| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Parsee789
   |
Posted - 2011.07.02 15:32:00 -
[1]
Whats' the point of having the CSM as a means of communicating to the player when CCP won't let them spill anything through the NDA?
I fail to see the logic in this. They just do this to make us think that they actually listen to what the playerbase thinks when recent events contradict that.
They took a long time to answer some questions we have and indirectly told us that they simply don't care.
In order for EVE to live WoD and DUST must die. We shall make them listen to our demands.
|
Gloria Stitz
|
Posted - 2011.07.02 15:34:00 -
[2]
 Originally by: Parsee789
I fail to see the logic in this. They just do this to make us think that they actually listen to what the playerbase thinks when recent events contradict that.
You have contradicted yourself, you have not failed to see the logic.
They just do this to make us think that they actually listen to what the playerbase thinks.
-------------
'Don't try to learn Eve all at once, otherwise your brain will explode' - Albert Einstein
------------ |
Miz Cenuij
Caldari
|
Posted - 2011.07.02 15:42:00 -
[3]
CSM are puppets with CCPs hand p their @&ú!.
"Men are going to die... and i'm going to kill them" |
Chebri
Minmatar
Metagalactic Adventures LLC.
|
Posted - 2011.07.02 16:31:00 -
[4]
Parsee789,
You are absolutely correct. CCP appears to rely on developers, CSMs and IT personnel for communications with the players. It is not working. CCP needs to hire professional communications employees. They need skilled public information personnel or they will continue to fail.
I don't know what education or training the GM's, developers and forum moderators have but many of them lack basic communication skills. I get responses from GM's that make me wonder if they read anything past the first sentence. It is incredibly frustrating.
I submitted a petition for a ship loss the other day because I thought a thief used an exploit. Prior to submitting the petition, I read the Aggression Timer information in the EVElopedia. I found nothing to support what the pilot was doing.
So, I got popped by a thief because I didn't know he could use my wrecks to continue the aggression timer. I petitioned to ask for help. This was the response.
Quote:
I'm sorry for your loss, but I'm afraid that so far it is a normal mechanism that a pilot can extend the aggression timer toward another one by shooting at containers or wreckage belonging to him. Thus we are not able to offer reimbursement.
(My intention here is not to embarrass or blame the GM. My intention is to blame CCP for not educating their employees.)
The response could have been much more clear (and I have asked for further clarification in the petition).
Example:
Pilot A is running a mission. Pilot B enters the mission and steals from one of Pilot A's wrecks which initiates the aggression timer. At this point, Pilot B can be shot by Pilot A but Pilot A can not be shot by Pilot B.
Pilot A shoots Pilot B. Now both pilots have aggression timers towards each other.
Pilot A leaves system and docks to wait out the timer. Pilot A undocks with no aggression timer remaining. Pilot A jumps back into the system with the mission to discover the aggression timer has returned and it specifies Pilot B. Pilot A docks thinking there is an aggression timer bug.
An hour later, Pilot A returns to the mission (failing to notice the aggression timer renewed by Pilot B). Pilot B fires on and destroys Pilot A's ship. Pilot A is very confused.
The GM's response to the inquiry was unclear due to the use of phrases that failed to accurately identify the parties involved. The GM also failed to provide a solution. My best guess is that what really happened was Pilot B would fire on one of Pilot A's wrecks to restart the aggression timer even though Pilot A was not in system. The solution would be for Pilot A to abandon the mission wrecks so that Pilot B couldn't use them to renew the timer.
 This would have been nice to know in advance via the EVElopedia, ya think?!? Please feel free to insert an image of Yosemite Sam jumping up and down while yelling because this is how I feel.
Here's another fine example of a failure in communication by CCP.
Quote:
Please note that although we are discontinuing support of Shader Model 2 we will not actively block those cards from running the client. It is therefore possible that players with that hardware will be able to run EVE for some time afterward. We do, however, urge them to update their graphics cards as soon as possible.
source: http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=882
What really happened? Computers with shader model 2 support were unable to launch the client after the June 21,2011 patch. Again, this would have been nice to know in advance! (Please review Yosemite Sam.)
The same thing happened with computer processors that could not run SSE2 commands. Advance notice would have been nice. Let me rephrase that. Advance notice to the player community about hardware requirement changes would have been the preferred, professional action.
I have joined the vote of no confidence in CCP. My subscription ends August 10th. I'm giving CCP until then to address and correct communications between the player base and CCP. If they are serious about getting their act together, they will hire a communications professional and sort this mess out. It is a shame to see such a cool game get so fouled up due to an unprofessional developing company.
end transmission
----
Quote:
Out beyond ideas of right-doing and wrong-doing, there is a field. I'll meet you there.
~Rumi
|
Arita Shion
|
Posted - 2011.07.02 16:35:00 -
[5]
^^ Can I have your stuff? ^^
|
Chebri
Minmatar
Metagalactic Adventures LLC.
|
Posted - 2011.07.02 16:39:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Arita Shion
^^ Can I have your stuff? ^^
Of course not. Go get your own.
----
Quote:
Out beyond ideas of right-doing and wrong-doing, there is a field. I'll meet you there.
~Rumi
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |