Now that you have the right people in place and everyone knows who is supposed to be doing what, just how do you manage this thing, anyway? The first step is getting a handle on just what you're doing and relaying that to the players. This is one of the critical issues facing any online game post-launch , and it involves an arcane black art known as "managing the expectations of the customers," otherwise known as your players. It's very easy for your Marketing and Public Relations departments and player relations, community relations, and development teams to speak separately to the player base or online press and promise or imply different features, fixes, and changes. There is one cardinal rule to always remember when communicating with your players: Anything and everything posted or mentioned in public by a member of the team, no matter how amorphous, will be taken as gospel. Everything said by any employee will be immediately taken by your subscribers as being set in stone and in the development track pipeline. Take, for example, UO . At the game's launch, there was no coherent policy or procedure for communicating with the players. For the most part, the developers and designers posted what they wanted to post, whenever they wanted to. The various members all frequented different player-run fan sites and engaged in "theoretical" discussions on features and changes to the game and almost never relayed these discussions in whole to the rest of the live team. When these discussions didn't result in changes to the game, this led to charges of unfulfilled promises and gave a black eye to the game. Once, one of the designers on the live team was asked by a player online if necromancy and alchemy could be added to this medieval fantasy RPG. The designer, before consulting others on the team, said he liked the idea and would bring it up with his associates . Within 24 hours, the UO fan sites were abuzz with the news that necromancy and alchemy were coming to the game. The designer tried to stem the tide by saying, "Hey, we're just thinking about it," but it was already too late. Soon, it was announced that the features were on the development list ”and there they sat for years . The designer wrote a check that Origin Systems had to cash, gave another black eye to the reputation of the game, and incidentally, created a running joke at UO 's expense that still exists today. The Four-Step Notification ProgramSo, what is a poor live team to do? You can't not talk to the players; open communication is a necessity in this market, not an optional exercise. It looks a lot like a "damned if you do and damned if you don't" situation, doesn't it? It's actually much easier than it looks from our examples. What you need is a cohesive internal organization that controls the flow of information from your own people on the live team to the players and back, and a process that allows the controlled and managed flow of information to the players. What the players want to know is: What is broken, what is being fixed, and what cool, new stuff will be added, and when? They want to get inside the heads of the live development team and understand what they are thinking and planning, so they can plan their own in-game time and strategies accordingly . In other words, they want to feel like they are a part of the process. That means they want current information, they want to know that their opinions are being delivered and considered by the development team, and they want some advance notice regarding major changes. Delivering this kind of coherent short-, mid-, and long- term information and coordinating player responses starts with a four-step process managed by community relations on the web site and in the message forums. The following process has proven successful in helping to manage player expectations in several games :
Using the basics of the four-step process, the community relations team for UO coordinates with the producer and other team members to get information and post it on the correct web page. Then, on the message board forums, they coordinate the discussions concerning these posts and relay the critical discussions. Thus, they expanded on the minimal four-step process. Instituting such a player notification process right from launch day will save the live team from plenty of grief down the road. However, there is a major caveat: All members of the live team have to buy into the process, and that means instituting a general prohibition or restrictions on which team members can post, when they can post, and on what subjects. In other words, team members have to be willing to gag themselves and clear all communications with the players through community relations. This can be as drastic as requiring all team members to refrain from posting without first clearing it with the community relations team or as loose as community relations establishing strict rules and guidelines to be followed when posting and working with the team members over time to refine the process. Whatever is instituted, it must be acknowledged that community relations is in charge of this aspect of player expectation management and that what they say goes. The Rules of Managing Player ExpectationsPW gamers have a wild and wooly streak to them and are quite capable of being caustic and rude in posts. This most often happens when they perceive that a live team has treated them, as a class, with disrespect and dishonesty. Nothing will inflame players more than an unannounced change in a game mechanic or character ability that erases dozens or hundreds of hours of play time. Lying or being evasive about it before or afterwards only compounds the problem. The whole concept of unannounced and/or hidden changes is considered disrespectful, as if the time a player puts into a game means nothing to the company and can be wasted at a whim. For some reason, many developers feel the need to hide takeaway changes. Much of this is probably to avoid predictable player outrage before the change takes effect. They'd much rather just face one huge blast of pain than have to discuss it for several days or weeks with the players. The problem with this method of making changes is that each instance causes the players to lose some trust in the game and the developers, and that trust is the most important asset any team has. Building trust means building loyalty, and loyal players become loyal subscribers for months and years. It builds patience, and patient players will work with you on just about any change you want to make. It is a karma bank; the more good karma you deposit, the more you can pull out when you need to make really drastic changes. In that sense, building trust by managing player expectations simply means following these rules:
Figures 11.3 [3] and 11.4 [4] demonstrate how community relations managers (CRMs) can create an " in-depth defense" that insulates the developers from direct contact with the players on a daily basis, yet allows for the free flow of information between the two groups when needed or desired. Following these rules will allow you to avoid most of the heartache your colleagues have already experienced .
Figure 11.3. Post-launch communication loops .
Figure 11.4. The live team's communications flow.
|