LOL ok. You question in a thread talking about lay offs, had nothing to do with lay offs. Is not about the lay offs. Because you didn’t specifically mention lay offs.
This is not me saying I don’t believe you. Because I didn’t actually say it.
Okay.
Moving on…
1 Like
/dramatic sigh
So first, the release in question is a legally mandated assessment of risk. It does not mean they believe that these are the outcomes they will have just that they could occur. This is a requirement for all publicly traded companies. Please educate yourself about the information you are sharing as there is enough bad news without manufacturing more through ignorance or malice.
Second please refer to the style and syntax guide stickied at the top of the forum It has much good information in it including that any link can be enclosed in ` (grave marks, the other thing on the ~ key) to allow posting of links for those that lack full TL3.
https://www.rasmussen.edu/student-experience/college-life/critical-thinking-skills-to-master-now/ as an example
3 Likes
Thinking of myself as being a possible employee who just escaped from being laid off I’d have to say to fellow posters here that I would highly recommend it.
However in secret with my friends I would say that I wish my company would listen to the majority of it’s player base more and put more engaging content in instead of taking things away that require our customers take needless time away from actually playing the game that they enjoyed more a year ago.
Has the majority of the playerbase ever really agreed on anything?
About mandatory Real ID.
Of course, some will argue that wasn’t ‘everyone’ and no it wasn’t.
It was a clear majority.
2 Likes
And didn’t they end up caving on that? aka “listen to the majority of it’s player base”
I’m not sure it’s quite as simple as that. Other things also happened, for instance… “pizza and blues” and whatnot. Mostly they only caved because the amount of people who were about to leave was titanic in number.
Anyway, the question is if the majority of players have ever agreed on anything - and the answer is yes, there’s at least one super-clear instance and many not as clear.
1 Like
Don’t they have to fire 800 people to begin with, before they can fire 800 more?
So the only time we are aware of that the player base clearly agreed on one thing…Blizzard ended up backing off from that one thing and did what the players wanted. Regardless of the reason.
That is my over all point.
Okay how bout this…
Yes, they listened… why did the foot need to be placed in the mouth at all though.
No… Mandatory Real ID is only the most inarguable example. There’s just no arguing against that it was a majority. Other things aren’t as clear and people debate whether they are majority or not - like flying, classic realms, etc.
The revolt against Mandatory Real ID only worked because it was nuclear in nature. People only had ‘leave and never come back’ as an option and it wasn’t even a choice. Everything else game-balance wise is also important, but less about literally doxxing players and selling their info to facebook … which was building up steam in that pipeline until real id being killed killed it… or maybe it didn’t. Hard to tell what nooks facebook has their tendrils into these days.
1 Like
Sure. And in the context of the conversation, the person speculated that the employees may want Blizzard to listen to the majority of the playerbase.
I am remarking that very few things are ever able to be recognized as “the majority of the playerbase wants this”. And typically when the majority of the playerbase actually agrees on a subject matter, it ends up being implemented.
On the surface, that seems contradictory - the simultaneous claim that A) virtually nothing is able to be recognized as majority of playerbase -and- B) ‘typically’ they implement what the majority of the playerbase wants.
I think more interesting than entangling there though - is simply to point out that while it’s possible to spin the layoffs as necessary and even at the extreme ultimately beneficial to the company, it’s much harder to get much traction here that they were anything good for the employees themselves or us the players. The only way to argue that point is to argue what’s good for the company is good for the players… and that’s a wobbly strand to try and connect.
2 Likes
How does it seem contradictory? Stating the difficulty in noting whether the majority of the playerbase want something changed/added/removed/etc… is because the playerbase is diverse. They want different things. Look at the biggest issues. You have a ton of players wanting flight, and high elves. You have a ton of players against it. There is no majority to listen to.
But when its clear a majority does want something…and as you have noted…its been clear times in the past. It has often been implemented.
Well, I noted the Real ID example… the most nuclear armageddon example.
What examples would you give where they clearly listened to majority feedback?
Someone else posted a link about XP I believe.
But the counter point would be…when have they not listened to the majority of the playerbase on an issue?
Within the context of the conversation “the employee may wish Blizzard listened to the majority of the playerbase”, that would imply there are things the majority of the playerbase is asking for…which Blizzard is ignoring.
Well, we’re dancing around being able to claim majority opinion right? Like, if I give an example, then anyone can say ‘that wasn’t really majority’… and that’s true because absolutely none of us can actually -prove- majority here. So unless we’re trying to constructively-friendly discuss, it’s all positioning in a debate.
I’m hoping to find ways past that though… but first there’s another issue. Namely that everything unlikeable can be justified as there needing to be time sinks or penalties. i.e. You can’t fly, and I can’t claim the majority want it… so you’re on the ground. Everywhere you go, you can get dazed… and I still can’t claim the majority don’t like dazed. There’s things you can get, to undo the thing that is there to punish you, but we are approaching real irony on that - where the solution they so generously give is only because they artificially introduced the problem in the first place!
So how do we get past that? Not being able to claim majority, and everything unpopular to at least some degree - also being handwaveable as ‘necessary’?
I mean that sincerely, because we can always lapse into side vs side… but I think we’ve both been here long enough to realize that never actually gets anywhere.