An EQ Player's Council that Represents Players

I dunno either way on this. If asked who I trust more to select a competent representative group, a company that cant manage to set up an auto-response for received emails, or a collective group of old grumpy forum posters, I'd be flipping a coin.

We aren't all old. Now where the heck are my glasses and my cane.? Anyway, offering suggestions is a great thing. It really is. However, it does seem to frequently turn towards interminable arguments and too often leads to personal attacks that don't actually help to advance the argument very well. We can disagree and that doesn't mean we're wrong. It just means that different opinions exist. And as a personal comment, stating the same thing multiple times looks more like desperation to me than something convincing.

As for me, I don't think dwarfs are really lumps of clay from Brell's pottery wheel. Feel free to disagree with me and I'll still buy you some ale.

Couldn't even invest time into a 9th raid this year. I doubt there's a lot of communication that the CRC receives from DBG staff.

I see the value of a player-driven RC and more transparent communication.

The CRC explicitly is not there to support the playerbase or address any issues of the playerbase. This would definitely NOT be redundant.

I completely disagree with the idea that anyone must be under an NDA to discuss anything. If the Devs don't want something to get out, then don't tell the group. If they need a sounding board then, the entire community should be able to take part. Their vetted lackeys should just be there to direct the Devs to the things most of the community seems to be leaning towards, or what the various classes each think of it.

I'm pretty happy with the representetives the casters have and I'd most likely pick them to represent us on a player council.

If the devs won't listen to those they picked to represent us, I really doubt a player selected council would have any better luck, if anything I would expect there to be less communication.

I for one appreciate those on the council, it is a thankless task.

Thank you guys.

I'm a beast and I applied! Never heard a thing!

Probably cause I'm always trashing the devs tho, makes sense

CRC is created to communicate ideas and concerns with game developers. People not on CRC are unhappy with what CRC is doing, create a Players Council to communicate ideas and concerns with game developers.

Fast forward a year. People not on CRC and Players Council (PC) are not happy with what both groups are doing, create a Super Players Council to communicate ideas and concerns with game developers.

Fast forward another year. Players not on CRC, PC and SPC are not happy with all three groups, create a Super Awesome I Know Devs Will Listen To Us Players Council to communicate ideas and concerns with game developers.

Fast forward another year. Players not on CRC, PC, SPC and SAIKDWLTUPC are not happy..... I think you get the drift.

One group is fine.

this has only ever worked well in eve online and specifically due to the nature and design of that particular game. it has never really worked well in traditional/diku mmorpgs.

If there is no NDA what would be the point of communicating with the group instead of the community as a whole?

President John F. Kennedy said: "We do things not because they are easy, but because they are hard."

Some of the posters feel that the creation of an indepenent 3rd party EQ Players Council website would be a waste of time or not worth it. In the real world, there is no shortage of people who want others to fail. Thomas Edison failed 2774 times and finally invented the light bulb. The Beattes were rejected 4 times before they got signed to Epic records.. And so on.

Sometimes I wonder why the forums even exist because I'm not seeing any tangible return on investment for the time spent that good faith posters are expending trying to make the EverQuest play experience better. I think the forums are giving EQ players false hope that their concerns are being listened to and evaluated. This is why I propsed the idea of a real Player Council that serves the players and not the developers.

In the end, the Darkpaw developers must look at all of the suggestions and feedback and see if they are meritorious enough to be implemented. They they must ask the producer if changes can be budgeted. So there's a lot of things that has to happen before change can happen. If 99% of players lose their minds and demand player mounts that look like unimmersive rocketships, then yes, they should veto the idea.

I tend to focus on proposing quality of life changes that enhances gameplay for everyone rather then specific class problems. For example, it would not take much effort by the devs to allow foraging while sitting or for foraging while you are sitting to make the character stand up, forage and fire off the kneel (looting) animation then return to sit. Currently you get a "You must be standing to forage" message when you attempt to forage from a sitting position. Other player changes might take considerable resources to pull off.

Niente's post was extremely helpful in helping players get an understanding of how things work. Having expecations that are grounded in reality will go a long way in reducing the level of frustration and feeling of alienation on these forums. So that is very much appreciated.

If the EQ forums are not working or they are not helpful, we need to ask ourselves why this is and what can be done to make them better. There would be no need for a Player Council if the forums were fufilling their role as designed.

There arent that many good faith posters.

Hopefully a few folks were picked to cover each area you were looking for input from. I can see where a small group could reinforce particular bias. It does look like you covered all the areas though.

Now that is interesting.

This depends on how bad the opinion is.

In general, a lot of people post really bad opinions, with little to no thought about the feasibility of their idea, whether it's been posted before, etc.

What is the size of the crc pool? Not asking for names, just curious as thats a big list of reqs they've met.

At least you have any idea who it is for casters. Cant say I know who is / supposed to be representing my viewpoints, and both my primary servers and playstyles are mentioned by name as having representation. (While the play experience continues to get worse every year)

They are not supposed to represent your viewpoint, but a general feel on what is good for the game

I've never been in support of a CRC - if you want input, get it from the open boards. Yes, they are noisy, but that beats the slants and opinions of a select few sounding boards any day. We've seen the examples, current and past, where devs take input from their circle and it has almost always turned out poorly down the road.

It is a nearly 25 year old game - be open about its direction. New players aren't coming in and old players aren't going anywhere unless you run them off.

The fact that they made everyone sign an NDA, for something that's just supposed to be feedback and ideas, should have been a red flag. If they want feedback and ideas, there's no reason it should be done in secret.