| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
Serene Repose
2322
   |
Posted - 2015.03.03 05:58:44 -
[31] - Quote
I don't see a "Paint my kitchen" link. 
Treason never prospers. What is the reason?
Why, if it prospers, none dare call it "treason."
|
Primary This Rifter
4S Corporation
Goonswarm Federation
617
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 11:52:15 -
[32] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:I think the developers' standard for "overwhelming" might just differ from yours.
Their standards must be unrealistic, then.
Reminder: CCP thinks you have no right to your alliance logos.
|
Valterra Craven
516
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 16:04:23 -
[33] - Quote
Circumstantial Evidence wrote:CCP Rise was extremely accommodating during the redesign of the Tech 1 haulers, listening to the feedback that simply changing existing stats around was not interesting gameplay, and we got a newly diverse set of T1 haulers, as a result.
Not really. The goal of that whole change was to make Gallente not the obvious choice to train. Given Gallente got pretty much all of the variety and still had a really good max end hauler, gallente is still the obvious and only real choice to train.
Circumstantial Evidence wrote:CCP Rise was at first reluctant, but did adopt suggestions that the Bowhead get an HP buff and agility bonus, compared to the original proposal.
HP wasn't the problem with the bowhead. Its expensive for what it does and can't carry all that much and is slower than freighters.
The bowhead was a solution to a problem created by rigs. In my opinion Repacking ships with rigs would have been a much better solution as it would have allowed us to use ships we already had. On top of this he didn't listen to the fact that the ship didn't need another one off skill like every other ORE ship has. Its quit ridiculous.
Circumstantial Evidence wrote:
The initial proposal to add capital rigs to freighters was met with tons of feedback, and the whole concept changed to giving them much more affordable low slot modules. (A side effect of nerfs to base stats, so that adding low slot modules wouldn't buff them over what they could do before - resulted in several players observing "be careful what you wish for.") I don't want to start a freighter complaint thread - this is just another example of feedback affecting the outcome.
The lows might be more affordable but it was still in general a nerf to freighters where one wasn't needed. The feedback he ignored was that freighters didn't need slots to begin with. On top of that it hit shield freighters harder than armor ones since low slots exist for armor freighters that allow them to put up better tank. In general that change was a big cluster f@#$ that should have never gone through, but that feedback was ignored.
And on top of that you miss the numerous threads where he rammed changes through, like the RML changes or anything else he's worked on. |
KIller Wabbit
The Scope
Gallente Federation
879
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 16:20:55 -
[34] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:KIller Wabbit wrote:That's certainly not the feedback I get from the GM's. They copy/paste until they run out of text and then tell me to go file a bug, that it's not their job to report bugs to the Dev's. Yes, please open a bug report if you're reporting a bug, and post in the forums if you have a suggestion or feedback. Neither can really be handled by our customer support department. That was my point, sorry if I was unclear. While our GMs do sometimes pass along feedback that they hear frequently while servicing players' tickets, it is not an effective channel for developer feedback.
Often I don't know that what I'm reporting is a bug. It might appear to be just a confusing mechanic or lack of information.
The point is that I've been punished in the game by stumbling on a bug you built in, I climbed one rope to try and resolve it, and then you want to make me climb yet another, different rope just because you have internal processes that don't mesh together. Customer service should only have one POC. Beyond that you are just wasting my time and money.
CCP .. always first with the wrong stuff
CSM .. CCP Shills with a vacation plan
|
Circumstantial Evidence
171
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:58:32 -
[35] - Quote
Valterra Craven wrote:...various opinions Nobody gets everything they want. The point of my message was to show specific examples where player feedback *has* influenced the outcome. |
|
CCP Darwin
C C P
C C P Alliance
1140
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 18:15:10 -
[36] - Quote
KIller Wabbit wrote:Customer service should only have one POC. Beyond that you are just wasting my time and money.
I agree that it would be nice to be able to have a unified point of contact on this, but currently we do not, because our in-game bug reporting system collects and transmits a bunch of technical information that is irrelevant to most support tickets.
Please note that bug reporting is not a customer service function. You are not guaranteed a reply. It does, though, increase the chance that the bug you report will get fixed in a future release.
CCP Darwin GÇó Senior Technical Artist, EVE Online GÇó @mark_wilkins
|
|
Sibyyl
Gallente Federation
23605
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 18:47:06 -
[37] - Quote
Valterra Craven wrote:The bowhead was a solution to a problem created by rigs. In my opinion Repacking ships with rigs would have been a much better solution as it would have allowed us to use ships we already had. On top of this he didn't listen to the fact that the ship didn't need another one off skill like every other ORE ship has. Its quit ridiculous.
Rigs are a mechanic, not a problem.
Role based ship functions is what this game is all about. There is no one size fit all like you seem to looking for.
Edit: the only repackaging related "problem" was ship skins, which CCP is fixing. Rigs are exactly how they should be.
Rush to danger, wind up nowhere
Sabriz for CSM go go go
|
Noriko Mai
2088
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 19:22:55 -
[38] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:KIller Wabbit wrote:Customer service should only have one POC. Beyond that you are just wasting my time and money.
I agree that it would be nice to be able to have a unified point of contact on this, but currently we do not, because our in-game bug reporting system collects and transmits a bunch of technical information that is irrelevant to most support tickets. Please note that bug reporting is not a customer service function. You are not guaranteed a reply. It does, though, increase the chance that the bug you report will get fixed in a future release.
+0.000000001% per report? 
Come On Everybody, support Dark Opaque theme
|
Valterra Craven
516
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 19:32:55 -
[39] - Quote
Sibyyl wrote:
Rigs are a mechanic, not a problem.
Role based ship functions is what this game is all about. There is no one size fit all like you seem to looking for.
Edit: the only repackaging related "problem" was ship skins, which CCP is fixing. Rigs are exactly how they should be.
Semantics. Industrails already served the purpose of hauling things. The only reason bowheads are necessary is because of the expense in losing rigs if ships were repacked. A simpler solution would be to allow the "repacking" of ships without losing the rigs. |
Valterra Craven
516
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 19:37:35 -
[40] - Quote
Circumstantial Evidence wrote:The point of my message was to show specific examples where player feedback *has* influenced the outcome.
And your point was taken. Maybe you should re-read my original post where I said words like "sometimes" and "tend". Just because examples exist where he does, does not mean that examples don't exist where he doesn't. |
|
|
Circumstantial Evidence
172
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 20:28:08 -
[41] - Quote
Valterra Craven wrote:Circumstantial Evidence wrote:The point of my message was to show specific examples where player feedback *has* influenced the outcome. And your point was taken. Maybe you should re-read my original post where I said words like "sometimes" and "tend". Just because examples exist where he does, does not mean that examples don't exist where he doesn't. I made my response listing three cases, intending to provide some balance. Your reply was dismissive in detail, of each case of developer changes in response to feedback I cited. Thus, it looked like your dissatisfaction at not seeing your personal views and other feedback addressed, was dodging the larger point. You saw it, and in fact I saw "tend" in your original statement, nonetheless a general negativity prompted my post. Thank you for clarifying. |
Marsha Mallow
1983
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 21:21:26 -
[42] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:CCP Darwin wrote:Rain6637 wrote:see my sig Regarding providing feedback to EVE development: While our GMs certainly do pass along feedback they receive in support tickets, posting on the forums is a much more efficient way to get your ideas in front of the developers. Even when EVE devs don't respond in threads, we're still reading. EVE devs do NOT usually read your GM tickets. Those will likely be described to the developers in the aggregate. Sometimes all I want is an answer, and GMs have been good for that. In a moment of clarity not too long before I changed my signature to this one, I realized the forum-going player base is probably very miniscule compared to the total subscriber base, and for devs to spend time fielding questions on the forums would be disproportionate. So I guess I mean to say my signature is meant as a piece of advice to players who may be under the impression they will be heard by posting on EVE-O somewhere nonspecific, and asking a GM a question via the ticket system is much more effective.
Good advice to new players would be to direct them to New Citizens and encourage all questions, regardless of how silly they might seem. There's a regular reddit thread with that very title. Players of all ages should be able to ask anything in the correct forum and expect an answer from players that isn't abusive (player age doesn't tell you how active they are on the forums). Regardless of how many times the question has been posted, just redirect them or give a concise answer and they'll probably say thanks and be likely to chat with other players more. Rip their head off and they'll never come to the forums again, or they'll turn into a turbo-troll overnight. If it needs to be escalated to a GM for clarification, fair enough, it takes seconds to write that. At the least people could just ignore the commonly asked questions rather than dogpiling the topic just to score points off some bewildered scrub.
The best advice I can think of for players of all ages is to raise issues as a query in the first instance, rather than roaring that a mechanic is broken or demanding a change. That holds true for bug reports/exploit notifcations too. In the first instance ask another player, then check the forums, then put in a support ticket with a query. The only bug report I've ever filed was my error, which when I resubmitted as a support ticket query (which took a while to answer but wasn't urgent) got a really detailed and helpful response from the GM.
Ask anyone in customer service or tech support to describe users and then back away just in case their head explodes. It's not all one sided with customer service issues. Users are bads too. Love the support helpdesk anyway, but it's a shame it's on a different URL.
DON'T BE RIDICULOUS!
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |