Square obviously not listening to feedback

[Aelin_Ashryver]

I'd love the old GNB sounds back, I still think the new sounds they added after people complained sound like you are hitting a card board box u.u

Super thrilled with the changes we've seen for AST, MNK and BLM along with a few others. I do wish they had added something to SMN to make it feel a bit less smooth brained to play, I love the summons but there is not a whole lot to think about. Maybe they did, we have to wait to see the tooltips to know for sure.

[Tsurayu]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_effect

If you think I should give up one of my social circles just because the gameplay's going downhill then you don't understand, well, anything. Excuse me if I don't care that my attitude is ruining the forums for someone who thinks "just abandon your friend group" is a reasonable course of action.

If that's the case, then I question why you all aren't hanging out together and engaging in other forms of media and entertainment if you, and possibly at least some of your friends, are so upset with this game. Watch some movies together, play some other games. I can't help but feel like if your relationships in this game were so important to you that you wouldn't complain so vehemently about the game.

[vetch]

If that's the case, then I question why you all aren't hanging out together and engaging in other forms of media and entertainment if you, and possibly at least some of your friends, are so upset with this game. Watch some movies together, play some other games. I can't help but feel like if your relationships in this game were so important to you that you wouldn't complain so vehemently about the game.

Question your local librarian about 'theory of mind' instead, because you seem to expect everyone to think like you do. Half my friend groups are as critically-minded as I am and we have all kinds of fun dunking on the game's poor choices while playing it.

Honestly I doubt the average player thinks too deep what makes the game fun for them. Hell, you could probably increase WAR's Fell Cleave damage by 1000% and reduce Holmgang CD to 30s and half the players would gush about how "badass" it makes them feel playing the game, for a while. Then you'd never hear from them again after they quit playing, because Id is easy to feed but easy to bore too.

It's a huge fallacy to claim to know what some nebulous silent majority wants though. That's kind of the thing about "silent". It's not a real argument. You might as well say God is on your side - Everyone always thinks that.

Riot Games made a post on the League of Legends devblog once upon a time about the Ultra Rapid Fire (URF) game mode, which they only enable as a special event. In URF, most skills have no cost or cooldown so you can fire them at will instead of needing to think and strategize and outplay your opponents as in normal game modes.

The thrust of the dev post was that people flooded into the game mode when it was turned on, but when it ended, participation in the game overall went down, meaning it actually caused some regular mode players who tried it out to quit playing the game afterward.

The easy dopamine hits of URF mode actually had the effect of cheapening a complex, long-legged game and turning it into a disposable experience.

[ThorneDynasty]

Honestly I doubt the average player thinks too deep what makes the game fun for them. Hell, you could probably increase WAR's Fell Cleave damage by 1000% and reduce Holmgang CD to 30s and half the players would gush about how "badass" it makes them feel playing the game, for a while. Then you'd never hear from them again after they quit playing, because Id is easy to feed but easy to bore too.

It's a huge fallacy to claim to know what some nebulous silent majority wants though. That's kind of the thing about "silent". It's not a real argument. You might as well say God is on your side - Everyone always thinks that.

[Valence]

Isn't it a bit of a fallacy to think that because people give negative criticism on things they don't like that it must mean they hate literally everything?

I mean, those people would probably not bother, and in fact, would have left since forever no?

[Sjol]

As someone who works with customers in software development, my experience is that you get a lot of opinions and suggestions from people. I think the problem is that you ask for feedback and customers give you suggestions when you really just want to know what they're pain points are. That's because users aren't typically great designers (UI, UX, job, functionality, etc.).

I figure SE is listening to our pain points and either acting on it as soon as they can, trying to figure out competing pain points (e.g., jobs are too clunky vs. jobs are too simple), and integrating them into their longer-term plans (e.g., 8.0).

Also, response to feedback has to be prioritized. So, an individual's or several individual's particular feedback may be actionable but is considered to be less priority than the stuff they did do. We don't know why they waited to incorporate specific feedback and we will likely never know.

Also, while developers and product managers aspire to be above it, being a jerk with your feedback tends to make them not want to address it. The people working on this are people, too.

[Zolvolt]

As someone who works with customers in software development, my experience is that you get a lot of opinions and suggestions from people. I think the problem is that you ask for feedback and customers give you suggestions when you really just want to know what they're pain points are. That's because users aren't typically great designers (UI, UX, job, functionality, etc.).

I figure SE is listening to our pain points and either acting on it as soon as they can, trying to figure out competing pain points (e.g., jobs are too clunky vs. jobs are too simple), and integrating them into their longer-term plans (e.g., 8.0).

Also, response to feedback has to be prioritized. So, an individual's or several individual's particular feedback may be actionable but is considered to be less priority than the stuff they did do. We don't know why they waited to incorporate specific feedback and we will likely never know.

Also, while developers and product managers aspire to be above it, being a jerk with your feedback tends to make them not want to address it. The people working on this are people, too.

Dear lord can you please say this louder for those in the back. If everyone read and undestood this one post the forums here would be a better place for discussion and a large amount of the hostility would be gone.

edit:::

A big part of feedback though is also transparency which is currently not being shown in an adequate way

Let’s use the Kaiten example

The devs deleted kaiten with functionally zero reason other than their stated reason of “action bloat”, they then specifically went on record saying “give it a try and give us feedback”. The community on both the JP and EN forums came together and overwhelmingly said “this is a bad idea” to the point EN has a megathread compiling megathreads on feedback to the Kaiten change

We did exactly what they asked us to do in regards to a change and then they have proceeded to literally never mention Kaiten again

What are we supposed to take from this interaction other than “give it a try and give us feedback” is basically a fancy way of saying “just accept the changes”. There was absolutely zero transparency with the way they handled Kaiten and this is leading people to not trust them and think they aren’t responding to any feedback at all. They are also cryptically opaque about the healer changes and a host of other issues

I reached the post limit but I just want to posit this idea out there. They told you that they removed kaiten because of action bloat. Thats the reason they gave. That tells me that they made a change, gave you a reason for it, and is it not possible that you just aren't happy with their answer? Saying action bloat is very transparent. What wouldn't be transparent is if they said nothing and just removed it like they do in other games. I'd also add that even with all the feedback in the world they aren't guaranteed to do what you want. Knowing the level of care they put into this game, do you truely believe that they did not try a version of EW sam with kaiten still before coming to this decision? I guarantee you they did. But at the end of the day they made a call, for the reason they gave, and if they believe the game is better of with that call then thats their decision to make. It really isn't about a lack of transparency. But again, just something to think about.

[Supersnow845]

Dear lord can you please say this louder for those in the back. If everyone read and undestood this one post the forums here would be a better place for discussion and a large amount of the hostility would be gone.

A big part of feedback though is also transparency which is currently not being shown in an adequate way

Let’s use the Kaiten example

The devs deleted kaiten with functionally zero reason other than their stated reason of “action bloat”, they then specifically went on record saying “give it a try and give us feedback”. The community on both the JP and EN forums came together and overwhelmingly said “this is a bad idea” to the point EN has a megathread compiling megathreads on feedback to the Kaiten change

We did exactly what they asked us to do in regards to a change and then they have proceeded to literally never mention Kaiten again

What are we supposed to take from this interaction other than “give it a try and give us feedback” is basically a fancy way of saying “just accept the changes”. There was absolutely zero transparency with the way they handled Kaiten and this is leading people to not trust them and think they aren’t responding to any feedback at all. They are also cryptically opaque about the healer changes and a host of other issues

[Supersnow845]

Dear lord can you please say this louder for those in the back. If everyone read and undestood this one post the forums here would be a better place for discussion and a large amount of the hostility would be gone.

edit:::


I reached the post limit but I just want to posit this idea out there. They told you that they removed kaiten because of action bloat. Thats the reason they gave. That tells me that they made a change, gave you a reason for it, and is it not possible that you just aren't happy with their answer? Saying action bloat is very transparent. What wouldn't be transparent is if they said nothing and just removed it like they do in other games. I'd also add that even with all the feedback in the world they aren't guaranteed to do what you want. Knowing the level of care they put into this game, do you truely believe that they did not try a version of EW sam with kaiten still before coming to this decision? I guarantee you they did. But at the end of the day they made a call, for the reason they gave, and if they believe the game is better of with that call then thats their decision to make. It really isn't about a lack of transparency. But again, just something to think about.

EW SAM launched with Kaiten so I’m not sure where you are getting that point from

My point is “if they were happy with the change and the stated reason means they are transparent” (paraphrasing you) why did they ask for feedback and act as if our feedback meant anything. If they were rock solid on the change and were not going to relent then “please give us feedback” just reads as “kick rocks”

[Arkdra]

EW SAM launched with Kaiten so I’m not sure where you are getting that point from

My point is “if they were happy with the change and the stated reason means they are transparent” (paraphrasing you) why did they ask for feedback and act as if our feedback meant anything. If they were rock solid on the change and were not going to relent then “please give us feedback” just reads as “kick rocks”

It's inexplicable to be honest. The most likely answer is that the blowback wasn't enough to get them to change their mind. Like go back and look through some of that bring back kaiten thread. Yeah, it's a big thread. If the first 10 pages are anything to go by then more than half of that thread is the same 20ish posters (I just eyeballed it I did not do a hard count). 30% of it might be just celesticerr and ryuzooo lol.

But then, if the blowback wasn't enough to reverse the kaiten decision, why did they back off the 6.2 adjustments for drg and specifically cite the kaiten blowback as the reason? The blowback was not enough to get kaiten back but it was enough to get them to start adding intent notes on the job actions pages every time they make a change? Weird reaction on the whole, even if it all worked out to my benefit.