38 réponses à ce sujet

[Addictress]

Speaking of Twitter, I had an interesting Bioware experience a while back. One of the leads of Andromeda (I won't say who) tweeted a question: what would you like to see changed in the game (relative to ME3)? And then retweeted private replies.

So I sent a reply which was a valid suggestion, but included an implied mild criticism of Bioware games in general. I wasn't trying to troll, it was just something I really would like to see changed.

I guess I shouldn't have been surprised, but my reply was not retweeted. So I tried again, but instead of configuring it as a private reply, I did it as a tweet in my own stream with an @mention to the lead. So at least my followers could see my idea. Still wasn't retweeted.

It's a clever and effective strategy, since it gives the "host" the opportunity to filter replies and discourages people from criticizing, because getting retweeted by a host with a large following helps your own standing in the community. There's an incentive to a$$-ki$$.

A glimpse at the future of discourse with Bioware?

Oohh HO! Ho Ho! Can you show me the tweet? I want to see

[Ieldra]

Speaking of Twitter, I had an interesting Bioware experience a while back. One of the leads of Andromeda (I won't say who) tweeted a question: what would you like to see changed in the game (relative to ME3)? And then retweeted private replies.

So I sent a reply which was a valid suggestion, but included an implied mild criticism of Bioware games in general. I wasn't trying to troll, it was just something I really would like to see changed.

I guess I shouldn't have been surprised, but my reply was not retweeted. So I tried again, but instead of configuring it as a private reply, I did it as a tweet in my own stream with an @mention to the lead. So at least my followers could see my idea. Still wasn't retweeted.

It's a clever and effective strategy, since it gives the "host" the opportunity to filter replies and discourages people from criticizing, because getting retweeted by a host with a large following helps your own standing in the community. There's an incentive to a$$-ki$$.

A glimpse at the future of discourse with Bioware?

I have so far not not joined the crowd who says that Bioware shut down the forums because they dislike criticism from the fans, but your experience appears to be at least some anecdotal evidence. Of course they have no obligation to retweet anything, but if they filter anything but troll responses I think we have a case of dishonesty in interacting with the fans. It may be just one over-anxious person, but the effect is indistinguishable from a conscious policy from the outside. I think opinion-based "moderation" was rare in these forums (though again, I lack the data to say for sure), but they might want to change that.

 

I would rather like to see that tweet, too.

 

In any case, the new situation is a problem. I want my more elaborate writings about Bioware's games to be visible in a place occasionally visited by the developers (which would point to a very public place), but at the same time, I want them to remain visible as long at they have merit for in-depth debate, rather than for one-line responses (which would point to a non-overcrowded place where threads don't vanish down the posting history if nobody posts in them for a few hours).

 

If any one place exists that fits both criteria, I would like to know. The absence of opinion-based filtering is an additional requirement of course.

[PapaCharlie9]

Bottom Line: Bioware is not interested in subsidizing friendships.

Obviously.

It remains to be seen whether this is a brilliant shift in marketing strategy, or a case of cutting off one's nose to spite one's face.

I'll give you this: CDPR and Bethesda still have branded forums online. If 6 months from now both have been shut down, I'll concede that you were right about the trend.

[Kantr]

I've never found these forums to be insular. I've always enjoyed reading the big discussions (even if the Sera dislikers made me sad). I never used to be a hardcore Bioware fan (I bought DA:O and let it sit in my steam library for a few years) before I came here in 2014.   

[They call me a SpaceCowboy]

I suspect Bioware moved to Twitter for reasons someone else up thread mentioned. It has the potential to reach a far larger audience than the forums ever could.

Note Bioware's twitter postings that use the brexit hashtag or that silly outfit colour hashtag a few years ago. The hope appears to be that some people who are looking at popular hashtag will notice a tweet about the current game Bioware is advertising and check it out.

You cant get exposure like that on the forum.

Why shut down the forums though? I'm leaning towards some PR character looking at the forum with its romance threads, hair threads, opinions of why the new game will suck, and various other odd topics and thinking this isn't how we want to present ourselves to casual potential buyers who are looking for information about the game.

In other words they want to control the narrative.

[They call me a SpaceCowboy]

Oohh HO! Ho Ho! Can you show me the tweet? I want to see

Seconded!

[thesuperdarkone2]

Obviously.

It remains to be seen whether this is a brilliant shift in marketing strategy, or a case of cutting off one's nose to spite one's face.

I'll give you this: CDPR and Bethesda still have branded forums online. If 6 months from now both have been shut down, I'll concede that you were right about the trend.

I wouldn't use the Bethesda forums since they are moving to a new forum and the new forums is god awful in every way

[Ieldra]

I wouldn't use the Bethesda forums since they are moving to a new forum and the new forums is god awful in every way

The color scheme is awful. In functionality, they're - ironically - changing to a setup that echos the old BSN.

 

Edit:

OK, usability is at -100. I can't even figure out how to quote and reply to comments.

[maia0407]

The color scheme is awful. In functionality, they're - ironically - changing to a setup that echos the old BSN.

 

Edit:

OK, usability is at -100. I can't even figure out how to quote and reply to comments.

Bethesda might just be more savvy in getting rid of users than Bioware has been. I'm reminded of the defensive architecture strategy cities use to discourage behaviors or certain groups of people from loitering. For example, place spiky bits on areas where you don't want people to sit or sleep. Make a chair seat slope so people don't use it too long. Bethesda is making their forums unattractive to use and, thus, encouraging users to go to other sites. Bioware, why didn't you think of this brilliant strategy? 

 

Defensive Architecture: https://www.theguard...us-more-hostile

[PapaCharlie9]

I suspect Bioware moved to Twitter for reasons someone else up thread mentioned. It has the potential to reach a far larger audience than the forums ever could.

IMO, that's illusory. Increasing total addressable market only helps if it doesn't come with additional competition for attention. And Twitter is pretty much the definition of competition for attention. Sacrificing depth for breadth is a loser's game if what you're trying to do is increase loyalty to your brand that converts into buying every installment of your franchise.

That breadth cuts both ways, too. If you release a new installment and it bombs with non-loyal anonymous reviewers in Metacritic, the Twitterverse will spread that word to non-loyal potential customers faster than you can say quarterly loss.

That said, if all Bioware wants is to reach a larger audience for 15 seconds of lifetime attention, then sure, social networks are awesome for that. They're also awesome for shoving ads in people's faces against their will, so there's that too.

[Ryzaki]

I wouldn't use the Bethesda forums since they are moving to a new forum and the new forums is god awful in every way

 

oh god the new forums. *vomits everywhere* 

 

it's a bethesda product alright.

[Ieldra]

Bethesda might just be more savvy in getting rid of users than Bioware has been. I'm reminded of the defensive architecture strategy cities use to discourage behaviors or certain groups of people from loitering. For example, place spiky bits on areas where you don't want people to sit or sleep. Make a chair seat slope so people don't use it too long. Bethesda is making their forums unattractive to use and, thus, encouraging users to go to other sites. Bioware, why didn't you think of this brilliant strategy? 

 

Defensive Architecture: https://www.theguard...us-more-hostile

If that's the case, then I prefer an open closure. What's happening here is sad, but if they find the forums don't give them anything back, neither in material profits nor something immaterial like inspiration or meaningful feedback, then closing them is the natural response, and I don't blame them for it. In fact, in the debate about this whole thing the only element I find unpleasant from their side is the impression of dishonesty - that they don't tell us the real reasons.

 

If one of the newly-created unofficial sites (LOL, there are already two "unofficial BSNs": bsn.boards.net and biowaresocialnetwork.boards.net) emerges dominant, I suspect they'll occasionally read the stuff there. The best of both worlds: they get the opinions of hardcore fans but retain the capacity to stay distant, and they don't have to spend money on moderation. In fact, *if* one those sites emerges dominant, then it may be good for the fans as well.

[They call me a SpaceCowboy]

IMO, that's illusory. Increasing total addressable market only helps if it doesn't come with additional competition for attention. And Twitter is pretty much the definition of competition for attention. Sacrificing depth for breadth is a loser's game if what you're trying to do is increase loyalty to your brand that converts into buying every installment of your franchise.

That breadth cuts both ways, too. If you release a new installment and it bombs with non-loyal anonymous reviewers in Metacritic, the Twitterverse will spread that word to non-loyal potential customers faster than you can say quarterly loss.

That said, if all Bioware wants is to reach a larger audience for 15 seconds of lifetime attention, then sure, social networks are awesome for that. They're also awesome for shoving ads in people's faces against their will, so there's that too.

Oh I agree with you. I wasn't defending it. I just think some pr wonk who probably never visited a forum before and took one look and was horrified. Lol.

[They call me a SpaceCowboy]

If that's the case, then I prefer an open closure. What's happening here is sad, but if they find the forums don't give them anything back, neither in material profits nor something immaterial like inspiration or meaningful feedback, then closing them is the natural response, and I don't blame them for it. In fact, in the debate about this whole thing the only element I find unpleasant from their side is the impression of dishonesty - that they don't tell us the real reasons.

If one of the newly-created unofficial sites (LOL, there are already two "unofficial BSNs": bsn.boards.net and biowaresocialnetwork.boards.net) emerges dominant, I suspect they'll occasionally read the stuff there. The best of both worlds: they get the opinions of hardcore fans but retain the capacity to stay distant, and they don't have to spend money on moderation. In fact, *if* one those sites emerges dominant, then it may be good for the fans as well.

One of those seems stable and has a few devs visiting. The other one... I'll let you see for yourself.

I hope to see you on the stable one!