Another Player Survey...

broll · November 2018

@DAZ0273

DAZ0273 said:
MPQ has made considerable strides over the last year with only one, in my opinion, fatal mis-step: the reintroduction of full 4* dilution. It is that factor which caused me to downgrade my score from last time there was one of these surveys in terms of being able to recommend this game to others. And it is a real shame because so many other issues were fixed or addressed.

I'm curious what considerable strides you feel they've made?

This year they've:

[Awful] Added supports which at best is a cool idea with one of the worst executions I've ever seen and at worst is all-round awful addition regardless of implementation.
[Awful] Devalued the Desktop UI to support supports.
[Bad] Removed the featured 4* system which was pretty widely liked and while not a fix really helped with Dilution
[Bad] No character adjustments other than Gambit
[Bad to Neutral] Added costumes, which so far looks like it will have similar horrible execution to supports and is pretty superfluous.
[Neutral] Added more 5* feeders, but didn't complete by a long shot and started before this year.
[Mixed] Paid SCL bundles
[Good] Fixed tapping
[Good] Nerfed Gambit
[Good] Places of Power event, however only ran once and no guarantee that it will be run again.
[Great] Saved covers

Maybe I missed something but this is all I can remember and it's a pretty mixed bag that IMO leans further towards negative than positive. Is there some major stride I'm not remembering?

It's funny they mentioned on Discord that they were probably going to slow character reworks to work on new systems because they didn't feel 2017 had enough changes. IMO 2017 was by and large a much better year for the game than 2018. Go back to tweaking characters and stop making horrible new systems (or make less of them and spend a lot more time on them)

DAZ0273 · November 2018

broll said:

@DAZ0273

DAZ0273 said:
MPQ has made considerable strides over the last year with only one, in my opinion, fatal mis-step: the reintroduction of full 4* dilution. It is that factor which caused me to downgrade my score from last time there was one of these surveys in terms of being able to recommend this game to others. And it is a real shame because so many other issues were fixed or addressed.
I'm curious what considerable strides you feel they've made?

This year they've:
[Awful] Added supports which at best is a cool idea with one of the worst executions I've ever seen and at worst is all-round awful addition regardless of implementation.
[Awful] Devalued the Desktop UI to support supports.
[Bad] Removed the featured 4* system which was pretty widely liked and while not a fix really helped with Dilution
[Bad] No character adjustments other than Gambit
[Bad to Neutral] Added costumes, which so far looks like it will have similar horrible execution to supports and is pretty superfluous.
[Neutral] Added more 5* feeders, but didn't complete by a long shot and started before this year.
[Mixed] Paid SCL bundles
[Good] Fixed tapping
[Good] Nerfed Gambit
[Good] Places of Power event, however only ran once and no guarantee that it will be run again.
[Great] Saved covers
Maybe I missed something but this is all I can remember and it's a pretty mixed bag that IMO leans further towards negative than positive. Is there some major stride I'm not remembering?

It's funny they mentioned on Discord that they were probably going to slow character reworks to work on new systems because they didn't feel 2017 had enough changes. IMO 2017 was by and large a much better year for the game than 2018. Go back to tweaking characters and stop making horrible new systems (or make less of them and spend a lot more time on them)

They solved Cover waste, the no.1 complaint I remember seeing on this forum. This effects everyone and is massive beyond my ability to articulate. The amount of characters I personally and thousands of other players would have at higher levels if this existed before is enormous. It would make a good forum contest: "How much was your progression held back due to iso pressure to champ characters and how many covers did you have to sell?". I bet we both sold hundreds.

They dealt with the Gambit situation. Yes it took them too long and more than one run at it and yes they probably overnerfed but at least it got rid of all the bloody "nerf Gambit" threads. Not really a huge deal to a new player but it could be offputting if it was perceived that the future higher tiers of the game completely revolve around one character that you can't really get any more.

They dealt with the issue of PvP by introducing Wins Based/Points hybrid. As the "unfairness" of points based progression and the botched attempt at Wins based which infuriated Vets only were very hot topics, another big issue resolved. This benefits a new player as it opensup PvP to them. I know of at least 3 players who quit vocally on these forums when they initially undid Wins based and there is clearly significant data held by the Devs to demonstrate that having Wins based only in the way they did was a bad idea. They fixed it for both sides of the argument.

Those 3 things are a significant alteration to the game, IMHO, that players had concerns about, some to the point that the game was unplayable.

I can't speak to the Desktop view as I play on mobile so it hasn't affected me.

Supports might be badly executed but it doesn't stop me playing at present, nor would it be a reason not to recommend.

Character adjustments - these aren't really relevant to a newer player, so again my recommendation isn't hindered by lack of these. Would I like some? Sure. However that wasn't the question I'm answering.

5* feeders come under the same umbrella to me as 4* dilution. They have tried to make the 5* tier more accessable but have brought the 4* tier set back 2 years. I'm not a 5* player as yet but obviously dilution at any level is bad and potentially daunting for a new player.

So that is why I downgraded my score in terms of recommendation. However, despite that I am happy to acknowledge the good things and improvements I feel have been made.

Daredevil217 · November 2018

broll said:

@DAZ0273

DAZ0273 said:
MPQ has made considerable strides over the last year with only one, in my opinion, fatal mis-step: the reintroduction of full 4* dilution. It is that factor which caused me to downgrade my score from last time there was one of these surveys in terms of being able to recommend this game to others. And it is a real shame because so many other issues were fixed or addressed.
I'm curious what considerable strides you feel they've made?

This year they've:
[Awful] Added supports which at best is a cool idea with one of the worst executions I've ever seen and at worst is all-round awful addition regardless of implementation.
[Awful] Devalued the Desktop UI to support supports.
[Bad] Removed the featured 4* system which was pretty widely liked and while not a fix really helped with Dilution
[Bad] No character adjustments other than Gambit
[Bad to Neutral] Added costumes, which so far looks like it will have similar horrible execution to supports and is pretty superfluous.
[Neutral] Added more 5* feeders, but didn't complete by a long shot and started before this year.
[Mixed] Paid SCL bundles
[Good] Fixed tapping
[Good] Nerfed Gambit
[Good] Places of Power event, however only ran once and no guarantee that it will be run again.
[Great] Saved covers
Maybe I missed something but this is all I can remember and it's a pretty mixed bag that IMO leans further towards negative than positive. Is there some major stride I'm not remembering?

It's funny they mentioned on Discord that they were probably going to slow character reworks to work on new systems because they didn't feel 2017 had enough changes. IMO 2017 was by and large a much better year for the game than 2018. Go back to tweaking characters and stop making horrible new systems (or make less of them and spend a lot more time on them)

So really aside from supports related stuff and the return to dilution that he already mentioned, things have been neutral to great. Remove supports (which I just ignore) and it’s been a good year. You also forgot wins-based.

DAZ0273 · November 2018

And leaving aside the question of new players, lets concentrate on the older ones with one very specific thing: tapping.

What was tapping? Pretty much the vast majority of MPQ players wouldn't have known or been affected, in any way whatsoever, by this. Top 10 problem? Don't know. Certainly it was only an issue at the elite/high end level of placement. I am fairly sure that I did not suffer because of it.

A small percentage of players were affected.

Yet the Dev's fixed it. They listened.

We don't always get what we want and the way Supports and Covers have been rolled out is truly baffling but if the Dev's can be bothered to fix tapping then I don't think we can really say that they aren't trying.

LHammer · November 2018

I answered the standard questions the same way I always do including a reminder that Steam users are players too and they really might want to try attracting more people to that platform (cards/achievements/starter pack in a bundle). Then, I get to the new question: "What other mobile games...?"

Thanks for making my point.

firethorne · November 2018

So... is posting the answers we had to the what other games are you playing on the forums against the forum rules because it would be "promoting other games"? I'm interested in what people put down, but have been warned in the past for posting a shot of Marvel's Satana from another game, even though she was relevant to the conversation in a Marvel context.

broll · November 2018

firethorne said:

So... is posting the answers we had to the what other games are you playing on the forums against the forum rules because it would be "promoting other games"? I'm interested in what people put down, but have been warned in the past for posting a shot of Marvel's Satana from another game, even though she was relevant to the conversation in a Marvel context.

I'm assuming yes. I got a warning for referencing off hand about 2 web games I haven't played in 10 years that was in no way reporting. Over moderation problem continues. Say nothing it's the best policy, apparently....

Daredevil217 said:

broll said:

@DAZ0273

DAZ0273 said:
MPQ has made considerable strides over the last year with only one, in my opinion, fatal mis-step: the reintroduction of full 4* dilution. It is that factor which caused me to downgrade my score from last time there was one of these surveys in terms of being able to recommend this game to others. And it is a real shame because so many other issues were fixed or addressed.
I'm curious what considerable strides you feel they've made?

This year they've:
[Awful] Added supports which at best is a cool idea with one of the worst executions I've ever seen and at worst is all-round awful addition regardless of implementation.
[Awful] Devalued the Desktop UI to support supports.
[Bad] Removed the featured 4* system which was pretty widely liked and while not a fix really helped with Dilution
[Bad] No character adjustments other than Gambit
[Bad to Neutral] Added costumes, which so far looks like it will have similar horrible execution to supports and is pretty superfluous.
[Neutral] Added more 5* feeders, but didn't complete by a long shot and started before this year.
[Mixed] Paid SCL bundles
[Good] Fixed tapping
[Good] Nerfed Gambit
[Good] Places of Power event, however only ran once and no guarantee that it will be run again.
[Great] Saved covers
Maybe I missed something but this is all I can remember and it's a pretty mixed bag that IMO leans further towards negative than positive. Is there some major stride I'm not remembering?

It's funny they mentioned on Discord that they were probably going to slow character reworks to work on new systems because they didn't feel 2017 had enough changes. IMO 2017 was by and large a much better year for the game than 2018. Go back to tweaking characters and stop making horrible new systems (or make less of them and spend a lot more time on them)

So really aside from supports related stuff and the return to dilution that he already mentioned, things have been neutral to great. Remove supports (which I just ignore) and it’s been a good year. You also forgot wins-based.

Yeah when I was fact checking myself I thought I saw Wins based came out last year so I didn't include it. I think that was probably the first test that was wins only.

I think the return of dilution and no character reworks other than Gambit are nearly are on par with the good. Adding wins based makes the year a wash, maybe slightly good, but still not better than 2017 IMO.

Spudgutter · November 2018

broll said:

firethorne said:

So... is posting the answers we had to the what other games are you playing on the forums against the forum rules because it would be "promoting other games"? I'm interested in what people put down, but have been warned in the past for posting a shot of Marvel's Satana from another game, even though she was relevant to the conversation in a Marvel context.

I'm assuming yes. I got a warning for referencing off hand about 2 web games I haven't played in 10 years that was in no way reporting. Over moderation problem continues. Say nothing it's the best policy, apparently....

Daredevil217 said:

broll said:

@DAZ0273

DAZ0273 said:
MPQ has made considerable strides over the last year with only one, in my opinion, fatal mis-step: the reintroduction of full 4* dilution. It is that factor which caused me to downgrade my score from last time there was one of these surveys in terms of being able to recommend this game to others. And it is a real shame because so many other issues were fixed or addressed.
I'm curious what considerable strides you feel they've made?

This year they've:
[Awful] Added supports which at best is a cool idea with one of the worst executions I've ever seen and at worst is all-round awful addition regardless of implementation.
[Awful] Devalued the Desktop UI to support supports.
[Bad] Removed the featured 4* system which was pretty widely liked and while not a fix really helped with Dilution
[Bad] No character adjustments other than Gambit
[Bad to Neutral] Added costumes, which so far looks like it will have similar horrible execution to supports and is pretty superfluous.
[Neutral] Added more 5* feeders, but didn't complete by a long shot and started before this year.
[Mixed] Paid SCL bundles
[Good] Fixed tapping
[Good] Nerfed Gambit
[Good] Places of Power event, however only ran once and no guarantee that it will be run again.
[Great] Saved covers
Maybe I missed something but this is all I can remember and it's a pretty mixed bag that IMO leans further towards negative than positive. Is there some major stride I'm not remembering?

It's funny they mentioned on Discord that they were probably going to slow character reworks to work on new systems because they didn't feel 2017 had enough changes. IMO 2017 was by and large a much better year for the game than 2018. Go back to tweaking characters and stop making horrible new systems (or make less of them and spend a lot more time on them)

So really aside from supports related stuff and the return to dilution that he already mentioned, things have been neutral to great. Remove supports (which I just ignore) and it’s been a good year. You also forgot wins-based.

Yeah when I was fact checking myself I thought I saw Wins based came out last year so I didn't include it. I think that was probably the first test that was wins only.

I think the return of dilution and no character reworks other than Gambit are nearly are on par with the good. Adding wins based makes the year a wash, maybe slightly good, but still not better than 2017 IMO.

The whole debate is subjective.

Some fixes impact vets more, some are more important to newer players.

My 2 cents, you get to acknowledge fixing mistakes, but not as much as if you hadn't made it in the first place. Do i appreciate someone giving me a bandaid for a cut? Sure. But i am still upset with them for being the one who cut me.

It doesn't help to give them low marks for mistakes and then better marks when they fix; tapping, wins based, gambit, dilution, etc. All it is doing is rewarding bad behavior. We are telling them to continue using us as beta testers, and instead of making sure it comes out the gate decent or fixing it quickly, we will thank them profusely for eventually getting around to it, with no repercussions. Even better, some people will actually *defend* them for finally fixing something 8 months after the fact, for something we pointed out before it was even released.

broll · November 2018

Spudgutter said:

broll said:

firethorne said:

So... is posting the answers we had to the what other games are you playing on the forums against the forum rules because it would be "promoting other games"? I'm interested in what people put down, but have been warned in the past for posting a shot of Marvel's Satana from another game, even though she was relevant to the conversation in a Marvel context.

I'm assuming yes. I got a warning for referencing off hand about 2 web games I haven't played in 10 years that was in no way reporting. Over moderation problem continues. Say nothing it's the best policy, apparently....

Daredevil217 said:

broll said:

@DAZ0273

DAZ0273 said:
MPQ has made considerable strides over the last year with only one, in my opinion, fatal mis-step: the reintroduction of full 4* dilution. It is that factor which caused me to downgrade my score from last time there was one of these surveys in terms of being able to recommend this game to others. And it is a real shame because so many other issues were fixed or addressed.
I'm curious what considerable strides you feel they've made?

This year they've:
[Awful] Added supports which at best is a cool idea with one of the worst executions I've ever seen and at worst is all-round awful addition regardless of implementation.
[Awful] Devalued the Desktop UI to support supports.
[Bad] Removed the featured 4* system which was pretty widely liked and while not a fix really helped with Dilution
[Bad] No character adjustments other than Gambit
[Bad to Neutral] Added costumes, which so far looks like it will have similar horrible execution to supports and is pretty superfluous.
[Neutral] Added more 5* feeders, but didn't complete by a long shot and started before this year.
[Mixed] Paid SCL bundles
[Good] Fixed tapping
[Good] Nerfed Gambit
[Good] Places of Power event, however only ran once and no guarantee that it will be run again.
[Great] Saved covers
Maybe I missed something but this is all I can remember and it's a pretty mixed bag that IMO leans further towards negative than positive. Is there some major stride I'm not remembering?

It's funny they mentioned on Discord that they were probably going to slow character reworks to work on new systems because they didn't feel 2017 had enough changes. IMO 2017 was by and large a much better year for the game than 2018. Go back to tweaking characters and stop making horrible new systems (or make less of them and spend a lot more time on them)

So really aside from supports related stuff and the return to dilution that he already mentioned, things have been neutral to great. Remove supports (which I just ignore) and it’s been a good year. You also forgot wins-based.

Yeah when I was fact checking myself I thought I saw Wins based came out last year so I didn't include it. I think that was probably the first test that was wins only.

I think the return of dilution and no character reworks other than Gambit are nearly are on par with the good. Adding wins based makes the year a wash, maybe slightly good, but still not better than 2017 IMO.

The whole debate is subjective.

Some fixes impact vets more, some are more important to newer players.

My 2 cents, you get to acknowledge fixing mistakes, but not as much as if you hadn't made it in the first place. Do i appreciate someone giving me a bandaid for a cut? Sure. But i am still upset with them for being the one who cut me.

It doesn't help to give them low marks for mistakes and then better marks when they fix; tapping, wins based, gambit, dilution, etc. All it is doing is rewarding bad behavior. We are telling them to continue using us as beta testers, and instead of making sure it comes out the gate decent or fixing it quickly, we will thank them profusely for eventually getting around to it, with no repercussions. Even better, some people will actually *defend* them for finally fixing something 8 months after the fact, for something we pointed out before it was even released.

Of course the debate is subjective, it's about opinions.

I would agree with you on the it's better to praise new stuff than fixes, but only if they new stuff was launched without needing fixes. They release most things in a broken state. If they just keep releasing new broken stuff and never go back and fix it, the game will be terrible. Ultimately they need a mix of both.

You say "We are telling them to continue using us as beta testers, and instead of making sure it comes out the gate decent or fixing it quickly, we will thank them profusely for eventually getting around to it, with no repercussions.", well this year was fix light and do you feel the stuff they released was decent and/or fixed quickly? I don't but maybe subjectively you do.

Spudgutter · November 2018

broll said:

It's funny they mentioned on Discord that they were probably going to slow character reworks to work on new systems because they didn't feel 2017 had enough changes.

And why are we only getting this interesting bit of information, second hand, from discord!!!!!

This is getting ridiculous. I guess i need to specify on my survey that i dont appreciate being left out of the cool kids club because i cant sit around on discord, and wait for someone to grace us with their presence.

This is precisely what i meant up above. They cant see that this is an interesting topic that the forum would like to be a part of? There were over 250 people that guessed in the last forum contest thread. You don't think incorporating our ideas and opinions into the plans for next year wouldnt be worthy of our discussion, you know, on the offical forum for the game?

broll · November 2018

Spudgutter said:

This is getting ridiculous. I guess i need to specify on my survey that i dont appreciate being left out of the cool kids club because i cant sit around on discord, and wait for someone to grace us with their presence.

1. What I used to is just go on one a week and search for developer posts (there's usually only 5-30 a day and usually only 1 or 2 a week that's both relevant to the game and noteworthy.
2. I stopped doing that because, like the later half of the sentence indicates, actual new relevant info doesn't actually come up all that much and it's usually not anything ground breaking, You're not missing nearly as much as you think.

Spudgutter · November 2018

broll said:

Spudgutter said:

This is getting ridiculous. I guess i need to specify on my survey that i dont appreciate being left out of the cool kids club because i cant sit around on discord, and wait for someone to grace us with their presence.

1. What I used to is just go on one a week and search for developer posts (there's usually only 5-30 a day and usually only 1 or 2 a week that's both relevant to the game and noteworthy.
2. I stopped doing that because, like the later half of the sentence indicates, actual new relevant info doesn't actually come up all that much and it's usually not anything ground breaking, You're not missing nearly as much as you think.

Yeah, I'm not deluding myself into thinking that anything substantive is coming from those conversations, just irritated that we don't get to be a part of the conversation at all. It's the principle of the matter more than anything. That said, every time this comes up, what is learned may not be something, but it's not nothing. There is a difference, otherwise i wouldn't have a burr under my saddle.

bbigler · December 2018

I ranked it 5 out of 10. I'm proving that new players can reach competitive play "quickly", but that's only if they're willing to spend at least $300 and at least 3 hrs a day playing. I doubt any of my friends are willing to do that. If they just want to play the game for fun and not be competitive, then I would recommend it. But I would not recommend the game to someone that has a competitive nature, but isn't willing or able to spend the required time and money to get there.

Steve111 · December 2018

I wonder how much these surveys actually matter. It just seems like a PR gimmick, something to make us think they are listening. For example, most people I speak to say the game can be improved by more 4* feeders, rebalancing of lame 5* characters etc, but it coming to fruition is like waiting for a winning lottery ticket.

Neuromancer · December 2018

TL;DR I used to rate the game's suggestibility a 0, but now I rate it a 2 since I actually suggested it once recently.

I think someone pays attention to the surveys. I (and probably quite a few others) did suggest costumes about a year back... wish they listened to all my other suggestions first. :-/

I used to rate the game a zero for suggestibility, but now I rate it a 2, because about half-a-year ago a friend of mine exclaimed that he only plays match-3 games anymore, and he needed a new one. And I was like, "!?" "Have you played MPQ?" And he was like, "oh, that game you have like 7000 hours on Steam?"

He then tried MPQ, was crazy about it, spent some money, and has now bailed out of the game as of yesterday. His complaint: it was nothing like the Prologue anymore. I laughed because in quite a few of my past surveys I had complained about the bait-and-switch of the game. He was right. He was also daunted when I told him I had over 180 roster slots, and still needed more. More than anything, he wanted more gameplay substance that captured the feeling of the Prologue. In this, I have similar desires, but I do think the Versus elements have their place, they just don't belong in the Story mode.

So, I suggest it, but it comes with many ample warnings, and only to match-3 player friends who are few-and-far-between.

Tony_Foot · December 2018

Steve111 said:

I wonder how much these surveys actually matter. It just seems like a PR gimmick, something to make us think they are listening. For example, most people I speak to say the game can be improved by more 4* feeders, rebalancing of lame 5* characters etc, but it coming to fruition is like waiting for a winning lottery ticket.

I don't see at all how sorting feeders for the 5* helps the game at all. I'm a 5* player and have almost all the 4* champed at around level 300 on average. I suspect I'm still near the higher end of the game compared to the average but adding feeders does little or nothing for me.

Sure it helps the odd player who couldn't quite cover a latest 5* before they left but we are talking an absolute age to get a 4* levelled without a BH. Even with double feeders it would make little difference to my roster or access to the 5*s I don't have fully covered. Feeders for 5* help the top end of the game or a few people a cover or two away from completing a 5*. These people shouldn't need the leg up.

Sorting out the champion rewards 3 to 4* Having 3 stars feed two four stars is what's needed to help the dilution pool in 4* land. After that, when they have cleared up the 3 to 4* transition mess move onto the next natural progression 5* feeders. Post after post complains about 4* token dilution, how hard it is to cover them with nearing 80 four stars. The help needs to come at the 3 to 4 area if we want to have new players to play with, helping the top end of the game with a few 5* feeds isn't helping a large portion of the player base.

The rockett · December 2018

I have a question about this and maybe somebody knows or maybe @Brigby can answer.

For these surveys, how does D3/Demi know the level of player that is submitting the survey? Can they track back and see my history like Sheild rank and days played? If not, can this be added onto the surveys? Reason is that if this is just a blank form and you have no idea of the level of players that are responding, wouldn’t that be useful information? Yes there are some issue that effect all players (saved covers) but there are some that only effect top end players (tapping which was fixed, top end PVP rewards and how weak they are). Just very curious on this.

HoundofShadow · December 2018

Based on my observation and if my theory is correct, I believe they know who the players are that answered the surveys. But I rather they answer your question, just in case it's forbidden to say how they did it.

Another Player Survey...

Comments

Categories