|
Post by ishruul on Mar 9, 2017 17:58:51 GMT
They've killed one of the 3 things that got me to switch from 40K years ago - a thriving, interesting official forum. One of the other reasons (cheaper to buy into) died years ago. Only the fact that it's a better competitive game remains. Pray that SR2017 doesn't Firetruck that up. Ah crap! You just summed up my thought exactly.
|
|
|
Post by phantasmagorium on Mar 9, 2017 18:14:06 GMT
The OP's theory for the 'purge' is intriguing. [Intrigue!] I'm in business. When I sell my business, which I will eventually, I will want to eliminate 'baggage' prior, to make the business more attractive to potential buyers. The Faction Forums/Discussion Forums are a form of baggage. So is the PG program (which I am/was part of). My concern is for an imminent sale of Privateer Press, Inc. I hope to enjoy many, many more years of this hobby, and yes, guided by THIS company and its enthusiastic/creative personnel. I think there could be worse, non-fans & in-it-for-ONLY-money folks at the helm... Urrrk. I hope that suspicion is wrong. I love the Iron Kingdoms too much to see some grubby corporate type run it aground.
|
|
|
Post by jynxed on Mar 9, 2017 18:14:25 GMT
Indeed. The forums weren't hurting PP at all. And even if they were slightly, the way that PP handled removing the forums caused exponentially more harm. Really the forums might as well not exist. They're literally now just a place to get official rules answers. They're useless for more experienced players, and thus they will become useless for new players without more experienced players to give them a helping hand. Yeah I have a friend who said it's good the forums got shut down because they were nothing but toxic pits of vitriol and negativity, but at least in the PoM forums I never got that vibe. Sure there are some negative people, and maybe GD was a little too negative, but when the forums got shut down the top posts were about storm lances, which legitimately need to be looked at. I'm concerned that because CID only focuses on new models we won't see much change to the older models that desperately need it. (deliverers and bastions in my faction to name a couple.)
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Mar 9, 2017 18:15:20 GMT
I'll be honest, while my initial reaction was hurt and anger at seeing what happened to the forums, now...I still feel the same, but I'm also shaking my head at PP's stupidity.
The toxicity of the forums was largely down to two things: PP's terrible communication as to it's design direction, and a half-dozen toxic individuals. Neither of these things necessitated taking a hammer to the forums.
What REALLY gets me, and makes me convinced that PP drastically miscalculated community response, was the response to a thread in the Tactics subforum, where someone was asking about the role of more experienced players on the forums. the response was (essentially) that while PP intends the forums to primarily be a resource for new players, they hope that experienced players will stick around to keep giving advice to new players. So, basically, the expectation is that after gutting the sections of the forums that appealed to more experienced players, and implementing a rigid and harsh TOS that I frankly find offensive (don't say bad things about us on our forum!) they expect experienced players to continue (effectively) volunteering their time getting new players into the game and spending money (and that is just NOT okay.)
|
|
|
Post by gunmageintraining on Mar 9, 2017 18:23:46 GMT
PP will quickly see their mistake in their bottom line. The forums, as toxic as people think they were (which I feel is overstated), still drove discussion, created community and helped people get interested in not just their chosen faction, but additional factions... All of that generates sales, equals additional revenue and a healthier community, a positive spiral so to speak.
PP making some marketing/balance missteps and the confusion and vitrol with regards to things like Storm Lances (and I'm a Swan), Skorne and Mk.3 in general aren't the forums fault, and if anything careful moderation and examination of forum discussions could have helped them identify problems and see possible solutions. That said, for all PP has never done the planed obsolescence of their models like GW, they've unfortunately rendered large sections of their product line useless from a gaming perspective through various editions and errata. Of course there will always be optimization and comparative value judgements, but that's the bigger issue than a few hostile posters on forums.
|
|
|
Post by HeadHunter on Mar 9, 2017 21:46:52 GMT
Yes, PP is in the business to make money, but there are only two ways any company can profit: exploiting their customers, or meeting their needs. The first approach results in high turnover, negative word-of-mouth, and the gain of short-term profits at the expense of long-term performance.
The second approach requires having a thicker skin, abandoning the "my baby is best" mentality, accepting that no product is ever perfect, and realizing that yes-men and fanboys don't result in anything ever improving. It means accepting feedback, even if you don't like the tone, because anyone who cares enough to come to a forum and reply obviously cares about the game and wants it to be better.
But PP has accepted this prevalent manner of modern thought that glorifies the echo chamber: surround yourself by like-minded people, exile those whose opinions differ, and the result will be utopia. But we know that's an illusion. At best, customers will go elsewhere to make their voice heard. At worst, customers will spend their money elsewhere to make their voice heard, and will encourage their friends to do so, too. Yes, there may be some players who hold on in spite of all that, but soon they'll find they have no one to play against - or, if they do, they'll tire of the stagnation.
I'm sure PP's attitude is "if you don't buy it, someone else will" but that's still blindness. If someone else truly will, they could still have my money and someone else's too if they meet the needs of both. Excluding the veterans at the expense of the new players is like trading your star players for future draft options. It doesn't always usually work out too well.
|
|
|
Post by copperflame on Mar 9, 2017 22:01:23 GMT
PP is a business. I for one am not a great business man so I don't know if this change with the forum will be a net gain or loss.
|
|
|
Post by jynxed on Mar 9, 2017 23:11:56 GMT
PP is a business. I for one am not a great business man so I don't know if this change with the forum will be a net gain or loss. If it was a smart business decision, every successful company would do it. They don't. Many successful companies have forums that aren't always sparkling with positivity, in fact they're usually not, as people typically come to forums to complain more than praise, as is human nature. Those companies use forums to gather information to improve their games from those forums, because regardless of what PP would have you believe, it's impossible to consider every angle in any game. That's just how it is.
|
|
|
Post by phantasmagorium on Mar 9, 2017 23:15:22 GMT
PP is a business. I for one am not a great business man so I don't know if this change with the forum will be a net gain or loss. If it was a smart business decision, every successful company would do it. They don't. Many successful companies have forums that aren't always sparkling with positivity, in fact they're usually not, as people typically come to forums to complain more than praise, as is human nature. Those companies use forums to gather information to improve their games from those forums, because regardless of what PP would have you believe, it's impossible to consider every angle in any game. That's just how it is. While true, it's not like PP can't watch, say, this forum and/or Reddit/DakkaDakka/etc to get a barometer on the playerbase, without having all our griping on their official forums where new players can see it. While I'm not a fan of the move, it doesn't make information gathering untenable by any means.
|
|
|
Post by redfive on Mar 10, 2017 0:16:23 GMT
If it was a smart business decision, every successful company would do it. They don't. Many successful companies have forums that aren't always sparkling with positivity, in fact they're usually not, as people typically come to forums to complain more than praise, as is human nature. Those companies use forums to gather information to improve their games from those forums, because regardless of what PP would have you believe, it's impossible to consider every angle in any game. That's just how it is. While true, it's not like PP can't watch, say, this forum and/or Reddit/DakkaDakka/etc to get a barometer on the playerbase, without having all our griping on their official forums where new players can see it. While I'm not a fan of the move, it doesn't make information gathering untenable by any means. The problem is that PP loses the ability to moderate and curate the discussion when it is farmed out to other sites. After all, negativity is not going to go away simply because you shove it out of your forums. Those people will simply go to other sites and rail there, which will be the same places new players will go to in order to find for help from "veteran" players (who are not going to stick around on the official forums in the numbers they used to). All PP really had to do was set out a list of guiding principles for the forum, enforce existing rules and eliminate problem posters. They already created new principles, they are enforcing a draconian rule set and they are actively eliminating problem players. Nuking the forum was not needed.
|
|
|
Post by phantasmagorium on Mar 10, 2017 0:22:31 GMT
While true, it's not like PP can't watch, say, this forum and/or Reddit/DakkaDakka/etc to get a barometer on the playerbase, without having all our griping on their official forums where new players can see it. While I'm not a fan of the move, it doesn't make information gathering untenable by any means. The problem is that PP loses the ability to moderate and curate the discussion when it is farmed out to other sites. After all, negativity is not going to go away simply because you shove it out of your forums. Those people will simply go to other sites and rail there, which will be the same places new players will go to in order to find for help from "veteran" players (who are not going to stick around on the official forums in the numbers they used to). All PP really had to do was set out a list of guiding principles for the forum, enforce existing rules and eliminate problem posters. They already created new principles, they are enforcing a draconian rule set and they are actively eliminating problem players. Nuking the forum was not needed. Sure, assuming that they were specifically trying to get rid of negative conversations at all. It's possible that they understand that negative feedback can still be useful, but felt they had to move it away from official channels for PR purposes (I'm not saying this is true, just a possibility). This way the community still has it's unfiltered ability to talk and generate feedback, and it isn't on their site. Loss of moderation powers isn't that big a deal when you consider how lightly they were used in the past, at least as far as 'guiding the discussion' goes. Heck, there probably isn't even a unanimous attitude towards the nuking of the forums at PPHQ - we'll probably never know. Again, this is all hypothetical. They could also have just been made upset for the last time. I don't have that kind of information.
|
|
|
Post by redfive on Mar 10, 2017 0:55:46 GMT
The problem is that PP loses the ability to moderate and curate the discussion when it is farmed out to other sites. After all, negativity is not going to go away simply because you shove it out of your forums. Those people will simply go to other sites and rail there, which will be the same places new players will go to in order to find for help from "veteran" players (who are not going to stick around on the official forums in the numbers they used to). All PP really had to do was set out a list of guiding principles for the forum, enforce existing rules and eliminate problem posters. They already created new principles, they are enforcing a draconian rule set and they are actively eliminating problem players. Nuking the forum was not needed. Sure, assuming that they were specifically trying to get rid of negative conversations at all. It's possible that they understand that negative feedback can still be useful, but felt they had to move it away from official channels for PR purposes (I'm not saying this is true, just a possibility). This way the community still has it's unfiltered ability to talk and generate feedback, and it isn't on their site. Loss of moderation powers isn't that big a deal when you consider how lightly they were used in the past, at least as far as 'guiding the discussion' goes. Heck, there probably isn't even a unanimous attitude towards the nuking of the forums at PPHQ - we'll probably never know. Again, this is all hypothetical. They could also have just been made upset for the last time. I don't have that kind of information. If they did not want curated discussion, the CID forums would not be a thing.
|
|
|
Post by phantasmagorium on Mar 10, 2017 2:02:04 GMT
Sure, assuming that they were specifically trying to get rid of negative conversations at all. It's possible that they understand that negative feedback can still be useful, but felt they had to move it away from official channels for PR purposes (I'm not saying this is true, just a possibility). This way the community still has it's unfiltered ability to talk and generate feedback, and it isn't on their site. Loss of moderation powers isn't that big a deal when you consider how lightly they were used in the past, at least as far as 'guiding the discussion' goes. Heck, there probably isn't even a unanimous attitude towards the nuking of the forums at PPHQ - we'll probably never know. Again, this is all hypothetical. They could also have just been made upset for the last time. I don't have that kind of information. If they did not want curated discussion, the CID forums would not be a thing. Sure. They may want both, but without the undirected commentary on their domain. They're clearly not mutually exclusive, or we wouldn't all be so salty about it.
|
|
|
Post by jynxed on Mar 10, 2017 3:25:10 GMT
Sure, assuming that they were specifically trying to get rid of negative conversations at all. It's possible that they understand that negative feedback can still be useful, but felt they had to move it away from official channels for PR purposes (I'm not saying this is true, just a possibility). This way the community still has it's unfiltered ability to talk and generate feedback, and it isn't on their site. Loss of moderation powers isn't that big a deal when you consider how lightly they were used in the past, at least as far as 'guiding the discussion' goes. Heck, there probably isn't even a unanimous attitude towards the nuking of the forums at PPHQ - we'll probably never know. Again, this is all hypothetical. They could also have just been made upset for the last time. I don't have that kind of information. If they did not want curated discussion, the CID forums would not be a thing. Yes and no, the CID forums are only for new releases, so it's evident they don't want people to discuss previous models on a level that may spark change. Either they think everything is fine or they don't think they need player involvement to fix the current state of the game. Neither is those is good.
|
|
Lanz
Junior Strategist
Posts: 685
|
Post by Lanz on Mar 10, 2017 3:53:49 GMT
If they did not want curated discussion, the CID forums would not be a thing. Yes and no, the CID forums are only for new releases, so it's evident they don't want people to discuss previous models on a level that may spark change. Either they think everything is fine or they don't think they need player involvement to fix the current state of the game. Neither is those is good. Then they turn around and publish a legion theme list that requires warcasters and focus to function.
|
|