Should blizzard have a voting system for future content?

[Gaidax]

No, players not knowing what they want is a real thing.

They think they do, but they don't.


Don't @me.

[loras]

Wooow... some priviliged bs there.

Democracy is for all, not just for the educated. Even if they vote against their interests, which often happens, they still deserve to be heard.

It does work even with dumb populace, as long as the institutions hold, because democracy doesn't elect a leader for a lifetime. It selects an employee for 4 years, after which you can oust them based on performance.
Democracy is still the best cause of that. It allows mkstakes to be fixed later.

But, it doesn't work quite as well for designing a game because failure can mean the shutdown of the game.

It is privilege to value being realistic and effective?
No wonder that some people trap themselves in infinite self-made misery.

Democracy is the art of ruling, and like any other it can be done well or poorly, and that beyond opinion or emotion.

If you prioritise hearing all above selecting capable leaders you will end up with ever greater fools to the detriment of all, and you will end up with puppets and morons who know how to deceive and how to manipulate matters to their own ends rather than serve anyone's interests other than theirs and their masters.

Democracy has some institutions and safeguards i'll admit, but nothing of the sort that can counter structural degradation of the voting populace. The UK and the US are excellent examples of this, as unsurprisingly "degenerated" people will choose likewise leaders. And i use those quotation marks to distinguish from common internet lingo, as i am not talking about moral degeneration, but rather more physical degradation; poverty itself ravages health and mind, a lack of education, health and stability degenerates a populace.
And you cannot expect such a compromised populace to make genuine independant choices any more than you could expect an ill, hungry, homeless schizophrenic to make them them.

So it's got nothing to do with privilege to not respect such a vote, but rather a lot more with actually being realistic and effective, and to not allow those were ruined by themselves or others to spread their ruin to yet more people.

And that goes no less for real life than it goes for a game: democracy is only as good as the people that comprise it.

[Electric Lighter]

No, players not knowing what they want is a real thing.

True that is why you restrict the vote to people who are invested in the game via having completed harder content aotc, rival, KSM.

These players have at least an informed opinion on the game. The rest will happily follow along so long as you make a super easy version of the content for them.

[Kumorii]

True that is why you restrict the vote to people who are invested in the game via having completed harder content aotc, rival, KSM.

These players have at least an informed opinion on the game. The rest will happily follow along so long as you make a super easy version of the content for them.

Being a more hardcore player doesn't mean you know what you want from a design perspective. Players are best at saying what they feel about a system they are playing. It's why almost every suggestion is "give us the system sort of like from game X" because they liked that system in said game. However they don't know from a design perspective why they like it. There's lots of psychology going into game design and players rarely know the intricacies behind it all.

[Electric Lighter]

Being a more hardcore player doesn't mean you know what you want from a design perspective. Players are best at saying what they feel about a system they are playing. It's why almost every suggestion is "give us the system sort of like from game X" because they liked that system in said game. However they don't know from a design perspective why they like it. There's lots of psychology going into game design and players rarely know the intricacies behind it all.

I don't really think this is true if I am being blunt...

I've never seen the level of naivety during early beta when its mostly streamers,raiders, and pvpers then I do from the wow general forums. Its a group that is very quick to point out what systems are going to crash and crash hard. I've not seen a scenario beyond torghast were they where not right on the money and to be clear the torghast on beta wasn't anywhere close tot he torghast we got.

[MasterHamster]

What do you think the Yay or Nay votes would be for a poll:
"Should every player receive an upgrade from every boss kill?"
I can imagine that an MMORPG designed by majority rule would have about 45 minutes of longevity.

[Electric Lighter]

What do you think the Yay or Nay votes would be for a poll:
"Should every player receive an upgrade from every boss kill?"
I can imagine that an MMORPG designed by majority rule would have about 45 minutes of longevity.

I was thinking future content and progression systems myself. Think warfronts, corruption, relics, isles, torghast covenants that kind of thing.

Blizzard would simply post the outline before development started and ask yay or nay

[Bee76]

@op hell no

SL is based on that "feedback" ofthe community
"no power grind, no tf/wf, no corruption, nothing i just wanna log in raid and log off and play something else"

so now you can do nothing more than fillig your gv lottery with 10 raidbosses and 4-10 m+, if you are not into pvp.
oh and you can grind like hell for anima - to buy cosmetics....

- - - Updated - - -

I was thinking future content and progression systems myself. Think warfronts, corruption, relics, isles, torghast covenants that kind of thing.

You remember the feedback of the popular streamers and beta testers about boreghast and the maw ?
"the outline" wouldnt tell you how blizz will implement it into the game. The great vault, such a cool idea, hyped for it. But what blizz delivered was something completly diffrent than most ppl did expect it.

[stresskiller]

sure lets all vote for a game-stop store in thunderbluff ...

[Kumorii]

I don't really think this is true if I am being blunt...

I've never seen the level of naivety during early beta when its mostly streamers,raiders, and pvpers then I do from the wow general forums. Its a group that is very quick to point out what systems are going to crash and crash hard. I've not seen a scenario beyond torghast were they where not right on the money and to be clear the torghast on beta wasn't anywhere close tot he torghast we got.

Saying something sucks or something will fail doesn't mean you understand why it will or how to fix it. As I said, players are exceptional when it comes to saying if they like something, even better if they dislike something. Explaining why they dislike something or even attempting to fix something is something else entirely. You are bringing up examples in which players actually get to test it. I'm not contesting that those players don't know if they like or dislike it. Everyone knows if they like or dislike something.

But to give advice and vote on future things that you haven't yet tested requires a lot more understand of WHY you like or dislike something, which many don't know.

[Electric Lighter]

Saying something sucks or something will fail doesn't mean you understand why it will or how to fix it. As I said, players are exceptional when it comes to saying if they like something, even better if they dislike something. Explaining why they dislike something or even attempting to fix something is something else entirely. You are bringing up examples in which players actually get to test it. I'm not contesting that those players don't know if they like or dislike it. Everyone knows if they like or dislike something.

But to give advice and vote on future things that you haven't yet tested requires a lot more understand of WHY you like or dislike something, which many don't know.

A lot of it can't be fixed...

The lion share of new ideas would never of left planning phase if the playerbase was aware of them. Corruption, isles... maybe not warfronts as they had some potential if tuned right but things like relics would of all been killed in their cribs.

A lot of wow players can smell padding a mile away now.

[llewllew]

No.
No.
No.

[Tyze]

Kinda ironic this thread doesn't have a voting system.

I think not, the streamers has too big of a impact and their small army will vote what they want.

[Swnem]

It is privilege to value being realistic and effective?
No wonder that some people trap themselves in infinite self-made misery.

Democracy is the art of ruling, and like any other it can be done well or poorly, and that beyond opinion or emotion.

If you prioritise hearing all above selecting capable leaders you will end up with ever greater fools to the detriment of all, and you will end up with puppets and morons who know how to deceive and how to manipulate matters to their own ends rather than serve anyone's interests other than theirs and their masters.

Democracy has some institutions and safeguards i'll admit, but nothing of the sort that can counter structural degradation of the voting populace. The UK and the US are excellent examples of this, as unsurprisingly "degenerated" people will choose likewise leaders. And i use those quotation marks to distinguish from common internet lingo, as i am not talking about moral degeneration, but rather more physical degradation; poverty itself ravages health and mind, a lack of education, health and stability degenerates a populace.
And you cannot expect such a compromised populace to make genuine independant choices any more than you could expect an ill, hungry, homeless schizophrenic to make them them.

So it's got nothing to do with privilege to not respect such a vote, but rather a lot more with actually being realistic and effective, and to not allow those were ruined by themselves or others to spread their ruin to yet more people.

And that goes no less for real life than it goes for a game: democracy is only as good as the people that comprise it.

Game and real life isn't the same.

I don't fully disagree with you, because, yes, it creates degeneracy, but the thing is there is no better system atm. For democracy to work everyone has to have a voice (otherwise they have a legimate reason to revolt) and if a degenarate leader is chosen, we have to accept cause that is the choice of the majority.
I understand what you mean, but i would rather have safeguards in the law to ensure education is beyond party lines.

With that said, the "democracy" in the UK and US is flawed in great part due to the 2 party system.
Anyways, it's a different conversation. I don't think it applies to game development.

[Shadowferal]

Seems to me we already see the results.

[Blackmist]

The trouble with democracy is every silly bastard gets a vote.

[Electric Lighter]

The trouble with democracy is every silly bastard gets a vote.

True its why its in the op not to allow that.

[loras]

Game and real life isn't the same.

I don't fully disagree with you, because, yes, it creates degeneracy, but the thing is there is no better system atm. For democracy to work everyone has to have a voice (otherwise they have a legimate reason to revolt) and if a degenarate leader is chosen, we have to accept cause that is the choice of the majority.
I understand what you mean, but i would rather have safeguards in the law to ensure education is beyond party lines.

With that said, the "democracy" in the UK and US is flawed in great part due to the 2 party system.
Anyways, it's a different conversation. I don't think it applies to game development.

Fair enough, yeah the UK and the US definitely have major issues with their effective two party systems.
And that education (and academics in general) should be beyond politics, and should be kept entirely separate if even remotely possible imo.
(and that goes both ways, politics playing at science results in politicians trying to evade responsibility by hiding behind scientists; the other way around inevitebly corrupts the principles of proper scientific inquiry as politics require decisions, and decisions require absolute certainty that science rarely provides)

And while i definitely agree that these are different situations i do think that the same principles apply; you need some sort of quality check while retaining meaningful representation, the kind of which seems impossible in this context.

As such i am quite opposed to "democracy" in this context.

[sephrinx]

No. This is how we would end up with boosts, dual spec, aoe looting, no attunements, etc.

[Electric Lighter]

No. This is how we would end up with boosts, dual spec, aoe looting, no attunements, etc.

I mean you get boosts because blizz wants money... as for the rest your really going to have to explain how those are negatives.