Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Whizbang Dustyboots" data-source="post: 3484604" data-attributes="member: 11760">They catch flack because the overwhelming majority of people who have responded to the interview think they didn't say enough.No one is asking for business models or anything that they'd get in real trouble for disclosing. The commodities example does not apply, period.The only real downside to stating any plans is that some idiot nine months later will scream that they've been lied to because Article X or Article Y didn't make the final cut. I've been on the other side of having to listen to those sorts of complaints, even when I thought my company did a good job of explaining why Feature X or Feature Y didn't make it and I still think it's worth doing.The majority of folks are pretty rational. They want a taste but appreciate that they won't hear everything and that things will change over time.The irrational folks who will scream about being lied to are the ones who are going to scream no matter what.You can't create a policy around irrational people who can never be pleased. You go with making the vast majority -- who are rational, who are reachable and who will understand if you deal with them honestly and proactively -- happy.Again, I've done this exact job. I'm not criticizing them because I want to know every tiny detail of what they're doing. I'm saying that, when I've been in their shoes -- when Blizzard or Bioware or even the WotC in the days before the 3E launch was in their shoes -- they did a much better job of communicating with the public and it's not terribly difficult to do a lot better.I'm happy that you're happy with the interview. I get that they apparently have one or more superiors who are preventing proactive and productive communcation. But none of that makes their communication over the past two weeks anything other than a complete mess.</blockquote>

Verification