Droid Engineer Archive
Thread: Our DE Correspondent
Actually i think he is pretty smart, i think he is reading thru the crap they are feeding him and understands that its coming and frankly at least hoping to have some sort of input into how it will be.
I dont think anyone could do a better job as the dev team has shown over and over again they will give us what they decide and we may have a say in tweeking it a bit.
We all have some one to answer to, with drashk its thunder, with thunder its the developers.
I dont think we would have anything diff if thunder himself were our rep.
Frankly im really disappointed in what the dev team came up with, i have cancelled my accounts but paid for a year, there progress to that time will determine wether i contiue to help them support there game.
So like everyone else i shall wait and see.
But i dont blame Drashk or anyone else, i do think it was an extremly poor choice on some ones part way up the line in the company on how they are proceeding, but in the end that will cost that person as well.
Sketh wrote:
Corrorspondant: We want plan A.
Devs: No way in hell. You are going to get B, and btw, we are going to announce it.
Cor: They will hate that.
(Devs announce B, and find that everyone does hate it)
Devs: OK, we need you to go back to the community and get us some solutions. But no way to A - and it MUST be some variant on B. But you can't tell them that it is set in stone, or the details of B that we have told you. Oh, and B MUST include B1 and B2 as part of it - but you can't tell them that either. You see, we have already coded that much of it up.
Ball is now in your court....
Yup, this is exactly what is probably happening, but it screws both the players and correspondents by keeping the truth from surfacing. What is lost by being up front and saying:
"We're doing this. Adapt or die."
I think what Gnome is trying to say is not that DrashK shouldn't have his own opinions, but that as a "Blue Name" when he posts threads, that it undermines the idea of "correspondent as a liasion" concept. Now, perhaps the best way to think of it is "Correspondents are in the "know", and you're pretty much stuck with anything that they present to you, because the Devs have already implemented some version of what they're presenting and are only taking small modifications to the existing (non public code) now" concept.
The whole situation stinks like the Sarlaac pits.
Andyes 90% of this exists because, as always, TH and Runesabre have failed to communicate on the schedule that they posted, so people are venting their spleen while they wait for "real information" however distasteful it might be.
I admit I've been one, but then again I haveexpectations from a company trying to bill itself as customer responsive and player focused. Honestly, SOE would be better served by just dropping their fascade and passing down the changes from on high.
They won't though, they have to keep false face, because IMHO they are losing people and the holiday influx of players was lower than their projections. Why else re-up cancelled accounts, make it "Jedi for everyone even quicker than before" season, toss Imperial Crackdown without communicating it earlier, and trying to add Droid content that is half assed?
They're hurting and scrambling for ways to keep membership up. And one of those ways is to string people along. And DrashK, the DEs and the entire player community is stuck with/in it until someone with some integrity speaks up over at SOE.
We'll cycle through this until we get information disclosed. Here's hoping it's soon, before we further fracture our community.
--D'ruk
Just to be clear here, since some of you seem to be misunderstanding my point. I think Drashk is doing a good job. I've said it numerous times in this thread alone. My only point was that the reason threads like this keep popping up is that Drashk is taking sides on this issue. Let's face it, none of us really know the character of any other person on this board. Usually in this case, it's human nature to impose our own behavior patterns on each other unless we have evidence to the contrary. I think the people who are taking the opinion that Drashk can't be impartial in this issue are reflecting more on themselves than on Drashk. To be clear once again, I think Drashk is fairly representing our views to the devs. I have been given no evidence to the contrary, and from the interactions I have had with him, I have no reason to doubt his motives.
My point all along, in this thread and others, is that by taking sides in an issue such as this, he is merely fanning the flames of discontent. When dealing with a mob such as our own dysfunctional family, you need to be able to maintain a certain distance. This allows you to be able to make harsh decisions (or be the bearer of bad news) when necessary and avoid these threats of bias. Had Drashk not posted his opinions on this matter, the reaction to his DC suggestion would have been quite different. That is the ultimate issue and the only reason I say that he shouldn't take sides.
In every disagreement, there are winners and losers. If Drashk comes out on the side of the winners (which he usually does) he risks alienating those who were on the opposite side. If he happens to have the wrong opinion, he loses credability with the ones who were right. There is no easy answer, the only way to win is to not play the game.
DrashK pays to play too. He has a right to make his feelings/preferences known. I think he knows how to separate what he wants, and what the community wants when it comes to informing the Devs. Not that it really matters, because the Devs have shown time and time again, they will do what "They" want.
You all think I am a troll for speaking like this. I cannot put all my thoughts into such attractive words as GnomeAd can, but that is EXACTLY what I am saying. If he speaks his peace as a BLUE name, then the devs listen to that point of view 95% more then one of our handles. If he want's to speak his peace on the boards, then all corresponents should be allowed to have a player ID along with the BLUE correspondent IDs which draw a TON more Dev attention then ours.
Gnome, thanks for putting it properly. I can't write for crap. 
Weissbrot wrote:
What you fail to see is that SOE is not Drashks boss. On the contrary, as a paying player he is as much boss of SOE as we are.
Reaperss wrote:
[...] I purchase for a living, I argue whatever point i'm handed by my boss. Even when I don't agree with it.
good point.
Sketh wrote:
The more I think about it, the more I think this threadis just an example of the Ad Hominem fallacy.
You don't like what Drashk is saying, so you attack what he is saying by attacking him.
Audio -
If you go back and read my posts carefully, I don't think I missed the point of the posters her at all.
However, logical point and motivation are different things - what I am sensing here is that the frustration levels are leading people to lash out to an extent, and find justification for it later.
This thread didn't get as nasty as the other one.
In terms of what I think is appropiate behaviour, and why, and why I do not think that our corrorspondant is out of line - well, I have already given my arguments and reasons many times above.
AudioOrgana wrote:
Either way, the DE issue aside, correspondents need to be careful what they say - and this has just been a clear example as to why.
Audio
Kevm wrote:
AudioOrgana wrote:
Either way, the DE issue aside, correspondents need to be careful what they say - and this has just been a clear example as to why.
Audio
yep..because as we see here in this thread there will always be people who will see a correspondent post something they don't agree with and then start posting "OMG...he doesn't agree with me. He can't be a good correspondent becuase he's promotiong his own agenda behind our backs!!! Burn him at the stake!!!!!"
when will these children realize that just because you don't agree with something doesn't mean you can't do your job?
It's not that he didn't agree with any single person, it's that in a few threads he was actively spoke against what unarguably the opinion of the vast majority of the community.
My point is simply that when in a position of correspondent it is unwise to do so, especially when the issue has been as heated as this.
Again, Isupport Drashk's latest thread regarding a proposed soloution - however, that current position does not negate the fact that I was very uncomfortable at seeing some of the statements made over the past week by him. Not because I didn't agree with them personally, but because in several threads I do believe he crossed the line between representing the community and pushing a personal (or Dev-contrived) agenda.
At this point arguing about where that line stands isn't necessary, nor productive, but the warning remains for correspondents to make sure they represent their community over their own views - or someone will call you on it. No matter what the motivations, I am glad that is true - it's one of the few checks and balances that exists.
Audio