Lot Selection Sequencing

That is not really a ringing endorsement of their decision. You are also basing that support off an assumption that no one really knew the game existed, so its "okay" they do this now.

What if they game was known about? And it wasn't LUCK?

And on that note, for full disclosure, this wont really matter to me when it comes to my house placement. Why?

I am at the Knight level currently. But just because something won't have a dramatic impact on someone, does not mean they should sit alongside the road and say nothing.

Again, I am in it to better the business side, not endorse a bad message or practise I see forming within said business.

 

And now me... I 100% think the system is fair. Just to be clear I wanted you to realize you're ranting and not being progressive. You're also not fact checking what you write. Most of the people in here are acting purely on emotion which, from an Business Owner's standpoint, will not help you. I assure you that if you can maintain a civil and CORRECT arguement then you will likely win... that being said I FULLY 100% SUPPORT their choice for the following reason:

I think someone who chose to back the game with $1599 should NEVER be put behind someone who paid $500... essentially a benefactor who has a backer amount of $1599 would be placed under a founder citizen according to all of your logic... this game is being made by people who deserve to be paid a fair wage and as such they need to get money as a company to pay them... they're not riddling their site with ads (thank you!) and they're not derailing the project with a corporate sponsor (thank you) but they are working on making a game and THINGS WILL KEEP CHANGING as they go.

Please, for the love of community, stop being destructive things and use your constructive logic and not your emotions when answering things...

Also be sure you get your facts correct when you're telling other people off for making a mistake/changing their mind (uh, being human?).

So am I.

 

What is destructive here? Pointing out the obvious?

My facts are perfectly fine.

Again, not a single person had said, up to that message, it was absolutely perfect what they just did.

You all used complimentary adjectives of "compromise", "okay" and "fine".

Instead of being pedantic, how about helping to improve the message for the future. I do not buy into any community of fanboism, bury your head in the sand and let it pass.

And I absolutely disagree with your money logic. You just implied that the rich of the world should be allowed to get anything they want, first. This is a horrible philosophy to me, but I am perfectly fine debating that offline if you feel the need.

 

I wasn't really sure if he was agreeing or disagreeing with me.

 

I said best compromise between those who happened to hear about the game sooner, and those who pledged tons of money when they did hear about it. Ie, between early-pledging Founders and higher-pledging Benefactors. NOT a compromise on their ideals or promises. You are twisting what you read to fit your opinions. I think this is the BEST choice they could have made. And I said that back on page one of this discussion.

 

Didn't twist anything. Read it again.

Why does a compromise even exist? My overall point has always been, clean up the message. That eliminates any "compromise" of any degree in the future because of bad wording, mis-timed announcement.

No one said their ideals, but it is surely a compromise (your word) on their promise. Dallas said one thing, now it is another. And between the two points, 7 solid months passed, before any clarification. Yet it is being marked up as a gaffe.

A week, sure, a month, maybe... beyond that, acceptance as a "mistake" without explanation or clarification, is just bad business.

 

Guys, I understand that some of you are frustrated. I get that. But bringing up the same points over and over again and going round and round with each other is not helping everything. We have already had to shut chat down because of the hostility and lack of respect being shown. Please ensure that your conversation here remain civil and productive so I am not forced to lock this thread too.

 

I am torn and understand both sides. I fully support what Portalarium decides to do because I support Lord British's vision.

I am a founder and have upgraded my pledge during the 15% as it helped me get to the level I really wanted but could not afford initially. Started as a Citizen, upgraded to Knight level before the KS period ended. Upgraded to Lord because of the 15% bonus. A house was a main point why I started with the citizen pledge.

 

I do agree that it probably should have been clarified earlier... such as, when they decided that Benefactor backers would be a thing. But honestly, in my opinion, they have more important things than clarifying every comment made by every dev in every format, every time a change is made, as long as it all gets cleared up before it actually impacts anyone (ie, when we can actually place houses, a year from now). I do think the intention in the much-contested quote was probably "pre-launch backers", but because there were no backers other than kickstarters at the time, it wasn't taken into account in the language, or in the implications and effects that Benefactors would have on that.

 

@FireLotus: This is all we do with every topic. We hear nothing from you guys and so all we have is to go around and around with our own thoughts and opinions. Hostility? Where? Seems like a very civil discussion reading through my chat log.

 

I didn't think anyone was hostile. I would love to know (via PM if you wish) what comments specifically were considered bad enough to close down chat. I have the entire transcript, if anyone wants to see it.

Snarky? Sure, I know I was. Worse than an innuendo-riddled PotA chat, in which you are often a participant? *shrug*

I'm not sure closing chat down is a good idea, considering bad communication is what got us in this pickle in the first place.

 

Suggestion, maybe create an area where people get one post to voice their opinion on stuff like this without being able to reply to other forum posters. I don't know if that type of functionality is baked into the forums already, but if it's easy to do I think that would help you guys collect feedback without all the back and forth.

I think it would give people the impression that they all got an opportunity to say their peace, make their best argument or post their best thoughts and move on. Then you'd also have an easy way to collect the feedback and if you wanted to explore other areas of that discussion you could write a follow-up thread.

Just my thoughts.

 

Also in that same comment, it was mentioned that Richard was looped in. If that's not the LAW, then I don't know what is.

 

I got nothing. *heads off to play Hearthstone*

 

+1000

Exactly. Very well said.

 

Not saying anything, and instead leaving it ambiguous is worse in my opinion. If you make a statement and stand by it people can look up to you as being honest and respect that decision, even if they don't agree.

Design related stuff? Yea, that's gonna change. I'm disappointed with that, but it happens. When changes effect money related things, it's not so acceptable. If you ask for money in exchange for perks, you better provide those perks.

 

They haven't changed a single perk that was paid for (aside from adding MORE things).

Just (in some people's opinion/perception) the 'perks' associated with when you paid for it.



In fact, I would find it easier to see the logic behind the argument that they did the opposite, since it said it was based on amount pledged in the official FAQ, rather than a single statement by a dev, thus ruling that Founders placed before higher-pledged Benefactors would be taking away perks they paid for. (I am not arguing this point, merely saying I would be able to see the logic here better.)

 

The main problem with this very topic however is the length of time that transpired from statement to correction.

As I said earlier, make a statement, need to clarify it, according to the plan you will be laying out in a years time from now, correct it ASAP. Not 7 months after the fact.

Even a simple: Oh, whoops, Dallas misspoke, we will sort that out at some future date, 6 months ago, would have been good enough.

If you have a plan, fine, you don't need to relay every piece of it. But when you do expose a piece, make sure it is correct or corrected in a timely manner. Or should we really start judging everything they DO say with hesitation - as if it is subject to change 6+ months from when they say it?

Make a plan, clean the message as much as possible before it's out the door, to minify future confusions and conflicts.

This is certainly not the first time this exact example has happened.

The same way a sport team gets ticket sales for season tickets, even though there is a huge waiting list.

Or the same way console makers get huge lists of queued up people at an "introductory" rate before the people who didn't queue up have to now pay "more" for the same equipment.

You make a superior product that everyone wants. It will also have the effect that the next time this company does another product, those who missed the first one (early) will surely jump at a new chance to be said early adopters.

But you don't dismiss loyalty based on who can buy more. You will burn down the base/core users who are the active base getting you MORE people into your game because of word of mouth and general fanboism/enthusiasm

 

They are doing things as fast as they can. It's a small staff and there is a lot going on. Sure, it's an excuse, but it's the reality. They want to meet deadlines for all of us and most normal games take years to develop. Here, 7 months later, we have an Alpha coming out for us all to test. Show me another game of this caliber with that size of a staff that has been able to do what they are doing. If there are others, there aren't many. Heck, Dice EA has a staff of 350 people and they can't even get Battlefield 4 working properly. What Portalarium is doing is nothing short of a miracle in my eyes in order to keep on deadlines so yes, things will slip through the cracks sometimes. It may be no one has noticed the issue until recently so they are trying to remedy the mistake now rather than later.

Things change. Things get delayed. That's part of running a business.