How feedback works and why it matters

100 Human Paladin
13690
Most of the problems come with PVP servers. Also you guys should increase the spawn rate of some of these northrend/BC mobs..
Reply Quote
100 Human Hunter
14365
Girlsgonewow no understand this.
Reply Quote
100 Troll Mage
18560
You make some good points, Tolvard, and I appreciate that your post is well written and mostly constructive. The primary issue I have with your post -- since it's overall very good -- is that you make huge assumptions about our "hidden" motivations for implementing CRZ. Even if the guesses you're making are logical inferences based on observations you've made, you absolutely declare your statements as fact when you're clearly a reasonable enough person to understand that you couldn't possibly know with certainty how we made the decisions we did.


What you said here was nearly as bad. You literally have five lines about how he is wrong, and one line about how he made points, and you can see how they can be made. No response at all. Completely trying to shift the focus.
Reply Quote
90 Night Elf Druid
11220
When you're at the point where a very vocal group are against it and your apologists are frequently saying "I hate feature X too but..." I think it's time to rethink the game plan.
Reply Quote
90 Blood Elf Paladin
8955
there would be one solution to end all the conspiracy theories. and it's probably not the most elegent or popular with...well, anybody, especially the guys behind the curtain.

Transparency.
Reply Quote
90 Undead Warrior
0
A lot of the pvp feedback on the beta was largely ignored and resulted with a lot of the problems we are just now getting fixed on the current PTR.
Competitive games like DotA and League of Legends patch their game almost weekly and fine tune things all the time. They don't need to set aside a multi month long PTR to fix a few things.
And you cant deny this works for them, and they have way more meta game then WoW does to balance.
It will never be OK to have one class be capable of killing another class or spec in roughly a second. It should not have taken months to get this fixed and is one of the many reasons I am leaving this game. Perhaps Blizzard has grown too large? And too slow?
The amount of time and development devoted to raid dungeons is appalling, you see these places for a handful of hours a week. Meanwhile all the other hours in a week are spent doing boring dalies or nothing at all.

Also CRZ is one of the worst things added to the game.
I don't want to level alts or professions while it is in place, it is simply impossible. You let people rob my low population server of resources and quests while giving back nothing in return. Stop thinking your players are thickheads and missing the point of CRZ.
Edited by Visceris on 11/15/2012 1:11 PM PST
Reply Quote
90 Gnome Mage
9310
11/15/2012 12:49 PMPosted by Zarhym
That's my biggest problem with a lot of the negative feedback I see on hot issues like CRZ: Not that it's negative, but that people usually need to explain the unknown by formulating what I'd define as straight-up conspiracy theories. And they spread like wildfire. We are probably in part to blame for it, but sometimes all the insights and behind-the-scenes facts just can't be shared in a meaningful way with the public.


Sometimes it is really, really hard to figure out why you guys make some of the decisions you make though. For anyone familiar with game design, or even software development in general, Blizzard often defies conventional wisdom. That can be a really good thing since it allows revolutionizing what people expect from a video game, but it's also really frustrating when it doesn't quite work out how you must have hoped. So then people start speculating on why since hindsight is 20/20 and they know you just must have seen it wouldn't work out.

But anyways, thanks a ton for talking to us like adults. Hopefully we players can do a better job of talking to you like adults as well, but it's hard. We often care too much to think and act rationally. A passionate playerbase is definitely a double-edged sword, so thanks for putting up with us.
Reply Quote
100 Goblin Mage
18920
11/15/2012 01:02 PMPosted by Gunny
That's my biggest problem with a lot of the negative feedback I see on hot issues like CRZ: Not that it's negative, but that people usually need to explain the unknown by formulating what I'd define as straight-up conspiracy theories. And they spread like wildfire. We are probably in part to blame for it, but sometimes all the insights and behind-the-scenes facts just can't be shared in a meaningful way with the public. There's just not a lot to be accomplished by engaging with people who say such changes are financially driven (i.e. cost efficiency > gameplay or customer concerns), or that they provide the path of least resistance for us in terms of our production pipeline.


You can lay the blame for conjecture and conspiracy theories flat on Blizzard's doorstep. Your lack of transparency and poor communication of reasons and intent over the years have developed this forum culture. Changes are now assumed to be made for financial reasons because developer thinking is rarely shared other than in vague, general statements. Developer blogs are inredibly generalized and rarely come out until after the fact and changes are done deals.

The entire approach to cusomter feedback seems to come down to: Thanks for posting, however, we simply don't agree. Occasionally players and developers seem to align and people hold this up as an example of feedback impacting the game, when the reality is more likely that the decision was made months ago. I've seen a few cases where huge volumes of negative outcry will force a change, but that's by far the exception.

So again, your lack of communication and transparency bred the lack of faith in the feedback process. Blend that in with contantly hawking Blizzard pets, books, and paid services... can you really wonder why the perception exists that it isn't so much about the game anymore as much as what you can squeeze out of it profit-wise?


Man, beat me to saying it, so I'm just going to +1 your post. Part of the reason that we're forced to make assumptions as to the motivation behind a change is because Blizzard won't share them unless their hand is forced, so him saying "your assumptions on the matter are incorrect" is partially Blizzard's fault to begin with.
Reply Quote
90 Pandaren Monk
6145
11/15/2012 01:02 PMPosted by Igornia
You make some good points, Tolvard, and I appreciate that your post is well written and mostly constructive. The primary issue I have with your post -- since it's overall very good -- is that you make huge assumptions about our "hidden" motivations for implementing CRZ. Even if the guesses you're making are logical inferences based on observations you've made, you absolutely declare your statements as fact when you're clearly a reasonable enough person to understand that you couldn't possibly know with certainty how we made the decisions we did.


What you said here was nearly as bad. You literally have five lines about how he is wrong, and one line about how he made points, and you can see how they can be made. No response at all. Completely trying to shift the focus.


I'm unsure how you interpreted this as a shift of focus. I read it as: "Thanks for the points. Your post is well written. Here is my issue - you make huge assumptions about a secret agenda which doesn't exist. But...I will take your post into consideration when discussing these things in the future." How is that shifting focus? He literally addressed the issue and thanked the OP for not QQ'ing. What else do you want? He even stated "There's just not a lot to be accomplished by engaging with people who say such changes are financially driven." Which means..."I'm not going to sit an argue with someone who already has his mind set on a conspiracy theory which has no factual basis. It will be a waste of my time."

I think one of the main issues here is people can't comprehend what the blue posts are saying. I'm not attacking you, by any means, Igornia...so please don't misinterpret my post. I'm just pointing out how your statement is incorrect imo. Zarhym adressed the issue at hand and even thanked the person for a well written post. Seemed like a good response to me.

+1 to Zarhym. I thought your response was tasteful and spot-on. Thank you.
Edited by Flerx on 11/15/2012 1:19 PM PST
Reply Quote
100 Worgen Warrior
10675
Zarhym you know you are great at what you do. You know that or you wouldnt be doing what you do.

I have to agree with the general consensus on this because whether it be about feed back or just a point of view. With any response from Blizzard the usaul stance is to go to the complete polar opposite to try to prove the base wrong and then the system completely breaks down.

We try to supply feedback and it get perverted in your discussion groups you have internally as an attack on your company. A perfect example,and you said you wanted them, was the looting in LFR. the forums went crazy and you made achange and look how that turned out its still a mess. All you did was change the reason why people got mad instead of trying to make the issue less inflamatory.

There are multiple things we can point out but its still gonna be about one thing. You guys do make decissions not to better gameplay but expend the time to help cover profits. The example to this is Multi-Boxing. The majority of the player base hates it but you guys have such a "Grey Area" stance on it. What do you expect people to do? Not PvP and deal with it, or post Feedback about why it shouldnt be allowwed. Thats alot of money to lose. We arent just people we are your bread and butter. The people who care about the game. The people who are always logging on everyday.

If we the people who log on everyday does that mean we do hold an honest opinion and post here al the time? OR do we faid away and post nothing then you get no feedback? I dont think its on you or the devs or us. Its all of us not taking these things into account for each other.

I tried to not go to this extent but really take your head out of the boardroom once and a while and take a look around and see whats going on. That doesnt apply to just you or anyone in specific. Log on once in a while and play what youve made and try to enjoy it. Take a week vacation from the office and do what we have everyday and post what you see wrong and see if you agree with us as posters.
Edited by Imworgenit on 11/15/2012 1:24 PM PST
Reply Quote
90 Blood Elf Paladin
7665
You make some good points, Tolvard, and I appreciate that your post is well written and mostly constructive. The primary issue I have with your post -- since it's overall very good -- is that you make huge assumptions about our "hidden" motivations for implementing CRZ. Even if the guesses you're making are logical inferences based on observations you've made, you absolutely declare your statements as fact when you're clearly a reasonable enough person to understand that you couldn't possibly know with certainty how we made the decisions we did.

That's my biggest problem with a lot of the negative feedback I see on hot issues like CRZ: Not that it's negative, but that people usually need to explain the unknown by formulating what I'd define as straight-up conspiracy theories. And they spread like wildfire. We are probably in part to blame for it, but sometimes all the insights and behind-the-scenes facts just can't be shared in a meaningful way with the public. There's just not a lot to be accomplished by engaging with people who say such changes are financially driven (i.e. cost efficiency > gameplay or customer concerns), or that they provide the path of least resistance for us in terms of our production pipeline.

We come off looking very defensive purely by nature of responding to a fallacious, hyperbolic, or incredibly presumptive argument. And, yet, that somehow tends to validate a conspiracy on the forums. This is an extreme example, but I'll use it since it was posted in this very thread:

Most people probably (hopefully!) understand that this is a major leap into the deep end of connecting dots simply because those dots exist in the same space and time. And the people who truly believe this type of stuff are going to feel validated if we A) defend ourselves purely on the basis of liking things like truth and facts (even you used the term "spin" to describe this); or B) remain silent because the endless tug of war that could result is a colossal waste of organic material.

Anyway, don't get me wrong. Your criticisms are well founded. I'll keep them in mind as I continue discussing the larger points of contention in the community with our developers and executives.


Zarhym, that's a great response and I for one greatly appreciate that sort of insight. I would also agree with you about not stating assumptions as fact but you have to realize that many people (anecdotally, everyone I know well in WoW) believe that CRZ's were more about server efficiency and cost saving and that being unwilling to provide an alternate, albeit less efficient, way to gain rep (or at least access to valor gear) is purely to keep people around the hubs so that PVP servers have world pvp.

The only way to keep people from having misconceptions (if indeed they are misconceptions) is by providing some transparency or at least insight into why the development teams disagrees with a point that obviously being loudly championed by the forum using portion of the playerbase. Personally I would suggest taking a page from CCP's playbook and do dev blogs for every feature or major change that completely lay out the design vision and how it will be implemented. Then again, I suppose from Blizzard's perspective that's just wishing for the moon.

One final point; I completely understand your point about not wanting to engage with people when they start suggesting that cost or some form of additional revenue factor into a decision. That said, its hard not to fall into that trap when according to Blizzard's representatives; that has never been the case about any decision. For all of those of us that actually work for a living, its a bit hard to believe.
Edited by Haradgrim on 11/15/2012 1:26 PM PST
Reply Quote
100 Orc Hunter
9650
Much respect to the blues, but sometimes it seems like you go for the most irrational troll post to make out as a straw man to make a counterpoint. Like the dude with 9 alts who hates dailies.



i would have to agree with this.

i've been playing this game off and on (mostly on) since it's early betas and lately i'm disturbed by there being little to no real response to real issues like their used to be. it's almost like watching mitt romney campaign again.

biggest issue i have yet seen addressed by anyone at blizzard is hunters. no, not hunter burst. not everyone pvps. i mean hunter sustain. the fact they are NOWHERE on any raid logging site is troublesome and the changes coming to 5.1 will not address this in the slightest. being able to use cobra/steady shot on the move means nothing since both of those abilities - and all other hunter abilities - are hideously undertuned base damage wise. the base damage of focus using hunter abilities outside of kill command make the class unwieldy now and i long for my mana bar back.

the longer this goes unaddressed the worse the problem becomes. this is not like shaman dps or dk dps or priest dps issues - those classes have other specs to fall back on. hunters do not.
Reply Quote
90 Blood Elf Mage
0

That's my biggest problem with a lot of the negative feedback I see on hot issues like CRZ: Not that it's negative, but that people usually need to explain the unknown by formulating what I'd define as straight-up conspiracy theories. And they spread like wildfire. We are probably in part to blame for it, but sometimes all the insights and behind-the-scenes facts just can't be shared in a meaningful way with the public. There's just not a lot to be accomplished by engaging with people who say such changes are financially driven (i.e. cost efficiency > gameplay or customer concerns), or that they provide the path of least resistance for us in terms of our production pipeline.


Here's the thing with that. You said it youself. People need to explain the unknown. Why is the reasoning behind CRZ unknown? Because no one- literally, no one- on the blue side of things is engaging with the players who are dissatisfied with it. more than 150 pages in the most recent thread about it- the 11th or 12th.

This was full of various issues that people were having, and the negative feedback bled into other things. The official reasoning for CRZ makes no sense to many of us, and blues are unwilling to actually engage with the many criticisms of it.

It makes leveling MORE (not less, as you say) painful. It makes things worse for low-pop servers, who were begging for people to raid with and buy from.

It breaks immersion, it has borked timed events, it has lag attached to every transition. It brings out the worst of behavior because there's no server accountability any more. This is just a small sample of the complaints. And what we get is GC tweeting that we shouldn't want a single player game, and you all blues making pronouncements that you're happy with it and the bugs aren't getting fixed any time soon.

Seriously, can you honestly look at the CRZ thread and tell me that blues have engaged with the criticisms and concerns, the way (say) you have around dailies?
Reply Quote
90 Night Elf Druid
14075
How "feedback works" and why "it matters".

Neither seems to be the case to me anymore, sorry. Wish this company and its hard working employees all the best, as well as the millions of people sticking around to play the games, but personally it's gone too far in an unappealing direction for me to stay. At least for now. Never thought I'd say that but honesty is the best policy. Extended vacation from Azeroth coming up and for the first time in as long as I can remember, I'm going to enjoy it.

Best of luck to everyone who sticks around and continues to ride the gear treadmill in World of Chorecraft. And I do mean that sincerely. Glad so many people continue to enjoy it. People in this house do not, however, and so it's time to say "see ya around".
Reply Quote
71 Undead Death Knight
1010
While you're 'round these parts, I want to draw your attention to a well-written, insightful article by Matt Rossi over at WoW Insider. It's a great point of reference when you consider some of the statements we, as Blizzard employees, tend to consistently reiterate.

"How feedback works and why it matters" via WoW Insider

Food for thought!

With love,
Zarhym


It's a good read and I hope others take time to check it out. Thanks for sharing it, Zar.
Reply Quote
90 Blood Elf Paladin
7665
Much respect to the blues, but sometimes it seems like you go for the most irrational troll post to make out as a straw man to make a counterpoint. Like the dude with 9 alts who hates dailies.



i would have to agree with this.

i've been playing this game off and on (mostly on) since it's early betas and lately i'm disturbed by there being little to no real response to real issues like their used to be. it's almost like watching mitt romney campaign again.

biggest issue i have yet seen addressed by anyone at blizzard is hunters. no, not hunter burst. not everyone pvps. i mean hunter sustain. the fact they are NOWHERE on any raid logging site is troublesome and the changes coming to 5.1 will not address this in the slightest. being able to use cobra/steady shot on the move means nothing since both of those abilities - and all other hunter abilities - are hideously undertuned base damage wise. the base damage of focus using hunter abilities outside of kill command make the class unwieldy now and i long for my mana bar back.

the longer this goes unaddressed the worse the problem becomes. this is not like shaman dps or dk dps or priest dps issues - those classes have other specs to fall back on. hunters do not.


Are you serious? In my LFR (Dread Approach) last night all 4 of the dop dps were BM HUnters. It was the same on all fights. BM Hunters are so rediculously overpowered its hillarious (I say that as someone with a hunter alt).
Edited by Haradgrim on 11/15/2012 1:41 PM PST
Reply Quote
90 Tauren Warrior
9290
Man, beat me to saying it, so I'm just going to +1 your post. Part of the reason that we're forced to make assumptions as to the motivation behind a change is because Blizzard won't share them unless their hand is forced, so him saying "your assumptions on the matter are incorrect" is partially Blizzard's fault to begin with.


Gotta disagree. Heavily. I feel like it's been stated before that the point of CRZ is to populate what would otherwise be empty zones on umpteen servers. I think that's a reasonable enough answer, because before CRZ was implemented I would see pretty frequent posts begrudging the lonely questing experience and the lack of world pvp. I mean, honestly...HOW many "World PvP is dead" threads did we go through a day. So to me, it's more logical to go with that response while understanding that CRZ allows for more people to be in lower level zones (1-85) without overcrowding higher pop zones (Pandaria) than arguing that Blizzard spent that amount of time (and money) developing CRZ in an effort to save money...instead of just merging servers if that was what they were actually after.

So...no...I don't think anybody is FORCED to make those assumptions. Funnily enough, it's also not an assumption that I see being made among those that tend to support it. Which, to me, suggests that it isn't a lack of any other reasonable explanation being provided that results in those assumptions...but the fact that attaching such nefarious reasoning to it provides one more reason to deride a feature that you might already dislike.
Reply Quote

Please report any Code of Conduct violations, including:

Threats of violence. We take these seriously and will alert the proper authorities.

Posts containing personal information about other players. This includes physical addresses, e-mail addresses, phone numbers, and inappropriate photos and/or videos.

Harassing or discriminatory language. This will not be tolerated.

Forums Code of Conduct

Report Post # written by

Reason
Explain (256 characters max)

Reported!

[Close]