Please lift the NDA - Page 5

Gori · 11-09-2007, 10:31 AM

Oh, and by the way. My thread was merged and a placeholder was NOT left. Make of that what you will regarding them wanting people to be aware of a thread on an existing topic.

LFG · 11-09-2007, 10:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pinski

I disagree. There is so much noise on the official beta forums right now combined with people being retarded as hell claiming their ability isn't as overpowered as person x says, while the class that person x has an overpowered ability while giving completely wrong information about the ability. TBH, some people who are in beta shouldn't be there. I also find it hilarious about what I've heard about a certain guild who didn't get in as a beta guild.

IMO, they would get far better and more concentrated feedback on adventuring issues in the class sections of this site than by giving the same weight to feedback from level 34 inquisitors in their private forum.

Not lifting the NDA until official release is the same thing as NOT FULLY BETA TESTING THE PRODUCT, because you have provided NO OPPORTUNITY for public feedback by keeping it private like this.

Firza · 11-09-2007, 10:49 AM

If you want constructive feedback from a community you would sit down with the community, and discuss matters.

Personally I feel SOE never intended BETA's to be there for discussion. Just to polish away the larger mistakes they made. (impossible to not make them, nothing personal).

Its the reason why I have not yet joined Beta. I got the invite a week ago. In about 2 weeks, with 1 toon there I could have tested....nada/squat/didledeedoo. (ok, mebe I could have found a bug/typo or two). But with 2 weeks to go those would probably allready been found by longer Beta-ers.

I prefer to then just sit the last week out, and hopefully (express delivery?????/prays) enjoy release as a surprise on my b-day.

Krontak · 11-09-2007, 10:56 AM

It's been a great start to the season although my wizards have been doing horribly! huh? oh..

Not sure why they can't drop the nda but still maintain the privacy of the beta boards so the real issues don't get mixed in with the complaints and overload that message board.

Gori · 11-09-2007, 11:00 AM

Well...I am leaning more towards a cover up at the minute. Since they merged my post without leaving a placeholder I made a new post very politely suggesting they leave at least one NDA placeholder thread with a "moved" lock that would re-direct to the discussion in the expansions section. This was because of the Echgar's and companies comments in another thread about how not leaving a placeholder could be confusing or frustrating. Given their desire to not have new threads spring up, coupled with their desire to not confuse people, I figured they would at least lock my thread and leave it up. For that very reason, I included a link to the ROK NDA discussion in the expansion forums o others could go there and post in the meantime. What did they do to this new post? They deleted it outright. By all appearences they do not want people talking about why the ROK NDA has not been lifted. My interpretation anyway.

Phrogg · 11-09-2007, 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LFG

This has gotta be the first time in the history of video games that a NDA hasn't been lifted until the official release. Does this mean people won't be able to talk about beta when the game is released? Seriously, this is government thinking.

Duh...its the fault of George Bush of course!

Blanka · 11-09-2007, 11:09 AM

First Rule about RoKlub, do not talk about RoKlub..

Jibb · 11-09-2007, 11:22 AM

It might help if more people responded to the >>official thread<<. At the very least, they couldnt claim we didnt care enough to post on the issue. I wouldnt mind seeing the thread climb to over 10 pages.

JonnAndCo
Najena

hcre · 11-09-2007, 11:54 AM

Anyone know if the NDA was lifted for the EQ expansion due out on the same day? Just saying, if it was then there is more reason to believe something is being covered up.

Alinabal · 11-09-2007, 12:00 PM

what law requires you to enforce a contract made between two unrelated third parties?

I say "fuck it", if SoE have a compliant about content on your site, get them to email you, until then... nothing to see here.