ) because some of the nuances of a person's attitude and tone can't always be conveyed in print.
The other factor unfortunately is what anonymity emboldens some people to say and somehow think it's appropriate when if they said it IRL it would likely get the cops called on them.
I still think that the essential, though, about the importance of customer communication remains the same because when no one does, it's fertile ground for the imagination...
More below.
2) Dev interaction is a bonus. It is not our job to communicate, and if we all disappeared tomorrow, that would be our right. This is not the case for a retail employee. Unfortunately, some people are better at dealing with customers than others.
Heh, Office Space...never gets old.
I can understand the idea that the *devs* do not have this in their job description. Unfortunately it seems like alternative channels of communication could stand to be beefed up such as the customer service because at times it really seems that some of you are doing their job better than some on the CS staff. This could be a staffing issue or something else--it's hard to say what without seeing behind the scenes, but I suspect there are things that other parts of Cryptic could do to relieve the pressure of expectations that has wound up on the dev team.
This is where I think my comparison holds because...well...somebody DOES have to talk with us gosh-darned customers. But I think maybe you guys need to be given an increased support staff to do those interactions, aggregate trending topics, etc. Now, why I have a mental picture of this hypothetical person dressed like Tron and shouting, "I FIGHT FOR THE USER!!!" is a whole other story. (Or better yet: a whole team of extra Minions at Smirk's disposal. "BA-NA-NA!!!")
For now though I hope I do not seem like I am bitter or unappreciative that you come in here and speak. If it came off that way I apologize because that is the LAST thing I intended.
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-) Proudly F2P.Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
While also being met with a chorus of appreciative players who suggested to disregard those who were being unreasonable...
This really isn't a valid reason as you will find both positive and negative feedback on every issue... You could just as easily justify shutting down the game and say that it was based on positive feedback from some players suggesting that course of action.
Not from my recollection. Those who were "appreciative" were often branded members of the CDF.
The number of people "being unreasonable" always seem to outnumber the ones who tell them to stop "being unreasonable".
Communications between the Devs and the players have always been tricky. Unfortunately, chatting with us here is an "extra" part of their jobs. Not chatting here will get them paid the same amount as chatting here. Except chatting here adds another unit of stress, I would imagine.
Member since November 2009... I think. (UFP) Ragnar
And Leviathan, that's essentially what we used to do. We'd tell you all of the things we had planned out. And when any of them got cut, or pushed back, or altered, we were met with a chorus of "Cryptic Lied!"
Can we have it back?
Just put a huge disclaimer in bold on top saying: "Any or all planned changes below could possibly not make it into the game or be cut altogether."
And Leviathan, that's essentially what we used to do. We'd tell you all of the things we had planned out. And when any of them got cut, or pushed back, or altered, we were met with a chorus of "Cryptic Lied!"
I don't understand this aversion - not just from you guys, but all developers in all games I've cared enough to lurk the forums of - for negative feedback. On anything.
If a scheduled feature is delayed or cut, the only logical response would be negative. There's no way around it. So saying that "whenever we turned the tables on the players they reacted badly" is, in my humble opinion, just a subtle way of saying that you just care for "pats on the back".
Actually, saying that just makes be believe that you actually believe that each and every one of your players is a drooling fool who can only utter "Gimme gimme gimme now now now for free for free for free". If that's not the case, I hope you understand that taking up the position you are taking is treating all other constructive, patient, intelligent players as said fools.
The game - not just this game, any game - is not a unilateral task. It's Art alright, but it's not a painting. The players do participate as much as in using the product as in affecting it's design and development. This is much more true in MMOs. They are the paradigm of a sort of give and take between the playerbase and the developers.
And anyone can tell you that in any relationship, personal, diplomatic or business relationship, the worst possible thing to do is for one of the two parties to fall silent.
And I cant resist a cynical remark. Please remember that most of your playerbase are way past the age where a "Because I said so" with no further explanation warrants an acceptable response.
While also being met with a chorus of appreciative players who suggested to disregard those who were being unreasonable...
This really isn't a valid reason as you will find both positive and negative feedback on every issue... You could just as easily justify shutting down the game and say that it was based on positive feedback from some players suggesting that course of action.
Actually it is. For every voice raised in outrage Cryptic would need at least a hundred voices raised in unflagging, unceasing praise to counter the bad press. There have been studies done - and quickly forgotten once their results were posted - that when it comes to people posting on game forums an overwhelming majority of the posts are made by people who have a negative opinion to "express" and that these people will post often and repeatedly whereas those that have something good to say will come in post what they want to say...once. Sometimes they'll stick around and try to defend their position, but when it becomes obvious the other party isn't going to acknowledge that the other poster has anything approaching a valid opinion they throw their hands up and leave. Sometimes permanently.
Cryptic is still struggling to overcome the damage its reputation took in the playerbase from the first two years of its operation of this game and it's approaching the five year anniversary. That right there should say it all with regards to why they are so reticent to put out to the masses what they're doing.
Now once it's ready to ship and they've got the content finalized I'd appreciate a much more timely dissemination of what their design goals were than we got with Delta Rising, and especially have some sort of organized system to release it by the company instead of relying completely on podcasts like PriorityOne to get the info out there.
Not that I want them to stop talking to the podcasts, but let them be a vehicle to go into the really elaborate explanations of the whats, whys, and hows - the nitty-gritty details while the official news page has a set of statements about what the intent was.
Except you removed the other half of the sentence, which tells you the context
Yes that is exactly what I did in right after typing out the point of not communicating.
Then you leave it up to imagination and interpretation. You post "we no longer include the forums" and go dark for half a year?
Were you expecting good faith and objective calm attitudes I don't believe that is very realistic.
And I want to add something about your original post in where you said you knew it was hard to swallow - which you left out of the context, and now try to rationalize why it's completely okay to not include the players and the forum.
As never ever having a single person complain on your forums bullet proof strategy that works 100% of the time - I can't comment on what situations you have been in personally or what you had said in relation to what was going on.
But I can imagine if you are looking for a complaint free world then it's probably frustrating and you probably should get an award for the patience you've had battling that frustation.
The implication is though that things are not subjective or relative.
I don't think you should aim to never have a complaint on your forums ever period - I think people for the most parts go to the forums exactly to vent and that's just how it is on all forums.
That doesn't mean every complaint is legit but it also doesn't mean that no complaint is legit.
And often time it seems like any kind of complaining effect you guys, where I'd assume you only care about the complaints that actually impact the game negatively.
For example loadout bugs or dead queues etc.
You easily get the impression you guys ragequit the forums if just 1 guy says there is too much snow in winterland.
Additionally, another interpretation is the total lack of consistency with communication.
That just opens up for the imagination and you start to wonder if it's complete chaos and desperation mode.
I've read the forums regularly since I started here and I'd go as far as to say it's pretty easy to sort the players and the viewpoints out.
To me it's almost like a little redneck village, size wise, where you know everyone - I don't know how it turns into such a mystery, for you, you don't know how to handle.
From a psychological standpoint, negative feedback always is more loudly heard and felt compared to positive praise for things done right. And it directly affects morale.
Therefore, it's often preferable to only advertise what they did do after the fact, and keep mum about more ambitious projects until they're confident that it would succeed. Unfortunately that too does backfire; Delta Rising is the poster-child of something that was advertised and expected to be successful, only to have it blow up because it was rushed out.
However, it would be worthwhile to Cryptic if they did go back to announcing what they had planned, with a clear disclaimer that they're all subject to change, and follow up with a simple but tough "We warned you" when certain plans/projects don't show up again for one reason or another. Sometimes the only way to get through is to just say it once then leave the minority to rage (as they're doing now, though for the wrong reasons). After all, life is filled with disappointment, and additions to games is no exception.
It was Mr. Grey or something, right? I'm only asking because its a possibilty that a LOT of players' concerns could be remedied by a little communication from Cryptic beyond short tweets or interviews that don't really address the bigger concerns being posted about.
It was said players weren't shouting into a vaccuum but that's exactly what it feels like to many. I don't and wouldn't expect the devs to respond to every question but maybe one or two on occassion? I know they get ripped at times but honestly, if an answer is double-speak or verifies a player's negative perceptions, that's going to be a given.
As an example, here's a direct question put in a respectful way:
End rewards were substantially reduced. This has altered the gameplay for many, including myself. Why was this done and is there any chance rewards will be put back to pre-DR levels?
This is one of many questions left in limbo and lack of responses to *anyone's* questions leaves players to assume the worst.
I dunno. Maybe seeing people who play the game as customers in today's world is a naive expectation.
From exposure to many college age persons I have to conclude the following: The person entrusted with this task lacks the communication skills to do anything except tweet. They probably don't really know how to type. And they don't know how to present information properly in the context of these forums.
With the "Support" staff I'd suggest the same thing applies. Except there they are required to reply by typing in a regular format. So they don't know how to relate with others. They are probably so uncomfortable that they are incapable of actually doing their job. And collectively they are Destroying the "Good Will" the community holds towards the entire enterprise.
I came here today to try and discover why the maintenance downtime is over an hour past scheduled completion? And when we might expect it to be finished? But they are incapable of presenting even that amount of information. Though they probably do, in fact, know what's going on.
Vestereng, I don't see how posting something with accusations of ragequitting, etc. helps. :-/
(And maybe this is just me but in the Winter Wonderland example, I find in my own experience that something *artistic* that I do resonates with me in a whole different way than a cut-and-dry report I do for work. The way I feel and react about one is not the same way I feel and react about the other.)
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-) Proudly F2P.Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
I will say, for me, on this side of the screen, it doesn't feel like a joke.
That's completely understandable, and very human. Even if you hated it with a passion, it's very hard to see something you've spent time on getting negative reviews and comments. It doesn't feel good, and it's even worse when the product is actually something you love.
Can I give you a suggestion to take to the higher-ups (and you can feel free to take full credit for this): Consider bringing in a third party to audit, review, and report feedback in a constructive manner.
Bringing in a good third party auditor - with no personal connection to the product/business - makes collecting feedback a lot easier, and gives you back a lot more actionable feedback.
Full disclosure, I admit my company performs this service. That's not intended as an advertisement or sale's pitch, merely honesty.
You would be amazed the level of feedback stakeholders and customers alike are willing to give a third party - even without assurances of anonymity. It's like the filters come off completely, and people are willing to talk freely (yeah, I know, filters are already off on forums mainly).
I joke with some interviewees that it's a company-paid therapy/bwitching session because that helps them feel free to surface all of the frustrations and concerns they have, but also to bring up what they'd like to see things become.
A good auditor will take all of that feedback - even if it's largely ranting - and summarize the core problems and strengths into something actionable for the company. A "God, I HATE STFS!!! TRIBBLE YOU, DEVS!!!" thread doesn't exactly give you reasonable feedback and doesn't put anyone in a helpful frame of mind, but it does convey that something has upset a customer and should be considered - probably by someone not easily offended.
Again, I'm NOT proposing this as something you should hire my company for, I'm making the suggestion that your team consider working with a neutral third party to really understand what is happening and maintain a professional distance from the work.
What I am saying is, if I increased the grind with 8000% and nerfed dil, ec and exp and then had a significant amount of complaints on my forum?
I would chalk it up to "lamers on the forum" or "whiners" or be surprised.
It wouldn't be realtive or subjective if those complaints were legit and before the release I'd expect it to happen.
Seems like no one figured it might be a very bad idea even dating back to when it was planned out.
No one saw the complaints coming and when they did no one decided to step up or had a plan to do anything.
Then when no one is communicating anything you can only imagine what is going on and yes most people here have a pretty vivid one.
One more thing I forgot to add I figure it can't be easy to maybe be geared to handle the star trek audience in terms of average intelligence and the difficulty of PR and controlling the customer?
Maybe it takes a better than average community manager?
I, for one, would like to thank the Devs for creating and maintaining a feature MMO that is not only free of flaws and creates harmony throughout the players community, but also single-handedly brings said community closer together with multiple posts of admiration.
I'm really not sure I understood what you were saying here, but I'll try to address what I did.
I said "we no longer include the forums" (in discussions of planned releases).
I didn't go dark for 6 months after that, we've posted since then. We did not discuss the plans for DR, for the reason stated above, that discussing plans often leads to accusations of promises reneged. I'm not saying one way or another, that that is a good policy, I'm just saying that is how things are at the moment, and that's the reason they are that way.
I have never said that I don't want to hear complaints. (and feedback/complaints have nothing to do with the line you quoted) I have repeated many times that complaints are fine. We WANT to know what you don't like about the game. What we don't like is when people get riled up and yell/curse/call us names, etc. If you can state your complaint in a rational manner, your ideas are much more likely to be taken into consideration. Again, listening is not the same as acting.
As for lack of consistency in communication, I think that's true. It's not chaos, but it is pretty freeform. I would argue that you can't have your cake and eat it too. The reason I am able to talk to you directly on the forums, without running it through PR channels, is because we have a pretty loose communications policy. We want players and devs to interact. If we had a more coherent/corporate communications policy, I would never talk with you directly. Anything I had to say would be routed through a community manager.
So yes, we may not be consistent in our communication, but that's kind of how it works. If you want consistency, we'd have to get rid of this type of interaction.
Only YOU can prevent forum fires!
0
rattler2Member, Star Trek Online ModeratorPosts: 58,686Community Moderator
edited December 2014
Well Taco... one problem we seem to have is that the constructive feedback tends to get drowned out by rants. I try to be objective about stuff, but when it gets buried by rage posting... its a little depressing because I feel like I'm not getting heard over the rage or I get accused of being something I'm not because I'm not joining in on the rage.
I can't take it anymore! Could everyone just chill out for two seconds before something CRAZY happens again?!
The nut who actually ground out many packs. The resident forum voice of reason (I HAZ FORUM REP! YAY!)
normal text = me speaking as fellow formite colored text = mod mode
As for lack of consistency in communication, I think that's true. It's not chaos, but it is pretty freeform. I would argue that you can't have your cake and eat it too. The reason I am able to talk to you directly on the forums, without running it through PR channels, is because we have a pretty loose communications policy. We want players and devs to interact. If we had a more coherent/corporate communications policy, I would never talk with you directly. Anything I had to say would be routed through a community manager.
So yes, we may not be consistent in our communication, but that's kind of how it works. If you want consistency, we'd have to get rid of this type of interaction.
I think the above part I highlighted is helpful in tempering the impression that people's first reaction is to take from statements about not taking forum feedback into account, and the point (understandable) that it is not a requirement of the developer job description, which is why I have called it out here.
I have to admit the thought of the effects of a tighter communication policy crossed my mind...and I don't know what to tell you, to be honest. I would miss seeing posts from some of you a lot. But I wonder on occasion if we might not get to that sort of breaking point. On one hand it could be good if the same process also formalized feedback collection and made it easier for feedback (ideally only filtered for flaming/name-calling and...I'm not even going to mention what I saw recently that took things to a whole other utterly messed-up extreme) but with content faithfully reported whether good or bad). On the other hand, that very same filtering risks offering its own type of distortion should the hypothetical person(s) doing the filtering not have the same understanding of the game works as the players do from our side and the devs do from your side, OR fall prey to confirmation bias. Which would only keep problems continuing on an off-course trajectory.
Really thorny issue.
I guess the best solution to avoid major changes like that is a cease-and-desist on flaming and name calling. You *and* some of us have both been saying that one for until we are blue in the face. (Hmmm...guess that's *another* reason for that gradient layer on my sig now... )
At least for me, there is something in my sig that, when I preview a post, sometimes makes me stop and really think about whether I am comfortable posting what I wrote or if I need to edit. However each person does it, I think we all need to stop and think, and remember that there is a real person on the other end and not a Borg drone with a keyboard.
By the way...have you seen my red Swingline stapler?
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-) Proudly F2P.Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
I'm really not sure I understood what you were saying here, but I'll try to address what I did.
I said "we no longer include the forums" (in discussions of planned releases).
I didn't go dark for 6 months after that, we've posted since then. We did not discuss the plans for DR, for the reason stated above, that discussing plans often leads to accusations of promises reneged. I'm not saying one way or another, that that is a good policy, I'm just saying that is how things are at the moment, and that's the reason they are that way.
I have never said that I don't want to hear complaints. (and feedback/complaints have nothing to do with the line you quoted) I have repeated many times that complaints are fine. We WANT to know what you don't like about the game. What we don't like is when people get riled up and yell/curse/call us names, etc. If you can state your complaint in a rational manner, your ideas are much more likely to be taken into consideration. Again, listening is not the same as acting.
As for lack of consistency in communication, I think that's true. It's not chaos, but it is pretty freeform. I would argue that you can't have your cake and eat it too. The reason I am able to talk to you directly on the forums, without running it through PR channels, is because we have a pretty loose communications policy. We want players and devs to interact. If we had a more coherent/corporate communications policy, I would never talk with you directly. Anything I had to say would be routed through a community manager.
So yes, we may not be consistent in our communication, but that's kind of how it works. If you want consistency, we'd have to get rid of this type of interaction.
Stole99 had started out saying there had been a shift in policy to ignore players and go by metrics. He asked if you hadn't said that somewhere.
You said you had no idea what he was talking about.
Then I quoted "no longer include the players..." which you then said was taken out of context.
And I replied that is what happens when you don't communicate.
But the thing is, since like mid summer the forums have felt abandoned by developers and of course other events added to it but up until now that quote to me has meant "metrics only period" and then the players' feedback will be ignored.
That quote right there, is basically what we've had of any kind of plan or direction or anything, so as said it's felt quite abandoned.
Then I added when no one saying anything all you have is your imagination that the game is doomed or whatever.
Next thing is, I don't believe most people realistically think they can have whatever they want put into the game and I'd even say, it might come off less professional, to even ask the players but if the alternative is another Delta Rising?
Does Delta Rising represent the peak ability of developers working without player feedback?
Because if that be the case I see no 'data supporting deciding to ignore feedback is working for neither developer or player.
What we don't like is when people get riled up and yell/curse/call us names, etc.
People might not get so riled up if certain members of the development team didn't openly and repeatedly express their disgust for, or even outright openly insult players whose views they disagree with, or players who rationally state their issues. I mean there are always going to be those who don't cooperate, but there's a good chunk of us who have been rationally stating our positions for years, and we've gotten pretty much no comparable treatment from the people whom you want us to treat with respect.
It's that sort of behaviour that creates an environment like this one, where a large amount of the forum community are insulting, protesting, or otherwise openly expressing their disregard with the development team- because for years and years they've done exactly what you're asking for. They've been calm, they've been rational, they've been if not nice, then at least cordial.
And what have they gotten for being the bigger man? Insults. Dismissals. Being told that if they don't like a design choice they can quit the game. Or being given a sweeping generalization about who they are and what they do that is actually quite hurtful and insulting.
I'm not going to name names, but I will say that it hasn't just been 'one bad apple'- over the years there have been several developers who have acted like this, some quite loved even.
It really hurts me as a player when I see this sort of behaviour from the developers because it says to me that they can't be bothered to really read through posts or keep themselves open to actually reviewing material- everything in their mind is 'perfect' and that's a really bad mind state to get into because it puts everyone who disagrees with you as an antagonist and you leading a righteous crusade against them. It makes it really easy to insult or dismiss them without paying any attention to their views or arguments or bug reports.
So I do appreciate what you're saying here, Taco, but there's a lot more going on than just players 'being mad just because'. There's very specific reasons why players aren't making as many threads that calmly state their views and experiences and tell you what they dislike: and that reason is that IT DOESN'T WORK. It has a history of NOT WORKING. It has a history of developers not just ignoring it, but actively dismissing it as without any merit without taking the time to review those complaints.
I'm not asking you guys to agree with everything- by the simple merit of how complex the game is we understand that doing so just isn't possible. What I'd like to see though is less insulting of the player base through dev statements- especially in interviews and podcast appearances. I'd like it if there wasn't this culture of 'if you don't like it you can quit' among some of the developers.
The devs shouldn't turn around, then, when people tell you information you've requested and insult them or dismiss their concerns. If you, who have managed to avoid behaving like that, can do it, I don't see why the others should be unable to.
I agree that the forums can and do become toxic, and that a careful hand needs to be taken to deal with them, and I appreciate that you take the time to discuss these matters with us.
I feel that it would really help if, even when they become toxic, someone takes a bit of time to reassure players that certain issues of concern, such as the negative impact of some of the recent Intelligence boff powers that is being discussed in the PVP forum and the bug report forum... were, if not addressed, then at least acknowledged.
Even if it's not a priority for the developers who handle those matters, the perception of the dev treatment of the matter would benefit hugely from at least acknowledging stuff like that. Even if it's just a "I'll look into it, but we're currently working on some other stuff that takes priority."
Even if that means posting once a week with "Sorry, haven't had time to get around to it"- even getting a post like that says "I still care about this matter, even if I haven't had time for it", which in turn tells the players that you care about their concerns. Absolutely they need that weekly post to remind them you haven't forgotten- because in its absense you get wild speculation, and the forums becoming toxic, and players reacting poorly to that one poorly received that a dev made months ago.
I hope this helps you better understand some of what's going on here.
Comments
I'd say it's not really even about giving any actual solutions as much as it is at least acknowledge the other person is talking to you.
Because when no one is saying anything it becomes "what it feels like", "how it seems" - how you interpret it and what you imagine.
Just like I imagine more often than not the feeling of being ignored is a way bigger insult than they actual problem in-game.
"We read your posts, we doing what we can but no promises" standard reply I see nothing terrible about it.
"Yes I can see how this or that issue has to be frustrating because x or y".
I am not expert on american corporatism but I thought it specialized in having consultants exactly for those type of jobs. Community manager or whatever they call it?
Anyway, I'd say you can defuse a lot just by posting nearly anything no matter how thin it is rather than letting it go
/edit
ps. That together with the tacofangs quote, "we no longer include the players or the forums", pretty much set the tone, at least for me, for like the last half year or so.
I agree with this. It's the reason that good companies don't just let the phone ring and ring and ring if they're busy. They have an automated "your call is important to us" message. It stops the caller from hanging up and going to another company instead.
See the point I'm making there? It's deliberately not subtle.
Free Tibet!
The *best* of those automated systems not only get you into the queue, but every so often give you an estimated hold time (or at least have a special message if there is a high call volume that means you will have a longer-than-usual wait time...helpful since you can't see, just like you can't see on the forum, if they're swamped) rather than just saying "your call is important." Hearing you have a 60-minute hold may not be what you want to hear and it doesn't fix your problem but it is an action that shows respect even before the solution itself.
Which is kind of the principle I pointed out in commanderander's recent communication, where he provided a "wait time" AND what he planned to communicate if the fix got behind the original estimate. That IMO is a good way to demonstrate respect for the customer.
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-)
Proudly F2P. Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
I'm not often looking for the specifics of what you will be doing. I understand that can and does change. I am not one of the posters who considered the engineering reports as being promises.
What I appreciate immensely and would like more of is not what, specifically, you will be doing. Rather, it's insight into your motivations behind why you have done what you did. It's not specific features I'm looking for. It's your strategy.
And keeping strategy hush-hush implies that we would not like it if we knew the strategy. I think that's wrong, frankly. If strategy has to be concealed, it seems manipulative or dishonest.
By all means, conceal specifics of how you expect to accomplish your strategy. Avoid committing to things that you do not know how you will do. Set reasonable expectations. Under-promise and over-deliver.
But it is disappointing that so many of your goals seem to be things that it feels like you (speaking of Cryptic in general; the general "you") seem to think would be unpopular if you explained what your goals and broad level strategy were. I don't think it's fair play if you are setting goals that you would not be comfortable expressing the philosophy behind. That to me is a breach of trust if there are goals for customers that customers would not cooperate with if they knew what those goals were.
I think equating this with a retail environment is specious at best.
1) Face to Face communication will ALWAYS be drastically different than text on a screen
2) Dev interaction is a bonus. It is not our job to communicate, and if we all disappeared tomorrow, that would be our right. This is not the case for a retail employee. Unfortunately, some people are better at dealing with customers than others.
AH! Good find!
Except you removed the other half of the sentence, which tells you the context:
"to see the process, talk about what we're planning on doing, or what's up coming."
It's not that we "No longer take player feedback," it's, "We no longer tell people what we're planning on doing in the future."
That whole post was in response to the idea that Cryptic should be sharing more on future plans, and my explanation of how badly that went for us in the past. (See: "You promised us, Cryptic!") I even state later in that same paragraph that "We'll take feedback on how something was put in, and tweak some stuff" I'm saying we aren't including the forums int he early decision making process, not that we aren't taking or using their feedback.
And unfortunately, I'm not the guy who can answer those questions. That is way outside my wheelhouse.
Well . . . we do post "we hear you" posts, and "We're aware of the issue." sometimes. In fact, we have apparently posted such things enough that when we post them now, all I hear back is, "Standard Craptic Reply. . . "
And even posts that specifically say they are not a promise seem to have the ability to transform into promises after a month or two.
Cool, thanks.
Not offended, just doesn't feel like a joke when every post you read includes a jab at your company/product (even if not directly at you).
This is patently false.
I have ended up with my foot in my mouth more times than not, when I tried to be the guy to post SOMETHING in a thread that was on it's way off the deep end. (See above "no longer include the forums" bit)
While also being met with a chorus of appreciative players who suggested to disregard those who were being unreasonable...
This really isn't a valid reason as you will find both positive and negative feedback on every issue... You could just as easily justify shutting down the game and say that it was based on positive feedback from some players suggesting that course of action.
Captain Ariel Trueheart Department of Temporal Investigations
U.S.S. Valkyrie - NCC 991701
=/\= ================================= =/\=
I [as just some TRIBBLE playing the game] actually think it is.
Feedback is best handled as an objective process. You leave it for the devs and if its actionable the game may change. What need is there for a dev reply. What does it actually do? Simply put it appeals to one's sense of self-respect. You request a change and the applied social force of that request triggers a response in the target entity. It doesn't particularly matter what that response does in fact lead to, its just an exercise of social power.
It may be a perfectly human thing to want (see. EO Wilson's theories of group social evolution), validation for one's time/opinion, but its entirely unproductive and very often detracts from the feedback process via arbitrary arguments that co-opt said process to reinforce within-group status and exert authority over the dev and correspondingly the game's population (which you can take as a technical explanation of forum whining).
Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
Nabreeki 1
Other Team 0
Mission Accomplished
Resistance is futile!
We are the Devs...err Borg!
You will service us!
Zeus
In some ways this can be very true. Losing nonverbal cues does have a tendency to lead to situations escalating more quickly (wellllll I say that and then I think about some of the real nutballs I had to deal with that came into my store looking for a fight
The other factor unfortunately is what anonymity emboldens some people to say and somehow think it's appropriate when if they said it IRL it would likely get the cops called on them.
I still think that the essential, though, about the importance of customer communication remains the same because when no one does, it's fertile ground for the imagination...
More below.
Heh, Office Space...never gets old.
I can understand the idea that the *devs* do not have this in their job description. Unfortunately it seems like alternative channels of communication could stand to be beefed up such as the customer service because at times it really seems that some of you are doing their job better than some on the CS staff. This could be a staffing issue or something else--it's hard to say what without seeing behind the scenes, but I suspect there are things that other parts of Cryptic could do to relieve the pressure of expectations that has wound up on the dev team.
This is where I think my comparison holds because...well...somebody DOES have to talk with us gosh-darned customers.
For now though I hope I do not seem like I am bitter or unappreciative that you come in here and speak. If it came off that way I apologize because that is the LAST thing I intended.
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-)
Proudly F2P. Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
Not from my recollection. Those who were "appreciative" were often branded members of the CDF.
The number of people "being unreasonable" always seem to outnumber the ones who tell them to stop "being unreasonable".
Communications between the Devs and the players have always been tricky. Unfortunately, chatting with us here is an "extra" part of their jobs. Not chatting here will get them paid the same amount as chatting here. Except chatting here adds another unit of stress, I would imagine.
(UFP) Ragnar
Can we have it back?
Just put a huge disclaimer in bold on top saying: "Any or all planned changes below could possibly not make it into the game or be cut altogether."
I highly doubt that would change anything...
(UFP) Ragnar
I don't understand this aversion - not just from you guys, but all developers in all games I've cared enough to lurk the forums of - for negative feedback. On anything.
If a scheduled feature is delayed or cut, the only logical response would be negative. There's no way around it. So saying that "whenever we turned the tables on the players they reacted badly" is, in my humble opinion, just a subtle way of saying that you just care for "pats on the back".
Actually, saying that just makes be believe that you actually believe that each and every one of your players is a drooling fool who can only utter "Gimme gimme gimme now now now for free for free for free". If that's not the case, I hope you understand that taking up the position you are taking is treating all other constructive, patient, intelligent players as said fools.
The game - not just this game, any game - is not a unilateral task. It's Art alright, but it's not a painting. The players do participate as much as in using the product as in affecting it's design and development. This is much more true in MMOs. They are the paradigm of a sort of give and take between the playerbase and the developers.
And anyone can tell you that in any relationship, personal, diplomatic or business relationship, the worst possible thing to do is for one of the two parties to fall silent.
And I cant resist a cynical remark. Please remember that most of your playerbase are way past the age where a "Because I said so" with no further explanation warrants an acceptable response.
Actually it is. For every voice raised in outrage Cryptic would need at least a hundred voices raised in unflagging, unceasing praise to counter the bad press. There have been studies done - and quickly forgotten once their results were posted - that when it comes to people posting on game forums an overwhelming majority of the posts are made by people who have a negative opinion to "express" and that these people will post often and repeatedly whereas those that have something good to say will come in post what they want to say...once. Sometimes they'll stick around and try to defend their position, but when it becomes obvious the other party isn't going to acknowledge that the other poster has anything approaching a valid opinion they throw their hands up and leave. Sometimes permanently.
Cryptic is still struggling to overcome the damage its reputation took in the playerbase from the first two years of its operation of this game and it's approaching the five year anniversary. That right there should say it all with regards to why they are so reticent to put out to the masses what they're doing.
Now once it's ready to ship and they've got the content finalized I'd appreciate a much more timely dissemination of what their design goals were than we got with Delta Rising, and especially have some sort of organized system to release it by the company instead of relying completely on podcasts like PriorityOne to get the info out there.
Not that I want them to stop talking to the podcasts, but let them be a vehicle to go into the really elaborate explanations of the whats, whys, and hows - the nitty-gritty details while the official news page has a set of statements about what the intent was.
Yes that is exactly what I did in right after typing out the point of not communicating.
Then you leave it up to imagination and interpretation. You post "we no longer include the forums" and go dark for half a year?
Were you expecting good faith and objective calm attitudes I don't believe that is very realistic.
And I want to add something about your original post in where you said you knew it was hard to swallow - which you left out of the context, and now try to rationalize why it's completely okay to not include the players and the forum.
As never ever having a single person complain on your forums bullet proof strategy that works 100% of the time - I can't comment on what situations you have been in personally or what you had said in relation to what was going on.
But I can imagine if you are looking for a complaint free world then it's probably frustrating and you probably should get an award for the patience you've had battling that frustation.
The implication is though that things are not subjective or relative.
I don't think you should aim to never have a complaint on your forums ever period - I think people for the most parts go to the forums exactly to vent and that's just how it is on all forums.
That doesn't mean every complaint is legit but it also doesn't mean that no complaint is legit.
And often time it seems like any kind of complaining effect you guys, where I'd assume you only care about the complaints that actually impact the game negatively.
For example loadout bugs or dead queues etc.
You easily get the impression you guys ragequit the forums if just 1 guy says there is too much snow in winterland.
Additionally, another interpretation is the total lack of consistency with communication.
That just opens up for the imagination and you start to wonder if it's complete chaos and desperation mode.
I've read the forums regularly since I started here and I'd go as far as to say it's pretty easy to sort the players and the viewpoints out.
To me it's almost like a little redneck village, size wise, where you know everyone - I don't know how it turns into such a mystery, for you, you don't know how to handle.
Therefore, it's often preferable to only advertise what they did do after the fact, and keep mum about more ambitious projects until they're confident that it would succeed. Unfortunately that too does backfire; Delta Rising is the poster-child of something that was advertised and expected to be successful, only to have it blow up because it was rushed out.
However, it would be worthwhile to Cryptic if they did go back to announcing what they had planned, with a clear disclaimer that they're all subject to change, and follow up with a simple but tough "We warned you" when certain plans/projects don't show up again for one reason or another. Sometimes the only way to get through is to just say it once then leave the minority to rage (as they're doing now, though for the wrong reasons). After all, life is filled with disappointment, and additions to games is no exception.
From exposure to many college age persons I have to conclude the following: The person entrusted with this task lacks the communication skills to do anything except tweet. They probably don't really know how to type. And they don't know how to present information properly in the context of these forums.
With the "Support" staff I'd suggest the same thing applies. Except there they are required to reply by typing in a regular format. So they don't know how to relate with others. They are probably so uncomfortable that they are incapable of actually doing their job. And collectively they are Destroying the "Good Will" the community holds towards the entire enterprise.
I came here today to try and discover why the maintenance downtime is over an hour past scheduled completion? And when we might expect it to be finished? But they are incapable of presenting even that amount of information. Though they probably do, in fact, know what's going on.
(And maybe this is just me but in the Winter Wonderland example, I find in my own experience that something *artistic* that I do resonates with me in a whole different way than a cut-and-dry report I do for work. The way I feel and react about one is not the same way I feel and react about the other.)
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-)
Proudly F2P. Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
That's completely understandable, and very human. Even if you hated it with a passion, it's very hard to see something you've spent time on getting negative reviews and comments. It doesn't feel good, and it's even worse when the product is actually something you love.
Can I give you a suggestion to take to the higher-ups (and you can feel free to take full credit for this): Consider bringing in a third party to audit, review, and report feedback in a constructive manner.
Bringing in a good third party auditor - with no personal connection to the product/business - makes collecting feedback a lot easier, and gives you back a lot more actionable feedback.
Full disclosure, I admit my company performs this service. That's not intended as an advertisement or sale's pitch, merely honesty.
You would be amazed the level of feedback stakeholders and customers alike are willing to give a third party - even without assurances of anonymity. It's like the filters come off completely, and people are willing to talk freely (yeah, I know, filters are already off on forums mainly).
I joke with some interviewees that it's a company-paid therapy/bwitching session because that helps them feel free to surface all of the frustrations and concerns they have, but also to bring up what they'd like to see things become.
A good auditor will take all of that feedback - even if it's largely ranting - and summarize the core problems and strengths into something actionable for the company. A "God, I HATE STFS!!! TRIBBLE YOU, DEVS!!!" thread doesn't exactly give you reasonable feedback and doesn't put anyone in a helpful frame of mind, but it does convey that something has upset a customer and should be considered - probably by someone not easily offended.
Again, I'm NOT proposing this as something you should hire my company for, I'm making the suggestion that your team consider working with a neutral third party to really understand what is happening and maintain a professional distance from the work.
I would chalk it up to "lamers on the forum" or "whiners" or be surprised.
It wouldn't be realtive or subjective if those complaints were legit and before the release I'd expect it to happen.
Seems like no one figured it might be a very bad idea even dating back to when it was planned out.
No one saw the complaints coming and when they did no one decided to step up or had a plan to do anything.
Then when no one is communicating anything you can only imagine what is going on and yes most people here have a pretty vivid one.
One more thing I forgot to add I figure it can't be easy to maybe be geared to handle the star trek audience in terms of average intelligence and the difficulty of PR and controlling the customer?
Maybe it takes a better than average community manager?
Thank you. My hat's off to you!
I'm really not sure I understood what you were saying here, but I'll try to address what I did.
I said "we no longer include the forums" (in discussions of planned releases).
I didn't go dark for 6 months after that, we've posted since then. We did not discuss the plans for DR, for the reason stated above, that discussing plans often leads to accusations of promises reneged. I'm not saying one way or another, that that is a good policy, I'm just saying that is how things are at the moment, and that's the reason they are that way.
I have never said that I don't want to hear complaints. (and feedback/complaints have nothing to do with the line you quoted) I have repeated many times that complaints are fine. We WANT to know what you don't like about the game. What we don't like is when people get riled up and yell/curse/call us names, etc. If you can state your complaint in a rational manner, your ideas are much more likely to be taken into consideration. Again, listening is not the same as acting.
As for lack of consistency in communication, I think that's true. It's not chaos, but it is pretty freeform. I would argue that you can't have your cake and eat it too. The reason I am able to talk to you directly on the forums, without running it through PR channels, is because we have a pretty loose communications policy. We want players and devs to interact. If we had a more coherent/corporate communications policy, I would never talk with you directly. Anything I had to say would be routed through a community manager.
So yes, we may not be consistent in our communication, but that's kind of how it works. If you want consistency, we'd have to get rid of this type of interaction.
normal text = me speaking as fellow formite
colored text = mod mode
I think the above part I highlighted is helpful in tempering the impression that people's first reaction is to take from statements about not taking forum feedback into account, and the point (understandable) that it is not a requirement of the developer job description, which is why I have called it out here.
I have to admit the thought of the effects of a tighter communication policy crossed my mind...and I don't know what to tell you, to be honest.
Really thorny issue.
I guess the best solution to avoid major changes like that is a cease-and-desist on flaming and name calling. You *and* some of us have both been saying that one for until we are blue in the face. (Hmmm...guess that's *another* reason for that gradient layer on my sig now...
At least for me, there is something in my sig that, when I preview a post, sometimes makes me stop and really think about whether I am comfortable posting what I wrote or if I need to edit. However each person does it, I think we all need to stop and think, and remember that there is a real person on the other end and not a Borg drone with a keyboard.
By the way...have you seen my red Swingline stapler?
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-)
Proudly F2P. Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
Stole99 had started out saying there had been a shift in policy to ignore players and go by metrics. He asked if you hadn't said that somewhere.
You said you had no idea what he was talking about.
Then I quoted "no longer include the players..." which you then said was taken out of context.
And I replied that is what happens when you don't communicate.
But the thing is, since like mid summer the forums have felt abandoned by developers and of course other events added to it but up until now that quote to me has meant "metrics only period" and then the players' feedback will be ignored.
That quote right there, is basically what we've had of any kind of plan or direction or anything, so as said it's felt quite abandoned.
Then I added when no one saying anything all you have is your imagination that the game is doomed or whatever.
Next thing is, I don't believe most people realistically think they can have whatever they want put into the game and I'd even say, it might come off less professional, to even ask the players but if the alternative is another Delta Rising?
Does Delta Rising represent the peak ability of developers working without player feedback?
Because if that be the case I see no 'data supporting deciding to ignore feedback is working for neither developer or player.
People might not get so riled up if certain members of the development team didn't openly and repeatedly express their disgust for, or even outright openly insult players whose views they disagree with, or players who rationally state their issues. I mean there are always going to be those who don't cooperate, but there's a good chunk of us who have been rationally stating our positions for years, and we've gotten pretty much no comparable treatment from the people whom you want us to treat with respect.
It's that sort of behaviour that creates an environment like this one, where a large amount of the forum community are insulting, protesting, or otherwise openly expressing their disregard with the development team- because for years and years they've done exactly what you're asking for. They've been calm, they've been rational, they've been if not nice, then at least cordial.
And what have they gotten for being the bigger man? Insults. Dismissals. Being told that if they don't like a design choice they can quit the game. Or being given a sweeping generalization about who they are and what they do that is actually quite hurtful and insulting.
I'm not going to name names, but I will say that it hasn't just been 'one bad apple'- over the years there have been several developers who have acted like this, some quite loved even.
It really hurts me as a player when I see this sort of behaviour from the developers because it says to me that they can't be bothered to really read through posts or keep themselves open to actually reviewing material- everything in their mind is 'perfect' and that's a really bad mind state to get into because it puts everyone who disagrees with you as an antagonist and you leading a righteous crusade against them. It makes it really easy to insult or dismiss them without paying any attention to their views or arguments or bug reports.
So I do appreciate what you're saying here, Taco, but there's a lot more going on than just players 'being mad just because'. There's very specific reasons why players aren't making as many threads that calmly state their views and experiences and tell you what they dislike: and that reason is that IT DOESN'T WORK. It has a history of NOT WORKING. It has a history of developers not just ignoring it, but actively dismissing it as without any merit without taking the time to review those complaints.
I'm not asking you guys to agree with everything- by the simple merit of how complex the game is we understand that doing so just isn't possible. What I'd like to see though is less insulting of the player base through dev statements- especially in interviews and podcast appearances. I'd like it if there wasn't this culture of 'if you don't like it you can quit' among some of the developers.
The devs shouldn't turn around, then, when people tell you information you've requested and insult them or dismiss their concerns. If you, who have managed to avoid behaving like that, can do it, I don't see why the others should be unable to.
I agree that the forums can and do become toxic, and that a careful hand needs to be taken to deal with them, and I appreciate that you take the time to discuss these matters with us.
I feel that it would really help if, even when they become toxic, someone takes a bit of time to reassure players that certain issues of concern, such as the negative impact of some of the recent Intelligence boff powers that is being discussed in the PVP forum and the bug report forum... were, if not addressed, then at least acknowledged.
Even if it's not a priority for the developers who handle those matters, the perception of the dev treatment of the matter would benefit hugely from at least acknowledging stuff like that. Even if it's just a "I'll look into it, but we're currently working on some other stuff that takes priority."
Even if that means posting once a week with "Sorry, haven't had time to get around to it"- even getting a post like that says "I still care about this matter, even if I haven't had time for it", which in turn tells the players that you care about their concerns. Absolutely they need that weekly post to remind them you haven't forgotten- because in its absense you get wild speculation, and the forums becoming toxic, and players reacting poorly to that one poorly received that a dev made months ago.
I hope this helps you better understand some of what's going on here.