Architect Archive
Thread: Next time someone tries to make you feel guilty
"No, we will not change the resource stack size. It should be mentioned that manufacturing runs of 1000 items happened because of a UI bug early on. The slider only went up to 100 items, but players soon found out they could type in 1000 units on the manufacturing schematic. We haven’t fixed this bug because we know players will consider it a big nerf, so we have hedged against doing this for the time being. There have been discussions and debates (and posts) in the past contrary to this position, but it was ultimately decided that is not going to change. The team will be meeting to see what is possible on the technology side and what is healthy for the game on the design side."
Wow, that is rather harsh, isn't it? No explanation why except for a cheesy "you're lucky we didn't nerf you even further!" Moreof a big fat middle finger than anything else.
THANKS DEVS! Your communication skills are as sharp as ever.
Well, we asked question #1 and got back an absolutely worthless vague answer.
So, we asked question #2, which really had 3 parts to it (all related). We got a definitive answer on the first third - "no, because we said so".
I'm not sure our batting average is really improving. At a personal level I'm not sure that trying to come up with any questions is worth even 1 second of my time.
I've worked for several companies with extensive customer service departments, and a set of answers like that to paying customers would have resulted in someone taking a long walk off a short pier very quickly.
LonelyGhost wrote:
We ought to come at this from another direction...something like "WHen will housing storage rates be consistent at 75 per lot?"
Sorry for seeming defeatist, but we all know the answer to that would be something like:
"Housing storage rates will not be set to a flat 75 items per lot at this time, although this is something we may or may not decide to revisit in the future when we feel like it. The team will be meeting to see what is possible on the technology side and what is healthy for the game on the design side. Please continue to pay your $15.00 per month (something healthy on the bottom line side) while we continue to effectively ignore you and stonewall whenever you ask a reasonable question."
I don't usually display this lack of optomism, but I've been beaten into submission by the answers to our last two questions.
Message Edited by Astev_Aris on 05-26-2004 05:00 PM
I can only agree with ZenDragon. Next question should maybe be
'we find it a waste of time asking questions, we may be coming across as sulking schoolchildren, but frankly there is no point, we spend weeks deciding on an appropriate question to ask, you spend 5 minutes giving us the wrong answer, so the question we have is - Why bother? '
How about...
"Why don't you answer our last question? Try not to blow us off with offtopic examples."