Do the developers' personal preferences affect class balance issues?
by Amanda Miller 
Sep 15th 2008 at 2:30PM
He feels that people become very emotional about the topic, and points out that developers are people too, and proposes that their feelings play a major role in how the classes are balanced.
Considering how many developers there are, I highly doubt that changes are implemented that don't support the vision of the entire group. Of course people have preferences and feelings, and that can never be fully separated from anything we do, but it is important to keep in mind that the developers are paid professionals working together, not alone.
Their jobs depend on balancing the classes as much as possible, and I doubt any one of them is going to risk their (awesome) job just to try to give their class a boost. In addition, even if one or two developers favor Boomkin, the rest have other favorites and are not about to let any one class get out of hand.
Personally, I think it is the players who become too sensitive or worked up about class balance issues in testing phases. Changes are made just so the developers can see the effects on a broader scale to give them a better idea of where and how things need to be tweaked.
How do you feel about this issue? Do you think that a developer's personal preferences and feelings have a strong impact on class balance issues? If so, how? I'm interested to hear the opinions of the community, and I know Paul is too.
Filed under: Patches, Analysis / Opinion, Blizzard, Expansions, Classes, Wrath of the Lich King, Forums
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 4)
jag Sep 15th 2008 2:35PM
I do think developers feelings count alot. Ghostcrawler specifically said that "Druids were in good hands" because so many Blizzard employees favor the class. The fact that these statements are backed up by changes that favor those classes confirms it.
I'm also positive that not a single developer plays a Hunter as a main. The things they are doing (or not doing) for this class are shameful.
VSUReaper Sep 15th 2008 2:39PM
I think you mean shaman.... IMHO hunters are getting alot of treats (unless I missed something major in the past week or so).
I think shamans are the ones that are getting slammed with the changes to raid stacking.
smcn Sep 15th 2008 2:52PM
"The fact that these statements are backed up by changes that favor those classes confirms it."
Feral druids would beg to differ. In fact, the post you cite by Ghostcrawler was in response to feral druid issues: http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=9679910008&pageNo=1&sid=2000#8
I'm a druid myself (resto), and let me tell you, feral druids are the mages of Wrath when it comes to whining. Not that some of their (and your) concerns don't have merit, but there isn't a single class with a spec that isn't feeling a little left by the wayside.
I am absolutely certain that developer's opinions have an effect on the game, but there are certain design and marketing goals that have to be met. Any "special treatment" is solely in the mind of people who aren't happy with their class/spec at that particular time.
P.S. If I never see another post from some PvPer whining about Kalgan playing a warrior I'll die a happy man.
here is a thought Sep 15th 2008 2:54PM
perhaps ONE of the hunter specs, the other two are being punished for being underpowered in the first place.
It feels like "you guys are having a hard time? can't hold up in PVP? can't get in on a raid because nobody wants you? Ok, lets see if making things worse will fix it"
Harmun Sep 15th 2008 2:55PM
There's going to be advocates for each class inside the dev team, but I imagine that someone who probably doesn't play the game is where the buck stops. Blizzard is a smart company managed by smart people with business degrees. They've consistently provided a product that makes as many of their customers as happy as possible, and are not willing to risk any of that cash flow on silly things like developer/gamer ego.
Do you remember back in the old EQ days, where the main programmer had a ridiculously strong game character that he used whenever he wanted to go in game? Notice how not one Blizzard dev is using any characters but the ones they've been able to build themselves?
The one exception to this I've seen is when they gave that poor kid from the make a wish foundation the phoenix mount before it was available to their general player base.
Taxis Sep 16th 2008 3:06AM
Yeah. Hunters aren't underpowered or forgotten. They are great if the player knows what they are doing, and ridiculous if the player doesn't. Its also the funnest class to level with.
Unfortunately its not a very viable class for arena. This isn't because there aren't any developers that like hunters, its because if they were to amend the 'problems' that hunters have that relate to arena, it would make the entire class op in every other aspect of the game. The population of hunters is relatively huge compared to every other class but warriors. I can say from personal experience I wouldn't want to see another overpopulated/overpowered class (we will leave that label up to the locks).
My main is a hunter, and I can hold my own in my class. So I know what I am talking about.
zakhan Sep 16th 2008 5:34AM
I don't think hunters lack strength in the arenas (and I have failed misserably in there on my own hunter) it's more a problem of having the biggest weaknesses.
A rogue for example has very few weaknesses in the arena, you can't catch them offguard with a big spell because they got a lot of interrupting going, you can't los them because they're a melee class, you can't kite them because they've got 2x sprint and shadowstep.
A hunter on the other hand has a ton of weaknesses you can easily exploit, and blizzard hasn't yet found a way for the majority of us to succeed despite them. There are a few hunters who are devastating in pvp though so it is possible.
Robert Sep 15th 2008 2:36PM
I highly doubt their personal issues affect anything. Blizzard has stated in the past that if 1 person on the team doesn't like the change it gets thrown out.
PeeWee Sep 15th 2008 4:00PM
And big companies never lie to their customers, right?
Yeah, right.
Kenty Sep 15th 2008 2:41PM
A development group is a lot like democracy, it works until 51% realize they can make the other 49% do what they want.
Developer preference obviously plays a part in class balance and decisions, if 15 developers want druids to rank as high as mages in DPS and only 3 developers want mages to be greater, the druids are going to be equal to mages.
Blizzard says they have a design philosophy they follow regarding class balance, but remember who came up with that philosophy. But yes, players are overly sensitive more or less because blizzard gives absolutely no information about changes or considerations until 3 months after feedback could be helpful.
Tarry Sep 24th 2008 5:57PM
"A development group is a lot like democracy, it works until 51% realize they can make the other 49% do what they want."
A bunch of the people commenting on the development seem to not really understand how products like a video game get developed. I'm assuming by "developers" most people think coders, the people who actually write the stuff that makes the software run.
In fact, those developers are just code jockeys. They are told what to code how and with what and they do it. It's based on a master plan. It's like a car assembly line.
Sounds like many peoples' issues are not with the devs/code jockies but rather with the usability and user experience types. I'd love to see stats on whether those types even game, because by and large, people who take those jobs are trained in psychology, sociology, art design and Human Computer Interface.
And if my suspicions are right and the actual designers and engineers don't game or game very lightly (enough to keep their jobs?), then any idea of the classes being balanced in favor of what the devs like to play becomes false.
rick gregory Sep 15th 2008 2:42PM
I don't KNOW of course, but if they don't then Blizzard should provide some explanation for the more controversial decisions. A simple example - INner Fire, the armor buff for priests. Has charges. These are annoying, esp in PvP but even grinding. Many, many priests have asked that they be removed and the duration of the spell increased to match other caster armor buffs. WE're fine with increased mana costs for casting it to make that fair. All we've seen from Koraa is, basically, 'No'. No real explanation, no rationale for why our armor buff has this mechanism while others don't. So we're left feeling it's that way for some arbitrary, perhaps personal reason.
Saelorn Sep 15th 2008 2:58PM
Inner Fire has an easy explanation, though. It has a much greater increase to armor value than any of the other caster armor buffs (more than twice the value). You could argue that the increased armor value is just a trade off for not slowing attackers or granting HP5, but apparently that trade off isn't as significant as you'd think.
James Sep 15th 2008 3:07PM
The thing is that what's OP to certain classes or comps is ezmode to kill if you do it right.
Warriors slay warlocks and their pets,right?
As sl/sl in season 3 I really found this to suck, it lost me so many games... Now in Season 4 I run with a sPriest and Im UA. The dumb ass warriors who attack my pet get owned before they even hit us once. We can drop s3 warriors before their druid even pops. So while they seemed Imba for me as slsl, I adapted and learned to kill them another way.
rick gregory Sep 15th 2008 3:28PM
Saelorn,
Sure, but 1) Blizzard cold make that argument to us and 2) Most priests would be fine with either making IF a higher cost spell than other armors, shorter duration or even less armor. The issue that most of us face is that charges get taken off so fast you're constantly recasting it when grinding or in PvP. The replies from Blizzard aren't engaging with our points though, they'lre just "No, charges are staying" which makes it sound more like personal preference within Blizzard and less like a well thought out reason.
Ultimately they're the designers, but it would help a GREAT deal to defuse issues if they would provide reasoning for why things are a certain way as long as that reasoning seemed self-consistent. The problem with what they've done is that they say one thing "Mages are AoE kings", "rogues are single target damage kings" and then we see the mechanics not support those contentions. (locks are better at AoE than mages in most cases at similar gearing levels, locks and hunters are equal to or better than rogues on bosses many times). Pick roles for the various classes, design to support that and when you're making a controversial decision, outline how tha decision supports the role you've given the class. Can't do that? Then it appears that personal bias is in play - that or poor design.
gridwerk Sep 15th 2008 3:48PM
@james
huh?
this game has its own language and sometimes feel I dont know the dialect.
andyjay220 Sep 15th 2008 3:57PM
@James
I think this is something I see a lot of when ppl bitch about certain classes. The ppl that feel class "X" is overpowered are usually the one that are weak against that class (clothies complain about rogues, warriors about mages, rogues about warriors and ret pallies,etc.). I was watching as all the ppl complaining about retadins were a lot of rogues.
Some classes own you, that's all there is to it. I didn't see a single priest complaining about my ret pally. Why? because they know that all I got was a sporting chance. Rogues? You're just going to get owned harder than I was already owning you :)
Returna Sep 15th 2008 2:42PM
I'd hope that they follow their passions and let their feelings influence what can make this game more fun for everyone.
However, I'd also hope that there are many developers with many characters and use that passion to bring balance among many points of view.
I play an arms warrior in PvP and an enhance shaman in PvE. When I flip their roles I see a major difference. I hope that developers that play different roles see where shortcomings fall and strengths come into play.
Wasuremono Sep 15th 2008 2:43PM
Sometimes I think the developers view or vision for a class differes so greatly from the players that it cause players to become very upset or question what in the world the developers are thinking. However I don't think any one developer really pushes a class into the ground or elevates it to the level of op.
Robert M Sep 15th 2008 2:46PM
This was a comment I read on wowpaladin.org about class balance, and I thought of it immediately when I read this post.
"Killsfercake said,
September 4, 2008 at 4:06 am
Someone needs to pull Kalgan away from his warrior on the beta and tell him to do his fucking job or hire me to balance the dame game"
Obviously, there are a ton of players who think balance is a word that blizz uses to cheat one class, and then they completely forget about the word in other areas. I think that's the bigger problem with "class balancing" We see it used to justify some changes and then when there are obscenely outrageous imbalance issues, many players feel like blizz sweeps it under the rug.