enemytank

Dirty laundry is washed at home

30 posts in this topic


In my country has a popular saying that says:
"Dirty laundry is washed at home"
that is, the domestic problems must be solved in the house and not in other people's homes
I'm watching players post their sorrows on outside forums,
This is not good.
But why are they posting in external forums?
I asked some who did this and the answer was the same:
We can not post in the CRS forum. We are deleted or banned /
suspended from the forum.
Would not it be the case to change the rules of the forum?
Let complain, cry, put your hurt (no personal offenses and racism etc ...) here in our forum.
Let's settle things here!
I think it would be a lot better.

Where there are no contestants there is no progress
If everyone agrees with everything, nothing will change.


CRS needs to lose fear or lose players.

S!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and deleted another post from me..lol  (30min ago)
and without warning..
Could at least warn:
"Your post has been deleted"

no coments..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, enemytank said:


In my country has a popular saying that says:
"Dirty laundry is washed at home"
that is, the domestic problems must be solved in the house and not in other people's homes
I'm watching players post their sorrows on outside forums,
This is not good.
But why are they posting in external forums?
I asked some who did this and the answer was the same:
We can not post in the CRS forum. We are deleted or banned /
suspended from the forum.
Would not it be the case to change the rules of the forum?
Let complain, cry, put your hurt (no personal offenses and racism etc ...) here in our forum.
Let's settle things here!
I think it would be a lot better.

Where there are no contestants there is no progress
If everyone agrees with everything, nothing will change.


CRS needs to lose fear or lose players.

S!

Basically I agree. Unfortunately, at times, some people go a bit beyond constructive criticism in the forums. When it goes beyond warranted questions and criticisms of game play, game management, game path etc.... and into the "zone of disrespect" and "whine-a-tion" well that's a bit different. 

Of course what is "disrespect" and "whining" is subjective to a degree, and that is is all happening in text, certainly doesn't make it easier for moderators to make decisions. 

On one side I think when people feel they are not being heard...well...they are prone to being a bit more "insistent" as they get more frustrated and may go post else where to vent. On the other hand CRS knows about a lot of the challenges, ideas etc...and listens, but they know what is possible and not possible better than most and perhaps get a bit tired of dealing with repeated posts about things they have either decided are better for the game or beyond their control to change. 

Anyway... as you say.... "no personal offences", that's the deal alright, if people can stay within those lines with out "losing it."

S!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please have been doing this since 2001. It happens with every other game.

Just google any game name and "reddit critisism"

....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ basically that. There's usually 3 locations for game-related conversation: Reddit, Steam forums, or game's specific forums. Where that conversation takes place is just a matter of preference. I'd imagine if people are avoiding conversation here it is due to the moderators. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have a choice.  I posted things in the paywall forums and saw more reaction out here.  I would prefer to discuss things 'in the family', but if I can't get attention to what I am saying there, I will here.

I get why they are paying attention to the external facing reactions, good rumor management and engagement with potential customers, but as I've said before have to show value to the people who are subbed.

That being said, got some discussions going in the more traditional sub forums that ARE getting full Rat attention and am happy to have them going and not post out here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/6/2019 at 9:58 AM, enemytank said:


In my country has a popular saying that says:
"Dirty laundry is washed at home"
that is, the domestic problems must be solved in the house and not in other people's homes
I'm watching players post their sorrows on outside forums,
This is not good.
But why are they posting in external forums?
I asked some who did this and the answer was the same:
We can not post in the CRS forum. We are deleted or banned /
suspended from the forum.
Would not it be the case to change the rules of the forum?
Let complain, cry, put your hurt (no personal offenses and racism etc ...) here in our forum.
Let's settle things here!
I think it would be a lot better.

Where there are no contestants there is no progress
If everyone agrees with everything, nothing will change.


CRS needs to lose fear or lose players.

S!

Our team has been extremely lenient over the years with a multitude of hardcore attacks against us, as described by Elfin, which exceed any sort of normal sense. Being here in these forums is a privilege. We want to engage in discussion with you all, even if we don't agree with what you're saying, we hear you out and want to come to some sort of common ground. We can't always do that, compromises are made where possible, otherwise things happen pragmatically. 

The Rats including my predecessors have been very open to discussion more than any other developer I've engaged with. I've tried to continue that tradition and have personally been on the frontlines, because I know as a player what it means to see the "Head Rat" out there talking. Not long ago that wasn't a thing, I hope you guys find it valuable as I do enjoy it (mostly :D) and recognize more so the need to be transparent and communicative.

My leadership within CRS might give you a some clues on the environment that I try to cultivate. First, it's inclusive: opinions that are constructive and intended to produce a good outcome for all MATTER. Second, I am capable of admitting that I don't have the right idea always. You can see that demonstrated with the initial implementation of 1.36, I budged, greatly against my own code of not having move-able flag supply. I stopped, listened, processed and agreed. Third, I intentionally do not surround myself around YES-MEN. This doesn't help me stay balanced or therefore my decision making process. Yeah it can get brutal at times, but I appreciate strong people who step up and say what they believe / who have good intent.

Now to the subject at hand: Everyone has an opinion. Not everyone is capable of demonstrating those practices as described (inclusiveness, accountability, appreciation of differing opinions). Stating an opinion does not mean it's the right way to go. Saying it louder, with some four letter words, doesn't change our mind. Saying it louder and losing your ability to have a productive discussion (aka: toxicity) typically ends up in a break from here. Why do we do that? Because the people who are here don't want to see someone who gets toxic and turns into a WWII Online basher.

I have said this before and I truly mean it... we don't intentionally go out of our way to displease anyone, or not listen to you and your specific opinion. We value our entire community, and it is our duty to protect the community. Yes... our community expects us to do something about people who are ruining their experience.

The question should be: Why is it unattainable for these people to have a productive civil discussion? Why can't they restrain themselves from losing it? If they haven't tried to have a discussion with us, they might be pleasantly surprised in how we respond, providing they don't go full ape crap on us. That won't last very long, and we can't.

You want to encourage the productive and discourage the destructive. Isn't that just common sense?

Managing a gaming community can be pretty difficult. Just be sure to know that there's two sides to every story, and not everything you hear is accurate. We're a forgiving company and want only the very best for our community and game. We share this project with you guys immensely in a way that no other developer that I can see does. Because we value the entire experience with you that much. Honor that, take pride in it, but don't take it fore-granted, please. S! 

8 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the talk in this thread:

 

has been clear, civil, and constructive. (even the antagonists were unusually clear and concise). but CRS was overly stubborn, almost willfully ignorant even when trying to address things.

we're not taking pleasure in disagreeing, like anti-fan's or something. you guys are driving us to this man.

 

it's a simple concept laid out by your subscribers, the ToE does not take into account gameplay or fun.

they were doing their best to be constructive, but CRS's stubbornness is far from what CRS asked of the players; in the form of constructive conversation

 

 

this theme when talking to you guys is too common.

i won't be gentle and it's rude to say this, you guys deserve the criticism.

 

take this as a attack if you will, i am genuinely concerned about you guys and the game; lotta unhealthy stuff going round from both sides.

Edited by major0noob
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, major0noob said:

the talk in this thread:

 

has been clear, civil, and constructive. (even the antagonists were unusually clear and concise). but CRS was overly stubborn, almost willfully ignorant even when trying to address things.

we're not taking pleasure in disagreeing, like anti-fan's or something. you guys are driving us to this man.

 

it's a simple concept laid out by your subscribers, the ToE does not take into account gameplay or fun.

they were doing their best to be constructive, but CRS's stubbornness is far from what CRS asked of the players; in the form of constructive conversation

 

 

this theme when talking to you guys is too common.

i won't be gentle and it's rude to say this, you guys deserve the criticism.

 

take this as a attack if you will, i am genuinely concerned about you guys and the game; lotta unhealthy stuff going round from both sides.

Good grief now I am having to agree with Majornoob as well. :) 

Ingame side chat is where the toxicity seems to be at present.

In the forums, by and large, the playerbase seems in agreement that the spawnlists need to reflect actual gameplay, and not an economic model that coupled with the implementation of an "historic axis panzer use doctrine" that this game simply cannot implement, and will soon be able to model even less in 1.36.

The disagreements do not seem to be the usual axis v allied partisanship, it now seems to be players v CRS.

Thread after thread reverts to the post Map 168 spawnlists.

When an Allied stalwart like Capco posts his suggested initial starting discussion numbers for a spawn list (as requested by Bmbm) the response isn't a "thanks for your input" or "food for thought but you might want to add a bit here" it is almost yabboosuks "You are giving the axis a 30% advantage!" 

I am sorry if CRS team has spent hundreds of man hours on the economic model, but this is not an economic milsim. 

S! Ian 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, XOOM said:

Our team has been extremely lenient over the years with a multitude of hardcore attacks against us, as described by Elfin, which exceed any sort of normal sense. Being here in these forums is a privilege. We want to engage in discussion with you all, even if we don't agree with what you're saying, we hear you out and want to come to some sort of common ground. We can't always do that, compromises are made where possible, otherwise things happen pragmatically. 

The Rats including my predecessors have been very open to discussion more than any other developer I've engaged with. I've tried to continue that tradition and have personally been on the frontlines, because I know as a player what it means to see the "Head Rat" out there talking. Not long ago that wasn't a thing, I hope you guys find it valuable as I do enjoy it (mostly :D) and recognize more so the need to be transparent and communicative.

My leadership within CRS might give you a some clues on the environment that I try to cultivate. First, it's inclusive: opinions that are constructive and intended to produce a good outcome for all MATTER. Second, I am capable of admitting that I don't have the right idea always. You can see that demonstrated with the initial implementation of 1.36, I budged, greatly against my own code of not having move-able flag supply. I stopped, listened, processed and agreed. Third, I intentionally do not surround myself around YES-MEN. This doesn't help me stay balanced or therefore my decision making process. Yeah it can get brutal at times, but I appreciate strong people who step up and say what they believe / who have good intent.

Now to the subject at hand: Everyone has an opinion. Not everyone is capable of demonstrating those practices as described (inclusiveness, accountability, appreciation of differing opinions). Stating an opinion does not mean it's the right way to go. Saying it louder, with some four letter words, doesn't change our mind. Saying it louder and losing your ability to have a productive discussion (aka: toxicity) typically ends up in a break from here. Why do we do that? Because the people who are here don't want to see someone who gets toxic and turns into a WWII Online basher.

I have said this before and I truly mean it... we don't intentionally go out of our way to displease anyone, or not listen to you and your specific opinion. We value our entire community, and it is our duty to protect the community. Yes... our community expects us to do something about people who are ruining their experience.

The question should be: Why is it unattainable for these people to have a productive civil discussion? Why can't they restrain themselves from losing it? If they haven't tried to have a discussion with us, they might be pleasantly surprised in how we respond, providing they don't go full ape crap on us. That won't last very long, and we can't.

You want to encourage the productive and discourage the destructive. Isn't that just common sense?

Managing a gaming community can be pretty difficult. Just be sure to know that there's two sides to every story, and not everything you hear is accurate. We're a forgiving company and want only the very best for our community and game. We share this project with you guys immensely in a way that no other developer that I can see does. Because we value the entire experience with you that much. Honor that, take pride in it, but don't take it fore-granted, please. S! 

There is no question that you guys handle it 'right' for the most part (except when Rats 1.0 hid behind Doc and Doc was, well, Doc).

For the past several years I have had the option of focusing on one online game with dev and subscriber money, I have no interest and cannot justify two.  The other one is Star Citizen.

 

I could have done the same sort of sweat equity there as here and subbed.  But a BIG part if not the decisive one is the way they handled criticism, just awful and way more 'fascist authoritarian' happytalk enforcement then anything we've seen here.

They also had gangs that would work over any subject they did not like and kill threads, which did happen here but the mods have gotten wise to such and they are handled appropriately.

Read my stuff, yes I can come across as fanboi if you read uncritically or hit me on a reflective/happy with new feature posting, but overall I have no problem calling an issue if I see it.  Just ask them.

 

I have found that I can make criticism here and not get set upon/shut down by the official mods, and so I have chosen to continue supporting this game rather then SC.  I have no reason presently to regret that decision.

But others get shut down ultimately, I believe it is ultimately in their confrontational presentation or subject (side bias being the one that comes most to mind).

Folks, you can take Xoom's statement above to the bank.  Just be polite, professional, don't act like a baby throwing things out the pram, don't accuse them of bias, don't be a jerk to the other players (only time I've gotten warnings when I did it) and you should be able to discuss most anything, including what you see as wrong or what you are not getting out of the game.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, ian77 said:

Ingame side chat is where the toxicity seems to be at present.

This will be resolved shortly.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/6/2019 at 3:17 PM, aismov said:

Please have been doing this since 2001. It happens with every other game.

Just google any game name and "reddit critisism"

....

other games have people with formal customer service training and/or designated people to interface with the members

when devs do engage directly it's in semi-controlled sessions where they're given some kind of prep, like gameplay live streams

relatively unknown people that now have capital letters making drastic changes to the game, then getting  in arguments with upset players is not the way things are normally done in a business, nor in a charity project

also lol @ resolving the side chat problem, maybe there should be more concern about the former builders posting long, extremely negative reviews that sit at the top of the Steam reviews than a text channel that has 35-50 viewers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, david06 said:

also lol @ resolving the side chat problem, maybe there should be more concern about the former builders posting long, extremely negative reviews that sit at the top of the Steam reviews than a text channel that has 35-50 viewers

Agreed. There is also a useful .ignore feature.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, david06 said:

also lol @ resolving the side chat problem, maybe there should be more concern about the former builders posting long, extremely negative reviews that sit at the top of the Steam reviews than a text channel that has 35-50 viewers

We do what is possible to work on those reviews, and with Zebbeee as our Steam Community Manager, we often go even further these days to try and connect with those users. We have been able to meet some of the requests but we certainly can't fulfill them all.

In terms of the side channel, it is a toxic place. It's a place to aggregate frustration and open ranting against other players, bias, or cheats what ever it may be at that given time. We have people who are showing up to the game and reading this, and they walk right out the door. We have veterans, who don't want to hear about this and just want to enjoy their time with us.

Any opportunity to produce improvements to the game and community is our priority.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd also like to point out, that the quote I have made above, is exactly the stuff that shuts down my willingness to read and respond to @david06. When your persona becomes an agitator, writing hip-fire responses that are unproductive, you lose credibility. 

You're responsible for putting structure and thought into your posts, if you want an appropriate (or any) response back. Communication is a two way street.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

customer-relationship management is a multi-billion dollar industry

the issue brought up in the OP is due to a breakdown of CRM: longtime customers that are financially and emotionally invested suddenly dropping the product, and then going on social media to tell everyone why

this is aggravated by CRS pushing negative testimonials away to the most public social media (Steam is a social network) rather than keeping them as close as possible to the company, preferably via an internal channel

shutting down another minor internal channel will only further aggravate the problem, and it won't solve the core issue of "angry builders"

ideally you would create a space where upset customers prefer to go, and then you would have someone do nothing else but wait for upset customers and then acknowledge how they feel

I don't care about credibility and I don't care about punctuation either, I am typing this in between mining virtual asteroids 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just sharing my thoughts before sharing some useful reminders at the end of this topic:

CRS acknowledged the problem and is trying to handle it with a diplomatic approach, altough anyone attacking the reputation of CRS in public with the explicit intention to prevent this company to live and grow (because of a harassment attitude) exposes himself to legal problems. Xoom is VERY tolerant regarding some here...

I personally wonder what these « haters » are doing as a life job IRL, since even our youngest players (10-14 years old) show much more’ maturity and respect. Still they very efficiently contribute with constructive feedbacks.

There is no comparison with the old CRS team that I personally also found « limited » with their communications and business  decisions. Even if time proved I was right to be worried, I am sad that we lost so many years on such a great project. Instead of Blaming the new team for that, I support them to go faster and get it on tracks again. Let’s give the new team more time to do their homework, try out things, learn from their mistakes. 

Priority of CRS is solely focused on increasing the population through graphics upgrades, gameplay overhaul and pricing adjustments. There are just constraints that prevent CRS doing what would be the most efficient. So they have to look for alternatives. But we have no benchmark since no one else tried to replicate our 2500 vs 2500 WWII combined-arms map for the past 20 years.

So if you read this and feel you have been pretty aggressive yourself lately, please lower the tone a bit for the coming weeks. 1.36 is rolling out with new subscription plans. 

Little reminders:

- if anything is wrong with ingame behaviour, please use the .report command from the ingame chat bar

- if anything is wrong with moderation or any other community-related issue, contact TMAN tman@corderedrats.com (organic or steam)

- if something is wrong with the game, notify the quality management team doing a .bug from the chat bar. If you have screenshots or videos share these with SCKING scking@corneredrats.com

- if you are worried about business decisions that negatively impact the attraction or retention of players, feel free to contact me at zebbeee@corneredrats.com

- if you have an issue with the slow development of the game, look for our open job positions and help us recruit more volunteers https://www.wwiionline.com/about-the-game-team#the-team

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, david06 said:

ideally you would create a space where upset customers prefer to go, and then you would have someone do nothing else but wait for upset customers and then acknowledge how they feel

That's kind of how I view the forums tbh.  

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, david06 said:

ideally you would create a space where upset customers prefer to go, and then you would have someone do nothing else but wait for upset customers and then acknowledge how they feel

this is currently known as 'university'.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Capco said:

That's kind of how I view the forums tbh.  

That's exactly how I feel about it as well. And as I mentioned above, we're open to that. But we need to keep the game fun and separate some of those comms. It's simply correcting and establishing new standards for the heath and benefit of the game.

Side channel really isn't productive, it's a quick vent and gets quickly lost and forgotten. We can't act on that sort of stuff. Typing a .report does get logged but similarly doesn't offer us the ability to interact with and move a discussion into something actionable. 

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As yet another marketer...everyone's an expert these days, eh?...my view has long been that CRS's fortunes are not dependent on their customer service, but rather on the gameplay.

Gaming customers will tolerate an idiosyncratic gaming company for an opporunity to play a game they like...especially if that game is unique and/or superior in some way that makes them feel positive about having chosen to play it.

No product is right for everyone, of course. That's just reality. I think most gaming customers understand that complaints and negative comments often come from folks that just aren't a good fit with a game, and somehow feel that the game should be changed to fit what they want. It's really a fool's errand to try to interact with those kinds of ex-customers, because the communication just feeds their ego-involvement in "suggesting"/demanding that the game be changed.

Better to devote the company's resources to development. Unique / superior gameplay is where the battle will be won or lost. The farther CRS moves in the unique / superior-gameplay direction, the more customers will come.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All of that said, every member part of our CRS team, does care deeply about not just the game, but its community. So we strive to do the best we can. We fall short on occasion, but we try to make up for that. Perfection is not promised. But consistency, not giving up, and staying positive about the future are things we've been able to hone in well.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, sorry, didn't mean to suggest that CRS doesn't care about its customers that are positive participants in the process, which of course is almost all of us. There's tons of evidence that CRS and its positive-participant community are highly integrated.

The discussion here though has been partly about folks who haven't been a good fit, and want to tell everyone about their views. My experience has been that kind of thing has much less negative impact than has sometimes been thought in the past, or that complainers themselves sometimes argue.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jwilly said:

It's really a fool's errand to try to interact with those kinds of ex-customers, because the communication just feeds their ego-involvement in "suggesting"/demanding that the game be changed.

Better to devote the company's resources to development. Unique / superior gameplay is where the battle will be won or lost. The farther CRS moves in the unique / superior-gameplay direction, the more customers will come.

don't encourage them to revert to CRS 1.0 man

they're not them yet, but there are worrying signs of going a parallel path to losing subs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to get back to side channel for a second - I have to assume that it's used differently on Axis and Allied.

On the Allied side, it's the way that side-wise coordination happens. Sure, there's some OT talk, but I've never really noticed it being 'poisonous' the way @XOOM indicated. I'm sure we could do something like replace 'Side' with 'Ops' for team-wide Coordinator, but the OT discussion would follow there as well. In other words, I'm not sure detuning or removing 'Side' would really impact things.

The only thing I can see is moderating OT discussion into a separate channel... but most players would still tune it, as that is the lifeblood of our in-game community.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.