The Devs Have Done More In 6 Months Then Higby & Smedly Did in 2 Years

I think the old group was toxic in much of their work (creatively minded but slow, and clueless on balance and tuning system to be productive), but they were better in their formal communication with the community. This new group seems to be working on more solid things with better results and in a faster manner, but their formal communication vacuum with the community is toxic and absolutely kills player morale.

I suspect a lot, if not almost all of that, was probably in the works (to some degree) before the DBGs take over.

Which isn't a criticism of how they are doing now (which is ok - now that PS4 development is done), but rather just likely reality.


I think the problem was always how much they concentrated ON PS4 development to be honest.

You know what they say, actions speak louder than words. And I am seeing a lot more improved moral by the features added or being implemented than any lip service by Higby and friends.

Once bitten, twice shy. Players don't have a huge trust for SOE/DBG. Including promises that "things are different". Many people are looking at the current good changes with an uncertain wariness. I may only take one new content fiasco to convince a lot of people that the leopard hasn't changed its spots.

In addition, many players have lost enthusiasm for the game because they don't know if there is a future for it. Many players are not far from the ledge, and nobody is talking them off that ledge.

And that's just the active players. Nobody and nobody is speaking to the ex-players and potential players about upcoming changes to keep an eye on. Dev communication is dead, much of the 3rd party community spokepeople are gone, game site coverage is long gone, etc.

How much rope does DBG/PS2 have? Can the game survive even with good content releases if it slips below critical mass of population sizes that are needed to keep the game playable?

I want to believe. But I am confused in terms of what to trust. And without any kind of formally communicated plan, there just isn't much beyond theorycrafting in forumside for me to stay mentally plugged into the game. And the first step to someone exiting a game is when they start to plug into other things: building bridges that may lead them out of Dodge.

One of the podcast, higby highlighted on this.
- Connected continents
- Travel by sea (battleships, etc)

Will this happen?

Well, since DBG acquired PS2, as far as we know they have no plans to continue any of SOE's projects. But an Inter-continental lattice is in the works, but it won't be here for some time(+6 months)

Ohhh trust me, I know. I am one of the biggest advocates in not trusting the choices of the devs. But I always believed the issues came down to the big three (Smed, T-Ray, and Higby). When they left I still had scepticism but decided to wait and see what they produce. So far it hasn't been as disappointing (nor exceptional). But I see the direction they are going and they are attempting to address long standing issues that others decided to bury their head in the sand about. So some faith has been restored enough to give them another chance. But we aint out of the woods yet.

What makes you think that? No talk about battle islands.

Eh, I guess we don't know if it's actually coming. But with the work being done on Sanctuary, I'd assume that would come with a continent lattice.

Plus, DBG appears to be bringing a bunch of metagame from PS1, so it makes sense that cont. lattice would be among that.

I agree that the new guard seems to be better in work. But I find the vacuum of formal communication or public plan to be worrying in terms of keeping the playerbase secured.

Nothing has been added, that was not under development by the "old" dev team.

And the "new" team, is in fact the same old team. Minus any people that took severance packages or were simply downsized.

The company that bought the game rights is a venture capital group, with no care or real interest in the development of the game - they just want ROI.

This is an offensive thread. Shame on everyone participating.

!

Yeah well, they actually need to do something positive to be vocal about. Which is what they are doing at present. I would rather someone that doesn't talk but does things right, rather than someone who pays lip service and screws it up.

They can add as much crap as they like but it's still not going to make the game playable FOR ME anyways!
This game has been trailed through the dirt for too long and is now just going through more beta testing more stuff that in my opinion will take another year to even find out if it works... MEH! Where Is my flying Command ship and flamethrowers ?

You can't really win no matter how you engage the community.

While I appreciate that good communication with the community is careful work, I also recognize that is a valuable cornerstone of the modern day product/service. I think you can win by engaging the community, it's just tricky work that will bite those who mishandle it.

If DBG doesn't know how to handle it, have them hire someone. Bob Painter knows SOE/DBG (he worked on EQ there) and he is great at PR/Events/Marketing. Hire him (even if just as a consultant).

They are losing their dialogue with their customers. This has consequences.

Not just losing that dialogue in non-communication, but also in making the customer think there will be communication and then not communicating with them.

If someone leaves you a message that they need something, you need to return their call (or leave them a message) and let them know that you received their message. That's just good communication in business. You can tell them you're working on it or not or whatever you want, but you need to let them know you have received their call.

For PS2 Devs, they need to just be consistent in their communication (and change it as needed over time to fit needs or the situation). If they write a big message saying "we'll communicate regularly with the community" and "we'll update the Roadmap", then they should follow-through on that. If PS2 then realizes such follow-up is not in the cards, they need to update the community with a message saying whatever it is they want the community to be expecting or believing. They need to "manage the customers expectations", and then follow-up and meet those expectations. (and/or adjust those expectations through communication as needed over time)

In business (or relationships in general) you always have the option of just misleading or ignoring or even lying to the customer. But such things have repercussions, and these repercussion may or may not be a factor for you.

They could just say:
"We are working hard on many things to improve the game. We expect our formal communication will be sparse at this time. Also, we do not expect to be actively updating or monitoring the Raodmap or Wishlist section of the Forum at this time, but please feel free to continue to post your thoughts and feedback to them."

That at least would match player expectations with the current perceived behavior of PS2 Devs. It's not optimizing things like marketing and community development, but at least it's hitting on expectations.

I understand what you are saying. But you also have to consider the fact this is a small team now. You cant have your cake and eat it. And honestly it is better to have limited dialogue that is actually backed up by plenty of real positive action. Than customers not believe a single word that comes out of your mouth. What you want is only going to give us another three years of what we already have had and look how that's turned out. Something needs to change and they are doing it.

I think you and I still have confused communication.

I:
1) am not suggesting they mirror what the old PS2 Devs did for Communication. I am suggesting that they need to be consistent between their messages to the community and their follow-up behavior.
2) am suggesting that a careful, more engaged formal communication with the community could be very productive. And not doing so is a missed opportunity and/or potential issue.

For me, #1 is essential. #2 is less important than #1. #2 is just an opportunity and/or potential issue. (one of many on the minefield of life)

Focusing just on #1 from above, it doesn't take a large team to make sure you've consistent between your message and your actions.

I agree that #2 can be more than the PS2 Dev Team can handle in full right now. But i's something they need to at least plan for tackling at some point. (and likely something they'll need to start planting seeds for now) Seriously, they can hire/contract Bob Painter to handle this.

I don't think the only options are old Dev Style or current Dev Style. I can appreciate what you are saying that the new Dev Style is better in the long run than the old Dev Style. But I think the new Devs should make sure their message is consistent with their behavior (just adjust the message to fit behavior, don't worry about contorting to fit a undesired message), and I also think they should start looking at stepping into broader communication/marketing etc. as they progress. (very likely starting with planting key, low cost/budget seeds now)

Hard work is good. But without a plan or without costumers on board, it's for not.

And on OMFG, and Hossin, and the Esamir/Amerish revamps, and Harassers, and Valks and a bucket of new weapons, and...

But are you Bob Painter, and looking to be hired?