Or - we can post once each in a number of threads, rather than ~10 times in a single thread questioning the level of our future involvement.

Seriously folks - let's put a fork in this discussion and wait to see how it works out.

The answer to that question, today, is a resounding no - and I think we've proven that repeatedly. At the same time - going forward - when we have 250K subs, 500K subs, or more - will anyone feel like they're heard?

Going back to my original post in the thread - my answer was that yes, we plan to stay this involved, if not being more involved. But - that involvement will get dilluted when we go from 115K fans to *hopefully* several hundred thousand customers.

Specifically:

1) "i think they do the most of GM work" - wrong, they do none of it.

2) "technical questions" - partially right. SOE will handle "out of game" support, but Sigil will handle all "in game" support.

3) "server based things" - mostly right. SOE hosts the servers, provides the bandwidth, etc. We (Sigil) will continue to own what gets done for the game from a content, design, rules, standpoint - but SOE will run the physcial operations.

Thx!

Agreed and:

A) You'll see us trying to stop that (rampant squashing of opinions & discusson) - starting with gentle reminders (like my post) and escalating in intensity as the situation worsens.

B) People should know that participating in celebrity-whack-a-mole doesn't impress us. In the same way that duration of board membership, or post count, don't impress us.

Frankly - no singular data point impresses us. But thoughtful contribution to intelligent discussion - and - on-going cultivation of a vibrant Vanguard community, most certainly do.

Folks - while I disagree with what was said in Whatever's post, please keep the boards civil. It is possible to disagree without attacking someone - and jumping on a "hey - what a bozo" bandwagon doesn't do anything except make the boards look like an insular group of yes men.

If you want us (Sigilites/Sigillians) involved in discussion on the boards, then let's discuss somethign worthwhile, rather than stoning people who speak out - regardless of their opinion.

Frankly, a part of the reason that it may look like we are less active on the boads is that the signal:noise ratio has gone up significantly as board membership has grown.

Thx!

I followed you through about the first 1/3rd of your post - but I think I missed the right turn to crazy town.

How does us committing to communicating with our players and staying engaged in a variety of ways, morph into predicting that we are going to surreptitiously hide and mismanage a schlock game behind obfuscation? <<side note - I'm not just trying to be a jerk, I'm staying true to form, for me at least, and trying to cut to the chase>>

We've said, repeatedly, that we know that Vanguard won't be the game for everyone - but we also know that our customers are smart and vote with their feet and their $'s. A part of the reason that we don't plan to continue these boards after release is that we don't want to run into a scenario where there's a perception that we (Sigil) are controlling the discussion/direction/voice of the community. To assert that we would think that we could actually positively impact the game by either ignoring our community or squelching its voice, is to assert that we are stupid. And if you think that's the case - then you probably wouldn't want to play a game that we'd build in the first place.

Again - I'm not trying to be a jerk - just trying to understand your point. If I've misunderstood you --- please clarify.

Let the flames, kudos, and disavowing, begin ...

Well - I'm the most "shirt and tie" guy at the company ... but I'm also one of the most active on the boards. My previous comment about how our involvement will manifest itself meant that we are going to be involved in a lot of ways - each of which will have varying levels of visibility to players. Two examples:

1) Brad or Jeff go on raids or group quests with a couple of guilds a week/month - highly impactful for a small set of people.

2) Zack (Ozuri) or I participate in IRC sessions with affiliates - broad, but somewhat impersonal communication.

Neither of the above are predictions, and while you're right that a group with the experience of our team should (and does) have ideas about how we want to run things - ultimately - games are living entities and we're not presumptuous enough to try to shoe-horn the Vanguard community into a specific pre-ordained model.

We will be active, but it'll be in a variety of ways, and that may be perceived differently by the community - as it grows and depending on where you fit within the community.

We certainly intend to be - but I think it'll end up feeling like we're less involved/active in the community at large, despite our best intentions. That's just a natural aspect of progression as the overall scope of the game grows.

I think we've set a reasonably good precedent for our level of communication, involvement with, and respect for the community - and that is something that we absolutely intend to continue. The real question is how that committment manifests itself as the game and the community continue to grow.