Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
Tiberius_theron

I don't feel Grapeshot values it's players time, money, or effort put into its products.

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Wh33ls said:

And if you are going to assert that they are tied, you are going to have to provide all the same information but in reverse. Since neither of use can provide proof of either, let us not make assumptions. 

I’m going to feel free to make my assumption since it is based upon fairly standard business practices while your assumption goes against them. Not all assumptions are created equal.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, boomervoncannon said:

Since every other company is expected to operate this way I’m not sure why you think they should be some sort of exception.

I honestly do not understand your reply. 

 

Did you miss the last two sentences when I said. They have went to market, they are working on their own budget now. They are not going to steal from Ark to throw money at Atlas. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Game is on the downward spiral with a max player count under 14k for the day...  I didn't believe it at launch but it really is starting to look like it was nothing more than a cash grab by Wildcard\Grapeshot\Snail.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, boomervoncannon said:

I’m going to feel free to make my assumption since it is based upon fairly standard business practices while your assumption goes against them. Not all assumptions are created equal.

Making an assumption based on an assumption that has no facts to back the assumption, does not make the assumption true. If every business in the world ran the exact same, we would not have needed to coin the term competitive advantage. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Wh33ls said:

I honestly do not understand your reply. 

 

Did you miss the last two sentences when I said. They have went to market, they are working on their own budget now. They are not going to steal from Ark to throw money at Atlas. 

I didn’t miss it, I just disagree with its premise. The funding from Atlas is a direct result of Ark’s success. Companies are expected to fund new products from succcessful ones. Providing support to a new product in development is part of that product or game’s cost and this is doubly true when development is being tested by paying customers and not free. All of these are true and follow logically.

Attempts by you to argue to the contrary have been quibbling over semantics, throwing out red  herrings, and nitpicking over things like the validity of an analogy by degree. None of them refute these central points.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, boomervoncannon said:

I didn’t miss it, I just disagree with its premise. The funding from Atlas is a direct result of Ark’s success. Companies are expected to fund new products from succcessful ones. Providing support to a new product in development is part of that product or game’s cost and this is doubly true when development is being tested by paying customers and not free. All of these are true and follow logically.

Attempts by you to argue to the contrary have been quibbling over semantics, throwing out red  herrings, and nitpicking over things like the validity of an analogy by degree. None of them refute these central points.

You were originally arguing something about poor customer service, but have now went to where the money is coming from. My points have been the same and you have not refuted any of them. You have merely changed what you were arguing. I have not once thrown a fish, and to be honest your analogies were poor.

I still stand by my view that the customer service the OP received was not bad enough to validate a rant on the forums. Adding more GM's to fix the "now" problems is not going to solve the long term problems which need to be fixed by the devs to assist the many and not the whiny few. And they are not going to use Ark's profits to pay for GM's for Atlas to delete spam rafts and replace lost brigs. 

Now, since you have been completely distracted and lost the focus of your original argument, I urge you to not be distracted from the fact that in 1998, The Undertaker threw Mandkind off Hell in a Cell, and plummeted 16 ft through an announcer's table. 

Edited by Wh33ls
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Wh33ls said:

Want some salt for your popcorn. I have been dehydrating all the tears I have been collecting from the "I want my stuff back" posters. 

I have never stated I wanted stuff back. I've never submitted a ticket wanting stuff back. As a matter of fact, I've submitted two tickets the entire time I've been playing and as far as I can tell, they were resolved, via GM's or other means.  I currently have no complaints with the ticket system.

I am stating though that players of Atlas are customers of Grapeshot and therefore, should reasonably expect customer service in a timely manner. If that means hiring more GM's to handle the issues, so be it.  It's good for customer relations, it's good for customer reviews and it's good for sales.  Jat saying that customer service was not a priority because they're focused fixing the reasons customer service tickets arise in the first place is just bad public relations. Making customers happy should always be a priority, whether it's support tickets or stomping out bugs.

10 minutes ago, Wh33ls said:

And they are not going to use Ark's profits to pay for GM's for Atlas to delete spam rafts and replace lost brigs. 

Replacing a lost ship as a result of buggy code? Yes. Replacing it because they took on 10 SotD's? No. Removing items used to grief another player? Without a doubt!  And if that means using funds from Ark to prop up another game, well... that's what they're there for. To make even more money.

Edited by Jean Lafitte

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jean Lafitte said:

I have never stated I wanted stuff back. I've never submitted a ticket wanting stuff back. As a matter of fact, I've submitted two tickets the entire time I've been playing and as far as I can tell, they were resolved, via GM's or other means.  I currently have no complaints with the ticket system.

I am stating though that players of Atlas are customers of Grapeshot and therefore, should reasonably expect customer service in a timely manner. If that means hiring more GM's to handle the issues, so be it.  It's good for customer relations, it's good for customer reviews and it's good for sales.  Jat saying that customer service was not a priority because they're focused fixing the reasons customer service tickets arise in the first place is just bad public relations. Making customers happy should always be a priority, whether it's support tickets or stomping out bugs.

I never said I was talking about you, your issue was with spam rafts blocking everything. Yes, that also sucks, but as fast as GM's can delete them there will be griefers building them to put right back.

I believe fixing the root cause of what is making customers unhappy is the priority. You can never know what fully makes someone happy, but read the forums for 2 minutes and you sure will know what is making them unhappy. You can band aid all day with temporary fixes, (give people their stuff back is just one example, delete parked rafts, delete spam foundations). But if you don't solve the underlying issue, this will never stop, and all you will be left with is a team of 200 GM's cleaning up the servers all day from the constant barrage of griefers. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once upon a time in Eve Online, I lost a very expensive ship to lag.  I submitted a ticket. Within 24 hours, the ship was replaced.  It took their GM less than 5 minutes to verify that loss and produce a replacement. It was missing a few modules but, I did get the majority of the items back.  The impression that left on me was profound. It told me that, in my own little personal world, that CCP did give a shit about my enjoyment and making things right even when it probably wasn't their fault. And it cost them next to nothing to do that.  That was probably 10 years ago and to this day, I still remember it. Why? It was great customer service. I paid a monthly subscription price for multiple accounts with CCP for over 12 years.

How many accounts has Atlas already lost because of poor customer service and screwed up priorities?

2 minutes ago, Wh33ls said:

I never said I was talking about you, your issue was with spam rafts blocking everything. Yes, that also sucks, but as fast as GM's can delete them there will be griefers building them to put right back.

Correct. And until such time as that's fixed, GM's need to continue to delete them and do so in a timely manner.  Period.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jean Lafitte said:

Once upon a time in Eve Online, I lost a very expensive ship to lag.  I submitted a ticket. Within 24 hours, the ship was replaced.  It took their GM less than 5 minutes to verify that loss and produce a replacement. It was missing a few modules but, I did get the majority of the items back.  The impression that left on me was profound. It told me that, in my own little personal world, that CCP did give a shit about my enjoyment and making things right even when it probably wasn't their fault. And it cost them next to nothing to do that.  That was probably 10 years ago and to this day, I still remember it. Why? It was great customer service. I paid a monthly subscription price for multiple accounts with CCP for over 12 years.

How many accounts has Atlas already lost because of poor customer service and screwed up priorities?

Yes, that is amazing customer service. Also $14.99 a month. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Wh33ls said:

I believe fixing the root cause of what is making customers unhappy is the priority. 

And if you lose customers because it takes you months to fix that root cause and you use 'limited resources' as a reason to not fix those issues, that's acceptable?

Just now, Wh33ls said:

Yes, that is amazing customer service. Also $14.99 a month. 

I didn't set the pricing model for Atlas.  Their choices on how to price their game should not be an excuse for poor customer service.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Jean Lafitte said:

Once upon a time in Eve Online, I lost a very expensive ship to lag.  I submitted a ticket. Within 24 hours, the ship was replaced.  It took their GM less than 5 minutes to verify that loss and produce a replacement. It was missing a few modules but, I did get the majority of the items back.  The impression that left on me was profound. It told me that, in my own little personal world, that CCP did give a shit about my enjoyment and making things right even when it probably wasn't their fault. And it cost them next to nothing to do that.  That was probably 10 years ago and to this day, I still remember it. Why? It was great customer service. I paid a monthly subscription price for multiple accounts with CCP for over 12 years.

How many accounts has Atlas already lost because of poor customer service and screwed up priorities?

Correct. And until such time as that's fixed, GM's need to continue to delete them and do so in a timely manner.  Period.

That's the whole point. They only have so many GM's, I would hate to see what their ticket backlog looks like. They get to it when they can. Ask 10 people what their definition of timely is and you will get 10 different responses. 

3 minutes ago, Jean Lafitte said:

And if you lose customers because it takes you months to fix that root cause and you use 'limited resources' as a reason to not fix those issues, that's acceptable?

I didn't set the pricing model for Atlas.  Their choices on how to price their game should not be an excuse for poor customer service.

You get what you pay for, $25 game, no monthly subs, and you want AAA customer service. Man, I wish I had your optimism. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Wh33ls said:

That's the whole point. They only have so many GM's, I would hate to see what their ticket backlog looks like. They get to it when they can. Ask 10 people what their definition of timely is and you will get 10 different responses. 

That depends on the situation. Prioritizing tickets is essential.  If I'm stuck in a rock somewhere, can't kill myself and can't get out, I'd expect a response within 15 minutes.  If I've been raft or pillar spammed, I'd expect a response within 24 hours.  If I lost a ship because of a bug, a week, and that's if I even bother to submit a ticket.

Again, if they don't have enough GM's to provide REASONABLE customer service, hire more. Don't use bug fixes as an excuse for not providing it, which is what they're saying.  They will lose more customers from poor customer service than they will gain by fixing the bug that caused these issues.  Fixing bugs and responding to customer tickets are BOTH part of customer service and neither should take precedence over the other.

That being said, we can agree to disagree and I'm done repeating myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Jean Lafitte said:

That depends on the situation. Prioritizing tickets is essential.  If I'm stuck in a rock somewhere, can't kill myself and can't get out, I'd expect a response within 15 minutes.  If I've been raft or pillar spammed, I'd expect a response within 24 hours.  If I lost a ship because of a bug, a week, and that's if I even bother to submit a ticket.

Again, if they don't have enough GM's to provide REASONABLE customer service, hire more. Don't use bug fixes as an excuse for not providing it, which is what they're saying.  They will lose more customers from poor customer service than they will gain by fixing the bug that caused these issues.  Fixing bugs and responding to customer tickets are BOTH part of customer service and neither should take precedence over the other.

That being said, we can agree to disagree and I'm done repeating myself.

If this were full launch I would 100% agree with "Fixing bugs and responding to customer tickets are BOTH part of customer service and neither should take precedence over the other". But, it's not, and fixing bugs, not band aiding take precedence. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Wh33ls said:

You get what you pay for, $25 game, no monthly subs, and you want AAA customer service. Man, I wish I had your optimism. 

I paid <$4.00 for a gallon of milk once.  The glue holding the seal on the top was stronger than the plastic jug.  I wrote an e-mail to that company in my usual sarcastic fashion.  The next day I had a response from their customer support. It wasn't a standard, 'thanks and fuck off' mail, it was a personal reply that was just as humorous as the one I sent.  They even offered me a free gallon of milk which I politely declined.  I still purchase their milk regardless of the fact that the seal is still a pain in the ass to get off.  Why? Customer service. They listened. They didn't fix the problem, but they listened and responded.

The kid next door shovels my sidewalk when it snows. He charges me $10 a pop to do it. When it's done, he always comes to the door and asks me if I think it looks good enough. It always does.

The price I pay for a product or service should have no bearing whatsoever on the support I receive.  Even a 10 year old child shovelling sidewalks knows that and that's why I give him repeat business. He cares what I think. It's just smart business.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see I can find many angered souls here to come help and build a pyramid of shame cuz the Atlas devs like to "show 'n tell" shiny ingame stuff on social media rather than addressing proper issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Jozzie McTowel said:

I see I can find many angered souls here to come help and build a pyramid of shame cuz the Atlas devs like to "show 'n tell" shiny ingame stuff on social media rather than addressing proper issues.

Their shiny stuff is called marketing and your project will not be a marketing tool. Furthermore, anytime someone tried to hijack a thread to promote a pet project, I instantly classify that project as an attempt to gain personal attention and tend to ignore it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jean Lafitte said:

Their shiny stuff is called marketing and your project will not be a marketing tool. Furthermore, anytime someone tried to hijack a thread to promote a pet project, I instantly classify that project as an attempt to gain personal attention and tend to ignore it.

I'm sure the pyramid will have Atlas is a Joke on it and not Build by ... As their reading skills aren't the brightest you can only grab their attention with pictures it seems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I don't mind losing my in game stuff to bugs, as it's about 50/50 on losses to bugs vs losses to learning curve/bonehead mistakes. I also don't care for the idea of wasting company resources on excessive in game service at this stage of the game. I would rather they allocated those resources to bug fixes.

That being said I have recommended on Twitter and will here as well that they at least throw us a bone. Leave a x2 taming and harvesting in place till they get some of the major bugs  ironed out.

Those of us adults who have jobs and lives could take their hour or two at night to replace things then, instead of wasting our weekend game time when our friends are on replacing stuff lost to bugs, and spending more time exploring and pillaging with our friends

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm having fun at the moment but I'm seeing more and more people get raided by Chinese players, mainly the culprits are tags with "winter is coming" I hope these get banned.

I can see myself quitting the game if I got raided by these on PVE because they are bringing SOTD into different islands and taking everyones stuff. They then taunt them by saying "we have your gold" not a thing is done about it.

I think the game as alot of potential, I just feel the game is in the wrong hands if I'm honest which is unfortunate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Wh33ls said:

You were originally arguing something about poor customer service, but have now went to where the money is coming from. My points have been the same and you have not refuted any of them. You have merely changed what you were arguing. I have not once thrown a fish, and to be honest your analogies were poor.

I still stand by my view that the customer service the OP received was not bad enough to validate a rant on the forums. Adding more GM's to fix the "now" problems is not going to solve the long term problems which need to be fixed by the devs to assist the many and not the whiny few. And they are not going to use Ark's profits to pay for GM's for Atlas to delete spam rafts and replace lost brigs. 

Now, since you have been completely distracted and lost the focus of your original argument, I urge you to not be distracted from the fact that in 1998, The Undertaker threw Mandkind off Hell in a Cell, and plummeted 16 ft through an announcer's table. 

And I still stand by the premise of the clear arguments I presented in the very post you were responding to when you said I had changed arguments. Reread that post. There is a very clear linear chain of logic that connects how poor customer service even in an EA product is not excusable to where the funding for said CS should come from.

YOU my friend were the one who went down the rabbit hole of attempting to excuse GrapeShots lack of adequate support with arguments about funding and finance with a bunch of nonsense pretending that Grapeshot and Wildcard aren’t the same thing when it comes to where the money comes from. THAT was your argument, not mine. All I did was call it out for the hogwash it is when it comes to their responsibility to provide CS to customers, EA or no.

Accusing the other party of doing the very things you are doing might be a popular tactic in public policy debate these days, but it’s not gonna fly here. My central points have been clearly stated in earlier posts, contrary to your own statements, none of them have been refuted, and at this point you are just clouding the issue by talking in circles.

It’s funny how things we disagree with are rants while things we agree with are legitimate complaints. You state that adding GM’s will not fix long term problems as if this is inherently an either or proposition when the reality is Grapeshot should be doing both. Developers work on long term solutions while GM’s fix immediate problems created by the bugs in the first place. I know this might sound crazy but look into it and you might be shocked by how many successful games have BOTH devs and GM’s. Sometimes they even *gasp* budget for both.

As for calling my analogies poor, we both know that’s just you @#$& talking them because you couldn’t actually offer a valid refutation. Anyone with a background in rhetoric knows that already. Oh and again I stand by my assumption because it is based on common business practices. Your assumptions otherwise run contrary to standard business practices ie people play shell games with company names and legal entities all the time, but the money all comes from the same place, so the burden of proof otherwise to support your assumption lies with you, not me. I’m the one assuming the sun will come up tommorrow. You’re the one assuming it won’t.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, boomervoncannon said:

And I still stand by the premise of the clear arguments I presented in the very post you were responding to when you said I had changed arguments. Reread that post. There is a very clear linear chain of logic that connects how poor customer service even in an EA product is not excusable to where the funding for said CS should come from.

YOU my friend were the one who went down the rabbit hole of attempting to excuse GrapeShots lack of adequate support with arguments about funding and finance with a bunch of nonsense pretending that Grapeshot and Wildcard aren’t the same thing when it comes to where the money comes from. THAT was your argument, not mine. All I did was call it out for the hogwash it is when it comes to their responsibility to provide CS to customers, EA or no.

Accusing the other party of doing the very things you are doing might be a popular tactic in public policy debate these days, but it’s not gonna fly here. My central points have been clearly stated in earlier posts, contrary to your own statements, none of them have been refuted, and at this point you are just clouding the issue by talking in circles.

It’s funny how things we disagree with are rants while things we agree with are legitimate complaints. You state that adding GM’s will not fix long term problems as if this is inherently an either or proposition when the reality is Grapeshot should be doing both. Developers work on long term solutions while GM’s fix immediate problems created by the bugs in the first place. I know this might sound crazy but look into it and you might be shocked by how many successful games have BOTH devs and GM’s. Sometimes they even *gasp* budget for both.

As for calling my analogies poor, we both know that’s just you @#$& talking them because you couldn’t actually offer a valid refutation. Anyone with a background in rhetoric knows that already. Oh and again I stand by my assumption because it is based on common business practices. Your assumptions otherwise run contrary to standard business practices ie people play shell games with company names and legal entities all the time, but the money all comes from the same place, so the burden of proof otherwise to support your assumption lies with you, not me. I’m the one assuming the sun will come up tommorrow. You’re the one assuming it won’t.

tldr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Wh33ls said:

tldr

Which is you conceding by virtue of being unwilling to weigh the merits of the other sides arguments. You’ve been perfectly willing to read and post extensively in this thread to this point, so tldr is just you giving up without wanting to admit it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, boomervoncannon said:

Which is you conceding by virtue of being unwilling to weigh the merits of the other sides arguments. You’ve been perfectly willing to read and post extensively in this thread to this point, so tldr is just you giving up without wanting to admit it.

No, I'll read a response, not a novel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...