Here are the pieces I’m personally aware of and which have existed for a couple of months now:
In an official Developer Update a few months ago Jeff Kaplan himself said that 2/2/2 role - queue was overall a “positive” change.
Here are some official developer quotes that were released a couple of months ago:
And even more importantly, here’s the point where the overall very positive opinion of the majority of the game’s player base is touched upon:
I have to admit this isn’t such a trustworthy source, but just the fact that the grand majority of the unofficial polls created in social places as historically negative for some reason as these Forums have surprisingly shown 2/2/2 role - lock to be a clear winner amongst fans, with the different concensus sometimes even touching 3:1 in favor of the system is a substantial feat…
You are of course free to make up your own mind about any of them.
Lucky you then, but that hasn’t been my experience. Aside from personal taste, I think role queue is the best way to maintain meta balance, whether they’ve implemented it well enough is a different discussion I suppose.
The forum has been rife with complaints on the long queue times. That long queue time is unavoidable with 2/2/2, and therefore most players don’t actually like it.
It’s just that many players still haven’t made the connection that their precious idea is also the cause of a bigger problem than what OQ caused.
I don’t think you understand the train of logic behind my last response, but even with that being said, all evidence that we have so far concerning this subject supports the exact opposite conclusion than the one you’re writing about here (as I’ve already said though, it’s up to your subjective crisis whether you’re going to consider said pieces as valid or not).
And, hypothetically speaking, if you had evidence as well to prove that claim of yours, how can you know whether a percentage of those dissatisfied players are or aren’t willing to excuse the problem of long queue times as long as they’re able to enjoy a 2/2/2 environment and all its benefits?
Yea I don’t put any value on those statements because they contain no actual data to back them up. If it was really well received they should’ve announced something like we’ve seen x% increase in active players or something along those lines.
The sole fact that they already brought back OQ is for me also quite a strong indicator 2-2-2 is nowhere near as successful as they made it out to be initially.
Okay, I guess this concern is fair, even if I don’t see absolutely any reason for the devs to make such a statement for example without already basing it on data and statistics they’ve already gathered in - house.
I don’t think I even have to get into why the direct increase of the player base isn’t the only indication of a new addition’s success, etc.
For the time being, we simply cannot know that for sure. The return for Open Queue, for the time being, can only objectively indicate for example that the devs judged that the amount of players OQ had attracted was significant enough to guarantee it a place in the Main Menu and/or OQ was granted this new place in order for it to assist with queue times, etc.
I did. That’s not evidence. It’s not even measurable. My evidence to the contrary, however, is measurable.
Blizzard may have to change to a 1/3/2 and buff individual tanks even more, in order to make RQ workable.
They tried a half-hearted measure very early on, because 2/2/2 will kill the game in the long term. Now, it’s either fast queue times or tanks from a huge range of ranks fill for a game.
It’s awful.
All that said I enjoy RQ because I can play DPS in a game without ever having to fill. But it has some significant downsides, which has driven away players even more than OQ.
It is the only evidence we have so far concerning this subject and nothing can change that, even if its validity is based on each person’s individual crisis for the time being.
I disagree completely, as 3/2/1 seemed like an absolute chore for tank players judging by how much Tank queues skyrocketed a week after that failed experiment was initiated…
Would love to see absolutely any evidence that supports such bold claims…
If you’re talking about your claims concerning high queue times, despite the fact that they aren’t even directly connected to the statement I was asked to provide evidence myself, they also happen to be an anecdotal metric at best and therefore do not constitute any form of actual evidence.
I know of no basis to know with any certainty that the statements reflect actual stats, and in any case those stats would be for usage rather than for preference
preference <> usage
Further, most for profit enterprises will speak of the popularity of their products, not their failings, even when by their own measures the product isnt a success. Policy is always to give a positive spin in customer-facing messages
In none of said previous conversations was any valid data presented to support the claim of a majority
Once again, we can not know whether this policy is applicable in this specific situation, especially when in the long term Blizzard would face very adverse effects from lying to both their investors and consumers from both a standpoint of status in the community and an even more important economical status as well.
Once again, refer to any of our previous conversations if you would like to finally provide your arguments according to which you personally consider the evidence provided as invalid.
Please do provide the source from which you’ve been able to draw this conclusion.
Very true, but this doesn’t invalidate my previous point.
Same here as well, as until you provide actual arguments for once that lead you to personally believe that the evidence available is invalid, then all such claims are nothing but baseless, I’m afraid.
A fair argument indeed, though the lack of complete data from surveys/etc. doesn’t necessarily mean in any way that a specific point is automatically invalid, as it has been proven in both statements related (like for example the claim from Jeff that the majority of comps pre - 2/2/2 role - lock in Competitive were actually of a 2/2/2 composition) or even not related to overwatch at all.
Queue times are the only hard evidence that we have, which you keep ignoring.
Edit: Also, calling queue times “anecdotal”. The evidence for queue times is completely the opposite of anecdotal. The relative times for each role is consistently in favor of tanks for all ranks, except maybe at the very top.
Queue times 1. Are inherently an anecdotal metric for the time being and therefore plain and simple do not constitute evidence… I’m not ignoring anything here. 2. If hypothetically they did constitute evidence, they simply do not directly answer the question of whether the majority of the player base actually enjoys 2/2/2 role - lock or not.
