Originally posted by Bellarion

6. Then all customers who do not agree with the choices made call into customer support and yell at an agent who can do absolutely nothing to assist them. Throwing around words like "refund" and "discount" all culminating in a hysterical uttering of the loathed statement "The Customer is always Right!' 

It should be noted that this phrase was originally "The Customer is never Wrong."

I think the distinction is telling, and fits more into what Sanya was trying to say, but is of little use to the frothing lunatics oozing entitlement out of every pore of their withered skin which only serves to barely contain the concentrated sadism struggling to burst forth and ruin everything unfortunate enough to be nearby....er, um you know, the typical customer...

Interesting but some points I do not agree on with the developer being right as well.  it all comes down to pleasing the customers and if the customers aren't happy the dollar signs won't roll for the developers.

The mmo genre has created a pre-fabricated set of player expectations that developers have to work against. There is a long list of features that large groups of players have enjoyed in previous games and expect to see again in new ones, or else they will complain. So the developers try to deliver on as many of those expectations as they can, such as:

Character appearance customization -  check

Crafting - check

PvP - check

Classes - check

Skill trees or similar choices - check

Loot - check

Pets - check

Auction house or trade method - check

and so on, and on, and on.

By the time a developer has satisfied enough of those expectations that they can persuade their investors that it is reasonable to believe the game will be popular - because games with those features have been proven to be popular before - how much time and money is really left to do anything new and groundbreaking? Not much.

That is why we keep getting the same thing over and over again. :/

More developers are going to have to find a way to break out of the mold, and we, the players, are going to have to be more supportive of those efforts when they do, if we are ever to hope for anything genuinely new and refreshing.

Originally posted by veritas_X

Originally posted by Hyanmen

I think I've found my favorite game columnist! 

 

She's pretty much the only one on this site's staff with the ability to write, so yeah, welcome to the fan club.

Meh... she does alright. Nothing to make me stand up and shout "hallelujah!" but then again, nothing to make me challenge her to a jello wrestling death match either.

Only one issue with this article. I disagree with her position on individual gamers not needing personal feedback. Everyone feels the need to be acknowledged (justified or not). The developer that doesn't at least try to be responsive is doomed.

Pretty much spot on with the rest of the article.

Originally posted by Antarious

Originally posted by LordDmaster

"If you don't trust your producer or president or designer or your community person to make the best possible decisions for the game, the best recourse you have as a customer is to not give those people your money."

 

That is so RIGHT

 

Thanks again Sanya

 

 

 

When I read the article... then I see this quote and the fact I agree with the person I quoted (tho not in the way they intended).

 

Then I consider who wrote this.. who they worked for.. and the current situation of that company (or what is left of it).

 

The only thing that comes to mind is....  Irony.

 

*edited to add*

 

I have no idea why a few posts above this someone is discussing whether the "hard core" is the majority or not.  Look around at all the failed games.. especially recently.  Then look at games which were successful and changed AGAINST customer wishes (in case of this article think DAoC... but imho SWG is probably a better example.. but Sanya wasn't a community relations poster for SOE.. which is why I find this article ironic given recent history especially this week...)

 

I actually agree with the article that Sanya didn't like(and linked in her article).  Tho I think I would have written it different and my approach would have been different.  Between the two article the one she quoted was closer to "how it is".  Games don't fail because some small group of customers are "wrong".. they fail or start to die because the majority of customers don't think its "right" anymore.

 

That has nothing to do with Hardcore or casual... it has to do with Development decisions that are wrong... and the attitude of developers lately toward their player base.  Oh don't worry my main beef is with things I've seen SOE employees say/do... but as I like to say.. we all have our perspectives.

 

This is of course mine... my point of view... my opinion and my experience.  I left that industry in 2005... for good reason.

I agree with this.

Why is it that this is the only consumer product where "trust" is required on our parts?  I don't need to "trust" Relic entertainment in order to enjoy Company of Heroes.  I trust in what I like.  We all do.

But you see, this is the only consumer software product where you really don't know what you are buying.  You don't, because developers have assumed an unrestricted prerogative to change the game at will, cancel the game at will, or remove anyone they want, for whatever reason.

You can't trust someone like that.  You can't trust pouring a bunch of money into something like that.  Whatever draws you to the game in the first place can change...and if it does, what then?

Quit?  Who is that really hurting?  The publishers already have the upwards of $200/year from us, so cancelling doesn't hurt them as much as it hurts the one who cancels.  Because the one who cancels who paid $200/year has nothing to show for it but bitter regret for thinking that the things they like were things they would always enjoy.

See, I want to buy games.  The problem is that the publishers don't want to sell me games, they want to sell me question marks: question marks concerning things that nobody should have to question.

And we aren't even talking about basic things like whether X class is going to get nerfed.  We are talking about things like, "is moving around and fighting going to correspond to the printed rulebook tomorrow?," or "is my computer even going to be able to run this game next week?," or, "are the features discussed in the expansion pack available to me today, or are they still working on it?," or, "is this game going to cancel in the next quarter because the publisher isn't meeting its sales goals?"

Things like that don't happen anywhere else in consumer software, yet I have to put up with them here...and with increasing frequency.  They are the things that kept me away from this genre for a long time, and I imagine they are the same things that keep players away now.  And it is all because publishers think that "never leaving production" and "agile development" are the things that make this genre great, rather than the things that drive people like Antarious away.

So I think that the problem isn't with a lack of trusting publishers...it's that publishers need to do more to be trustworthy.  And that trust begins by restraining the prerogative of the live teams to change the game at will.  Because frankly, many here have been scammed, thrown under the bus, banned for no reason, nerfed, and deceived far too often for us to trust devs as much as we used to.

It's true that "the developers" are beholden to the money that they get for their products, however that certainly doesn't mean they are beholden to the customers. Ultima Online and Star Wars Galaxies were completely destroyed because the companies behind them cared about the dollars not the people paying the dollars. I'm sure you all can think of other games that changed without popular support.

Originally posted by Saikron

It's true that "the developers" are beholden to the money that they get for their products, however that certainly doesn't mean they are beholden to the customers. Ultima Online and Star Wars Galaxies were completely destroyed because the companies behind them cared about the dollars not the people paying the dollars. I'm sure you all can think of other games that changed without popular support.

No, they cared about the dollars instead of the game they created. They should be proud about their creation instead of changing the game only to suit a bigger group of players.

Originally posted by Beatnik59

I agree with this.

Why is it that this is the only consumer product where "trust" is required on our parts?  I don't need to "trust" Relic entertainment in order to enjoy Company of Heroes.  I trust in what I like.  We all do.

But you see, this is the only consumer software product where you really don't know what you are buying.  You don't, because developers have assumed an unrestricted prerogative to change the game at will, cancel the game at will, or remove anyone they want, for whatever reason.

You can't trust someone like that.  You can't trust pouring a bunch of money into something like that.  Whatever draws you to the game in the first place can change...and if it does, what then?

Quit?  Who is that really hurting?  The publishers already have the upwards of $200/year from us, so cancelling doesn't hurt them as much as it hurts the one who cancels.  Because the one who cancels who paid $200/year has nothing to show for it but bitter regret for thinking that the things they like were things they would always enjoy.

See, I want to buy games.  The problem is that the publishers don't want to sell me games, they want to sell me question marks: question marks concerning things that nobody should have to question.

And we aren't even talking about basic things like whether X class is going to get nerfed.  We are talking about things like, "is moving around and fighting going to correspond to the printed rulebook tomorrow?," or "is my computer even going to be able to run this game next week?," or, "are the features discussed in the expansion pack available to me today, or are they still working on it?," or, "is this game going to cancel in the next quarter because the publisher isn't meeting its sales goals?"

Things like that don't happen anywhere else in consumer software, yet I have to put up with them here...and with increasing frequency.  They are the things that kept me away from this genre for a long time, and I imagine they are the same things that keep players away now.  And it is all because publishers think that "never leaving production" and "agile development" are the things that make this genre great, rather than the things that drive people like Antarious away.

So I think that the problem isn't with a lack of trusting publishers...it's that publishers need to do more to be trustworthy.  And that trust begins by restraining the prerogative of the live teams to change the game at will.  Because frankly, many here have been scammed, thrown under the bus, banned for no reason, nerfed, and deceived far too often for us to trust devs as much as we used to.

I totally agree with you where you say.  When it comes to MMOs - ppl really have no freaking idea what they are buying these days.  The PR teams promise everything and the PRE-Order campaign lands the game half of the entire sales for the game - even before anyone knows jack shit what the game is about.  This is the first thing that has to change now in MMOs.  PPL need to realise that preorders are not good for custimors/gamers - its only good for the publishers/developers. 

Would ppl actually have bought WAR if they knew the lagfest of a RVR content that "the game is all about" (leaving PVE content in the game well below par of most MMOs today)

Would ppl have bought AOC if the company would have come out and say that DX10 wasn't gonna be in until more than year after ppl bought the box ?  - oh wait... it isn't in yet...

Some ppl might have bought it - but I really think its time that the gamers - AND the gaming websites that are FOR the gamers - really start to get the point through.  Deliver what your PR group is talking about - if not - then at least shut up !

What will the years from 2005-2010 be thought off when looking back on MMO history?  I tell you what I think.  It will be talked about as the period when everyone wanted to make money like WOW did - but that was it... Noone actually thought of anything else when it came to developing and publishing MMOs... 

The longer a customer pays a subscription, the more they're going to feel like a shareholder. Hardcore players will get to the point where they actually know how the game plays better than the lead designer does.

Honestly I think the only way for the developers to get past this problem is to empower the players right from the start with the tools they provide. Then they're more likely to feel in control of their environment and have some tangible influence, like a deputized designer. This is only possible in a very sandboxy game, but we can see it works. Look at the ruddy glow of good health in the cheeks of Eve.

Umm all this Bitching and moaning about a game and or games...

Ok a Customer

A customer, also client, buyer or purchaser is usually used to refer to a current or potential buyer or user of the products of an individual or organization, mostly called the supplier or seller. This is typically through purchasing or renting goods or services. However in certain contexts the term customer also includes by extension anyone who uses or experiences the services of another. A customer may also be a viewer of the product or goods in which are being sold. In this case, a customer can walk into a building intending to buy a product but are not satisfied with what he or she may find in the store, resulting in them leaving without a purchase.

The word derives from "custom," meaning "habit"; a customer was someone who frequented a particular shop, who made it a habit to purchase goods of the sort the shop sold there rather than elsewhere, and with whom the shopkeeper had to maintain a relationship to keep his or her "custom," meaning expected purchases in the future.

The slogan "customer is king" or "customer is god" or "the customer is always right" indicate the importance of customers to businesses - although the last expression is sometimes used ironically.

From Wiki

the Above states that a person using a service or purchasing an item/product is a customer, it doesn't state age, looks, height, weight, ethnic background or any of the other stuff these so called "hard core players" are crapping on about. If someone pays you for services they are a customer and if the Article writer doesn't even understand this basic concept no wonder the games/Business they worked on died or is dying.

Also the Customer has every right to complain and ask for a refund if the company doesn't give what it says it can produce and sorry if you don't like that concept but tough.

Honestly most MMO companies are so out of touch from there player base and real life reality its not funny and they deserve a really big wake up call.

Even if a Customer is wrong or out of touch they are paying you money for a service that they should be recieving. and to change stuff for a negative reason and not expect a backlash is very naive.

Originally posted by Frobner

I just got home from a really long day at work but I have to make few comments here...

The custimor is always right ! - Cause if not - this custimor will not pay.

NOW.... lets go down to the facts tho... WIll a person that has played a character that he progressed through 1 or 2 years stop paying when he meets something he dislikes ? Probably not. What needs to happen so that he stops playing and gives up on hours and months and even years of playing with friends and developoing his character? The fact is... something huge has to happen....

The devs of MMO games have got ENDLESS amount of power to do what they want - Even if it means that alot of players will not like it. Im sorry Sanya but we are NOT talking Chicken or hamburgers here... Get a grip if you think RPG can be brought up as comparison to that. It pretty much means you have ZERO understanding of gaming. Specially RPG games.

Lets take an example here shall we... I quit WOW last year when Sunwell hit - as did HUGE portion of players that at that time had enough of the balancing method that BLizzard was using at that time. WHole classes and specs were left sitting outside an instance to buff ppl up. 5 man content of the game was unplayable for some classes while beeing way to easy for others. Yes... BLizzard lost probalby over 50K players in few weeks after release of Sunwell cause alot of ppl had enough at this point - It was not the first "mistakes"- there were seriers of prior issues that brought ppl to the verge of thinking they would quit the game because of these issues.

Here is the thing in WOW that maybe ppl need to realise by now - if they havn't already. There is one class in the game that is left HANGING in midair - flip flopped around whenever the devs think they got time - or when it becomes to Powerfull cause the changes made last time were not though trough. This is a class that Most ppl know that some of the devs HATE and have PUBLICLY stated so in earlier games they played. They even put up a huge protest in EQ to hang the servers when this class was given talents equal to those of the Warrior as a tank.

Yes - Im talkning about the PALADIN. And nothing has changed. WHy ? Because there is not actually 1 single DEV at BLizzard that has a TRUE vision for the class. One day the vision is to have the Ret tree as a healing/dps tree - not realising that when you have BOTH you create huge proglems (like first in WRATH). Then you realise that the dmg is to high so now you have nerfed both the DPS and healing ability and you know what.... It is effecting the OTHER specs MORE than its actually effecting the ret spec. And not only effecting the PVP arena side - no - its effecting PVE raiding even MORE.

Now.. you could forgive such issues coming up once or twice. But .. Go back through TBC and you will see while huge portion of the paladin population left in Sunwell. They realised that the devs had absolutly NO vision for the class... And most of these ppl were proofed correct when WOTLK hit.

Example... There is ONE single healing spec in WOW that does not have a smartheal group healing ability. FIne... if not for the fact that it affects the ablity of that spec to do 5 man content in the game (or prevents the 5 man content to be balanced around basic needs for structured healing ailities). This one healing spec was instead given talent to heal 2 ! players at same time... but then.. Blizzard realised that might maybe ... effect some setups in Arena... and so that ablity was nerfed. NOw this holy paladin spec is no longer a viable HEALER (even if he was taken to last boss for world first kills before Emergency fix). And still Blizzard claims their VISION of the spec is this and that... Their vision is NONE...

Finally - about your handraising story... Who doesn't want to get more powerfull in a RPG MMO game ? Get a clue what RPG is about... That on the other hand does not mean that all those ppl raising their hands want to be come more powerfull than OTHER classes in the game... They just want to keep progressing WITH these ppl ...

Now get a clue what RPG gaming is about Sanya....

Whoh whoh calm down. I see what you're writing about but, your english is so horrible, that it pisses me off to read more of that. Seems like you deviated from the topic and went on a rant on palys. You also gotta learn the difference between effect and affect and learn the difference between your and you're.

Granted that the "customer" is not a single entity but regardless of that the customer or the customers are the one who pays for a service and the developers are one creating the service so certainly there is a customer and there is the provider of the service, among others the developers.

So what the developers need to do is to find that pleases the majority of existing customers and what may draw more customers because in the end they are paying to make MMORPGs feasible and profitable.

The long list of dead and dying MMO's that adopt and follow this policy is all the counterpoint I need to this article.

If that isn't enough, I would add to the list a gigantic string of dry and ho-hum titles that flood our choices due to following this chiken shit way of thinking about business.

In closing I'll ask the question for thought...why does this industry (software development houses included) try to reinvent the business model?  They're not the first to enter into a large format customer base business?  For crying out loud, do what other's have done before you that worked.  Stop taking the approach of trying to re-invent the damn wheel but making it square.  Just stop. 

We tell all these failed, dead and dying games exactly how their products will fail unless they take certain steps, and yet...blindly and arrogantly (yes I personify devs, they're people) do not heed our clear calls of what course of action to take and drive their poor game into the ground time and again.  This, is what happens.  Nothing else.  If you haven't seen this happen, you haven't been playing long.

 As a player I've come across plenty of stupid suggestions from fellow players; however, it doesn't take a genius to spot good ideas from players who actually have a clue. I've lurked on dozens of f2p forums, so yeah I know what crap suggestions look like.

Some dude posted about IRL he deals with the type of customers who complain that product A does not come with the options that come with product B. Exactly. Many bad suggestions are made by players who don't really know what they want. They just throw wild ideas out there based on what they liked elsewhere, regardless of the fact that such features may be incompatible with your game. Unfortunately, these kind of responses seem to make up the majority of stuff cluttering up suggestion forums everywhere. There's a reason doing support is hell, and dealing with clueless customers is a big part of it.

As a feedback-giving customer I prefer to personally email my suggestions to the support team, or whoever's being tagged to deal with that kind of stuff. Posting on the forum is usually seen as an exercise in futility, and I blame this largely on the self-centered retards who keep throwing out crap ideas and then getting all pissy when others pick them apart. Of course it's bad that many companies don't appear to be acknowledging player feedback, but if I was a customer service rep who had to deal with hordes of clueless 5-second-attention-span primadonnas day in day out, I'd avoid the forums like the plague too.

Good article as usual Sanya, but there's one thing I need to point out. Counting on "the ultimate accountability to the market" to keep game companies listening to customers isn't enough. There's a huge hole in that process, and every customer who quits a game (or decides not to play it) without giving any feedback proves its existence.

Case in point - I am not playing an MMO that just launched that I was definitely going to play. I'd played the company's earlier offering in the same genre and had definitely decided to buy this game and try it out for at least a month.

I made my decision not to play the game based solely on something directly related to the game or company. Can you tell me what that reason was?

Of course not, because I didn't tell you, nor did I tell them. I, as a customer, don't owe a company the effort of ensuring that it knows why I am not buying their product.

Now, I would have (and still will) gladly tell that company why, if they ever ask me. They've got my email address from the forums and hundreds of posts from me to demonstrate interest (I like discussing the effects of design decisions on the people aspect of gameplay, and those tend to wander a bit). But, I've heard nothing. Not an email nor a PM from them.

That's the hole in the feedback process, and it's usually obscured by the assumption that because a company is dependent on customer revenue to survive, they've got adequate mechanisms for getting feedback.

My case proves that this is not true. This company has my contact means and could undoubtedly identify me as a person who had shown interest, but hadn't bought. But they haven't shot me a message saying "hey, um, we know you were looking at this, will you click this link and tell us why you haven't bought it?". I'd do that, no problem.

So my point is, just saying "accountability is built in" isn't enough. The company must actually be actively identifying lost customers and getting their feedback to discover why their game isn't selling, or the whole accountability system fails for lack of input.

Originally posted by aleos

Originally posted by Hyanmen

Originally posted by aleos

 The people that run the show at making games are absolutly fucking DRY. NO IDEAS, NO INNOVATION, NO HEART. They have lost something somewhere down the road and aren't even using the biggest source of ideas. Us.

They just aren't given the chance to do something different, because it's risky. 

The player's aren't very good source of ideas. We don't know what we want. The developer should develop something we want to play, not what we think we want to play.

Of course its risky. You going to spend millions of dollars on an idea that might not work. Kinda sounds like a lot of shit produced today no? You make it sound as if we were actually asked what we wanted to play we would fumble around like ass hats and idiots drooling over oatmeal cookies. We know exactly what we want most of us aren't complete morons. 

Yes we wan't games like WoW. Yes?

Look at the amount of post about wowkiller, and look at the whinage for games that is not topping WoW subscription numbers and so utlmately is a failed game.

So yeah.. we customers do know what we want and we want WoW 2.0.

Originally posted by Yamota

Granted that the "customer" is not a single entity but regardless of that the customer or the customers are the one who pays for a service and the developers are one creating the service so certainly there is a customer and there is the provider of the service, among others the developers.

So what the developers need to do is to find that pleases the majority of existing customers and what may draw more customers because in the end they are paying to make MMORPGs feasible and profitable.

Yes they have to do that.

Why?

-Because there can be only one game, and that game must suit all customers to MMO games.

We have 3 developers here and they are developing game types A,B and C. We have 9 customers, 3 for each game type.

A:

Customer 1: Want game A to be an B-type game.
Customer 2: Want game A to be an C-type game.
Customer 3: Want game A just as it is.

B:

Customer 1: Want game B to be an C-type game.
Customer 2: Want game B to be an A-type game.
Customer 3: Want game B just as it is.

C:

Customer 1: Want game C to be an A-type game.
Customer 2: Want game C to be an B-type game.
Customer 3: Want game C just as it is.

Imagine... if those gamers rather would go what game they want instead of picking the latest cool game and whine for it to be just like thay want to be. Would be pretty nice, huh?

But yeah, that is just to demanding and frustrating, let's settle for one type of gamee and make it availble to everyone. :D (Well we we can name them different ofcourse.)

Excellent read, Sanya. Thank you for taking the time to write this and try to keep things in perspective.

Originally posted by brostyn

Two of my favorite games were destroyed because devs decided to go their own merry way. Despite tons of hollering, crying, whining, and bitching from their subsribers. Those two are EQ and DAoC.

 

EQ used to be a nice little grouping game. Then some idiot dev had a brainfart to totally change the game to a raid centric nightmare. Locking out players from content, creating a raider vs. grouper division, and worst of all balancing the group game based on raid gear instead of group gear.

DAoC. Oh, DAoC, once the best game ever to grace the earth. Full of grouping, little to no raids. Not gear dependent. Vibrant economy. Awesome RvR. It had it all. Then, out of  nowhere we are hit by this thing called Trials of Atlantis. I mean, wtf was that? This thing was a nightmare. Those of us who left EQ, because of the raids were once again being forced to raid. Not only that, but every encounter seemed to be broken. It took DAoC years, and tens of thousands of subscribers before they finally figured out "the customer is always right".

 

So, you can say all you want that "The Customer" is not always right(of course, we aren't talking individuals here), but history of MMOs that have gone from riches to rags proves otherwise.

Can add Star Wars Galaxies to the list if you want as well as Warhammer.  I remember when SOE decided to slam the CU down everyone's throats, the massive protests that would crash the servers were completely ignored.  For what its worth the customer may have been playing games for most of their life; so, they might know a thing or two about what works.   The fact that they are paying, should entitle them some respect from the developers as well. 

I've seen one too many MMORPGs fail because someone decided to stop listening to the players complaints.  Yes, you cannot listen to everyone's complaints; but, we were born with this gift called discernment.  This ability allows a person to make a rational decision based on knowledge they have accumulated over time.  As  most of us have seen in the past, this is not the case with the way these businesses operate in today's economy.  When the developers start to alienate their customers, who have valid concerns for a product, that is when the product fails.  The "customer" is not always right; but, the "customer" is not always wrong either.

Good article....the Customer is NOT always right.... but the Customers (purposefully plural) are ultimately the ones you have to satisfy in order to keep the lights on.

The problem comes that in so many companies (definately NOT limited to game companies)..... the persons actualy empowered to make decisions about the company, product, service, etc.... are INSULATED (either by happenstance or by design) from both the customers AND the people in charge of making the nuts and bolts of the company work. Far too often decisions are based not on actual data from EITHER the Customers OR the Design Teams.... but entirely on the ego of the decision maker.

I've seen this happen time and again....first hand.....and yes it does usualy lead to train-wrecks... but by that point the damage has already been done.

Even in cases where some market research is done....OFTEN it is either completely ignored if it does not meet what the decision maker has already decided to do.... or it is tortured and tweaked to the point where it presents a conclusion that is the exact opposite of what the raw data would indicate....but conveniently matches what the decision maker had already decided they wanted to do.

The problem here is that there often tends to be little overlap between the skillset that GETS one in a position to be a decision-maker (mostly self-promotion).... and the skill-set that ALLOWS one to be good at making decisions. Note that those skill-sets are NOT mutualy exclusive (and when you find a person that happens to have both... you are in a very fortunate position indeed).... but neither are they mutualy reinforcing.

I will also state that while "The Dev's" may, in reality, indeed be very far from a monolithic entity....as far as the customer is concerned that is largely immaterial. The customers experience with the Product is NOT determined by the performance of any one individual in the company....it is determined by the the performance of the company as a WHOLE. Nor is the customers money paid to any individual in the company....it is paid to the customer as a whole. So while it may be interesting to note that Joe the Developer may have agreed 100% with the customers opinion.....but ultimately that doesn't matter squat to the customer...if it isn't reflected in the final product delivered to the customer.

To illustrate, I once had an Account Manager at one of my vendors respond to a complaint I had by saying "Well it's not my fault... I did X task the very next day that you put in the request....it was Dept. Y that didn't act on your request for weeks...and I don't really have any control over what they do".   I responded by stating respectfully that while that may be entirely true it's also entirely immaterial. As a customer, I pay for the END RESULTS provided to me by the company as a whole.... not the singular task performed by any one individual within the company does (unless that in itself constitutes the entirety of the service I need from the company).

Customer Service is generaly a thankless job...and I personaly would not really like to do it.... but when performing that job, you are not representing just your own performance but the companies as a whole.... and you are often the only conduit provided to the customer to dialogue with the company. I never take it personal with the Customer Service Rep's I talk to (unless they ACTUALY are the source of the problem)...... but I will definately let them know of any disatisfactions I have with their companies services. It's upto the individual companies structures and procedures as to whether that has any internal effect on the company.... but at the very least, I've given them the raw data that they might use to better be able to retain me...or understand why they have lost some business.