The latest feedback survey was hilariously biased

This! When I saw that on the survey I just had to laugh at how ridiculous it was.

Somehow this will fly over someone’s head

They may have asked 2 different questions because of the fact that the killer meta is arguably larger than the survivor meta, hence why so many people complain about DS/UB so often. They probably want to try and address unfun survivor builds by offering them alternative perks first, and then nerfing the others so that survivors aren't left with only 1 or 2 viable builds at high ranks. In comparison,killers have many perks that help in all aspects of the game with most of them being viable at high ranks: Infectious Fright and Deerstalker for slugging, Thanataphobia, Pop, Ruin, Corrupt, etc. for slowing gens, Enduring, Brutal Strength, Spirit Fury, etc. for ending chases quicker. Killers generally just have perks that are more useful than that of survivors, because of this, the devs probably want to focus on trying to add the same for survivor seeing as the last meta perks (subjective) that survivors received were Fixated and Inner Strength from the Stranger Things chapter, which was released over a year ago whereas the last meta perk that killers received was Undying, which came out about 4 months ago now.

Killer mains are constantly saying the devs are biased to survivors and that they only have handful of useful perks which is why they flip when any of those perks are touched. The survey asking survivors about useful perks and killers about fun perks only encourages the argument of devs being biased. What they should've done is asked both sides about both useful and fun perks so it would not come across as being biased to one side over the other.

I thought it was a good survey. I'm also 100% sure they care about the answers to the merch questions, since the point of asking is to find out if we'll buy the merch and I don't think they're just pretending to want to know that.

Every time I've filled out one of these surveys, there's been a box at the end where you can leave comments about things they didn't ask about, so it's not like they're excluding feedback that doesn't fit their exact questions.

Your first example is quantitative as well. I can easily make a graph out of those to display them, by just giving them the numbers 1, 2, 3, etc. internally. A "other" option would just be another value (but it should be included all the time, this is correct, same like a N/A-option)

All of the questions (except for the last one, which was an open field) were quantitative. Qualitative surveys are not being able to be shown in statistics, something like a questionnaire or an interview.

They sure can do a qualitative survey, but this would be MUCH shorter. And honestly, looking at the Forums, a good bunch of those would be a waste of time to read if it consists things like "Delete SWF" or "Remove Bubba". Or they can do a bigger quantitative survey, but a) they get some info already from the Forums or other places (like the need of optimization, they might ask about it, but another answer than "yes, I want more optimization", even from people who are not affected at all cannot be expected) and b) it would be far longer and the longer such a survey is, the less people want to answer it.

U do realize that using that logic there's no such thing as qualitative questions? U can turn anything into numerical data. Whether it's an essay, some1s entire opinion written on the forums or anything really. I really don't think u understand what those terms mean.

Once again, you're also missing the entire point of what the op is saying. What we're talking about isn't even on topic to the discussion.

You are mixing up ordinal and nominal, both are quantitative. Ordinal is bringing things into a logical order (e.g. the questions about how satisfied you are with the game, you can clearly order them), while nominal is listing things which cannot be brought in order (e.g. your Color example, blue is not more than green. Or, in the Survey: Which games you have played before, Bloodboren is not more or less than DayZ, for example).

Qualitative is something like "What would you want to change in DBD?" without any options to choose from - this is basically only useful when you are quite new to the topic, but the Devs are not new to it. And if they would bring up a question like this, they would have thousands of people writing their own opinion into it and some poor soul needs to read that.

So they ask what they want to ask and where they want to know anything about. This does not make something biased, this is how surveys work, they ask what they want to know and not what the players want to tell. For that you have the Forums (Steam or this Forum), where the Devs can read.

And this is what I also answered regarding OPs concerns, they have to make the survey this way. What worth would it have if they ask if the game needs more optimization? I would say "Yes", despite not having any problems with DBD at all. And so would others, so they would have a big pile of "Yes":

Even if they would ask "Is your game running smoothly?" and the majority would answer "Yes", should they drop any form of optimization for the future?

Questions like this dont make sense. But if you want to go further on some details, you have that Box in the end, e.g. if they ask about Rank Reset, you can write down your additional thoughts on it.

But overall asking for the opinion of players would just be a mess.

A player satisfaction survey is bhvr's word for market research, litterally no questions involved gameplay at all.