But why would they spend money to gather feedback that they have already gathered and are already fully aware of? (And have been for nearly a full year)
The response of: “but think of all the players we haven’t heard from” is a typical response from someone defending their actions with something that is impossible to rebuddle, if you play their game.
Oh but you see, it’s so much worse than an insult to our intelligence…
Saying that you don’t have enough feedback is essentially saying: “we don’t know what we are supposed to be doing because we can’t be certain most people will like it, so we chose to do nothing”.
That’s essentially what you’re saying, you think, their message means. Not trying to put words in your mouth, I just want to draw a comparison.
I see it much more as an attempt of justifing someones (in)actions / viewpoint by saying something you can’t rebuddle, if you were to argue against them.
The difference is in the intentions behind the statements.
Your version is pleeding: “not wanting to make more misstakes” at best and “incompetence” at worst.
Mine is: “say something to make them shut up” at best or “no Catfish, I don’t care that the playerbase hates our layered gambling systems, it makes shareholders happy so it stays”.
Obviously I don’t believe that to be a quote or the like but think about it:
How many different times have they said something that infers that they know of more than they talk about?
In the devblog that announced the lock “changes” they said this:
You can’t claim that you don’t have enough feedback which is why you chose to not act on it while having done so in the past. Any patch would prove this point but I chose this blog because it highlights the 2nd problem I have with it in one quote.
Does this quote read like they were unsure of what we wanted? Does it sound like they chose these changes while having had to consider what other feedback they didn’t get?
Sure looks like they got some feedback and ajusted accordingly while not considering what feedback they were “missing”.
There’s just one problem for me. The inconsistant and deliberately arbitrary application of the feedback.
Why give us the most obvious QoL update (time waster RNG removal) while also being real tame with the changes to the RNG mechanics that tied to “engagement RNG”? Funny “coincidence” that.
You have to love that the apparent reason for it is: “…would have a big impact on item acquisition…”
Which is essentially saying that they are afraid of sweeping changes to the retention part of the game when it is in our favour but then also go:
Which is essentially the exact same situation except now that it negatively effects our gear, it’s fine to do even bigger sweeping changes. -.-
Who cares if we have to regrind a ton of new gear, that’s what we’re supposed to do!