It’s easy to explain. He is almost the only one from CG who is very vocal in this forum and he doesn’t even work for them. A lot of people are directing their anger and frustration towards him. It’s not fair to kyno but understandable. CG is more or less ignoring big chunks of this Forum and kyno has to play devils advocate which makes him the „big target“ for a lot of users here.
I know the reasoning and have clashed with kyno over the years (ive been here on the forum for three years next month), but it doesn’t change it not being his fault.
Crumb’s job as Community Manager is whatever CG tells him is job is as Community Manager. If he wasn’t following orders from his leadership I’d imagine we’d have a new Community Manager.
There are many layers to what and who restrict his ability to communicate.
These layers are all put in place by EA and/or CG.
If their company policies prevent their community manager from communicating regularly with the community, they might want to take a look at those.
I don't think the challenges are company policies. I imagine they're more related to the number of companies involved (Disney, LucasArts, EA, CG) and divisions built into those. It's arguably the most popular IP right now for a mobile game so I'm sure there is a ton of oversight.
So, SW BF2 didn’t have the exact same companies involved?
MSF don’t have the same number of companies involved?
It sounds like Kyno has a little more information than he’s allowed to share, otherwise he would.
We’ll never know the reason communication changed and is where it is now until someone who actually knows tells us.
However, we can make some educated assumptions based on other games.
It’s probably not a Disney issue as they are the parent company of many games that interact with their player base far more than this.
It’s probably not a LucasArts issue for the same reason it’s probably not a Disney issue.
It’s probably not an EA issue for the same reason as the 2 above.
So, unless it is one of the 3 above and they are treating this game completely different than all their other games, then we’re left with CG.
Also of note is that CG is the only EA game that canceled it’s game changers program.
There’s a pattern here that’s not difficult to spot.
What other mobile games are those 3 companies all partnered on?
How many of them are mobile games?
I would agree there are patterns but you seem to also be ignoring connections that dont suit your sentiment.
Can you explain how a mobile game somehow is special from other platforms you think exempts them from community engagement?
MSF, DSA and RSA are all mobile games that engage with their community, so even that assertion holds zero water.
Those games aren’t 4.8 years old you say? Again, what does that have to do with community engagement unless the game is in its end phase and closing down?
As we've discussed each of those games has different relationships and partnerships, so I'm not sure where the parallels are, but to say they can do it why cant this game doesnt exactly hold water either.
I appreciate your desire to bring in the "game is dying" into the conversation, I know it can be hard to keep things going in a fully constructive manner, but you do realize that games in different stages have different goals.
Didnt one of the games similar to this do a bunch of marketing at the beginning paying YTs to promote then, just to get people in the door, and then things kind of fall apart as those same YT entities left. (Because they stopped paying)
My point wasnt to say that this game does exactly what it should for its age, or however you tried to reword my previous statement. My point is that those games are in an earlier stage of what they are doing and it's very likely they will be doing things differently as time moves on.
But it does hold water when we are talking about setting up a discord or a facebook. Don't even say they can't. That's absurd.
And regardless of how long a game has been around, it doesn't mean there aren't ways to adapt and change and become better.
Can you honestly say the communication has been better as of, say the last year?
I mean, we can search through dev posts and denote the frequency and impact of posts.
I am willing to be they were more frequent and more impactful in previous years.
Yes, things change, but this seems to be for the worst.
At this point, you have to realize, it is not just 1 person here and there coming onto the forums, or the same disgruntled gamer making the same claim about communication. Surely right?
It's HORRIBLE. And you know it. Please ask them to improve! Because they aren't listening to us.
If you mean the devs setting up a discord or FB, then yes it is not that simple.....but you are correct they could but it would not be simple and it doesnt mean they would be able to "more freely talk" in some other location.
I honestly do think the RA/QA/SoTG setup is better now than it was previously, and that is a change that was made in the last year.
Frequent yes 100%.
Impactful.....not sure.
We do ask and provide and point them to feedback.
And despite what people think they do see the forums and are almost always aware of things as they are playing out. Sometimes due to timing we may flag them before they had a chance to see it.
So...no Q and A last month...no SoTG last month ( granted because of the twice delayed RA, but still). Last month isn’t the first time they missed their own targets, with no stated reason why.
Other than dec, they have not missed the setup they announced, up till now have they?
Crumb’s job as Community Manager is whatever CG tells him is job is as Community Manager. If he wasn’t following orders from his leadership I’d imagine we’d have a new Community Manager.
There are many layers to what and who restrict his ability to communicate.
These layers are all put in place by EA and/or CG.
If their company policies prevent their community manager from communicating regularly with the community, they might want to take a look at those.
I don't think the challenges are company policies. I imagine they're more related to the number of companies involved (Disney, LucasArts, EA, CG) and divisions built into those. It's arguably the most popular IP right now for a mobile game so I'm sure there is a ton of oversight.
So, SW BF2 didn’t have the exact same companies involved?
MSF don’t have the same number of companies involved?
It sounds like Kyno has a little more information than he’s allowed to share, otherwise he would.
We’ll never know the reason communication changed and is where it is now until someone who actually knows tells us.
However, we can make some educated assumptions based on other games.
It’s probably not a Disney issue as they are the parent company of many games that interact with their player base far more than this.
It’s probably not a LucasArts issue for the same reason it’s probably not a Disney issue.
It’s probably not an EA issue for the same reason as the 2 above.
So, unless it is one of the 3 above and they are treating this game completely different than all their other games, then we’re left with CG.
Also of note is that CG is the only EA game that canceled it’s game changers program.
There’s a pattern here that’s not difficult to spot.
What other mobile games are those 3 companies all partnered on?
How many of them are mobile games?
I would agree there are patterns but you seem to also be ignoring connections that dont suit your sentiment.
Can you explain how a mobile game somehow is special from other platforms you think exempts them from community engagement?
MSF, DSA and RSA are all mobile games that engage with their community, so even that assertion holds zero water.
Those games aren’t 4.8 years old you say? Again, what does that have to do with community engagement unless the game is in its end phase and closing down?
As we've discussed each of those games has different relationships and partnerships, so I'm not sure where the parallels are, but to say they can do it why cant this game doesnt exactly hold water either.
I appreciate your desire to bring in the "game is dying" into the conversation, I know it can be hard to keep things going in a fully constructive manner, but you do realize that games in different stages have different goals.
Didnt one of the games similar to this do a bunch of marketing at the beginning paying YTs to promote then, just to get people in the door, and then things kind of fall apart as those same YT entities left. (Because they stopped paying)
My point wasnt to say that this game does exactly what it should for its age, or however you tried to reword my previous statement. My point is that those games are in an earlier stage of what they are doing and it's very likely they will be doing things differently as time moves on.
But it does hold water when we are talking about setting up a discord or a facebook. Don't even say they can't. That's absurd.
And regardless of how long a game has been around, it doesn't mean there aren't ways to adapt and change and become better.
Can you honestly say the communication has been better as of, say the last year?
I mean, we can search through dev posts and denote the frequency and impact of posts.
I am willing to be they were more frequent and more impactful in previous years.
Yes, things change, but this seems to be for the worst.
At this point, you have to realize, it is not just 1 person here and there coming onto the forums, or the same disgruntled gamer making the same claim about communication. Surely right?
It's HORRIBLE. And you know it. Please ask them to improve! Because they aren't listening to us.
If you mean the devs setting up a discord or FB, then yes it is not that simple.....but you are correct they could but it would not be simple and it doesnt mean they would be able to "more freely talk" in some other location.
I honestly do think the RA/QA/SoTG setup is better now than it was previously, and that is a change that was made in the last year.
Frequent yes 100%.
Impactful.....not sure.
We do ask and provide and point them to feedback.
And despite what people think they do see the forums and are almost always aware of things as they are playing out. Sometimes due to timing we may flag them before they had a chance to see it.
So...no Q and A last month...no SoTG last month ( granted because of the twice delayed RA, but still). Last month isn’t the first time they missed their own targets, with no stated reason why.
Other than dec, they have not missed the setup they announced, up till now have they?
They missed two Q and A’s ( March and May) and arguably one SoTG (May). June isn’t shaping up to be a Q and A month either...CG does what CG wants to do regardless of what they have told the community.
I’m pretty sure they skipped May Q&A over the backlash and I doubt we will have any because everyone got upset they said no sandbox, raid on pause etc
People were really complaining on what’s the point of Q&A if CG will say no
Crumb’s job as Community Manager is whatever CG tells him is job is as Community Manager. If he wasn’t following orders from his leadership I’d imagine we’d have a new Community Manager.
There are many layers to what and who restrict his ability to communicate.
These layers are all put in place by EA and/or CG.
If their company policies prevent their community manager from communicating regularly with the community, they might want to take a look at those.
I don't think the challenges are company policies. I imagine they're more related to the number of companies involved (Disney, LucasArts, EA, CG) and divisions built into those. It's arguably the most popular IP right now for a mobile game so I'm sure there is a ton of oversight.
So, SW BF2 didn’t have the exact same companies involved?
MSF don’t have the same number of companies involved?
It sounds like Kyno has a little more information than he’s allowed to share, otherwise he would.
We’ll never know the reason communication changed and is where it is now until someone who actually knows tells us.
However, we can make some educated assumptions based on other games.
It’s probably not a Disney issue as they are the parent company of many games that interact with their player base far more than this.
It’s probably not a LucasArts issue for the same reason it’s probably not a Disney issue.
It’s probably not an EA issue for the same reason as the 2 above.
So, unless it is one of the 3 above and they are treating this game completely different than all their other games, then we’re left with CG.
Also of note is that CG is the only EA game that canceled it’s game changers program.
There’s a pattern here that’s not difficult to spot.
What other mobile games are those 3 companies all partnered on?
How many of them are mobile games?
I would agree there are patterns but you seem to also be ignoring connections that dont suit your sentiment.
Can you explain how a mobile game somehow is special from other platforms you think exempts them from community engagement?
MSF, DSA and RSA are all mobile games that engage with their community, so even that assertion holds zero water.
Those games aren’t 4.8 years old you say? Again, what does that have to do with community engagement unless the game is in its end phase and closing down?
As we've discussed each of those games has different relationships and partnerships, so I'm not sure where the parallels are, but to say they can do it why cant this game doesnt exactly hold water either.
I appreciate your desire to bring in the "game is dying" into the conversation, I know it can be hard to keep things going in a fully constructive manner, but you do realize that games in different stages have different goals.
Didnt one of the games similar to this do a bunch of marketing at the beginning paying YTs to promote then, just to get people in the door, and then things kind of fall apart as those same YT entities left. (Because they stopped paying)
My point wasnt to say that this game does exactly what it should for its age, or however you tried to reword my previous statement. My point is that those games are in an earlier stage of what they are doing and it's very likely they will be doing things differently as time moves on.
But it does hold water when we are talking about setting up a discord or a facebook. Don't even say they can't. That's absurd.
And regardless of how long a game has been around, it doesn't mean there aren't ways to adapt and change and become better.
Can you honestly say the communication has been better as of, say the last year?
I mean, we can search through dev posts and denote the frequency and impact of posts.
I am willing to be they were more frequent and more impactful in previous years.
Yes, things change, but this seems to be for the worst.
At this point, you have to realize, it is not just 1 person here and there coming onto the forums, or the same disgruntled gamer making the same claim about communication. Surely right?
It's HORRIBLE. And you know it. Please ask them to improve! Because they aren't listening to us.
If you mean the devs setting up a discord or FB, then yes it is not that simple.....but you are correct they could but it would not be simple and it doesnt mean they would be able to "more freely talk" in some other location.
I honestly do think the RA/QA/SoTG setup is better now than it was previously, and that is a change that was made in the last year.
Frequent yes 100%.
Impactful.....not sure.
We do ask and provide and point them to feedback.
And despite what people think they do see the forums and are almost always aware of things as they are playing out. Sometimes due to timing we may flag them before they had a chance to see it.
So...no Q and A last month...no SoTG last month ( granted because of the twice delayed RA, but still). Last month isn’t the first time they missed their own targets, with no stated reason why.
Other than dec, they have not missed the setup they announced, up till now have they?
They missed two Q and A’s ( March and May) and arguably one SoTG (May). June isn’t shaping up to be a Q and A month either...CG does what CG wants to do regardless of what they have told the community.
I’m pretty sure they skipped May Q&A over the backlash and I doubt we will have any because everyone got upset they said no sandbox, raid on pause etc
People were really complaining on what’s the point of Q&A if CG will say no
Backlash is over no plans for those things, not over the act of disclosing that they have no plans for those things.
Crumb’s job as Community Manager is whatever CG tells him is job is as Community Manager. If he wasn’t following orders from his leadership I’d imagine we’d have a new Community Manager.
There are many layers to what and who restrict his ability to communicate.
These layers are all put in place by EA and/or CG.
If their company policies prevent their community manager from communicating regularly with the community, they might want to take a look at those.
I don't think the challenges are company policies. I imagine they're more related to the number of companies involved (Disney, LucasArts, EA, CG) and divisions built into those. It's arguably the most popular IP right now for a mobile game so I'm sure there is a ton of oversight.
So, SW BF2 didn’t have the exact same companies involved?
MSF don’t have the same number of companies involved?
It sounds like Kyno has a little more information than he’s allowed to share, otherwise he would.
We’ll never know the reason communication changed and is where it is now until someone who actually knows tells us.
However, we can make some educated assumptions based on other games.
It’s probably not a Disney issue as they are the parent company of many games that interact with their player base far more than this.
It’s probably not a LucasArts issue for the same reason it’s probably not a Disney issue.
It’s probably not an EA issue for the same reason as the 2 above.
So, unless it is one of the 3 above and they are treating this game completely different than all their other games, then we’re left with CG.
Also of note is that CG is the only EA game that canceled it’s game changers program.
There’s a pattern here that’s not difficult to spot.
What other mobile games are those 3 companies all partnered on?
How many of them are mobile games?
I would agree there are patterns but you seem to also be ignoring connections that dont suit your sentiment.
Can you explain how a mobile game somehow is special from other platforms you think exempts them from community engagement?
MSF, DSA and RSA are all mobile games that engage with their community, so even that assertion holds zero water.
Those games aren’t 4.8 years old you say? Again, what does that have to do with community engagement unless the game is in its end phase and closing down?
As we've discussed each of those games has different relationships and partnerships, so I'm not sure where the parallels are, but to say they can do it why cant this game doesnt exactly hold water either.
I appreciate your desire to bring in the "game is dying" into the conversation, I know it can be hard to keep things going in a fully constructive manner, but you do realize that games in different stages have different goals.
Didnt one of the games similar to this do a bunch of marketing at the beginning paying YTs to promote then, just to get people in the door, and then things kind of fall apart as those same YT entities left. (Because they stopped paying)
My point wasnt to say that this game does exactly what it should for its age, or however you tried to reword my previous statement. My point is that those games are in an earlier stage of what they are doing and it's very likely they will be doing things differently as time moves on.
But it does hold water when we are talking about setting up a discord or a facebook. Don't even say they can't. That's absurd.
And regardless of how long a game has been around, it doesn't mean there aren't ways to adapt and change and become better.
Can you honestly say the communication has been better as of, say the last year?
I mean, we can search through dev posts and denote the frequency and impact of posts.
I am willing to be they were more frequent and more impactful in previous years.
Yes, things change, but this seems to be for the worst.
At this point, you have to realize, it is not just 1 person here and there coming onto the forums, or the same disgruntled gamer making the same claim about communication. Surely right?
It's HORRIBLE. And you know it. Please ask them to improve! Because they aren't listening to us.
If you mean the devs setting up a discord or FB, then yes it is not that simple.....but you are correct they could but it would not be simple and it doesnt mean they would be able to "more freely talk" in some other location.
I honestly do think the RA/QA/SoTG setup is better now than it was previously, and that is a change that was made in the last year.
Frequent yes 100%.
Impactful.....not sure.
We do ask and provide and point them to feedback.
And despite what people think they do see the forums and are almost always aware of things as they are playing out. Sometimes due to timing we may flag them before they had a chance to see it.
So...no Q and A last month...no SoTG last month ( granted because of the twice delayed RA, but still). Last month isn’t the first time they missed their own targets, with no stated reason why.
Other than dec, they have not missed the setup they announced, up till now have they?
They missed two Q and A’s ( March and May) and arguably one SoTG (May). June isn’t shaping up to be a Q and A month either...CG does what CG wants to do regardless of what they have told the community.
I’m pretty sure they skipped May Q&A over the backlash and I doubt we will have any because everyone got upset they said no sandbox, raid on pause etc
People were really complaining on what’s the point of Q&A if CG will say no
So the community must be enthusiastically overjoyed when CG announces it's cancelling things it promised? Otherwise they will cancel Q&As? What's next? The beatings will stop when morale improves? Jeez what a bunch of user hating jerks
Crumb’s job as Community Manager is whatever CG tells him is job is as Community Manager. If he wasn’t following orders from his leadership I’d imagine we’d have a new Community Manager.
There are many layers to what and who restrict his ability to communicate.
These layers are all put in place by EA and/or CG.
If their company policies prevent their community manager from communicating regularly with the community, they might want to take a look at those.
I don't think the challenges are company policies. I imagine they're more related to the number of companies involved (Disney, LucasArts, EA, CG) and divisions built into those. It's arguably the most popular IP right now for a mobile game so I'm sure there is a ton of oversight.
So, SW BF2 didn’t have the exact same companies involved?
MSF don’t have the same number of companies involved?
It sounds like Kyno has a little more information than he’s allowed to share, otherwise he would.
We’ll never know the reason communication changed and is where it is now until someone who actually knows tells us.
However, we can make some educated assumptions based on other games.
It’s probably not a Disney issue as they are the parent company of many games that interact with their player base far more than this.
It’s probably not a LucasArts issue for the same reason it’s probably not a Disney issue.
It’s probably not an EA issue for the same reason as the 2 above.
So, unless it is one of the 3 above and they are treating this game completely different than all their other games, then we’re left with CG.
Also of note is that CG is the only EA game that canceled it’s game changers program.
There’s a pattern here that’s not difficult to spot.
What other mobile games are those 3 companies all partnered on?
How many of them are mobile games?
I would agree there are patterns but you seem to also be ignoring connections that dont suit your sentiment.
Can you explain how a mobile game somehow is special from other platforms you think exempts them from community engagement?
MSF, DSA and RSA are all mobile games that engage with their community, so even that assertion holds zero water.
Those games aren’t 4.8 years old you say? Again, what does that have to do with community engagement unless the game is in its end phase and closing down?
As we've discussed each of those games has different relationships and partnerships, so I'm not sure where the parallels are, but to say they can do it why cant this game doesnt exactly hold water either.
I appreciate your desire to bring in the "game is dying" into the conversation, I know it can be hard to keep things going in a fully constructive manner, but you do realize that games in different stages have different goals.
Didnt one of the games similar to this do a bunch of marketing at the beginning paying YTs to promote then, just to get people in the door, and then things kind of fall apart as those same YT entities left. (Because they stopped paying)
My point wasnt to say that this game does exactly what it should for its age, or however you tried to reword my previous statement. My point is that those games are in an earlier stage of what they are doing and it's very likely they will be doing things differently as time moves on.
But it does hold water when we are talking about setting up a discord or a facebook. Don't even say they can't. That's absurd.
And regardless of how long a game has been around, it doesn't mean there aren't ways to adapt and change and become better.
Can you honestly say the communication has been better as of, say the last year?
I mean, we can search through dev posts and denote the frequency and impact of posts.
I am willing to be they were more frequent and more impactful in previous years.
Yes, things change, but this seems to be for the worst.
At this point, you have to realize, it is not just 1 person here and there coming onto the forums, or the same disgruntled gamer making the same claim about communication. Surely right?
It's HORRIBLE. And you know it. Please ask them to improve! Because they aren't listening to us.
If you mean the devs setting up a discord or FB, then yes it is not that simple.....but you are correct they could but it would not be simple and it doesnt mean they would be able to "more freely talk" in some other location.
I honestly do think the RA/QA/SoTG setup is better now than it was previously, and that is a change that was made in the last year.
Frequent yes 100%.
Impactful.....not sure.
We do ask and provide and point them to feedback.
And despite what people think they do see the forums and are almost always aware of things as they are playing out. Sometimes due to timing we may flag them before they had a chance to see it.
So...no Q and A last month...no SoTG last month ( granted because of the twice delayed RA, but still). Last month isn’t the first time they missed their own targets, with no stated reason why.
Other than dec, they have not missed the setup they announced, up till now have they?
They missed two Q and A’s ( March and May) and arguably one SoTG (May). June isn’t shaping up to be a Q and A month either...CG does what CG wants to do regardless of what they have told the community.
I’m pretty sure they skipped May Q&A over the backlash and I doubt we will have any because everyone got upset they said no sandbox, raid on pause etc
People were really complaining on what’s the point of Q&A if CG will say no
So the community must be enthusiastically overjoyed when CG announces it's cancelling things it promised? Otherwise they will cancel Q&As? What's next? The beatings will stop when morale improves? Jeez what a bunch of user hating jerks
No. It’s fine to dislike what they say but asking them to stop Q&A because you don’t like what they say on the other hand...
I didn’t like some of the answers myself but I still look forward to Q&A every month
I understand that there must be several layers of bureaucracy. But if said bureaucracy is damaging the communities opinion of all parties involved from CG to Disney then surely finding a work-around should be a priority?
I could not agree more. This sentiment is something many of us express and are hoping to get changes made. It is just a difficult path to navigate.
Like it or not what Kozi did, no matter how effective on the "real front", she gave feeling of engagement. Crumb has done the same but it changed/stopped and we all hope we can get back to that somehow.
This is the realist response yet that I've seen. No offense @Kyno, you've been doing a great job keeping up with all of us and I commend you for that, but it's a completely different ballgame when someone with CG in front of their name addresses comments on here. I think the lack of that has drove this so much harder.
Still waiting on that edit forum profile setting so I can change my name...
Kyno you keep talking about having a conversation but so far the conversation is just one sided since CG doesn't think they have to respond to any of this.
Us here, can have a civil and constructive conversation about this and many other topics and those can drive change, despite what some may say.
The Ahrnald thing, doesnt need to be addressed, IMO. I am hoping that other can realize that and I think some have.
Should they make a statement addressing the somewhat disappointing interaction that we see that goes against previous statements they made. Probably, but it's not always that easy, especially quickly.
What we have seen is not the whole story, and they will not share details. This puts them in an interesting spot and probably what is leading to a lack of a response.
I get what you’re saying and don’t disagree with anything. My personal issue is the total lack of communication. Saying nothing and delaying updates has me worried that in reality there are two guys sharing one laptop meanwhile we are investing hundreds if not thousands into this game. I don’t want to invest any more money if they’re just going to let this game die. That’s what I’m worried about and why I’ve stopped spending.
The negotiating with cheaters thing irks me too. As far as Ahnald is concerned, I like his videos and find him informative and entertaining but couldn’t care less about his inherited account.
Kyno you keep talking about having a conversation but so far the conversation is just one sided since CG doesn't think they have to respond to any of this.
Us here, can have a civil and constructive conversation about this and many other topics and those can drive change, despite what some may say.
The Ahrnald thing, doesnt need to be addressed, IMO. I am hoping that other can realize that and I think some have.
Should they make a statement addressing the somewhat disappointing interaction that we see that goes against previous statements they made. Probably, but it's not always that easy, especially quickly.
What we have seen is not the whole story, and they will not share details. This puts them in an interesting spot and probably what is leading to a lack of a response.
Do you not think that addressing the recent controversies by saying that they can’t go into any specifics of the cases and give their reasons (legal, business etc.) would quell some of the flames? Even if not all/ the majority of them, I think many would argue that that would look better than no communication at all... maybe I’m wrong with that thought though!
They also nerf/break things all the time and usually don’t address to fix it. (Aurra leadership, fives, Darth revan not countering, just to name a couple.
Kyno you keep talking about having a conversation but so far the conversation is just one sided since CG doesn't think they have to respond to any of this.
Us here, can have a civil and constructive conversation about this and many other topics and those can drive change, despite what some may say.
The Ahrnald thing, doesnt need to be addressed, IMO. I am hoping that other can realize that and I think some have.
Should they make a statement addressing the somewhat disappointing interaction that we see that goes against previous statements they made. Probably, but it's not always that easy, especially quickly.
What we have seen is not the whole story, and they will not share details. This puts them in an interesting spot and probably what is leading to a lack of a response.
They have put themselves into that "interesting spot". Don't make it sound reactionary.
Kyno you keep talking about having a conversation but so far the conversation is just one sided since CG doesn't think they have to respond to any of this.
Us here, can have a civil and constructive conversation about this and many other topics and those can drive change, despite what some may say.
The Ahrnald thing, doesnt need to be addressed, IMO. I am hoping that other can realize that and I think some have.
Should they make a statement addressing the somewhat disappointing interaction that we see that goes against previous statements they made. Probably, but it's not always that easy, especially quickly.
What we have seen is not the whole story, and they will not share details. This puts them in an interesting spot and probably what is leading to a lack of a response.
“Should they make a statement addressing the somewhat disappointing interaction that we see that goes against previous statements they made.”
You can just say negotiating with a cheater, linguistic gymnastics not required.
Don't juxtapose more communication at the expense of content creation.
If they are working on great things then they can just make a post that says, "We're working on great things but can't really talk about it." Posting sentences that are innocuous yet reassuring takes all of 45 seconds.
Kyno you keep talking about having a conversation but so far the conversation is just one sided since CG doesn't think they have to respond to any of this.
Us here, can have a civil and constructive conversation about this and many other topics and those can drive change, despite what some may say.
The Ahrnald thing, doesnt need to be addressed, IMO. I am hoping that other can realize that and I think some have.
Should they make a statement addressing the somewhat disappointing interaction that we see that goes against previous statements they made. Probably, but it's not always that easy, especially quickly.
What we have seen is not the whole story, and they will not share details. This puts them in an interesting spot and probably what is leading to a lack of a response.
Do you not think that addressing the recent controversies by saying that they can’t go into any specifics of the cases and give their reasons (legal, business etc.) would quell some of the flames? Even if not all/ the majority of them, I think many would argue that that would look better than no communication at all... maybe I’m wrong with that thought though!
I dont think it would. The vast majority of the players that are upset would not likely be accepting of anything like that.
Just like "they dont answer anything in the QAs"...
What I have seen quell some of this is what seems like more information that is floating around showing more of the story, but again, thatbis not something they will share.
Kyno you keep talking about having a conversation but so far the conversation is just one sided since CG doesn't think they have to respond to any of this.
Us here, can have a civil and constructive conversation about this and many other topics and those can drive change, despite what some may say.
The Ahrnald thing, doesnt need to be addressed, IMO. I am hoping that other can realize that and I think some have.
Should they make a statement addressing the somewhat disappointing interaction that we see that goes against previous statements they made. Probably, but it's not always that easy, especially quickly.
What we have seen is not the whole story, and they will not share details. This puts them in an interesting spot and probably what is leading to a lack of a response.
“Should they make a statement addressing the somewhat disappointing interaction that we see that goes against previous statements they made.”
You can just say negotiating with a cheater, linguistic gymnastics not required.
If you have seen what seems to be the leading up to that conversation you may have a different perspective on what you would call that.
Kyno, maybe not everyone appreciate the work you do here, but i do. It's really hard to moderate this kind of forums. But i really think that the community needs more transparency and open communication, in other mobiles i play for more less, the player base has exploded and when they did, the company's came and tried to talk, to built things people wanted. To simply stay behind a computer and saying nothing, its disrespectful with everyone.
Kyno you keep talking about having a conversation but so far the conversation is just one sided since CG doesn't think they have to respond to any of this.
Us here, can have a civil and constructive conversation about this and many other topics and those can drive change, despite what some may say.
The Ahrnald thing, doesnt need to be addressed, IMO. I am hoping that other can realize that and I think some have.
Should they make a statement addressing the somewhat disappointing interaction that we see that goes against previous statements they made. Probably, but it's not always that easy, especially quickly.
What we have seen is not the whole story, and they will not share details. This puts them in an interesting spot and probably what is leading to a lack of a response.
“Should they make a statement addressing the somewhat disappointing interaction that we see that goes against previous statements they made.”
You can just say negotiating with a cheater, linguistic gymnastics not required.
If you have seen what seems to be the leading up to that conversation you may have a different perspective on what you would call that.
We may or we may not. How could we know without being privy to the lead up to the conversation? (I assume you are implying that you're privy? Did CG share it with you or was it someone else? If someone else, is it credible and are you allowed to share it with the rest of the players? If CG, why is CG sharing case specific information? Or does their internal policy allow sharing such detail with mods who are not EA/CG employees even if not for distribution to the public?). At the end of the day, they gave a week off for cheating (is this admission that the email is legitimate btw? Or what lead up are we talking about? Or is this a hypothetical lead up that may or may not exist?).
Another if you knew what I know or might know, you may feel differently. Well, seeing as how the players don't have any shred of information on what that hypothetical knowledge might be, it really isn't of much use in evaluating CG's actions.
the big thing is all these changes are easy and hiding behind guild lines that they made is just lazy
You think they as a company should allow some external entity dictate when they do or do not follow their internal guidelines?
I'm pretty sure no company would ever agree that is a good idea.
A company uses customer feedback to consider departing from or amending internal guidelines. Pretty sure many companies would consider that to be an excellent idea.
Replies
Other than dec, they have not missed the setup they announced, up till now have they?
People were really complaining on what’s the point of Q&A if CG will say no
Backlash is over no plans for those things, not over the act of disclosing that they have no plans for those things.
So the community must be enthusiastically overjoyed when CG announces it's cancelling things it promised? Otherwise they will cancel Q&As? What's next? The beatings will stop when morale improves? Jeez what a bunch of user hating jerks
Doesnt that sound amazing.
No. It’s fine to dislike what they say but asking them to stop Q&A because you don’t like what they say on the other hand...
I didn’t like some of the answers myself but I still look forward to Q&A every month
This is the realist response yet that I've seen. No offense @Kyno, you've been doing a great job keeping up with all of us and I commend you for that, but it's a completely different ballgame when someone with CG in front of their name addresses comments on here. I think the lack of that has drove this so much harder.
Us here, can have a civil and constructive conversation about this and many other topics and those can drive change, despite what some may say.
The Ahrnald thing, doesnt need to be addressed, IMO. I am hoping that other can realize that and I think some have.
Should they make a statement addressing the somewhat disappointing interaction that we see that goes against previous statements they made. Probably, but it's not always that easy, especially quickly.
What we have seen is not the whole story, and they will not share details. This puts them in an interesting spot and probably what is leading to a lack of a response.
The negotiating with cheaters thing irks me too. As far as Ahnald is concerned, I like his videos and find him informative and entertaining but couldn’t care less about his inherited account.
Do you not think that addressing the recent controversies by saying that they can’t go into any specifics of the cases and give their reasons (legal, business etc.) would quell some of the flames? Even if not all/ the majority of them, I think many would argue that that would look better than no communication at all... maybe I’m wrong with that thought though!
They have put themselves into that "interesting spot". Don't make it sound reactionary.
“Should they make a statement addressing the somewhat disappointing interaction that we see that goes against previous statements they made.”
You can just say negotiating with a cheater, linguistic gymnastics not required.
DISCLAIMER: Post is subject to change.
If they are working on great things then they can just make a post that says, "We're working on great things but can't really talk about it." Posting sentences that are innocuous yet reassuring takes all of 45 seconds.
I dont think it would. The vast majority of the players that are upset would not likely be accepting of anything like that.
Just like "they dont answer anything in the QAs"...
What I have seen quell some of this is what seems like more information that is floating around showing more of the story, but again, thatbis not something they will share.
If you have seen what seems to be the leading up to that conversation you may have a different perspective on what you would call that.
You think they as a company should allow some external entity dictate when they do or do not follow their internal guidelines?
I'm pretty sure no company would ever agree that is a good idea.
We may or we may not. How could we know without being privy to the lead up to the conversation? (I assume you are implying that you're privy? Did CG share it with you or was it someone else? If someone else, is it credible and are you allowed to share it with the rest of the players? If CG, why is CG sharing case specific information? Or does their internal policy allow sharing such detail with mods who are not EA/CG employees even if not for distribution to the public?). At the end of the day, they gave a week off for cheating (is this admission that the email is legitimate btw? Or what lead up are we talking about? Or is this a hypothetical lead up that may or may not exist?).
Another if you knew what I know or might know, you may feel differently. Well, seeing as how the players don't have any shred of information on what that hypothetical knowledge might be, it really isn't of much use in evaluating CG's actions.
A company uses customer feedback to consider departing from or amending internal guidelines. Pretty sure many companies would consider that to be an excellent idea.