WHY Does Blizzard Not Work With Players?

General Discussion
...

Which is why new stuff get ADDED, instead of REPLACING what works.

But, to answer your question, yes, I'd DEFINITELY having a LOT more fun had those systems remained.

And the repetitiveness increased with the RNG gear, instead of reduced.

Nowadays instead of farming honor in PvP I get to pray that:
-I get at least 500 pts in resource BG or a flag in a CTF one.(~60% of the games)
-I get a box with actual gear in it (~20-30% in my experience).
-Said gear is not for a slot I already have better gear (progressively worse).

Valor tokens would get my alts' ilvl to at least a reasonable point (355), could be trickled down to a single slot a week, limited to the first 7 heroics of the week...

I get really sad thinking about how much better the token system was.


Well I'm glad you'd have more fun... because I wouldn't (and I'm a day 1 Vanilla player). I enjoy the current system where I can wander around the world, do a warfront of two and hang out in arathi every couple weeks without ever stepping foot into a dungeon to get my alts ilvl to at least a reasonable point (355). So you see, the player base is now divided.


The point is, we didn't NEED it. We could have BOTH!

Also you will never get to 355 from warfronts alone, unless you're the god of RNG.
I have 12 chars, did it with 9 already, the best result is the guaranteed 370 plus 1-4, mostly 2, pieces of 340 gear from rares + 1 from the quest, other than constantly replaying the same warfront, which gets real old, real fast.
They think they know better because of their experience and certificates.
But they don't, they forgot the root of WoW, they think about it as some enterprise or business but they completely forgot about what it really is: A game.
11/06/2018 06:57 AMPosted by Ashania
...

Well I'm glad you'd have more fun... because I wouldn't (and I'm a day 1 Vanilla player). I enjoy the current system where I can wander around the world, do a warfront of two and hang out in arathi every couple weeks without ever stepping foot into a dungeon to get my alts ilvl to at least a reasonable point (355). So you see, the player base is now divided.


The point is, we didn't NEED it. We could have BOTH!

Also you will never get to 355 from warfronts alone, unless you're the god of RNG.
I have 12 chars, did it with 9 already, the best result is the guaranteed 370 plus 1-4, mostly 2, pieces of 340 gear from rares + 1 from the quest, other than constantly replaying the same warfront, which gets real old, real fast.


You could have both and more but then you'd have those silly people that can't control their addiction/compulsions complaining that the games not alt friendly simply because they feel the need to maximize on everything. This is one of the reasons why Blizz has been trying to verge away from having some measurable weekly cap because players have complained about their need to fill the cap each week and how that's not "fun".

So again, you don't represent what everyone wants. I don't represent what everyone wants. A part of the population will complain no matter what decision Blizzard makes and the community is rarely in agreement with what they want.
11/06/2018 06:00 AMPosted by Mvura
11/06/2018 05:34 AMPosted by Ryuk
It happens when you've built a legacy of 15-18 years of quality then you start producing crap the people that have been fans of your games for half their lives or more will be pissed.


No, its pretty specific to certain audiences.

Case in point - if you're not interested in Diablo Unlimited, what's the problem? A different unit at Blizzard makes a game you're not going to play? SUCH TRAVESTY.

Why can't people who like mobile games or have a switch or just aren't PC gamers play Diablo? Why does it always have to be about you? What was it about your childhood that renders you completely unable to deal with this?


It probably has something to do with mobile games = micro transactions very very clearly. Buying a loot crate or some in game gold is not as overtly clear MT wise as it has an element of RNG or is not directly related to P2W, mobile games are notorious for putting the in game advantages right in front and anyone wanting to compete seriously without taking YEARS of gameplay needs to buy stuff.

Also, the childhood thing is a reference to when games were created to be just that, the game. You bought it and everything about the game came in that one purchase. MTs have slowly found their way into every company/game producer at it sickens a lot of people. Diablo Immortal may not be like that, but god help Blizzard if it is truly P2W.

11/06/2018 06:04 AMPosted by Gávilar
Announcing it at Blizzcon with nothing else alongside it was a mistake. Bethesda could get away with that dumb Skyrim mobile game because it was announced as more of a 'hey we did this cool thing too if you want!' and it was alongside Fallout 76, Starfield or whatever, and the new Elder Scrolls teaser.

Diablo Immortal is nothing but a shameless cash grab. It's going to work, but it has certainly damaged the community's respect for Blizzard.


And thats just it, as a business move nothing is wrong with it. However, the fact that they announced it in such an unfriendly market...
11/06/2018 06:00 AMPosted by Mvura
11/06/2018 05:34 AMPosted by Ryuk
It happens when you've built a legacy of 15-18 years of quality then you start producing crap the people that have been fans of your games for half their lives or more will be pissed.


No, its pretty specific to certain audiences.

Case in point - if you're not interested in Diablo Unlimited, what's the problem? A different unit at Blizzard makes a game you're not going to play? SUCH TRAVESTY.

Why can't people who like mobile games or have a switch or just aren't PC gamers play Diablo? Why does it always have to be about you? What was it about your childhood that renders you completely unable to deal with this?


Only in gaming does the surreal situation occur when consumers or customers get blamed for critiquing what a producer sells. Not only do these same consumers get blamed for voicing their opinion but are basically called names or have their childhood experiences called into question. If I tell Ford that their decision to only make SUV's is really really dumb and people still want to buy sedans, is that telling Ford that there is something wrong in my childhood that I cannot deal with the production line? Of course not, and this comment is ignorant beyond description.

"Your opinion is just about you?" - really? Of course its about me, by definition an opinion is expressing my preference. Only someone completely clueless would run a business without taking the opinion of their customers into account. Its precisely why a business existing, to match the wants and needs of a consumer to something that it can produce.

I am not saying Blizzard does not do this. In the past, Blizzard has produced consistently high quality games that I (and my family) have enjoyed. But I do think going mobile is a misstep - because no one wants it....
No one from their current aging player base wants it. It's meant for a new audience. When I talk to my nieces and nephews or any of the kids at the various schools I work at... they all talk about their love for video games. Want to take a guess at how often a Blizzard game comes up? Of the hundreds of kids I'm exposed to, only one has ever mentioned playing a Blizzard game and it was D3.

Fortnite and Call of Duty on the other hand.....
Which player exactly??
...

The point is, we didn't NEED it. We could have BOTH!

Also you will never get to 355 from warfronts alone, unless you're the god of RNG.
I have 12 chars, did it with 9 already, the best result is the guaranteed 370 plus 1-4, mostly 2, pieces of 340 gear from rares + 1 from the quest, other than constantly replaying the same warfront, which gets real old, real fast.


You could have both and more but then you'd have those silly people that can't control their addiction/compulsions complaining that the games not alt friendly simply because they feel the need to maximize on everything. This is one of the reasons why Blizz has been trying to verge away from having some measurable weekly cap because players have complained about their need to fill the cap each week and how that's not "fun".

So again, you don't represent what everyone wants. I don't represent what everyone wants. A part of the population will complain no matter what decision Blizzard makes and the community is rarely in agreement with what they want.


That what caps are for. They could make some activities mutually exclusive with others. If the activities are capped, like raiding, those players will have to stop playing. They would QQ about being unable to do everything, but they would still play. By removing options, you're only making those who like them, quit.

The caps could be even reward related, instead of time gated, just like island expeditions. The one type of person that Blizzard can't design for is the overly addicted player. And even they could fill their quota by playing alts.

No one represents everyone, but, if you can design relevant content for each type of player, you are, indeed, designing for everyone.

So, no, removals are not justified, and the current design is severely lacking.
Because if they followed most of what gets suggested in these forums, they'd have gone bankrupt long ago already :P
11/06/2018 07:31 AMPosted by Ashania
...

You could have both and more but then you'd have those silly people that can't control their addiction/compulsions complaining that the games not alt friendly simply because they feel the need to maximize on everything. This is one of the reasons why Blizz has been trying to verge away from having some measurable weekly cap because players have complained about their need to fill the cap each week and how that's not "fun".

So again, you don't represent what everyone wants. I don't represent what everyone wants. A part of the population will complain no matter what decision Blizzard makes and the community is rarely in agreement with what they want.


That what caps are for. They could make some activities mutually exclusive with others. If the activities are capped, like raiding, those players will have to stop playing. They would QQ about being unable to do everything, but they would still play. By removing options, you're only making those who like them, quit.

The caps could be even reward related, instead of time gated, just like island expeditions. The one type of person that Blizzard can't design for is the overly addicted player. And even they could fill their quota by playing alts.

No one represents everyone, but, if you can design relevant content for each type of player, you are, indeed, designing for everyone.

So, no, removals are not justified, and the current design is severely lacking.


Just to be clear, I'm also in agreement that the current design is severely lacking. I just want that out there before it seems like I'm white knighting the game, but I also happen to understand the predicament that Blizzard is in. As I said before, many players did not enjoy having a "cap". Whether it's because it stops them from playing or because they felt like it forced them to play until the cap is met, they didn't enjoy it. Blizzard listened to them and now we're here.

So you see, Blizzard tried to work with the player base, tried to give them what they want and it's the exact opposite of what the other parts of the player base (you) wanted.
11/06/2018 05:58 AMPosted by Vaerth
11/06/2018 05:34 AMPosted by Ryuk
...

It happens when you've built a legacy of 15-18 years of quality then you start producing crap the people that have been fans of your games for half their lives or more will be pissed. You've made quality products, games made by gamers for gamers then you make mobile cash grabs and time gate mmo content like it's a mobile game then yes fans have a right to be pissed off.


I get the reasons for a NDA I see both points you two made in your comments. But as times change so does business practices. I simply mean that if they took a moment and spoke to players there would be way less anger and no Void Elves lol. I refer to the Void Elf thing because while I play Horde and dont care personally it has been a heavily spoken about topic since I left last year from WoW. I will be here for the month playing a little but nothing in BFA will keep my sub going, I am just playing around and checking some of it out since I bought BFA last year and never played it lol. There is nothing in BFA for my class to be excited about, and no allied races I like (I wanted a non Zombie Forsaken option or gen 1 DKs lol).

So, I understand why they kept things on the hush in years prior, but for a few years now that might not be the best approach anymore. Diablo Immortal is tanking Blizzard stocks right now, had they asked a few players their thought then this could have been adverted I would think lol. The customer is always right, we all know that. The silence out the Immortal announcement shows they really need a new approach or perhaps they are ready to let their empire fall.


I personally have no opinion on cosmetic things but I got friends that love there void elfs
Blizzard did work with the playerbase about high elves.

A lot of players did not want them.

Oh. You mean, they should have listened to you personally.

Got it.
...

That what caps are for. They could make some activities mutually exclusive with others. If the activities are capped, like raiding, those players will have to stop playing. They would QQ about being unable to do everything, but they would still play. By removing options, you're only making those who like them, quit.

The caps could be even reward related, instead of time gated, just like island expeditions. The one type of person that Blizzard can't design for is the overly addicted player. And even they could fill their quota by playing alts.

No one represents everyone, but, if you can design relevant content for each type of player, you are, indeed, designing for everyone.

So, no, removals are not justified, and the current design is severely lacking.


Just to be clear, I'm also in agreement that the current design is severely lacking. I just want that out there before it seems like I'm white knighting the game, but I also happen to understand the predicament that Blizzard is in. As I said before, many players did not enjoy having a "cap". Whether it's because it stops them from playing or because they felt like it forced them to play until the cap is met, they didn't enjoy it. Blizzard listened to them and now we're here.

So you see, Blizzard tried to work with the player base, tried to give them what they want and it's the exact opposite of what the other parts of the player base (you) wanted.


I could clearly tell you were not shilling, np there.

The caps are still there. You can still get raid loot, conquest gear, mythic + pvp chest only once a week.

The uncapped stuff already exists for the true hardcore (M+ and Arenas/RBGs) players.

What I'm trying to tell you, is that what has been removed, did not need to be removed at all, and it would not have impacted anything other than making me (and many other players) happier with an aspect of the game.

They did not have to remove valor or honor points/badges because of their new system.
Because, as is evident by posts on GD, most players don't care about whats best for the game, they care about whats best for them. Most of the time when players tell Blizzard to listen to the customer, they mean listen to them and them alone all others be damned.

GD does not represent the playerbase.
11/06/2018 07:48 AMPosted by Snikrot
So you see, Blizzard tried to work with the player base, tried to give them what they want and it's the exact opposite of what the other parts of the player base (you) wanted.
They've moved to e-sports and "raid, M+, or die". That's what a very distinct minority of the player base wanted. To get there, they removed large amounts of the content the majority of the player base wants and has traditionally consumed. The new gameplay they've included as replacements are stuff like islands and warfronts. Which are just mindless, repetitive and unrewarding garbage. Great ideas, lousy execution. Did anyone ever tell Blizz they wanted a PVE warfront, where you did the exact same thing each and every time, in a "can't lose" scenario? Pretty sure, NOT.

Someone used Wrath as an example...Wrath had dungeons that rewarded useful loot, rep, EXP, an endless amount of open world content for casuals and hardcore alike, and raids that were doable by even casual guilds willing to faceplant repeatedly to grind their way through...that were actually fun. With meaningful rewards at the end. Many side quest chains that rewarded good stuff (Broken Hilt jumps to mind), Argent Tourney, etc.
11/06/2018 05:25 AMPosted by Vaerth
the players


Because this doesn't exist. What we have is a whole slew of individuals. In other words, I doubt we could agree on the color of the sky never mind anything of actual import.
Because they are arrogant as hell.
The answer to the question should have been. "We will certainly be looking into adapting it for PC play" not "don't you guys have cell phones?".

Then it would have been nice and vague/hopeful and not insulting and completely missing the point. They have to train the guys on the stage better. They thought they had the room when the clearly did not.

Blizzard on the whole needs to learn to utilize polls with it's playerbase. We would be happy to take those and they could use them to avoid mistakes such as this.
11/06/2018 08:08 AMPosted by Margirita
The answer to the question should have been. "We will certainly be looking into adapting it for PC play" not "don't you guys have cell phones?".
Since, they've already said they're actively working on D4. Reportedly, were going to announce it, but "someone" pulled it at last minute. What we have here, is not only being totally disconnected from their players...but a failure to communicate. Wonder if the two are connected?
A game for 0-30 score: The game maker never listen player's voice.

A game for 30-60score: The game maker listen the player's voice but only understand a lit bit.

A game for 60-90 score: The game maker fully understand what players want and listen everyone's voice.

A game for 100 score: A masterpiece is never made by listening others voice. I'm the game itself, I create games.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum