Moderator: Moderators for English X Forum
Roger please do not make personal comments such as the above, you know that it only encourages angry responses and further arguments.Roger L.S. Griffiths wrote: @Plynak: TBH It sounds to me like you are blinded by your own vitriol.
If all criticism was constructive then there would be no need for moderators in ANY forum.khartsh wrote:Again, all criticism is constructive if it is used effectively by the party being discussed. You might not like the tone, it might not be eloquent, but even the most basic "it sucks" might end up affecting change in a system.
Personnally, I totally agree here.Then you must be playing a different game. They did not address anything. We are still stuck with one ship using a terrible UI in a game with a braindead AI. You still need hundrets of hours to make you stations profitble and you still can not control their production. You still earn more money by picking up garbage in space than actualy trading. You still have to do every single boring task manualy. You still have to scan stations like an idiot. They only changed minor things, like adding a radar. Some things are even taken from MODs (NESA). Oh I almost forgot they made three new cokpits, put together some missions and called it 2.0. Nothing more. Again, player numbers speak for themselves.
While this is true in most normal circumstances, the history of what went on with the original release and the bad feelings and negativity it sowed plays a huge roll here as well.Roger L.S. Griffiths wrote:There are right ways and wrong ways to present critique in order to influence the desired change(s) - constructive criticism is the kind of criticism that leads to the desired change. In this context, that does require appropriate wording of said critique - simple "it is broke" kind of critique is non-informative, and not conducive to even requesting clarification. Aggressive critique is more likely to be ignored.
The modern world is also much less tolerant of bad or defective products. And the gaming community much less tolerant of those things when nothing concrete is laid out as to how the issues are going to be addressed and in what order.If individuals want change they need to express their desire for change in the right way else the situation/article in question will either not improve or perhaps get worse. When dealing with professional organisations or companies it helps to show respect or at least restraint, the modern world is not tolerant of ANY form of aggressive or flipant behaviour regardless of the basis or provocation.
You are a programmer, and surely must know all the code of the XR OR this is the worst way to try to make people understand about something.ravage_za wrote:Plainly apparent to myself, though, is that Egosoft has NOT listened.
They have selectively picked the odd inconsequential "fix" that makes no difference to me and many others. They clearly are ignoring the elephant in the room, while pandering to people who are going to agree with them whatever they do.
Perhaps if some people would desist in speaking for Egosoft, they may actually start speaking for themselves.
I did not say all criticism is constructive. I said all criticism can be constructive. You keep making this about the message or the messenger, I am trying to help you see that it has nothing to do with what we say or how we say it if there is no one listening then no criticism can ever be constructive.Roger L.S. Griffiths wrote:If all criticism was constructive then there would be no need for moderators in ANY forum.khartsh wrote:Again, all criticism is constructive if it is used effectively by the party being discussed. You might not like the tone, it might not be eloquent, but even the most basic "it sucks" might end up affecting change in a system.
This is not greek mythology with ES CEO acting as zeus or such.Roger L.S. Griffiths wrote:@kartsh: In this context, the way the feedback is phrased determines whether it is listened to or not. The sooner people understand that simple fact the better off we all will be.
Aggressive or flippant feedback is simply not the kind of feedback that gets favourable results.
Well, not where i work. People always get pissed off anyway - and since we depend on their satisfaction, we handle that.Roger L.S. Griffiths wrote: If a customer is insulting or flippant then they should expect to have the door slammed in their face. It is the way the modern world works... unfortunately.
There are other threads for suggestions, please allow us to speak our minds as forum rules allow?santi wrote:This thread is a clear example of why people who do not like the game feel like noone is listening to them. Over twelve pages of discussion, keeping the thread up there, all of you participating. From 0 to 10, how usefull is this thread to Egosoft big fat 0.
In turn, the wallets of said customers will be shut. I wonder who will benefit from that.Roger L.S. Griffiths wrote:Nope, it is a customer's responsibility to convey the desired changes to the developer in a meaningful way. If they do not, then they only have themselves to blame to a large degree.
If a customer is insulting or flippant then they should expect to have the door slammed in their face. It is the way the modern world works... unfortunately.
May I make an observable note and mention that you appear to be the one receiving almost all complaints, while they are not addressed to you.Roger L.S. Griffiths wrote:It is important that the message gets conveyed appropriately otherwise the receiver of the message could either ignore it or respond in the wrong way.