So is the Wow community council dead?

[Kyriani]

They should have got the opinions from the people who stopped playing.

I can't say for sure how many people got one, but as someone who has let their sub lapse, I received a survey from Blizzard about wow and why I wasn't playing, and what things I'd like to see that could bring me back. They had a lot of spots to fill in things in your own words and the those sections specifically asked you to be as detailed as possible. As a non-raiding, non-competitive, casual player, you can be sure I gave them a lot to read.

Whether or not such feedback will amount to anything is anyone's guess though.

That would be the worst possible choice. The majority of players who stopped playing are not going to return or care, and the small minority of players who do wait for that mythical expansion to bring the spark back are probably easily outnumbered by players who have stopped playing, but are still invested in hating the game.

At best you might get some good ideas, but mostly it would probably just be nostalgia pandering and players giving non-constructive feedback like fire all the devs, or remove levelling/open world and make raids twice as long.

I disagree. As someone who would come back with the right changes in design philosophy, I think asking for feedback from me and those like me is a worthwhile endeavor. It's not enough to just try and stop the hemorrhaging of players. They need to at least try to recoup some of those who left.

[Orwell7]

To be honest, endgame progression besides gear CAN be fun.

To evolve the world around us should be an integral part of an MMO, be it seasonal or not. They tried to do this via AP and Renown, but they were character-specific.
What we tie these power upgrades to WORLD events like the opening of AQ gates?

This way you, the player, can contribute to defeat the current big baddy.

For example, freeing your 2nd soulbind could be tied to some hand-in quests, where the quest items came from Dungeons, Raids and WQs.
Then everyone on your server can get it at, for example, week 3. No need to quest on every alt you have.

The same way with conduits, legendaries, and so on.
Legos can be tied to a Q item from Twisting Corridors - 500 players defeating TC can unlock 1 specific legendary for every spec (like, the EQ lego for Ele Shamans).
Of course there should be a weekly X items auto-contributing for low population servers.

This way active players can still feel useful, they can bang their heads on grinding it out, but alts and players without that much time in their hands won't feel behind!

Oh and this could make the WF race even more interesting, because Blizz could control what power level they "let" players grind out on Week1, Week2, and so on. Just like the Venthyr Boomy lego if you remember.

[Gaidax]

Didn't it serve it's purpose? Cause some drama so Blizzard can pay a couple PR people to say "Look we tried it your way, we tried listening to you, the players, but you fucked it up didn't you, guess we'll have to make more borrowed power systems and timegates."

I don't think people should be instantly assuming some sort of giga conspiracy about every single thing. It's a tad paranoid really.

As I see it - WoW team decision makers genuinely want some sort of productive discussion starting without the usual unwashed masses turning it into a shitshow by the third thread post, as observed in standard forums. The idea is pretty good and good natured too - it's not some super secret "we tried" plan.

I'm just a bit on a skeptic side there, because my brain has been trained to be on the skeptic side by the community and by the team's all over the place performance.

[Candlewick]

I don't think people should be instantly assuming some sort of giga conspiracy about every single thing. It's a tad paranoid really.

As I see it - WoW team decision makers genuinely want some sort of productive discussion starting without the usual unwashed masses turning it into a shitshow by the third thread post, as observed in standard forums. The idea is pretty good and good natured too - it's not some super secret "we tried" plan.

I'm just a bit on a skeptic side there, because my brain has been trained to be on the skeptic side by the community and by the team's all over the place performance.

In the hidden forums it devolved pretty quick to... the devs have a lot of ego and its pretty fragile. Within a week a third party was relying messages to each side. The wow devs are so out of touch they think simcraft is a social construct...

[Kokolums]

As I see it - WoW team decision makers genuinely want some sort of productive discussion starting without the usual unwashed masses turning it into a shitshow by the third thread post, as observed in standard forums.

Blizzard does not know how to moderate forums tho. So, it doesnt matter how many times they create new forums, it will always devolve into a shitshow.

Its like these forums. The mmoc forums are widely viewed as hypertoxic. But thats because the moderators do not have a clue how to mod. And on top of that, they refuse criticism on the moderation ideas, so it remains gutter-quality here.

[Gaidax]

Blizzard does not know how to moderate forums tho. So, it doesnt matter how many times they create new forums, it will always devolve into a shitshow.

Its like these forums. The mmoc forums are widely viewed as hypertoxic. But thats because the moderators do not have a clue how to mod. And on top of that, they refuse criticism on the moderation ideas, so it remains gutter-quality here.

If MMO-C staff would moderate these forums any more than happens now, they'd be even more dead.

Often the problem is not moderation itself, but the issues that would come from assertive moderation. These range between forums being abandoned and dying (like Elitist Jerks btw, who practically moderated their forums to death) or in case of companies - claims of censorship, which would simply destroy credibility.

It's not that easy of a thing. Blizz could start moderating more, but you'd then get pepegas pouncing on it with their videos about how Blizzard is Fourth Reich or some such and you can bet it would stick too.

[Miffinat0r]

If MMO-C staff would moderate these forums any more than happens now, they'd be even more dead.

Often the problem is not moderation itself, but the issues that would come from assertive moderation. These range between forums being abandoned and dying (like Elitist Jerks btw, who practically moderated their forums to death) or in the case of companies - claims of censorship, which would simply destroy credibility.

It's not that easy of a thing. Blizz could start moderating more, but you'd then get pepegas pouncing on it with their videos about how Blizzard is Fourth Reich or some such and you can bet it would stick too.

Not sure if they still have them but NYT and WSJ do a pretty good job at moderating their comment sections.

The trick is to moderate when someone is not contributing to the conversation and has become hostile and starts throwing around insults.

Many perceive this to be censorship, but if no meaningful conversation is actually occurring and you're just replying to get the last word, ya moderate that.

For example:

Poster A: I think M+ should move into a queue.
Poster B: Oh here's the bads making arguments

Poster B in that scenario should have thier comment removed as it does not thing to further the conversation, but rather just insults the original poster.

[Kokolums]

If MMO-C staff would moderate these forums any more than happens now, they'd be even more dead.

Correct moderation would be to kick people that launch personal attacks. They dont do that tho. Instead, they allow personal attacks all over the place but then make iffy judgment calls on what is “trolling” and ban that. Thats the absolute worst way to mod forums. People are afraid to bring new ideas out of fear of being called a troll and are encouraged to attack other posters. So it turns into a pure shitshow like we have now.

I dont know where you get the idea that heavy moderation takes place. There is NO moderation just a bunch of judgement calls that feel random. Blizz keeps doing that too.

[Gaidax]

Not sure if they still have them but NYT and WSJ do a pretty good job at moderating their comment sections.

The trick is to moderate when someone is not contributing to the conversation and has become hostile and starts throwing around insults.

Many perceive this to be censorship, but if no meaningful conversation is actually occurring and you're just replying to get the last word, ya moderate that.

For example:

Poster A: I think M+ should move into a queue.
Poster B: Oh here's the bads making arguments

Poster B in that scenario should have thier comment removed as it does not thing to further the conversation, but rather just insults the original poster.

You're not getting what I said.

Let me take another approach to getting my point across - if MMO-C would hand on more infractions and bans to their, what, ~100-200 actual active posters, this place would die.

In case of Blizzard - their forums are game forums, these are both inherently more toxic, their position as impartial is shaky at best and these are their customers too after all. Quite obvious why they can't push rules too hard there.

[Kokolums]

You're not getting what I said.

Let me take another approach to getting my point across - if MMO-C would hand on more infractions and bans to their, what, ~100-200 actual active posters, this place would die.

In case of Blizzard - their forums are game forums, these are both inherently more toxic, their position as impartial is shaky at best and these are their customers too after all. Quite obvious why they can't push rules too hard there.

Im not saying mmoc should hand out more bans, in saying they should moderate correctly. Game forums are not inherently more toxic. Blizzs forums are also mismoderated tho.

[Relapses]

Correct moderation would be to kick people that launch personal attacks. They dont do that tho. Instead, they allow personal attacks all over the place but then make iffy judgment calls on what is “trolling” and ban that. Thats the absolute worst way to mod forums. People are afraid to bring new ideas out of fear of being called a troll and are encouraged to attack other posters. So it turns into a pure shitshow like we have now.

I dont know where you get the idea that heavy moderation takes place. There is NO moderation just a bunch of judgement calls that feel random. Blizz keeps doing that too.

The problem is that people interpret "hey buddy that's a pretty shitty opinion" as a "personal attack." How dare anybody think differently than what {insert favorite YouTuber here} has told you to think!

[Schizoide]

It sometimes happens anyway but alphas and betas are for identifying bugs, not redesign or removal of game features. Everyone seems to think that beta is where Blizzard should change the whole concept of their expansion based on feedback. It's not.

Well, that's what I just said, so yes I agree, that's how they see them.

Blizzard should listen to player feedback on design. Not obey, obviously, but take the feedback and consider it.

I believe they are genuinely interested in hearing about stuff people don't like but they would like to have more info than "TORGHAST SUCKS", etc. If they're smart they will encourage everyone who has issues with any part of the game to explain what and importantly why. The level of discourse on their own forums is generally useless for this, never mind fan sites like this one which apparently is full of bitter-enders who can't let go of the game.

This is incorrect, historically. Again I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt now, but in the past they said they're looking for actionable high-quality reasoned feedback but they absolutely did not accept it anywhere. Not on fansites like this one, not on their own hosted public forums, not on Twitter, and not on their private forums. Not since GC left.

There were two ways to get Blizzard to consider feedback, before the community council anyway.

a) Be a Twitch streamer or YouTuber with a large audience.

b) Devote months of time to gathering consensus on multiple forums, Twitter, etc. Post polls. Forum threads hundreds of pages long. Be relentless with this-- then maybe they'll notice it. I did this myself successfully in the Shadowlands beta. This was on a design matter with nearly 100% player consensus that it should be changed, and it was not easy to get developer attention.

Hopefully now, I can just go to the main council member for my class or whatever, and sincerely convince him or her I'm right, and get them to post a thread.

[ArenaDk]

not really, players are good at finding things THEY PERSONLAY DONT LIKE, that doesnt make the things bad, just check any pathfinder thread to see the dozens of diffeerent opinions how it should be handle, that should give you a clue

Exactly, thats the point. Players are good in finding flaws, it doesnt matter if its a personal one only or not. If someone finds something to be disliked, its a flaw. But this also plays into why player are bad in fixing things. As you mentioned dozens may not feel its a flaw in the same way , none at all or for the same reason. And the solution may be worse than the flaw for the majority again or even for the complainer themselfs. Thats why pointing out stuff even if its a personal grudge is still valuable, just getting salty about it and demanding tailored fixes is not.

[Relapses]

This is incorrect, historically. Again I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt now, but in the past they said they're looking for actionable high-quality reasoned feedback but they absolutely did not accept it anywhere. Not on fansites like this one, not on their own hosted public forums, not on Twitter, and not on their private forums. Not since GC left.

How do you gauge whether feedback was accepted by devs? If the devs do not immediately halt their project and cede the feedback immediately does that mean the feedback was "rejected"?

[GreenJesus]

Shame too as he seemed to be the only one who consistently had feedback about Blizz while the rest are just glorified yes people.

It's the worst when someone has an opinion I'm sympathetic towards but has very reprehensible attitudes toward so many.

I think it was over for him when he admitted on asmongolds stream that he said the N word regularly.

[Schizoide]

How do you gauge whether feedback was accepted by devs? If the devs do not immediately halt their project and cede the feedback immediately does that mean the feedback was "rejected"?

A response with "We disagree on this and here's why" would be the ideal method. GC used to do this all the time, he would post on forums, have his fireside chat blog posts, etc. It isn't about them agreeing all the time, it's about holding open conversations with players and not treating us with contempt.

In the case of the Shadowlands beta they never did respond to us, but after a couple of weeks they made the exact change we requested, and the game is far better for it. For that class, anyway.

[MoanaLisa]

This is incorrect, historically. Again I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt now, but in the past they said they're looking for actionable high-quality reasoned feedback but they absolutely did not accept it anywhere. Not on fansites like this one, not on their own hosted public forums, not on Twitter, and not on their private forums. Not since GC left.

Does not some of this feedback end up in future patches? Feedback is fine but the great majority of the unending bitching I see is that it wasn't changed immediately for launch. If true then it's misleading to say they "absolutely did not accept it anywhere."

Does anyone expect them to really pull major features from an expansion on their say-so? Do they expect launch to be delayed for months while they sort through 15 different opinions, often wildly contradictory, about major features? Come on....

[Relapses]

A response with "We disagree on this and here's why" would be the ideal method. GC used to do this all the time, he would post on forums, have his fireside chat blog posts, etc. It isn't about them agreeing all the time, it's about holding open conversations with players and not treating us with contempt.

In the case of the Shadowlands beta they never did respond to us, but after a couple of weeks they made the exact change we requested, and the game is far better for it. For that class, anyway.

I agree that GC's communication methods were better than the current team's but credit where credit's due they've been exceptionally transparent with the 9.2 PTR build thus far so hopefully that's a leaf that's being turned over. I was more trying to separate your take from the typical "Blizzard didn't make Mage do 1 billion DPS in every situation like I asked so they obviously suck at applying feedback," nonsense you see on forums.

[Schizoide]

Historically, damn near ALL of it ends up in future patches, because when beta testers find consensus it's a dang sure bet non-beta players will agree. Every bandaid you see in X.1 patches and major turnaround you see in X.2s came after extensive, detailed, actionable, well-written beta feedback in beta forums that Blizzard completely ignored.

They simply do not want design feedback in the beta cycle, we both agree that is the case. And that is a huge mistake.

9.1.5 and 9.2 are huge corrections for Blizzard. With all the various scandals and hemorrhaging subscription counts, they're realizing hey, wait, we aren't immortal. Microtransaction revenue doesn't compensate for losing tons of players, because the whales won't play (or pay) without the minnows to impress. No king lives forever. So yes, they're scared, and they're trying to do better. Or at least saying they are, the proof will be in the pudding.

As for pulling features and making impactful changes due to beta feedback, yes I do think they should do that. Better to delay for a couple months than to release a turd. It's Blizzard, what happened to "When it's done"?

[MoanaLisa]

I think it was over for him when he admitted on asmongolds stream that he said the N word regularly.

That would do it.