The Daily Blues
by Adam Holisky 
Aug 20th 2010 at 9:00AM
In which a worthy read and QQ join under a common crab.
Table of contents
Ghostcrawler
Ghostcrawler -- A very worthwhile read.Quote:
Our job here isn't to effect change in the classes. When you sit down to write a post with that in mind, the likelihood that you will end up disappointed is many orders of magnitude higher than the likelihood that you won't. Your real job here is to tell the devs things you like and things you don't like about the game, and about proposed changes. They then take that feedback and use it to inform their decisions. This is our function here.
You can approach that function in many ways. Personally, I approach things in a very layered approach, stretching from the most detailed to the most abstract. So, my approach is generally like so:
1) Explain things I do/don't like
2) Try to explain why at a low level (e.g., specific mechanical issues)
3) Try to explain at a higher level (e.g., "I'm frustrated with the lack of connection between elem gameplay and the elem name/image/theme/kit.")
4) Try to provide explanations of my feelings that apply to intuition (e.g., the oft-used "Basically, elem feels too much like 'improved shaman', and that makes it very hard to identify with the kit")
5) Lastly, provide suggested fixes to the problems I outline in 1-4. Difference is, I do this not to give the devs ideas (though if that happens, great). Ideas are easy to come by. I provide suggestions because it shows another angle of what the problem exactly is, by saying what I though would ameliorate the problem.
Another style of post I do which is a bit tangential to the above is trying to discuss things with others, so that I may better understand their issues, and then provide the above suite of post styles to help them articulate it. I also try to get it to go the other way, and see if other players have the same issues I do, because that provides me with a sense of what I need to try and explain most fervently.
As a result, I can't really ever feel that my time here is wasted. I provide 31 flavors of feedback and try to facilitate community discussion. If I came here trying to get my pet solutions implemented, I would be extremely disappointed every day, because the list of things I would have on my plate as a dev of this game would be very long indeed. (Not that the current path is so bad, just that different devs have different views)
So tl;dr: Maybe re-think why you post here, and figure out if it's just going to frustrate you forever.
Our job here isn't to effect change in the classes. When you sit down to write a post with that in mind, the likelihood that you will end up disappointed is many orders of magnitude higher than the likelihood that you won't. Your real job here is to tell the devs things you like and things you don't like about the game, and about proposed changes. They then take that feedback and use it to inform their decisions. This is our function here.
You can approach that function in many ways. Personally, I approach things in a very layered approach, stretching from the most detailed to the most abstract. So, my approach is generally like so:
1) Explain things I do/don't like
2) Try to explain why at a low level (e.g., specific mechanical issues)
3) Try to explain at a higher level (e.g., "I'm frustrated with the lack of connection between elem gameplay and the elem name/image/theme/kit.")
4) Try to provide explanations of my feelings that apply to intuition (e.g., the oft-used "Basically, elem feels too much like 'improved shaman', and that makes it very hard to identify with the kit")
5) Lastly, provide suggested fixes to the problems I outline in 1-4. Difference is, I do this not to give the devs ideas (though if that happens, great). Ideas are easy to come by. I provide suggestions because it shows another angle of what the problem exactly is, by saying what I though would ameliorate the problem.
Another style of post I do which is a bit tangential to the above is trying to discuss things with others, so that I may better understand their issues, and then provide the above suite of post styles to help them articulate it. I also try to get it to go the other way, and see if other players have the same issues I do, because that provides me with a sense of what I need to try and explain most fervently.
As a result, I can't really ever feel that my time here is wasted. I provide 31 flavors of feedback and try to facilitate community discussion. If I came here trying to get my pet solutions implemented, I would be extremely disappointed every day, because the list of things I would have on my plate as a dev of this game would be very long indeed. (Not that the current path is so bad, just that different devs have different views)
So tl;dr: Maybe re-think why you post here, and figure out if it's just going to frustrate you forever.
A very worthwhile read.
Specificity is good. (Brevity generally is too.)
Good: "Lightning Bolt isn't improved by enough talents so as a result, it does too little damage given its cast time."
Less helpful: I'm not sure why, but I don't like Lightning Bolt."
Even less helpful: "I want a new spell because mages just got one."
Not helpful: "I feel neglected."
Ghostcrawler -- This is QQ, though.Quote:
its fairly easy to be discouraged as a DK right now considering most other classes have had extensive work done, and id like to keep this thread free from QQ.
its fairly easy to be discouraged as a DK right now considering most other classes have had extensive work done, and id like to keep this thread free from QQ.
This is QQ, though. If you have specific concerns, bring them up. I can't turn around and tell the other class designers "DKs don't feel that their class is done." They will look at me with blank stares until I give them more to go on.
Quote:
While GC posts do bring trolls into decent threads occasionally, no dev response at all to reasonable shaman posts when other reasonable posts get responses leads to a group of people who love their class and want it fixed, but don't see any positive influence from the devs towards their thoughts and discussions. Which in turn, mounts further bitterness atop an already large pile... nay, mountain of depression that shaman feel.
While GC posts do bring trolls into decent threads occasionally, no dev response at all to reasonable shaman posts when other reasonable posts get responses leads to a group of people who love their class and want it fixed, but don't see any positive influence from the devs towards their thoughts and discussions. Which in turn, mounts further bitterness atop an already large pile... nay, mountain of depression that shaman feel.
GC's bosses: "Hmm. GC can't seem to be everywhere at once, and players get upset when he can't do so. Maybe it's better if we return to the forums of yore when nobody had the expectation of a blue post."
Ghostcrawler -- Holy priest level 10 spellThe new Holy level 10 spell is pretty simple, but it also has a lot of play with Chakra. I am just pointing this out, because many players never noticed the talent that made the old Holy level 10 (Desperate Prayer) into a tool that could heal others.
Other
Zarhym -- Constructive feedbackQuote:
I have 3 healing main characters in Live (Shaman, Druid, Priest). In the beta, I've only tried healing instances on my druid and it is a HORRIBLE experience. It's worse than pre-BC. I understand the intent is to make us more aware of our mana, and that mana is not an unending resource, and that we need to better manage that resource. But going OOM after 2 trash packs is annoying. So, not only do our healing spells cost a crap-ton of mana, but they don't heal for anymore than they did at 80, and everybody in the group is now taking TONS more damage and has 2 to 3 times the hit points they had in WOTLK.
If you really expect people to enjoy healing why would you basically force them to sit and drink for up to 30 seconds, effectively "stopping their flow of gameplay"? What was fun about healing in WOTLK and BC was that you were constantly doing something, whether it be healing or helping DPS on easy trash. But now we have to juggle between all these healing spells while watching our mana like a hawk. Make a few wrong decisions and youre OOM. There's not much room for error.
I cannot see myself playing a healer when Cata comes out if healing will be like it currently is. Sure, I will still play WoW, but I will be DPS'ing...something that is much less stressful (shouldn't be any stress in a game). I'm fine with that, but Blizz is making all these changes to the game to make it easier for newcomers to pick up and play....well, nothin easy about healing as it currently stands. I can only guess healers will become even MORE of a commodity than they currently are as people get annoyed/fed up and just play something else, whether its a diff. class/spec, or game.
ok, /rant off. But There is some constructive feedback in there...healing is stressful/annoying due to constant mana watching and requiring "too much" thought to pick the right spell for the right situation.
I have 3 healing main characters in Live (Shaman, Druid, Priest). In the beta, I've only tried healing instances on my druid and it is a HORRIBLE experience. It's worse than pre-BC. I understand the intent is to make us more aware of our mana, and that mana is not an unending resource, and that we need to better manage that resource. But going OOM after 2 trash packs is annoying. So, not only do our healing spells cost a crap-ton of mana, but they don't heal for anymore than they did at 80, and everybody in the group is now taking TONS more damage and has 2 to 3 times the hit points they had in WOTLK.
If you really expect people to enjoy healing why would you basically force them to sit and drink for up to 30 seconds, effectively "stopping their flow of gameplay"? What was fun about healing in WOTLK and BC was that you were constantly doing something, whether it be healing or helping DPS on easy trash. But now we have to juggle between all these healing spells while watching our mana like a hawk. Make a few wrong decisions and youre OOM. There's not much room for error.
I cannot see myself playing a healer when Cata comes out if healing will be like it currently is. Sure, I will still play WoW, but I will be DPS'ing...something that is much less stressful (shouldn't be any stress in a game). I'm fine with that, but Blizz is making all these changes to the game to make it easier for newcomers to pick up and play....well, nothin easy about healing as it currently stands. I can only guess healers will become even MORE of a commodity than they currently are as people get annoyed/fed up and just play something else, whether its a diff. class/spec, or game.
ok, /rant off. But There is some constructive feedback in there...healing is stressful/annoying due to constant mana watching and requiring "too much" thought to pick the right spell for the right situation.
For all intents and purposes, we don't consider it constructive feedback just because you followed the Code of Conduct and didn't call us names. This is a beta test, so generalized feedback about how and (vaguely) why healing is not fun -- when we haven't even reached the level cap in the test process -- doesn't give us actionable feedback.
There are a few things to consider here:
1) Healers don't play in beta quite like they do in Wrath of the Lich King. Yes, the system is designed to be less forgiving so that the heal you choose to cast, or how often you choose to heal your party or top off their health bars, should be a more meaningful decision.
2) Numbers are still being balanced, bugs are still being worked out with each new build, and we're still iterating upon individual spells and abilities.
3) The whole group could be approaching a dungeon like they do in Wrath, trying to pull as many packs of mobs as possible to charge through it. This isn't Wrath, nor are players or creatures balanced around Wrath numbers.
4) As an expansion of my first point, you might be making bad choices.
If you'd like to give us constructive feedback we can take with us to the drawing board, give us scenarios. Tell us what rotations you're using, the group make-up, whether you're using CC or AoE, a play-by-play of specific pulls or boss fights, etc. We want to know what the specific cases are where you are being as conservative as possible and still finding it to be a struggle, or even just too frustrating. We can look into that type of data.
The basic premise of this post speaks to all feedback on these forums. Not only do generalized complaints do very little to give us areas on which to focus testing, you're actually accomplishing the opposite of what you're trying to. You're making it more difficult for us to implement changes and then get technical breakdowns from testers in order to keep this a civil, constructive environment where we can better iterate upon areas of concern based on real data.
These forums should not be used like the live forums tend to be, folks. If we can't get adequate and detailed reports from players about their experiences while testing, we'll need to find more players willing to work with us in this regard.
Blizzard
- Mac Graphics Driver Update Fixes StarCraft 2 Crashes
- StarCraft II Free Character Name Change Coming Soon
Filed under: The Daily Blues
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
Dorkii Aug 20th 2010 9:07AM
About the new level 10 Holy spell, it's for Priests. Not paladins?
Adam Holisky Aug 20th 2010 9:12AM
Thx, fixed.
No idea why I typed paladin.
Nina Katarina Aug 20th 2010 9:08AM
" If we can't get adequate and detailed reports from players about their experiences while testing, we'll need to find more players willing to work with us in this regard. "
Detailed reports? Ooh, I can do that! Pick me, pick me!
Duulket Aug 20th 2010 9:16AM
I can as well.
jishdefish Aug 20th 2010 9:29AM
I was about to say the same thing...
Hades Aug 20th 2010 10:53AM
"detailed" certainly helps. However, every time one of the devs posts some snarky reply about how "it's not helpful" to a post that isn't the world's most articulate piece of writing, It comes across as though the devs are lazy or stupid.
This kid could be 15. He is a healer. What if he doesn't know enough about the game to lay out all those details? He seems to know something, but don't assume he knows enough.
It would've been soooo easy for Zarhym to turn that person's post into something constructive by responding with "What is your rotation?" or "Tell me more about how things are being pulled." All he had to do was spend a second thinking of how he could get the info he wanted out of the player. Tech support is great at taking a vague post like "my comp froze" and syphoning specific info out of the player until they know what exactly is wrong. Zarhym and GC could learn a ton about how to interact with players from the blues over at tech support, especially the Mac guys =) .
It's getting old reading the exact same blue-posts reworded 4000 different ways. Ok, we get it, some of these posts aren't good enough for you. Now either reply to the ones that are, ask questions in response to not-so-great posts and turn them into constructive threads, or stfu about it.
Stoop Aug 20th 2010 11:05AM
When the way you pick beta testers is completely random, you get completely random beta testers. If you want detailed bug reports, have an application process that weeds out "bad testers"
System specs are not the pinnacle of testing prowess indicators.
I've tested many MMO's, Blizzard's "Total luck of the draw" system has always perplexed me.
Avan Aug 20th 2010 11:07AM
Yeah, that post made me laugh audibly. Blizzard's public testing has always been a joke.
Edge Aug 20th 2010 11:32AM
@Hades just from reading these blues I pretty much agree.
I appreciate that they are trying to get more constructive posts, but every time I look at blue posts lately it is exactly as you say. The amount of time taken to write up that long diatribe about how to address issues has been done over and over. I know because I've seen it in these blues constantly. They could be using that time exactly like you said. it's almost like they prefer to feed trolls and ignore real issues.
Someone Aug 20th 2010 11:37AM
@ Hades:
Imagine that you wrote a book. Before publishing it, you give it to some people to read it first and tell you what they think about it. You would edit or cut off some parts the testers didn't like and only then publish it.
Which kind of feedback would help you the most?
1) "I didn't like chapter 6, it sucked and I was bored as hell while reading it."
2) "Chapter 6 could use some work. The action is a bit to vague, you described the city a bit too much and the characters could interract more."
This guy's post was a type 1) feedback. I think Zahrym gave the guy that response out of frustration and hoping that players will start giving more useful posts if they see how posts should look like rather than because he really wanted to hear that guy's specific feedback.
Thundrcrackr Aug 20th 2010 12:00PM
Blizzard sure likes to QQ about our QQ.
Kyle Aug 20th 2010 12:08PM
@ Someone
The issue Hades is pointing out is that they could just as easily said "Well what parts about it sucked" and helped introduce players to what it is they are looking for or how they want it presented. Instead we get yet another Blue post saying "NO!NO!NO! Thats not what we want. - read that in the XT voice.
As previous posters have said unless they refine their beta opt in process to include some sort of screening you can't expect the players who got in to be skilled writers or to truly understand the underlying fundamentals of what it is they are experiencing.
Someone Aug 20th 2010 1:22PM
@ Kyle
Yes, they could’ve simply asked what was exactly what the player didn’t like. However the beta forums aren’t there for that specific player to give feedback. There are houndreds, if not thousands of players in the beta and Blizzard invited them for a reason – because they want to hear opinions as many and as varied as possible.
I don’t agree with your opinion that them simply asking would help improve the community’s posting habits. I have been reading blue trackers for longer than I’d like to admit and I know they did ask, and did that many times. That’s not the problem here. Frankly, if an explicit post by a blue telling players their default way to give feedback is unhelpful and suggesting them how to improve doesen’t change the way posts are made, than simply asking players questions which should’ve been answered in the main post wouldn’t impact it neither.
No one expects players to be skilled writers or understand complex mechanics of the game in order to write their opinions. Blizzard wants usable feedback. May it be from a 12-year old or from a person who barely speaks English, as long as they get feedback Blizzard is happy. The current way people post doesen’t give Blizzard any valuable information, and not because posters don’t have Shakespeare’s writing skills or because they aren’t skileld informaticians. No, it’s because the information given by players is simply useless when it comes to designing a game.
Let’s say you give the following feedback: „I don’t like this mechanic, it sucks”. What do you expect Blizzard to do? To switch the „Sucks” button and then everything will be fine?
Yes, Blizzard could’ve simply asked this guy and the thousands who will follow him questions in order to suck some usable feedback out of them, but it’s a bit easier to try and do change the posting habits of a forum rather than babysitting each player into giving information which can actually be used.
TL;DR – Zahrym was right.
Chris Aug 20th 2010 1:22PM
@Hades - I'm sure it's getting old for the blue posters reading the same posts from people who actually aren't testing. If the poster doesn't put the effort into what their concerns/issues are, then neither will the response.
People are just being stupid - mindless complaining without detail is, well, the very definition of QQ. If that druid healer has issues with mana, he needs to detail his spell rotation, party makeup, when he noticed dmg spikes, etc.
musicchan Aug 20th 2010 1:22PM
@Kyle: So here's my question then. If Blizzard posters end up posting a lot about "please give us more constructive feedback", why is no one listening to them? Yes, asking specific questions woule help, but it seems like they want people to jump directly to the specifics instead of a Blue having to ask for it every time. It seems to me like they're trying to teach people how to make better feedback posts but no one is listening.
Hades Aug 20th 2010 4:25PM
@Someone:
I completely agree with your book analogy. The only thing I would critique is this: If the inadequate feedback is a result of the author selecting her "testers" completely randomly - or at best how good the lighting is in their house (aka computer specs) - then her expectations were unreasonable to begin with.
Zarhym's post was great as an instructional "how-to". It would have been excellent as a sticky addressed to everyone at the top of the general forums. Singling one person out as an example, especially when it is clear that person at least believes they are being constructive, is just bad customer relations.
In addition to all of that, the pseudo-threat at the end:
"If we can't get adequate and detailed reports from players about their experiences while testing, we'll need to find more players willing to work with us in this regard."
was an absolutely pointless generalization and empty threat to all of the beta-testers. Generalizations are terrible because they always risk alienating potential allies. The testers who are providing helpful feedback may look at that empty threat as a childish lack of appreciation by Zarhym.
Thundrcrackr's short post sums it up well. "Blizzard sure likes to QQ about our QQ."
Zarhym is writing about ways in which you should not communicate your thoughts when writing a beta post. I am writing a post about how Zarhym needs to take his own advice. I think the tone of Zarhym's post was worse than the one he was responding to tbh.
Neil Aug 20th 2010 4:38PM
I think the idea that the blues are posting it and no one is listening is really the key isn't it?
When you teach a subject in school, you are teaching to a wide variety of individual pupils. Each of them has a different learning ability, and a different learning style. You have the class clowns and the teachers pets and everyone in between. In the testing environment that Blizzard chooses to use, you get this same array of people.
So, the solution has to be the same as the solution in the classroom. Either you try to help the class clowns grow into more participatory members of the class by asking them specific feedback and getting them more involved in the process, which (hopefully) teaches them how to be better members of the society as a whole. Or you just ignore the "bad seeds" and pay attention to the good kids.
As parents, we sort of hope that the former teacher is present in the classroom. But this isn't a classroom. Blizzard is a business, and that means that the Blues are getting paid to look over at the forums and see if they can get some useful information out of them. So, they have to make a decision based on the value of their time.
What is valuable: Finding good feedback and reporting it.
What is slightly less valuable, but could lead to more value later: Asking for clarification from frustrated players who seem to be (at least a little bit) intelligent.
What is of even less value: complaining to a poster (in a 500 word post) that their post is simply not good enough.
What serves almost no value to Blizzard at all: That same Blue making the same 500 word post multiple times in the same forum to multiple posters...
So, while I agree that there are a lot of posters out there who should really be more constructive about their posts. And I agree that the Blues could get more information if they asked the right questions of the "bad" posters. I completely see how that would probably take a lot more time (=money) to get what amounts to a small amount of feedback.
Ultimately, I guess I agree with the poster that said that "Blizzard sure likes to QQ about our QQ."
Eisengel Aug 20th 2010 8:33PM
Well said, Hades!
Ways to get good feedback
1. Choose your testers
- screen your testers so that you are sure they will give you the type and style of feedback you want
2. Inform your testers
- have multiple examples of a situation and different feedback posts on the same situation, and point out the good and bad points of the feedback, demonstrating what you want
3. Conform the input
- require your testers to use a certain kind of form to force them to give you the style and type of feedback you want
If you open up a general forum with no forms, no examples, and allow anyone to post, guess what, you will definitely get a lot of feedback that is not useful. It would be like going to the middle of Grand Central Station and asking people passing by to solve a complex math problem. Eventually you'll find someone with the knowledge, experience, capability and motivation to do it, but it will take a very long time, and those people will be very few and far between. WoW's subscription base is what, 12 million? With absolutely no screening, examples, or forms Blizz expects great feedback from anyone with a heartbeat and a credit card?
Besides, Zarhym is a jackass. It's a good thing that Real ID thing never went live and revealed his name as I'm sure a lot of forum-goers would've been on road trips for a little 'face time'.
Peary Aug 20th 2010 9:14AM
When are people gonna learn the difference between qq and real constructive information. Or maybe find a way to get players into the beta who know how to relay their concerns better. lol
VioletArrows Aug 20th 2010 9:19AM
That would require thinking logically instead of emotionally, and if you're already frustrated, well, too late there.