feedback? where?

[Jeeqbit]

So what it is then? They do the changes based on feedback or they simply pursue their vision regardless of feedback?

Literally both. They will listen to feedback but then see if it can fit into their vision or work with their vision.

It is the job of a director to decide what feedback should and should not be listened to. This is necessary. Listening to all feedback blindly would not be good, but ignoring all feedback is not good either. The right director is someone who can figure out what to listen to and what not to. I'd always have said this, but Yoshi-P knows this and has stated this too.

So the answer to your question is neither/both. If you are looking to be critical of this, it would make more sense to criticise their ability to decide/decipher what to, and not to, listen to. Since they are located in Japan and most people in the English forum are not, there is also a language barrier so we can also criticise the ability of the community team to gather feedback well, or alternatively if the feedback is gathered effectively, the ability for that feedback to successfully be translated, received and implemented over in Japan.

[WaxSw]

Literally both. They will listen to feedback but then see if it can fit into their vision or work with their vision.

It is the job of a director to decide what feedback should and should not be listened to. This is necessary. Listening to all feedback blindly would not be good, but ignoring all feedback is not good either. The right director is someone who can figure out what to listen to and what not to. I'd always have said this, but Yoshi-P knows this and has stated this too.

What is the point of giving feedback then?

Lets assume they have a vision (because what they said in EW about not knowing what to add to Sch suggest the opposite). If they only impose their vision and only take feedback that is in line with that vision, What is there to stop a flawed vision to ruin the game?

If what you say is true then the devs have forgotten about what to do to avoid another disaster like 1.0:



Because by forcing their vision despite the multiple criticism and proof behind that they are not doing (1) (2) and (3)

[Sesera]

What is the point of giving feedback then?

Lets assume they have a vision (because what they said in EW about not knowing what to add to Sch suggest the opposite). If they only impose their vision and only take feedback that is in line with that vision, What is there to stop a flawed vision to ruin the game?

If what you say is true then the devs have forgotten about what to do to avoid another disaster like 1.0:



Because by forcing their vision despite the multiple criticism and proof behind that they are not doing (1) (2) and (3)

Ok here how it works

Data shows very few people play healer > lets check feedback
Data shows more people play healer > throw feedback to trashcan

[Jeeqbit]

What is the point of giving feedback then?

I mean, it's worth a try to give feedback.

Lets assume they have a vision (because what they said in EW about not knowing what to add to Sch suggest the opposite)

I would kinda agree about SCH.

If they only impose their vision and only take feedback that is in line with that vision, What is there to stop a flawed vision to ruin the game?

The answer to that question is the director. It always has been, is and always will be on the director to process feedback and decide what to, and not to, listen to. Feedback from two different people can contradict eachother and in other cases the feedback may be bad for a reason that most players cannot see or have not thought about. Sometimes listening to feedback can simply cause a game to fall.

It is on the director to draw the line and figure out what they should listen to and what they should ignore. In many cases they get it wrong and the game fails; what was new about Yoshi-P was getting it right for so long causing the game to increase in popularity while other MMORPGs were reducing in popularity.

An easy example as well is WoW was very popular and then they had a lot of changes in their leadership and team structure, which led to a string of decisions that progressively reduced the popularity of the game and caused a lot of them to start playing this (this started long before it went viral in 2021 btw). A simple change of leader can destroy an online game.

If what you say is true then the devs have forgotten about what to do to avoid another disaster like 1.0

Who knows if they have forgotten. They do listen to feedback, but obviously it often seems very selective and often confined to the JP audience.

Because by forcing their vision despite the multiple criticism and proof behind that they are not doing (1) (2) and (3)

So let's address those points, then.

1 is hard to really address. They either know people are leaving or they don't, but like any company they hold a lot of statistics and do market research/surveys.

2 is referring to keynotes and live letters. Like their vision or not, they present it regularly in slides and hours-long presentations with Yoshi-P himself. They have even taken to asking for feedback directly in the stream occasionally like "are these changes alright?"

3 is where it's on the director to decide what to listen to and what not to. But here are some examples of where they listened and adapted: reversing bowmage, reversing the removal of Energy Drain on Scholar, making healers have more work in Abyssos to the point some healers avoided PF, saying the hitboxes have become to big implying they will be reduced, saying content has become over-telegraphed to the point of not needing to wipe and discuss strategy and vowing to get the team to make it less sleepy.