Millions of Voices Suddenly Cried Out

[Russ Pitts]

Millions of Voices Suddenly Cried Out

All told, we're still not sure exactly what the damage is. (Whether we're dealing with an Uncle Owen and Aunt Beru-sized disaster or the destruction of Alderaan.) But one thing is clear: In the MMOG space, trust is critical. Players are willing to give you the benefit of the doubt and pay for something that isn't even all that perfect, but once you betray their trust, they never forget it.

Also, Star Wars (like Star Trek and Tolkein - the other two of the Big Three) brings out the most fanatic of fans. Pleasing them can be a full-time job, on top of a full-time job. Something SOE learned to their detriment. What's ironic, though, is they had already pleased their fans - most of them - and then they reached for another brass ring and lost it all.

Writer (and blogger) Amber Night put it best: "I think the reason NGE keeps resurfacing is that the community is still pretty baffled over just how a slam-dunk license like Star Wars could have gone so horribly and spectacularly wrong. That much of it can't be talked about only serves to further speculation. Couple this with SOE's continuing struggle to communicate with their players in any meaningful way, and it's a subject that has no choice but to continue to bubble up time and time again."

Which, again, makes us wish we'd predicted as much. Then again, with media giants like SOE making such colossal mistakes, perhaps we shouldn't feel too bad.

Russ Pitts is an Associate Editor for The Escapist. His currently unnamed, yet critically unrecognized column appears every Monday at The Escapist Daily. He also blogs at www.falsegravity.com [http://www.falsegravity.com].

Permalink

 

[Archon]

I want those readers, not excuses. Don't fail me again...editor.

 

[Allen Varney]

One point I wish had come out more strongly in all this flaming is Sony Online's use of NDA as CYA. A nondisclosure agreement is supposed to protect trade secrets and other valuable processes. In the case of the NGE, none of the usual reasons apply; instead, craven executives are hiding behind the NDA strictly to avoid taking responsibility for their mistakes. Instead, they're content to let the audience's full fury fall on a minor functionary, as shown in my Escapist Lounge blog post, "SWG NGE: Crying Freeman [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/8.42942]."

 

[RaphKoster]

Hmm, I really need to point out something.

I said I was "irritated, honestly," about the pull quote; and when I addressed Allen I said, and I quote:

"Allen, like I said, I don't think you had any intent to just fan flames, and I don't think you did anything wrong by using that quote (even if it irritates me) -- as you said, it's out there and can't be taken back. You can't really remove anything on the Internet."

Later in the comment thread, when people started attacking Allen for using the quote, I also posted:

"I wasn't 'pissed,' I was irritated. I don't think Allen did anything journalistically wrong -- after all, the quote was out there -- but I had declined to comment just because I didn't want to just rehash stuff yet again. Allen's actually a friend going back years, so I feel bad about this turning into bashing on him either."

How exactly that turns into my complaining that the quote was unfair, I don't know.

It is true that Allen offered me the opportunity to comment; I declined with a short form of exactly what I posted in the blog. I emailed him saying that maybe pointing out that since the NGE, SOE has gone on to manage EQ2 really well would help balance the article a bit.

I'm a tad irritated all over again that now this article portrays my interactions with Allen in quite this way. It's a friendship I value, despite our disagreement over this article.

 

[Russ Pitts]

Raph,

Let me start by saying I have nothing but the utmost respect for both you and Allen, and would never think to insult (or intentionally mis-characterize comments from) either of you.

That said, your initial post from your blog [http://www.raphkoster.com/2007/06/12/tired-of-hearing-about-the-nge/]:

I actually declined to comment for the article, but there?s nonetheless a giant inset quote from me dug up from ages ago (which irritates me, honestly). I had declined because I just didn?t want to perpetuate the discussion.

Suggests you had declined to comment for the article, but were irritated to discover that comments from you were used anyway. You hadn't wanted to comment. Comments from you were used. You were irritated. Perhaps my characterization of your feelings on the matter as believing it was "unfair" is a bit off, but I think we're splitting hairs there. If you would prefer I change the text of my article to read "Raph was irritated" rather than what it now reads, I'm more than happy to do so, but I'm not sure it makes a substantial difference.

In any case, I certainly wasn't attempting to imply any ill feeling between you and Allen, and if none exists, so much the better. To my mind, as a reader and editor, a story about SWG without a quote from Raph Koster is a bit lacking, and Allen, in sifting through your numerous, varied past comments on the subject, did what I would have expected any writer to do, and then some. I applaud him for it, in spite of the fact it irritated you.

If I may be so bold, may I suggest that if you truly wish to not get involved in further discussions on the NGE, then why not simply stop getting involved? I can't instantly recall the number of times I heard you (directly or indirectly) reference the NGE at last year's AGC (but it was a lot), and practically every discussion of Allen's story has featured one or more notes from you in the comments section. You even blogged about it yourself, initiating a whole round of discussion on your own site for crying out loud.

If you'll accept a bit of free PR advice, Raph, I'd suggest just letting it lie. Not every critic must be answered, and not every story about the NGE needs to be addressed. If you can't talk, however, that's fine. I'm sure a lot of folks would love to know what you know, but I understand confidentiality agreements, as do most people. So if you can't add anything new, why add anything at all?

Allen's story, as I said to the representative from LucasArts, is the most concise, even-handed history of the event I've yet read, but if it lacks some fine detail you (or someone else) could share, we'd love to hear that. The issue clearly isn't going away, and if there are facts we don't yet have that would open up entirely new vistas of understanding, then I sincerely hope at some point we'll receive that gift. Until then, however, suggesting you're tired of hearing about it, while nevertheless continuing to comment, adding nothing, does the audience a bit of a disservice.