I wonder if Fogbugz does support public bug lists.  I'll look into it.

"Entitlement gamer" has been successfully used by SD for years to lable and shame and silence dissenters, much like some people might use the word Commie or Liberal. 

I could list the personal experiences l've had with the fan boy attack dogs here, but I'm on my phone.

But here is one brief example.. Have you noticed that some people will add a qualifier to their post such as "with all due respect" before making a negative statement?

A lot of what gets reported as a "bug" is often a difference of opinion on how the game should work.  That is, sometimes what one person considers a "bug" is simply something working as designed but might be a bad design.

Let me recap Dr. Frank's initial post. I also want to also express some frustration to the responses to his post because you'd think his post was full of a bunch of old bugs when in fact, they are not.  

I'm going to go through each "bug" in the initial post and describe them in engineer-ese.

1. Too many enemies early game. (balance issue in current SK build)
2. Combat rating  10 vs. 11 disagreement (is a wolf with howl tougher than an archer?, not a bug, but an interesting topic)
3. Tooltip text uses the color red. (not a bug. Red is a standard way of conveying you are missing something)
4. Outpost tooltip is misseplled (good catch, thanks! obviously new to SK)
5. If unit leader is out of moves, all subunits are treated as having 0 moves even if they personally have units. (bad design, changing in next build)

That's it.

That is the entire original post in which we were accused of not fixing old bugs and various other charges of being "buggy".  Look at the subsequent comments to the post.

Later in the thread there is good, useful, postings and we do appreciate that.  But we're also human beings and by the time we get to post 6, no one even wants to pay attention to the thread because it's a bunch of histrionics. 

Now, I realize some people reading this are going to take what I"m writing as "defensive".  What I am trying to convey is that communication is a two-way street.  We WANT to work with you guys. We like you guys.  But if we feel like we're being treated unfairly we're not going to participate.  

If we're going to work together to make a great game together, we have to have some mutual respect and empathy.

I'm sorry if what I said came off as entitled, Brad. I didn't mean to.

I'll just go back to being productive and helpful. I guess I just got a little frustrated. My bad.

You guys are doing some really good things with Sorcerer King. I'll go back to being a cheerleader for it. Sorry if I veered off the path there for a second.

I just want to clear one bug up:

That isn't the bug. The bug is that it doesn't show:

Unlocks 'slave pits'...

Which is the only important thing when deciding what tech/skill to aim for.

I would like it to read
[in white]: Unlocks 'slave pits'...
[in red]: Must have the malevolence perk

Or just: Unlocks 'slave pits'...

But for all things with a prerequisite it doesn't show the actual description of the skill. Because the writing in red hides it. So for a while I assumed they weren't in the game yet. I assumed a lack of description meant a lack of effect. That the description was reading from the xml/code and with no code the description was blank, only showing the icon. It was only when I had a longer look I realised that any 'Must have the...' warning replaces the description completely rather than being tagged at the bottom of it. It's secondary to whether such a description is helpful or needed... it isn't. It's obvious from the layout which techs/skills are required. So I still believe that you are wrong in dismissing it. I can't correct your oversights and unfair dismissal of ideas, bugs and feedback when you (as a company, not a person) don't provide feedback on bugs because I'm sure this isn't the only bug you've overlooked, or dismissed as confused player preferences.

Anyway, I think there was only really one really old bug worthy of getting people annoyed. That was the movement bug, which you've fixed. On mention of legacy bugs I had a look through the very first page of the elemental support section and jotted down the bugs and complaints I've noticed. I'm sure there are a lot more, so much of the feedback for the early versions of War of Magic is relevant because of the shared engine and design. Things like pop-ups coming in the wrong order, the mouse interacting with things in the wrong manner, standing on map items without interacting with them, units standing on the same tile in battle... there are quite a few old issues. I don't have time to go through 4 years of bug reports to fish them all out for you.

To XWerewolfX, I don't think you were in the wrong. I don't think you said anything that deserved being singled out and picked on. I was just as annoyed as you, I'm much more vocal and offensive (if anything I expected some more direct personal retribution for my comments, not Frogboy's friendly fire incident). Your post was merely an honest plea for some comment. You do eXplorminate stuff ffs! &?@#!#%&! eXplorminate is one of the few curators (that aren't Stardock) to recommended Sorcerer King! I see you as a loyal, long-standing member of the community (2006 onwards). An avid fan and passionate gamer of many years who has been casually insulted, demeaned and demonised for speaking out about wanting bugs fixed with only a few simple comments asking for comment. It's just unfortunate for you that it was Frogboy that decided to respond. He is quick to anger (he called me arrogant so many times I was tempted to change my name to ArrogantBoy), quick to speak (all those Typographic errors do suggest a rush) and very slow to apologise (He never said sorry for labelling my review abusive, or for the much more relevant 4 year old movement bug discussed here). Also he very often misses what is staring him in the face, (as anyone who saw him surrender to the Sorcerer King can attest) and he himself has openly admitted his other failings (Wikipedia page for War of magic, linking back to the Elemental forums):
"...my own catastrophic poor judgment in not objectively evaluating the core game play components."

To have the guy with self-confessed catastrophic poor judgement evaluating bug reports and replying in an obviously not-objective, off-the-cuff and offensive manner is... well it has predictable results. You have many people on your payroll... I was hoping to get ScottTykoski to respond... I like him. He's polite, he asked for specific feedback and I was happy to give it. I thought he was the bug-guy and he'd be responding to more bugs.

Thanks. On my end, the ideal process flow for me as a beta tester would be:

1. Quickly determine if that "thing" I discovered has been identified previously by someone else
2. If not, log it. I may not know if it is a bug, a design decision, or what have you. I'll leave that up to SD but I have done my part by informing SD.
3. If it has been documented, read status. For instance, SD has it down as a design issue, not a bug. If I feel I disagree, find or start a thread debating the merits of the design decision else continue testing. Or it could be under research, etc.

In short, the process flow above is all I would need to feel satisfied. Here are my thoughts on the success of the current process:

1. Without spending X amount of time searching the forums, I have no idea of someone has already recorded the issue. This is waste in the process (not to mention clouding the forums). I can feel moderately frustrated by this.
2. This is ok - I log issues. I see something, I say something - DHS, doh! Not a frustration issue currently.
3. I have no idea what status is unless it is fixed. If it's not fixed, I have no idea if it's a bug, a design, or if it's lower priority. I can feel severely frustrated by this.

I hope this helps clarify my position and what I feel is the general consensus of your other passionate fans. There's alot of passion in this thread, and it's coming from well-intentioned places.

On bugs:

I think of bugs in different terms (from http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/bug):

Many of the things I post are imperfections, flaws, failings or breakdowns of the UI. Some are simply:

These things bug me. I'm not saying they are lies, factually incorrect or correct. But they are imperfect. Each time you agree that the design isn't clear I say that you are agreeing that it is a bug by the above definitions and synonyms. It may not fit your very clear, firm and inflexible view of the use of the word. But it is not morally wrong to label badly designed features, failing interfaces, unhelpful tooltips or any other feedback on annoying features as bugs. They bug me, they annoy and bother me, they are flaws, inconsistencies, they fail to show the required information or give wrong or unhelpful information to the player (like with combat strength, missing tooltips, incorrect skill and spell descriptions). In almost every way they are indeed bugs. They just aren't numerical faults, like showing ?? instead of 4. Or showing two sets of eyes on characters (something I used to have on my old computer in Elemental games due to some really old driver bugs, which were real, proper bugs by your definition... but things that I dismissed as uninteresting quirks of using a rusty old laptop rather than serious gameplay issues worthy of attention.)

On the issue of the bad review

I rewrote the review twice. I bent over backwards to remove any reference to the comments you had thrown at me. I still think it's bad form and a sign of hostile developers to start labelling your reviewers or customers arrogant in any situation or business. I'd fire the customer support section of a business if I found them insulting people, blocking reviews is almost as bad as charging a fee for bad reviews, dismissing feedback... that's unforgivable. I was careful not to use the word sorry as that implies guilt. That by giving a bad review I was committing a crime and that I only changed it because I was guilty. I still stand by what I said. I just agreed that it wasn't helpful to new customers wanting something a little more succinct and only covering game-mechanics. That it was indeed far too emotional and personal. But no less emotional and angry than reviews involving ASCII art, I've seen many a middle finger on bad games. I think those are useful, clear and important even if the feedback isn't in a very nice format. (pretty but unpleasant, it serves as a warning to customers and to the developers that something is amiss)

On saying sorry

I am sorry for bringing up the pain of Elemental War of Magic. But I'm not sorry for bringing up the fact that you failed before with your handling of Elemental. Incapable of judging the game impartially because you really enjoyed coding it. You dismissed feedback on game-design, mechanics, balance issues and bug reports (I linked to a thread all about combat mechanics and glass-cannons from 4 years ago, to bugs still around today and movement issues you've just fixed). I really hope you open your eyes to feedback and don't ignore it once more. I should, in the interests of being polite have stuck with the more light-hearted 'surrendering to the SK' comment. But I avoided deleting the quote as it shows that it is more than just your anger, impolite and rushed responses that make you less than ideal for communicating with customers and being the face of customer support for this game. I sincerely want *someone* to liaise with customers. But I don't appreciate rushed responses that dismiss bugs, insult bug-reporters and label lots of bugs as arrogant personal preferences that can be ignored or thrown away.

It's no great hardship for anyone if I do not apologise for the views I hold. But is it ok for the CEO of a company not to say sorry when he agrees that a four year old movement issue was annoying enough to fix? (there is an obvious design failing, even if you refuse to call it a bug) Is it ok to dart around the issue of legacy bugs by throwing insults and trashing the quality of bug-reporting?

On arrogance

Anyway I'm arrogant (I'm opinionated, certainly not vain or pretentious but bumptious, overbearing, high-handed... etc.) but does that mean it's ok for you to keep calling me arrogant? Should you be calling anyone names as the CEO of a company?
The bugs thread includes design issues and balance feedback (which was even requested of me in the last thread. I wasn't including balance issues before that, there are lots of things I've not been including but could have if I had unlimited time and resources)

Is it ok to turn around and dismiss the feedback that doesn't (now) fit your definition of bug?
Is it ok for you to respond angrily and defensively to people wanting bugs to be fixed?
Is it ok to pick on people because you don't like how they say things or think they're asking too much?

Why I'm annoyed

I'm annoyed with what you say far more than how you say it. I'm annoyed when you dismiss feedback. I'm annoyed when you wriggle out of addressing old bugs. I'm annoyed when you call me a liar, dishonest, arrogant, confused, sneaky, manipulative or imply those things by suggesting that I should be more honest next time, or that things are being disguised as bugs. I'm annoyed by quibbling over the definition of words to excuse failings. Things that aren't technically bugs... just bad design decisions... what's the difference? Both are human errors that cause the game to be less perfect. Classifying the type of bugs, differentiating between say technical and design bugs, or between GUI, mechanics and balance, or rating from trivial to severe, codes for crashes and performance issues etc. Those are all extremely useful labels... but only if they are used constructively and not harmfully. With a clear system in place for how they should be used.

Can you expect people to post balance feedback in the balance section if you don't actually have a balance section? If not where am I supposed to post things after being asked to provide balance feedback? I don't know... there's no helpful documentation and that bugs me... I've posted about it... which feels about as constructive as writing it in the sand as the tide comes in. Without any clear guidelines for reporting bugs is it ok to belittle bug-reporters for providing sub-par bug reports?

I haven't felt this angry since I saw my review was blocked... that anger is still with me. If anything it's just grown with each additional comment. Volunteering bug reports currently feels like I'm buying a round for the guy that stole my wallet. Chatting at the bar while he berates me for concealing my wallet in such an obvious place. And mentions that he can see my house from here, and oh, isn't my partner pretty. The little comments that feel so insulting because of the context as well as the content, the simple insults and the implied insults.

I need to take a break from Stardock. I'm sure you'll be happy that I do. But I don't think the game will be better if bug-reporters avoid posting bugs for fear of being attacked, insulted or merely ignored in return for giving their free time. I'm sure the loss of one bug-reporter (me) isn't going to make a difference at all. But I don't think you should be proud of driving people away with your comments.

@borg Clearly you're not familiar with customer service.

That is indeed the basic misunderstanding here.  I look at the forums as a way for us to work together on soe thing I assume we want to enjoy together. But I get the feeling that some people see me as their employee Or servant.  I'm not. 

I want to make cool games WITH you guys. Not FOR you guys. I just ask that you treat us the same way you'd have me treat you.

@dr frank,

I read the way I'm spoken to and can't help but shake my head at the double stanndard.  I've had almost nothing but praise for the feedback you've Given. I ask that you please reread what I wrote and just what I wrote without the baggage you've attached to it.  Your feedback had not just been appreciated but taken to heart.

I've been making games for 20 years. I enjoy discussing the making of them. It's my primary motivation. im here so I can interact with you guys. but it pains me when I see me or my team treated like we're servants, expected to not push back If we disagree.

if I've written somethinc unreasonable in this thread, please call me out on it. But at the same time, if someone wants to critique a feature I'm going to discuss that back. Especially if there's going to be a half dozen posts talking about "all the old bugs" when in fact we are only talking about one item that wasn't a bug but rather a way the game worked that annoyed some people.

I even talked to Derek on it today and the movement feature was done that way to prevent a cheese strategy from long ago. It's not applicable le in SK so we're changing it. But co e in, suggesting that here's some huge list of issues from WOM that are present in SK is ridiculous. 

Just because you can't see them or refuse to see them doesn't mean they're not there, nor does it mean they haven't been reported before.  I don't doubt that you see the game on a completely different level than we do, but imo it's bad form to be so utterly dismissive of your paying customers who are emotionally invested in your product. 

We try to help you, but you refuse to listen and call us ridiculous.  Way to go.

Quoting Frogboy,

reply 40

@borg Clearly you're not familiar with customer service.

That is indeed the basic misunderstanding here.  I look at the forums as a way for us to work together on soe thing I assume we want to enjoy together. But I get the feeling that some people see me as their employee Or servant.  I'm not. 

I want to make cool games WITH you guys. Not FOR you guys. I just ask that you treat us the same way you'd have me treat you.

 

I think this is the first time you've ever addressed me by name, albeit indirectly.

I understand customer service, but I deal with internal rather than external customers. Typically it's the operations management folks that want to understand the financial impact of an initiative they are undertaking, and they need it fairly quickly. It requires legwork to gather the necessary information from a variety of sources and put it together into a cohesive analysis. So, just like fixing bugs, it takes time.

I think servant is too strong a word, but while I don't report to the Ops folks, I do work for them. If I told them sorry, it can't be done within 24 hours..that would be a problem.

@werewolf, I dont think you come across as an entitled gamer.  My frustration was seeing a series of posts that accused us of being non responsive that culminated with the assertion that we have a responsibility to have someone comment on these posts. 

Anyway, this thread has gotten way too heated.

So let me sum up and then I won't be responding further:

A feature request or a design change you want isn't a bug If it's not implemented.

A developer not implemenrinf a change you want doesn't mean the developer isn't listening.

We do read every single post and add reports to fogbugs. We don't usually respond to posts.

We ask you treat us the same way you would want to be treated. 

You've worn out your welcome. Goodbye.