[...] New Media Collide. The publication seems to have prompted game designer and theorist Raph Koster to blog about what he learned by adopting a more collaborationist approach to his fans. Here's some of [...]

[...] Raph doesn’t bear all of the responsibility for that – in fact, he condemns what happened on his own blog.  His condemnation includes these pearls of wisdom: Some have since decided that it was listening to the players too much that caused some of the design problems with SWG. I am not sure I agree. If anything, I think that many subsequent problems came from not listening enough, or not asking questions in advance of changes. Walking a mile in the players’ shoes is a difficult trick to pull off even if you have the best of intentions. [...]

Without it my life would have been very different. I never would have met my in game and real life husband. I would not have two beautiful children (twins, a boy and a girl eerily enough). My server just wasn’t a place to join a game, it was for me and many others a home. So many mmo’s miss out on community building and fail to realize just how important it really is to someone like me. It’s why I didn’t last 6 months in WoW.

I’m looking forward to the emulator, not so much for the game but for the community its bringing together again.

Thank you.

When this game was first announced by Sony as a press release, I started following its development from then on. From concept to alpha, to closed beta when I first got to play. I stayed with SWG through everything through the combat upgrade which I didnt like but endured. Through the second combat upgrade again I didn’t like it. By the time we got up to the NGE Right as I had finished my Jedi finally after all the work I had put into the game after striving and trying through various systems. Then we got broadsided by a complete overhaul in the game. At that point for the first time since I started playing SWG I cancelled my account because as somebody here put it I felt betrayed, and decived into buying an expansion days earlier that was no longer of use. My so called ‘Elder Jedi’ is nothing more than a glowstick swinging fool. Sony has ruined SWG completley destroying the game you helped to create Raph. Not just destroying the game but the community as well.

Thats why im looking forward to the SWG Emu, it will be pre-cu. back to the good days.

[...] 30th July, 2006. 1:47 am. Blame? No. Resolution. ( Read more… )If something is broken, don’t ask who broke it. Fix it. If you can’t fix it, inform those who can and make sure you’re out of their way. If they won’t fix it, find someone else, repeat. If you can’t find anyone else, don’t use it. If you must use it, learn how to fix it yourself.http://www.raphkoster.com/2006/07/19/community-building/#comment-11807 [...]

Yeah organizationally learn from your mistakes, let me know whos making them for what reason, this way we can find out who needs re-education and who dosnt….which goes to my next point. The only way to identify trends is via data, good actionable data….

Raph-”how do I not disappoint those who invest their passion into this”??

Actionable Data?

And I’ll try to make sure you get it free, if it means another game I get to spend countless hours enjoying.

Ewww did I just engage in shameless self promotion? yeah probably, but only because I care that gamers preferances get into the hands of people who can do something about the games we spend so much time playing. People who care enough to want to know….

The unfortunate reality is there are people who dont want to know, they think the status quo is fine, they dont think much of video gamers except for how much they can squeeze out of them. I contend that any market participant who ignores thier customers preferances has a grim future.

Developers have to understand the responsibility they have to their current community when making changes to attract new players. I think when you design a MMORPG, you design for a certian type of player. Then it either succeeds or fails, and can do so and many diffrent levels. Instead of making sweeping changes to an existing gamen when it fails to meet expectations, it seems more ethical to just go back to drawing baord.

I would have more respect for both SOE and LA had they just shut SWG down and redesigned it rather than mishandling the game, the IP, and more importantly the community, as they have in the last 14 month.

it is NOT about “blame,” but about understanding.

When people view an action in a positive light, they “give credit” to the actor; when people view it in a negative light, they “place blame” on the actor. In both cases, it’s a matter of placing responsibility on the actor for the action. Indeed, this is even a good thing. Then what? You “understand” that the actor is either a great person or a horrible person? You’re going to vote your dollars to the great person and not the horrible one? You’re going to villify this horrible person on your personal blog so that no one else will suffer a game with them again?

The “who” is irrelevant. It doesn’t matter. In the case of Raph, all you actually need to know is that it wasn’t him; his personal brand remains intact. But at the end, even that doesn’t matter. You don’t play a game based on whether or not Raph made it. You play a game based on whether or not you like it. Naturally, people make the first impression decision based on a host of factors, including who made it, but is that really your concern? Are you hiring people from SOE? Will that factor into some marketing scheme? I doubt that. People who are ought to ask Raph for his opinion personally and privately, not in a public forum. So, again, the “who” is irrelevant.

Finally, the “who”, in cases like this, is only actually good for one thing: punishment. You need to know who made the mistake so that they can be punished appropriately. Yet you don’t have the right to punish them. Any of them. You can pretend to, and enjoy it, but are you really? Punishment should never be meted out arbitrarily. Not only should it be directly connected to its mistake–which in this case means the person in error should be demoted, transferred, or fired–but it should also be constructive. The punishment should always increase overall quality. If you have a bad team member, you fire him because without him, the team will function better.

Discovering who was behind the NGE does none of these. It’s useless. It gives you a scapegoat. It’s pointless. Receiving an answer does nothing useful. (Disclaimer: I am far from an expert on Japanese culture, which is why I didn’t cite it in my original comment. But since it’s been brought up…) As Morgan and “before today” alluded, the Japanese culture differs from the American very pointedly in this way. People fire themselves. While suicide is frowned upon, rightly, in our society, it is done because there is nothing left for them. They cannot fix their mistakes, their presence does not help things, and they have nowhere to go.

If something is broken, don’t ask who broke it. Fix it. If you can’t fix it, inform those who can and make sure you’re out of their way. If they won’t fix it, find someone else, repeat. If you can’t find anyone else, don’t use it. If you must use it, learn how to fix it yourself.