SOE Vision - in general.

[Bad Mojo]

Let me set things straight before everyone starts to blow this out of proportion. I see a lot of uninformed reactionary comments here.

This "vision" is not SOE's vision. It was a talk given at the GameDevlopers Conference. It's a talk about how Raph Koster (who I don't think even works on PS, but SWG instead) and Rich Vogel think companies should manage their MMOG. This talk was not given as SOE policy, but instead, was delivered as nothing more than a talk by those two guys. That's it.

Now, you might have issues with how Raph and Rich think SOE should manage their MMOGs. That's fine. But SOE isn't advocating their talk at the GDC as the "vision" for PS (or any other SOE MMOG). I even quote from Raph's web site (where these slides are hosted):

I work at Sony Online Entertainment as creative director at the Austin studio; nonetheless, all views expressed on this site are my own, and not necessarily endorsed by any former or current employer.

As for the specifics, when you read that talk, you should consider what the goal is and how Raph and Rich actually have a method to deal with problem players and a system to make a MMOG a fun game for the majority.

Again, it's just the slides from a GDC talk, it's not SOE's vision for anything. I recommend people check out Raph's home page ( http://www.legendmud.org/raph/ ) and maybe read up on him and read some of this other writings ( such as this http://www.legendmud.org/raph/gaming/laws.html ).

[Chanfan]

Bad Mojo does make some good points - it's something taken out of context, and is the view of a person, not the official policy of Sony (and indeed I caught myself when first posting it, and changed my wording to "A Sony exec�").

However, it is the ideas of two folks pretty far up the food chain at SOE, folks who are responsible for crafting SOE's "vision" for some of their games - describing how they would run things. I think it would be pretty indicative of at least some of the controlling viewpoints.

So you are right, don't blow it out of proportion, but don't understate it, either.

And yes, it's not terribly surprising, but is a good reminder on the nature of business, on appearances vs. realities, and ideals vs. ethics.

Nothing in there is super horrible (like on the oft-quoted level of car companies doing studies on predicted costs of wrongful death lawsuits vs. cost to fix a problem). Some if it does come off as less honest and ethical than I would hope.

Stealing a customer base is pretty standard, I'll admit - not too many think badly of Pepsi for trying to nab Coke drinkers.

Making a dev available so that so that players feel they have access for suggestions - seems to imply that players will only feel this way, and not actually have input. Obviously, you can't actually use everyone's input.

Changing the subject
�Don�t answer controversies, you feed them
�New info can derail a distasteful topic

That certainly comes off as political dodging and not being answerable, but it's their product - they only have to answer to themselves, their bosses, and their shareholders. That's the bottom line.

Can they be ostracized?
�Must be seen to make public effort to communicate
�You�ll need to put on a show of sorrow when you fail

Certainly there are annoying troublemakers I'd be happy to see banned, on occasion. The thing I don't like here are the implications that you don't need to try and communicate, you only need to be seen to having made an effort. But truthfully, I don't expect them to be sorry, but understand the PR reasons you might need to appear so.

Do you have excuses for banning?
�Language is the most common

This is just like a policeman citing you over for not having a litter bag in your car, or similar - it's an excuse to get what they actually want done.

I can go on with good rationalizations. There really isn't all that in there that's surprising.

Still makes me feel like crap to read it, tho'. The general tone still comes off as "fake caring if you must, do what it takes to make 'em feel good while still doing what you need to do".

I guess it's like taking a peek at how fast food is made. I know that I don't really want to know, but I probably should educate myself, so I can make more informed choices for the future.

[IDgaf]

Don't get upset about it man - get annoyed, but not upset.

Be aware of what they're doing, learn what their priorites are and learn to harness those to your effect.

You know what they want to avoid - so you know what you can do to raise a point if you feel you've been wronged or have had bad customer support.

As with anything in a capitalist society, the quickest way to see results is to withdraw funding. Money talks and bullshit walks. Just think about what you spend, what products you spend it on and how often you spend money on them.

If everyone on this planet practiced Considered Consumption - whether it be cash or using up plastic cups at the water fountain -the world'd be a lot better off.