DPS jobs lacking utility?

[Shurrikhan]

Im sure that square knows wich skill players make less use, and change game based in those istatistics.

Doesn't make it any less bull. If you situate something poorly (such that your implementation is scarcely worth using) and then use players' lack of interest in that implementation as indication that they have no interest in the concept, that's negligent at best. More likely: disingenuous.

"Would you like to buy this mount for 300 primal totems?"
"No?"
"Well I guess no one wants the ability to buy mounts with totems. Let's get rid of that."

[Lucyfurr1988]

Doesn't make it any less bull. If you situate something poorly (such that your implementation is scarcely worth using) and then use players' lack of interest in that implementation as indication that they have no interest in the concept, that's negligent at best. More likely: disingenuous.

"Would you like to buy this mount for 300 primal totems?"
"No?"
"Well I guess no one wants the ability to buy mounts with totems. Let's get rid of that."

think sleeve draw - used to pull 3 cards but loads of players moaned that they were finding it stressful to do so, couldnt always get a 3 card divination and mp was too hard to maintain. sleeve draw gets a massive nerf and they attach mp regeneration to it.

the problem isnt negligence at all the problem is they pay too much attention to the people unwilling to learn to play their jobs right

[Shurrikhan]

think sleeve draw - used to pull 3 cards but loads of players moaned that they were finding it stressful to do so, couldnt always get a 3 card divination and mp was too hard to maintain. sleeve draw gets a massive nerf and they attach mp regeneration to it.

the problem isnt negligence at all the problem is they pay too much attention to the people unwilling to learn to play their jobs right

And that's not neglecting a majority in favor of a more vocal minority, whilst being disingenuous as to whether the given concept was workable or desirable?

I jest. But I feel this has applied to more than just job changes alone. Whole paths of content as they could have been or how the parameters on content have formed speak to similar problems.

[Lucyfurr1988]

And that's not neglecting a majority in favor of a more vocal minority, whilst being disingenuous as to whether the given concept was workable or desirable?

I jest. But I feel this has applied to more than just job changes alone. Whole paths of content as they could have been or how the parameters on content have formed speak to similar problems.

casual players are the majority of players in the game, honestly i want more complexity back in my jobs