Should Blizzard cater to community perception, even if it is wrong?

[Whitepaw]

See that's my point, you don't care about ML, you're just envious of mythic raiders for some reason so are happy when they lose something. I reckon that's where most of the approval of this change comes from. It's really simple;

- If it does affect you, then it's a bad change because it makes absolutely no sense
- If it doesn't affect you, why do you give a fuck either way?

Going by how many people on this forum who thinks it's a good thing, versus how many people actually mythic raid let me tell you, it's out of spite for players better than you. That's all this is.

- - - Updated - - -



Have you ever been in a hardcore guild? If you can tolerate people for hundreds of pulls you clearly all like eachother, plus everyone is there for the guild - not themselves. This is why non-hardcore players just can never understand why this change is bad.

- - - Updated - - -



While you're correct, it's like kind of apathetical attitude that gave us WoD. Just because it's their game doesn't mean they can't make wrong decisions.

- - - Updated - - -



Bullshit is what they are. You don't automatically deserve loot for killing a boss, and you don't get bullied out of loot as a trial.

- - - Updated - - -



You're not at mercy at all, the loot council doesn't go "lul fuck that guy no loot" firstly, mythic guilds are far more close knit that other guilds because they play with eachother far more in difficult content, secondly, you all know who will get what - it will go to the person who benefits most from it and that's good for the whole guild. I really don't get how people struggle with this concept.

- - - Updated - - -

Let's say in BFA I get a sweet warforged neck with mastery on that's higher item level than mine, mastery isn't good for me so I don't need it - that neck is BiS for our healer who is still using a heroic neck, guess what - I can't trade it. What a great loot design. It's Blizz telling us "no no, you don't get to choose what happens to what the boss drops - that's far too much responsibility you tryhard elitists"

You clearly all like each other in hardcore raiding guilds? Are you for real? And everyone is there for the guild?

Look, if that's your experience, then it's a good thing for you. But there are public statements about hardcore raiding guilds (and when I say hardcore, I mean world 1st guilds), where the direct opposite has been the case.

I have been in semi hardcore (server top 3) guilds - and I have raided with loads of people in that segment. I just want to be crystal clear: The environment is super competitive. Performance is all-important, errors are frowned upon and gear is of extreme importance - to the point where each normal raider exists in a de facto dictatorship, where very few decide loot for the whole raid group. I dislike that, because the system is often based on objective data (which is ok), mixed with a lot of subjectivity (which I often don't agree with). And I have seen that with most factors being equal, I out-perform most people, whereas when the kool kids get a little loot help, they perform better, which then creates a positive feedback loop with the raid leader etc.

With this great change, the loot that's actually upgrades will be random and so the playing field will be level. You can ofc run into some serious unlucky RNG, but you will still be able to trade non-upgrade items. But the small mini-game of hustling all the items via the guild's own optimation routine is gone.

[korijenkins]

Community perception or demand is never wrong. If the community as a whole wants a feature, its the producers job to grant them it.

Blizzard is the only company arrogant enough to ignore what people want and just crap out random features hoping they'll get it right. Instead of hiring people with no credentials to run devteams, perhaps they should actually get people with experience in the game they're making.

[Seranthor]

Community perception or demand is never wrong. If the community as a whole wants a feature, its the producers job to grant them it.

Blizzard is the only company arrogant enough to ignore what people want and just crap out random features hoping they'll get it right. Instead of hiring people with no credentials to run devteams, perhaps they should actually get people with experience in the game they're making.

Like you perhaps? No, seriously, if you are qualified you should absolutely submit your credentials to them.

[Varitok]

Well, This team is so bad it wouldn't hurt to actually listen to fan complaints considering they don't do that now.

- - - Updated - - -

Community perception or demand is never wrong. If the community as a whole wants a feature, its the producers job to grant them it.

Blizzard is the only company arrogant enough to ignore what people want and just crap out random features hoping they'll get it right. Instead of hiring people with no credentials to run devteams, perhaps they should actually get people with experience in the game they're making.

Usurp Ions position at Blizzard and make the game great. Please, you're our only hope Kori.

[Lilija]

Ok, so the logic here I guess is, even if you are in a guild, you might want to have more personal control over your loot than to be at the mercy of your guild members. Although you don't really have control, either something drops or it doesn't. So it's more like, now it's in the hand of fate, instead of in the hand of a guild master, who might not like you, or who might prefer someone else above you.

I can really understand this. If Master Loot is gone, I can't really say I'll miss it, other than maybe the thrill of rolling for loot every now and then, but that is something I can get in LFR nowadays, when someone doesn't need an item.

It's all about perception and psychology.

Funny thing I have observed. People giving away things they don't need can create quite positive social interactions. PL has better perception and better psychology.

- - - Updated - - -

I don't think it will be the tectonic shift people make it out to be.
I do think it will lead to more guild loot drama though. In many guilds the authority of loot distribution was delegated to a prearranged loot council. Now it will all be on the shoulders of the individual that receives the piece to handle the potential pressure.

So basically after the RNG PL is more personal choice of an individual than ML That is much more realistic choice than the collective choice of a group between ML and PL. I guess my inclination towards PL might be because I am a bigger fan of individual choice rather than the collective one.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm sorry to hear you had such bad experiences. Mine are very different.
I hope you agree you can't extrapolate your own experience to '99%' of the cases.

The problem is those bad experience were a fact. We don't know which one is more prevalent. I personally didn't have major issues with ML. But I did see it as a waste of time so more of a nuance that I will not miss.

- - - Updated - - -

But in reality what would actually happen is that your guild leader will say "DON'T EQUIP THAT PIECE YET!!!"
And they will have a council to decide who needs it more, and they will ask you to trade it or be kicked.

That's how it will work in progression guilds, I promise you that.
So Blizzard didn't really take anything out of the hands of Guild Masters, they just added an arbitrary step.

Removing ML without removing the ability to trade gear for 2 hours after looting is pointless.
You haven't removed ML at all. Its a half-measure that will just inconvenience guilds.

The ones who want ML are going to do armor-type stacking in raids and forced trades.
The ones who want PL were already doing PL so no change

That would require a lot of guild kicking Don't think such a policy would survive long.

- - - Updated - - -

You clearly all like each other in hardcore raiding guilds? Are you for real? And everyone is there for the guild?

Look, if that's your experience, then it's a good thing for you. But there are public statements about hardcore raiding guilds (and when I say hardcore, I mean world 1st guilds), where the direct opposite has been the case.

I have been in semi hardcore (server top 3) guilds - and I have raided with loads of people in that segment. I just want to be crystal clear: The environment is super competitive. Performance is all-important, errors are frowned upon and gear is of extreme importance - to the point where each normal raider exists in a de facto dictatorship, where very few decide loot for the whole raid group. I dislike that, because the system is often based on objective data (which is ok), mixed with a lot of subjectivity (which I often don't agree with). And I have seen that with most factors being equal, I out-perform most people, whereas when the kool kids get a little loot help, they perform better, which then creates a positive feedback loop with the raid leader etc.

With this great change, the loot that's actually upgrades will be random and so the playing field will be level. You can ofc run into some serious unlucky RNG, but you will still be able to trade non-upgrade items. But the small mini-game of hustling all the items via the guild's own optimation routine is gone.

And this is something the "but the Mythic raiders" people miss. What you describe is spot on my experience with middle of the pack Mythic progression. The countless times people trying to tell me that I don't need certain upgrade because they think it's not good. That's because most people do not know all the theorycraft of all specs. They often extrapolate from the specs they play and that isn't always accurate.

- - - Updated - - -

Community perception or demand is never wrong. If the community as a whole wants a feature, its the producers job to grant them it.

Blizzard is the only company arrogant enough to ignore what people want and just crap out random features hoping they'll get it right. Instead of hiring people with no credentials to run devteams, perhaps they should actually get people with experience in the game they're making.

You should know that when a developer doesn't follow your opinion it doesn't mean they are ignoring the community. None of us on the forums speak for the community.

[Corroc]

On this particular case I honestly dont think its done because of player demand. When you take a look at all the loot systems in wow the idea of one unified loot system over everything else doesn't really sound so bad. If you cant remember we have had loot systems like round robin,FFA and group loot for example. The basic idea of Master loot is you have one person who decideds what is done to the loot. At trusted hands it doesn't sound that bad but there have still been occasions where someone in the top guild has decided to screw over everyone before quitting the game or something else.

The idea of having one singular loot system which cannot be cheated or abused in anyway doesn't sound that bad.

[Kallisto]

Community perception or demand is never wrong. If the community as a whole wants a feature, its the producers job to grant them it.

Blizzard is the only company arrogant enough to ignore what people want and just crap out random features hoping they'll get it right. Instead of hiring people with no credentials to run devteams, perhaps they should actually get people with experience in the game they're making.

Ok then what does the community want? Come on let's hear it. I don't want to hear what you want I want to hear what the community wants since you seem to know it.

[Suilea]

Don't know if someone has brought that up yet, but it might really suck to farm legacy transmog gear with that change going live.
(Except if they keep FFA as an option...)

[Deleted]

It's all about perception and psychology.

Funny thing I have observed. People giving away things they don't need can create quite positive social interactions. PL has better perception and better psychology.

I noticed that, too. I'm actually surprised how often people give stuff away.

[gobio]

Who decides what is "right" and what is "wrong" in this agenda driven title?
If "what is right" is decided by Blizzard, then no Blizzard should never cater to community perception.
If "what is right" is decided by Community Perception, then yes Blizzard should always cater to community perception.
If "what is right" is decided by the agenda driven guy that posted this, then Blizzard should ALWAYS just cater to HIM.

[rayvio]

perception is a huge factor in marketing and a game like WoW is always going to need new players so unfortunately perception is a big deal
that doesn't mean that wrongly perceived faults should always be 'fixed' though, but it does mean that sometimes changes may need to be made. obviously it's better to fix the perception than the non-existent problem but that's not always possible as people can be incredibly stubborn in their beliefs (I'm sure we've all seen many examples both online and offline)

the fact that the master looter system could be exploited has, I'm sure, put many people off of joining guilds who use it. given the nature of exaggeration and overreaction it's probably even put people off of joining guilds who don't use it. Blizz also, unfortunately, have a habit of removing some things that don't quite work properly rather than taking the time to fix them. quite frankly it's amazing that master looter has lasted this long given all of the stories of how somebody's sister's boyfriend's cousin's room-mate's nephew's neighbour's apostrophe's twin's widow's adopted step-son's pet penguin's penpal's best friend's hooker's lawyer's toaster's favourite author's agent's doctor's niece's imaginary friend carried 39 "noobs" through Naxx only to lose Corrupted Ashbringer to a level 3 warlock who wasn't even in the raid because the master looter was powerlessly enslaved by their overpowered chest protrusions

[Lilija]

I assume that Blizzard is primarily responding to statistical feedback rather than community perception. That is they will have records of reports for specific issues, they can see which options are favored and they can work on that.
I personally think they should be bolder with seeking feedback in a way that is easier to control, such as with properly structured surveys.

And they are doing that Blizzard is doing surveys among them their customers chosen randomly. Not on every issue ofc because that would be too costly but on those that cannot be decided by pure in game data like people's preferences correlated with their experience (something people on forums have no way of knowing yet many act like they do).

- - - Updated - - -

the fact that the master looter system could be exploited has, I'm sure, put many people off of joining guilds who use it. given the nature of exaggeration and overreaction it's probably even put people off of joining guilds who don't use it. Blizz also, unfortunately, have a habit of removing some things that don't quite work properly rather than taking the time to fix them. quite frankly it's amazing that master looter has lasted this long given all of the stories of how somebody's sister's boyfriend's cousin's room-mate's nephew's neighbour's apostrophe's twin's widow's adopted step-son's pet penguin's penpal's best friend's hooker's lawyer's toaster's favourite author's agent's doctor's niece's imaginary friend carried 39 "noobs" through Naxx only to lose Corrupted Ashbringer to a level 3 warlock who wasn't even in the raid because the master looter was powerlessly enslaved by their overpowered chest protrusions

Well for the most time ML didn't have any realistic alternative. PL in terms of WoW is a young system but maybe overall was received well enough that it can possibly take place of ML.

[lockybalboa]

Games are made for consumers, so of course they should be fun for most people, ideally. I really don't understand the mentality of some fanboys who say the devs should just ignore the consensus of players and make decisions which are to the detriment of game enjoyment. These same group of fanboys are personal fans of the devs and not really concerned about the well-being of the game. Seriously think about it, what are games for?

[WowIsDead64]

(Hats of to a WoW vlogger for bringing this up yesterday, not going to name names or link to avoid another round of 'I don't care what ... thinks' as it is irrelevant to the discussion anyways)

So this came up:
is Blizzard forcing personal loot in raids, just to appease the perception by a part of the community that master loot is a tool used by guilds to screw over raiders?

Now in guilds I have been in Master Loot with a loot council was always used correctly to optimize for increased future success of the raid-group. This goes beyond raw numerics of simmed upgrade potential but addresses weak-points (do we have a dps or peak healing problem etc. etc.) and also takes into account likely attendance and even soft issues like this guy hasn't had a singe upgrade in 4 weeks. So my perception of Master Loot is that it it good in organized raiding (when there are pugs, we always used PL).

Ion otoh explains that they make the switch to forced PL even for organized raiding in guilds because of signals that it is (often?) abused.

Now I'm not saying right or wrong. It isn"t my experience, but perhaps I'm the (lucky) exception.

What I do find interesting though is: should systems be changed based on false believes by the community? Should classes be nerfed because a small vocal part of the community believes they are OP even if data contradicts it? Should Titanforging be nerfed because a small vocal part of the community caan't wrap their head around probability and believes LFR players are running around in full 980's even when the data contradicts it?

I can see both sides. Objectively it is wrong, and so logically you shoudn't cater to wrong believes except through education. Subjectively, if that is how players realy feel, then does perception trounce reality and should you submit to it?

What do you think?

Situation is probably more complex, than you think. Blizzard have "hidden" reasons to remove ML - their endless-manipulated-RNG-loot model is no longer compatible with ML. For example you can't be sure, that WF/TF item, that should give some player illusion, that he is lucky and give him incentive to grind this RNG-fest even further, will go to appropriate player with ML. May be even physically incompatible - i.e. may be there are some coding problems with Hearth of Azeroth system. Blizzard simply sacrifice organized raids in order to push their new loot model. They're even going to remove tier sets to achieve their goals - make as much pieces of loot "randomly upgradable", as possible. And in order to make it's removal reasonable and justified, they simply used standard strawman/exaggeration/hyperbole argument, i.e. listed all cons/rare/worst case scenarios, while completely ignoring all pros. Remember? That abused exactly the same tactic to remove flying.

But, you know. My own opinion: Good for players >> Good for game. I.e. sometimes game developers should make game, as players want it to be, i.e. fun, not to make it "mathematically perfect". Especially if it's RPG - not some sort of arcade. RPG should always have some room for freedom of choice and this involves some natural "flaws" in game design. When game is "perfect" - it's usually boring.

[HuxNeva]

Situation is probably more complex, than you think. Blizzard have "hidden" reasons to remove ML - their endless-manipulated-RNG-loot model is no longer compatible with ML. For example you can't be sure, that WF/TF item, that should give some player illusion, that he is lucky and give him incentive to grind this RNG-fest even further, will go to appropriate player with ML. May be even physically incompatible - i.e. may be there are some coding problems with Hearth of Azeroth system. Blizzard simply sacrifice organized raids in order to push their new loot model. They're even going to remove tier sets to achieve their goals - make as much pieces of loot "randomly upgradable", as possible. And in order to make it's removal reasonable and justified, they simply used standard strawman/exaggeration/hyperbole argument, i.e. listed all cons/rare/worst case scenarios, while completely ignoring all pros. Remember? That abused exactly the same tactic to remove flying.

But, you know. My own opinion: Good for players >> Good for game. I.e. sometimes game developers should make game, as players want it to be, i.e. fun, not to make it "mathematically perfect". Especially if it's RPG - not some sort of arcade. RPG should always have some room for freedom of choice and this involves some natural "flaws" in game design. When game is "perfect" - it's usually boring.

That doesn't make sense to me.

The Hearth of Azeroth is technically just an Artefact, with AP (Azurite Power ~= Artefact Power) going into it to level it. With weapons and Azurite pieces not being able to WF/TF, there are actually less pieces that follow this system.

[WowIsDead64]

That doesn't make sense to me.

The Hearth of Azeroth is technically just an Artefact, with AP (Azurite Power ~= Artefact Power) going into it to level it. With weapons and Azurite pieces not being able to WF/TF, there are actually less pieces that follow this system.

There is difference - "talents" are tied to items themselves now. But it doesn't matter. What I wanted to say, is that sometimes devs try to make game "fun" via some "their" way. They try to achieve their goals. But sometimes players just want to play, how they want, even if this way isn't good, optimal, etc. For example: may be talent trees were bad from game design point of view, but at the same time they were "immersive", so some players simply liked to play this little mini-game. Another example - tier sets. Some players, like me, are, dunno, how to explain it better, "completionists" and "collectors" - they want to have some long term completable goal to achieve. And reaching this goal - is what gives them satisfaction. But Blizzard make their game for dopamine-hamsters now - i.e. make endless RNG-fest, where spamming some source of RNG rewards - is goal in itself.

[Lilija]

Games are made for consumers, so of course they should be fun for most people, ideally. I really don't understand the mentality of some fanboys who say the devs should just ignore the consensus of players and make decisions which are to the detriment of game enjoyment. These same group of fanboys are personal fans of the devs and not really concerned about the well-being of the game. Seriously think about it, what are games for?

And what exactly is the consensus of WoW players? Because even looking at the forum which are always biased in the negative way you will not find this magical consensus. There is simply too many of us and we are too different people.

[Vorkreist]

Situation is probably more complex, than you think. Blizzard have "hidden" reasons to remove ML - their endless-manipulated-RNG-loot model is no longer compatible with ML. For example you can't be sure, that WF/TF item, that should give some player illusion, that he is lucky and give him incentive to grind this RNG-fest even further, will go to appropriate player with ML. May be even physically incompatible - i.e. may be there are some coding problems with Hearth of Azeroth system. Blizzard simply sacrifice organized raids in order to push their new loot model. They're even going to remove tier sets to achieve their goals - make as much pieces of loot "randomly upgradable", as possible. And in order to make it's removal reasonable and justified, they simply used standard strawman/exaggeration/hyperbole argument, i.e. listed all cons/rare/worst case scenario

Exactly what I've been saying. They want to get control of looting so they can rig the drop rates. The longer people take to gear up because RNG the more they might stay subbed between content patches => Higher MAU =>Happy Investors the only thing that actually maters in their eyes. Blizzard couldn't give a flying fuck about what people actually want or need.

[Kokolums]

And what exactly is the consensus of WoW players? Because even looking at the forum which are always biased in the negative way you will not find this magical consensus. There is simply too many of us and we are too different people.

Internet forums are overwhelmingly filled with introverts and moderators are basically 100% introverts so there is a dangerous consensus for introverted play. This group will push the game into unhealthy playstyles like the Suramar solo questline or removal of chat channels, offline mode and barriers to communities.

[WowIsDead64]

Exactly what I've been saying. They want to get control of looting so they can rig the drop rates. The longer people take to gear up because RNG the more they might stay subbed between content patches => Higher MAU =>Happy Investors the only thing that actually maters in their eyes. Blizzard couldn't give a flying fuck about what people actually want or need.

And this is example of making game "fun their way". They think, that not achievable BIS = incentive to log in = infinite content = happy players. And may be stats even confirm this assumption, cuz players play more and longer. But... This works once, may be twice. And then players realize, that no goal - no reason to move forward. Gear becomes pointless. Ilvl becomes pointless. Zero replayability due to too much grind - game turns into one-time single player. They burn out due to endless grind and just quit this game forever. No stable playerbase - not healthy game. This is the reason, why Diablo 3 failed. This is the reason, why I don't play it. But some D3 guys, that are moved to development of Wow, still think, that it's good idea.