While I won’t deny that I copy and paste some of my tech responses, understand that this is usually when there is not enough information to point to a problem otherwise. The “standard” responses that myself and other MVPs (and even Blizzard Tech Support) give typically help make sure it is nothing that the user can’t fix right away.
My first concern is getting a player playing again as fast as possible. It has nothing to do with whether I think anything is wrong with Blizzard’s servers or not. For example right now, there is trending reports with the new patch about sound output not working correctly. As first I did start with some standard bits to check first, but as I see more reports coming in, then I know its not an isolated incident. (By the ways, I can say Blizzard is seeing the same sound issue reports for today but there is no confirmation of a problem yet.)
Also by running through the standard steps that I copy and paste, typically allows me and others to really work to pinpoint whatever issue a person could be facing. So don’t take it the wrong way, if you get slapped with one of my standard responses, and it helps me (and Blizzard) a lot more to confirm you have completed the usual troubleshooting steps.
I am absolutely not doubting that you did exactly what you were supposed to do. Just saying that there are a whole lot of people who are invalidated and have to eat a punishment at no fault of their own on the claim that there’s not enough data to do anything. And the response they get is completely apathetic.
I get that you have zero control over what happens as far as development goes, and my frustration isn’t with you as a person, more of just with the process that you’re a buffer between the player and the people who can do something. Valid voices fall on deaf ears because they’re silenced at your level.
That’s I.T. support for you in general. Throw the text book response and then work from there, that’s how a lot of companies do it. It’s not something bad though, it gets the obvious stuff out of the way and it keeps your response times down as a customer representative.
Well, please understand that I am not tone deaf to the debate of getting penalized for technical malfunctions. As you know, Blizzard has a very detailed explanation to the current state of their policy here on the forums:
But I myself really work hard to walk the line between what is fair for the person who had the technical malfunction, what is justified for those who deliberately leave games, and what is fair for those who’s game is now impacted due to the fact there is a leaver. Prior to role queue, I always felt that Blizzard had the best solution in place in how they choose to handle leavers. Now I do think this is something that might be worth looking at again, and if, by some miracle, fortuntate enough to have a few minutes with Jeff Kaplan or Scott Mercer. You better believe I will ask about this.
Until then, I will always continue to present the facts as straightforward as possible. I much rather set the expectations for what players should expect when there is a leaver or if they have a technical malfunction, and if Blizzard changes the rules, you can be sure I will continue to communicate that.
It’s nice that you do volunteer tech support. I wouldn’t go into that ever again (I have had paid jobs in this). I would never take it as a paid role again, let alone voluntary. So much verbal abuse, many irate customers and performance quotas to hit.
Guys. I thought this post was created to thank Wyoming. We kinda drifted away from that. I do not hang around in Forum that much and also I am a player from the EU Server, but even I stumbled over Wyoming sometimes. So let us do what we all came her to do and say “Thank you”<3
Here on the Overwatch forums, I am grateful to have another tech-savvy player to join the ranks of the Forum MVPs. Her name is Nicole (that is her BattleTag) and she is more tech savvy than I am. There is about a dozen or so of us U.S. English forum MVPs across all of Blizzard games and we really are passionate players for Blizzard’s games.
I would point out there is no official community forum MVP program for specifically Overwatch. World of Warcraft has a community MVP program but their role is really focused on giving gameplay advice with World of Warcraft (which in terms of content is a really huge game). Overwatch is a very simple game in terms of content (though its growing more and more). I am a “Tech Support and Customer Service MVP” and our group posts mostly in the technical support and customer service forums across all of Blizzard’s games.
Well, understand that I am not required to meet any specific quotas and for the most part I have little obligation other than just making sure I follow the Blizzard Code-of-Conduct and Forum Code-of-Conduct. I am not paid or compensated in any official matter. I can participate as much as I see fit.
Remember the green text is merely Blizzard’s way of saying that the information that I post is for the most part trustworthy. Please note, that by no means am I ever perfect. (That was proven last month.)
I’m glad that you enjoy it. When you have other staff listening to your calls, checking your email/live chat responses and rating them. Being told to keep your calls under 15 minutes and being punished in your monthly performance rating for having long calls - that kind of stuff makes I.T. support horrible job wise ^^
And understand, that I am not sure if I would directly pursue any random “tech support” job. Maybe apply for a role as a Game Master for Blizzard if one opens up, but understand that I am actually getting my Bachelor’s Degree in Graphic Design. It’s a really balanced education which is allowing me to expand my skills in art and marketing, combined with my prior history as an arcade technician for the last few years, I know I will one day be able to contribute to the video game industry in an even more positive impact (even if it is not directly with Blizzard).
Fun Fact: I used to work for BANDAI NAMCO for five years.
I recently got matched against WyomingMyst on Route 66. Shortly after the match started I complained about my frame stuttering issues and Wyoming stopped playing for a moment to type tech tips in the match chat for me. Thanks.
My youngest brother did that for over ten years. He got the commemorative sword and shield as marks of his service time. The role is pretty interesting in that way, as most jobs wouldn’t give you irl sword and irl shield or all those other things you get along the way.
That’s troubleshooting. That’s why I always preface my tickets with the steps I’ve taken already. And while I understand the end-users lie because they don’t want to feel silly about forgetting to plug their monitor in (arbitrary example) and that uniformed process is absolutely necessary in business, it doesn’t have to be empty.
I guess I’m used to a different speed, I work with my end-users directly and bypass the tech support in my work because I want my users to trust me as a developer. Granted, my user base is thousands at best and not millions, but there are key people within the domain who speak for the rest. And that may be the basis of my criticism.
I don’t think it was ever handled optimally. The solution was rigid and left little room for error. While I agree that it’s not fair to the team that you’re gone, coming back to a game that you didn’t leave and still getting a leaver penalty just discourages people from rejoining in the first place.
My solution to this is to:
Rework the match cancellation process. If someone leaves before the given time (which can remain the same) and do not return within 2 minutes, the match is cancelled per usual. This allows a buffer for client crashes on match creation.
Take a snapshot of when the player left the match
Take a snapshot of the final game time
Reduce the earnings/losses the players who remained in the match receive by the difference between the time the player left and the time the match ended. In short, if a player leaves early on, the earnings and losses will be heavily reduced whereas if they left at the end, full earnings and losses will be awarded.
If the player returns, award them the same with a reduction for time missed.
Players who queued with the leaver will not receive these reductions and will take a loss per usual.
This will ultimately encourage players to stay and try to win when they are a player down instead of instantly leaving when the two minutes are up. It will also mitigate the losses people receive for disconnects while still penalizing those who left.
As for the penalty a leaver gets, I don’t think a flat -50 SR is intelligent because SR is used to calculate fair matchups. Someone’s SR dropping because they left doesn’t make them less skilled, it just puts them in easier games. It’s also likely they don’t care much about their SR if they’re leaving, so my suggestion for them is:
Retain the timeout penalty. This ensures that players who do have connection issues can get them resolved and keeps intentional leavers from getting back into matches immediately.
Award them a standard loss.
A better punishment should be considered. There’s already a pretty absurd skill variance in the matchmaker.