|
Maybe I'm just ignorant of the reason here but is there any reason that the absolute full list of changes in a patch are not listed? For example, the stealth nerf to Spectral Guise, the change in pvp power as it relates to healing, etc. were not mentioned. Most of the times people have to find these out for themselves then wait for confirmation on their respective forums.
Any ideas? |
|
Because if they detailed everything that went into a patch it'd be about ten pages long and everyone would whine about that. I agree that they could be a touch more extensive though.
|
|
Then why not release them as they are now, but a button like "click here for full changes"
|
|
I'm not sure I'd be interested in seeing all the "changed doodad_3_blue to doodad_4_green" statements a full list might contain.
They release what they feel is important to the players. Some thing slip through the cracks at times. But we get most of the good stuff. |
|
Edited by Delanei on 11/28/12 6:32 PM (PST)
I'm not sure I'd be interested in seeing all the "changed doodad_3_blue to doodad_4_green" statements a full list might contain. But when they don't mention it we feel lied to or that they tried to sneak it behind our backs, but regardless of that fact they stir things up whether they tell us or not. |
|
Texture and art changes I understand, of course, but anything that affects actual gameplay, be it something major (again, spectral guise as an example) or something minor (some boss in some encounter now does x damage instead of y on z spell) should be documented. If presented in an orderly format, I don't see how this would be too daunting for players to look at. They can see the important things that affect general play and their class first, and see this extended screen by choice.
|
Lol anyone who argues that players can't read all the notes if they wanted are insulting people. Can players not read? If they don't need to then dont, but patch notes are evidence for Blizz and I can't understand why they refuse to provide certain information |
|
|
Why do you need "evidence"? Come on, folks. This is a video game. If you need evidence of every change in the code? You're over-fixating. |
|
Edited by Jamalia on 11/28/12 6:48 PM (PST)
Because if they detailed everything that went into a patch it'd be about ten pages long and everyone would whine about that. I agree that they could be a touch more extensive though. I have to admit to nerd raging/politely asking in the forums about "silent" changes/nerfs back in BC and wrath. They happen more frequently than most know. I was ignored by Blizz. Nothing has changed on this front. IDK what to say. I got tired and care a lot less now. The game isn't very important to me know, especially now that they've reduced the trees to kiddie parks.which are still cookie cuttered. |
|
Which just upsets them even more when they find out about them the hard way though. |
Community Manager
|
Edited by Daxxarri on 11/28/12 7:15 PM (PST)
Maybe I'm just ignorant of the reason here but is there any reason that the absolute full list of changes in a patch are not listed? For example, the stealth nerf to Spectral Guise, the change in pvp power as it relates to healing, etc. were not mentioned. Most of the times people have to find these out for themselves then wait for confirmation on their respective forums. I compile the notes, so I should probably explain a bit. Essentially, the development of every World of Warcraft patch is a highly iterative creative process. Like most creative processes, there's a little bit of chaos involved, with discreet sub-teams working on individual projects, but also coordinating closely at the same time, so there's always a frenzy of activity going on at any given moment. With that in mind, there's not one comprehensive, monolithic source of information on what's being changed. Instead, information needs to be solicited, provided, re-phrased, confirmed, re-confirmed, edited, and revised as the patch is developed and I compile the notes. That also means that if there's an omission, you can be reasonably certain that it wasn't intentional. It's also worth noting that, as the code changes to resolve issues and implement new features, sometimes things go unexpectedly wonky with older parts of the game. I'm careful to compile the notes as completely as possible, but it's not unlikely that some things will slip through the cracks from time to time. Perhaps an item didn't follow a typical development pipeline, or something was fixed at the last second. And of course, there will be rare occasions when I simply make an error and omit something that should have been included. In all cases, we try to make the notes as informative and complete as possible, while also keeping them relevant for 99% of players. Because if they detailed everything that went into a patch it'd be about ten pages long and everyone would whine about that. I agree that they could be a touch more extensive though. That's not precisely the case, but we do try to keep things relatively concise. Admittedly, there are many changes that occur that wouldn't mean anything at all to 99% of players, and really crunchy notes of that sort have historically always been omitted. They do not mention the ones which are apt to upset a large majority of the players. That's not the case either; there are notes in virtually every update that we know will upset someone. We don't shy away from providing information that needs to be provided, and I'm afraid that you are ascribing a motivation to an event that is actually happenstance. |
#13
11/28/2012
|
|
Edited by Lometos on 11/28/12 7:19 PM (PST)
So it's just coincidence that almost all of the stuff that you "forgot" to put in the patch notes are things that negatively impact the game/things that you know we wouldn't like? Things like the greatly reduced node spawns, removal of LFR status, Blingtron usable once per account, Golden Lotus amount from the vendor. Come on Blizzard, you have millions of subscribers, you don't need to resort to tactics like this. It is not like you are desperate to hold onto players.
It is rather insulting to your playerbase that you hide things like this from us. |
|
[quote] Then why wasn't the Blingtron nerf mentioned? Or the lower spawn rate of herbs? Or the change to the purchase of golden lotus with spirits of harmony? Seems like this is stuff that SHOULD HAVE made it in, but was left out so people wouldn't know. |
|
Community Manager
|
So it's just coincidence that almost all of the stuff that you "forgot" to put in the patch notes are things that negatively impact the game? I have a question for you: Do you really think that we believe that players are happier to find these things out on accident, with no warning? That somehow we think we can slip things by un-detected, when logic, history, and all evidence points to the contrary? What's the advantage there? |
#16
11/28/2012
|
|
So why was there no mention of the major change to LFR - you can no longer see how many bosses are down.
This should most definitely been in the patch nots yet absolutely nothing has been said about it from Blizzards end. |
|
Community Manager
|
Edited by Daxxarri on 11/29/12 12:33 PM (PST)
Indeed, it should have been. The fact that completing a partially cleared instance should make it much more likely that the next Raid Finder queue to be a fresh instance should also have been noted as well. I'll be adding both of those to the notes shortly, in fact. Edit: The next instance won't always be fresh, but the queueing player will be given strong preference for a fresh instance. |
#18
11/28/2012
|
|
|
The advantage is you can simply ignore addressing the issue like is almost always done with "stealth nerfs." Just change it and not say a word. |
|
I have a question for you: /thread |
