The Council’s Chamber

 
^ Back to top

Topic is locked indefinitely.

 

Statement from CPM0 - "State of affairs : Communication & Trust"

Author
Sanguis Defense Syndicate
#81 Posted: 2013.08.12 15:50
Buster Friently wrote:
I fail to see why a properly elected CPM couldn't be working with CCP to improve things just as effectively as the unelected CPM0. All we need is elections. That's all CPM0 should be doing - providing the framework to deliver CPM1. By this measure, they're as delinquent as CCP in delivering milestones.

Still a good effort, I just think it's on the wrong goals.


I'm honestly leery of an elected CPM. An elected body will naturally feel that they hold more authority than the current body. This could lead to increased conflict between the CPM and CCP (and possibly between the CPM and the rest of the community). The current iteration of the CPM has ties with CCP members and switching horses might require rebuilding relationships that have taken years to hone.

Whether the CPM is elected or not, they will still be held to an NDA. Don't fool yourselves, an NDA is an NDA and a new CPM will not likely have any more access to information covered by an NDA nor more access to information that they can release to us.

The dwindling of the community is almost certainly the cause for this new "openness" by CCP, not anything we have asked for or nagged about. They are listening to us because they have finally figured out that they have to and for no other reason. There has been no massive uptake of this game by the EVE community, likely because the FPS community is not the same as the EVE/MMO community. So the EVE people aren't voluntarily supporting this game with their fees.

That leaves the rest of us.

CCP is a company and their eventual goal will be (and has to be) making money. The cash shop is one way to do this but a subscription fee is, in my opinion, where they want to go in the long run. They will almost certainly bring subscription to this game in line with EVE once it is polished enough to be considered a product in line with other FPS.

My 2 cents,


Munch

Anyone who buys AUR now is a fool.

Condotta Rouvenor
Gallente Federation
#82 Posted: 2013.08.12 16:21
Work relationships can be important to work productivity, but is this the same situation? This post is about communication and not election. What good are relations with out communication?

@NDA: Yes CPM is under a NDA and though they may see things we do not, we trust they give the right feedback to said information… Which brings us back to communication….

Openness: This has been a run around for over a year. Even under closed beta where we as players were not allowed to post anything or talk about the game at all, we still stride hard to get any openness. Good Luck
Templar of the Glowing Blade
#83 Posted: 2013.08.12 16:58
Nova Knife wrote:
mollerz wrote:


And that is a couple of examples in a long list. I heard CPM plays on closed servers with CCP? If this is true, is this where you play test future builds?


Oh man, you have no idea how much we wish this were true.

The mere existence of a test server would almost certainly have prevented so, so many issues.

Edit: Expanding on that - All of our 'foreknowledge' of upcoming builds comes from idle chat on skype or rough outlines of patchnotes, and the semi-regular meeting we have for them to say "So, these are the highlights of our plan for 1.X, questions?"

It's very rare for us to actually 'see' firsthand any of these changes. The only time this has been the case is when we got to see Uprising a little early at Fanfest (But then, so did everyone else who went to Fanfest.) We get some screenshots here and there for art stuff, but nothing nearly concrete enough or nearly as helpful as a test server would be. (There are /tons/ of roadblocks into getting a test server set up, and it's been a really tough sell trying to convince CCP of the merits of such a server, especially since we want such a server to be -public-)

It seems kind of easy to me to just mirror the TQ servery in its entirely so that the Dust environment is captured and brought over to the test server. As a solution to the multiple client issues and connecting to the correct server, perhaps its time to rework the launcher to have a CONNECT TO TEST SERVER//CONNECT TO TQ option for people wanting to check out the latest updates to the game that will be released. Considering the launcher already downloads updates automatically, we could play on TQ, get annoyed, switch to the TEST server within minutes/an hour and expect to see what is being considered to fix our frustration. CCP has already proven that they can have us connecting to the test server all through the Closed Beta phase, now it is time to apply that considerable knowledge and make-it-work!

DJINN Jecture speaks for herself, a Closed Beta Vet, still playing Eve and Dust

Clonation
#84 Posted: 2013.08.12 17:04
Nova Knife wrote:
Vrain Matari wrote:


The fact that the CPM has released a statement like this indicates to me that despite recent restructuring and personnel changes, an unhealthy culture abides. In Reyk or in Shanghai I do not know.

But CCP, you have to find the source of that culture and find a way to change it into something a whole lot more efficacious and a whole lot wiser than what we have now. It's a difficult situation and a big ask, but if DUST is to become the catalyst for bringing New Eden to life, it needs to be done. And swiftly, methinks.


There is a pretty apparent culture difference.

However, I don't think this is the real source of the problem, and the absolute worst thing CCP could do is turn this into a witchhunt. It's not just one person or group of people causing this, the communication gap is a roadblock that exists in the process itself, that needs to be removed at all costs. This is not about placing blame or trying to find fault in any person or team. That doesn't matter. The last thing we want CCP to take from something like this is that there is anyone in the company causing this, who would just become a scapegoat, get fired, and have CCP think they 'solved' the problem.

Now more than ever, CCP needs all of their employees to be at their best. They need to work together with each other and with the community, and any assumption that anyone needs to be blamed or is at fault for this will just take away from any cohesion they might otherwise form as a result of this effort.

TL:DR - This is not a people problem. This is a "Operating Procedure" problem.





Nova and CPM,

Thanks for this thread and insight. I appreciate and agree with the approach to this issue as a Process problem vs a People problem. That is definitely how a solution should be sought.

CCP, how many times and ways can your community ask this of you? How many more times will you ignore this problem with your process?
Dust2Dust.
#85 Posted: 2013.08.12 17:11
DJINN Jecture wrote:
Nova Knife wrote:
mollerz wrote:


And that is a couple of examples in a long list. I heard CPM plays on closed servers with CCP? If this is true, is this where you play test future builds?


Oh man, you have no idea how much we wish this were true.

The mere existence of a test server would almost certainly have prevented so, so many issues.

Edit: Expanding on that - All of our 'foreknowledge' of upcoming builds comes from idle chat on skype or rough outlines of patchnotes, and the semi-regular meeting we have for them to say "So, these are the highlights of our plan for 1.X, questions?"

It's very rare for us to actually 'see' firsthand any of these changes. The only time this has been the case is when we got to see Uprising a little early at Fanfest (But then, so did everyone else who went to Fanfest.) We get some screenshots here and there for art stuff, but nothing nearly concrete enough or nearly as helpful as a test server would be. (There are /tons/ of roadblocks into getting a test server set up, and it's been a really tough sell trying to convince CCP of the merits of such a server, especially since we want such a server to be -public-)

It seems kind of easy to me to just mirror the TQ servery in its entirely so that the Dust environment is captured and brought over to the test server. As a solution to the multiple client issues and connecting to the correct server, perhaps its time to rework the launcher to have a CONNECT TO TEST SERVER//CONNECT TO TQ option for people wanting to check out the latest updates to the game that will be released. Considering the launcher already downloads updates automatically, we could play on TQ, get annoyed, switch to the TEST server within minutes/an hour and expect to see what is being considered to fix our frustration. CCP has already proven that they can have us connecting to the test server all through the Closed Beta phase, now it is time to apply that considerable knowledge and make-it-work!

It's not that simple - there's all sorts of hoops to jump through with Sony to have something like this available and they'd never allow untested/unapproved code to pass through PSN to enable a test server to be run in this manner. It would essentially mean that CCP would have to have the build totally ready for Sony to authorise for public testing and by that time we'd be waiting twice as long as we do already just to get our hands on it.

Dedicated sidearm scout - Watch out for that headshot

Scout community is the nuts

Professor Nova's Super Ethical Auction House
#86 Posted: 2013.08.12 17:17
DJINN Jecture wrote:

It seems kind of easy to me to just mirror the TQ servery in its entirely so that the Dust environment is captured and brought over to the test server. As a solution to the multiple client issues and connecting to the correct server, perhaps its time to rework the launcher to have a CONNECT TO TEST SERVER//CONNECT TO TQ option for people wanting to check out the latest updates to the game that will be released. Considering the launcher already downloads updates automatically, we could play on TQ, get annoyed, switch to the TEST server within minutes/an hour and expect to see what is being considered to fix our frustration. CCP has already proven that they can have us connecting to the test server all through the Closed Beta phase, now it is time to apply that considerable knowledge and make-it-work!


The biggest thing here is that in order to do a test server, the only real way to do it is to stick a second client on the PSN store.

There's naturally a ton of hoops involved in setting this up in the first place, and with the QA/Approval processes, it'd be super tricky to get something on the test server in time to make it pay off from player feedback before a live release of that content. Especially now since they're trying to stick with a monthly schedule. (These are all outside observations, ofc)

I mean, the ability to have a dual-client using the launcher like you suggest is intrigueing. I have no idea if that's even on the table, but I'd imagine it'd pretty much be the same thing as maintaining a second client on PSN, in terms of hoops with sony, since they still need to do internal and sony QA processes for anything getting pushed to the client.
Crux Special Tasks Group
Gallente Federation
#87 Posted: 2013.08.12 17:45
Nova Knife wrote:
DJINN Jecture wrote:

It seems kind of easy to me to just mirror the TQ servery in its entirely so that the Dust environment is captured and brought over to the test server. As a solution to the multiple client issues and connecting to the correct server, perhaps its time to rework the launcher to have a CONNECT TO TEST SERVER//CONNECT TO TQ option for people wanting to check out the latest updates to the game that will be released. Considering the launcher already downloads updates automatically, we could play on TQ, get annoyed, switch to the TEST server within minutes/an hour and expect to see what is being considered to fix our frustration. CCP has already proven that they can have us connecting to the test server all through the Closed Beta phase, now it is time to apply that considerable knowledge and make-it-work!


The biggest thing here is that in order to do a test server, the only real way to do it is to stick a second client on the PSN store.

There's naturally a ton of hoops involved in setting this up in the first place, and with the QA/Approval processes, it'd be super tricky to get something on the test server in time to make it pay off from player feedback before a live release of that content. Especially now since they're trying to stick with a monthly schedule. (These are all outside observations, ofc)

I mean, the ability to have a dual-client using the launcher like you suggest is intrigueing. I have no idea if that's even on the table, but I'd imagine it'd pretty much be the same thing as maintaining a second client on PSN, in terms of hoops with sony, since they still need to do internal and sony QA processes for anything getting pushed to the client.

In lieu of a test server, they could just take the feedback on the forums more seriously.

Although, I think that's the point of this thread, so... Derp.

Never forget

More tiericide, less tieriphiles.

Villore Sec Ops
Gallente Federation
#88 Posted: 2013.08.12 17:50
+1 CPM

I have become so fed up of waiting for the broken things to be fixed that I have virtually stopped playing Dust.

My high hopes and expectations for the game get lower and lower each time I play at the moment.

I hope the game gets sorted before too many players like myself stop playing and the game gets cancelled.

If it's not fixed by the time the PS4 comes out I am considering part exchanging my PS3 for a PS4 so I can play Destiny and Planetside 2
Ahrendee Mercenaries
#89 Posted: 2013.08.12 18:32
bump

If you run cloak and shotgun, you're a scrub

Don't brick tank that scout, come on, get good.

Proud member of RND

Rosen Association
#90 Posted: 2013.08.12 19:09  |  Edited by: Buster Friently
Django Quik wrote:
Buster Friently wrote:
I fail to see why a properly elected CPM couldn't be working with CCP to improve things just as effectively as the unelected CPM0. All we need is elections. That's all CPM0 should be doing - providing the framework to deliver CPM1. By this measure, they're as delinquent as CCP in delivering milestones.

Still a good effort, I just think it's on the wrong goals.

Get your priorities right Buster. The last thing we need is any interruption to the processes being created as they are now.

And no, it's not a given that an elected body with zero experience of these things would be able to work 'just as effectively' as CPM0 are at this stuff. It's not even what CPM1 should be doing and definitely not what many would be signing up for or being voted in to do if there were elections today.



I think my priorities are fine. The point of the CPM, as with the CSM, is to give the players a voice in the process of development.

This CPM doesn't represent the players. That's pretty much the end of it.

Kudos to them for making a long ass post stating what we all already know - that CCP doesn't communicate well with regards to Dust.

That's true, and any improvement here is nice, but CPM0's job should be providing a bridge to representation, not pushing their own agenda - right or wrong.
#91 Posted: 2013.08.12 20:23
+1
We've been asking for transparency and communication since closed beta. Hope its not too late.
Dust has potential but there only so many times I can watch CCP punch itself in the nut-sack.

TO DA MOON 514

Ikomari-Onu Enforcement
Caldari State
#92 Posted: 2013.08.12 20:36
I've said it before, but how many other games developers actually communicate at all with the community? The fact that we get any development communication is amazing.

Don't get me wrong, there are a lot of issue, and I think the communication is needed if Dust is to survive, especially in the area of balancing, matching and PC. But at the end of the day, they could equally well just fall silent and concentrate on working out the issues and actual coding.

I forget who posted about an "excuse" that it took too much time away from actual work to communicate with the community, well it's not an excuse, it does take a considerable amount of time to do, time that could be spent designing/coding. Community communication is not usually a skill required or found of/in development.

Dust University
#93 Posted: 2013.08.12 20:40
Structured communication should also always be backed with substance. It's one thing to say you are working on something but it's another to actually do it and finish it in a timely fashion.

Eve Online Invite https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=ed64524f-15ca-4997-ab92-eaae0af74b7f&action=buddy

Clonation
#94 Posted: 2013.08.12 21:08
Luke Vetri wrote:
I've said it before, but how many other games developers actually communicate at all with the community? The fact that we get any development communication is amazing.

Don't get me wrong, there are a lot of issue, and I think the communication is needed if Dust is to survive, especially in the area of balancing, matching and PC. But at the end of the day, they could equally well just fall silent and concentrate on working out the issues and actual coding.

I forget who posted about an "excuse" that it took too much time away from actual work to communicate with the community, well it's not an excuse, it does take a considerable amount of time to do, time that could be spent designing/coding. Community communication is not usually a skill required or found of/in development.

Luke,

You are correct that any level of developer/player interaction is a big exception to the rule intoday's gaming industry.

But CCP has approached DUST in some similar ways that they've used in Eve. That is, a very non-traditional approach to communication with players. Note, they didn't come up with this idea. Players of thier niche game have pushed them relentlessly over the years to get to this point. The CSM originated as a "fix" to part of the communication problem in Eve.

Dust is, or planned to be, not such a niche game. But they financed it 'in-house' and continue to program and develop the whole thing using a different approach than what a lot of industry "experts" and veteran development studios would describe as Standard.

Ok, so it's rough around the edges, Dust. As in, not up to par. Not what they wanted. Not ready for prime time. And the missing throngs of rabid free to play gamers attest to that.

We are asking CCP to stop with the fence straddling. You can't pretend to be the silent but churning devstudio when you don't churn. You can't be the friendly and open devstudio when you're not 'open' & transparent.

What's itgonna be, ccp? You are niche right now whether you want it or not. You don't seem to have the Dev power to spew forth great torrents of code and content.

Now is the time to change tacks and listen, communicate and interact in a really serious and transparent fashion with the tiny niche population you have
Onslaught Inc
#95 Posted: 2013.08.12 21:15  |  Edited by: Heinrich Jagerblitzen
Buster Friently wrote:
I fail to see why a properly elected CPM couldn't be working with CCP to improve things just as effectively as the unelected CPM0. All we need is elections. That's all CPM0 should be doing - providing the framework to deliver CPM1. By this measure, they're as delinquent as CCP in delivering milestones.

Still a good effort, I just think it's on the wrong goals.


Because the whole point of our statement was to highlight the areas where CCP needs to improve their working relationship with the CPM, to bring it to the level that everyone's come to expect from the CSM over the years. In other words, they're NOT using us anywhere near as effectively as they could. Replacing us with elected individuals won't magically make CCP integrate us into their development process anymore than they do now. It just means you'll have a new CPM who's make-up will largely be determined by a popularity contest, that still has all the same challenges ahead convincing CCP to work with them. And depending on the individuals elected, CCP may be more or less willing to respect their feedback (After all, the players could elect trolls or large alliance leaders that may or may not have the capability of remaining professional and effective in a time of crisis).

In other words, if there's no working, established, functional CPM body to begin with (with a structured way that CCP engages them regularly, and proof that this process is working to get player feedback considered by the devs in a timely fashion) elections may very well be a step backwards, not forwards.
Mikramurka Shock Troop
Minmatar Republic
#96 Posted: 2013.08.12 21:32  |  Edited by: Vrain Matari
Luke Vetri wrote:
I've said it before, but how many other games developers actually communicate at all with the community? The fact that we get any development communication is amazing.

Don't get me wrong, there are a lot of issue, and I think the communication is needed if Dust is to survive, especially in the area of balancing, matching and PC. But at the end of the day, they could equally well just fall silent and concentrate on working out the issues and actual coding.

I forget who posted about an "excuse" that it took too much time away from actual work to communicate with the community, well it's not an excuse, it does take a considerable amount of time to do, time that could be spent designing/coding. Community communication is not usually a skill required or found of/in development.

I don't really need CCP to communicate with me or the community - if they can grow a playerbase and generate a decent metacritic score and build a game that enriches New Eden on their own then fine, i'd rather think about other things gameplay related, tbh.

But there's no arguing with the fact that CCP has been, for whatever reason, unable to read or unwilling to heed the warning signs that were quite obvious to the community, and has continued to lumber ahead until they got themselves into real trouble.

I don't care if they communicate, i just want them to fix it. But until a better alternative is offered, the community has shown better judgement on the core issues than the developer.

Spending merc fortune like water keeping these clone tumors under control....

0uter.Heaven
#97 Posted: 2013.08.12 21:40
b straight with me, is dust dying? Shocked

& justice for all

Onslaught Inc
#98 Posted: 2013.08.12 22:37
Shadow of War88 wrote:
b straight with me, is dust dying? Shocked


I think the appropriate analogy is that a sick patient has been stabilized in the operating room for the time being, but the CPM wants to make sure that the doctor's orders from here out include plenty of exercise and proper nutrition so that the patient doesn't end up right back in the hospital a few months down the road.
Rosen Association
#99 Posted: 2013.08.12 22:45
Heinrich Jagerblitzen wrote:
Buster Friently wrote:
I fail to see why a properly elected CPM couldn't be working with CCP to improve things just as effectively as the unelected CPM0. All we need is elections. That's all CPM0 should be doing - providing the framework to deliver CPM1. By this measure, they're as delinquent as CCP in delivering milestones.

Still a good effort, I just think it's on the wrong goals.


Because the whole point of our statement was to highlight the areas where CCP needs to improve their working relationship with the CPM, to bring it to the level that everyone's come to expect from the CSM over the years. In other words, they're NOT using us anywhere near as effectively as they could. Replacing us with elected individuals won't magically make CCP integrate us into their development process anymore than they do now. It just means you'll have a new CPM who's make-up will largely be determined by a popularity contest, that still has all the same challenges ahead convincing CCP to work with them. And depending on the individuals elected, CCP may be more or less willing to respect their feedback (After all, the players could elect trolls or large alliance leaders that may or may not have the capability of remaining professional and effective in a time of crisis).

In other words, if there's no working, established, functional CPM body to begin with (with a structured way that CCP engages them regularly, and proof that this process is working to get player feedback considered by the devs in a timely fashion) elections may very well be a step backwards, not forwards.



No, it's not a step backwards. It's a step towards representation.
Currently, you guys don't represent players by popularity contest or otherwise.

I agree with your main point - that improvements need to be made to communication. An elected body would actually represent something other than whomever CCP picked.

See, I agree that all this needs to be done, but I don't agree that the CPM0's ideas of how Dust should look different have any merit because the entire point of the CPM is to represent players - which you don't.

Now I'm sorry to derail this as I have. The point from the OP is valid. Hopefully it helps. I still feel the CPM0 should be moving aside as quickly as possible, rather than trying to fix Dust.
Onslaught Inc
#100 Posted: 2013.08.12 23:12
Buster Friently wrote:
See, I agree that all this needs to be done, but I don't agree that the CPM0's ideas of how Dust should look different have any merit because the entire point of the CPM is to represent players - which you don't.

Now I'm sorry to derail this as I have. The point from the OP is valid. Hopefully it helps. I still feel the CPM0 should be moving aside as quickly as possible, rather than trying to fix Dust.


Whether we represent the players' ideas or not has little to do without our method of selection, and everything to do with our willingness to listen to the community and forward their feedback.

Elected officials and alliance leaders can still give the finger to the community, and give CCP their own terrible ideas. And even appointed officials can listen and share community feedback to CCP without letting personal opinion get in the way.

In other words, its not the elections that matter - its the conduct of the council members once they are on the council you should be paying attention to at all times. If you feel we are letting our personal opinions or perspectives override community sentiment you should create a thread here in the Council's Chambers outlining why you believe we are failing as representatives, and provide concrete examples.

Otherwise, its silly to say that just because we weren't elected we are somehow incapable of bringing community feedback to CCP. That assumption is also dangerous - if you believe that elections somehow guarantee a council member's objectivity, you're setting yourself up to be blind to an elected CPM official doing a terrible job down the road as well, because you gave the election system too much trust to begin with.
Forum Jump