Ranger Archive
Thread: ENOUGH ALREADY!!!!
DeltaXi65 wrote:
Tonteth wrote:
DeltaXi65 wrote:
Guys,...
We need to stay upbeat guys. We need to recognizethat the only people that can help us are the Devs, so developing an adversarial relationship with them isn't in our best interests. You don't bite the hand that feeds you.
You wanna pass that statement on to the devs? If I'm not mistaken, it's our money that pays their salary no?
Holocrons at christmas were a gift. Not only that, but it destroyed every profession. How would that be equal to a class that had their last unique skill given to everyone else?
Ah, yes. The old "Do what I tell you because I pay your salary" argument. That's crap. They develop the game. We choose to play. If we don't like how they develop the game, we don't continue to pay. The customer is not always right - the customer can always go somewhere else. A customer is always going to want something for nothing, or to get top quality for lowest price and that's never possible.
The holocron issue is simply proving that the player base is extremely bad at predicting the outcome of Developer decisions. The holocron decision was a horrible one, but it was popular. Where were the naysayers then? They were gone - because they got something for nothing.
And there's no such class in the game right now, so that part of the argument is moot.
My point is simply this - the gnashers have been pretty bad at predicting the actual results of changes in the game. So they should stop doing it.
B
Ah yes, the "they made the game so shut up argument" That's crap. They made the game to have a player base. They should be providing what the customer wants, not what they think the customer wants. You're right, if we don't like how they develop the game, we don't pay anymore. Perhaps that's why their subscription numbers have been falling for the last 3 months. When the cost to maintain the game is more than the money they make a month, the game will be scrapped and they will be unemployed, again. The single customer is not always right. But the majority of the customers is. And I don't see how a majority's complaint about a bad change is trying to get something for nothing.
Your *OPINION* of the holocron gift at christmas is also a moot point. So what's wrong with using another moot point to argue the first moot point?
.Ah, yes. The old "Do what I tell you because I pay your salary" argument. That's crap. They develop the game. We choose to play. If we don't like how they develop the game, we don't continue to pay. The customer is not always right - the customer can always go somewhere else. A customer is always going to want something for nothing, or to get top quality for lowest price and that's never possible.
Ummm I don't something for nothing. All I want is that what they put in the game, works as it should. Not so much as I want, I'll go for what they planned. But with stuff that was in at launch still not working, is sad and pathetic. Just fix what you created, before adding more buggy stuff.
Squidwalker wrote:Delta wrote:Ah, yes. The old "Do what I tell you because I pay your salary" argument. That's crap. They develop the game. We choose to play. If we don't like how they develop the game, we don't continue to pay. The customer is not always right - the customer can always go somewhere else. A customer is always going to want something for nothing, or to get top quality for lowest price and that's never possible.
Ummm I don't something for nothing. All I want is that what they put in the game, works as it should. Not so much as I want, I'll go for what they planned. But with stuff that was in at launch still not working, is sad and pathetic. Just fix what you created, before adding more buggy stuff.
So what do you do if you buy a shooter (hypothetically speaking, of coruse)and it doesn'y measure up? Do you stop playing the game, or do you send the developers emails (since most of those games don't have direct feedback sytems...you know what I mean) telling them that they had better make you happy or else?
Calculus_Entropy wrote:
I am going to have to call you guys on the "we pay you salary issue," too. You can't tell a police office that your taxes pay his salary, so he can't write you a ticket.
No, but what you can do if you feel you are receiving very poor police service is to influece things at the voting booth. There are constantly measures on the ballot for funds for such services. Police ultimately are held accountable for their actions by the community in which they serve, either directly or indirectly.
You can't tell you ISP that you pay for the service so they need to make it faster, and expect them to do it.
I did just that last week in fact. My service was very slow, I told them I couldn't take it anymore and intended to switch to cable (and was ready to do just that), and a day later I was getting 4x the speed I was getting the day before. The key though is knowing what cards you hold, and picking your battles carefully.
Message Edited by GoldMemberBria on 04-15-2004 02:04 PM
Calculus_Entropy wrote:
Squidwalker wrote:
Delta wrote:
Ah, yes. The old "Do what I tell you because I pay your salary" argument. That's crap. They develop the game. We choose to play. If we don't like how they develop the game, we don't continue to pay. The customer is not always right - the customer can always go somewhere else. A customer is always going to want something for nothing, or to get top quality for lowest price and that's never possible.
Ummm I don't something for nothing. All I want is that what they put in the game, works as it should. Not so much as I want, I'll go for what they planned. But with stuff that was in at launch still not working, is sad and pathetic. Just fix what you created, before adding more buggy stuff.
So what do you do if you buy a shooter (hypothetically speaking, of coruse)and it doesn'y measure up? Do you stop playing the game, or do you send the developers emails (since most of those games don't have direct feedback sytems...you know what I mean) telling them that they had better make you happy or else?
Calc, this comes up all the time. There is a huge difference in the two types of games. If I buy a stand alone single person any kind of game, and don't like it, I won't play it and won't recomend it. BUT the difference is, whether I choose to play or not, whether I stop playing for 3 months then go back and finish it, I'm not paying a constant subscription fee. I know when I spend my $50 at the store, I take the risk of not liking the game. But I also know that its static content, that has been developed to a good level of statisfaction, and there is an end game. If it's full of bugs and doesn't work, won't load, you can't do the things the game is designed to let you do parts of it don't work....Hell yes I'm calling/writing the company and complaining, looking for an update ASAP to download and fix. Oh and those updates for these games....are free because they know they screwed up and shipped an incomplete product and basiclaly I didn't get my $50 worth. They know the value of a customer.
MMO like EQ( I played) and SWG, have that initial $50 cost AND a subscription fee. But with that, I get a community of player to play with, AND changing/added content. I know that when I buy it, it has that subscription fee, but I expect something for it. What I expect is this. The part of the game that is in place at teh time I buy the box, works. In my case I bought it release day, and I didn't get my $50 worth because much of the game was broken and bugged. BUT I knew the game would still be worked on and was a fluid thing, and for that I had to pay a subscription fee. I accept that.
Now let me ask you something. If you had bought said stand alone single person shooter or what ever, and it didn't work, what would you do? Now notice I'm not asking the same thing you asked me about "what if I didn't like it." That is subjective. I'm asking "what if it didn't work?" That is objective, and can't be argued. Either you can do what the game is made to let you do, or you can't.
So basically, for my initial cost of $50 I expect the professions and abilities that were in the game at that time, to be working. There were many that were not, and still are. I expect them to fix those things ASAP for free. Its what they shipped and what I paid for. Now for my subscription fee I expect enhancments, additions, content, and bug fixes of those new things. The two should be seperate.
So in my eyes, SOE took our initial cost money, said "hahahaha well they bought an incomplete product, whether they pay subscription or not, we got that from them." And with our subscription fees are making all the enhancements and new content etc. What should have happened is that there should have been a team that solely worked on finishing and debugging the launched product. Then a second team for development of new stuff.
They nailed themselves, because they launched with out all the stuff they advertised. Namely mount, vehicles and player cities. So that team that would normally have been working on launch bugs, spent the first 6 months working hard on adding those promised things. Now that stuff is in the game, they are neglecting to go back and fix the "at launch" bugs.
I have playe very few professions. The one I know is for sure broken since launch is Pistoleer. Unlike ranger that works, but is just lacking luster, it's actually broken. All of that profession other then damage mitigation is from launch. It has not had any work on it since laucnch. 90% of the specials don't work at all and/or are redundant. Again, all of this was in the game at launch. So they are telling me that the devs, worked hard at adding AWESOME content like Geno cave, Corvette, revamping theme parks, Updating/adding quests and NPC's but they can't fix what was broken out of the box.
Now said like that, how you act? Wow I rambled, sorry bud.
Random thoughts are spread throughout
Squidwalker wrote:
Calc, this comes up all the time. There is a huge difference in the two types of games. If I buy a stand alone single person any kind of game, and don't like it, I won't play it and won't recomend it. BUT the difference is, whether I choose to play or not, whether I stop playing for 3 months then go back and finish it, I'm not paying a constant subscription fee. I know when I spend my $50 at the store, I take the risk of not liking the game. But I also know that its static content, that has been developed to a good level of statisfaction, and there is an end game. If it's full of bugs and doesn't work, won't load, you can't do the things the game is designed to let you do parts of it don't work....Hell yes I'm calling/writing the company and complaining, looking for an update ASAP to download and fix. Oh and those updates for these games....are free because they know they screwed up and shipped an incomplete product and basiclaly I didn't get my $50 worth. They know the value of a customer.
MMO like EQ( I played) and SWG, have that initial $50 cost AND a subscription fee. But with that, I get a community of player to play with, AND changing/added content. I know that when I buy it, it has that subscription fee, but I expect something for it. What I expect is this. The part of the game that is in place at teh time I buy the box, works. In my case I bought it release day, and I didn't get my $50 worth because much of the game was broken and bugged. BUT I knew the game would still be worked on and was a fluid thing, and for that I had to pay a subscription fee. I accept that. I will concede that FPS and MMO are different animals and can't be compared
.
Now let me ask you something. If you had bought said stand alone single person shooter or what ever, and it didn't work, what would you do? I would swear and never play it again. Now notice I'm not asking the same thing you asked me about "what if I didn't like it." That is subjective. I'm asking "what if it didn't work?" That is objective, and can't be argued. Either you can do what the game is made to let you do, or you can't.
So basically, for my initial cost of $50 I expect the professions and abilities that were in the game at that time, to be working. There were many that were not, and still are. I expect them to fix those things ASAP for free. Its what they shipped and what I paid for. Now for my subscription fee I expect enhancments, additions, content, and bug fixes of those new things. The two should be seperate. I agree, but the fact is, they aren't different things. We all know this to be true, so we live with it.
So in my eyes, SOE took our initial cost money, said "hahahaha well they bought an incomplete product, whether they pay subscription or not, we got that from them." And with our subscription fees are making all the enhancements and new content etc. What should have happened is that there should have been a team that solely worked on finishing and debugging the launched product. Then a second team for development of new stuff.
They nailed themselves, because they launched with out all the stuff they advertised. Namely mount, vehicles and player cities. So that team that would normally have been working on launch bugs, spent the first 6 months working hard on adding those promised things. Now that stuff is in the game, they are neglecting to go back and fix the "at launch" bugs.
I have playe very few professions. The one I know is for sure broken since launch is Pistoleer. Unlike ranger that works, but is just lacking luster, it's actually broken. All of that profession other then damage mitigation is from launch. It has not had any work on it since laucnch. 90% of the specials don't work at all and/or are redundant. Again, all of this was in the game at launch. So they are telling me that the devs, worked hard at adding AWESOME content like Geno cave, Corvette, revamping theme parks, Updating/adding quests and NPC's but they can't fix what was broken out of the box. I know many pistoleers and I don't know anyone that says they are broken. In fact they are all ecstatic about the prof. This may be due torecent changes, however.
Now said like that, how you act? Wow I rambled, sorry bud.
. I guess the bottom line here is, if you don't like what you are paying for, stop paying for it.