Forums are useless, Blizzard doesn't listen

#1 - Oct. 22, 2014, 12:03 a.m.

Yeah go ahead and dislike this, infact remove it, go ahead and continue posting things that you may think Blizz will listen, that you may think that, you may spend hours tweeting brain damaged devs about what needs to be in this game to make it better, you may spend hours posting topics. In the end, Blizzard does not care about one important thing you say. Some people may say they do listen, they would only listen to certain bugs, and things that are no where near important things that help balance he game. They care about their own thing, they laugh as people post several topics thinking they will care or listen.

The facts about this is SOO many people have been posting things regarding their classes that are simple as crap to fix. Blizzards devs have done NOTHING about it. It happens in EVERY expansion, where on beta Blizz thinks they have everything right then about 6 months in they sorta change things. You know why they change it? Because most of the people care about this game, and use their brain correctly to help Blizz fix it. You know why they fix it? They fix it because they lose so many subs not listening to people in the first place at all.

If you think you have a great change request coming up, don't bother to waste your time posting topics, tweeting devs, or making vids about it. In the end they will not listen to one thing you say until atleast 6months into WoD(I am mostly talking about classes abilities/balanceness). So many classes are broken so many posts about how to fix simple things every beta, every expansion, yet nothing.....

YOU ARE BEING IGNORED BY BLIZZARD, DON"T WASTE YOUR TIME. THEY DO THEIR OWN GAME, THEY THINK THEY DON"T NEED YOU.

http://us.battle.net/wow/en/forum/topic/14928232940 that's a change that NEEDS to be done, Blizz has done nothing about it. Every single rank one warrior I have talked to says they need to remove whirlwind for arms, and give us overpower, heroic strike, or MoP slam to replace it. Nearly 500 views, yet nothing.... They do not listen, nor do the changes. Just wait.... it's gonna change 6months later in WoD once every warr rerolls.

Bashiok

Community Manager

#67 - Oct. 22, 2014, 2:11 a.m.

I am sorry you feel that way, Kronivic. We spend a lot of time and energy listening and collecting feedback, and yes, even making changes based on that feedback. At a time like this post-patch especially those changes happen on a sometimes hourly basis through hotfixes. Not all of them are based on feedback or bug reports from players, but I'd say probably most of them are. I think you're potentially not seeing the loop closed, or are selectively viewing the things you would like to see changed, and if that doesn't happen, are drawing an incorrect conclusion. The possibility is that any number of other reasons could be the cause for why you're not seeing the changes made that you want to. It is possible we didn't see the feedback or ideas being presented; we do our best to read and listen as much as possible and improve and streamline those processes whenever possible, but we're just simply not going to be able to see absolutely everything out there. It could also be that we did see the ideas and feedback, and just didn't think they were good ideas or valid feedback. Ideally in that case we're able to have a conversation about why that is, but again there's just a logistical (if not physical) limitation in being able to discuss each player's ideas with them.

It's also a big reason why, as far as feedback goes, telling us your problems and experiences are a much, much, much more valuable piece of information for us than just pure suggestions on things you'd like to see added or changed.

In your recent thread "Give paladins disrupting shout" I think you do present a problem, that as a Warrior you think it looks like a Paladin ability so it should be given to them instead, but it doesn't quite encapsulate the problem you're trying to solve. The discussion we could have at that point is if that's a good enough reason or not to change the abilities each class has, and in this case I'm going to assume the conclusion we'd both come to after that conversation is no, it's not. :)

Being passionate about the direction of the game is awesome, and so thank you for voicing your concerns.

Bashiok

Community Manager

#88 - Oct. 22, 2014, 2:42 a.m.

10/21/2014 07:35 PMPosted by Zeryani
all we've been given are glib dismissals "We did like you asked so be grateful you even got that" Feels like the approach these days

Can you link me to where somewhere told you that, or where that was alluded to by anyone?

Bashiok

Community Manager

#101 - Oct. 22, 2014, 2:57 a.m.

10/21/2014 07:17 PMPosted by Kronivic
http://us.battle.net/wow/en/forum/topic/14928232940 I know you won't read this because you won't listen, and it's true, but if you come back, Please explain how this whirlwind is sstill warriors rage dump. Explain how every warrior in the game would rather have heroicstrike, over power, or regular MoP slam. This has nearly 500 views, no response from ANY dev, or anybody. This is a change that needs to be made. It affects comps, players, and CC breakage. It explains that Blizz not knowing the separation from PvE to PvP, which includes inbalancness=loss of subs. That is totally wrong if someone says they do listen, and do the changes. I SAY not only listen to this, but do the change.... It is going to have to be changed in WoD regardless, why still keep it?

Oh. Well that's a little disheartening. I thought I typed up a nice response for you. Well then, looking at the thread it does have a bit under 500 views, as do a great many threads (not all with as expertly crafted a title as "Whirlwind is ruining warriors", of course), and it has all of 7 upvotes, and then a couple pages of people disagreeing with the proposed thoughts and suggestions in the OP. I'd probably want to touch base with a class designer before offering a super official statement on the feedback given, but at first glance I'd say this is probably not particularly sound in its approach, and some of those replying in the thread offer some potentially well reasoned ideas for why it may not be.