77 replies to this topic

[Jestun]

When feedback is ignored what does it matter how it is phrased?

[James The Fox Dixon]

Thinking over the events of the past couple of days, I've come to a decision. I decided that I will pull a PGI and ignore people that cannot be respectful in threads. Has anyone else gave it any thought on their future posting behavior?

I did find an awesome addition to my signature.

Etiquette [et-i-ket, kit]-unwritten code of behaviour expected in a certain setting according to a norm within a group or society.

Edited by James The Fox Dixon, 22 August 2013 - 12:03 PM.

[mack sabbath]

James The Fox Dixon, on 22 August 2013 - 11:57 AM, said:

Thinking over the events of the past couple of days, I've come to a decision. I decided that I will pull a PGI and ignore people that cannot be respectful in threads. Has anyone else gave it any thought on their future posting behavior?

I did find an awesome picture to use in my signature.

This thread is no longer about PGI and promises or mistruths, but more of this guy making it about himself.

I wish they'd hire him already, so he'll have something productive to do but feel sorely put upon in a video game forum.

[Toong]

Jestun, on 22 August 2013 - 11:23 AM, said:

When feedback is ignored what does it matter how it is phrased?

Because it's not ignored. A lot of people on the forums said they didn't want 3rd person. However, PGI accurately stated that the forums are only a small percentage of the total userbase, and that the opinions they express are not always in line with the larger fanbase as a whole.

They made a judgement call to put in 3rd person based on the entirety of the userbase. The fact that they took the time to explain all this months ago is evidence that they did indeed listen to the forums. Just because the outcome isn't what you wanted, doesn't mean you were ignored.

-EDIT-

Also, if your feedback is phrased in the form of cancerous vitriol, the chance of being ignored skyrockets. Funny how people don't like listening to jerks.

Edited by Toong, 22 August 2013 - 12:30 PM.

[Boarchild]

Khobai, on 22 August 2013 - 11:11 AM, said:

Which again is a completely justified response. People like to win. Nobody likes to have their chances of winning ruined by someone else.

This WAS about respect. That is clearly disrespectful, and doesn't highten anyones enjoyment of the game. The only thing it results in is people quitting the game because of the community. It's not PGIs fault people behave like miscreants. They didn't force that behaviour, it's a choice.It's a choice you make. All games don't have to be COD clones. There are other people besides COD players. Not being a clone of another game, does not force anyone to behave in a certain manner. Missing locks isn't the cause of thefts, thieves are. Same applies here. Gamemodes/PGI aren't the cause of disrespect, people's choices are.

[Khobai]

Quote

This WAS about respect.

Expecting people to be respectful on the internet is entirely naive. In fact its much more prudent to assume people will be disrespectful and then take steps to try and minimize the amount of disrespect.

[James The Fox Dixon]

Khobai, on 22 August 2013 - 12:45 PM, said:

Expecting people to be respectful on the internet is entirely naive. In fact its much more prudent to assume people will be disrespectful and then take steps to try and minimize the amount of disrespect.

I support banning people that are disrespectful.

[Boarchild]

Khobai, on 22 August 2013 - 12:45 PM, said:

Expecting people to be respectful on the internet is entirely naive.

You pretty much nailed it. That is exactly why people act as they do. It's the internet... no respect needed... It's still human interaction, we still call it a community, and hence, it should be respectful. Going with your train of thoughts, COD has that exact mechanic, and well, just youtube, the misguided anger doesn't stop with respawns So, if you really want a mechanic to minimize disrespect, then banning is probably more effective. One shouldn't have to take meassures to minimize disrespect, even if that's a bit utopic. The problem wouldn't even exist if people just acted.. nicer

[KharnZor]

Sorry OP you can claim the moral high ground all you like but you are not entitled to tell people how to think or feel. If a poster feels passionate about a subject and chooses to express it then they shall do just that in a manner that best describes their thoughts and feelings on the subject at the time. If you don't like these posts you can always not read them or choose to ignore them. If its a topic that offends you due to whatever reason then you can choose not to respond and indeed not even read the topic at all. All you are doing now (weather you realize it or not I don't know) is trolling the people that you are targeting in your OP.

[Terran123rd]

Let me see if I can put this as calmly and as rationally as I can.

The anger, or at least my anger, comes from the fact that they specifically told us:

Quote

Players will never be forced to use or play against other players using 3rd person.

Emphasis mine. Here's the relevant post. They even specifically told us that there would be a first-person-only que:

Bryan Ekman, on 14 June 2013 - 03:23 PM, said:

A: There will be two modes Normal and Hardcore (FPV) only. We anticipate most players will play the first mode leaving the hardcore mode for the those wanting a challenge. 3PV will be going onto test servers in the next 60 days and we’ll see how it goes from there.

Emphasis mine, again.

We would neither be forced to use it, nor would first-person-only players be forced to play against people using third person. Come August 20th, however, not only is there only one que, first-and-third- mixed, it is the default view and players must specifically go into the options menu and opt out.

We have a situation where first-person-only players are being forced into matches with third-person players, whether they want to be in one or not, there are explicit, publicly-stated plans NOT to implement a first-person-only que, and we are, in a way, having it forced upon us by making it an opt-out feature (where we must consciously choose NOT to use it), rather than being an opt-in (where we must consciously choose TO use it). A subtle distinction, but a significant one. We are expected to use third-person, and our experience is somehow considered to be "less" if we don't.

This is directly contrary to their previous promises. They have either deliberately gone against those earlier promises, or they have failed to effectively communicate why they were not able to fulfill them. Neither is a good sign. Combine this with apparent trolling on PGI's part, a passive-aggressive 'apology' essentially telling us to suck up and take it, and the fact that, at minimum, a LOT of people did not want this feature in the first place, and you can hopefully understand where we're coming from with this.

[BlackBeltJones]

We should allow OP the chance to enjoy his time on etiquette island. Clearly he feels equally strong for his beliefs and should be given some latitude. Sure most of us likely feel as Lando did and James The Fox Dixon is pointing out that Lando had no reasonable right to expect Darth Vader to maintain his commitment, he is also pointing out that Darth Vader did Lando a favor by not altering the deal further.

[MaddMaxx]

Geaux Tiger, on 22 August 2013 - 09:16 AM, said:

Actually no. PGI needs to respect US first. Without us there is no PGI/MWO, not the other way around. PGI doesn't respect its customers then the customers go find other games and dev studios that do respect them. Simple fact.

You prove the OP's point perfectly. So by your logic, the Community actually started making MWO and then PGI showed up with Millions in Investor cash and asked if they could help?

Back to the Bayou with ya.

[KharnZor]

MaddMaxx, on 22 August 2013 - 02:41 PM, said:

You prove the OP's point perfectly. So by your logic, the Community actually started making MWO and then PGI showed up with Millions in Investor cash and asked if they could help?

Back to the Bayou with ya.

I don't think that's what he meant. If anything you should be on etiquette island with James so you can learn some yourself

[Hellcat420]

Boarchild, on 22 August 2013 - 10:59 AM, said:

If you are referring to the line;

They didn't.. They just stated you will never be forced to use 3rd person view. Neither will you be forced to use 3rd person view when playing against other players.
I don't get this whole lying thing. I never will. It's starting to look like world of tanks.

The whole lying thing aside, what really bothers me is that this is turning out to WoT, with the ingame language use. As soon as the first (most likely very young) person dies, it's not usunusual to get the "Another noob team! FU!". This is where the whole respect thing comes in for me. You win some, you lose some. Learn what you can from the times you lose, and apply it to your next match. All players need to show respect both for the game, and for eachother.

if english is your primary language you should be embarassed.

[MechPorn]

The squeakiest wheel gets the grease, no matter how horribly idiotic it is to keep the piece of junk around.

Hellcat420, on 22 August 2013 - 02:58 PM, said:

if english is your primary language you should be embarassed.

If English is your primary language; you should be embarrassed.

[James The Fox Dixon]

KharnZor, on 22 August 2013 - 02:54 PM, said:

I don't think that's what he meant. If anything you should be on etiquette island with James so you can learn some yourself

I like it on my island. The people are respectful and it's peaceful. It's a lot better than the disrespectful island and angry island.

Edited by James The Fox Dixon, 22 August 2013 - 03:01 PM.

[Kraven Kor]

Toong, on 22 August 2013 - 12:29 PM, said:

Also, if your feedback is phrased in the form of cancerous vitriol, the chance of being ignored skyrockets. Funny how people don't like listening to jerks.

My own feedback, while occasionally stern, has never been "cancerous vitriol."

I have been ignored along with the rest.

[KharnZor]

James The Fox Dixon, on 22 August 2013 - 03:01 PM, said:

I like it on my island. The people are respectful and it's peaceful. It's a lot better than the disrespectful island and angry island.

If you cant handle the range of emotions that human beings can display then stay on your island. With all the respect etc. I bet it'll get boring real fast.

[James The Fox Dixon]

KharnZor, on 22 August 2013 - 06:50 PM, said:

If you cant handle the range of emotions that human beings can display then stay on your island. With all the respect etc. I bet it'll get boring real fast.

It's not boring. Quite the opposite in fact as people are civil and respectful of each other that meaningful discussion occurs. That is something lacking from disrespectful and angry island.

[KharnZor]

James The Fox Dixon, on 22 August 2013 - 06:54 PM, said:

It's not boring. Quite the opposite in fact as people are civil and respectful of each other that meaningful discussion occurs. That is something lacking from disrespectful and angry island.

Oh I bet. I bet the air is polluted by a big cloud of smug too

Edited by KharnZor, 22 August 2013 - 07:05 PM.