The Developers Need to Start Surveying Players After Every Patch

[Dzian]

The issue with paladin was more that it didn't fit the games design. Everything in the game revolves around dps checks and thus a low dps class of any format doesn't really fit in the game.

Paladins are supposed to be high mitigation but mitigation isn't important it's the last thing considered in most cases

Most big hits that can screw you over tend to be managed by various mechanics more often than any form of mitigation. Which is another reason pld didn't fit.

The other issue is the preset party makeup of 2 tanks 2 healers and 4 dps. This requires every job to be almost equal.

So again a high mitigation low dps tank class instantly falls short. Because the mitigation isn't important.

If taking a pld meant you could take an extra dps then it "could" have worked out. (Assuming a war & drk or 2 wars would contribute as much dps as the pld+dps option) But neither the slight mitigation advantage a pld has nor the preset party compositions allow for such things.

[Defias]

Really? Everquest tanks did equal damage to DPS?
As a longtime player of EQ1, EQOA, & EQ2 I can say that's not true.

As WOW opened up Pandora's box on Tank dps. The very reason dual-spec came out was to try and fix the issue as Tanks became pure DPS & could no longer Tank effectively, Tanks became nigh non-existent.
Every Warrior, Paladin, & Deathknight were dps specced.
Eventually Tanks complained they needed to have 2 gearsets, 1 for dps, and 1 for Tanking while other players only needed 1 set.
(Now WOW has made significant changes so this isn't nearly as big an issue. But the fact remains.)

Also I'be seen many Tanks come and go because on top of the stress of Tanking, learning Strength Tanking was extremely rough on new tanks.
SE just made sure gear is assigned appropriately.

Maybe they should look at ESO and adapt this game to those classes. Where every class can wear and use all weapons, armor, and fill every role.
Maybe then folks will be happy?

[Dante_V]

Only response I am going to make to the "tanking matter" people are focusing on, rather than the fact SE doesn't conduct player surveys before making substantial changes to game mechanics.



Furthermore, when I resppecced my PLD from STR to VIT, I gained a couple hundred points of HP. The VIT change only has an impact on WARs due to Defiance boosting their HP pool based on its base. It makes absolutely no difference to PLD or DRK, and is actually a rather silly change in a game that allows players to choose where to put their bonus stat points (it's the illusion of customization). So while PLD may have had some abilities buffed, it lost its max DPS potential for no defensive benefit at all. That is what people are upset about.

First Square isn't required to listen to your personal requests, nor should they have to consider things outside of overall playing experience which varies wildly from player to player. While they do take into consideration the community's thoughts in the end it is ultimately their game. Also even if they did implement features solely based upon player feedback, there is no guarantee that your feedback would be represented as such as it would likely be to the tune of the majority of feedback as opposed to yours alone. To this degree square absolutely does listen to players ala fixing things such as mudra lag, raid mechanics, and various other things. Just because they aren't listening to exactly what you want doesn't mean that they are not listening. What if they just don't agree with what you say?

This is one of the few games I can honestly say that genuinely considers player input, sometimes for better or even worse, but they do. It's self evident. In fact I can name input that I personally put into the game on a thread here on this forum about QoL requests. I requested that the names of the aetherytes location be put on the map (in ishgard) when you hover your mouse over the aetherytes so that we didn't have to guess where we were teleporting and that the repair for airships along with the airship venture map be accessible without the need for repair materials or cereluem tanks in our inventory. One of the mods here directly quoted my post and a bunch of others in response, sent it to them, and BAM... the next update they were there. Granted these are QoL things and fairly minor, but I can say that I've never had a developer take such things into account to that degree. Just because they aren't actively pinging every player with an email doesn't mean they aren't listening, they are I promise.

You said you aren't going to be playing anymore so then what is the point of then meeting the demands of people who are no longer players?
You seemed to be able to find this group and likewise I'm sure that others wishing to submit their input will take the same proactive stance in doing so as the thousands before have done.

Anyhow the best of luck to you in the future!

[Spawnie]

This has been bothering me for awhile, Tanks did not get nerfed they returned to what their class was meant to do. Sure they took a hit to dps but now hold aggro better and get more HP with the new gear. And the devs have nothing to do with tanks being unpopular, tanking is a hard job with little room for mistakes because a mistake by a tank can wipe the group and not everyone is cut out for it. Lastly you don't play a tank to dps just as you would not play a dps to tank or a healer to dps.

like sephirot normal run yesterday... the tank decided he wanted to test somethin and ended up wiping the whole group lol

[Kosmos992k]

I believe arbitrary decisions like nerfing tank DPS -- which feedback on the tanking forums shows is a largely unpopular decision with the regular posters-- would simply not occur if the developers properly surveyed all players about what they liked and disliked about playing tanks.

The decision is a good one, even if Warriors are upset over their loss of Fell Cleave and other OPness. The point of the change is that tanks tank, they do not DPS.

As for feedback and a survey, SE would be suicidally stupid to survey players mere days after a major patch like this. There is so much over reaction this close to a patch it invalidates the feedback itself.

You have to let the dust settle and people adjust before you ask how it's going.

[Andrea]

While I don't agree with your topic I do believe they should mail us surveys every month or so.

Not everyone that plays will visit the forums so I feel it would be a good way of judging what players would like.

[Rjain]

I work as a business consultant for entertainment companies.

If you work as a business consultant for entertainment companies you should be aware of the presence of social media and how Square Enix receives more than enough feedback from their official forums, Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, and any other thing imaginable that their workers scour for player information. If you legitimately think that the only way to receive feedback from the player base is through e-mail you probably should not call yourself a business consultant. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if 30% of the entire player base didn't even check their e-mail based on the amount of "how was I supposed to know [x] was supposed to happen" when SE constantly sends out messages in regard to particular events and changes.

Rest assured that Square Enix receives more than enough feedback to last them a lifetime and beyond.

Edit: Note that I am not saying surveys are a bad idea, of course direct customer surveys can be helpful, but it is completely laughable when people have the frame of mind that they are not "being listened to" and there's no way to "give feedback".

[Kosmos992k]

While I don't agree with your topic I do believe they should mail us surveys every month or so.

Not everyone that plays will visit the forums so I feel it would be a good way of judging what players would like.

That would not be practical or helpful in the long run. Such frequent surveying would lead to indecision and paralysis of development as each month you would get a new series of priorities or directives from the latest survey which might contradict the prior month, or simply be impractical, and for major features/revisions, you may end up waiting for the survey instead of proceeding.

Games are to an extent an artform, and sometimes you have to let the creators create.

[Alberel]

OP you seem to have a severe lack of understanding for why the changes to tanks in 3.2 actually occurred. It wasn't a nerf. It was a fix.

Tanks, as a role, are supposed to absorb damage to protect the squishier members of the party. All of their stats and skills should be tailored towards that role. Instead we had tanks stacking DPS gear and some warriors starting to inch out damage to rival the lower end of the actual DPS job spectrum. The game was starting to suffer from a power creep in tank DPS that was threatening the balance of the trinity this game depends upon. This issue was also causing PLDs to be completely unwanted as tanks were being taken for their damage and not for their ability to do their actual role.

The change to tank scaling on VIT instead of STR forced players back into the role they were always meant to be in. It wasn't done on a whim, it was to fix a growing issue. If you want to do damage then don't play a tank. The only people complaining here are the tanks themselves who are sad that they're no longer ridiculously overpowered. Pretty much everyone else is relieved to see a semblance of balance restored. Judging by your post it sounds like you just want to vent about that single, entirely justified and NEEDED, change.

[FoxyAreku]

There's plenty of feedback in other places. Like here, for example.