Confusing double-talk from the Cantina tour

[ThePedigree]

Reading through the transcripts of the Seattle Cantina tour has me scratching my head. Schubert says alot of things that don't really seem to be jiving with what is actually going on right now.

"If you are a PvP fan, I think you’re okay."

 

Well, not exactly. There are several outstanding issues right now that have come to light since the news of what 2.4 will and won't have, and many of those issues have be ignored or swept under the rug. Yeah yeah, vocal minority on the forums right? Well then why would you make this statement:

 

"Our attitude on PvP is generally to be more transparent. Because, as a general rule, if we expose our philosophy, you guys will tell us if we’ve f*cked up. Right? It’s the whole open-source philosophy. The way to find out if your game has problems is to give it oxygen. So our PvP team is really open and really forthcoming."

 

Well, there are lot of people that are telling you that you're messing up. The hot issues right now that people have been addressing on this forum:

 

1. No class balance before arena launch. There seems to be a majority here that feel that launching arenas without touching the class balance and doing this "wait and see" approach is a giant mistake. There are already classes that are both under and over performing in the current pvp game. There were already classes that felt that they were either pigeon-holed into a particular spec to compete in high end pvp, or didn't even feel welcome as that class. This is unlikely to change, and the consensus seems to be that people would rather adjustments be made to try and bring everyone in line before the arena season launch to have as fair a chance to be competitive from day one. Yeah, we know it won't be perfect. But that would a far cry better than what we are expecting now. Please rethink this decision.

 

2. Removal of Rated Warzones. Alot of people are upset this feature is being removed because "Not enough people played it." Lots of people spent loads of money to move to new servers to try and break into this gameplay, or just to have more competition. Now you've pulled the rug out from under them. Rather than give people the choice to play Rated Objective play or Rated Deathmatch play, you've made that decision for them. Many people have posted here that they'd rather go through the motions of organzing it themselves, or wait in queue than to not be able to play at all.

 

3. No separate queue for objective-based and deathmatch warzones. Again, you're making the decision for them as to what PVP content you'll have to play. If you're concerned about it affecting queue times, how will this be different than the impact people quitting out of them will have? Not everyone who likes to pvp likes Arena, just as not everyone who likes to pvp like objective-based play. Let people queue for the content they want to do, not jump through all these hurdles. Isn't the goal to make things easier and more enjoyable for your customers?

 

"we’re doing it for PVP because those guys said, “we want to do this.” This is (the PvP team’s) testament to them saying they want to be forthcoming, because if we’re wrong, they’ll tell us. And it turns out, you will."

 

We have. We have been for some time. Stop being so stubborn about metrics and wagging your finger and saying you know better. It hasn't served you well over the first year of the game, and it hasn't this second either.

[LordArtemis]

There seems to be a majority here that feel that launching arenas without touching the class balance and doing this "wait and see" approach is a giant mistake.

 

I would really like to know how you could have come up with such a ridiculous and baseless assumption. There is in no conclusive way ANY proof that anything discussed here pertaining to player concerns over a lack of balance before Arena launch represents a majority.

 

Any claim to the contrary is absolutely ludicrous. I would say more evidence exists, if you consider players compared to posters OR percentage of folks posting concerns compared to forum members that do not that the majority have little to no concern about it at all.

 

I'd also like to know who exactly is this "we" that you keep mentioning....because I'm almost positive you were not elected as a spokesman for anyone. Certainly not me or anyone I know.

Edited September 3, 2013 by LordArtemis

[Applicator]

Reading through the transcripts of the Seattle Cantina tour has me scratching my head. Schubert says alot of things that don't really seem to be jiving with what is actually going on right now.

 

 

Well, not exactly. There are several outstanding issues right now that have come to light since the news of what 2.4 will and won't have, and many of those issues have be ignored or swept under the rug. Yeah yeah, vocal minority on the forums right? Well then why would you make this statement:

 

 

 

Well, there are lot of people that are telling you that you're messing up. The hot issues right now that people have been addressing on this forum:

 

1. No class balance before arena launch. There seems to be a majority here that feel that launching arenas without touching the class balance and doing this "wait and see" approach is a giant mistake. There are already classes that are both under and over performing in the current pvp game. There were already classes that felt that they were either pigeon-holed into a particular spec to compete in high end pvp, or didn't even feel welcome as that class. This is unlikely to change, and the consensus seems to be that people would rather adjustments be made to try and bring everyone in line before the arena season launch to have as fair a chance to be competitive from day one. Yeah, we know it won't be perfect. But that would a far cry better than what we are expecting now. Please rethink this decision.

 

2. Removal of Rated Warzones. Alot of people are upset this feature is being removed because "Not enough people played it." Lots of people spent loads of money to move to new servers to try and break into this gameplay, or just to have more competition. Now you've pulled the rug out from under them. Rather than give people the choice to play Rated Objective play or Rated Deathmatch play, you've made that decision for them. Many people have posted here that they'd rather go through the motions of organzing it themselves, or wait in queue than to not be able to play at all.

 

3. No separate queue for objective-based and deathmatch warzones. Again, you're making the decision for them as to what PVP content you'll have to play. If you're concerned about it affecting queue times, how will this be different than the impact people quitting out of them will have? Not everyone who likes to pvp likes Arena, just as not everyone who likes to pvp like objective-based play. Let people queue for the content they want to do, not jump through all these hurdles. Isn't the goal to make things easier and more enjoyable for your customers?

 

 

 

We have. We have been for some time. Stop being so stubborn about metrics and wagging your finger and saying you know better. It hasn't served you well over the first year of the game, and it hasn't this second either.

 

Only bads complain about pvp balance. Everyone is a god at pvp, they only lost because the other class was OP. I just get more satisfaction when pwning the supposed OP classes with my underpowered ones.

[jorill]

personally "I" think doing the wait and see on class balance for arenas is the better approach then guessing what might happen.

[hadoken]

The real problem with the 'wait and see' approach is it encourages people to use already unbalanced classes/specs (which are ALREADY known by players) at the start to soak up whatever rewards the arenas offer.

 

Yea they'll get it balanced eventually, but it'll be too late as people will have gotten what they wanted out of the system by then.

 

I get that they're trying to cater to the "I just pvp cause it's fun" crowd (and that isn't a bad idea) but those people are going to be miserable as hell in arenas starting off. They're basically saying those players should just take a break til they figure out *** is going on.

[Bojangle]

The real problem with the 'wait and see' approach is it encourages people to use already unbalanced classes/specs (which are ALREADY known by players) at the start to soak up whatever rewards the arenas offer.

 

Yea they'll get it balanced eventually, but it'll be too late as people will have gotten what they wanted out of the system by then.

 

I get that they're trying to cater to the "I just pvp cause it's fun" crowd (and that isn't a bad idea) but those people are going to be miserable as hell in arenas starting off. They're basically saying those players should just take a break til they figure out *** is going on.

Arenas should NEVER be geared or try and include the casual pvp'ers ie. "cause it's fun" crowd. Arenas should be very competitive and made for those hard core pvp'ers just like the difficulty modes for pve. I am a pve'er and enjoy doing some pvp, especially in Star Wars, but I would never expect things to work for me in arenas. If I ever did one, I would expect to get rolled. Warzones on the other hand sure. Those can be catered to all types.

[Savej]

I certainly agree that 4v4 is very different from 8v8. And a lot of the preemptive complainers that think they are speaking for "everyone" are, at best, close-minded and often just full of cow dung . But, last I checked, 8v8 isn't actually going anywhere and many of the balance/class problems are not specific to group dynamics anyways. No matter what balance isn't going to get fixed in one patch. The "wait and see" strategy seems like a bad one to me.

[Savej]

Arenas should NEVER be geared or try and include the casual pvp'ers ie. "cause it's fun" crowd. Arenas should be very competitive and made for those hard core pvp'ers just like the difficulty modes for pve. I am a pve'er and enjoy doing some pvp, especially in Star Wars, but I would never expect things to work for me in arenas. If I ever did one, I would expect to get rolled. Warzones on the other hand sure. Those can be catered to all types.

 

Arenas in this game are for everyone. You won't be able to queue for pvp without getting in an arena. You didn't mention why they should only be for the top 1% of players?

[HoboWithAStick]

Not doing class balance before this comes out is going to really kill it for allot of people. If you've played compeditive pvp games (Like moba's) You will know they take balance very serious and do ajustments on a weekly basis. Since makeb came out almost 0 balance changes have come out for pvp or pve and we have been told we have to wait till either patch 2.5 or 2.6 till class balance. How is that acceptable? There are classes and specs that need attention now, waiting is going to make people just roll agents and warriors or if they do play on what they want they get to screw up their eulo rating.

 

Of course playing a strong class doesn't mean you are going to win but does give you a much better chance when going against someone with a similar skill level.

 

Regardless though if bioware wants to really show the community that they take these arenas serious they need to do a couple of things.

 

- Fix some of the lower performing classes/specs before 2.4 goes live (at least do something)

- Be commited to balance (Bi-weekly)

- Remove all AOE specs and give all classes similar aoe potential

- Fix latency issues and rubberbanding issues and hitching issues (Remove dirrectional requirement on hidden strike, maul and backstab until this happens)

- Remove class Rep system and have the community/combat team address players concerns without limitation and in a timely manner.

- Resolve system changed to punish use of bad cc rather then reward.

Edited September 3, 2013 by HoboWithAStick

[oaceen]

I would really like to know how you could have come up with such a ridiculous and baseless assumption.

 

the PTS, PVP, and various class forums. there are even a few threads here in general discussion.

it's not ridiculous (unless you mean the stance he's referring to) or baseless assumption. there is a lot of discussion, and a lot of people are not happy with it.

 

whether or not you or i or anyone else in this thread agree with it, there's a lot of vitriol surrounding the decision.

[Andryah]

whether or not you or i or anyone else in this thread agree with it, there's a lot of vitriol surrounding the decision.

 

Which in the context of PvP would make it different how exactly? in any MMO? None the less.. some vocal vitriol about PvP design by some is hardly a majority indicator. If you have 3 noisy cats outside your window at 2:00 AM squealing and fighting.. it does not mean the majority of cats in the neighborhood are squealing and fighting.. it just makes it sound/look that way.

 

As to the topic at hand... I object to the OPs misrepresentation of "double-talk". I guess any answer you don't agree with is double talk to the OP. Not very objective at all.

 

People need to grow up some IMO. Not every answer you get from devs will be the answer you want. Would you prefer they just clam up instead of talk about what they are planning to do?

Edited September 3, 2013 by Andryah

[ThePedigree]

I would really like to know how you could have come up with such a ridiculous and baseless assumption. There is in no conclusive way ANY proof that anything discussed here pertaining to player concerns over a lack of balance before Arena launch represents a majority.

 

Any claim to the contrary is absolutely ludicrous. I would say more evidence exists, if you consider players compared to posters OR percentage of folks posting concerns compared to forum members that do not that the majority have little to no concern about it at all.

I guess you missed the numerous threads in several forums over the last month that have been complaining about the lack of balance before arena goes live. Or the numerous threads about various class balance issues still hanging out in the pvp forums.

 

I'd also like to know who exactly is this "we" that you keep mentioning....because I'm almost positive you were not elected as a spokesman for anyone. Certainly not me or anyone I know.

Clearly I'm not speaking for you. And I didn't have an intention to. Which is why I never said everyone. I used the words "some people", "seems like a majority", and "a lot of people". Those word are in no way inclusive of everyone. I intentionally used those words to avoid having to make such clarifications. But since I offended your sensibilities by even suggesting there might be a large group of players that feel differently than you do about these issues, then perhaps I should apologize.

[ThePedigree]

Which in the context of PvP would make it different how exactly? in any MMO? None the less.. some vocal vitriol about PvP design by some is hardly a majority indicator. If you have 3 noisy cats outside your window at 2:00 AM squealing and fighting.. it does not mean the majority of cats in the neighborhood are squealing and fighting.. it just makes it sound/look that way.

Because the numerous threads about these issues stretched across all the various forums is equivalent to 3 noisy cats at 3 am.

 

As to the topic at hand... I object to the OPs misrepresentation of "double-talk". I guess any answer you don't agree with is double talk to the OP. Not very objective at all.

No, double-talk is when you say you're going to be more transparent and listen to your players and instead dismiss them or ignore them.

Edited September 3, 2013 by ThePedigree

[Andryah]

I guess you missed the numerous threads in several forums over the last month that have been complaining about the lack of balance before arena goes live. Or the numerous threads about various class balance issues still hanging out in the pvp forums.

 

Which proves what... there's 500ish disgruntled forum members with pitchforks and spears in the streets?

 

Come on. His point was that in the absence of an actual census or poll (you know.. real data, rather then smoke and mirrors).. there is no way anyone can declare how many people are upset about anything in this game. I've seen much bigger meltdowns in the forum over much more trivial things.. and even they were not any sort of majority view of anything. Using your methodology.. the introduction of dyes to the game meant it would collapse from player outrage.. yet here we are.. happily plodding along in game, dying everything in every imaginable color.

 

It's completely OK in my opinion to express your concerns or views about the game. But can't it be done on the merit of your views.. rather then wanting some internet hoard metaphorically standing behind you to prop you up? One person presenting their ideas and concerns with honest conviction is way more credible then a faux-crowd created to make you look bigger and more legitimate.

Edited September 3, 2013 by Andryah

[Andryah]

Because the numerous threads about these issues stretched across all the various forums is equivalent to 3 noisy cats at 3 am.

 

Excellent. You understand the analogy then.. it's just that you think you are special and the analogy is not applicable in your case. And.. to make a point here.. I said 2:00 AM, not 3:00 AM... which leads me to believe you apply selective comprehension to topical discussion.

 

 

No, double-talk is when you say you're going to be more transparent and listen to your players and instead dismiss them or ignore them.

 

Actually.. being more transparent and listening to players means "some" things that players want or express will be made a reality. By no means does it mean every wild piece of spittle that flies out and hits a monitor screen is converted into the top 10 things the devs must work on immediately. Double-talk is people like yourself pretending and prognosticating that because you say it.. the devs must do it and do it nao.

 

Case in point: There have been numerous and often ranty questions about why no balance of class play in PvP ahead of arenas. AND... wait for it.. wait for it.. they answered the question.. clearly and unambiguously. You just don't like the answer and when you don't like an answer I guess you need to label it with negative pejoratives to make yourself feel better in some way. Or perhaps it's just how you personally lash out at people and things. /shrug.

Edited September 3, 2013 by Andryah

[LordArtemis]

I guess you missed the numerous threads in several forums over the last month that have been complaining about the lack of balance before arena goes live. Or the numerous threads about various class balance issues still hanging out in the pvp forums.

 

You "guess" I missed the numerous threads? You think multiple threads on the issue represents a majority? I really hope your not trying to make that contention.

 

One could say "lots of folks in the forum" or "lots of threads on the issue" but one can't say "the majority" and expect to be taken seriously IMO.

 

 

Clearly I'm not speaking for you. And I didn't have an intention to. Which is why I never said everyone. I used the words "some people", "seems like a majority", and "a lot of people". Those word are in no way inclusive of everyone. I intentionally used those words to avoid having to make such clarifications. But since I offended your sensibilities by even suggesting there might be a large group of players that feel differently than you do about these issues, then perhaps I should apologize.

 

You used the word "we". We represents more than you. So who is "we"? My question does not represent offense...it represents curiosity as to who decided that you were a spokesman?

 

I don't think you intended to present your opinion as your own at all. I think it's pretty obvious you intended your post to sound as if you were speaking for more folks than yourself, and I think that the question should be answered.

 

You speak for you. It is pretty likely you do not speak for others. They are probably more than capable of speaking for themselves.

 

Because the numerous threads about these issues stretched across all the various forums is equivalent to 3 noisy cats at 3 am.

 

That still does NOT change the likelihood that it does not represent a majority. Is it important? Sure. Should they ignore it, probably not. There are many issues that deserve attention, and that is probably close to the top considering the amount of negative feedback on the issue which has been considerable.

 

 

No, double-talk is when you say you're going to be more transparent and listen to your players and instead dismiss them or ignore them.

 

Hyperbole. I have seen many examples of them not dismissing players and listening to them...too many examples to list over the last few months. Perhaps you could say they are not paying attention to this issue in the way they should IN YOUR OPINION but that does not indicate a overall pattern.

 

It indicates that folks that play end game and PVP are hard to please. Go ahead...deny that one.

 

I have plenty of examples of that.

Edited September 3, 2013 by LordArtemis

[TUXs]

It's completely OK in my opinion to express your concerns or views about the game. But can't it be done on the merit of your views.. rather then wanting some internet hoard metaphorically standing behind you to prop you up? One person presenting their ideas and concerns with honest conviction is way more credible then a faux-crowd created to make you look bigger and more legitimate.

 

Bioware has proven they'll react to the crowd and they'll ignore the lone voice of conviction. If Bioware were to improve their communication, we'd probably see less "hoards".

[Andryah]

Bioware has proven they'll react to the crowd and they'll ignore the lone voice of conviction. If Bioware were to improve their communication, we'd probably see less "hoards".

 

You missed the point entirely.

 

The lone voice of conviction gathers many rational supporters and support. It garners both respect and attention with time. It is in fact demonstrated by things like Bioware setting up class representatives as just an example point of demonstration. It is in fact demonstrated by how well the rational and well thought out and presented threads (on just about any game topic) can and do gain traction in the forum.

 

A few hundred monitor screens covered in random spittle on the other hand.. that's a lot of work for a lot of moms somewhere to clean up.

 

It's the difference between people gathering around your expression of ideas on their merit, and you gathering the "we" around your expression of ideas to pretend to speak for the masses. One is powerful, the other is powerless.

Edited September 3, 2013 by Andryah

[TUXs]

You missed the point entirely.

 

The lone voice of conviction gathers many rational supporters and support. It garners both respect and attention with time. It is in fact demonstrated by things like Bioware setting up class representatives as just a simply point of demonstration. It is in fact demonstrated by how well the rational and well thought out and presented threads (on just about any game topic) can and do gain traction in the forum.

 

A few hundred monitor screens covered in spittle on the other hand.. that's a lot of work for a lot of moms somewhere to clean up.

 

Huh? I get your point about a reasonable post gaining traction on its own, but what the hell are you trying to say about the class reps? So far, they've been a huge joke...

[Andryah]

Huh? I get your point about a reasonable post gaining traction on its own, but what the hell are you trying to say about the class reps? So far, they've been a huge joke...

 

My point about class reps as a methodology represents gathering of rational thought through discussion and spokemanship, and embraced by the player base. they exemplify the process of gathering rational thought and discussion. They are a model of how to do it.

 

Whereas random player speaking as "we" is very often actually an expression of "I" and does not really represent the interests of the "we". It's an imperialistic approach to communications IMO.

 

Now.. in a gaming forum.. I personally don't give them high hopes of achieving the goal.. but that's environmental.. the methodology is however sound. The environmental challenges are separate from the methodology.

Edited September 3, 2013 by Andryah

[TUXs]

My point about class reps as a methodology represents gathering of rational thought through discussion and spokemanship, and embraced by the player base. they exemplify the process of gathering rational thought and discussion. They are a model of how to do it.

 

Whereas random player speaking as "we" is very often actually an expression of "I" and does not really represent the interests of the "we". It's an imperialistic approach to communications IMO.

 

Now.. in a gaming forum.. I personally don't give them high hopes of achieving the goal.. but that's environmental.. the methodology is however sound. The environmental challenges are separate from the methodology.

 

Uh huh...you were here last week right?! You saw the "replies" to Vanguards right? Did you also see how all the "rational" comments about what they said were ignored? It wasn't until hell broke lose on the forums that anything changed.

 

How about this...

 

You do it the way YOU like, let others do it however THEY like.

[Andryah]

You do it the way YOU like, let others do it however THEY like.

 

I am. I am expressing my opinion, and even discussing it with you. I am always happy to let others decide if they agree with me or not. I don't need to prop faux-players up behind me and pretend I speak for them. My comments about the Class Rep approach was one of methodology, not environmental misuse and contamination of the methodology.

 

 

There is no "we" in "I".. which is what LA objected to about the tone and direction of this thread.. and I agree with LA on that.

Edited September 3, 2013 by Andryah

[Sir-Coffee]

I would really like to know how you could have come up with such a ridiculous and baseless assumption. There is in no conclusive way ANY proof that anything discussed here pertaining to player concerns over a lack of balance before Arena launch represents a majority.

 

Any claim to the contrary is absolutely ludicrous. I would say more evidence exists, if you consider players compared to posters OR percentage of folks posting concerns compared to forum members that do not that the majority have little to no concern about it at all.

 

I'd also like to know who exactly is this "we" that you keep mentioning....because I'm almost positive you were not elected as a spokesman for anyone. Certainly not me or anyone I know.

 

So much raging in this post and you probably didn't even check the PTS forums/PvP forums lmao

[LordArtemis]

So much raging in this post and you probably didn't even check the PTS forums/PvP forums lmao

 

Oh come on. If you think that represents rage the threshold for that judgement from you must not be very high. Nor does that post indicate that I didn't see the complaints posted...it indicates it does not likely represent a majority.

 

Guess what? That is probably an accurate assessment. It is probably exaggeration to point out it is a majority...in fact in most cases it would be an exaggeration at best for ANY subject on the forums.

 

We are not really privy, as a general rule, to the information required to establish a majority opinion on anything.

Edited September 3, 2013 by LordArtemis

[Sir-Coffee]

I am. I am expressing my opinion, and even discussing it with you. I am always happy to let others decide if they agree with me or not. I don't need to prop faux-players up behind me and pretend I speak for them. My comments about the Class Rep approach was one of methodology, not environmental misuse and contamination of the methodology.

 

 

There is no "we" in "I".. which is what LA objected to about the tone and direction of this thread.. and I agree with LA on that.

 

No, you got this wrong Marty. There is no ‘U’ and ‘I’ in ‘education.’ Well, I mean yes, the letters ‘U’ and ‘I’ are in the word ‘education.’ But education with a capital E? You know what I’m talking about.