I'm looking forward to the post talking about the survey results and what they learned from this feedback to drive a productive conversation, but I'm also fully expecting that results are "for internal use and shaping future roadmaps, etc, etc."
I submitted a one sentence response to the second part of the survey. I also expect a cursory glance at best.
A survey is only as good as the polite honesty and seriousness it is taken. On that note, they could also glean the same information from the forum posts and save the cost of a private company survey.
Definitely. I responded with a polite note just asking them to please take Test and Beta feedback and be willing to delay launching changes to live to give them more time. I think that's a pretty rational sentiment that's shared by a few people. But I think it's only getting a cursory glance based on how the survey was given. Asking one question and then giving an open ended box screams "we want them to feel like we care about more than just this one question." And that scenario would mean they'd be wasting their time doing anything more than a cursory glance.
I did not take the survey and if it was still up i still would absolutely not take it. These forums are for feedback and we cant even get Dev responses here. The Devs have screwed this game up in my opinion since HoT when they started changing the experience to force people to play in instances instead of static content. The nerfs have been so over the top that the last time i killed a mob i received 0.012% experience for the kill. Absor has refused any comment in the last Decade about the experience drop. Why is this? Is it because he was in charge of the instances and wanted more people to play in them? that was and still is the ongoing question. When Absor explains why he cut the experience so savagely in the static zones then i will answer his question. I have been waiting over a decade for him to answer mine. Two and a half years of not paying to play Everquest. Thanks Absor!
I don't think that Absor can make such decisions on his own. Why do you think that it was Absor at all ? They have team meetings every week or so and it is the studio head who is responsible in the end and having the last word.
As someone who does both for a large company I promise you surveys are FAR FAR FAR FAR FAR more efficient than a dialogue. Whether they are effective is a completely different conversation.
There's not really a good/bad time to ask for feedback. And surveys are commonly used to understand general trends. Asking on forums where 2.1% of the players post reveals little about trends. Getting engagement across your demographic is important when collecting / measuring feedback.
Yes! Free boxes are awesome for collecting feedback. Some people are so, apparently, frothing rabid angry I doubt they could form coherent sentences though. So there's that.
Or it could have been a Proof of Concept to get a gauge of how many responses they would get in a limited time (no survey should be for an unlimited or open-ended time), how a pre-made survey site could function for them, how many of those who filled in the open box would be 100% identical (i.e. duplicates, not individuals), and the feedback on the forums.
Unless the surveys are conducted in a statistically relevant method, the survey results are going to be biased towards people who take the survey. Maybe they like taking surveys or they have a strong opinion about the game. The results are just going to reflect the views of the specific subset of people who are inclined to take a survey. It's the same with the forum. The forum is made up of people who are motivated to post on the forum. The type of person that posts on the forum may not accurately represent the type of person who plays EQ in general. With the survey being so limited, I wish they had mentioned what they were looking for in the patch notes. I didn't do the survey because I don't like doing surveys in general. But if I knew they were specifically asking about attracting new players, then I might have done it because I have some opinions about that.
Thank you for asking this question. The reason why i blame Absor is because he came out during HoT and said that he was adjusting the experience in static zones because he wanted people to play in the instances. Can i offer you a link to where this is said? No. But it was also heavily implied by many people in the know at the time that the real reason was because he worked hard on the instances and felt they were not being played in enough for the time he spent making them. He has been called out numerous times over the years, (not just by me) and has refused to offer ANY explanation to the situation. So tell me, what am i supposed to think. To the best of my knowledge he is the longest running Dev there and is in charge of most things as he is the Lead Designer. Being Lead Designer alone is enough reason to blame him. Do you really think JChan or whomever was in charge at the time walked up to him and said: Hey Alan, the Experience is to much cut it down! I Highly Doubt It. Mesc
