VaranisArano wrote: »I think the Devs listen to sensible, well-reasoned feedback. I just don't think they always do what I want.
Crucial distinction.
Wolf_Watching wrote: »VaranisArano wrote: »I think the Devs listen to sensible, well-reasoned feedback. I just don't think they always do what I want.
Crucial distinction.
VOTE. Also not saying what you want. They cannot do that. Just saying in regards to suggestions. Are they being considered (when they are well stated, once again not unsupported rubble).
VaranisArano wrote: »Wolf_Watching wrote: »VaranisArano wrote: »I think the Devs listen to sensible, well-reasoned feedback. I just don't think they always do what I want.
Crucial distinction.
VOTE. Also not saying what you want. They cannot do that. Just saying in regards to suggestions. Are they being considered (when they are well stated, once again not unsupported rubble).
I dislike voting, in large part because I think it promotes ignoring the feedback offered by commenters in favor of just looking at their votes, and because these forum polls create an overreliance on a relatively tiny number of self-selected posters to make their point. Well-reasoned, well-supported feedback, forum polls are NOT.
But that's a tangent.
I qualify my "Yes, they listen" answer because there's an obvious retort "but then why don't they listen to our feedback?"
At the end of the day, this retort and most "do the devs really listen" questions really come down to a persistent mistaken belief that "if someone really considers my most excellent feedback, they'll realize I'm right and they'll do it my way.
IMO, that's a fallacy. The Devs are perfectly capable of understanding and taking good quality feedback into account fully, and then deciding to do what they want anyway.
So yes, I think that good quality feedback is fully registered by the Devs.
I just don't think that necessarily means that the Devs are going to change their minds or be convinced to change their course of action by said good quality feedback. They do what they want, often with the certainty that their course of action is better than any well-stated feedback to the contrary. (It gets really awkward when the Devs later realize they were wrong, as with the DOT buff/nerf whiplash we're getting, and the players who gave good feedback have a massive "We told you so!")
So yes, the Devs understand and register our good, quality feedback.
That doesn't mean:
A. They won't decide their way is better/more profitable.
B. They aren't mistaken about what they expect to happen.
C. They want to, but can't make it happen, right away.
All of those things can and have happened, even when the Devs are fully registering good, quality feedback.
BennyButton wrote: »The only acceptable and correct answer is a resounding no.
Wolf_Watching wrote: »Are they (developers and class reps) protecting your interest? (... playstyle -or are DEVs at least giving you similar alternatives to use-, RPs. etc.)?
No. I think they do listen to some but it's very selective. Really feel they pay way to much attention to , and at times cater to what streamers and super elite players say and do then they do to the average joe, even though average joe represents the majority of the game population and is usually the one most hurt by the changes. Then of course there's the fact that a lot of good posts probably get lost in the mix since they can't possibly sit there and comb through every thread each day.
VaranisArano wrote: »Wolf_Watching wrote: »VaranisArano wrote: »I think the Devs listen to sensible, well-reasoned feedback. I just don't think they always do what I want.
Crucial distinction.
VOTE. Also not saying what you want. They cannot do that. Just saying in regards to suggestions. Are they being considered (when they are well stated, once again not unsupported rubble).
I dislike voting, in large part because I think it promotes ignoring the feedback offered by commenters in favor of just looking at their votes, and because these forum polls create an overreliance on a relatively tiny number of self-selected posters to make their point. Well-reasoned, well-supported feedback, forum polls are NOT.
But that's a tangent.
I qualify my "Yes, they listen" answer because there's an obvious retort "but then why don't they listen to our feedback?"
At the end of the day, this retort and most "do the devs really listen" questions really come down to a persistent mistaken belief that "if someone really considers my most excellent feedback, they'll realize I'm right and they'll do it my way.
IMO, that's a fallacy. The Devs are perfectly capable of understanding and taking good quality feedback into account fully, and then deciding to do what they want anyway.
So yes, I think that good quality feedback is fully registered by the Devs.
I just don't think that necessarily means that the Devs are going to change their minds or be convinced to change their course of action by said good quality feedback. They do what they want, often with the certainty that their course of action is better than any well-stated feedback to the contrary. (It gets really awkward when the Devs later realize they were wrong, as with the DOT buff/nerf whiplash we're getting, and the players who gave good feedback have a massive "We told you so!")
So yes, the Devs understand and register our good, quality feedback.
That doesn't mean:
A. They won't decide their way is better/more profitable.
B. They aren't mistaken about what they expect to happen.
C. They want to, but can't make it happen, right away.
All of those things can and have happened, even when the Devs are fully registering good, quality feedback.
No. I think they do listen to some but it's very selective. Really feel they pay way to much attention to , and at times cater to what streamers and super elite players say and do then they do to the average joe, even though average joe represents the majority of the game population and is usually the one most hurt by the changes. Then of course there's the fact that a lot of good posts probably get lost in the mix since they can't possibly sit there and comb through every thread each day.
This won't go over well but *** it, I'll say it anyways.
First, the Class Rep program is an organizational tool that represents a limited number of "actors" e.g. end-users. The entity does not have, and will not, share any stakeholder sway in the development of the game. The group is an informality where feedback is offered on discussion topics; BUT it's done as a public relations methodology. No one on the forums will be able to provide meaningful feedback without historical data to support their statements. Everything else is subjective and opinion based, including my own posts. I would like to know whether the Class Reps are given a thorough survey accompanied by a specific test case scenario; otherwise, their simply measuring "Perception" which is a subjective Quality Assurance attribute.
Second, often when bugs are reported, those defects are tracked in a defect matrix until resolved. So, NO but that's expected when you're dealing with 1000s of identified defects. Perhaps at the end of Q2 2020 of their master plan, many bugs will be resolved, or not if its origination resides in the core components of the software application without reworking the software.
Third, anyone who says Champion Points isn't a paint point in the power creep is delusional. I'd challenge anyone to disable or zero-out all your champion point tree allocations. You'll notice a significant game play difference. Champion points was replaced veteran ranks to be an account reward system for long-term players. It's no longer the case and its impacting the power scale of the game: How many current and previous skill change proposals have been instigated due to their over performance because of the champion point system? Ask yourself that question. The developers need a KISS solution to changing how champion points are used. Such, removing the different trees and create a node list based on the character's attributes e.g. resource pools, recoveries, spell/physical resist, spell/weapon damage, spell/weapon damage critical chance and damage nodes, spell/physical penetration, break-free/dodge/block/sprint/stealth cost nodes, and healing done. Simple and remove all +% modifiers. Yeah, added more than the question asked; but said it and moving on.
Lastly, players have no actual method other than the PTS update/patch notes to recognize whether or not their ideas are considered. It's a subjective response to type question.
There's my feedback to this survey. Extract whatever to satisfy your metrics.