Regardless, I don't think they really listen to the player base. Yeah the bug reports comes in and it gets added to their list of bugs...but really it just gets put in the queue with what they consider it's severity being where on the queue it gets put...not what the players reporting the bug thinks. And that is a GOOD thing. They really should be doing that. People seem to think that the devs not listening to the players is a bad thing, but really, most of the time, it's a good thing.
This is a little off track but (I hope) relevent. I work in mental health, in both a senior and junior position. My senior position I work during the week, and my junior position I work on the weekend (due the the experience I need for the doctorate I've undertaken, in order to switch career).
It's sort of given me the two sides of a similar story, those in the junior position (for example the players who do not know the in's and outs of Cryptic management) constantly TRIBBLE and and moan about those 'above' them. On the flip side of the coin, I hear all these TRIBBLE and moans, and I do try my damned hardest to address them, but there are simply not enough resources to address all of the complaints (even the most severe, such as shortages of staff - which puts people in actual danger).
I have no idea what goes on at Cryptic HQ - but I can imagine a similar scenario, where they have a set budget given to them by PWE that that have to stick too, and decide what goes where.
If I tried to address each and every complaint from those under me, I would spend most of my time trying to justify why I spent time on 'this' rather than 'that', and would have no time to do my actual job.
I think this is why Cryptic does listen, but does not interact with the community as much as it would like, because (similar to the example of my own job) you are damned if you do, and damned if you don't.
I don't blame them for just getting on with the job they have, given the time/resources that PWE have made available to them.
Cold. Dude. WAAAY over the top already, in what you call "playing nice". Deep breath, step back, remember that we're all insignificant motes in a vast uncaring universe and that's a good thing, maybe a nice drink. It's not that vital that you not only be heard, but be the only one heard and drag the rest of the thread wherever you want to go.
The mods will decide when (and if) to close it down, regardless of any opinions expressed here, so arguing the point seems... pointless.
Getting back on topic - Some say the question (do the devs listen) has been answered (due to 'that' topic). So clearly they do listen regarding something controversial, that can give Cryptic bad PR - but I imagine that decision was taken from the higher echelons.
Perhaps it may be more constructive to rephrase the question as; - do the devs listen to the more mundane day to day complaints of the players (and sidestep 'that' issue)?
Taking 'that' hot topic (which may even be out of the hands of the devs) could go some way to get things back on track?
Do they listen? No, not really. At one point they did, but that was years ago. This game in monetized to hell and gone, starship combat is a muddled over grown mess where winning depend on how you set up your macro bound to your space bar, with winning absolutely no longer dependent on any real skill while one is actually playing. Ground combat while not as bad is pretty bad. I wonder what the management is going to do when the fed passes loot box laws which they inevitably will. They could have been ahead of the curve years ago and done away with them, but greed won over good sense and morality. Players asked years ago lets have a "pocker game" on our ships.. the reply "Oh no! That would be depicting gambling. It's a moral boundary we won't cross" .. yet we have loot boxes. Or as they say over at EA.. "Surprise Mechanics!". Well the laws will change and the game will have to change and may be just maybe it might finally turn into more then collecting virtual junk out of random chance box that are constantly having the payout "tweaked" (and tweaking could very well be per customer and no global per a patent that Cryptic/PWI have licenced years ago from Activision) Or it might just roll over and die. Either way it's not likely that we the customers are really going to have any say in the matter.
At this point when the hammer comes down I honestly expect further story development is going to pretty much cease with the loss of loot boxes of which the greater percentage goes to PWI and the rest to payroll, overhead and development. Without that revenue stream what will follow... yea. Your guess is as good as mine. But the one for certain is it won't be much. Income will be either subscriptions (and I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if "life time" subscriptions cease to be life time.) Considering the level of rebuild the game will post lootbox mechanics I expect we might see a relaunch and rebrand as "Startrek online II" and all the previous LTM's no longer honored.
Of course how could I possibly know about anything like this even though I owned a game store and delt with corporations and corporate attitudes on a daily basis. Enjoy the ride while it last Cryptic management because it's going to end. Just keep your eyes open for executive types "moving on" I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to see interim CEO, CFO, CIO, etc aas existing personages starting to exit with the next 6 months.. if that long. Why stick around when they know their contract are going to have to be renegotiated and their level of compensation severely curtailed? There is only so much staff you can shed to save money before you need to start shedding suits and ties because you can't afford them anymore.
To many players are utterly addicted to the loot box mechanics in this game. I don't know if it'll survive the federally mandated loss of them. And what more of a shame is how much players have spend for virtual items that are going to most likely just go "poof" when they have to rebuild the game from the ground up if they want to keep the licence. And don't expect any grace from CBS. It's all about the money. TRIBBLE put the proof to that.
'But to be logical is not to be right', and 'nothing' on God's earth could ever 'make it' right!'
Judge Dan Haywood
'As l speak now, the words are forming in my head.
l don't know.
l really don't know what l'm about to say, except l have a feeling about it.
That l must repeat the words that come without my knowledge.'
I'm only going to say this once so I advise you folks to listen. Certain folks in here need to dial it way the heck back before additional moderation occurs. We've been lenient considering how touchy this subject can be. I strongly suggest certain folks not continue to push the issue. If folks cannot discuss things civilly that will be the end of it.
With that said I think some folks need to realize it takes time to get stuff done. Coding is not as simple as simply flipping switches as much as we all wish it was. if you want a feature or bug fix it takes time to implement and do properly. It's literally impossible to have a 100% bug free game today with as complex as games can be. The best you can hope for is to keep them at a minimum. I've seen at least 100 bugs that I've reported or others have passed to me get fixed. I have also seen several features get requested that were finally implemented. You're never going to please everyone in a gaming community, so any company is going to do what they feel is best. You don't have to agree with it, and for that matter you don't even have to like it, and are free to voice that dislike provided it's done civilly. Just because your specific request/feature hasn't been implemented yet doesn't mean it will never happen and that they never listen. Sometimes larger features take awhile to complete, and not all requests are feasible. Let's also not forget potential legalities in getting certain ships, features, or items in game that may crop up. There's plenty they would love to do, but don't always have the time or money to do it. Folks love to rip on the the devs quite a bit, but at the end of the day they're not machines and are human just like the rest of us.
They don't always make decisions I agree with, but I know for a fact they listen. When Delta Rising first came out and we were introduced to Cruiser Commands and several other powers like Threatening Stance, the ground version Threatening Posture did not yet exist. At the time there were no plans that any of us knew for a ground version to be included. Myself and several others that are part of my crew, and even folks outside of my crew all gathered a good bit of data and sent it on to the dev team. We told them that a ground version of the power was needed if folks still wished to create builds designed to keep threat. The team read over the data that was sent, and within a short time later, Threatening Posture became a thing.
"Someone once told me that time was a predator that stalked us all our lives. I rather believe that time is a companion who goes with us on the journey and reminds us to cherish every moment, because it will never come again." - Jean Luc Picard in Star Trek Generations
The mods will decide when (and if) to close it down, regardless of any opinions expressed here, so arguing the point seems... pointless.
Getting back on topic - Some say the question (do the devs listen) has been answered (due to 'that' topic). So clearly they do listen regarding something controversial, that can give Cryptic bad PR - but I imagine that decision was taken from the higher echelons.
Perhaps it may be more constructive to rephrase the question as; - do the devs listen to the more mundane day to day complaints of the players (and sidestep 'that' issue)?
Taking 'that' hot topic (which may even be out of the hands of the devs) could go some way to get things back on track?
Something clearly in the dev hands...the T6 Nova should be quite clear that the devs don't listen to the players. There was a bloody poll that said it was THE most wanted ship at that time. That was YEARS ago...and yet...no T6 Nova still. Even with the argument of they are a small dev team...they released some of the runner ups in that poll but not what won? Yeah if that isn't a clear statement of they will do what they want and the player input is moot, I don't know what is. Anything they produce that happens to be what we want happens so rarely, it more likely a case of what they want and what we want just happened to coincide more than they listened at all.
Ah yes, the super scientific online poll. Totally trustworthy and 100% infallible. Remember kids, an online vote for naming a bridge in Europe lead to a write-in winner of "Adolf Hitler Bridge." Obviously they didn't follow through with it. So yeah, online voting? I take it completely totally seriously.
Back to your post. It's as if you think that 100% of players wanted a Nova and nobody wanted anything else. Many people also asked for the Vor'Cha and/or Ambassador at T6 for years which they obviously DELIVERED on after that poll. So do they listen or don't they listen? As always your answer may vary based on whether or not they give you the thing YOU want.
When you see "TRIBBLE" in my posts, it's because I manually typed "TRIBBLE" and censored myself.
Ah yes, the super scientific online poll. Totally trustworthy and 100% infallible. Remember kids, an online vote for naming a bridge in Europe lead to a write-in winner of "Adolf Hitler Bridge." Obviously they didn't follow through with it. So yeah, online voting? I take it completely totally seriously.
And who can forget Boaty McBoatface? (They wound up actually using that name, for an unmanned deep-sea craft. Then Boaty McBoatface made some important and alarming discoveries, bringing the name they hoped everyone would forget back into the headlines...)
Ah yes, the super scientific online poll. Totally trustworthy and 100% infallible. Remember kids, an online vote for naming a bridge in Europe lead to a write-in winner of "Adolf Hitler Bridge." Obviously they didn't follow through with it. So yeah, online voting? I take it completely totally seriously.
And who can forget Boaty McBoatface? (They wound up actually using that name, for an unmanned deep-sea craft. Then Boaty McBoatface made some important and alarming discoveries, bringing the name they hoped everyone would forget back into the headlines...)
And Boaty lives on in my Samsar, Shippy McShip face. 'Cus it looks like it has a face. Geddit?
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though. JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Meh, I've had people telling me I'm going to hell before. Heaven, semi-naked men with wings. Hell, semi-naked men in leather. Either way I'll be happy.
Already offered and suggested civility in disagreement. *shrugs* I get the feeling it's more a "have to have the last word thing," so I'm sure another love letter will be heading my way.
Perhaps it may be more constructive to rephrase the question as; - do the devs listen to the more mundane day to day complaints of the players (and sidestep 'that' issue)?
I think that's the issue that some people have here. There is clear evidence that the Devs do listen to the player-base (yeah, yeah, yeah - I realise saying that is a trigger for some *rollseyes*). They just don't respond to everything.
We're all guilty of this, but there is another factor in what the Devs can do and can't do in terms of content delivery (with a tiny reference to the T6 Nova): CBS.
Star Trek, and what can and can't be used, in any licenced game based on the IP are dictated by what CBS will allow. We are all aware of this caveat in relation to this game. And we have all forgotten this as well, lol. Why isn't there a T6 Nova? Could the delay be down to negotiations with CBS? That's a valid question. The T6 Ambassador Class, the so called Narendra (Which I will forever think of as the Probert Class, because he deserves to have his name on that ship. I waited 30+ years to see that ship realised) would have had to have been authorised by CBS for use in game (and Andy himself). The fact the Narendra could be reskinned to the as-seen-on-screen Ambassador Class was a bonus for fans. And again, would have had to have been agreed and ok'ed by CBS.
It's a known fact that CBS do want an easily available to use T6 Constitution Class in game - which is why the T6 versions are always in lockboxes.
So all this makes me wonder if the Devs have tied hands in regards to certain things, as well as limited time/resources. Maybe it's not simply as black and white as some people have postulated. But it's hard to answer that one, given how hostile some are towards the Devs, I'm actually not surprised they don't respond. Which means we are never going to hear from them directly on this question. No matter what they would say in response there are always going to be individuals ready to run screaming at them with freshly sharpened pitchforks - just because they can.
Maybe the real question is not whether the Devs listen, but one of player-entitlement?
People ask how long have I been playing STO - well the answer is simple: I have been here since the beginning. I just haven't always had a lot to say.
Maybe the real question is not whether the Devs listen, but one of player-entitlement?
More like both.
The Developers should be sensitive to user feedback, but the users need to also have more consideration and try and maintain realistic expectations.
The problem in STO is that neither side consistently succeeds in these roles. The blame goes both ways.
And that brings us full circle, because the Devs do listen (evidence suggests they do), so that question is moot. Which leaves us with the real question: why don't they respond? Again, it can be argued that they do indeed reply. Just not in direct post for post in threads. Things happen in the game. Also, I think the answer to that is pretty self-evident: resources and time (and the ever present hostility towards them from some quarters). That's why we have community managers and mods.
People ask how long have I been playing STO - well the answer is simple: I have been here since the beginning. I just haven't always had a lot to say.
The Developers should be sensitive to user feedback, but the users need to also have more consideration and try and maintain realistic expectations.
The problem in STO is that neither side consistently succeeds in these roles. The blame goes both ways.
Sorry to double reply to you, but your point raises an interesting question:
If the player-base/community was able to dial it back, be civil, act civil. Stop all the ranting, bashing and moaning, post problems and feedback in constructive ways, do you think we'd get more interaction with the Devs?
Just a thought.
People ask how long have I been playing STO - well the answer is simple: I have been here since the beginning. I just haven't always had a lot to say.
The Developers should be sensitive to user feedback, but the users need to also have more consideration and try and maintain realistic expectations.
The problem in STO is that neither side consistently succeeds in these roles. The blame goes both ways.
Sorry to double reply to you, but your point raises an interesting question:
If the player-base/community was able to dial it back, be civil, act civil. Stop all the ranting, bashing and moaning, post problems and feedback in constructive ways, do you think we'd get more interaction with the Devs?
Just a thought.
I remember them interacting with the community and replying to various posts in the past, but after the constant backlash they received (including the snide 'and the players love it' in reponse to practically every dev post) they stopped interacting.
The devs themselves have said in the past that community hostility on the forums is one of the main reasons they don't come here anymore.
I wonder where anyone would get the idea the forums are hostile?
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though. JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
The Developers should be sensitive to user feedback, but the users need to also have more consideration and try and maintain realistic expectations.
The problem in STO is that neither side consistently succeeds in these roles. The blame goes both ways.
Sorry to double reply to you, but your point raises an interesting question:
If the player-base/community was able to dial it back, be civil, act civil. Stop all the ranting, bashing and moaning, post problems and feedback in constructive ways, do you think we'd get more interaction with the Devs?
Just a thought.
I remember them interacting with the community and replying to various posts in the past, but after the constant backlash they received (including the snide 'and the players love it' in reponse to practically every dev post) they stopped interacting.
The devs themselves have said in the past that community hostility on the forums is one of the main reasons they don't come here anymore.
That's what I thought. I don't rate our chances well of having the community behave in a civil polite way - even if it was the only way to bring back Dev participation.
The devs themselves have said in the past that community hostility on the forums is one of the main reasons they don't come here anymore.
Yeah, I think this all came from just after Delta Rising, when that first dropped the hostility was at an all time high level.
That was a really tough launch and bad feelings between the players and developers still exist to this day. My guess is that right now, with the backlash over the whole Disco Connie R&D Box thing.. it probably wouldn't be much better.
I hope things never get back to being as bad as they were post DR, that was honestly a really bad time to be a fan of STO. I would hope that things would be better and more civil today, but I should know better then to expect anything like that.
Comments
This is a little off track but (I hope) relevent. I work in mental health, in both a senior and junior position. My senior position I work during the week, and my junior position I work on the weekend (due the the experience I need for the doctorate I've undertaken, in order to switch career).
It's sort of given me the two sides of a similar story, those in the junior position (for example the players who do not know the in's and outs of Cryptic management) constantly TRIBBLE and and moan about those 'above' them. On the flip side of the coin, I hear all these TRIBBLE and moans, and I do try my damned hardest to address them, but there are simply not enough resources to address all of the complaints (even the most severe, such as shortages of staff - which puts people in actual danger).
I have no idea what goes on at Cryptic HQ - but I can imagine a similar scenario, where they have a set budget given to them by PWE that that have to stick too, and decide what goes where.
If I tried to address each and every complaint from those under me, I would spend most of my time trying to justify why I spent time on 'this' rather than 'that', and would have no time to do my actual job.
I think this is why Cryptic does listen, but does not interact with the community as much as it would like, because (similar to the example of my own job) you are damned if you do, and damned if you don't.
I don't blame them for just getting on with the job they have, given the time/resources that PWE have made available to them.
The mods will decide when (and if) to close it down, regardless of any opinions expressed here, so arguing the point seems... pointless.
Getting back on topic - Some say the question (do the devs listen) has been answered (due to 'that' topic). So clearly they do listen regarding something controversial, that can give Cryptic bad PR - but I imagine that decision was taken from the higher echelons.
Perhaps it may be more constructive to rephrase the question as; - do the devs listen to the more mundane day to day complaints of the players (and sidestep 'that' issue)?
Taking 'that' hot topic (which may even be out of the hands of the devs) could go some way to get things back on track?
At this point when the hammer comes down I honestly expect further story development is going to pretty much cease with the loss of loot boxes of which the greater percentage goes to PWI and the rest to payroll, overhead and development. Without that revenue stream what will follow... yea. Your guess is as good as mine. But the one for certain is it won't be much. Income will be either subscriptions (and I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if "life time" subscriptions cease to be life time.) Considering the level of rebuild the game will post lootbox mechanics I expect we might see a relaunch and rebrand as "Startrek online II" and all the previous LTM's no longer honored.
Of course how could I possibly know about anything like this even though I owned a game store and delt with corporations and corporate attitudes on a daily basis. Enjoy the ride while it last Cryptic management because it's going to end. Just keep your eyes open for executive types "moving on" I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to see interim CEO, CFO, CIO, etc aas existing personages starting to exit with the next 6 months.. if that long. Why stick around when they know their contract are going to have to be renegotiated and their level of compensation severely curtailed? There is only so much staff you can shed to save money before you need to start shedding suits and ties because you can't afford them anymore.
To many players are utterly addicted to the loot box mechanics in this game. I don't know if it'll survive the federally mandated loss of them. And what more of a shame is how much players have spend for virtual items that are going to most likely just go "poof" when they have to rebuild the game from the ground up if they want to keep the licence. And don't expect any grace from CBS. It's all about the money. TRIBBLE put the proof to that.
What a shame.
l don't know.
l really don't know what l'm about to say, except l have a feeling about it.
That l must repeat the words that come without my knowledge.'
With that said I think some folks need to realize it takes time to get stuff done. Coding is not as simple as simply flipping switches as much as we all wish it was. if you want a feature or bug fix it takes time to implement and do properly. It's literally impossible to have a 100% bug free game today with as complex as games can be. The best you can hope for is to keep them at a minimum. I've seen at least 100 bugs that I've reported or others have passed to me get fixed. I have also seen several features get requested that were finally implemented. You're never going to please everyone in a gaming community, so any company is going to do what they feel is best. You don't have to agree with it, and for that matter you don't even have to like it, and are free to voice that dislike provided it's done civilly. Just because your specific request/feature hasn't been implemented yet doesn't mean it will never happen and that they never listen. Sometimes larger features take awhile to complete, and not all requests are feasible. Let's also not forget potential legalities in getting certain ships, features, or items in game that may crop up. There's plenty they would love to do, but don't always have the time or money to do it. Folks love to rip on the the devs quite a bit, but at the end of the day they're not machines and are human just like the rest of us.
They don't always make decisions I agree with, but I know for a fact they listen. When Delta Rising first came out and we were introduced to Cruiser Commands and several other powers like Threatening Stance, the ground version Threatening Posture did not yet exist. At the time there were no plans that any of us knew for a ground version to be included. Myself and several others that are part of my crew, and even folks outside of my crew all gathered a good bit of data and sent it on to the dev team. We told them that a ground version of the power was needed if folks still wished to create builds designed to keep threat. The team read over the data that was sent, and within a short time later, Threatening Posture became a thing.
Star Trek Online volunteer Community Moderator
Back to your post. It's as if you think that 100% of players wanted a Nova and nobody wanted anything else. Many people also asked for the Vor'Cha and/or Ambassador at T6 for years which they obviously DELIVERED on after that poll. So do they listen or don't they listen? As always your answer may vary based on whether or not they give you the thing YOU want.
Sadly, there are many on the board that don't understand the difference between a business and a charity.
And Boaty lives on in my Samsar, Shippy McShip face. 'Cus it looks like it has a face. Geddit?
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Already offered and suggested civility in disagreement. *shrugs* I get the feeling it's more a "have to have the last word thing," so I'm sure another love letter will be heading my way.
I think that's the issue that some people have here. There is clear evidence that the Devs do listen to the player-base (yeah, yeah, yeah - I realise saying that is a trigger for some *rollseyes*). They just don't respond to everything.
We're all guilty of this, but there is another factor in what the Devs can do and can't do in terms of content delivery (with a tiny reference to the T6 Nova): CBS.
Star Trek, and what can and can't be used, in any licenced game based on the IP are dictated by what CBS will allow. We are all aware of this caveat in relation to this game. And we have all forgotten this as well, lol. Why isn't there a T6 Nova? Could the delay be down to negotiations with CBS? That's a valid question. The T6 Ambassador Class, the so called Narendra (Which I will forever think of as the Probert Class, because he deserves to have his name on that ship. I waited 30+ years to see that ship realised) would have had to have been authorised by CBS for use in game (and Andy himself). The fact the Narendra could be reskinned to the as-seen-on-screen Ambassador Class was a bonus for fans. And again, would have had to have been agreed and ok'ed by CBS.
It's a known fact that CBS do want an easily available to use T6 Constitution Class in game - which is why the T6 versions are always in lockboxes.
So all this makes me wonder if the Devs have tied hands in regards to certain things, as well as limited time/resources. Maybe it's not simply as black and white as some people have postulated. But it's hard to answer that one, given how hostile some are towards the Devs, I'm actually not surprised they don't respond. Which means we are never going to hear from them directly on this question. No matter what they would say in response there are always going to be individuals ready to run screaming at them with freshly sharpened pitchforks - just because they can.
Maybe the real question is not whether the Devs listen, but one of player-entitlement?
More like both.
The Developers should be sensitive to user feedback, but the users need to also have more consideration and try and maintain realistic expectations.
The problem in STO is that neither side consistently succeeds in these roles. The blame goes both ways.
And that brings us full circle, because the Devs do listen (evidence suggests they do), so that question is moot. Which leaves us with the real question: why don't they respond? Again, it can be argued that they do indeed reply. Just not in direct post for post in threads. Things happen in the game. Also, I think the answer to that is pretty self-evident: resources and time (and the ever present hostility towards them from some quarters). That's why we have community managers and mods.
Sorry to double reply to you, but your point raises an interesting question:
If the player-base/community was able to dial it back, be civil, act civil. Stop all the ranting, bashing and moaning, post problems and feedback in constructive ways, do you think we'd get more interaction with the Devs?
Just a thought.
I remember them interacting with the community and replying to various posts in the past, but after the constant backlash they received (including the snide 'and the players love it' in reponse to practically every dev post) they stopped interacting.
The devs themselves have said in the past that community hostility on the forums is one of the main reasons they don't come here anymore.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
That's what I thought. I don't rate our chances well of having the community behave in a civil polite way - even if it was the only way to bring back Dev participation.
Probably when one of the Devs staggered back into the office after setting foot on here, and bled to death from all the pitch fork wounds
Yeah, I think this all came from just after Delta Rising, when that first dropped the hostility was at an all time high level.
That was a really tough launch and bad feelings between the players and developers still exist to this day. My guess is that right now, with the backlash over the whole Disco Connie R&D Box thing.. it probably wouldn't be much better.
I hope things never get back to being as bad as they were post DR, that was honestly a really bad time to be a fan of STO. I would hope that things would be better and more civil today, but I should know better then to expect anything like that.