Sounds like a decent enough idea to get a concentrated opinion. But it's definately not new and I have participated in this kind of thing in other games, for me the success of which always comes down to its implementation.
As someone else pointed out here focus groups tend not to work at all with very general subjects, they are only useful when used as "focus" groups which will require a good deal of interaction, direction and moderation from devs. If used for specific issues or ideas it can be a very effective tool, if it's allowed to run wild with ideas the information becomes diluted to such an extent that it will be useless and defeats the object.
----- The person who is certain, and who claims divine warrant for his certainty, belongs now to the infancy of our species.
Wow, that's a disingenuous and simplistic evaluation of that one thread.
Of those 108 posts you've identified, how many are pro, and how many are against?
There's a lot of pot-stirring going on in that thread. How many individual opinions does it reflect?
Archaegeo has 14 of those 108 posts. Daveraa has 12 of them.
That's 2 people, accounting for 24% of the total post count.
In fact, there are really only a handful people actively engaged in that conversation, which is hardly a groundswell of opinion from the entire playerbase.
Regarding the original post, you didn't give the background for the entire issue, so I will provide it here.
This is the original SV announcement from today:
Two interesting announcements for you guys:
~Council of Patriarchs~
As an "extension" to the feedback forum we created a section called "The Council of Patriarchs" on the forums.
Guilds can appoint/elect two representatives that will gain access to this section. In it the representatives will have a forum to give concentrated feedback/ideas/suggestions/etc from their guild's members and it gives us at Star Vault the possibility to quickly check back with the larger and especially organised part of the community.
The guild leaders can send the forum names of their two representatives to me via PM and I will then grant access. Please keep in mind that only "established" guilds will be able to send in representatives. 1-man-guilds, etc will not be granted access.
~House of Commons~
We also want to give all non-guilded players a better possibility to raise their points/questions with us directly.
We will be having moderated chat sessions for the entire community on our IRC network Stratics on a regular basis now. These so called "House of Commons Chats" are organized and moderated by Stratics and on average there should be quite a few devs present to answer your questions.
The first HoC-chat will happen on Thursday, Aug. 12th at 8pm GMT+2 and we plan to hold a HoC every 2nd Thursday of each month. Further information about this will be posted shortly before the chat starts.
Oddly enough, the House of Commons portion of the announcement was conveniently ignored in the original post here.
From the Massively news article:
While it isn't unusual to solicit player feedback, it is interesting that the forum is not visible to most paying customers. Whether or not it was Star Vault's intention to open up an "us versus them" can of worms, discussion on the official boards is currently trending towards the divide between solo and group/guild players.
Oddly enough, the House of Commons portion of the announcement was ignored in their news as well. I guess they didn't think it was news either...
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
In short.. SV has set up a private forum where guildleaders can raise issues and discussions with the developers where the general player population cannot read nor reply. Good idea? Bad idea? Won't contentious topics just be anonymously cut and pasted for people to read anyway? What is really gained by creating an elite group called the "Council of Patriarchs" as opposed to just publicly polling their subscriber base? If a guild of 10 players get 2 seats and a guild of 50 get 2 seats.. is that not going to provide a distorted level of feedback?
Echo Chamber.
Small group of fish in a stagnant pond, swimming round and round, and never ever finding a fresh new stream of water to breathe new and needed life into a stale world.
If the Devs are at a loss as to where to go from here, then setting up a hotline directly to their most hardcore sycophants isn't going to give them any new ideas.
Sorry mates, but this game was stillborn from the moment that the devlopers started to believe that wishful thinking could replace actual experience.
"Gypsies, tramps, and thieves, we were called by the Admin of the site . . . "
In short.. SV has set up a private forum where guildleaders can raise issues and discussions with the developers where the general player population cannot read nor reply. Good idea? Bad idea? Won't contentious topics just be anonymously cut and pasted for people to read anyway? What is really gained by creating an elite group called the "Council of Patriarchs" as opposed to just publicly polling their subscriber base? If a guild of 10 players get 2 seats and a guild of 50 get 2 seats.. is that not going to provide a distorted level of feedback?
Echo Chamber.
Small group of fish in a stagnant pond, swimming round and round, and never ever finding a fresh new stream of water to breathe new and needed life into a stale world.
If the Devs are at a loss as to where to go from here, then setting up a hotline directly to their most hardcore sycophants isn't going to give them any new ideas.
Sorry mates, but this game was stillborn from the moment that the devlopers started to believe that wishful thinking could replace actual experience.
Oddly enough, the House of Commons portion of the announcement was ignored in their news as well. I guess they didn't think it was news either...
Probably because we have this "House of Commons" chat every few days whenever Henrik pops up into IRC. Nothing big about devs talking to players through IRC in smaller communities.
Maerlyn makes a statement in that thread that is flat out wrong.
"Maerlyn wrote:
Back in the days of UO there was none to very little internet gaming. The concept of guilds grew in the decade(s) to come."
The number of players playing online grew of course, but early UO was very guild-centric. I'm not saying there weren't tons of non-guilded players; there were, but guilds did not evolve over time as Maerlyn says, no more so than the overall population subscribing to games grew.. In fact, the guild vs guild feature of UO was one of the best and most fleshed out aspects of the game. I played UO from the day it was released and my memory on this is clear. There were tons of guilds and guild wars was extremely popular. I think he is being defensive and confusing the growth of online numbers with number of guilds in context of number of players.
One of the concerns about the Council of Patriarchs is the fact that it might emphasize the concerns of guilds over the concerns of solo players. Just by not having raiding as the end game content, MO is already more suited to solo play than some MMOs.
One of the concerns about the Council of Patriarchs is the fact that it might emphasize the concerns of guilds over the concerns of solo players. Just by not having raiding as the end game content, MO is already more suited to solo play than some MMOs.
Recently Shinzon (a core MO player and part of the inside feedback group) described the Mortal Online endgame (territory control) in these words:
It's 3 keeps per territory and whoever has the most points wins, you gain points by killing guilded players who you have war declared to, and home owners are taxed by the guild with the most points. So there is no smooth dynamic growth, as I said, it's capture the flag team deathmatch.
This is the kind of stuff that the "Patriarchs" will be giving feedback on. So this not only affects solo players (through the tax system) but also small guilds that just want a house. If this system goes through, a small guild that wants a house will likely be wardeced by any large guilds fighting for control of the territory so that they can get more "points"...
This is just an example of what the Patriarchs will be discussing behind closed doors... if anyone wants to talk about the stated territory control mechanics please start a new thread and let's keep this one focused on Patriarch specific discussion.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
The people IN guilds will know what is being discussed as it is filtered to them through their leaders. Heck entire threads will likely be cut and pasted on guild forums. The poor schmucks without a representative will not only not have a voice in the discussion but won't even have a clue about what the discussion is...
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
I don't believe splitting up the playerbase is a wise idea, with the already low population.
I see it as more of a private circle jerk by SV. A place where they can go puff up thier chests and get no criticism, and if they do, punish those players by not being allowed to join the "in-crowd". Each guild gets hand selected to participate in these forums, and I find it almost impossible for this to happen without any form of favortism.
2 years from now, you won't be treated the same, as some gain a seniority type status with the devs. Guess which clans get a "Get Out of Jail Free" card, when a major exploit is overused by most of a guild. Oh wait.... that already happened, with the last dupe, and the IRC circlejerk of friends.
The people IN guilds will know what is being discussed as it is filtered to them through their leaders. Heck entire threads will likely be cut and pasted on guild forums. The poor schmucks without a representative will not only not have a voice in the discussion but won't even have a clue about what the discussion is...
That's actually their choice. If they are not in a guild or if they are in a guild that isn't smart enough to have contacts with the other guild leaders/diplomats, then that was a decision they made and not the fault of the supa sekrit society.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Maerlyn makes a statement in that thread that is flat out wrong.
"Maerlyn wrote:
Back in the days of UO there was none to very little internet gaming. The concept of guilds grew in the decade(s) to come."
The number of players playing online grew of course, but early UO was very guild-centric. I'm not saying there weren't tons of non-guilded players; there were, but guilds did not evolve over time as Maerlyn says, no more so than the overall population subscribing to games grew.. In fact, the guild vs guild feature of UO was one of the best and most fleshed out aspects of the game. I played UO from the day it was released and my memory on this is clear. There were tons of guilds and guild wars was extremely popular. I think he is being defensive and confusing the growth of online numbers with number of guilds in context of number of players.
Good luck. -CC
2/12/98
A guild system was added.
6/11/98
Guild warfare went in.
Guild warfare was not even possible until 9 months after launch. UO never had content that required keeping 20+ people organized for a couple hours
I think you are confusing the concept of guilds and the evolution of guilds.
China Cat is correct that there were guilds before the guild system - it's why they created the guild system in UO. Prior to that people would reroll their character with their guild tag as part of the character's name. I distinctly remember seeing plenty of people with LLTS and OES at the end of their name all over Atlantic server prior to the guild system. We still fought guild wars - very much at the expense of our game-assigned reputation - and we still banded together to take on game content.
At the same time, you are correct about the evolution of guilds. The tools and mechanics needed to manage today's complex content such as 40-man raids and siege warfare are far beyond anything that was needed (or even thought of) in the 1990's.
The concept of guilds was already established in the 1990's. Nanny, Chaos, DIKU and others started with NPC guilds and MUDs very quickly started adopting player-run guild systems well before the turn of the century. While UO's guild system is one of the most extensive, I think DAoC and WOW both contributed greatly to the player-desire and developer-drive toward more extensive guild control and management.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
The people IN guilds will know what is being discussed as it is filtered to them through their leaders. Heck entire threads will likely be cut and pasted on guild forums. The poor schmucks without a representative will not only not have a voice in the discussion but won't even have a clue about what the discussion is...
That's actually their choice. If they are not in a guild or if they are in a guild that isn't smart enough to have contacts with the other guild leaders/diplomats, then that was a decision they made and not the fault of the supa sekrit society.
No.. you are missing the point ENTIRELY. What is the point of making the forums closed when everyone IN a guild will be fed all the info and likely have the entire threads cut and paste? Making them hidden serves zero purpose except to make it difficult for those without representation to even know what's being discussed. Silly way of doing business.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
, but guilds did not evolve over time as Maerlyn says, no more so than the overall population subscribing to games grew.
Guild warfare was not even possible until 9 months after launch. UO never had content that required keeping 20+ people organized for a couple hours
The concept of guilds was already established in the 1990's. Nanny, Chaos, DIKU and others started with NPC guilds and MUDs very quickly started adopting player-run guild systems well before the turn of the century. While UO's guild system is one of the most extensive, I think DAoC and WOW both contributed greatly to the player-desire and developer-drive toward more extensive guild control and management.
Sorry for the confusion, but chinacat is clearly arguing that guilds did not evolve. Guilds have certainly been around since MUDs http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Story_About_A_Tree . The territorial warfare that SV has planned is part of their ideas about the evolution of guilds within the game and the counsel of Patriarchs is one of the means they will try to use to get player feed back about what works, what doesn't and what can be done to improve the veriety of ways players can interact as groups / guilds.
Sorry for the confusion, but chinacat is clearly arguing that guilds did not evolve. Guilds have certainly been around since MUDs http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Story_About_A_Tree . The territorial warfare that SV has planned is part of their ideas about the evolution of guilds within the game and the counsel of Patriarchs is one of the means they will try to use to get player feed back about what works, what doesn't and what can be done to improve the veriety of ways players can interact as groups / guilds.
I'm not arguing. I'm reporting that as a person who played UO from day 1 of release there were tons of guilds and I see no increase in number of guilds that is "evolutionary". Simply put, as more "people" started playing MMO's, more guilds were created. It's a silly discussion and frankly sorry I even quoted MO's community manager. Maerlyn appears to be in defensive mode which is understandable given the outcry from many MO subscribers. Whether the guild leader & SV forum is a good idea or not, making it private is a very bad idea and can only create division among its community which is precisely what is happening. Going off on some "guilds have evolved" tangant, whether he's right or wrong is of no consequence any way.
-CC
"Lately it occurs to me, what a long, strange trip it's been". -Hunter
If it was secret you and everyone else would not know about it. That is the essence of a secret. A better term is private forum. Privacy allows one to let all the warts hang out and be discussed in an open manner without a bunch of things being taken out of context or used against you.
Most companies seek for guild leaders feedback before launch, and after launch treat every paying customer in the same way. It's fair to finance closed, secret free beta for selected guilds, listen to their feedback and change the game / expansion according to what they likes / dislikes. But it's not fair to choose favourites among paying customers.
Blueprints disaster in EvE - it was just effect of secret treating some paying customers in favourable manner, and costed CCP tons of subscriptions.
Recent shitstorm over EvE council meeting minutes proves that representatives voted in by 2% of playerbase want something completely different than large majority of playerbase.
And the biggest disaster of all - Trammel - was the result of feedback given by EA shareholder, who was at the same time UO player.
1) We pay exactly the same ammount of attention to the feedback forum, the suggestion forum, the general discussion forum and the patriarch forum.
2) There IS somebody who is going through the "soloer's opinions" and puts them on Henrik's table on a regular basis - me. Giving the CEO and the Creative Designer feedback on whats going on in the community, their questions, problems, ideas and fears is my job.
3) The forum is not "secret", it's private. Nobody had to sign an NDA and it's perfectly fine for the representatives to discuss everything thats going on there in public.
4) It's private because having it public DOES dilute the content. If you want to have a talk with somebody hundreds of people looking at you and commenting on it DOES alter how things are being discussed.
2) There IS somebody who is going through the "soloer's opinions" and puts them on Henrik's table on a regular basis - me. Giving the CEO and the Creative Designer feedback on whats going on in the community, their questions, problems, ideas and fears is my job.
Did he just say ME?
Might as well let the hand holding begin. "Kumbayah".
Maerlyn has been part of the most over-censoring, and bias forum police in the history of MMOs.
Even going as far to ban people based on their opinions/statements, on other forums such as this.
Maerlyn has been part of the most over-censoring, and bias forum police in the history of MMOs.
Even going as far to ban people based on their opinions/statements, on other forums such as this.
You're probably just pissed because you got banned off the official MO forums.
Most over censoring and bias forum police in MMO history? Seriously? You must be new to MMOs.
There have been some CMs in other games that make Maerlyn look like a softie.
He can censor or be bias as much as he wants. Its SV's forum after-all. Its not a free open forum where you can say (ie= troll/dev bash) anything you want.
Tried: EQ2 - AC - EU - HZ - TR - MxO - TTO - WURM - SL - VG:SoH - PotBS - PS - AoC - WAR - DDO - SWTOR Played: UO - EQ1 - AO - DAoC - NC - CoH/CoV - SWG - WoW - EVE - AA - LotRO - DFO - STO - FE - MO - RIFT Playing: Skyrim Following: The Repopulation I want a Virtual World, not just a Game. ITS TOO HARD! - Matt Firor (ZeniMax)
Comments
Sounds like a decent enough idea to get a concentrated opinion. But it's definately not new and I have participated in this kind of thing in other games, for me the success of which always comes down to its implementation.
As someone else pointed out here focus groups tend not to work at all with very general subjects, they are only useful when used as "focus" groups which will require a good deal of interaction, direction and moderation from devs. If used for specific issues or ideas it can be a very effective tool, if it's allowed to run wild with ideas the information becomes diluted to such an extent that it will be useless and defeats the object.
-----
The person who is certain, and who claims divine warrant for his certainty, belongs now to the infancy of our species.
From the Massively news article:
While it isn't unusual to solicit player feedback, it is interesting that the forum is not visible to most paying customers. Whether or not it was Star Vault's intention to open up an "us versus them" can of worms, discussion on the official boards is currently trending towards the divide between solo and group/guild players.
Oddly enough, the House of Commons portion of the announcement was ignored in their news as well. I guess they didn't think it was news either...
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Echo Chamber.
Small group of fish in a stagnant pond, swimming round and round, and never ever finding a fresh new stream of water to breathe new and needed life into a stale world.
If the Devs are at a loss as to where to go from here, then setting up a hotline directly to their most hardcore sycophants isn't going to give them any new ideas.
Sorry mates, but this game was stillborn from the moment that the devlopers started to believe that wishful thinking could replace actual experience.
"Gypsies, tramps, and thieves, we were called by the Admin of the site . . . "
Yeah felt like smoking one to ...
Probably because we have this "House of Commons" chat every few days whenever Henrik pops up into IRC. Nothing big about devs talking to players through IRC in smaller communities.
2/12/98
A guild system was added.
6/11/98
Guild warfare went in.
Guild warfare was not even possible until 9 months after launch. UO never had content that required keeping 20+ people organized for a couple hours http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/info/basics/raidarea.html http://eq2.zam.com/wiki/Category:Raiding_(EQ2) To suggest that there has been no evolution of guilds is disingenuous.
One of the concerns about the Council of Patriarchs is the fact that it might emphasize the concerns of guilds over the concerns of solo players. Just by not having raiding as the end game content, MO is already more suited to solo play than some MMOs.
Recently Shinzon (a core MO player and part of the inside feedback group) described the Mortal Online endgame (territory control) in these words:
It's 3 keeps per territory and whoever has the most points wins, you gain points by killing guilded players who you have war declared to, and home owners are taxed by the guild with the most points. So there is no smooth dynamic growth, as I said, it's capture the flag team deathmatch.
This is the kind of stuff that the "Patriarchs" will be giving feedback on. So this not only affects solo players (through the tax system) but also small guilds that just want a house. If this system goes through, a small guild that wants a house will likely be wardeced by any large guilds fighting for control of the territory so that they can get more "points"...
This is just an example of what the Patriarchs will be discussing behind closed doors... if anyone wants to talk about the stated territory control mechanics please start a new thread and let's keep this one focused on Patriarch specific discussion.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
BestSigEver :P
The people IN guilds will know what is being discussed as it is filtered to them through their leaders. Heck entire threads will likely be cut and pasted on guild forums. The poor schmucks without a representative will not only not have a voice in the discussion but won't even have a clue about what the discussion is...
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
I don't believe splitting up the playerbase is a wise idea, with the already low population.
I see it as more of a private circle jerk by SV. A place where they can go puff up thier chests and get no criticism, and if they do, punish those players by not being allowed to join the "in-crowd". Each guild gets hand selected to participate in these forums, and I find it almost impossible for this to happen without any form of favortism.
2 years from now, you won't be treated the same, as some gain a seniority type status with the devs. Guess which clans get a "Get Out of Jail Free" card, when a major exploit is overused by most of a guild. Oh wait.... that already happened, with the last dupe, and the IRC circlejerk of friends.
That's actually their choice. If they are not in a guild or if they are in a guild that isn't smart enough to have contacts with the other guild leaders/diplomats, then that was a decision they made and not the fault of the supa sekrit society.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
I think you are confusing the concept of guilds and the evolution of guilds.
China Cat is correct that there were guilds before the guild system - it's why they created the guild system in UO. Prior to that people would reroll their character with their guild tag as part of the character's name. I distinctly remember seeing plenty of people with LLTS and OES at the end of their name all over Atlantic server prior to the guild system. We still fought guild wars - very much at the expense of our game-assigned reputation - and we still banded together to take on game content.
At the same time, you are correct about the evolution of guilds. The tools and mechanics needed to manage today's complex content such as 40-man raids and siege warfare are far beyond anything that was needed (or even thought of) in the 1990's.
The concept of guilds was already established in the 1990's. Nanny, Chaos, DIKU and others started with NPC guilds and MUDs very quickly started adopting player-run guild systems well before the turn of the century. While UO's guild system is one of the most extensive, I think DAoC and WOW both contributed greatly to the player-desire and developer-drive toward more extensive guild control and management.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
No.. you are missing the point ENTIRELY. What is the point of making the forums closed when everyone IN a guild will be fed all the info and likely have the entire threads cut and paste? Making them hidden serves zero purpose except to make it difficult for those without representation to even know what's being discussed. Silly way of doing business.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
probably adding more candies to keep ppl around since they cant fix most of the bugs.
Sorry for the confusion, but chinacat is clearly arguing that guilds did not evolve. Guilds have certainly been around since MUDs http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Story_About_A_Tree . The territorial warfare that SV has planned is part of their ideas about the evolution of guilds within the game and the counsel of Patriarchs is one of the means they will try to use to get player feed back about what works, what doesn't and what can be done to improve the veriety of ways players can interact as groups / guilds.
I'm not arguing. I'm reporting that as a person who played UO from day 1 of release there were tons of guilds and I see no increase in number of guilds that is "evolutionary". Simply put, as more "people" started playing MMO's, more guilds were created. It's a silly discussion and frankly sorry I even quoted MO's community manager. Maerlyn appears to be in defensive mode which is understandable given the outcry from many MO subscribers. Whether the guild leader & SV forum is a good idea or not, making it private is a very bad idea and can only create division among its community which is precisely what is happening. Going off on some "guilds have evolved" tangant, whether he's right or wrong is of no consequence any way.
-CC
"Lately it occurs to me,
what a long, strange trip it's been". -Hunter
Most companies seek for guild leaders feedback before launch, and after launch treat every paying customer in the same way. It's fair to finance closed, secret free beta for selected guilds, listen to their feedback and change the game / expansion according to what they likes / dislikes. But it's not fair to choose favourites among paying customers.
Blueprints disaster in EvE - it was just effect of secret treating some paying customers in favourable manner, and costed CCP tons of subscriptions.
Recent shitstorm over EvE council meeting minutes proves that representatives voted in by 2% of playerbase want something completely different than large majority of playerbase.
And the biggest disaster of all - Trammel - was the result of feedback given by EA shareholder, who was at the same time UO player.
I could give countless other examples.
Maerlyn
Community Manager 292
1) We pay exactly the same ammount of attention to the feedback forum, the suggestion forum, the general discussion forum and the patriarch forum.
2) There IS somebody who is going through the "soloer's opinions" and puts them on Henrik's table on a regular basis - me. Giving the CEO and the Creative Designer feedback on whats going on in the community, their questions, problems, ideas and fears is my job.
3) The forum is not "secret", it's private. Nobody had to sign an NDA and it's perfectly fine for the representatives to discuss everything thats going on there in public.
4) It's private because having it public DOES dilute the content. If you want to have a talk with somebody hundreds of people looking at you and commenting on it DOES alter how things are being discussed.
5) EVERYBODY is being listend to.
Did he just say ME?
Might as well let the hand holding begin. "Kumbayah".
Maerlyn has been part of the most over-censoring, and bias forum police in the history of MMOs.
Even going as far to ban people based on their opinions/statements, on other forums such as this.
Ding Ding Ding!
We have a winner!
You're probably just pissed because you got banned off the official MO forums.
Most over censoring and bias forum police in MMO history? Seriously? You must be new to MMOs.
There have been some CMs in other games that make Maerlyn look like a softie.
He can censor or be bias as much as he wants. Its SV's forum after-all. Its not a free open forum where you can say (ie= troll/dev bash) anything you want.
Tried: EQ2 - AC - EU - HZ - TR - MxO - TTO - WURM - SL - VG:SoH - PotBS - PS - AoC - WAR - DDO - SWTOR
Played: UO - EQ1 - AO - DAoC - NC - CoH/CoV - SWG - WoW - EVE - AA - LotRO - DFO - STO - FE - MO - RIFT
Playing: Skyrim
Following: The Repopulation
I want a Virtual World, not just a Game.
ITS TOO HARD! - Matt Firor (ZeniMax)