Shogun's response to patch campaign

[screwtype]

Shogun has responded to the "patch campaign" over at the com.

http://p223.ezboard.com/fshoguntotal...ID=24704.topic

[HarunTaiwan]

I don't think you should post about the com here at org...The mods have (rightly) said many times that other forums aren't a good topic.

I think we all know the campaign got their attention. There's about 50 NEW reviews by now - if the same response happens to their XP they will be in trouble - so for their sakes I hope they won't fight their own customers and instead do proper QA and think about after-sales service.

I encourage everyone to review the game: positive, negative, however they want - it can only help consumers and offer valuable feed-back to CA.

I'm in manufacturing myself, and personally, I almost like to see negative feedback on my products, because then I can fix a problem that probably has affected way more people than I realize. Also, you can see what bothers the consumer - not always what you think.

[screwtype]

I don't think you should post about the com here at org...The mods have (rightly) said many times that other forums aren't a good topic.

This is not a thread about the com. It's about Shogun's response to the patch campaign, which I'm sure will be of interest to the org community.

[Vlad Tzepes]

I also think Shogun's response is a legitimate matter of debate at the .org.

There is one really interesting twist in Shogun's post:

The Shogun:

"I see absolutely no reason to let individuals who are set on damaging the TW series (no matter how good their declared intentions) continue posting here. Why would we encourage such behaviour on a board that we pay to keep running? Continued destructive posting will result in the individuals concerned being banned."

I do not surf a lot the .com, so I can only imagine what "destructive posting" should mean.

But if it's only about opinions, then I don't think that these should be conditioned - positively or negatively - by a "we pay for what we want to listen, so start singing" philosophy. It kind of worries me that somebody at CA can think like this.

Of course there has been a lot of criticism lately towards RTW, but there is also a lot of praising. As always, the truth might be somewhere at the middle, and I assume CA and Activision are able to correctly identify where truth stands in this controversy.

[HarunTaiwan]

Hmmmm, good point on the thread.

Regarding CA/Sega figuring out "the truth"

There is only one truth, and that is if you anger your customer or damage your own reputation in any way (be it your fault or not) there are often consequences.

Read through this article about campus IT service and see if anythings fit the current situation. See if any of their suggestions have been implemented.

http://staff.valpo.edu/myohe/papers/02repu/02repud.htm

[Kraxis]

Honestly would you allow people to actively campaign against you on your forum? I can't see why CA has to put up with that. Yeah they won't patch it, but that doesn't make it a right to be allowed to work against them. No honest company would allow that.
You would also get kicked out of a store if you tried to do the same thing there. Where is the difference?

Now I might not agree with how this is handled but I see the Shogun as tied on both hands here.

[HarunTaiwan]

Kraxis,

Many companies now specifically have websites and forums for people to complain about their products so they can catch problems and fix them.

If you have any kind of campaign against your company aside from a lone crazy, you've alienated customers somehow and should review your policies.

I would welcome anyone interested in this topic to check out last week's Economist's - about how the internet makes consumer the King.

[Catiline]

so long as it's a reasoned discussion on what CA have stated this is fine for discussion. as has been pointed out stay clear of discussing .com.

[Divinus Arma]

I don't think you should post about the com here at org...The mods have (rightly) said many times that other forums aren't a good topic.

I saw this and had to reply. I respectfully disagree.

The TW community is just that: a community. Conversation should be held about any and all matters as the community sees fits. There will always be discussions that some do not care for or see constructive. Can you imagine if TosaInu posted a giant announcement "no talking about the com or you may be banned!"

Instead, in the context of the TW patch and fan concerns, It is my opinion that criticisim be constructive. I don't mean polite, I don't mean cordial, I don't mean butt-kissing. I just mean that "RTW sucks and all you who play it are losers" or similar comments are not productive criticism. Similarly. comments about the com should be productive as well.

Oh and by the way: You're all a bunch of freakin whiners! RTW is the best game of all time so go eat s*** and die! YARRRAAGRGHHHHH!!!



(yes that was a joke)

[Divinus Arma]

as has been pointed out stay clear of discussing .com.

Really... hmm. Is this a forum rule or something? I must have missed something here. Not being sarcastic.

[Vlad Tzepes]

Honestly would you allow people to actively campaign against you on your forum? I can't see why CA has to put up with that.

I work in a media company.

This company has a web site and, of course, a forum for viewers. Of course the company pays for the site.

You should see what people have to say when they do not like a certain programme. Wow. Criticism towards RTW is nothing compared to that.

On the other hand, this company i work for never witnessed a coordinated campaign against any of it's programmes, like this one against RTW. Again,

[Bhruic]

I guess it all comes down to what a "destructive post" is in his mind. If they started banning anyone who posted negatively, I'd find that extremely distasteful. But if they are merely banning people who are trying to campaign against them (via the Amazon route or others), then I can see their point.

Bh

[Old Celt]

I can see their point in that no one likes to have such unpleasantness to deal with. I disagree that banning and censorship is the best way to deal with this kind of problem. Unless people are being obscene or woefully ridiculous with no backup to their arguments, I believe such conversation SHOULD be had, and the arguments refuted publicly.

I wish CA would respond with whatever evidence they have to say there is no bug. When people suggested the problem could be avoided by letting the program run long term in the background, a CA staffer responded with insinuation that it would be ridiculous to do that, like avoiding stepping on cracks in the sidewalk. This whole thing begins to feel like a conversation with a debtor and a collection agency. The customers are the collection agency, and CA is in the role of debtor. They don't seem to want to speak with us, but not much progress can be made unless they do.

[Catiline]

I should prehaps clarify - discussion of .com is in principle fine. There is a significant danger that any discussion of .com brings their problems here. .com patrons are welcome, .com issues are not.

[Satyr]

It appears that they are just deleting threads that have anything to say about the the lousy AI, the reload bug, and the lack of another patch. Oh well, all we can really do is hope that CA has learned a good lesson and the next game is much improved over Rome. Signing with Sega may be the first sign that CA realized they had a serious problem with Activision and the 2 patch deal. Let's hope so.

[Bhruic]

When people suggested the problem could be avoided by letting the program run long term in the background, a CA staffer responded with insinuation that it would be ridiculous to do that, like avoiding stepping on cracks in the sidewalk.

No, that was Killem54 (or whatever his nick is). He's a moderator, but that's his only affiliation with CA (ie, he doesn't work for them). I have no idea how he became a moderator, as his posting style is, well, I'll be generous and call it "annoying". Moderators should be tactful, but he more often pours oil on the fire than tries to douse it.

The moderators here are a much nicer crew.

Bh

[Mikeus Caesar]

The moderators here are a much nicer crew.

Indeed. They let you talk about almost whatever you want, without any threat of intimidation, leading to a relaxed atmosphere.

[Catiline]

THe praise is lovely gents, but if you want to give us a pat on the collective head do it in the Watchtower and lets get this thread back on topic please.

[red comyn]

With regards to the com, it is run by CA but should be run for the benefit of the comsumer. As long as the post are resonable and constructive and not multiple topics on the same subject then they shouldnt be blocking threads. I for one didnt got there very often until all the chat on here saying how bad they were being for locking threads. If they were deleting them it wouldnt look so bad, but all you could see for a while was a row of padlocks down the side of the board. Which I belive leads new or prospective customers to ask "what they hiding". Which will damage there reputation / profits more than if they just stated what the facts were. If they cant afford the time or personel to fix the flaws in the game then say so. Would others and not just myself have more time/respect for them if they said "look sorry guys we screwed up".

[A.Saturnus]

Many companies now specifically have websites and forums for people to complain about their products so they can catch problems and fix them.

Complain? yes, campagning to damage the company economically? hardly

Accept it, there won't be another patch whatever you do and the reason is simple: Activision can't win anything with it. Total War is now - since CA belongs to Sega now - a dead end for Activision. Why should they support it any further? CA and Activision are competitors now, they will fulfill existing contracts and nothing more.

[red comyn]

Activision can't win anything with it. Total War is now - since CA belongs to Sega now - a dead end for Activision. Why should they support it any further? CA and Activision are competitors now, they will fulfill existing contracts and nothing more.

Why should they support it?, activision has nothing to gain, CA and sega have both things to gain and even more to lose if they dont support it. The good will and support of the people who buy there product, both now and in the future, however the compnay politics work out its the CA company name and the total war brand that will be damamged unless people are in some way satisfied.

[Old Celt]

Well, here's a novel solution to the problem:

SEGA could invest the peanuts it would take to fix the known serious issues! OR

CA could just factor the cost of the patch material into the X pack. We're paying the whole freight on that one, so money is no excuse at all. The coding has to be done anyway. The only expense would be for QA and patch delivery construction. They could tap the hundreds of willing players on this and other forums to get all the beta testing they could possibly want-- for FREE!

OR

CA could work OT and fix this on their own. Devs are salaried, it's not like they'd be working for nothing. Other companies (e.g. Blizzard) do this all the time without crying it will break them, or they need money from the publisher.

That's 3 solutions in less than 5 minutes of thought. You know what that tells me? It tells me there are WAYS to solve this, just not any WILL to solve it.

There will be a patch. It's just a matter of whether we call it an expansion pack or not, pay for it ourselves or not, and get it soon, or sometime in "late 2005".

[Colovion]

Ridiculous. He's basically saying

"the product is shit. we know it. we know you know it. it's too expensive for us to make our product resemble a status superior to fecal matter. deal with it or get the fuck out."

let's all take stock of the reactions to overwhelming opinions of people who play this game and understand that money runs the world and people don't give a flying fuck if something is sub-par because in the end if there's no money in doing something then it won't get done

you win again capitalism

damnit

[Quietus]

Complain? yes, campagning to damage the company economically? hardly

Criticism is one thing, sabotage is another.

[Old Celt]

Criticism is one thing, sabotage is another.

What exactly are you getting at? I see such terms as "guerilla warfare", and "perpetrators" being thrown around pretty loosely in Shogun's rant. It would be nice if he would have been specific about the nature of his accusations.

If he is refering to reviews being written about RTW, then I don't agree with him. People have every right to rate things as they choose, provided they can back up their statements. I don't consider harsh reviews to be any more of an attack on CA, then I would a harsh movie review to be an attack on Paramount. If people don't agree with what is said in a review, they are free to review themselves and set things straight as they see them. That's freedom of speech in action.

[Colovion]

Dear Shogun

If you don't like seeing people complaining about the game then you've chosen the wrong forum to moderate. Reality check. Your hopes of a candy and flowers forum don't coincide with the reality of a large number of unsatisfied people in the community. It's disconcerting to see that closed-minded and ignorant people such as yourself are in a position of authority. I hope you can accept the fact that people have opinions and feel the need to share them with others. Can't take the heat? Get out of the kitchen.

Sincerely,

A devoted member of the Total War Community.

[Bel]

Well, one thing we know about CA is they're not the biggest fans of free speech or dissent. Everything written in those reviews is true, if they think the truth reflects poorly on them, their game, and their reputations they are finally correct about something. It does.

[Crazed Rabbit]

I bought this game, paid good money for it.

Now, I say there's a problem with their product, and their response is "We don't want to listen to your complaints. Anyone else complaining will be banned. Get out, then come back and buy the XP when its out."

Well, I won't buy your XP pack then, and you can moderate an empty forum all you want, striking down invisible flamers and locking all threads not praising you.

Crazed Rabbit

[aphex]

I've been an active part in the loadgame threads over there, but I just can't agree with the way it's gone external in this anti-CA bugfix crusade...
IMO, it would have been a lot more contained if ye olde Killemall moderator hadn't inflamed the situation several times.
Still... maybe his posts were meant to inflame so the thread could be 'legally' R&R'd..?

[Bhruic]

Asking the mods of the forum to allow threads aimed at hurting the image of RTW is a little silly, imo. It's like asking a store owner to let you in his store to hand out flyers asking people to boycott his store. If you want to stand outside the store (ie, public property, in this case, create your own forum), by all means, do so. But expecting him to cooperate is just asking too much.

While I think this crackdown may be going too far in suppressing opinions of the game, I would, in their position, be doing the same thing. Except I'd have booted "Killemall" from the mod team for his flagarant exacerbation of the situation.

Bh