EQN Round Table...Livestream??? (partial rant and poll)

Burdoc101

I am not sure why they are doing this. I can only assume they want to get more money from twitch ads, or to waste time (not sure who's time yet: ours, theirs, or EQN development). They are now doing round tables every Wednesday as a live-stream.

[Edit]

Whoops, forgot to add what this week's round table is about! Its a Round Table about the Round Table itself.

[Edit /end]

https://www.everquestnext.com/news/round-table-livestream-october-16-2013-eqn

I feel their scripted you-tube videos were enough; since the round tables never have really gave us a definitive answer yet [Edit] (Besides a few to mention) [Edit /end]. It just frustrates me so far that they are putting so much effort into community, but not telling us everything. It just feels like a big waste of time, but I still have hope (its all I got left).

It would be neat if the live-stream INVOLVED the community and had live questions being asked and answered TO ITS FULLEST. Then these round table discussion WOULD matter rather then what they are now. Which to myself is nothing more then a little hype boost for them every week.

I really look at Star Citizen and how they are developing the game with their community. And sure, they kinda owe it to the community since they are throwing money at them to develop the game, but still; I wish the SOE/EQN team would pick up on this and just tell us everything; in detail. I mean they are going F2P still, so why does it matter?

I will give credit to them atleast that the Dev Diaries are the best thing so far and hope they continue them. 

I have to take a poll now to see if anyone else feels like myself or if I'm forever alone.

Please correct me where need be (like I have to ask :-), love the MMORPG community). 

Nadia

i stopped caring about the round table after the discussion about Race, seems more a vehicle to drum up hype

Ender4

I view these completely differnt than you do. They are trying to connect to the community and explain why they are making the choices they are. It doesn't feel remotely like some sort of marketing scheme or anything to me. This isn't like say Funcom with AOC where they outright lied about things and kept things secret so people wouldn't know about it.

This is a game that is still pre-beta just trying to get some feedback on what the community wants and giving some info on why they are doing what they are doing. They are at the stage of development where they still can make changes to the game if they have misjudged what the community wants. They would pick much more interesting topics if they were just trying to get hype. Two guys discussing the potential death penalty isn't hype~.

I don't get why anyone would be bothered by this. Out of all the games that I've followed this one is one of the lowest key when it comes to the hype machine.

Sovrath

Originally posted by Ender4

I view these completely differnt than you do. They are trying to connect to the community and explain why they are making the choices they are. It doesn't feel remotely like some sort of marketing scheme or anything to me. This isn't like say Funcom with AOC where they outright lied about things and kept things secret so people wouldn't know about it.

This is a game that is still pre-beta just trying to get some feedback on what the community wants and giving some info on why they are doing what they are doing. They are at the stage of development where they still can make changes to the game if they have misjudged what the community wants. They would pick much more interesting topics if they were just trying to get hype. Two guys discussing the potential death penalty isn't hype~.

I don't get why anyone would be bothered by this. Out of all the games that I've followed this one is one of the lowest key when it comes to the hype machine.

I agree with your assessment.

My thought is that these round table discussions are sort of a barometer of the community.

They probably have an idea as to what they want to do but they don't want to make any decisions that a "substantial" majority of the community would be against.

I think some gamers believe that this round table component is a chance for the players to design the game with the developers.

And  nothing could be further from the truth.

Burdoc101

Originally posted by Ender4

I view these completely differnt than you do. They are trying to connect to the community and explain why they are making the choices they are. It doesn't feel remotely like some sort of marketing scheme or anything to me. This isn't like say Funcom with AOC where they outright lied about things and kept things secret so people wouldn't know about it.

This is a game that is still pre-beta just trying to get some feedback on what the community wants and giving some info on why they are doing what they are doing. They are at the stage of development where they still can make changes to the game if they have misjudged what the community wants. They would pick much more interesting topics if they were just trying to get hype. Two guys discussing the potential death penalty isn't hype~.

I don't get why anyone would be bothered by this. Out of all the games that I've followed this one is one of the lowest key when it comes to the hype machine.

I agree that they are trying to connect or reach out to the community, but they are going half ass about it. A lot of the round table has just been leaving unanswered questions or assumptions to float around the web.

Personally it leaves me with a gray palette where I am not sure whether to be excited or not about their answers. Sometimes the polls given should be corrected or broken down further. Some answers that they give are not complete or do not really tell what they are actually going to do. If they are going to involve the community in building the game with them they should really open their information with us.

I will admit they have justified some polls with answer that I appreciate, like the race/class restrictions. That is obviously answered openly and to its fullest, but most of them have been so far frustrating to gaze at because of the "maybe" answers given. 

I would appreciate it if they re-did polls again or went back and re-answered a poll with a part two video if its necessary if they can't answer the question at that time. 

If a game company is going to involve the community, go all the way and you will be more appreciated for it.

Burdoc101

Originally posted by Sovrath

Originally posted by Ender4

I view these completely differnt than you do. They are trying to connect to the community and explain why they are making the choices they are. It doesn't feel remotely like some sort of marketing scheme or anything to me. This isn't like say Funcom with AOC where they outright lied about things and kept things secret so people wouldn't know about it.

This is a game that is still pre-beta just trying to get some feedback on what the community wants and giving some info on why they are doing what they are doing. They are at the stage of development where they still can make changes to the game if they have misjudged what the community wants. They would pick much more interesting topics if they were just trying to get hype. Two guys discussing the potential death penalty isn't hype~.

I don't get why anyone would be bothered by this. Out of all the games that I've followed this one is one of the lowest key when it comes to the hype machine.

I agree with your assessment.

My thought is that these round table discussions are sort of a barometer of the community.

They probably have an idea as to what they want to do but they don't want to make any decisions that a "substantial" majority of the community would be against.

I think some gamers believe that this round table component is a chance for the players to design the game with the developers.

And  nothing could be further from the truth.

Well I would be the fool to believe that then.

Your probably right that the game is already designed with their idea in mind, but I question why they have focused so much on saying they want to build EQN together with the community. 

I mean heck designing Landmark is brilliant to get creative people involved to build lore friendly structures for EQN itself. 

Ender4

I think they are still in the stage where these things aren't set in stone so they can't really be completely open about it. Most of these videos have been about pretty minor parts of the game.

The type of hype that bugs me is the GW2 type. Where they obviously have the info and they tease you saying next month we'll release it and make a big deal about it.

You certainly can debate how useful/successful the round table stuff is but to me it doesn't feel like marketing. They also seem to be ramping them up some so hopefully the future ones have more meat to them.

I also believe that yes the results could change the game. It would probably be in a pretty minor way though. Like if they got more people voting for harsher death penalty maybe instead of just an XP tax that you work off they decided to just make it a pure XP loss. This is a pretty small change but it is one that would shift their game towards what the players are asking for. In some cases they probably just aren't sure what they want to do and the player feedback will help the most in those cases.

The core of the game is probably set in stone but we can help round some of the little things out.

Burdoc101

Originally posted by Ender4

I think they are still in the stage where these things aren't set in stone so they can't really be completely open about it. Most of these videos have been about pretty minor parts of the game.

The type of hype that bugs me is the GW2 type. Where they obviously have the info and they tease you saying next month we'll release it and make a big deal about it.

You certainly can debate how useful/successful the round table stuff is but to me it doesn't feel like marketing. They also seem to be ramping them up some so hopefully the future ones have more meat to them.

I also believe that yes the results could change the game. It would probably be in a pretty minor way though. Like if they got more people voting for harsher death penalty maybe instead of just an XP tax that you work off they decided to just make it a pure XP loss. This is a pretty small change but it is one that would shift their game towards what the players are asking for. In some cases they probably just aren't sure what they want to do and the player feedback will help the most in those cases.

The core of the game is probably set in stone but we can help round some of the little things out.

Hmm, this is fair to say and I can agree with this much. Twas feeling a bit like Debbie Downer today; after reading the news they made :-P. 

Ender4

Having watched the first live stream I can safely say anyone who thought this was a hype machine only thing is insane. This is the least hype driven communication with a community I've ever seen. This seems to be a really honest discourse with the community on what to do with the game.

azzamasin

Originally posted by Ender4

Having watched the first live stream I can safely say anyone who thought this was a hype machine only thing is insane. This is the least hype driven communication with a community I've ever seen. This seems to be a really honest discourse with the community on what to do with the game.

Exactly and if you follow anyone of the developers or producers on social media you'll realize just how passionate they are about this games potential.

Wizardry

I guess they "SOE" operate sort of like any business or a police force.They gathered together and drew up a planning schedule for the day/week/month and stick to it with no real purpose than to follow their agenda for that week.

I am sure they thought about how and how much the community will take part in what is actually an idea based on community feedback.I feel it is simply like every other developer,tell the people what they want to hear,tell them the game is for them made by them.There is no way they will listen to the community but instead a few people here and there.

The REAL clout comes from large media outlets,big gaming websites such as MMORPG.That is because they are the ones who help market and hype their game.If in an interview MMORPG expresses a concern sent in by gamer's they will listen but if you or i state some concern,they will not listen with any intent.

SOE's whole plan has been rather obvious create early interest and try to create enough reason to get people to anticipate and want to buy/use Landmark.IMO Landmark will be a very strong indicator of where this game goes.It might actually be part of the overall plan by SOE.If Landmark show some really bad ideas then it will badly hurt the chances of Next ,the final product.Landmark was the product they most likely felt could get out by Christmas and start making them some money to finish the REAL product which is of course NEXT.

Personally it is all about MY TIME and what i want to do with it.I will have no interest in PART of a game "Landmark" and no interest in a round table unless i thought  they would actually listen to the average gamer again with "intent" and not just to say they are listening.

 

Ender4

My personal point was that this is such a dry vehicle for talking about the game that it isn't a hype machine. I was around for WAR, GW2, SWTOR etc and all of them were pure hype to try to get people into their game. They were parceled out and thrown in your face and simply talked about how amazing every feature was going to be. This format is talking about really marginal parts of the game are going to work and what you want the company to do with them. There is no hype built into these at all, these seem to be honestly about what you want and not about what they want us to see.

cheeseheads

yup this link http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/post/5994885/Raph-Koster-on-why-fanboism-is-bad-for-the-industry.html#5994885 explains the poll results so far

donpopuki

Why must it be shoe horned into a single concept? Is it hype? Yes. Is it building community? Yes. Are they using the info to change the game? Yes. Are some of the questions worthless? Yes. Are they going to do what they want more often than the community suggests? Yes.

Burdoc101

I certainly agree that the developers at SOE are passionate about their game. This makes me excited for EQN and Landmark even more because I know they want this game to be as good as it can be. 

I am only disappointed that as much as they say they want to involve the community they only go half-way when they could go so much further I feel. @Wizardry made a good point earlier similarly to how I think they are going about this. 

Of course this is just how I feel and I am not a developer so I don't know what goes into making a game besides time, money and a few guesses, but it brings me back to my question I haven't seen answered yet:

If EQN/Landmark are going F2P and they want to involve the community so much, why not give every detail about the game in its current development? 

Ender4

---

Originally posted by DMKano

---

Originally posted by Nadia i stopped caring about the round table after the discussion about Race, seems more a vehicle to drum up hype

---

My feelings exactly - it's a marketing tool.

 

---

I think this opinion is ridiculous. A hype driven marketing tool would have far more interesting topics that were meant to drive interest in the game. Which races are included is not hype. GW2 had tons of hype, SWTOR had tons of hype, this isn't anything at all like the hype machine, it is the exact opposite.

Any time you put any information out it is somewhat marketing but this is certainly not a big hype machine version of it.

Burdoc101

Originally posted by Torvaldr

I like the discussion that ensue on the forums afterwards.

This shouldn't be a surprise to the OP if they were participating in the community discussions. This was highlighted in one of the last community roundtables as people like the OP made a bunch of assumptions about what these are supposed to be about. So they said they will go over why they're doing them, what they use them for, and so on.

It's just some optional chat thing. If you don't like then skip over it.

If you want to give feedback about a roundtable topic they have forums available to do that. Not too many games lately, other than some small indie projects like Firefall, have offered this sort of opportunity for the community to respond. They welcome all sorts of feedback, not just the answers to the poll. What they will actually do with that feedback is up to them.

Anyway I find the community discussion the most interesting part of it all.

To say I am have not been apart of community discussions would be a false assumption.

I am pretty hyped for this game and check websites, forums regularly for any new information that deals with EQN or Landmark. Besides looking I also am involved with reading others posts and usually post new information here on the MMORPG.com forums, and other sites, about EQN.

If you could reply with the link to the discussion you mention that highlights this, I would appreciate it. 

Here is a list just for mmorpg.com:

http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/397697/New-Poll-Death-Penalty-Poll.html

http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/398060/October-2013-Producers-Letter.html

http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/397560/EQN-Landmark-Dev-Diary-.html

http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/397807/New-Poll-Game-Holidays-Poll-EQN.html

http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/397803/Friends-and-More-EQN-Friends-List-Response.html

http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/397017/Clockwork-Guns-and-Shadow-Assassins.html

http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/397072/New-Poll-Fast-Travel.html

http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/394976/EQN-Map-with-Lore.html

http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/394078/Gnomes-Confirmed-.html

http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/396984/EQN-Lore-Dissection-Part-1.html

 

Which brings me to my back to why I am disappointed/frustrated with the round table.

I am participating in their community development and just feel we are not getting the answers we deserve for participating. I would at-least like some clarification, updated round table polls or part 2 videos if they do not have or cannot give the information at this time.

 By no right though do we deserve anything, because we do not own the game.

 

 

Enrif

Originally posted by Burdoc101

Of course this is just how I feel and I am not a developer so I don't know what goes into making a game besides time, money and a few guesses, but it brings me back to my question I haven't seen answered yet:

If EQN/Landmark are going F2P and they want to involve the community so much, why not give every detail about the game in its current development? 

Because every other Developer could steal the ideas. There are some Games out there in the Dark of Development that could take a bit of them(Blizzard Titan), and it wouldnt be the first time that some one else copies stuff from SOE and makes it "better"(Vanilla WoW). This is the sole reason why they cant give all the details. 

Or to put it other way, why should i drive a Ferrari, when some one else offers me a Lamborghini for the same price?

Burdoc101

Originally posted by Enrif

Originally posted by Burdoc101

Of course this is just how I feel and I am not a developer so I don't know what goes into making a game besides time, money and a few guesses, but it brings me back to my question I haven't seen answered yet:

If EQN/Landmark are going F2P and they want to involve the community so much, why not give every detail about the game in its current development? 

Because every other Developer could steal the ideas. There are some Games out there in the Dark of Development that could take a bit of them(Blizzard Titan), and it wouldnt be the first time that some one else copies stuff from SOE and makes it "better"(Vanilla WoW). This is the sole reason why they cant give all the details. 

Or to put it other way, why should i drive a Ferrari, when some one else offers me a Lamborghini for the same price?

What about Star Citizen then?

 

Also EQ 2 and WoW were made around the same time. WoW just did a better job.

 

[edit] And just to choose between the two vehicles...I choose neither, I choose a truck; 4-wheel drive FTW!  :-P

Storm_Cloud

Meh! I stopped caring about the roundtable the second time they went against the majority on their polls. I stopped voting.

I will try the games though, both EQNL and EQN.

 

Apraxis

Originally posted by Burdoc101

Originally posted by Enrif

Originally posted by Burdoc101

Of course this is just how I feel and I am not a developer so I don't know what goes into making a game besides time, money and a few guesses, but it brings me back to my question I haven't seen answered yet:

If EQN/Landmark are going F2P and they want to involve the community so much, why not give every detail about the game in its current development? 

Because every other Developer could steal the ideas. There are some Games out there in the Dark of Development that could take a bit of them(Blizzard Titan), and it wouldnt be the first time that some one else copies stuff from SOE and makes it "better"(Vanilla WoW). This is the sole reason why they cant give all the details. 

Or to put it other way, why should i drive a Ferrari, when some one else offers me a Lamborghini for the same price?

What about Star Citizen then?

 

Also EQ 2 and WoW were made around the same time. WoW just did a better job.

 

[edit] And just to choose between the two vehicles...I choose neither, I choose a truck; 4-wheel drive FTW!  :-P

The difference to Star Citizen?

1. Chris Roberts do know what he want to implement in the game.. so he can say it to the community.

SOE Team either don't know or do not have decided what direction they will go. They can't give out, what they dont have decided.

And there is the first main difference. Star Citizen is a one man show. Whatever Chris Roberts think will be realized.. he makes the final calls. In EQN a lot of cooks are involved, and they have to make money.

2. Chris Roberts development cost is more or less already payed.. they got over 20 million from they community.. they don't have to fear about future customers or the success of the game.

EQN will be F2P.. they don't have earned a single dime, they will not earn anything at release day.. just slowly over time. They have to care about the future success of the game.

3. Star Citizen is a Space Opera game, a dogfight game.. and noone can beat Chris Roberts in that genre.. even more noone cared about that genre as he left the gaming industry. The last space dogfighting game is from 2003, and it is the last game from Chris Robets. In more or less no other genre one man is that dominating.

SOE is just one of hundreds fantasy based mmo developers.

 

That are just a few differences.. you can't really compare both. But in my opinion, the most important difference is, that SOE don't know what EQN will be, beside of the few things they have actually told us. But they could at least show us more about the parts they have already nailed, and know what it will be.

Apraxis

Originally posted by Storm_Cloud

Meh! I stopped caring about the roundtable the second time they went against the majority on their polls. I stopped voting.

I will try the games though, both EQNL and EQN.

 

In my humble opinion.. if they would do exactly what the polls told them, they would have already failed. You can't do what the majority says.. it have to fit into a game together, and it have to be part of a greater vision.

All that does not say that SOE does have a greater vision.. but at least they are not that stupid to go with everything with the majority.

Those polls are a tool to help them to make decisions, they are not to make the decisions for them. That is a difference, and a big one, too.

Storm_Cloud

Originally posted by Apraxis

Originally posted by Storm_Cloud

Meh! I stopped caring about the roundtable the second time they went against the majority on their polls. I stopped voting.

I will try the games though, both EQNL and EQN.

 

Those polls are a tool to help them to make decisions, they are not to make the decisions for them. That is a difference, and a big one, too.

LOL! Ok, so, this is where I get lost. If the poll is there to help them, then why not go with what ppl want?

I don't get it. Majority doesn't rule anymore? hahahaha

Now who decided to break that one? lol

 

Burdoc101

Originally posted by Apraxis

Originally posted by Burdoc101

Originally posted by Enrif

Originally posted by Burdoc101

Of course this is just how I feel and I am not a developer so I don't know what goes into making a game besides time, money and a few guesses, but it brings me back to my question I haven't seen answered yet:

If EQN/Landmark are going F2P and they want to involve the community so much, why not give every detail about the game in its current development? 

Because every other Developer could steal the ideas. There are some Games out there in the Dark of Development that could take a bit of them(Blizzard Titan), and it wouldnt be the first time that some one else copies stuff from SOE and makes it "better"(Vanilla WoW). This is the sole reason why they cant give all the details. 

Or to put it other way, why should i drive a Ferrari, when some one else offers me a Lamborghini for the same price?

What about Star Citizen then?

 

Also EQ 2 and WoW were made around the same time. WoW just did a better job.

 

[edit] And just to choose between the two vehicles...I choose neither, I choose a truck; 4-wheel drive FTW!  :-P

The difference to Star Citizen?

1. Chris Roberts do know what he want to implement in the game.. so he can say it to the community.

SOE Team either don't know or do not have decided what direction they will go. They can't give out, what they dont have decided.

And there is the first main difference. Star Citizen is a one man show. Whatever Chris Roberts think will be realized.. he makes the final calls. In EQN a lot of cooks are involved, and they have to make money.

2. Chris Roberts development cost is more or less already payed.. they got over 20 million from they community.. they don't have to fear about future customers or the success of the game.

EQN will be F2P.. they don't have earned a single dime, they will not earn anything at release day.. just slowly over time. They have to care about the future success of the game.

3. Star Citizen is a Space Opera game, a dogfight game.. and noone can beat Chris Roberts in that genre.. even more noone cared about that genre as he left the gaming industry. The last space dogfighting game is from 2003, and it is the last game from Chris Robets. In more or less no other genre one man is that dominating.

SOE is just one of hundreds fantasy based mmo developers.

 

That are just a few differences.. you can't really compare both. But in my opinion, the most important difference is, that SOE don't know what EQN will be, beside of the few things they have actually told us. But they could at least show us more about the parts they have already nailed, and know what it will be.

I have to disagree on most of your points. My numbered list will reflect to your answers.

 

1. Chris Roberts is not doing this alone: https://forums.robertsspaceindustries.com/discussion/49210/get-to-know-your-star-citizen-development-team-updated-10-10-2013

 

SOE may not know exactly what they can or cannot do with the game right now because they are still testing "new stuff", as they put, or ideas out. They can, however, most certainly give us what information they do have like: what assets they have been working on thus far; what "new stuff" are they trying; actual impacting game-play or mechanics questions to the community; updated round-table polls and responses (part 2, 3, 4, etc.); giving us more concept art; giving us factual data; showing us their intended goals for each month (like the producer's letter, but more detailed); and telling us the process. I really would be happy with Dev Diaries. They are stating facts for Landmark and hope they continue such videos. (There have been round-table where they have given flat out answers, such as race restrictions; which I applaud their answer even if it was disheartening).

 

Umm...every business needs to make money to support themselves; even RSI. (Robert Space Industries, Star Citizen.)

 

 

2. RSI is spending the community kick-starter funds on creating the game. They cannot depend on the kick-starter funds to feed their families after the game is fully developed. Wouldn't you think that they want the game to succeed after launch so that they can continue to support themselves and their families? Straight from the website: "Follow our progress here! Star Citizen is aiming to be the first AAA game developed with money from fans instead of a major publisher. Money pledged to Star Citizen goes directly to the game’s development needs." https://robertsspaceindustries.com/funding-goals

 

SOE is a major MMO company. They can most certainly take a hit even if Landmark and EQN flop. They don't need a kickstarter to fund their major project. They are re-inventing the MMO genre as we know it. Possibly creating a new standard for MMOs based on how well the game is created and received.

 

Both companies have to worry about the future of their games; it would be foolish to think otherwise. If a business does not get paid: you are unable to support your employees; people get laid off and then they can't feed themselves or families. There is motivation for both parties for each of their games to succeed.

 

 

3. Chris Roberts is one of the best out there for sure, but you already have a competing market with a MMO giant called EVE Online (along with Dust 514 as its ground counterpart). Also Star Citizen is turning out to be more then just a dog fighter simulator. It will have it, but I would do more research on it before stating what the game is because (like Dust 514) its going to also have ground assaults and much more. https://robertsspaceindustries.com/funding-goals

.

Also, have you seen how many WoW "clones" there have been? I believe there is more competition on the horizon that we don't know of. Same goes for EQN. 

 

Fantasy genre will always be around, I agree that there are a ton of MMOs like it. What will separate EQN will be new innovative, creative ideas; a polished game-play experience; and the Everquest universe. If not, it will be the same thing as usual. 

 

 

 

 

 

Burdoc101

Originally posted by Storm_Cloud

Originally posted by Apraxis

Originally posted by Storm_Cloud

Meh! I stopped caring about the roundtable the second time they went against the majority on their polls. I stopped voting.

I will try the games though, both EQNL and EQN.

 

Those polls are a tool to help them to make decisions, they are not to make the decisions for them. That is a difference, and a big one, too.

LOL! Ok, so, this is where I get lost. If the poll is there to help them, then why not go with what ppl want?

I don't get it. Majority doesn't rule anymore? hahahaha

Now who decided to break that one? lol

 

Well they did come up with a good response for why the went against the community for race restrictions (I wanted that badly), but as disheartening as it was for me, their reasons were logical why they went against the majority or plurality.

Ender4

---

Originally posted by Storm_Cloud
LOL! Ok, so, this is where I get lost. If the poll is there to help them, then why not go with what ppl want?

I don't get it. Majority doesn't rule anymore? hahahaha

Now who decided to break that one? lol

 

---

I hope you are just trolling here? Of course they aren't going to just let everything be up for vote winner takes all, that would be an awful way to make a game. They are asking for player feedback, something most companies don't bother with. Depending on that feedback the game may shift one direction or another. The actual poll isn't even the most important part of the feedback they get, it is the discussions about the polls that are most useful to them.

For the guy who wants them to share every little thing they've set in stone, no company in the world does this while building their product. It isn't even realistic for them to do it. There will be a round table every week and we'll get more and more info as they go on. A ton of the game isn't set in stone yet and if they are still changing how things work on a daily basis it would be worthless to share the info with us. They already stated that the alpha is the only time they will have an NDA so by the time the game is in beta they will share everything just like WoW did. This is about as open as a game company can get.