156 réponses à ce sujet

[Krethka]

Stanley Woo wrote...  *sigh* People love taking what I say and using it to get their righteous indignation on.

 
This is because you're telling customers who received a defective product (I'm speaking specifically about the unaddressed bug that routinely renders save files unreadable, which was reported to Bioware five or more months ago, but examples abound) that fixing critical bugs is a "favor".

I can't believe Bioware allows their employees to post that.  I'm honestly baffled what your ombudsperson and/or marketing teams do all day if this is permitted.  If nothing else, it would be damaging in court.

Stanley Woo wrote... They jump to whatever conclusion they like, then castigate us (or me) for having stolen their puppy.

No, they're upset because Bioware took $60 for a defective product, and has done an abysmal job of addressing these rather severe defects.  Your use of hyperbole here is insulting, and emblematic of the larger problem: Bioware doesn't take the defects in their products seriously.

Stanley Woo wrote... Based on the tone and the content of the posts against me, it's pretty obvious that folks are expressing their frustration and dislike of me and hoping I'll act as a lens that will focus it on the company like a big Bat-signal. How about let's try not taking my words in the worst possible way, and actually discuss things?

People are reacting negatively to your posts because you're trivializing the importance of their concerns.  I suspect that if you (or better yet, a more capable employee who can accurately read the mood of your rather dissatisfied customers and has more experience doing corporate damage control) changed the content of your condescending posts, posters would be inclined to react positively.

You're making a fundamental attribution error-- you're saying that if people are reacting negatively to your actions, it's something inherent to them.

Stanley Woo wrote... Technically--and for some people, this will translate to "as a money-grubbing soulless corporation, I hate you, humble paying customer"--your EULA states that you agree that your particular software product is purchased "as is". Anything over and above technical support can be considered "optional." The fact that pretty much everyone does it does not mean patches are suddenly mandatory, just as the fact that everyone speeds does not mean exceeding the speed limit is suddenly legal.

Customers aren't reacting to what Bioware could legally get away with in a court of law.  You might well be able to issue a defect product, hide behind the EULA, and evade punitive legal measures.  But it's a terrible public relations and business decision that a decent company would never put forward to an audience of their paying customers.  I assure you that if I took this stance to a customer regarding a product from my company, I'd be fired.

I'm sorry for the bold text, but I gather that you're missing something very fundamental to the conversation.

[Krethka]

Godak wrote...

Krethka wrote...

You would be fired by any decent company for telling that to a customer.  I hope Bioware becomes a decent company some day and does it.

Companies fire employees for telling customers the truth? Weird.

They certainly fire employees for rude and condescending behavior.  If an executive from Toyota went on TV and responded to the concerns about their product with "Well, we make defective products.  Based on some fine print, my personal position is that we're not required to do anything about it.  Customers should be more responsible in their purchasing decisions, and stop acting like we stole their puppy.", they'd be gone that day.

Bioware should be doing two things right now:
1) Fix the severe bugs.
2) Apologetically update their customers regarding progress on fixing the severe bugs.

It kills me that Stanley Woo is actually in the Quality Assurance department and doesn't get this.  Here's hoping he gets a phone call from EA.

[I Valente I]

Krethka wrote...

Stanley Woo wrote...  *sigh* People love taking what I say and using it to get their righteous indignation on.

 
This is because you're telling customers who received a defective product (I'm speaking specifically about the unaddressed bug that routinely renders save files unreadable, which was reported to Bioware five or more months ago, but examples abound) that fixing critical bugs is a "favor".

I can't believe Bioware allows their employees to post that.  I'm honestly baffled what your ombudsperson and/or marketing teams do all day if this is permitted.  If nothing else, it would be damaging in court.

Stanley Woo wrote... They jump to whatever conclusion they like, then castigate us (or me) for having stolen their puppy.

No, they're upset because Bioware took $60 for a defective product, and has done an abysmal job of addressing these rather severe defects.  Your use of hyperbole here is insulting, and emblematic of the larger problem: Bioware doesn't take the defects in their products seriously.

Stanley Woo wrote... Based on the tone and the content of the posts against me, it's pretty obvious that folks are expressing their frustration and dislike of me and hoping I'll act as a lens that will focus it on the company like a big Bat-signal. How about let's try not taking my words in the worst possible way, and actually discuss things?

People are reacting negatively to your posts because you're trivializing the importance of their concerns.  I suspect that if you (or better yet, a more capable employee who can accurately read the mood of your rather dissatisfied customers and has more experience doing corporate damage control) changed the content of your condescending posts, posters would be inclined to react positively.

You're making a fundamental attribution error-- you're saying that if people are reacting negatively to your actions, it's something inherent to them.

Stanley Woo wrote... Technically--and for some people, this will translate to "as a money-grubbing soulless corporation, I hate you, humble paying customer"--your EULA states that you agree that your particular software product is purchased "as is". Anything over and above technical support can be considered "optional." The fact that pretty much everyone does it does not mean patches are suddenly mandatory, just as the fact that everyone speeds does not mean exceeding the speed limit is suddenly legal.

Customers aren't reacting to what Bioware could legally get away with in a court of law.  You might well be able to issue a defect product, hide behind the EULA, and evade punitive legal measures.  But it's a terrible public relations and business decision that a decent company would never put forward to an audience of their paying customers.  I assure you that if I took this stance to a customer regarding a product from my company, I'd be fired.

I'm sorry for the bold text, but I gather that you're missing something very fundamental to the conversation.

my friend, you are digging yourself into a hole, and embarrassing yourself. Please stop pretending you know how every company should be run. Who cares if "you would be fired", you don't work for Bioware. Your posts matter nothing, on these forums you(and I, and everyone here) are inconsequential. It's a shame to have a righteous power trip, but even moreso when the power you're tripping on doesn't exist.

[Onyx Jaguar]

Krethka wrote...

Godak wrote...

Krethka wrote...

You would be fired by any decent company for telling that to a customer.  I hope Bioware becomes a decent company some day and does it.

Companies fire employees for telling customers the truth? Weird.

They certainly fire employees for rude and condescending behavior.  If an executive from Toyota went on TV and responded to the concerns about their product with "Well, we make defective products.  Based on some fine print, my personal position is that we're not required to do anything about it.  Customers should be more responsible in their purchasing decisions, and stop acting like we stole their puppy.", they'd be gone that day.

Bioware should be doing two things right now:
1) Fix the severe bugs.
2) Apologetically update their customers regarding progress on fixing the severe bugs.

It kills me that Stanley Woo is actually in the Quality Assurance department and doesn't get this.  Here's hoping he gets a phone call from EA.

http://social.biowar...index/2578266/1

[Remmak]

I Valente I wrote...
my friend, you are digging yourself into a hole, and embarrassing yourself. Please stop pretending you know how every company should be run. Who cares if "you would be fired", you don't work for Bioware. Your posts matter nothing, on these forums you(and I, and everyone here) are inconsequential. It's a shame to have a righteous power trip, but even moreso when the power you're tripping on doesn't exist.

I don't think we're inconsequential, but we sure aren't dictators and shouldn't act like it.

[iceon]

I say thank you when I get the receipt from paying the busdriver... I say thank you when I buy something from a shop... I say thank you to my woman when I leave the food table.. I say thank you when someone brings me something at work or do something that I ask them to do... so... why shouldn't I say thank you in this case?



I must say though that if I bought a new car and the stereo was broken and the car salesman said that I should have known that before buying the car although he didn't let me test it and that he has no obligation to fix it... I would be pretty furious..



Somehow I think that the games/movies/music industry get's away to easy on that kind of scenarios... imagine how it would be if a shop sold wares where stuff might or might not be in the package, of course you buy the package as is and you have no right to complain because it said so in a little note on the shop window...



I understand perfectly the points of the developers ... especially since I work as a developer but I think that there still needs to be a little understanding from both ends... both sides have to bend over a little sometimes

[marbatico]

its very simple, its polite. though that may not be of much value in our society, its still appreciated.

(right, devs?)

[matt coll]

[quote]Stanley Woo wrote...

[quote]purplesunset wrote...

I wasn't sure where to put this thread, so I'll put it in Off Topic. After patch 1.03, I see a lot of people saying things like "Thanks Bioware!" after quoting a part of the patch notes.

Seriously:

1) Aren't they already getting paid ?[/quote]
Yes, but that has nothing to do with the customer showing appreciation for what we do. Purchasing a game is an exchange of money for goods, not giving thanks of showing appreciation or enthusiasm. If anything, it's thanking your local retailer or distributor for providing you with access to the game.
[quote]2) Aren't patches supposed to fix things that weren't suppsoed to be broken in the first place ?[/quote]
Yes, and as we all know, things always go as expected and nothing ever is missed, compromised, or goes wrong. Ever.[/quote]
[quote]3) Do they actually care if they get thanked or not? see ---> number  1)[/quote]
Ultimately, no, since it's our job to develop games regardless of whether people comment on them, but it's darned nice to hear people enjoying what you do. The passion and enthusiasm of our fans is one of the reasons we have a community in the first place. It's our way of thanking the fans for supporting us. Besides, don't you enjoy it when people are nice to you for something you did?
[quote]By expressing gratitude you're fostering this attitude that  doing things like  patching their own game  is a favor or something. Ummm, no, it's not.  Let's nip this in the bud, please. [/quote]
It is a favour. We are under no obligation to provide post-release patches. I believe the EULA for most, if not all games states something to the effect of the product being released "as-is" and the software having no warranty in and of itself. I seem to remember reading that, so please correct me if I'm wrong. Any warranty included in game purchases relates directly to the physical media on which the game is printed.

You are not entitled to a game that works to your specifications or to your satisfaction, but we still work darned hard to try and make it as painless and bug-free as we can. That is something people can and do thank us for: our commitment to quality.
[/quote]
thank you, stanley. thank you for pwning this arrogant fool
everybody deserves to be treated politely until they prove otherwise

Modifié par matt coll, 15 mai 2010 - 09:21 .

[eldav]

Devs dont make patches out of duty, but for respect to the gamer.

[The Grey Spectre]

Stanley Woo wrote...

It is harder than it looks, and that's where a lot of the disagreement comes from.

A layman looks at his game, which has bugs in it, and sees all the ways in which it fell short. Everything that "should have worked" is seen as having a default "perfect" state, and all the flaws should be easily brought back to this perfect state. It's like a pie. In its "default perfect state," it's a hot, whole pie. People see bugs as pieces taken out of the pie, or the fact it's not hot anymore, or it's been taken out of its baking tin and placed in a different container.

Software bugs aren't always as easy to deal with as people think. Continuing with that pie analogy, some things are really easy to fix. Pie's cold? We'll just warm it back up again. Ding! Simple fix and it doesn't affect anything else except the temperature of the pie. Pie's on a different plate? We'll just put it back in its original pie tin. Ding! Fixed. Again, you haven't changed the pie, it still tastes the same, it's just in a different container.

But if there's a piece taken out of the pie--not a whole slice, but a piece--it's not so easy to fix, is it? In fact, it might be impossible to simply repair the pie, since anything you do to it will have some effect on the rest of the pie because everything was all baked together.

Now, imagine some guy is balancing that pie on a 10-foot pole while doing a complicated tap routine in time with the music on top of a moving car. And this performance is being broadcast simultaneously to every country in the world on the internet! How many potential problems can you see cropping up in that scenario? That's pretty much what game development is like these days: all manner of different resources baked together in a pie with a bunch of interoperating systems choreographed into it, being broadcast on disc to different regions so people can experience it on all manner of different systems.

ANd no matter how diligent people are, no matter how careful and capable they are, no one can account for every single contingency, no one is perfect, and no battle plan survives contact with the enemy. There was a lot of, shall we say "interesting," things done wiht NWN to make it all work as well as it did.

I was thinking of adding my two cents but this thread seems to have plenty of Déjà vu posts, in other words, I would be further repeating what has already been said previously, and round and round we go.

Modifié par The Grey Spectre, 15 mai 2010 - 10:11 .

[Ponce de Leon]

Stanley Woo wrote...

It is a favour. We are under no obligation to provide post-release patches. I believe the EULA for most, if not all games states something to the effect of the product being released "as-is" and the software having no warranty in and of itself. I seem to remember reading that, so please correct me if I'm wrong. Any warranty included in game purchases relates directly to the physical media on which the game is printed.

I beg your pardon, if you're going to read this, but wouldn't NOT fixing a game problem be a commercial suicide? I mean, wouldn't this put the company in bad voice to treat the community and players in general in a bad way and therefore put your future releases in a much less "respected" fashion, if I might say so (and if people understand what I mean). So therefore, the favor is not only for the player that bought the game, but also for the developer, to politely treat the player and ultimately earn more money at a future product, no?

Edit : also, sorry if anyone mentioned this already. I skipped the rest once I read this part of your post 

Modifié par dark-lauron, 15 mai 2010 - 10:03 .

[I Valente I]

dark-lauron wrote...

Stanley Woo wrote...

It is a favour. We are under no obligation to provide post-release patches. I believe the EULA for most, if not all games states something to the effect of the product being released "as-is" and the software having no warranty in and of itself. I seem to remember reading that, so please correct me if I'm wrong. Any warranty included in game purchases relates directly to the physical media on which the game is printed.

I beg your pardon, if you're going to read this, but wouldn't NOT fixing a game problem be a commercial suicide? I mean, wouldn't this put the company in bad voice to treat the community and players in general in a bad way and therefore put your future releases in a much less "respected" fashion, if I might say so (and if people understand what I mean). So therefore, the favor is not only for the player that bought the game, but also for the developer, to politely treat the player and ultimately earn more money at a future product, no?

Edit : also, sorry if anyone mentioned this already. I skipped the rest once I read this part of your post 

It is somewhat of a paradox, I agree. But I think Mr. Woo was using the word favor in a legal sense only. When you factor in other things like a company's image, or customer satisfaction etc. then of course it's not so much a favor but a necessity. However, legally speaking, like Stanley said he was, there is no such obligation. Legally speaking.

[Godak]

I Valente I wrote...

It is somewhat of a paradox, I agree. But I think Mr. Woo was using the word favor in a legal sense only. When you factor in other things like a company's image, or customer satisfaction etc. then of course it's not so much a favor but a necessity. However, legally speaking, like Stanley said he was, there is no such obligation. Legally speaking.

Exactly. If you actually read Woo's comments in context, I don't think there's any other way to understand it.  He was merely stating that the law does not require them to patch the game, so, in that sense, it is technically a "favor'.

[the_one_54321]

Thanking people for doing a good job, even if they get paid for that job, is a simple and well appreciated courtesy. You'll get much farther in your professional life when you take this into consideration. People like to be thanked.

[Fexelea]

I am quoting this because it is the truth.

Patches are NOT a favour. They are customer cookies. Thanking the dev for the patches is encouragement.

How hard it is to make games or fix the bugs is not important. When you do forensics accounting on Lehmans it is not easy either, but your client isn't gonna cut you slack because "it is very hard". They will indeed thank you for your effforts. That's just how business rolls.

So I think the OP can have a very simple answer: It is encouragement to the company to do what the customer wants.

Stanley, you should revise what you write and think about how it will be taken before you post. Unfair as it is that we can fire away, as long as you have that Bio logo under your name (you could easily comment with another account) people will take it as Bio's opinion. Patches are not a favor just like me buying Bio games is not a favor. It's a business relationship. And if either of us stops caring about the other part it is over. Of course you have many many of such relationships, but as AFW says below, there is always a critical mass point. If you decide there isn't enough people with the problem for it to be worth fixing, that makes sense. But the way you put that forward is important.

As it stands now, I have a broken PS3 game. I cannot play, and not for firmware but because of the patch on Awakenings disc. (And yes I have tickets with EA!) So you must appreciate how you impression of it being a "favour" to produce a patch for me -and the other ps3 users- to play the game I bought (Which broke the original game, so "as is" isn't really applicable) just makes me go "oh, fine then, I won't buy anymore". This is not a desirable thing for anyone, and if more and more customers get upset, you lose more and more sales.

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

I am a software engineer. Fixing bugs and patching is part of our product's life cycle. Without that phase we would lose our customers. So, the logical thing to do is to fix them. And BioWare does that too as long as a large number of people are asking for it. We are no different. In fact the company counts on it and plans the cost for that phase like any other part of the product plan. Fixing bugs is expensive, so we'll quit doing that when the project budget has an overrun or when the majority of end users stop reporting them. That's why companies are happy to have lots of apologist and that's why they keep feeding them. To paint the picture that fixing bugs is merely a favor fits the fairy tail required to keep the costs down.

[Fexelea]

OnlyShallow89 wrote...

In that case, I will respectfully disagree.
Assassin's Creed 2 and Spore had huge DRM controversy, yet they were still (at the time of their respective releases) in the Top Sellers lists for PC games. Activision clearly were milking people for money with MW2 and its higher price and overpriced DLC, yet MW2 was one of the most successful game releases of all time, shifting millions of copies.
It tends to only be the die-hard fans (so BioWare fanboys etc) who actually care what a company's image is. Joe Public out there couldn't give a rat's backside if Developer 18 said that Product X8U was Something Bad.

Not starting quote war, just brought it up so you know what I'm answering to.

Current sales of AC2 have little to do with the DRM. Future sales of AC are what will be challenged by the bad DRM press: how the system crashed and people couldn't play it, etc. is what will impact purchasing decisions (just like a game breaking and not being fixed would impact purchasing decisions. IE: i bought the darkness, played and got the loop glitch. They didn't patch. I don't buy their games anymore)
On MW2, don't confuse price point with image. It is because the brand awareness and emotional branding was so good that the game sold so well. If you create brand evangelists, you can sell them anything. How where they created? Is it sustainable? Are more appropriate questions. However not very relevant to our patch-as-a-favour discussion.
I disagree about corporate image not being important except to the already loyalists. How do you think those loyalist become so, and how long do you think they will last if they are neglected? There are strong impacts of a company's reputation for much more than its customers: it's investors, prospective employees, and even government are things to consider. Fombrun explains the value well in the enlightened-self-interest commentary. Kotler provides an overall perspective and Wiechman an in-depth of more reasons. Again not very relevant to this particular rather small issue, but in the end as I said earlier if your customers stop buying your products because they don't work and you don't fix them whilst others do, you will find yourself loosing them.

[Zaxares]

Steering away from the whole "patching and legality" business, I thank people for their efforts because it's always nice to be appreciated for what you've done. For instance, unless I've received bad service, I always thank wait and retail staff just for serving me.

[Beocat]

Stanley Woo wrote...

Technically--and for some people, this will translate to "as a money-grubbing soulless corporation, I hate you, humble paying customer"

Hehe, Mr. Woo, that made me laugh.  I swear, I hear people say things like that about the industry I work in all the time too.  It's been a running joke for years.

~sighs~  It seems courtesy and manners are dying off in today's society.  Well, I'm grateful to the people who work hard to make great games for me.  You guys are awesome  

[Mercuron]

Indeed. If ever there was a caoster to beat all caosters, DA:O would be that caoster. Nothing caosters quite so well as a copy of DA:O. In fact, I understand it holds the current caostering record of 59/2, although I admit, I haven't checked the listings in some time ...

























(Sorry, just felt that 'you mad?' is a tad overdone these days)

(By the way, you may have misspelled 'coaster')

[Veange]

Ju-0n wrote...

Stanley Woo wrote...


Patches as a "favour": perhaps the word "favour" is the catalyst here. All I meant was that developers are never obligated to provide post-release support. And yet, pretty much every developer does because it just makes sense. Some developers will provide a single patch, some provide ongoing support for years, even long after the game has stopped appearing regularly on store shelves. It is a "favour" because patches require time and resources that can't be used to develop the next product.

Technically--and for some people, this will translate to "as a money-grubbing soulless corporation, I hate you, humble paying customer"--your EULA states that you agree that your particular software product is purchased "as is". Anything over and above technical support can be considered "optional." The fact that pretty much everyone does it does not mean patches are suddenly mandatory, just as the fact that everyone speeds does not mean exceeding the speed limit is suddenly legal.

What a load of rubbish. Name the last ****ing game EA ever supported! Fact of the matter is the console DA:O is now a over-priced caoster because EA/BW will not fix the ****ing mess that was RELEASED. I hope EA/BW goes broke and the developers go bankrupt and end up  living in cardboard boxes. EA/BW is little more than fraud artists masquerading as crappy coders, and there should be a law that specifically applies to con artists like EA/BW that sell faulty products and do NOTHING to FIX them.

EA/BW is just a greedy money grubbing bunch of ****s. Consider all of the DLC and the Expansion for DA:O that have not even been Q&A. Lets face the truth hrer Mr Woo EA/BW are scam artists who sell faulty products. They do not give a **** about their customers or their games after we have paid for them. The proof lies with the entire DA:O experience for consloe gamers. EA/BW have ripped them off, stolen their money and given them a faulty product, whcih, seven months after release they have not even bothered to fix.

Tell us Mr. Woo what will be next a patch to fix the abortion of a game or more DLC. Let me guess more DLC you money grubbing greedy ****ing con artists!

trying that hard to troll a reaction out of bioware forum mod, eh?

I'm sure if you applied your life philosophies to bioware game production and showed them "how it's done" there will cease to be any problems whatsoever. No sane customer would complain about any aspect of it.

No doubt you have volumes to teach them about what constitutes polite demeanor in good customer services as well, hrmm?

[Dsurian]

Awww...Veange made a funny!

As far as legality goes, I can understand such a clause to exist in a EULA smply to prevent - well, people like Ju-On to actually sue a company over something so comparitivly silly.

But at the same time, I can't help but feel entitled to whatever it is I buy to be in good working order, as implyed by the producer and understandably assumed by the user (reasoning behind an automobiles warranty, for instance). If it isn't, then as it can only reasonably be fixed by a specialist (the games creator, in this case), the problem should be rectified as soon as possible. I've personally noticed a few games being released retail that seemingly should have still been in the beta - and any dev team lacking this laziness should be respected.

[Stanley Woo]

Ju-0n, your outrage and bluster is very clearly bordering on the libelous, which is not permitted on our forums. I'm all right with people blowing off some steam and getting angry and frustrated, but according to our Site Rules, which you yourself actively agreed to follow when you signed up to participate in our community. If you cannot conduct yourself in a civil, professional manner, I will be forced to remove your posting privileges.

[VampireCommando]

Ju-0n wrote...



What a load of rubbish. Name the last ****ing game EA ever supported! Fact of the matter is the console DA:O is now a over-priced caoster because EA/BW will not fix the ****ing mess that was RELEASED. I hope EA/BW goes broke and the developers go bankrupt and end up  living in cardboard boxes. EA/BW is little more than fraud artists masquerading as crappy coders, and there should be a law that specifically applies to con artists like EA/BW that sell faulty products and do NOTHING to FIX them.

EA/BW is just a greedy money grubbing bunch of ****s. Consider all of the DLC and the Expansion for DA:O that have not even been Q&A. Lets face the truth hrer Mr Woo EA/BW are scam artists who sell faulty products. They do not give a **** about their customers or their games after we have paid for them. The proof lies with the entire DA:O experience for consloe gamers. EA/BW have ripped them off, stolen their money and given them a faulty product, whcih, seven months after release they have not even bothered to fix.

Tell us Mr. Woo what will be next a patch to fix the abortion of a game or more DLC. Let me guess more DLC you money grubbing greedy ****ing con artists!

You sir are foul, no matter your anger there is no need for personal attacks, and extremly harsh ones at that, you should be discusted with your self.