Pretty much an Every man for themselves and Double-Edged Blade, if you ask me.
Too many do's and don'ts that makes the decision hard.

Devs should have a glimpse on what people are saying, but it should be the constructive critism that is not written by rambling trolls; constructive critism as in basing concerns on why something should be nerfed by comparing it and giving a viable opinion.

But on top of that, the dev(s) need to keep a clear mind. It is certainly easy to be merely corrupted by nerdrage and baits. Devs just need to be aware that before they read their forums that they are aware that they are entering toxic waste zone.


I think it`s best to have a representative that can clearly filter out the trash (as well as possible), who would then give a daily/weekly/monthly report - plus the psychological training.

The chance is simply too high that a dev will get suckered-in if they read it .

I really like the example about the IGN article and his comment below it to that person. Personally speaking, I'm not even a dev or such but it is so easy to have trolling bear traps try to snap your leg. I agree with the article that indie-dev is good (if not important) as niche games are always good -- but they really need to have some creativity.


Also, let`t not forget that aspect "ou can`t please everybody". I forgot if that was a tvtrope or something like that but phrase is just plausible. If a dev does listen to somebody and changes, regardless if it is the most correct and best nerf in Earth's history, he'll still have at least 1+ troll that will tear him down in the forum.

It is okay to post opinions on nerfs and stuff; that's what the forums are there for. After all, if you put "post your opinion", you asking for trouble. xD

However, a dev should only go to MODERATED areas. There is nothing more awesome than mods who know when to chop people`s head off if they are crossing the line for no reason.


(off topic)
Like he said, certain games are just revamps, but let`s not forget that we see such revamps everywhere else, too. Some are good, some are bad. Considering TV, I think Battlestar Galactica was a good remake ~ despite the heavy religion stuff in the end, but its a story.

Back to games. I recall reading a similiar commentary about "creativity is dead", where new ideas are somewhat stuck on something that already exist or existed, due to the nature of how games, fanfictions and etc are invented.

typos

 

-----signature-----

This.

 

-----signature-----

And that inevitably due to human nature causes biases which skews their judgement thus likely is the biggest reason it has been a perpetual clusterblank.

I would think for every complaint on the forum there would be at least 10,000 - 100,000 perhaps a lot more that feel the same way, you multiply by that by the agreeing posts and you would be large enough of a percentage for them to not go ignored.

If Blizzard had better QA practices I would feel more confident in their devs reading the forums. Blizzard's internal QA is horrible however and there is obvious favoritism amongst the dev staff for classes and playstyles. Forums only serve to exacerbate this issue since we all know that when we read a forum we tend to ignore dissenting views and focus on views expressed which agree with us.

 

-----signature-----

If the devs stop listening to player feedback or stop playing the game themselves, I will cancel the same day. I am not one of those people that threatens to cancel over every little thing, but a team full of developers with no real knowledge of how things are working? No thanks. I would rather have slightly biased developers than clueless ones.

 

-----signature-----

I should have clarified. They may "play" but they don't pvp. The raiders get huffy when their dps is nerfed a little here and there. They can completely break classes in pvp with the push of a button though.


It is a pve game with pvp as an afterthought. It would be nice if they had a small group of pvpers to consult with prior to making decisions that break classes.

 

-----signature-----

First, no way every complaint on the forum has 10k-100k people that would agree with it. Have you seen some of the asinine complaints on the Blizzard forums?

Second, 100k people out of 4.7M copies sold, is like 2%. I don't want devs making kneejerk reactions because of the opinion of 2% of the population. The majority of that 2% won't even really understand what their talking about or the consequences of whatever they're asking to be changed.

I look at the mess that is the Blizzard forums and I'm amazed anyone is able to sift through the garbage for anything useful at all.

 

-----signature-----

Well, going on historical trends from the WoW forums, statistical inference suggests that most players share an opinion contra to GC's statements. It's not strong enough to make them do an about-face like they did with the RealID fiasco, but it is apparent. Even anecdotal evidence is showing a downward trend, so despite what anyone thinks heroics will be nerfed (and probably severely) soon.

 

-----signature-----

And yet, still a ton of nerfs (and notably in recent changes) come from PvP whining... so I seriously doubt your theory. Their shitty "eSport" crap still ruins parts of the game for those who couldn't care less about PvP.

 

-----signature-----