A request regarding expressing frustation

Options
2»

Comments

  • smkspy
    smkspy Posts: 2,024 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited December 2017
    Options
    MPQ forum thought police strikes again. Snark (that isn't spam) is not against the rules and telling people not to use it to express their frustration is silly. It may not be helpful, but does not hurt or attack anyone. Don't like the snark from someone, ignore it. That's the cool thing about the internet, you get to pick and choose who you reply to. 

    And IRCC, I don't remember such an announcement like this when the pvp change happened, also all those snarky threads and comments were okay, but not snark for this subject?
  • DrDevilDinosaur
    DrDevilDinosaur Posts: 436 Mover and Shaker
    Options

    A good thing to keep in mind is that old mate Casey Malone was not just responsible for the original Gambit design and the subsequent redesign, he was also responsible for the 3* Iron Fist - another character who was Overpowered at release and required a rapid nerf.

    I'll let you draw your own conclusions from that information, all I want to say is maybe we should start asking for who the designers are behind each character when they release.

  • Yepyep
    Yepyep Posts: 952 Critical Contributor
    edited December 2017
    Options
    Landale said:
    I am very disappointed with the change to 3* Gambit.  I didn't care that you wanted to remove the GamBatt aspect - that was fine...heck, I was one of the first people to post that it seemed like a bug at first.  I'm glad they finally removed it (even though I just christened a shiny new GamBatt myself).

    But, the 3* version Black cover is awful now.  Charged tiles can either help or hurt, so it's not necessarily a boon to lay those down, and then to top it off firing the power damages the player's team?  It better do a whole lot of damage to the targeted enemy to make up for that.

    ...now I can't see myself ever using him again except when he's an essential. 
    I completely agree with the bits copied above. I always thought the battery aspect of the character created a perverse incentive NOT to advance in covers and was inherently flawed conceptually.

    But 3*'s black just went from his best to his worst power (with the caveat that the synergy with red is a good idea). It is down there with Bl4de's black (ironic given that Bl4de was 3* Gambit's BFF before the nerf; no longer).

    There just isn't enough left to 3* Gambit to make him worth using, sadly. He'll no longer be my sole 3* bonus character, that's for darned sure...

    Edited: meant to say the black synergy with red is a GOOD idea...
  • STOPTHIS
    STOPTHIS Posts: 781 Critical Contributor
    Options
    smkspy said:
    MPQ forum thought police strikes again. Snark (that isn't spam) is not against the rules and telling people not to use it to express their frustration is silly. It may not be helpful, but does not notice hurt or attack anyone. Don't like the snark from someone, ignore it. That's the cool thing about the internet, you get to pick and choose who you reply to. 

    And IRCC, I don't remember such an announcement like this when the pvp change happened, also all those snarky threads and comments were okay, but not snark for this subject?
    Snark towards players who simply disagree with you is fine, but snark towards the staff for screwing up is not.
  • Maceo511
    Maceo511 Posts: 67 Match Maker
    Options
    If I were getting a free 5* a month, I would get sensitive about snark as well.  There’s 21 pages of what I thought was a great, level headed discussion, with really good suggestions, that apparently, were not taken into consideration.  If something done is so laughly absurb, what else are we to do, but laugh and poke fun at it?
  • LifeofAgony
    LifeofAgony Posts: 690 Critical Contributor
    Options
    That question of why has been asked multiple times but as Mr. Malone stated in his post, he will not be monitoring the thread further or responding.  

    This seems to fly directly against what you are stating that they are reviewing comments and suggestions.

    So which of these correct?
  • Brigby
    Brigby ADMINISTRATORS Posts: 7,757 Site Admin
    Options
    LifeofAgony said:
    That question of why has been asked multiple times but as Mr. Malone stated in his post, he will not be monitoring the thread further or responding.  

    This seems to fly directly against what you are stating that they are reviewing comments and suggestions.

    So which of these correct?
    The development team may not be able to respond frequently, however they do review the feedback. The developers did have their data to support the decision to change Gambit, however a big part of it was also supported by what the community reported here in the forum. 

    When it comes to responding, you can expect communication primarily from me, and I will be sure to acquire as much information as I can from the rest of the team.
  • tfcrazy1980
    tfcrazy1980 Posts: 131 Tile Toppler
    Options
    @Brigby, question, how is it different when mods have a tendency to make snarky remarks? Is it the content of said snarky remark or is it the person its aimed at? Just asking a serious question because ive seen it numerous times.
  • Brigby
    Brigby ADMINISTRATORS Posts: 7,757 Site Admin
    Options
    tfcrazy1980 said:
    Brigby, question, how is it different when mods have a tendency to make snarky remarks? Is it the content of said snarky remark or is it the person its aimed at? Just asking a serious question because ive seen it numerous times.
    Moderators are expected to follow the forum rules, just like any other member of the forum, so if you encounter an instance where a moderator is for some reason attacking or insulting another player, then please report that post to me, and I will be sure to personally review it.
  • tfcrazy1980
    tfcrazy1980 Posts: 131 Tile Toppler
    Options
    @Brigby, thank you for the clarification and the heads up.
  • Pr0spect0r
    Pr0spect0r Posts: 291 Mover and Shaker
    Options
    The developers definitely do review the comments and suggestions posted in the forum. This can be further proven by Casey Malone responding in one of the discussions threads. Your comment does bring up a good point though: "Why did the development team not go with one of our suggestions?" This is constructive criticism; it identifies a key point where we could improve our process.

    In this case, we can improve our communication by providing additional information explaining why certain community ideas were unfortunately not chosen. This would show our team didn't simply ignore player suggestions, while at the same time explaining why we went a different route.
    Honestly  i would enjoy that; if a big controversy regarding a character and his skills arises and calls for a good looking at by the developers; having the developers pool together several of the forums suggestions and going through them with a comb being like why such and such a change cant work in the grand scheme. I know it cant be expected for every character cuz lets be real not every character should have this issue moving forward. having a post by itself from you @Brigby or any of the other staffers going through our posts of suggestions of reworks is a hell of a good faith show that you care. people cant dispute it when you are reading your own words and their explanation as to why they didnt pick it. sure they will be mad it didnt go through but at least you have a reason instead of some blanket post.
  • LifeofAgony
    LifeofAgony Posts: 690 Critical Contributor
    Options
    From the update article
    • The AP generation of Stacked Deck is too strong, without any good way to play against it.
    So in the spirit of constructive, dropping this by 1 ap per color was a step in the right direction, and then took a severe wrong turn by adding another overpowered feature with AP destruction.

    @Brigby where did the genesis of this idea come from as it was never suggested and has actually made him even more overpowered than he was.  No one thought gambit needed more power yet this is the results they came up with.  It doesn’t feel like they actually took any of the feedback as this change is out of left field.
  • BoyWonder1914
    BoyWonder1914 Posts: 884 Critical Contributor
    Options
    Brigby said:

    The developers definitely do review the comments and suggestions posted in the forum. This can be further proven by Casey Malone responding in one of the discussions threads. Your comment does bring up a good point though: "Why did the development team not go with one of our suggestions?" This is constructive criticism; it identifies a key point where we could improve our process.
    In this case, we can improve our communication by providing additional information explaining why certain community ideas were unfortunately not chosen. This would show our team didn't simply ignore player suggestions, while at the same time explaining why we went a different route.

    If you're being serious about this, I would love to see it in action. Many of the moves that the developers make have created a perception that money/revenue is the key impetus behind a lot of their decisions, so this is their chance to clear that up. 

    For example, many have been lead to believe that Gambit's change was actually done to generate even more interest in him while he's still in Latest Legends packs, so that people will have even more incentive to get him before he goes to Classic Tokens, whereupon they will introduce a more appropriate "re-balance" of his abilities. 

    Many are led to believe that the Devs didn't revert back to points-based PVP because you were listening to players, but because they didn't like the [alleged] loss of revenue that was associated with so many people no longer shielding as much, if at all. 

    Many are led to believe that you removed vaulting not because people complained about no longer having access to 80% of 4-star characters, but because it allowed newer players to jump into 4-star land way too quickly, and dissuaded spending for CP because newer characters were now so much easier to cover. 

    This truly is their chance to bridge a huge gap of misunderstanding between the playerbase and the developers of this game, so I hope you're not jumping too far out of your britches, Brigby. I'll remember that you said this!  B)
  • beyonderbub
    beyonderbub Posts: 661 Critical Contributor
    Options
    aesthetocyst said:
    beyonderbub said:
    It's tough to comply with the OP when certain forumites only post pure snark.
    Why, whatever do you mean? I aspire to this standard but suspect I fall short
    I aspire to respond to all posts with just memes and stickers. 

Categories