Feedback: Hunters

The forums are not generally representative of the community at large.

There have been some changes in the past where if you look at the forums, you get the opinion that feedback is mixed (even if some people here are claiming that feedback is overwhelmingly negative), and you look basically where else and it far more positive than negative.

But we’re worried about max 350 people (less, due to how people can count as multiple different people for the purposes of the user counter, and that even in this thread the feedback is not universally one way), out of the hundreds of thousands of players who play MM?

Yes, exactly my point.

Do you truly think is just like that? there is HUNDREADS of people liking posts about not removing pets

There was a closed thread who was going to get 300 easily before being removed.

7 Likes

They really need to be careful of the biases of the places they source feedback from.

Including that one guy who likes his own posts 13 times. But that’s hundreds out of hundreds of thousands, or an upper bound of 0.1%.

1 Like

Personally, I do like when Blizzard provides niche options for players. Fantasy and customization are important for this game, everyone dreams of having characters matching their expectations, even if it’s not optimal.

One day, I was the minority asking for petless hunters for my ranger fantasy.

My worry about the outcry over the MM changes was not that people would get pets back, but that Blizzard could go back on the awesome changes to the spec’s toolkit. This is huge, because it sets the direction for the spec forward, much like Lone Wolf did one day.

The problem with pet/petless clash before was that is was gimping the spec’s evolution. MM just couldn’t evolve as long as pets carried so much utility as if the spec behaved like BM or Survival. But now that’s settled, and the pet retains its last function: tanking.

Thankfully, Blizzard added an option that will appease most of those worried about pets (but it’s impossible to make everyone happy, so some will still want more out of this). This is much like dual 1-handers Fury Warrior or 1-pet Beast Master, a way for players to express themselves, even though their chosen playstyle is not optimal. What’s being a few DPS behind if you are not playing ultra-competitive cutting edge content?

3 Likes

Not directed at you specifically, but there have been a number of topics in the past where the forums are only in favor of options for players, when blizzard picks the option you disagree with (big example was raid loot in DF).

1 Like

if utility is on the pet, then people who want to play without a pet have to summon it when they need to use that utility. it’s been a pain point for no-pet MM players for ages

if having to talent into these things turns out to be an issue, the solution would be to make them baseline (with a toggle button to switch between them) but still attached to the hunter

It is that simple. I cannot look at these stats and pretend it was a massive movement when it was actually just an echo chamber. I think its good and fine that they added the option back for people that wanted it. I support keeping pets because I know how much some people want it. I just don’t think its healthy to gaslight.

1 Like

Or just that they have yet to swap talents, due to it being a queue or doing a bit of farming/traveling while in pet spec/waiting for summon.

But I suppose that is too much to thin about for those that would kick at the drop of a hat. After all, who is the real stupid one, the MM hunter that would change talents and lose the pet if given the chance, or the one trying to kick them before they get that chance?

1 Like

I wouldn’t say that. The people sharing their feelings about the pets were still also playing the new MM on the PTR and giving feedback for it. They were separate issues. Plus it wasn’t just this thread. There were other threads. And there’s other sources through which they get feedback. In the PTR itself most notably. But also other websites. You could just sense the general vibe from people.

10 Likes

Because obviously we should only listen to the mixed feedback of less than 0.1% of people who play the spec, and base our decisions solely on that group.

2 Likes

I mean, the forums are a huge mess. People have all kinds of personal opinions, but our perception makes us put huge groups of people into “camps” and then attribute to each camp its worst behaviors.

Like in this very topic, there wasn’t just “pro-pet” and “anti-pet” opinions, but a wider spectrum that included “pro-changes but don’t mind pets in some form” (like me), “anti-changes at all”, “there should not be a petless hunter” and other stuff. But it’s easier to only see the “two camps”.

It doesn’t help that everyone comes to the internet in a very defensive state, and everyone elso seems way more aggressive than they really are.

What matters is that the dispute is settled in some way, most players of both “camps” will be appeased, and we can move on to the next matter.

6 Likes

What gaslight? 100+ likes in the first post, 250+ in another.

the forums are just a controlled field compared to the game, i would agree with you if it was just 10 people talking about, but its close to 300 in the forums alone

take this factor and make a projection to the rest of the players, who dont do M+? it would be infinitely bigger

Its no surprise this is the third time they revert the “no pet MM”

4 Likes

i think you might have responded to the wrong post? o:

Oops. Let me fix it.

1 Like

We have been heard, guys! MM is keeping the summoned pet!!

www. wowhead. com/news/marksmanship-hunters-can-retain-pets-in-11-1-364067

7 Likes

Thank you Blizzard. It’s been a rough couple of weeks for me since this announcement was made.

8 Likes

I can’t help but think the 2 largest groups were these and the “good changes for group content, but lacking for solo” players

3 Likes

The problem is they’re still having to balance around having a pet or not having one. In solo content you will be expected to still use a pet

That seems like a self-imposed expectation to me.