Guild Wars 2

Goldrock.9076:

if you were too look up any company for employee reviews you would see the same exact thing.

Not really you wouldnt. Try looking up the most successful companies. Yes they have some bad reviews here and there, but neither are the majority complaining about a very specific issue (whereas the majority of ANet’s negative reviews come from bad management) nor do they have such a low overall score.

Ayrilana.1396:

xbutcherx.3861:

Ayrilana.1396:

Labjax.2465:

PopeUrban.2578:

“Peer review” sites are inherantly biased toward negative reviews because those with nothing bad to say don’t want to burn bridges, risk their career, or alienate future employers.

Wait, what? Don’t you have this backwards? Why would someone who has only good things to say be afraid to say them?

It’s not that they are afraid to. People that are disappointed with anything for whatever reason are more likely to go on and review something to vent than someone whose expectations were met or exceeded.

You know you are the only one defending Anet’s position right now, if 1 person is happy with the game’s direction and 99 more are not; there is something wrong about it, keep defending all you want and argue all you want, at the end the numbers and the reviews says everything.

I’m the only one? Not really. It’s just that the negative people are more vocal at the moment. I dare say that you should provide your source that it’s 99 percent of players. People who are disappointed are more likely to post about it than those that are not.

ROFL, you want me to bring the CEO of NCsoft to show you numbers? read the THREAD, you’re the only one defending this!! This thread has 104 replies, how many are defending (only you) and how many are there stating something is wrong with the game and the company (the other 99%), you don’t need glassdoor to know that.

Goldrock.9076:

and as a gamer that stuff really none of our buisness and i think anet should take it down no need to spread negative morale around true or not.Thats their buisness and their employees and any future employee’s not the players not the customers buisness,

Wrong, it affects the game developing so in other words it is affecting us as consumers, because we are suffering the consequences.

xbutcherx.3861:

Ayrilana.1396:

xbutcherx.3861:

Ayrilana.1396:

Labjax.2465:

PopeUrban.2578:

“Peer review” sites are inherantly biased toward negative reviews because those with nothing bad to say don’t want to burn bridges, risk their career, or alienate future employers.

Wait, what? Don’t you have this backwards? Why would someone who has only good things to say be afraid to say them?

It’s not that they are afraid to. People that are disappointed with anything for whatever reason are more likely to go on and review something to vent than someone whose expectations were met or exceeded.

You know you are the only one defending Anet’s position right now, if 1 person is happy with the game’s direction and 99 more are not; there is something wrong about it, keep defending all you want and argue all you want, at the end the numbers and the reviews says everything.

I’m the only one? Not really. It’s just that the negative people are more vocal at the moment. I dare say that you should provide your source that it’s 99 percent of players. People who are disappointed are more likely to post about it than those that are not.

ROFL, you want me to bring the CEO of NCsoft to show you numbers? read the THREAD, you’re the only one defending this!! This thread has 104 replies, how many are defending (only you) and how many are there stating something is wrong with the game and the company (the other 99%), you don’t need glassdoor to know that.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/hot/Who-else-is-enjoying-HoT/first#post5820903

Ayrilana is not the only one that has nice things to say about HoT. Does the game have issues that need to be fixed? Sure. But there are a lot of people playing the game right now and having a blast. And if you look at the NEWER reviews on glassdoor, the vast MAJORITY of them have good things to say about the company.

IntheCoconut.3497:

xbutcherx.3861:

Ayrilana.1396:

xbutcherx.3861:

Ayrilana.1396:

Labjax.2465:

PopeUrban.2578:

“Peer review” sites are inherantly biased toward negative reviews because those with nothing bad to say don’t want to burn bridges, risk their career, or alienate future employers.

Wait, what? Don’t you have this backwards? Why would someone who has only good things to say be afraid to say them?

It’s not that they are afraid to. People that are disappointed with anything for whatever reason are more likely to go on and review something to vent than someone whose expectations were met or exceeded.

You know you are the only one defending Anet’s position right now, if 1 person is happy with the game’s direction and 99 more are not; there is something wrong about it, keep defending all you want and argue all you want, at the end the numbers and the reviews says everything.

I’m the only one? Not really. It’s just that the negative people are more vocal at the moment. I dare say that you should provide your source that it’s 99 percent of players. People who are disappointed are more likely to post about it than those that are not.

ROFL, you want me to bring the CEO of NCsoft to show you numbers? read the THREAD, you’re the only one defending this!! This thread has 104 replies, how many are defending (only you) and how many are there stating something is wrong with the game and the company (the other 99%), you don’t need glassdoor to know that.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/hot/Who-else-is-enjoying-HoT/first#post5820903

Ayrilana is not the only one that has nice things to say about HoT. Does the game have issues that need to be fixed? Sure. But there are a lot of people playing the game right now and having a blast. And if you look at the NEWER reviews on glassdoor, the vast MAJORITY of them have good things to say about the company.

I didn’t say people are not enjoining the game, this thread is base on the company internal problems and how it is affecting the game and the direction is taking, Don’t get me wrong I play every night and I enjoy a lot stuff from the game.

There are other stuff that I used to enjoy and was nerfed to the ground, I didn’t care about the dungeon reward that much but since the nerf is realyl hard to get a group, Fractals…. I played fractals a lot and now I see fractals as a complete joke.

I hate HoT with a passion, everything looks like a complete jumping puzzle or gliding puzzle, mini games and adventures.

Ascended? I have 3 characters with full ascended sets, I still have ascended boxes in the bank from the OLD GOOD fractals. Now I just craft insignia and sell them at the TP, price are skyrocking forcing new players to buy gems for gold.

I have crafted 5 Legendary and working on my 6th and NO, I’m not doing the legendary journey.

WvW and Spvp are a joke, new borderlands are horrible, worst class balanced in since beta. I used to main a warrior and now playing herald….! I can go on and on but really people that read and plays the game knows about all this.

xbutcherx.3861:

Ayrilana.1396:

xbutcherx.3861:

Ayrilana.1396:

Labjax.2465:

PopeUrban.2578:

“Peer review” sites are inherantly biased toward negative reviews because those with nothing bad to say don’t want to burn bridges, risk their career, or alienate future employers.

Wait, what? Don’t you have this backwards? Why would someone who has only good things to say be afraid to say them?

It’s not that they are afraid to. People that are disappointed with anything for whatever reason are more likely to go on and review something to vent than someone whose expectations were met or exceeded.

You know you are the only one defending Anet’s position right now, if 1 person is happy with the game’s direction and 99 more are not; there is something wrong about it, keep defending all you want and argue all you want, at the end the numbers and the reviews says everything.

I’m the only one? Not really. It’s just that the negative people are more vocal at the moment. I dare say that you should provide your source that it’s 99 percent of players. People who are disappointed are more likely to post about it than those that are not.

ROFL, you want me to bring the CEO of NCsoft to show you numbers? read the THREAD, you’re the only one defending this!! This thread has 104 replies, how many are defending (only you) and how many are there stating something is wrong with the game and the company (the other 99%), you don’t need glassdoor to know that.

This thread, and others, do not represent what players are feeling whether that be positive or negative.

While I believe that anet is lacking in vision from the top down, I feel for management in some way. Some of the reviews spoke of a noisy work area where it was hard to concentrate. If the employees are acting like a bunch of kids all the time I can see why management has to ride them. From everything I have seen of the anet staff, they lack any kind of discipline and professionalism. They go to work and industry events dressed like they are still college students rolling out of bed and late for class. If they want to act like kids they will get treated that way. Why pay industry standard salary for people who dont work hard enough to deserve it.

Ayrilana.1396:

xbutcherx.3861:

Ayrilana.1396:

xbutcherx.3861:

Ayrilana.1396:

Labjax.2465:

PopeUrban.2578:

“Peer review” sites are inherantly biased toward negative reviews because those with nothing bad to say don’t want to burn bridges, risk their career, or alienate future employers.

Wait, what? Don’t you have this backwards? Why would someone who has only good things to say be afraid to say them?

It’s not that they are afraid to. People that are disappointed with anything for whatever reason are more likely to go on and review something to vent than someone whose expectations were met or exceeded.

You know you are the only one defending Anet’s position right now, if 1 person is happy with the game’s direction and 99 more are not; there is something wrong about it, keep defending all you want and argue all you want, at the end the numbers and the reviews says everything.

I’m the only one? Not really. It’s just that the negative people are more vocal at the moment. I dare say that you should provide your source that it’s 99 percent of players. People who are disappointed are more likely to post about it than those that are not.

ROFL, you want me to bring the CEO of NCsoft to show you numbers? read the THREAD, you’re the only one defending this!! This thread has 104 replies, how many are defending (only you) and how many are there stating something is wrong with the game and the company (the other 99%), you don’t need glassdoor to know that.

This thread, and others, do not represent what players are feeling whether that be positive or negative.

But your does? Or you words are no representing your feelings towards the game? So why replying in the first place?

xbutcherx.3861:

Ayrilana.1396:

xbutcherx.3861:

Ayrilana.1396:

xbutcherx.3861:

Ayrilana.1396:

Labjax.2465:

PopeUrban.2578:

“Peer review” sites are inherantly biased toward negative reviews because those with nothing bad to say don’t want to burn bridges, risk their career, or alienate future employers.

Wait, what? Don’t you have this backwards? Why would someone who has only good things to say be afraid to say them?

It’s not that they are afraid to. People that are disappointed with anything for whatever reason are more likely to go on and review something to vent than someone whose expectations were met or exceeded.

You know you are the only one defending Anet’s position right now, if 1 person is happy with the game’s direction and 99 more are not; there is something wrong about it, keep defending all you want and argue all you want, at the end the numbers and the reviews says everything.

I’m the only one? Not really. It’s just that the negative people are more vocal at the moment. I dare say that you should provide your source that it’s 99 percent of players. People who are disappointed are more likely to post about it than those that are not.

ROFL, you want me to bring the CEO of NCsoft to show you numbers? read the THREAD, you’re the only one defending this!! This thread has 104 replies, how many are defending (only you) and how many are there stating something is wrong with the game and the company (the other 99%), you don’t need glassdoor to know that.

This thread, and others, do not represent what players are feeling whether that be positive or negative.

But your does? Or you words are no representing your feelings towards the game? So why replying in the first place?

I never said that mine did.

re: developer lack of professionalism – You obviously have no experience working in a development setting. As far back as the 80’s, people now known as “developers” were given more leeway in how they dress and conduct their work. And they have been given more and more leeway as time goes on.
They don’t need to dress like bank tellers, as they’re not customer-facing.(Though when they do have to interact with customers, they’re generally held to a higher standard.) And the work that they do is intensely mentally demanding, and requires that they take breaks to do something mindless and “recharge”. (This is when you may see them “acting like a bunch of kids”.) Do some developers take shameless advantage of the leeway that they’re given? Absolutely. But some of the hardest working people I’ve ever seen go to work “dressed like they are still college students rolling out of bed and late for class”.
Good management is the key to keeping your developers productive.(Actually, that’s true for any employees.) I didn’t need to read any of the Glass Door reviews to know that Anet’s upper management has been remiss in many of their duties.(Though I did read some of them, and they just reinforce what I already knew from what has been handled well or poorly in GW2.)
<edit: Why does the forum software ignore all my indents and leave me with a WallOtext?>

Ayrilana.1396:

xbutcherx.3861:

Ayrilana.1396:

xbutcherx.3861:

Ayrilana.1396:

xbutcherx.3861:

Ayrilana.1396:

Labjax.2465:

PopeUrban.2578:

“Peer review” sites are inherantly biased toward negative reviews because those with nothing bad to say don’t want to burn bridges, risk their career, or alienate future employers.

Wait, what? Don’t you have this backwards? Why would someone who has only good things to say be afraid to say them?

It’s not that they are afraid to. People that are disappointed with anything for whatever reason are more likely to go on and review something to vent than someone whose expectations were met or exceeded.

You know you are the only one defending Anet’s position right now, if 1 person is happy with the game’s direction and 99 more are not; there is something wrong about it, keep defending all you want and argue all you want, at the end the numbers and the reviews says everything.

I’m the only one? Not really. It’s just that the negative people are more vocal at the moment. I dare say that you should provide your source that it’s 99 percent of players. People who are disappointed are more likely to post about it than those that are not.

ROFL, you want me to bring the CEO of NCsoft to show you numbers? read the THREAD, you’re the only one defending this!! This thread has 104 replies, how many are defending (only you) and how many are there stating something is wrong with the game and the company (the other 99%), you don’t need glassdoor to know that.

This thread, and others, do not represent what players are feeling whether that be positive or negative.

But your does? Or you words are no representing your feelings towards the game? So why replying in the first place?

I never said that mine did.

Well you hell sure sound like you did.

xbutcherx.3861:

Ayrilana.1396:

xbutcherx.3861:

Ayrilana.1396:

xbutcherx.3861:

Ayrilana.1396:

xbutcherx.3861:

Ayrilana.1396:

Labjax.2465:

PopeUrban.2578:

“Peer review” sites are inherantly biased toward negative reviews because those with nothing bad to say don’t want to burn bridges, risk their career, or alienate future employers.

Wait, what? Don’t you have this backwards? Why would someone who has only good things to say be afraid to say them?

It’s not that they are afraid to. People that are disappointed with anything for whatever reason are more likely to go on and review something to vent than someone whose expectations were met or exceeded.

You know you are the only one defending Anet’s position right now, if 1 person is happy with the game’s direction and 99 more are not; there is something wrong about it, keep defending all you want and argue all you want, at the end the numbers and the reviews says everything.

I’m the only one? Not really. It’s just that the negative people are more vocal at the moment. I dare say that you should provide your source that it’s 99 percent of players. People who are disappointed are more likely to post about it than those that are not.

ROFL, you want me to bring the CEO of NCsoft to show you numbers? read the THREAD, you’re the only one defending this!! This thread has 104 replies, how many are defending (only you) and how many are there stating something is wrong with the game and the company (the other 99%), you don’t need glassdoor to know that.

This thread, and others, do not represent what players are feeling whether that be positive or negative.

But your does? Or you words are no representing your feelings towards the game? So why replying in the first place?

I never said that mine did.

Well you hell sure sound like you did.

I apologize if any of my posts came off that way. Only one post was intentionally made that way, I just remembered, but it was to make a point. There’s no way that we as players can base whether a game if performing poorly or well on what we see online.

The following below isn’t directed at you but I wanted to include as I brought it up earlier. People are more likely to review something or comment about it if their needs are not met than otherwise. This is something that I was taught in my marketing courses years ago and there have been studies done. Below are a few articles that I tried to find from just sources that people would find credible.

http://business.time.com/2012/08/28/why-you-shouldnt-trust-positive-online-reviews-or-negative-ones-for-that-matter/
http://customerthink.com/bad_is_stronger_than_good_lessons_for_customer_loyalty_experience_by_howard_lax/
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/24/your-money/why-people-remember-negative-events-more-than-positive-ones.html?referer=&_r=0&referer=

xbutcherx.3861:

Well I was right and wrong at the same time, I will admit it.
This is a quote from GW2GURU
The new Quarterly earnings report for NCSoft has been released. You can go here to find it if you’re interested:

http://www.ncsoft.ne...r/earnings.aspx

In it, the tidings for GW2 could be described as “bleak”. Pre-royalty sales for the 3rd quarter were around $23 million, only slightly higher than that of Aion. Furthermore, the trend of declining sales of GW2 continues, and does so at a faster rate than the rates of change of NCSoft’s other big sellers (Aion, Linear 1, Lineage 2 and Blade and Soul all have relatively consistent sales).

More than that, the quarterly sales by Arenanet are now lower than that of any other division of NCSoft except NCSoft Taiwan, for the first time since GW2 was released.

Now, 3rd quarter sales figures are often on the weaker side, and GW2 is still making a profit, so there’s that. However, the sales figures support that, on average, Arenanet was bringing in slightly under $3.1 million per month in the last 3 months, BEFORE taxes and expenses, with a trend of decline.

In light of this, it would seem that the microtransaction model of GW2 is not proving to be an overwhelming success in the long term (though of course, this quarter could be an anomaly). Things will likely pick up in the 4th quarter, but how much it does will say quite a bit about the viability of Arenanet’s current practices.

Now you can understand why Anet is moving in this direction and why dungeon were abandoned?

To me, this is the most informative and worrying post in the entire thread.

It’s not enough to ask “Is ANet making money?” The real question is “Is ANet making enough money?”

City of Heroes was still making money when NCSoft shut it down. It just wasn’t making enough. And sure, GW2 is making more than CoH did at the end, but ANet is a bigger company with more expenses, too. Unless they start slashing expenses, their “line of failure” will be higher. How soon will they hit that line?

Palador.2170:

xbutcherx.3861:

Well I was right and wrong at the same time, I will admit it.
This is a quote from GW2GURU
The new Quarterly earnings report for NCSoft has been released. You can go here to find it if you’re interested:

http://www.ncsoft.ne...r/earnings.aspx

In it, the tidings for GW2 could be described as “bleak”. Pre-royalty sales for the 3rd quarter were around $23 million, only slightly higher than that of Aion. Furthermore, the trend of declining sales of GW2 continues, and does so at a faster rate than the rates of change of NCSoft’s other big sellers (Aion, Linear 1, Lineage 2 and Blade and Soul all have relatively consistent sales).

More than that, the quarterly sales by Arenanet are now lower than that of any other division of NCSoft except NCSoft Taiwan, for the first time since GW2 was released.

Now, 3rd quarter sales figures are often on the weaker side, and GW2 is still making a profit, so there’s that. However, the sales figures support that, on average, Arenanet was bringing in slightly under $3.1 million per month in the last 3 months, BEFORE taxes and expenses, with a trend of decline.

In light of this, it would seem that the microtransaction model of GW2 is not proving to be an overwhelming success in the long term (though of course, this quarter could be an anomaly). Things will likely pick up in the 4th quarter, but how much it does will say quite a bit about the viability of Arenanet’s current practices.

Now you can understand why Anet is moving in this direction and why dungeon were abandoned?

To me, this is the most informative and worrying post in the entire thread.

It’s not enough to ask “Is ANet making money?” The real question is “Is ANet making enough money?”

City of Heroes was still making money when NCSoft shut it down. It just wasn’t making enough. And sure, GW2 is making more than CoH did at the end, but ANet is a bigger company with more expenses, too. Unless they start slashing expenses, their “line of failure” will be higher. How soon will they hit that line?

I wouldn’t worry about it. For one thing, the person making these assumptions leaves out royalties, which includes China’s profit, they’re not reported with Guild Wars 2’s earnings, since Guild Wars 2 in China had to be released by a different company.

In fact, Guild Wars 2, as far as NcSoft is concerned, as met expectations and that’s really all that matters. This kind of theorzing shows a lack of understanding of how businesses work.

Businesses have a business plan. Business plans call for certain profits in certain quarters. If a company isn’t doing well, you’d start seeing layoffs. Anet hasn’t laid people off (and we’d know if they had).

When SWTOR wasn’t performing up to spec, they laid off staff. When TSW wasn’t performing they laid off staff. Anet is still hiring. That doesn’t happen with games that aren’t doing well.

When you factor in China to the Guild Wars 2 bottom line, the game is healthy.

Here’s an article about it from a more professional source:

http://massivelyop.com/2015/11/04/ncsoft-q3-2015-financial-report-guild-wars-2-wildstar-all-game-sales-down/

According to this every single NcSoft title is down quarter to quarter, not just Guild Wars 2. In fact, Guild Wars 2, according to this article, was only marginally down,. and it doesn’t include sales of the expansion.

Here’s another quote from the article:

“During the conference call, NCsoft said it has been focused on cost-efficiency and expects fourth quarter revenues to improve, referencing Guild Wars 2 specifically.”

What people are really saying is that a game that hasn’t had an expansion in over 3 years makes less than it did a year earlier. That’s the rule, not the exception. That’s how the entertainment industry works. Games make less money over time, then they release an expansion.

How this expansion does we’ll know in six months time, not sooner.

Thanks for posting that Vayne as you beat me to it.

Also note on the earnings report that they specifically state that GW2 sales are down because of in game item promotion scale down. And as mentioned, sales tend to decrease over time as customers tend to only buy the game, or expansion, once.

Ayrilana.1396:

No it didn’t matter. I was talking specifically about negative reviews. If was not talking about those where people had their needs met or exceeded. Please don’t add things to my argument that were not even there. Thanks.

Saying it’s well documents does not mean that I don’t have an argument. I can provide several links and such but people will just be “oh well that’s not credible” and so on. You’re taught in marketing classes about this as well.

Yeah, ok…

It’s not that they are afraid to. People that are disappointed with anything for whatever reason are more likely to go on and review something to vent than someone whose expectations were met or exceeded.

You referenced expectations being met or exceeded as a direct comparison to that of disappointment. I have added nothing.

Twice now you’ve indicated you have sources to back up your claim, but rather than simply post them in the first place (which would save you a lot of trouble in defending yourself) you dodge doing so by insisting that people would say “oh well that’s not credible.” Which means your “credible” sources are either incredibly shaky and non-academic or you don’t actually have any to reference. I see no other reason why you’d go to so much trouble to make a show of having your point backed up, but resist the golden opportunity to end the argument with iron-clad source material.

Furthermore, I’m not sure what marketing classes have to do with employee reviews. That sounds like something that would back up an argument for consumer reviews, not employees.

Labjax.2465:

Ayrilana.1396:

No it didn’t matter. I was talking specifically about negative reviews. If was not talking about those where people had their needs met or exceeded. Please don’t add things to my argument that were not even there. Thanks.

Saying it’s well documents does not mean that I don’t have an argument. I can provide several links and such but people will just be “oh well that’s not credible” and so on. You’re taught in marketing classes about this as well.

Yeah, ok…

It’s not that they are afraid to. People that are disappointed with anything for whatever reason are more likely to go on and review something to vent than someone whose expectations were met or exceeded.

You referenced expectations being met or exceeded as a direct comparison to that of disappointment. I have added nothing.

Twice now you’ve indicated you have sources to back up your claim, but rather than simply post them in the first place (which would save you a lot of trouble in defending yourself) you dodge doing so by insisting that people would say “oh well that’s not credible.” Which means your “credible” sources are either incredibly shaky and non-academic or you don’t actually have any to reference. I see no other reason why you’d go to so much trouble to make a show of having your point backed up, but resist the golden opportunity to end the argument with iron-clad source material.

Furthermore, I’m not sure what marketing classes have to do with employee reviews. That sounds like something that would back up an argument for consumer reviews, not employees.

Fine, since you seem to still have issues. Read it as needs not met vs otherwise. I don’t see the need to argue over something that has absolutely nothing to do with what I was talking about.

What sources? I have posted sources in a recent post if you would scroll up. The vonvept of people most likely to review or comment about a negative experience is not solely about employee reviews. You need to understand that there are concepts that can be applied to a vast range of subjects.

SqualZell.7813:

…A-net is THE company that has THE LEAST amount of communication in my library of games.

That’s because you haven’t played Neverwinter. Anet are positively chatty in comparison and when they do communicate they are mostly honest. Cryptic, the Neverwinter devs, would say that they were listening to the feedback then make changes that made it worse. Complaints about low XP in new areas resulted in a reduction of XP in old areas. At times it felt like some sort of social experiment.

But I’m not bitter. XD

hmm this forum gets fun every single day

DoctorDing.5890:

SqualZell.7813:

…A-net is THE company that has THE LEAST amount of communication in my library of games.

That’s because you haven’t played Neverwinter. Anet are positively chatty in comparison and when they do communicate they are mostly honest. Cryptic, the Neverwinter devs, would say that they were listening to the feedback then make changes that made it worse. Complaints about low XP in new areas resulted in a reduction of XP in old areas. At times it felt like some sort of social experiment.

But I’m not bitter. XD

WoW has the same issues of communication that people here are complaining that GW2 has too.

Here’s one such post:

http://us.battle.net/wow/en/forum/topic/18300411650

And another:

http://us.battle.net/wow/en/forum/topic/17605342210

Ayrilana.1396:

DoctorDing.5890:

SqualZell.7813:

…A-net is THE company that has THE LEAST amount of communication in my library of games.

That’s because you haven’t played Neverwinter. Anet are positively chatty in comparison and when they do communicate they are mostly honest. Cryptic, the Neverwinter devs, would say that they were listening to the feedback then make changes that made it worse. Complaints about low XP in new areas resulted in a reduction of XP in old areas. At times it felt like some sort of social experiment.

But I’m not bitter. XD

WoW has the same issues of communication that people here are complaining that GW2 has too.

Here’s one such post:

http://us.battle.net/wow/en/forum/topic/18300411650

And another:

http://us.battle.net/wow/en/forum/topic/17605342210

2 threads? please now search how many does Anet have.

Ayrilana.1396:

Fine, since you seem to still have issues. Read it as needs not met vs otherwise. I don’t see the need to argue over something that has absolutely nothing to do with what I was talking about.

What sources? I have posted sources in a recent post if you would scroll up. The vonvept of people most likely to review or comment about a negative experience is not solely about employee reviews. You need to understand that there are concepts that can be applied to a vast range of subjects.

It does have to do with what you’re talking about though. It seems the only reason you see it as irrelevant is because you believe so firmly that negatives are remembered far more than anything else.

Ok, I see you posted some in response to somebody else. Let’s see, source one:

The researchers found that there was “relatively more positive manipulation than negative manipulation, even though the order of magnitude of the two is similar.” The big takeaway is that the system is being manipulated with fake positive and fake negative reviews—and that’s all negative for consumers who are using them to try and make smart choices.

Ok, so this is just about fake reviews and even says that positive manipulation happens more than negative manipulation.

Second source: Talks entirely about customers. Yes, it references a bias to remember negative more than positive, but it doesn’t talk about employees and the resistance they would face compared to a customer. For instance (as I have stated) an employee might be reluctant to say something negative, for fear of it coming back to them. A customer generally has no such reason to fear repercussions.

Third source:

Take the work of Teresa M. Amabile, a professor of business administration and director of research at the Harvard Business School. She asked 238 professionals working on 26 different creative projects from different companies and industries to fill out confidential daily diaries over a number of months. The participants were asked to answer questions based on a numeric scale and briefly describe one thing that stood out that day.

“We found that of all the events that could make for a great day at work, the most important was making progress on meaningful work — even a small step forward,” said Professor Amabile, a co-author of “The Progress Principle: Using Small Wins to Ignite Joy, Engagement and Creativity at Work” (Harvard Business Review Press, 2011). “A setback, on the other hand, meant the employee felt blocked in some way from making such progress. Setbacks stood out on the worst days at work.”

After analyzing some 12,000 diary entries, Professor Amabile said she found that the negative effect of a setback at work on happiness was more than twice as strong as the positive effect of an event that signaled progress. And the power of a setback to increase frustration is over three times as strong as the power of progress to decrease frustration.

As Professor Baumeister noted in his study, “Many good events can overcome the psychological effects of a bad one.” In fact, the authors quote a ratio of five goods for every one bad.

This looks to be the closest to what we’re talking about, in relevance. Unfortunately, it still doesn’t mean much. It says nothing about how likely employees are to report bad events (beyond a confidential journal), if they perceive there may be consequences.

It indicates that conceptually, there is some imbalance, but that if enough positive happens to a particular person, it can outweigh the bad. So I’ll give you that you’re right about the general concept, but there is no reason to believe that you are right about how it applies to the current situation.

You need to understand that you can’t just apply concepts to a wide range of subjects wily nilly, without taking into account the quirks of that particular environment.

xbutcherx.3861:

Ayrilana.1396:

DoctorDing.5890:

SqualZell.7813:

…A-net is THE company that has THE LEAST amount of communication in my library of games.

That’s because you haven’t played Neverwinter. Anet are positively chatty in comparison and when they do communicate they are mostly honest. Cryptic, the Neverwinter devs, would say that they were listening to the feedback then make changes that made it worse. Complaints about low XP in new areas resulted in a reduction of XP in old areas. At times it felt like some sort of social experiment.

But I’m not bitter. XD

WoW has the same issues of communication that people here are complaining that GW2 has too.

Here’s one such post:

http://us.battle.net/wow/en/forum/topic/18300411650

And another:

http://us.battle.net/wow/en/forum/topic/17605342210

2 threads? please now search how many does Anet have.

I listed two as example. I am not going to go through and post each and every one.

Labjax.2465:

Ayrilana.1396:

Fine, since you seem to still have issues. Read it as needs not met vs otherwise. I don’t see the need to argue over something that has absolutely nothing to do with what I was talking about.

What sources? I have posted sources in a recent post if you would scroll up. The vonvept of people most likely to review or comment about a negative experience is not solely about employee reviews. You need to understand that there are concepts that can be applied to a vast range of subjects.

It does have to do with what you’re talking about though. It seems the only reason you see it as irrelevant is because you believe so firmly that negatives are remembered far more than anything else.

Ok, I see you posted some in response to somebody else. Let’s see, source one:

The researchers found that there was “relatively more positive manipulation than negative manipulation, even though the order of magnitude of the two is similar.” The big takeaway is that the system is being manipulated with fake positive and fake negative reviews—and that’s all negative for consumers who are using them to try and make smart choices.

Ok, so this is just about fake reviews and even says that positive manipulation happens more than negative manipulation.

Second source: Talks entirely about customers. Yes, it references a bias to remember negative more than positive, but it doesn’t talk about employees and the resistance they would face compared to a customer. For instance (as I have stated) an employee might be reluctant to say something negative, for fear of it coming back to them. A customer generally has no such reason to fear repercussions.

Third source:

Take the work of Teresa M. Amabile, a professor of business administration and director of research at the Harvard Business School. She asked 238 professionals working on 26 different creative projects from different companies and industries to fill out confidential daily diaries over a number of months. The participants were asked to answer questions based on a numeric scale and briefly describe one thing that stood out that day.

“We found that of all the events that could make for a great day at work, the most important was making progress on meaningful work — even a small step forward,” said Professor Amabile, a co-author of “The Progress Principle: Using Small Wins to Ignite Joy, Engagement and Creativity at Work” (Harvard Business Review Press, 2011). “A setback, on the other hand, meant the employee felt blocked in some way from making such progress. Setbacks stood out on the worst days at work.”

After analyzing some 12,000 diary entries, Professor Amabile said she found that the negative effect of a setback at work on happiness was more than twice as strong as the positive effect of an event that signaled progress. And the power of a setback to increase frustration is over three times as strong as the power of progress to decrease frustration.

As Professor Baumeister noted in his study, “Many good events can overcome the psychological effects of a bad one.” In fact, the authors quote a ratio of five goods for every one bad.

This looks to be the closest to what we’re talking about, in relevance. Unfortunately, it still doesn’t mean much. It says nothing about how likely employees are to report bad events (beyond a confidential journal), if they perceive there may be consequences.

It indicates that conceptually, there is some imbalance, but that if enough positive happens to a particular person, it can outweigh the bad. So I’ll give you that you’re right about the general concept, but there is no reason to believe that you are right about how it applies to the current situation.

You need to understand that you can’t just apply concepts to a wide range of subjects wily nilly, without taking into account the quirks of that particular environment.

Focus on the concepts and not the examples please. You’re not going to find a source that specifically addresses reviews on company review websites.

Ayrilana.1396:

Labjax.2465:

Ayrilana.1396:

Fine, since you seem to still have issues. Read it as needs not met vs otherwise. I don’t see the need to argue over something that has absolutely nothing to do with what I was talking about.

What sources? I have posted sources in a recent post if you would scroll up. The vonvept of people most likely to review or comment about a negative experience is not solely about employee reviews. You need to understand that there are concepts that can be applied to a vast range of subjects.

It does have to do with what you’re talking about though. It seems the only reason you see it as irrelevant is because you believe so firmly that negatives are remembered far more than anything else.

Ok, I see you posted some in response to somebody else. Let’s see, source one:

The researchers found that there was “relatively more positive manipulation than negative manipulation, even though the order of magnitude of the two is similar.” The big takeaway is that the system is being manipulated with fake positive and fake negative reviews—and that’s all negative for consumers who are using them to try and make smart choices.

Ok, so this is just about fake reviews and even says that positive manipulation happens more than negative manipulation.

Second source: Talks entirely about customers. Yes, it references a bias to remember negative more than positive, but it doesn’t talk about employees and the resistance they would face compared to a customer. For instance (as I have stated) an employee might be reluctant to say something negative, for fear of it coming back to them. A customer generally has no such reason to fear repercussions.

Third source:

Take the work of Teresa M. Amabile, a professor of business administration and director of research at the Harvard Business School. She asked 238 professionals working on 26 different creative projects from different companies and industries to fill out confidential daily diaries over a number of months. The participants were asked to answer questions based on a numeric scale and briefly describe one thing that stood out that day.

“We found that of all the events that could make for a great day at work, the most important was making progress on meaningful work — even a small step forward,” said Professor Amabile, a co-author of “The Progress Principle: Using Small Wins to Ignite Joy, Engagement and Creativity at Work” (Harvard Business Review Press, 2011). “A setback, on the other hand, meant the employee felt blocked in some way from making such progress. Setbacks stood out on the worst days at work.”

After analyzing some 12,000 diary entries, Professor Amabile said she found that the negative effect of a setback at work on happiness was more than twice as strong as the positive effect of an event that signaled progress. And the power of a setback to increase frustration is over three times as strong as the power of progress to decrease frustration.

As Professor Baumeister noted in his study, “Many good events can overcome the psychological effects of a bad one.” In fact, the authors quote a ratio of five goods for every one bad.

This looks to be the closest to what we’re talking about, in relevance. Unfortunately, it still doesn’t mean much. It says nothing about how likely employees are to report bad events (beyond a confidential journal), if they perceive there may be consequences.

It indicates that conceptually, there is some imbalance, but that if enough positive happens to a particular person, it can outweigh the bad. So I’ll give you that you’re right about the general concept, but there is no reason to believe that you are right about how it applies to the current situation.

You need to understand that you can’t just apply concepts to a wide range of subjects wily nilly, without taking into account the quirks of that particular environment.

Focus on the concepts and not the examples please. You’re not going to find a source that specifically addresses reviews on company review websites.

Why bother anymore with this? she/he is obviously a fan boy and thinks everything is perfect and doesn’t need changes.
HoT forever, peace

xbutcherx.3861:

Ayrilana.1396:

Labjax.2465:

Ayrilana.1396:

Fine, since you seem to still have issues. Read it as needs not met vs otherwise. I don’t see the need to argue over something that has absolutely nothing to do with what I was talking about.

What sources? I have posted sources in a recent post if you would scroll up. The vonvept of people most likely to review or comment about a negative experience is not solely about employee reviews. You need to understand that there are concepts that can be applied to a vast range of subjects.

It does have to do with what you’re talking about though. It seems the only reason you see it as irrelevant is because you believe so firmly that negatives are remembered far more than anything else.

Ok, I see you posted some in response to somebody else. Let’s see, source one:

The researchers found that there was “relatively more positive manipulation than negative manipulation, even though the order of magnitude of the two is similar.” The big takeaway is that the system is being manipulated with fake positive and fake negative reviews—and that’s all negative for consumers who are using them to try and make smart choices.

Ok, so this is just about fake reviews and even says that positive manipulation happens more than negative manipulation.

Second source: Talks entirely about customers. Yes, it references a bias to remember negative more than positive, but it doesn’t talk about employees and the resistance they would face compared to a customer. For instance (as I have stated) an employee might be reluctant to say something negative, for fear of it coming back to them. A customer generally has no such reason to fear repercussions.

Third source:

Take the work of Teresa M. Amabile, a professor of business administration and director of research at the Harvard Business School. She asked 238 professionals working on 26 different creative projects from different companies and industries to fill out confidential daily diaries over a number of months. The participants were asked to answer questions based on a numeric scale and briefly describe one thing that stood out that day.

“We found that of all the events that could make for a great day at work, the most important was making progress on meaningful work — even a small step forward,” said Professor Amabile, a co-author of “The Progress Principle: Using Small Wins to Ignite Joy, Engagement and Creativity at Work” (Harvard Business Review Press, 2011). “A setback, on the other hand, meant the employee felt blocked in some way from making such progress. Setbacks stood out on the worst days at work.”

After analyzing some 12,000 diary entries, Professor Amabile said she found that the negative effect of a setback at work on happiness was more than twice as strong as the positive effect of an event that signaled progress. And the power of a setback to increase frustration is over three times as strong as the power of progress to decrease frustration.

As Professor Baumeister noted in his study, “Many good events can overcome the psychological effects of a bad one.” In fact, the authors quote a ratio of five goods for every one bad.

This looks to be the closest to what we’re talking about, in relevance. Unfortunately, it still doesn’t mean much. It says nothing about how likely employees are to report bad events (beyond a confidential journal), if they perceive there may be consequences.

It indicates that conceptually, there is some imbalance, but that if enough positive happens to a particular person, it can outweigh the bad. So I’ll give you that you’re right about the general concept, but there is no reason to believe that you are right about how it applies to the current situation.

You need to understand that you can’t just apply concepts to a wide range of subjects wily nilly, without taking into account the quirks of that particular environment.

Focus on the concepts and not the examples please. You’re not going to find a source that specifically addresses reviews on company review websites.

Why bother anymore with this? she/he is obviously a fan boy and thinks everything is perfect and doesn’t need changes.
HoT forever, peace

And we’re back to insults. If you don’t have anything nice to say, don’t say anything. Thanks. See ad hominem.

Ayrilana.1396:

xbutcherx.3861:

Ayrilana.1396:

Labjax.2465:

Ayrilana.1396:

Fine, since you seem to still have issues. Read it as needs not met vs otherwise. I don’t see the need to argue over something that has absolutely nothing to do with what I was talking about.

What sources? I have posted sources in a recent post if you would scroll up. The vonvept of people most likely to review or comment about a negative experience is not solely about employee reviews. You need to understand that there are concepts that can be applied to a vast range of subjects.

It does have to do with what you’re talking about though. It seems the only reason you see it as irrelevant is because you believe so firmly that negatives are remembered far more than anything else.

Ok, I see you posted some in response to somebody else. Let’s see, source one:

The researchers found that there was “relatively more positive manipulation than negative manipulation, even though the order of magnitude of the two is similar.” The big takeaway is that the system is being manipulated with fake positive and fake negative reviews—and that’s all negative for consumers who are using them to try and make smart choices.

Ok, so this is just about fake reviews and even says that positive manipulation happens more than negative manipulation.

Second source: Talks entirely about customers. Yes, it references a bias to remember negative more than positive, but it doesn’t talk about employees and the resistance they would face compared to a customer. For instance (as I have stated) an employee might be reluctant to say something negative, for fear of it coming back to them. A customer generally has no such reason to fear repercussions.

Third source:

Take the work of Teresa M. Amabile, a professor of business administration and director of research at the Harvard Business School. She asked 238 professionals working on 26 different creative projects from different companies and industries to fill out confidential daily diaries over a number of months. The participants were asked to answer questions based on a numeric scale and briefly describe one thing that stood out that day.

“We found that of all the events that could make for a great day at work, the most important was making progress on meaningful work — even a small step forward,” said Professor Amabile, a co-author of “The Progress Principle: Using Small Wins to Ignite Joy, Engagement and Creativity at Work” (Harvard Business Review Press, 2011). “A setback, on the other hand, meant the employee felt blocked in some way from making such progress. Setbacks stood out on the worst days at work.”

After analyzing some 12,000 diary entries, Professor Amabile said she found that the negative effect of a setback at work on happiness was more than twice as strong as the positive effect of an event that signaled progress. And the power of a setback to increase frustration is over three times as strong as the power of progress to decrease frustration.

As Professor Baumeister noted in his study, “Many good events can overcome the psychological effects of a bad one.” In fact, the authors quote a ratio of five goods for every one bad.

This looks to be the closest to what we’re talking about, in relevance. Unfortunately, it still doesn’t mean much. It says nothing about how likely employees are to report bad events (beyond a confidential journal), if they perceive there may be consequences.

It indicates that conceptually, there is some imbalance, but that if enough positive happens to a particular person, it can outweigh the bad. So I’ll give you that you’re right about the general concept, but there is no reason to believe that you are right about how it applies to the current situation.

You need to understand that you can’t just apply concepts to a wide range of subjects wily nilly, without taking into account the quirks of that particular environment.

Focus on the concepts and not the examples please. You’re not going to find a source that specifically addresses reviews on company review websites.

Why bother anymore with this? she/he is obviously a fan boy and thinks everything is perfect and doesn’t need changes.
HoT forever, peace

And we’re back to insults. If you don’t have anything nice to say, don’t say anything. Thanks. See ad hominem.

In what way am I insulting you? by calling you fanboy? and since when is that an insult? or should I call you fangirl?

DoctorDing.5890:

SqualZell.7813:

…A-net is THE company that has THE LEAST amount of communication in my library of games.

That’s because you haven’t played Neverwinter. Anet are positively chatty in comparison and when they do communicate they are mostly honest. Cryptic, the Neverwinter devs, would say that they were listening to the feedback then make changes that made it worse….

Sounds familiar, but I do agree with most here, Anet is just plain terrible with communication. At this point I think they just ignoring us. They already got the $50 for HoT and if they will continue to shove things into the gem store, someone will buy it. So money will still flow in regardless. I guess you can say they probably reading the forum and laughing at us while wiping their tears of joy with $100 bills.

xbutcherx.3861:

Ayrilana.1396:

xbutcherx.3861:

Ayrilana.1396:

Labjax.2465:

Ayrilana.1396:

Fine, since you seem to still have issues. Read it as needs not met vs otherwise. I don’t see the need to argue over something that has absolutely nothing to do with what I was talking about.

What sources? I have posted sources in a recent post if you would scroll up. The vonvept of people most likely to review or comment about a negative experience is not solely about employee reviews. You need to understand that there are concepts that can be applied to a vast range of subjects.

It does have to do with what you’re talking about though. It seems the only reason you see it as irrelevant is because you believe so firmly that negatives are remembered far more than anything else.

Ok, I see you posted some in response to somebody else. Let’s see, source one:

The researchers found that there was “relatively more positive manipulation than negative manipulation, even though the order of magnitude of the two is similar.” The big takeaway is that the system is being manipulated with fake positive and fake negative reviews—and that’s all negative for consumers who are using them to try and make smart choices.

Ok, so this is just about fake reviews and even says that positive manipulation happens more than negative manipulation.

Second source: Talks entirely about customers. Yes, it references a bias to remember negative more than positive, but it doesn’t talk about employees and the resistance they would face compared to a customer. For instance (as I have stated) an employee might be reluctant to say something negative, for fear of it coming back to them. A customer generally has no such reason to fear repercussions.

Third source:

Take the work of Teresa M. Amabile, a professor of business administration and director of research at the Harvard Business School. She asked 238 professionals working on 26 different creative projects from different companies and industries to fill out confidential daily diaries over a number of months. The participants were asked to answer questions based on a numeric scale and briefly describe one thing that stood out that day.

“We found that of all the events that could make for a great day at work, the most important was making progress on meaningful work — even a small step forward,” said Professor Amabile, a co-author of “The Progress Principle: Using Small Wins to Ignite Joy, Engagement and Creativity at Work” (Harvard Business Review Press, 2011). “A setback, on the other hand, meant the employee felt blocked in some way from making such progress. Setbacks stood out on the worst days at work.”

After analyzing some 12,000 diary entries, Professor Amabile said she found that the negative effect of a setback at work on happiness was more than twice as strong as the positive effect of an event that signaled progress. And the power of a setback to increase frustration is over three times as strong as the power of progress to decrease frustration.

As Professor Baumeister noted in his study, “Many good events can overcome the psychological effects of a bad one.” In fact, the authors quote a ratio of five goods for every one bad.

This looks to be the closest to what we’re talking about, in relevance. Unfortunately, it still doesn’t mean much. It says nothing about how likely employees are to report bad events (beyond a confidential journal), if they perceive there may be consequences.

It indicates that conceptually, there is some imbalance, but that if enough positive happens to a particular person, it can outweigh the bad. So I’ll give you that you’re right about the general concept, but there is no reason to believe that you are right about how it applies to the current situation.

You need to understand that you can’t just apply concepts to a wide range of subjects wily nilly, without taking into account the quirks of that particular environment.

Focus on the concepts and not the examples please. You’re not going to find a source that specifically addresses reviews on company review websites.

Why bother anymore with this? she/he is obviously a fan boy and thinks everything is perfect and doesn’t need changes.
HoT forever, peace

And we’re back to insults. If you don’t have anything nice to say, don’t say anything. Thanks. See ad hominem.

In what way am I insulting you? by calling you fanboy? and since when is that an insult? or should I call you fangirl?

It’s usually used an an insult or to discredit the character of someone which in most cases has nothing to do with their argument.

Ayrilana.1396:

xbutcherx.3861:

Ayrilana.1396:

xbutcherx.3861:

Ayrilana.1396:

Labjax.2465:

Ayrilana.1396:

Fine, since you seem to still have issues. Read it as needs not met vs otherwise. I don’t see the need to argue over something that has absolutely nothing to do with what I was talking about.

What sources? I have posted sources in a recent post if you would scroll up. The vonvept of people most likely to review or comment about a negative experience is not solely about employee reviews. You need to understand that there are concepts that can be applied to a vast range of subjects.

It does have to do with what you’re talking about though. It seems the only reason you see it as irrelevant is because you believe so firmly that negatives are remembered far more than anything else.

Ok, I see you posted some in response to somebody else. Let’s see, source one:

The researchers found that there was “relatively more positive manipulation than negative manipulation, even though the order of magnitude of the two is similar.” The big takeaway is that the system is being manipulated with fake positive and fake negative reviews—and that’s all negative for consumers who are using them to try and make smart choices.

Ok, so this is just about fake reviews and even says that positive manipulation happens more than negative manipulation.

Second source: Talks entirely about customers. Yes, it references a bias to remember negative more than positive, but it doesn’t talk about employees and the resistance they would face compared to a customer. For instance (as I have stated) an employee might be reluctant to say something negative, for fear of it coming back to them. A customer generally has no such reason to fear repercussions.

Third source:

Take the work of Teresa M. Amabile, a professor of business administration and director of research at the Harvard Business School. She asked 238 professionals working on 26 different creative projects from different companies and industries to fill out confidential daily diaries over a number of months. The participants were asked to answer questions based on a numeric scale and briefly describe one thing that stood out that day.

“We found that of all the events that could make for a great day at work, the most important was making progress on meaningful work — even a small step forward,” said Professor Amabile, a co-author of “The Progress Principle: Using Small Wins to Ignite Joy, Engagement and Creativity at Work” (Harvard Business Review Press, 2011). “A setback, on the other hand, meant the employee felt blocked in some way from making such progress. Setbacks stood out on the worst days at work.”

After analyzing some 12,000 diary entries, Professor Amabile said she found that the negative effect of a setback at work on happiness was more than twice as strong as the positive effect of an event that signaled progress. And the power of a setback to increase frustration is over three times as strong as the power of progress to decrease frustration.

As Professor Baumeister noted in his study, “Many good events can overcome the psychological effects of a bad one.” In fact, the authors quote a ratio of five goods for every one bad.

This looks to be the closest to what we’re talking about, in relevance. Unfortunately, it still doesn’t mean much. It says nothing about how likely employees are to report bad events (beyond a confidential journal), if they perceive there may be consequences.

It indicates that conceptually, there is some imbalance, but that if enough positive happens to a particular person, it can outweigh the bad. So I’ll give you that you’re right about the general concept, but there is no reason to believe that you are right about how it applies to the current situation.

You need to understand that you can’t just apply concepts to a wide range of subjects wily nilly, without taking into account the quirks of that particular environment.

Focus on the concepts and not the examples please. You’re not going to find a source that specifically addresses reviews on company review websites.

Why bother anymore with this? she/he is obviously a fan boy and thinks everything is perfect and doesn’t need changes.
HoT forever, peace

And we’re back to insults. If you don’t have anything nice to say, don’t say anything. Thanks. See ad hominem.

In what way am I insulting you? by calling you fanboy? and since when is that an insult? or should I call you fangirl?

It’s usually used an an insult or to discredit the character of someone which in most cases has nothing to do with their argument.

It is more like this : A person who is completely loyal to a game or company reguardless of if they suck or not.

So are you? look at all the replies you wrote

Ayrilana.1396:

Focus on the concepts and not the examples please. You’re not going to find a source that specifically addresses reviews on company review websites.

/facepalm

Yes, because addressing live reviews on companies in a scientific way would be very difficult to do, for reasons that I’ve already stated (mainly, the perception about confidentiality and consequences). Which is why your stuff about negativity being more memorable than positivity turns out to be meaningless, as it could very easily be balanced out (or even trumped) by reluctance to post a negative review that could be linked back to employee name.

How many times do I have to restate the same point.

xbutcherx.3861:

Ayrilana.1396:

xbutcherx.3861:

Ayrilana.1396:

xbutcherx.3861:

Ayrilana.1396:

Labjax.2465:

Ayrilana.1396:

Fine, since you seem to still have issues. Read it as needs not met vs otherwise. I don’t see the need to argue over something that has absolutely nothing to do with what I was talking about.

What sources? I have posted sources in a recent post if you would scroll up. The vonvept of people most likely to review or comment about a negative experience is not solely about employee reviews. You need to understand that there are concepts that can be applied to a vast range of subjects.

It does have to do with what you’re talking about though. It seems the only reason you see it as irrelevant is because you believe so firmly that negatives are remembered far more than anything else.

Ok, I see you posted some in response to somebody else. Let’s see, source one:

The researchers found that there was “relatively more positive manipulation than negative manipulation, even though the order of magnitude of the two is similar.” The big takeaway is that the system is being manipulated with fake positive and fake negative reviews—and that’s all negative for consumers who are using them to try and make smart choices.

Ok, so this is just about fake reviews and even says that positive manipulation happens more than negative manipulation.

Second source: Talks entirely about customers. Yes, it references a bias to remember negative more than positive, but it doesn’t talk about employees and the resistance they would face compared to a customer. For instance (as I have stated) an employee might be reluctant to say something negative, for fear of it coming back to them. A customer generally has no such reason to fear repercussions.

Third source:

Take the work of Teresa M. Amabile, a professor of business administration and director of research at the Harvard Business School. She asked 238 professionals working on 26 different creative projects from different companies and industries to fill out confidential daily diaries over a number of months. The participants were asked to answer questions based on a numeric scale and briefly describe one thing that stood out that day.

“We found that of all the events that could make for a great day at work, the most important was making progress on meaningful work — even a small step forward,” said Professor Amabile, a co-author of “The Progress Principle: Using Small Wins to Ignite Joy, Engagement and Creativity at Work” (Harvard Business Review Press, 2011). “A setback, on the other hand, meant the employee felt blocked in some way from making such progress. Setbacks stood out on the worst days at work.”

After analyzing some 12,000 diary entries, Professor Amabile said she found that the negative effect of a setback at work on happiness was more than twice as strong as the positive effect of an event that signaled progress. And the power of a setback to increase frustration is over three times as strong as the power of progress to decrease frustration.

As Professor Baumeister noted in his study, “Many good events can overcome the psychological effects of a bad one.” In fact, the authors quote a ratio of five goods for every one bad.

This looks to be the closest to what we’re talking about, in relevance. Unfortunately, it still doesn’t mean much. It says nothing about how likely employees are to report bad events (beyond a confidential journal), if they perceive there may be consequences.

It indicates that conceptually, there is some imbalance, but that if enough positive happens to a particular person, it can outweigh the bad. So I’ll give you that you’re right about the general concept, but there is no reason to believe that you are right about how it applies to the current situation.

You need to understand that you can’t just apply concepts to a wide range of subjects wily nilly, without taking into account the quirks of that particular environment.

Focus on the concepts and not the examples please. You’re not going to find a source that specifically addresses reviews on company review websites.

Why bother anymore with this? she/he is obviously a fan boy and thinks everything is perfect and doesn’t need changes.
HoT forever, peace

And we’re back to insults. If you don’t have anything nice to say, don’t say anything. Thanks. See ad hominem.

In what way am I insulting you? by calling you fanboy? and since when is that an insult? or should I call you fangirl?

It’s usually used an an insult or to discredit the character of someone which in most cases has nothing to do with their argument.

It is more like this : A person who is completely loyal to a game or company reguardless of if they suck or not.

So are you? look at all the replies you wrote

I genuinely disagree with you. I’m not blindly siding with Anet. Once again, someone’s character does not have anything to do with their argument.

Labjax.2465:

Ayrilana.1396:

Focus on the concepts and not the examples please. You’re not going to find a source that specifically addresses reviews on company review websites.

/facepalm

Yes, because addressing live reviews on companies in a scientific way would be very difficult to do, for reasons that I’ve already stated (mainly, the perception about confidentiality and consequences). Which is why your stuff about negativity being more memorable than positivity turns out to be meaningless, as it could very easily be balanced out (or even trumped) by reluctance to post a negative review that could be linked back to employee name.

How many times do I have to restate the same point.

It has nothing to do whether it can or cannot be done. It’s that it likely has not been done at this point and there’s little point is trying to search all over for one that uses that specific example when the concepts are the same regardless.

Customers are more likely to report on a negative experience than otherwise else.

Ayrilana.1396:

It has nothing to do whether it can or cannot be done. It’s that it likely has not been done at this point and there’s little point is trying to search all over for one that uses that specific example when the concepts are the same regardless.

Customers are more likely to report on a negative experience than otherwise else.

This is fast reaching critical mass of ridiculousness. Context affects the application of the concepts………………….

You are just repeatedly ignoring my point, failing to refute it, and insisting that I’m wrong. This is reminiscent of that Monty Python sketch…

Ayrilana.1396:

xbutcherx.3861:

Ayrilana.1396:

xbutcherx.3861:

Ayrilana.1396:

xbutcherx.3861:

Ayrilana.1396:

Labjax.2465:

Ayrilana.1396:

Fine, since you seem to still have issues. Read it as needs not met vs otherwise. I don’t see the need to argue over something that has absolutely nothing to do with what I was talking about.

What sources? I have posted sources in a recent post if you would scroll up. The vonvept of people most likely to review or comment about a negative experience is not solely about employee reviews. You need to understand that there are concepts that can be applied to a vast range of subjects.

It does have to do with what you’re talking about though. It seems the only reason you see it as irrelevant is because you believe so firmly that negatives are remembered far more than anything else.

Ok, I see you posted some in response to somebody else. Let’s see, source one:

The researchers found that there was “relatively more positive manipulation than negative manipulation, even though the order of magnitude of the two is similar.” The big takeaway is that the system is being manipulated with fake positive and fake negative reviews—and that’s all negative for consumers who are using them to try and make smart choices.

Ok, so this is just about fake reviews and even says that positive manipulation happens more than negative manipulation.

Second source: Talks entirely about customers. Yes, it references a bias to remember negative more than positive, but it doesn’t talk about employees and the resistance they would face compared to a customer. For instance (as I have stated) an employee might be reluctant to say something negative, for fear of it coming back to them. A customer generally has no such reason to fear repercussions.

Third source:

Take the work of Teresa M. Amabile, a professor of business administration and director of research at the Harvard Business School. She asked 238 professionals working on 26 different creative projects from different companies and industries to fill out confidential daily diaries over a number of months. The participants were asked to answer questions based on a numeric scale and briefly describe one thing that stood out that day.

“We found that of all the events that could make for a great day at work, the most important was making progress on meaningful work — even a small step forward,” said Professor Amabile, a co-author of “The Progress Principle: Using Small Wins to Ignite Joy, Engagement and Creativity at Work” (Harvard Business Review Press, 2011). “A setback, on the other hand, meant the employee felt blocked in some way from making such progress. Setbacks stood out on the worst days at work.”

After analyzing some 12,000 diary entries, Professor Amabile said she found that the negative effect of a setback at work on happiness was more than twice as strong as the positive effect of an event that signaled progress. And the power of a setback to increase frustration is over three times as strong as the power of progress to decrease frustration.

As Professor Baumeister noted in his study, “Many good events can overcome the psychological effects of a bad one.” In fact, the authors quote a ratio of five goods for every one bad.

This looks to be the closest to what we’re talking about, in relevance. Unfortunately, it still doesn’t mean much. It says nothing about how likely employees are to report bad events (beyond a confidential journal), if they perceive there may be consequences.

It indicates that conceptually, there is some imbalance, but that if enough positive happens to a particular person, it can outweigh the bad. So I’ll give you that you’re right about the general concept, but there is no reason to believe that you are right about how it applies to the current situation.

You need to understand that you can’t just apply concepts to a wide range of subjects wily nilly, without taking into account the quirks of that particular environment.

Focus on the concepts and not the examples please. You’re not going to find a source that specifically addresses reviews on company review websites.

Why bother anymore with this? she/he is obviously a fan boy and thinks everything is perfect and doesn’t need changes.
HoT forever, peace

And we’re back to insults. If you don’t have anything nice to say, don’t say anything. Thanks. See ad hominem.

In what way am I insulting you? by calling you fanboy? and since when is that an insult? or should I call you fangirl?

It’s usually used an an insult or to discredit the character of someone which in most cases has nothing to do with their argument.

It is more like this : A person who is completely loyal to a game or company reguardless of if they suck or not.

So are you? look at all the replies you wrote

I genuinely disagree with you. I’m not blindly siding with Anet. Once again, someone’s character does not have anything to do with their argument.

I’m starting to believe you are just trolling, have bipolar syndrome or something, or do I need to quote on every replies you did? and yet you are trying to imply that the game is perfect, flawless and all the happy people plays the game and only the ones that are upset of how the game is going are posting here.

Labjax.2465:

Ayrilana.1396:

It has nothing to do whether it can or cannot be done. It’s that it likely has not been done at this point and there’s little point is trying to search all over for one that uses that specific example when the concepts are the same regardless.

Customers are more likely to report on a negative experience than otherwise else.

This is fast reaching critical mass of ridiculousness. Context affects the application of the concepts………………….

You are just repeatedly ignoring my point, failing to refute it, and insisting that I’m wrong. This is reminiscent of that Monty Python sketch…

No. That’s what you’re doing.

Context matters little with the concept I was attempting at trying to explain to you. Customers are more likely to report about a negative experience than anything contrary to that.

Ayrilana.1396:

xbutcherx.3861:

Ayrilana.1396:

xbutcherx.3861:

Ayrilana.1396:

xbutcherx.3861:

Ayrilana.1396:

Labjax.2465:

Ayrilana.1396:

Fine, since you seem to still have issues. Read it as needs not met vs otherwise. I don’t see the need to argue over something that has absolutely nothing to do with what I was talking about.

What sources? I have posted sources in a recent post if you would scroll up. The vonvept of people most likely to review or comment about a negative experience is not solely about employee reviews. You need to understand that there are concepts that can be applied to a vast range of subjects.

It does have to do with what you’re talking about though. It seems the only reason you see it as irrelevant is because you believe so firmly that negatives are remembered far more than anything else.

Ok, I see you posted some in response to somebody else. Let’s see, source one:

The researchers found that there was “relatively more positive manipulation than negative manipulation, even though the order of magnitude of the two is similar.” The big takeaway is that the system is being manipulated with fake positive and fake negative reviews—and that’s all negative for consumers who are using them to try and make smart choices.

Ok, so this is just about fake reviews and even says that positive manipulation happens more than negative manipulation.

Second source: Talks entirely about customers. Yes, it references a bias to remember negative more than positive, but it doesn’t talk about employees and the resistance they would face compared to a customer. For instance (as I have stated) an employee might be reluctant to say something negative, for fear of it coming back to them. A customer generally has no such reason to fear repercussions.

Third source:

Take the work of Teresa M. Amabile, a professor of business administration and director of research at the Harvard Business School. She asked 238 professionals working on 26 different creative projects from different companies and industries to fill out confidential daily diaries over a number of months. The participants were asked to answer questions based on a numeric scale and briefly describe one thing that stood out that day.

“We found that of all the events that could make for a great day at work, the most important was making progress on meaningful work — even a small step forward,” said Professor Amabile, a co-author of “The Progress Principle: Using Small Wins to Ignite Joy, Engagement and Creativity at Work” (Harvard Business Review Press, 2011). “A setback, on the other hand, meant the employee felt blocked in some way from making such progress. Setbacks stood out on the worst days at work.”

After analyzing some 12,000 diary entries, Professor Amabile said she found that the negative effect of a setback at work on happiness was more than twice as strong as the positive effect of an event that signaled progress. And the power of a setback to increase frustration is over three times as strong as the power of progress to decrease frustration.

As Professor Baumeister noted in his study, “Many good events can overcome the psychological effects of a bad one.” In fact, the authors quote a ratio of five goods for every one bad.

This looks to be the closest to what we’re talking about, in relevance. Unfortunately, it still doesn’t mean much. It says nothing about how likely employees are to report bad events (beyond a confidential journal), if they perceive there may be consequences.

It indicates that conceptually, there is some imbalance, but that if enough positive happens to a particular person, it can outweigh the bad. So I’ll give you that you’re right about the general concept, but there is no reason to believe that you are right about how it applies to the current situation.

You need to understand that you can’t just apply concepts to a wide range of subjects wily nilly, without taking into account the quirks of that particular environment.

Focus on the concepts and not the examples please. You’re not going to find a source that specifically addresses reviews on company review websites.

Why bother anymore with this? she/he is obviously a fan boy and thinks everything is perfect and doesn’t need changes.
HoT forever, peace

And we’re back to insults. If you don’t have anything nice to say, don’t say anything. Thanks. See ad hominem.

In what way am I insulting you? by calling you fanboy? and since when is that an insult? or should I call you fangirl?

It’s usually used an an insult or to discredit the character of someone which in most cases has nothing to do with their argument.

It is more like this : A person who is completely loyal to a game or company reguardless of if they suck or not.

So are you? look at all the replies you wrote

I genuinely disagree with you. I’m not blindly siding with Anet. Once again, someone’s character does not have anything to do with their argument.

What, exactly, is it that you disagree with?
That the reviews are real? That there are issues employees have with their work environment? That the site is a very helpful tool in terms of future employers, and also as a peek into something we, as mere customers, are not included on?

Because I have read everything you have posted in this thread, and I can sum it all up as basically, “We can’t trust that source because: The reviews might be faked, there aren’t enough good reviews for us to get a balanced impression, other companies have bad reviews too so stop picking on Anet.”

All of those points are irrelevant. There is very little likelihood that those reviews are fake, the reviews don’t have to be balanced in order to give us a glimpse into the work environment, and it doesn’t matter what other companies are doing. You DO come off as a fan boy/girl who is just making up any excuse to try and change the subject/defend Anet. It is pretty common knowledge that developers are basically fodder, that it’s hard work, and unappreciated. Nothing stated in those reviews was surprising, neither was anything so outlandish that it should be so discredited and Anet so defended. They’re a company. They aren’t your mother. Of COURSE they do all those things. That’s what ALL companies do.

But that doesn’t mean it’s the right thing to do. Or that it isn’t relevant to bring it up.

Ayrilana.1396:

Customers are more likely to report about a negative experience than anything contrary to that.

These aren’t customer reviews…

Ayrilana.1396:

Labjax.2465:

Ayrilana.1396:

It has nothing to do whether it can or cannot be done. It’s that it likely has not been done at this point and there’s little point is trying to search all over for one that uses that specific example when the concepts are the same regardless.

Customers are more likely to report on a negative experience than otherwise else.

This is fast reaching critical mass of ridiculousness. Context affects the application of the concepts………………….

You are just repeatedly ignoring my point, failing to refute it, and insisting that I’m wrong. This is reminiscent of that Monty Python sketch…

No. That’s what you’re doing.

Context matters little with the concept I was attempting at trying to explain to you. Customers are more likely to report about a negative experience than anything contrary to that.

This thread isn’t about customers…!

xbutcherx.3861:

Ayrilana.1396:

xbutcherx.3861:

Ayrilana.1396:

xbutcherx.3861:

Ayrilana.1396:

xbutcherx.3861:

Ayrilana.1396:

Labjax.2465:

Ayrilana.1396:

Fine, since you seem to still have issues. Read it as needs not met vs otherwise. I don’t see the need to argue over something that has absolutely nothing to do with what I was talking about.

What sources? I have posted sources in a recent post if you would scroll up. The vonvept of people most likely to review or comment about a negative experience is not solely about employee reviews. You need to understand that there are concepts that can be applied to a vast range of subjects.

It does have to do with what you’re talking about though. It seems the only reason you see it as irrelevant is because you believe so firmly that negatives are remembered far more than anything else.

Ok, I see you posted some in response to somebody else. Let’s see, source one:

The researchers found that there was “relatively more positive manipulation than negative manipulation, even though the order of magnitude of the two is similar.” The big takeaway is that the system is being manipulated with fake positive and fake negative reviews—and that’s all negative for consumers who are using them to try and make smart choices.

Ok, so this is just about fake reviews and even says that positive manipulation happens more than negative manipulation.

Second source: Talks entirely about customers. Yes, it references a bias to remember negative more than positive, but it doesn’t talk about employees and the resistance they would face compared to a customer. For instance (as I have stated) an employee might be reluctant to say something negative, for fear of it coming back to them. A customer generally has no such reason to fear repercussions.

Third source:

Take the work of Teresa M. Amabile, a professor of business administration and director of research at the Harvard Business School. She asked 238 professionals working on 26 different creative projects from different companies and industries to fill out confidential daily diaries over a number of months. The participants were asked to answer questions based on a numeric scale and briefly describe one thing that stood out that day.

“We found that of all the events that could make for a great day at work, the most important was making progress on meaningful work — even a small step forward,” said Professor Amabile, a co-author of “The Progress Principle: Using Small Wins to Ignite Joy, Engagement and Creativity at Work” (Harvard Business Review Press, 2011). “A setback, on the other hand, meant the employee felt blocked in some way from making such progress. Setbacks stood out on the worst days at work.”

After analyzing some 12,000 diary entries, Professor Amabile said she found that the negative effect of a setback at work on happiness was more than twice as strong as the positive effect of an event that signaled progress. And the power of a setback to increase frustration is over three times as strong as the power of progress to decrease frustration.

As Professor Baumeister noted in his study, “Many good events can overcome the psychological effects of a bad one.” In fact, the authors quote a ratio of five goods for every one bad.

This looks to be the closest to what we’re talking about, in relevance. Unfortunately, it still doesn’t mean much. It says nothing about how likely employees are to report bad events (beyond a confidential journal), if they perceive there may be consequences.

It indicates that conceptually, there is some imbalance, but that if enough positive happens to a particular person, it can outweigh the bad. So I’ll give you that you’re right about the general concept, but there is no reason to believe that you are right about how it applies to the current situation.

You need to understand that you can’t just apply concepts to a wide range of subjects wily nilly, without taking into account the quirks of that particular environment.

Focus on the concepts and not the examples please. You’re not going to find a source that specifically addresses reviews on company review websites.

Why bother anymore with this? she/he is obviously a fan boy and thinks everything is perfect and doesn’t need changes.
HoT forever, peace

And we’re back to insults. If you don’t have anything nice to say, don’t say anything. Thanks. See ad hominem.

In what way am I insulting you? by calling you fanboy? and since when is that an insult? or should I call you fangirl?

It’s usually used an an insult or to discredit the character of someone which in most cases has nothing to do with their argument.

It is more like this : A person who is completely loyal to a game or company reguardless of if they suck or not.

So are you? look at all the replies you wrote

I genuinely disagree with you. I’m not blindly siding with Anet. Once again, someone’s character does not have anything to do with their argument.

I’m starting to believe you are just trolling, have bipolar syndrome or something, or do I need to quote on every replies you did? and yet you are trying to imply that the game is perfect, flawless and all the happy people plays the game and only the ones that are upset of how the game is going are posting here.

Did I ever say the game was perfect or treating it as fact? Also, I’m not the one saying that the only ones upset of how the game are only posting on here. That’s actually you and the other poster. All I’ve been saying is that what you see on forums isn’t necessarily representative of the player population and that people are more prone to report about negative experience than to the contrary.

If it seems like I’m all over the place then it’s because you two keep pulling my arguments in those directions. All I was stating was what I said above.

paintpixie.7398:

Ayrilana.1396:

Customers are more likely to report about a negative experience than anything contrary to that.

These aren’t customer reviews…

It doesn’t matter. The concepts are the same.

People are more likely to report on negative experience than anything contrary.

Better?

Labjax.2465:

Ayrilana.1396:

Labjax.2465:

Ayrilana.1396:

It has nothing to do whether it can or cannot be done. It’s that it likely has not been done at this point and there’s little point is trying to search all over for one that uses that specific example when the concepts are the same regardless.

Customers are more likely to report on a negative experience than otherwise else.

This is fast reaching critical mass of ridiculousness. Context affects the application of the concepts………………….

You are just repeatedly ignoring my point, failing to refute it, and insisting that I’m wrong. This is reminiscent of that Monty Python sketch…

No. That’s what you’re doing.

Context matters little with the concept I was attempting at trying to explain to you. Customers are more likely to report about a negative experience than anything contrary to that.

This thread isn’t about customers…!

See above.

It’s as if everything must be handfed and tailored exactly to the discussion because using a little bit of critical thinking is out of the question.

Ayrilana.1396:

xbutcherx.3861:

Ayrilana.1396:

xbutcherx.3861:

Ayrilana.1396:

xbutcherx.3861:

Ayrilana.1396:

Shen Slayer.3058:

Ayrilana.1396:

Shen Slayer.3058:

That wasn’t just bad review, that was insiders talking, people that worked there.

Doesn’t matter. You think the reviews from all of the other companies don’t have people commenting who used to work there?

Of course it matters and we are not talking about other companies. We are finally seeing where the disconnect internally and the end product of the expansion. Think about it…the disconnect between Anet employees is carried over with disconnect from players and expansion. Disgruntled employees and customers!

From a few people and yes it does matter. People are treating those reviews as if it’s an indication that the company is performing poorly when practically every company is the same.

Performing poorly? Do you play the game? want more evidence than Reddit or this forum?

Small subset of players otherwise you can use your logic and infer that playerbase wants mounts based on what we see on the forums and Reddit. What exactly do you consider performing poorly?

How about balanced patch? WvW? Dungeons? hundreds of topics about problems with the game? how about COMMUNICATION?

What game doesn’t? How much communication is considered successful? Does Anet provide less, about the same, or more communication that other MMO companies? Is communication for everything they do, before they do it, really required?

I guess you have no played any other game and want to be a blind Anet fanboy, be my guess defend everything Anet is doing after the HoT fiasco.

So we’re down to insults now?

The expansion has been pretty successful. There are some bugs that still need to be fixed which they’re working on and the megaserver things still needs to be addressed. Nothing so bad to say that the expansion flopped but then I’m not over exaggerating the severity of the bugs.

Just bugs huh?
I just going to quote this one, I’m done replying to your nonsense and denial, keep playing thinking is a flawless game made by the happiest company in the world

xbutcherx.3861:

Ayrilana.1396:

xbutcherx.3861:

Ayrilana.1396:

xbutcherx.3861:

Ayrilana.1396:

xbutcherx.3861:

Ayrilana.1396:

Shen Slayer.3058:

Ayrilana.1396:

Shen Slayer.3058:

That wasn’t just bad review, that was insiders talking, people that worked there.

Doesn’t matter. You think the reviews from all of the other companies don’t have people commenting who used to work there?

Of course it matters and we are not talking about other companies. We are finally seeing where the disconnect internally and the end product of the expansion. Think about it…the disconnect between Anet employees is carried over with disconnect from players and expansion. Disgruntled employees and customers!

From a few people and yes it does matter. People are treating those reviews as if it’s an indication that the company is performing poorly when practically every company is the same.

Performing poorly? Do you play the game? want more evidence than Reddit or this forum?

Small subset of players otherwise you can use your logic and infer that playerbase wants mounts based on what we see on the forums and Reddit. What exactly do you consider performing poorly?

How about balanced patch? WvW? Dungeons? hundreds of topics about problems with the game? how about COMMUNICATION?

What game doesn’t? How much communication is considered successful? Does Anet provide less, about the same, or more communication that other MMO companies? Is communication for everything they do, before they do it, really required?

I guess you have no played any other game and want to be a blind Anet fanboy, be my guess defend everything Anet is doing after the HoT fiasco.

So we’re down to insults now?

The expansion has been pretty successful. There are some bugs that still need to be fixed which they’re working on and the megaserver things still needs to be addressed. Nothing so bad to say that the expansion flopped but then I’m not over exaggerating the severity of the bugs.

Just bugs huh?
I just going to quote this one, I’m done replying to your nonsense and denial, keep paying thinking is a flawless game made by the happiest company in the world

Read the post following that. There was a point to that comment.

I’m done with your nonsense and denial as well.

Ayrilana.1396:

paintpixie.7398:

Ayrilana.1396:

Customers are more likely to report about a negative experience than anything contrary to that.

These aren’t customer reviews…

It doesn’t matter. The concepts are the same.

People are more likely to report on negative experience than anything contrary.

Better?

It does matter. People have already said in this thread that employees are less likely to post negative reviews because of the career repercussions.

Also, you are discrediting the fact that companies are very likely to post false positive reviews, as well, and as somebody said earlier, false positives actually happen more than false negatives. For instance, I lived in an apartment complex a few years back that would occasionally get bad reviews. The bad reviews were all true (although I personally didn’t find the things they were complaining about to be a deal breaker for me, personally, and I lived there for six or seven years). But every now and then the staff would go on the review site and give over-the-top reviews because they…wait for it…wanted more customers.

Review sites are hardly the end-all, be-all, but they are a relevant tool and I use them for everything, from buying something, to living somewhere, to jobs, etc. And I know that even one negative review is far more valuable than a million positive ones. Because it is likely to be more honest, and more telling of the product/service. You don’t need to know what a (insert anything here) is like on a good day. You need to know what it’s like on a bad day. That’s the best way to make an informed decision.

paintpixie.7398:

Ayrilana.1396:

paintpixie.7398:

Ayrilana.1396:

Customers are more likely to report about a negative experience than anything contrary to that.

These aren’t customer reviews…

It doesn’t matter. The concepts are the same.

People are more likely to report on negative experience than anything contrary.

Better?

It does matter. People have already said in this thread that employees are less likely to post negative reviews because of the career repercussions.

Also, you are discrediting the fact that companies are very likely to post false positive reviews, as well, and as somebody said earlier, false positives actually happen more than false negatives. For instance, I lived in an apartment complex a few years back that would occasionally get bad reviews. The bad reviews were all true (although I personally didn’t find the things they were complaining about to be a deal breaker for me, personally, and I lived there for six or seven years). But every now and then the staff would go on the review site and give over-the-top reviews because they…wait for it…wanted more customers.

Review sites are hardly the end-all, be-all, but they are a relevant tool and I use them for everything, from buying something, to living somewhere, to jobs, etc. And I know that even one negative review is far more valuable than a million positive ones. Because it is likely to be more honest, and more telling of the product/service. You don’t need to know what a (insert anything here) is like on a good day. You need to know what it’s like on a bad day. That’s the best way to make an informed decision.

Thumbs up ^^

Swagger.1459:

Patch notes don’t lie people, and those reviews are much closer to the “truths”. This game needs to be steered on a better course and the devs need to be allowed to create fully finished “products”.

This so much.

Every time I look at the patch notes I cringe, and what’s the problem with waiting until something’s finished to release it?

paintpixie.7398:

Ayrilana.1396:

paintpixie.7398:

Ayrilana.1396:

Customers are more likely to report about a negative experience than anything contrary to that.

These aren’t customer reviews…

It doesn’t matter. The concepts are the same.

People are more likely to report on negative experience than anything contrary.

Better?

It does matter. People have already said in this thread that employees are less likely to post negative reviews because of the career repercussions.

Also, you are discrediting the fact that companies are very likely to post false positive reviews, as well, and as somebody said earlier, false positives actually happen more than false negatives. For instance, I lived in an apartment complex a few years back that would occasionally get bad reviews. The bad reviews were all true (although I personally didn’t find the things they were complaining about to be a deal breaker for me, personally, and I lived there for six or seven years). But every now and then the staff would go on the review site and give over-the-top reviews because they…wait for it…wanted more customers.

Review sites are hardly the end-all, be-all, but they are a relevant tool and I use them for everything, from buying something, to living somewhere, to jobs, etc. And I know that even one negative review is far more valuable than a million positive ones. Because it is likely to be more honest, and more telling of the product/service. You don’t need to know what a (insert anything here) is like on a good day. You need to know what it’s like on a bad day. That’s the best way to make an informed decision.

Reviews on that website are anonymous. I can go on right now and write one about Anet without having ever worked there.

Companies can post fake positive reviews just as the same employee can post multiple fake ones. I stated somewhere in this thread that neither can be necessarily relied on. Or at least not as your sole source without anything more concrete, credible to back it up. Some negative reviews can be a distortion of the facts are similly a misunderstanding on the reviewers part.

Ayrilana.1396:

paintpixie.7398:

Ayrilana.1396:

paintpixie.7398:

Ayrilana.1396:

Customers are more likely to report about a negative experience than anything contrary to that.

These aren’t customer reviews…

It doesn’t matter. The concepts are the same.

People are more likely to report on negative experience than anything contrary.

Better?

It does matter. People have already said in this thread that employees are less likely to post negative reviews because of the career repercussions.

Also, you are discrediting the fact that companies are very likely to post false positive reviews, as well, and as somebody said earlier, false positives actually happen more than false negatives. For instance, I lived in an apartment complex a few years back that would occasionally get bad reviews. The bad reviews were all true (although I personally didn’t find the things they were complaining about to be a deal breaker for me, personally, and I lived there for six or seven years). But every now and then the staff would go on the review site and give over-the-top reviews because they…wait for it…wanted more customers.

Review sites are hardly the end-all, be-all, but they are a relevant tool and I use them for everything, from buying something, to living somewhere, to jobs, etc. And I know that even one negative review is far more valuable than a million positive ones. Because it is likely to be more honest, and more telling of the product/service. You don’t need to know what a (insert anything here) is like on a good day. You need to know what it’s like on a bad day. That’s the best way to make an informed decision.

Reviews on that website are anonymous. I can go on right now and write one about Anet without having ever worked there.

Companies can post fake positive reviews just as the same employee can post multiple fake ones. I stated somewhere in this thread that neither can be necessarily relied on. Or at least not as your sole source without anything more concrete, credible to back it up. Some negative reviews can be a distortion of the facts are similly a misunderstanding on the reviewers part.

It doesn’t quite work like that. From what I have personally experienced, it takes a few days to verify your review. I doubt that multiple posts by one employee or false posts by non-employees are as big of a problem as you think it is. The reason for the (outward) anonymity is to protect the employee from backlash from the previous or current job.

I agree with you that a review site can’t be relied upon as the sole source of information about something, but that doesn’t mean we should throw the baby out with the bathwater, so to speak. They are actually very useful.

paintpixie.7398:

Ayrilana.1396:

paintpixie.7398:

Ayrilana.1396:

paintpixie.7398:

Ayrilana.1396:

Customers are more likely to report about a negative experience than anything contrary to that.

These aren’t customer reviews…

It doesn’t matter. The concepts are the same.

People are more likely to report on negative experience than anything contrary.

Better?

It does matter. People have already said in this thread that employees are less likely to post negative reviews because of the career repercussions.

Also, you are discrediting the fact that companies are very likely to post false positive reviews, as well, and as somebody said earlier, false positives actually happen more than false negatives. For instance, I lived in an apartment complex a few years back that would occasionally get bad reviews. The bad reviews were all true (although I personally didn’t find the things they were complaining about to be a deal breaker for me, personally, and I lived there for six or seven years). But every now and then the staff would go on the review site and give over-the-top reviews because they…wait for it…wanted more customers.

Review sites are hardly the end-all, be-all, but they are a relevant tool and I use them for everything, from buying something, to living somewhere, to jobs, etc. And I know that even one negative review is far more valuable than a million positive ones. Because it is likely to be more honest, and more telling of the product/service. You don’t need to know what a (insert anything here) is like on a good day. You need to know what it’s like on a bad day. That’s the best way to make an informed decision.

Reviews on that website are anonymous. I can go on right now and write one about Anet without having ever worked there.

Companies can post fake positive reviews just as the same employee can post multiple fake ones. I stated somewhere in this thread that neither can be necessarily relied on. Or at least not as your sole source without anything more concrete, credible to back it up. Some negative reviews can be a distortion of the facts are similly a misunderstanding on the reviewers part.

It doesn’t quite work like that. From what I have personally experienced, it takes a few days to verify your review. I doubt that multiple posts by one employee or false posts by non-employees are as big of a problem as you think it is. The reason for the (outward) anonymity is to protect the employee from backlash from the previous or current job.

I agree with you that a review site can’t be relied upon as the sole source of information about something, but that doesn’t mean we should throw the baby out with the bathwater, so to speak. They are actually very useful.

You don’t have to do them all once. You can spread them out over time across various IP addresses. I never said false reports were a big issue. That subject was brought up by someone who mentioned fake positive reviews. My post was just using their argument and showing how it can be the same for the opposite side as well.

Vayne.8563:

I wouldn’t worry about it. For one thing, the person making these assumptions leaves out royalties, which includes China’s profit, they’re not reported with Guild Wars 2’s earnings, since Guild Wars 2 in China had to be released by a different company.

That looks a lot better for them, thanks for the info.

While part of me does want ANet smacked down for bad choices, financially if that’s what it takes, it’s so that they’ll learn and improve the game. Not because I hate them or want them fired or the game shut down. In general, I don’t really want the game to do badly.