shteev said: Perhaps the greatest proof we have that the devs are not listening to the players is that a thread called 'Proof that the devs are not listening to the players' has been on the first page of the forum since mid July.
The devs were not incompetent, nor did they not listen to the players. They proved consistently in introducing new features (deck slots, tiebreakers, longer progression rewards in the weekend event, etc.) that the community asked for.
The better explanation is that the development company was going bankrupt and the Devs were out the door.
Start a new poll. Seriously. Get rid of the negativity and start fresh. It is a new development team.
Skiglass6 said: Longer progression rewards for weekend event? Who asked for that? Is that your way of blaming the community for extending the event, which led to revert back to 4hr recharge because the event pushed into the midweek coalition event? I guarantee nobody wanted to string out he progression reward, add a basic booster pack and remove specific guaranteed rares. For those who want 4hr recharge because there is not enough to do, they could always run a fateful showdown type event on weekend as well with the change back to 8hr recharge. /sarcasm If you think that would be too many rewards, then they could extend training grounds from 4 wins to 20 wins before you get your 15 crystals. At 10 wins you get a basic booster. After 20 wins you stop getting runes altogether. Then they can have top rank QB style where the Top rank player gets a guaranteed rare and a few jewels. Sarcasm\
Coalition players complained that after the 450 ribbons, there was no reward for continuing to play other than keeping their rank on the leaderboards. This is the second time you've contested that fact. That's fine if you weren't around when the complaints were being tossed, I'm not going to waste my time digging through old threads looking for a reference.
D3H responded by extending the ribbons to 850 and adding extra rewards. Yes, the basic booster kinda sucks but they did introduce an extra pack at the end as well. They then reduced it back to 750 after complaints of it being too long.
Please explain to me how that is not listening to the community. I'm all ears.
Dologan said: Sorry, I'm not letting this go. The weekend events are COALITION events. This means that one of their main goals is for coalitions to compete for rewards, and thus there is a pretty clear expectation for their members to play every node to full points, at least at the top ranks. This takes a LOT of time and almost half of it is played for no progression reward -- most people at top 10 coalitions end up with at least a whole third more points than needed for maximum personal progression, meaning that >30% of the time we're essentially playing Training Grounds past 4 points, or replaying Story mode. If we can do that, so can you @Phillmoore, without expecting people to sacrifice their weekends. Besides, there has lately been a whole other personal event running alongside the coalition event on weekends, so there is more to do. And if that is still isn't enough for you to do, you can always play another game, or read a book, or hang out with friends. I love this game; I find the concept fantastic, but it is infuriating to see developers exploiting players while squandering its potential with poor testing and practices that alienate the most enthusiastic players.I've been wanting to spend money on an exclusive lately, but I'm going to refrain from doing so until they address the recharge times either by changing it to something more reasonable or, at the very least, making a proper official explanation of why they are ignoring the opinion of 70% of the people that care enough about the game to join the forums.
Ohboy said:1) complaint that progression is too short2) progression increased3) complaint progression too hard to hit now4) event length increased5) complaint that event is lasting too long6) event length decreased7) complaint that progression is again hard to hit8) recharge frequently increased9) complaint that frequency is too high10) complaint that progression is once again too short 11)???
Ohboy said: Sure @naphomci, I can't tell you what to do. And I don't know the current goals of d3go. But you look at the history of changes and tell me... Does your proposal exist in a vacuum, or does it look like your proposal will just bring new(old) problems?
Steeme said: shteev said: Perhaps the greatest proof we have that the devs are not listening to the players is that a thread called 'Proof that the devs are not listening to the players' has been on the first page of the forum since mid July. The devs were not incompetent, nor did they not listen to the players. They proved consistently in introducing new features (deck slots, tiebreakers, longer progression rewards in the weekend event, etc.) that the community asked for.The better explanation is that the development company was going bankrupt and the Devs were out the door.Start a new poll. Seriously. Get rid of the negativity and start fresh. It is a new development team.
Ohboy said: Oh it was in this very thread.We're heading to the start of that cycle again. And this is exactly what I meant when I talked about staying silent when others are making requests.Sure, you don't care if the changed proposes goes through. But it comes at a price. And you might balk at that price. Here's a short recap of what happened in the last year. 1) complaint that progression is too short2) progression increased3) complaint progression too hard to hit now4) event length increased5) complaint that event is lasting too long6) event length decreased7) complaint that progression is again hard to hit8) recharge frequently increased9) complaint that frequency is too high10) complaint that progression is once again too short 11)??? Sure @naphomci, I can't tell you what to do. And I don't know the current goals of d3go. But you look at the history of changes and tell me... Does your proposal exist in a vacuum, or does it look like your proposal will just bring new(old) problems?
This just makes the developers look beyond incompetent. Not only do they drift around on the winds of opinion on the forums but they can't even substantiate or defend their basis for change.
But then again, we already knew the devs were beyond incompetent and horrendous communicators.
So, good summary Ohboy!
naphomci said: Ohboy said: Sure @naphomci, I can't tell you what to do. And I don't know the current goals of d3go. But you look at the history of changes and tell me... Does your proposal exist in a vacuum, or does it look like your proposal will just bring new(old) problems? You seem to be indicating that this is my proposal. Part of my issue with how the old devs handled this issue is that @Brigby put up both polls on the issue. So, at some point, it was clearly something that was contemplated. Look at the poll options, one of them was 'only change recharge time.' Either Brigby had no connection to the devs or there was at least a possibility of it. It may be a case of MTGPQ's right hand being unaware of what the left hand is doing, but if that is the case then it is a huge self inflicted wound to be so publicly displayed.
Phillmoore said: I still can't believe that when you "play" a game and don't like the parameters your answer isn't to stop playing the game but to ask for hem to changei hate snap. The card game and after I had taught my daughters to play it I hated it even more. But could I change the rules once they had learnt how to play. Never gonna happen. This is a game. Either play or don't play. But remember it is a game not a career. So if it takes up too much of your play time then don't play. But as a mostly free to play game then i believe you have to sacrifice something to the game and if that's more of my time it's still my choice to play or not but please let's close this down.the simple answer here is that the developers aren't listening. Because they are no longer there!
Ohboy said: naphomci said: Ohboy said: Sure @naphomci, I can't tell you what to do. And I don't know the current goals of d3go. But you look at the history of changes and tell me... Does your proposal exist in a vacuum, or does it look like your proposal will just bring new(old) problems? You seem to be indicating that this is my proposal. Part of my issue with how the old devs handled this issue is that @Brigby put up both polls on the issue. So, at some point, it was clearly something that was contemplated. Look at the poll options, one of them was 'only change recharge time.' Either Brigby had no connection to the devs or there was at least a possibility of it. It may be a case of MTGPQ's right hand being unaware of what the left hand is doing, but if that is the case then it is a huge self inflicted wound to be so publicly displayed. You realize the poll had options for every permutation of the three key variables brigby identified.Brigby even detailed his intention of gaining data on how the three variables are perceived by the community.So no, just because it's one of the options does not mean it was "clearly contemplated".And it IS your proposal. Just because it's not original does not mean it isn't yours. You started this thread. It's yours. Own it. What's with this sudden backtracking.
Steeme said:Start a new poll. Seriously. Get rid of the negativity and start fresh. It is a new development team.
This needed to be said. Thank you.
Sadly some people just choose to antagonize, condescend, belittle, and disenfranchise the player base as well as the development team while ironically expecting positive changes to occur based on their actions.
Gunmix25 said: Steeme said:Start a new poll. Seriously. Get rid of the negativity and start fresh. It is a new development team. This needed to be said. Thank you. Sadly some people just choose to antagonize, condescend, belittle, and disenfranchise the player base as well as the development team while ironically expecting positive changes to occur based on their actions.
naphomci said: Gunmix25 said: Steeme said:Start a new poll. Seriously. Get rid of the negativity and start fresh. It is a new development team. This needed to be said. Thank you. Sadly some people just choose to antagonize, condescend, belittle, and disenfranchise the player base as well as the development team while ironically expecting positive changes to occur based on their actions. The two polls weren't negative, nor were the threads overtly negative. They did nothing, so I chose a new approach. Of course, this approach hasn't done anything either.
Gunmix25 said: naphomci said: Gunmix25 said: Steeme said:Start a new poll. Seriously. Get rid of the negativity and start fresh. It is a new development team. This needed to be said. Thank you. Sadly some people just choose to antagonize, condescend, belittle, and disenfranchise the player base as well as the development team while ironically expecting positive changes to occur based on their actions. The two polls weren't negative, nor were the threads overtly negative. They did nothing, so I chose a new approach. Of course, this approach hasn't done anything either. Polls were fine but tailored to the situation at the time... hence his call for a new one. No, the threads were fairly negative out right and very openly. But again they were directed at a specific group that no longer exists. But @Steeme I believe was trying to say that the openly negative remarks that continue are directed at a group (new devs) we know nothing about based on the assumption that they'll be no better than the group before when we've really got nothing to compare them to the old group yet
Ohboy said: 1) complaint that progression is too short2) progression increased