Diablo 3 - Announcement - Simplified Skill Tooltips

Seeing the Forest for the Talent Trees
Originally Posted by Blizzard (Blue Tracker / Official Forums)
We’ve gotten a lot of feedback on our crazy, exciting, and scary talent overhaul, for which we are enormously appreciative. For real and for true. We *want* your feedback on the new talents. That is why we are presenting so much detail so early. While we will continue to iterate on talent specifics, your feedback is an important part of that process. Don’t abstain because you’re convinced that things will change without you. Your input is one of our most important tools for improving the game.

We have seen a few consistent responses from players concerned or dismissive about the model, so we thought we’d take the opportunity to explain the philosophy behind some of our decisions, to provide a better framework upon which you can continue giving us feedback.

1. "I have fewer choices."
This is the big one, and the truth is it is ultimately correct. You will have fewer choices. But you will have more choices that *matter*. One of the important philosophies of game design is that interesting choices are fun. The word ‘interesting’ is key. Choosing between a talent that grants 10% damage and one that grants 5% damage, all else being equal, isn't interesting (unless perhaps you’re a superstar role-player). Choosing between a talent that grants you 5% haste or 5% crit might be interesting, but more than likely there is still a right answer (and like most of us, you'll probably just ask someone else what the answer is.) Choosing between a talent that grants you a root or a snare can be interesting. Which does more damage? Hard to say. Which is better? It depends on the situation.

This is why we don't have a clear damage, tanking, and healing talent choice every tier. In the case of the old trees, choosing the talent you want from among the talents that don’t interest you isn’t an interesting decision -- it's a multiple choice test, and an easy one at that. Are you Ret? You probably want the damage option. But what if the Ret player had to choose from three healing talents and couldn't sacrifice healing for damage? Now it gets interesting. Worst case scenario is the player just picks one at random because he refuses to heal. However, he has the ability. Maybe he'll use it in some situation. Meanwhile, other players will be happy that they can benefit more from the hybrid nature of the paladin class without having to give up damage to do so.

2. "There weren't cookie cutter builds."
You're wrong. Next!

To be fair, we did manage to engineer most of the Cataclysm talent trees to include a few legitimate choices. These typically occur when you need to spend enough points to get to the next tier of a tree to get the good stuff. Many specs had 1-4 points to spend wherever they want. That's a huge victory compared to pre-Cataclysm talent trees, but ultimately nothing to really brag about.

It is possible of course to strike a blow for individuality and use a non-cookie cutter build. Ninety-nine percent of the time, these builds are just going to be less effective. The remaining percent of the time, they will eventually become the new cookie-cutter. When players talk about their love of options, I think what they are really saying is they are in love with the idea of having dozens of interesting talents. We just don't think that will ever happen.

Look, we tried the talent tree model for seven years. We think it’s fundamentally flawed and unfixable. We know some of you have faith in us that someday we’ll eventually replace all of the boring +5% crit talents with interesting talents and give you 80 talent points that you can spend wherever, and that the game will still remain relatively balanced and fun. We greatly appreciate your faith, but we fear it is misplaced. It’s not a matter of coming up with enough fun mechanics, which is challenging but ultimately doable. The problem is the extreme number of combinations. When you have such a gigantic matrix, the chances of having unbeatable synergies, or combinations of talents that just don’t work together is really high. That’s not lazy design. That is recognizing how math works.

So given that we don’t think it’s humanly possible to have 40-50 fun, interesting and balanced talents in a tree, the alternative is to continue on with bloated trees that have a ton of inconsequential talents that you have to slog through to get to the fun stuff. A lot of you guys have stuck with us for years, continue to play regularly, and still love World of Warcraft. You are the reason we’re still making this game. We think you deserve better, and we think we can do better.

3. "We'll still have cookie-cutter builds with the new design."
I am slightly amused by the number of comments that say "The theorycrafters will just math out which is the right talent and we'll all just pick that one." But the theorycrafters aren’t agreeing with those comments, because they know they won’t be able to.

Just to make sure, I chose several specs at random and researched their builds. Sure enough, even with the Cataclysm builds today, you see quotes like “spend the last two points wherever you want” or “choose X or Y at your discretion.” It is “easy” (which I put in quotes because theorycrafters devote a lot of time and neurons to it) to determine the value of a DPS talent like Incite or Ignite. It is hard to determine the DPS value of Improved Sprint or Lichborne. Most of the Mists talents are things like the latter. Now there are still some pure throughput (damage, healing, or tanking) talents in the trees. We expect there will sometimes be a right answer as to which talent to take for those roles. On a fight like Baelroc (one boss, no adds), Bladestorm and Shockwave probably aren't competitive with Avatar. We're okay with that, because on Beth'tilac (lots of adds) they definitely can be and it will depend a lot on your play style and the role you have in the fight. However, given that we know a player can only have one of those three talents and that the synergistic effects from those talents with other talents are limited, it is much easier for us to balance say the healing value of Archangel and Divine Star. Despite what you read on the forums, we actually have gotten better at balancing World of Warcraft over the years.

4. "No rewards for leveling."
Once upon a time, you got a new talent point every level. That worked okay for a game with 60 levels. It works less well for a game with 90 levels. It probably is totally incomprehensible for a game with 150 levels, should we ever get there. We keep bumping the level cap because frankly it’s fun and we haven’t yet come up with a progression mechanism that will feel quite as good.

Leveling is pretty fast these days and fairly rewarding, in that you see lots of new content and get gear quickly, which is something we have trouble replicating at max level (though stay tuned for Mists of Pandaria). On top of that, you’ll still get lots of abilities as you level up. Instead of having to click Raging Blow, we’ll just give it to you, because frankly if you skip it, you’re making a mistake (or you’re RPing a Fury warrior who has taken too many blows to the head). There are gaps in getting new abilities, especially at high level, because we don’t want players to have to have four rows of action bars to play their character. Again, that is just the blessing and curse of having a game with so many levels.

Third, I’ll challenge the notion of just how interesting it is to get that second point in Pain and Suffering or Rule of Law while leveling. Do you really notice that you now kill a creature in 2.9 GCDs instead of 3 GCDs? (But see below for a bit more on this.) There are some game-challenging talents of course, like Shadowform, but as we just discussed, you'll still get those.

Finally, the reality is that for many players, WoW has become a game focused on max level. Back in the day, leveling a fleet of alts was really compelling gameplay, but for many of the old-timers, there just isn’t a ton of interest in making a second mage or whatever. Hopefully account-level achievements will help with that somewhat, but at the same time, I don’t think it’s realistic to expect all of our long-term players to have thirty or more characters at some point in the future. It’s a fair concern that the new talent system is geared more towards making max level exciting, but that’s also where players tend to spend most of their WoW-playing hours these days. We don’t know yet what we are going to do for players who want to play a monk but just can’t stomach the idea of hitting Hellfire Peninsula one more time, and how we solve the problem when you get a friend to try WoW, only to discover that your pal will need to spend several weeks or months getting up to max level before he or she is ready to join your Arena team or raid group. But these feel like problems we are going to have to solve at some point.

5. "I like being better than noobs."
It was surprising and a bit disappointing at how frequently we saw this argument. The players in question fully admit that they don't experiment to find the best build. They accept the cookie cutter spec that is offered from a website, but then they use the fact that they knew the cookie cutter to mock players who don't. Intimate knowledge of game mechanics certainly is and should be a component of skill. But knowing how to Google "4.3 Shadow spec" doesn't automatically make you a better player. Sorry, but I’m just going to dismiss this one as an illegitimate concern.

6. "The talents are all PvP choices."
We see this response from players who say “I don’t care about PvP,” or “raid bosses can’t be snared,” or even “I am a solo player, so I don’t need a defensive cooldown.”

First, a lot of players do care about PvP, and almost every choice in the new talent model will be interesting for them. We are also taking some steps with Mists to encourage more crossover between PvP and PvE as the game once had, so even if you don’t care for PvP now, maybe we can get you interested in the future.

Second, a lot of raid bosses can’t be snared, but their adds and trash sure can be. We don’t do a lot of Patchwerk fights these days. Crowd control, movement increases, and defensive cooldowns are all an important part of raid encounters these days. They are even a part of dungeon encounters until you overgear the content.

Now if you're a solo player or a fairly casual raider and you don't often find the need to use crowd control or hit a defensive cooldown, then maybe the choice isn't compelling. But we think that's a problem with the game. I think it’s a fair complaint that our outdoor world creatures have become a little monotonous over the years. Once upon a time, you could choose to take on that camp of gnolls, or you could try and handle the elite ogres, or you might get a patrolling kobold. While we don’t want outdoor leveling to be brutally difficult, that doesn’t mean that every situation needs to be solved with 3 Sinister Strikes. Imagine a cave full of weak spiders. You can choose to AE them all down, use a movement cooldown to get through the cave quickly, use a defensive cooldown to survive the damage, or use your heals to keep you up. When players use their full toolbox of abilities intelligently, they tend to feel good about their character and the game. But it is our responsibility to engineer more of those situations into the world.

7. "Spec doesn’t matter."
This is a concern especially for warriors, priests, DKs and the pure classes (those characters who have multiple specs of the same role). What we have concluded is that many players want to choose their spec based on flavor (“I want to be the mage who uses Frost magic”) or rotation (“I like the fast gameplay of the Frost DK”). While the raid buff / debuff matrix and spec utility helps to encourage diversity among groups and discourage raid stacking, it’s also a little lame when the Affliction lock is asked to spec Demonology (against the player’s desire) in order to bring a specific buff. In Mists, we want players to have even more flexibility about which character they want to play. Asking a player to swap from damage to tanking for a couple of fights is acceptable to us. Asking someone to respec from Unholy to Frost just for the debuff is not.

There will still be some utility in the various specs, but less than we have today. You should pick a spec because you like the rotation or the kit. Fire is about crit, Hot Streak, and Ignite. Frost is about Shatter combos and the Water Elemental. Arcane is about mana management and clearing Arcane Blast stacks.

8. “It must be new to be good.”
This is a tricky one. Specifically, the warlock and druid trees include a lot of new talent ideas simply because we felt like those classes needed them. While we want to make an effort to add some new mechanics every expansion just to keep things fresh, we don’t want to arbitrarily replace fun talents that have stood the test of time just in the name of change for change’s sake. Bladestorm is fun. Body and Soul is fun. Shadowstep is fun.

From a designer’s perspective, the half-life of a new spell or talent idea is fleetingly short. You know how when you buy a new car and drive it off the lot it immediately loses a huge chunk of its value? New game ideas are like that. Seeing something brand new is super exhilarating, but that thrill just doesn’t last. I suspect even by the time Mists launches, we will see a lot of comments along the lines of “When are druids going to get something new? We haven’t seen any new ideas since November!”

It isn’t our goal to come up with 18 new talents for every class. We want to come up with 18 fun talents, and that’s going to mean a mix of old and new. Try not to confuse “shiny” with “good,” and we’ll try on our end not to fall into that trap as well.

9. “You overhaul talents every expansion. Please leave well enough alone.”
This is another tricky issue, because neither extreme (stagnation versus constant design churn) is appealing, and every individual player (and designer!) has a different definition of where those extremes lie. We changed talent trees in Cataclysm to try and fix some of the underlying problems the talent design had since its inception. We actually considered going to the Mists model for Cataclysm, but we were worried that the change would be too shocking to players, so we went with a more restrained design first. As often happens with compromises, it didn’t fix the underlying problems. Our hope is that this new design solves them once and for all. That isn’t a promise to not change talents for 6.0, 7.0, and beyond. But we hope that an overhaul this drastic isn’t necessary again for a long time to come.
MMOs are inherently living designs that are going to change over time. This is particularly true of subscription models, where players rightly expect to see something for their monthly payment. We don’t think it’s fair to cling to designs that aren’t working just because that’s the design we shipped with. As we have discussed a great deal lately, we will try to limit our big design changes to new expansions, but it’s just not in our DNA to leave something at a B- level if we think we can make it A+.

10. “You’ve got your minds made up and don’t care about what we think.”
You’re wrong. Next!

As I have said a million times, good games (maybe good anything) can’t be designed by popular vote. Our design feedback process is about making informed decisions. The developers will make the decisions we feel are right for the game, but we’ll do that armed with the feedback from players about what is fun and not fun for them. If you want to provide the best feedback possible, try to be succinct (we get a lot of feedback), try to be specific (why don’t you like something), and don’t assume you speak for everyone (game design, like art, is often subjective). Don’t get upset if we don’t implement your idea -- that’s just not a realistic expectation. Don’t confuse the echo chamber phenomenon that can occur in forum discussions for consensus. Most importantly, try to remember what will be fun for everyone, and not just your character.

One more thing to keep in mind: Playing with the new talent system in-game is really different from choosing talents on “paper.” Some of the decisions we made didn’t come about until we could get into the game and see how leveling and playing actually felt. Once we’re in alpha, many of you guys will be able to give us some more concrete feedback. We understand that, and we’re pushing for doing that just as soon as we can. In the meantime, enjoy the Hour of Twilight.
This article was originally published in forum thread: Seeing the Forest for the Talent Trees started by chaud View original post
Comments 285 Comments
  1. ghostprotocol's Avatar
    Classic GC. I'm right because I say I'm right.
  1. Shilien's Avatar
    It is really too bad Blizzard has kind of lost sight of their own game. Talent choices might not have been all that meaningful or noticeable but it gave you something to do when you hit a level, and a feeling of power gained (change being made). At this point with their push to endgame it makes the entire revamp of all the old world content in Cataclysm irrelevent. They don't want people to roll and enjoy alts, they want people to just blast through content and get to endgame where apparently the game begins (which many players have felt, and apparently now Blizzard is making 'real').

    The real side effect of this is they will continue to lose more people (because the game is stale at this point and all the major lore characters killed or friendly) and new people will not stick around because the game doesn't reward them enough for playing.
  1. Bodakane's Avatar
    Ok, what would you rather have a choice between:

    1. Given $100 free and clear
    2. Kick to the nuts
    3. Poke in the eye
    4. Punch in the face
    5. A minor concussion
    6. A toe stomp

    Or

    1. $75 right now
    2. $25 a week for a month
    3. $100 bucks right now, but if you spend it within a week you owe $15


    The second set technically has less options than the first set. The first set however only really has one choice people are gonna take, so 2-6 are irrelevant because no one is going to use those instead of #1.
  1. Gilian's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Scarjack View Post
    Ok, what would you rather have a choice between:

    1. Given $100 free and clear
    2. Kick to the nuts
    3. Poke in the eye
    4. Punch in the face
    5. A minor concussion
    6. A toe stomp

    Or

    1. $75 right now
    2. $25 a week for a month
    3. $100 bucks right now, but if you spend it within a week you owe $15


    The second set technically has less options than the first set. The first set however only really has one choice people are gonna take, so 2-6 are irrelevant because no one is going to use those instead of #1.
    Oke... kinda hard to discuss this with people when they comment with this kind of nonsense. I really hope you don't really believe this is a good methaphore for the talent trees..
  1. Bodakane's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Gilian View Post
    Oke... kinda hard to discuss this with people when they comment with this kind of nonsense. I really hope you don't really believe this is a good methaphore for the talent trees..
    Its actually spot on. Your irrational hatred or anger doesn't qualify as fact nor does it disqualify my analogy. Your lack of understanding of the current trees and the future ones is also not my responsibility.

    We have no choice now if we want to compete at a reasonable level. That means there's no real options now. Saying there is, is well, a lie. Come MoP we will have some actual choices to make. Just like my analogy, those choices will be dependent on what we want to accomplish.
  1. Simplevintagex's Avatar
    People still play WoW? It's lost, what, 800,000 subscribers in the past month, and 2 million within this year alone? People are finally realizing that this game has run it's course, and that the devs have fucked this game up beyond belief with their stance that PvP should be the centerpoint, and balancing factor in a game that is primarily meant for PvE.

    Here's hoping they lose 3 million next year! But maybe not, the new expansion IS adding Pandas after all....ROFL.
  1. Rexxr's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by ghostprotocol View Post
    Classic GC. I'm right because I say I'm right.
    So true. Lets look at what they have told us every 15 levels you get 3 choices. That is it no more no less. If they want it to be interesting, when I turn 30 you let me choose those 3 options or the previous 2 from 15 than I have 5 choices.

    Also I love the section about how you will be unable to theory craft. LOL! I am pretty sure elitist jerk will have a max dps spec up by the end of day 1 of MoP.
  1. Dawn Falcon's Avatar
    Bullshit Blizz, there are CLEAR choices for most spec's. The ones which are not clear choices simply don't MATTER that much.
  1. Ragedaug's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Rexxr View Post
    So true. Lets look at what they have told us every 15 levels you get 3 choices. That is it no more no less. If they want it to be interesting, when I turn 30 you let me choose those 3 options or the previous 2 from 15 than I have 5 choices.

    Also I love the section about how you will be unable to theory craft. LOL! I am pretty sure elitist jerk will have a max dps spec up by the end of day 1 of MoP.
    There are no more then 1-4 choices now. That averages a choice every 30 levels. With every new character I start leveling, the first thing I do is read the Elitist Jerks page on the class/spec I'm playing, then I google search the spec to verify the consensus on what is available on EJ. Your choice are pick your own sub-optional talents that will cause you to under perform or choose to follow the cookie cutter.

    I'll try to make a little better analogy to one posted earlier. In Cataclysm the choices are:

    1) $100
    2) $75
    3) $25 a period for 3 period
    4) $50
    5) $15 a period for 3 period

    Seems like a lot of choices, but I personally see only 1 correct answer there.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rexxr View Post
    Also I love the section about how you will be unable to theory craft. LOL! I am pretty sure elitist jerk will have a max dps spec up by the end of day 1 of MoP.
    There are very few talents in MoP that can be theorycrafted for optimal DPS in all roles & encounters. The abilities that have been theorycrafted are already baked into the build and we still get them. There are a few talents that will be theorycrafted as must take for certain specs, but those are the minority. The majority of the talents are for utility and the value of the utility depends on what you are doing, so there can't be 1 right answer for those.

    ---------- Post added 2011-12-09 at 03:31 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Dawn Falcon View Post
    Bullshit Blizz, there are CLEAR choices for most spec's. The ones which are not clear choices simply don't MATTER that much.
    Can you provide an example?

    For my example, I'm looking at the Hunter tree, and only the level 15 and 75 options have clear DPS increase abilities. The remaining tiers are for CC, damage reduction, and escape.
  1. Aspenarious's Avatar
    I've had some more time to think about these new talents and I think this articulates my position a bit better.I am playing a Hunter. My class is a DPS class. What is exciting and interesting to me is a talent that makes me deal more damage. Or at least deal damage in a way that I couldn't before. However, because any talent that deals damage will be mathed out so that the one that deals the most is always selected, then from Blizzard's perspective that choice becomes no longer interesting. They are right. It's now no longer a choice, you take it or you short change yourself.So given that, no talents can deal damage. Which means, by my first statement, no talent CAN be exciting or interesting to me.I think that's the problem I have.
  1. mmoc8193869699's Avatar
    I don't really care about the talents because they will change.

    What is worrying is that Idiotcrawler is serving us the same speech that he served before cataclysm, promising us "more fun because he knows best". After a full year of cataclysm plagued with hotfixes, delayed patches (4.1 - 4.2), cancelled raids and dungeons (abyssal maw), unbalanced pvp (ring of frostlol, lolbarad), the guy has not given us any proof he knows his job.

    Quite the contrary, over one year he has:
    - cancelled his new tanking model by bumping the threat modifier and making vengeance irrelevant to the point of unbalancing pvp (blood dks say hi)
    - stating dungeons are hard then serving us the hour of twilight roflstomp dungeons
    - stating aoefest is over in dungeons then bringing it back to wotlk level in 4.1
    - proving he does not play the game by stating that people will still go back to t11 after 4.2 to get chest pieces from Nefarian.

    The only thing he does well is writing witty piece of texts to his own glory ("my blog has had many reads all hail myself")
  1. Kumashy's Avatar
    I find totally amusing the people who take this game so seriously. You come into these forums and every day you see the same thing.

    I've said it before and I'll say it again, blizzard is not ruining WoW, the ever so arrogant and entitled community is.

    it's an MMO, they try things, they change, they make some people happy, they piss off another side of the player base, it's the nature of the game, it happened before, it is happening now, and it will always happen. If you seriously have not yet gotten used to it during the past 7 years, then I have no words of hope for you my friend.

    I'm personally...how to label it...mmm...intrigued by the talent system change. I'll wait for beta, try it, and make my mind about it. No matter what happens, I'm good. WoW for me goes back to the very basic concept of "first-kill". That feeling you get every single time you kill a new boss in a raid instance for the very first time. Everything else in the game just represent means to get there, that includes the talent system. I've been playing for 7 years for that very same goal, and I personally have to say, it's been quite a trip so far.

    But then again, I don't concern myself with pretending to know what's better for the game, or voicing the concerns of "massive amounts" of people like some of you do. I for one am glad Blizzard is finally taking the silk gloves off and slapping some comebacks around, maybe with an attitude. (Current bans about the LFR exploit, this post explaining the reasoning behind the changes, etc)

    One major flaw of a Capitalistic or Consumerism-centric countries is that they spawn this brood of people who think that just because they pay for something, they are without a question entitled. In this case, entitled to make changes to the game, entitled to complain when things don't go their way. When in reality, if you strip it down, you're paying for access to the game servers, period. You don't like what you get when you log into them? Stop paying and find something else.

    It really is that simple people.
  1. Kourvith's Avatar
    No, no, no, people, please don't post your opinion on this. Because you know, Ghostcrawler knows better than you what "does really matters" to us.....Pretty sure there will be another blue post in a week presenting apologies and explaining that "it wasn't really what he meant", as a reaction to further Blizzard stock drops.
  1. Carighan's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Kourvith View Post
    No, no, no, people, please don't post your opinion on this. Because you know, Ghostcrawler knows better than you what "does really matters" to us.....Pretty sure there will be another blue post in a week presenting apologies and explaining that "it wasn't really what he meant", as a reaction to further Blizzard stock drops.
    "Further"?
    Shows their stock as quite stable, really.
  1. Kazlehoff's Avatar
    i played a drinking game with this article where i took a shot every time blizzard told there paying customers they were wrong.im going to go throw up now and lay down. dont feel well
  1. undead44's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by garion55 View Post
    I just dont get it.

    So GC says they want feedback and then the proceeds on refuting all the feedback that they've gotten.

    What he meant was "we want feedback that agrees with what we're going to do anyway".


    Sad and pathetic.
  1. palladiamors's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by MestHoop View Post
    But... they ARE wrong, and if they don't tell them they're wrong, they'll just keep on complaining about it (some people will anyway though).
    Also, people need to stop getting their panties in a twist when someone tells them they're wrong (with proper argumentation). People are wrong all the time, fucking deal with it
    Except guess what? THEY AREN'T WRONG! *Gasp!* My god! People can have different opinions, or find different things fun then you! And when some self-important person, such as yourself or Ghostcrawler, has the gall to say "You're wrong!" to some ones OPINION, then that's crossing a line. With you it's just some pissant on a forum beating your gums, but with Ghostcrawler it's PR for Blizzard, and even JOKING, it looks and comes off badly. There is no way for it to NOT come off as poorly done. Simply put, YOU DO NOT DO THAT. It has nothing to do with political correctness or politeness, and EVERYTHING to do with BUISNESS SENSE. When your boat is bringing on water, even if the flow isn't to bad, you do NOT poke the hole to make it bigger.

    Just in case you didn't get that, if you already have customers leaving by the truckload and a LARGE NUMBER of your remaining customers complain about a proposed feature, YOU DO NOT TELL THEM THAT THEY ARE WRONG IN DISLIKING IT. Even jokingly. I am sorry that some of you fanboys think they need to 'shut up the whiners', but that is a BAD attitude to have in a buisness enviroment. Should he have addressed the issue? Absolutely, but NOT like this. That ENTIRE POST was just a long list of "You're wrong, we're right, and here is our flimsy and hole filled reasoning."
  1. Palemoon's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Kazlehoff View Post
    i played a drinking game with this article where i took a shot every time blizzard told there paying customers they were wrong.im going to go throw up now and lay down. dont feel well
    Because...paying makes you automatically right on every topic and opinion?
  1. underdogba's Avatar
    We immediately know we can't take anything they have to say in this blue post seriously, because they actually believe that Avatar is not going to be mandatory for all dps warriors!This reminds me of a post where GC suggested that some pally tanks would take Judgments of the Pure. I'm not sure what universe of suboptimal play the dev team lives in.
  1. Gurbz's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by palladiamors View Post
    Except guess what? THEY AREN'T WRONG! *Gasp!* My god! People can have different opinions, or find different things fun then you! And when some self-important person, such as yourself or Ghostcrawler, has the gall to say "You're wrong!" to some ones OPINION, then that's crossing a line. With you it's just some pissant on a forum beating your gums, but with Ghostcrawler it's PR for Blizzard, and even JOKING, it looks and comes off badly. There is no way for it to NOT come off as poorly done. Simply put, YOU DO NOT DO THAT. It has nothing to do with political correctness or politeness, and EVERYTHING to do with BUISNESS SENSE. When your boat is bringing on water, even if the flow isn't to bad, you do NOT poke the hole to make it bigger.

    Just in case you didn't get that, if you already have customers leaving by the truckload and a LARGE NUMBER of your remaining customers complain about a proposed feature, YOU DO NOT TELL THEM THAT THEY ARE WRONG IN DISLIKING IT. Even jokingly. I am sorry that some of you fanboys think they need to 'shut up the whiners', but that is a BAD attitude to have in a buisness enviroment. Should he have addressed the issue? Absolutely, but NOT like this. That ENTIRE POST was just a long list of "You're wrong, we're right, and here is our flimsy and hole filled reasoning."
    Except that he is not telling people their opinion is wrong. He is telling them that their stated reason for forming that opinion is wrong. He is further explaining why it is wrong. Just because you don't like the answer doesn't make him an asshole. He used reasoning and logic, and explained the design team's decisions clearly. The response from you and others like you boils down to "Well you suck!"

    And if some of the language was a little bit harsh, well to that I say they need to go farther. Handling this community with gloves for 7 years has led to a bunch of people thinking that $15 a month entitles them to hurl shit at the people providing the product. Quite frankly a lot of people need to have some sense slapped into them so that they realize that the developers who have been paid to do this job every day for years might know a little better what is good for their product that some whiny idiot on a forum.

    They have made a lot of changes I have not liked. If they ever make a change I dislike enough, I will stop giving them my $15. Which is the only choice you really have.

Site Navigation