Are Scenarios Wasted Development Time?

[Sildor]

Scenarios are good. They are already a very good source of VP and good for gearing up for heroics and LFR, I like them.

[Aizele]

scenario's are good but I think they should reward JP from each boss and the reward after the end (after you have received your daily VP from 1 scenario), because JP is harder to get then VP this expansion and I reckon scenarios could be a good JP source, they are fast and don't have massive queues. They could also offer a bit more to people for completing them (example: add Glory of the Scenario Hero with a mount that isn't easy to get). The idea of scenarios isn't bad, they just haven't done a good job on using it, could be improved a lot more.

[Deleted]

lol you call warhammer online a better pvp mmo? lol just lol.

and why would lets say fiat tell you to go to opel because there car suits you better? your business instinct is even worst then a peanut

Wut? I'm not going to brag about my 'business instinct', suffice to say it's better than yours. But I digress, where in my post did I say blizzard should just tell people to go play other games, or let other games take some market share? I didn't.
What i'm saying is blizz could sew up 3 markets instead of trying to please everyone and losing a lot more business in the process. I'm not into guarentees, but i'd say if blizz stuck with a 3 game model and catered to the 3 separate player bases with more or less equal development teams, their revenues would not suffer in the slightest.

As it is, they've lost almost the entire diablo community by trying to promise pvp and what not, only for them to pull the rug from under the players by not having a good enough team to develop pvp.

With WoW, their rollercoaster subscriptions are due to inconsistent patch projections they make and constantly fail to deliver on expected deadlines. If they released major patches on a consistent basis, the pve crowd (yes they always have something to complain about) would be far happier, leading to extended subs.

SC2 afaik is almost solely active on a multiplayer basis, nobody i know bought the game for the sp campaign, so they stick with what they're good at.

---------- Post added 2013-01-01 at 02:52 PM ----------

PvP is not a competitive multiplayer game and it shouldn't be. PvP is the MMO experience. I agree with you on the e-sports thing. I don't know why people want to turn everything into e-sports these days.

Advertising revenue, nothing else matters.

[loki504]

Wut? I'm not going to brag about my 'business instinct', suffice to say it's better than yours. But I digress, where in my post did I say blizzard should just tell people to go play other games, or let other games take some market share? I didn't.
What i'm saying is blizz could sew up 3 markets instead of trying to please everyone and losing a lot more business in the process. I'm not into guarentees, but i'd say if blizz stuck with a 3 game model and catered to the 3 separate player bases with more or less equal development teams, their revenues would not suffer in the slightest.

As it is, they've lost almost the entire diablo community by trying to promise pvp and what not, only for them to pull the rug from under the players by not having a good enough team to develop pvp.

With WoW, they're rollercoaster subscriptions are due to inconsistent patch projections they make and constantly fail to deliver on expected deadlines. If they released major patches on a consistent basis, the pve crowd (yes they always have something to complain about) would be far happier, leading to extended subs.

SC2 afaik is almost solely active on a multiplayer basis, nobody i know bought the game for the sp campaign, so they stick with what they're good at.

---------- Post added 2013-01-01 at 02:52 PM ----------



Advertising revenue, nothing else matters.

you really think people leave WoW because they didn't deliver path of titan or dance studio? no there a rollercoaster because blizzard is the only company that release they sub numbers. if you see other companys either mmo or other companys people can sub to. you will see people come and go everyday. noting to see because they don't deliver that deadline. just because gc tweets they hope to be ready for patch x.xx doesn't mean it will be in it.

[Trassk]

I personally feel that scenarios will be something that fizzles out come the next expansion. Blizzard are always testing things in there game and often abandon concepts if they think it isn't doing as well as they hoped. Stuff like the daily heroic quest or the weekly raid quest, that was a big thing in wrath but got abandoned.

[McNeil]

I never knew people liked scenario's so much, to me they got a complete bore even before we finish the first scenario. The launch scenario's are the worst... fighting groups of monkeys, escorting someone with beer, clearing a village from walking trees, saving a beer festival... the list goes on.

I prefer new dungeons to scenario's big time. I wish they could add some dungeons that had the difficulty of heroic Shattered Halls, Shadow Labyrinth and Arcatraz

[Deleted]

No, PVP is wasted development time.

Implying any time is actually put into PvP, other than GC responding to witty comments on twitter.

[Deleted]

I think they are more fun then heroics. Especially in the long run, but that's maybe because they are fast since I dislike do them and hcs after like 3 times

[Totle]

Scenarios are a fantastic idea that bring much more diversity and creativity to encounters because you don't have to deal with balancing mechanics for tanks and healers.

For example, let's look at one of the new scenarios - A little patience.

As Alliance, the first half of the scenario is about running around, gathering mats and bringing it back to base so you can build things and it you have to defend your area while the build duration goes through.

Sounds familiar?

It's about as close to Warcraft 3 in WoW as we can get, and it's possible because of the flexibility of scenarios.

To be honest, I expect that the new progression will be something like this:
Quests --> Scenarios
Then, once you hit max level, you'll gain access to dungeons and it will be like what MoP did with only heroic 5 mans as an introduction to raiding.
Gear up, then hit LFR.

[Tomana]

No, but making them max-level only may not be the best idea.

[Deleted]

IMO yes.

For the majority of people that play pve/pvp with little interest in the lore they are totally pointless.

They are not hard, they don't introduce new challenges, no interesting reward or chance of anything decent dropping.

They are just like LONG boring quests imo.

I can understand solo players that enjoy lore enjoying them though, but of the players I know I've never met one that enjoys scenarios or did them for anything other than maybe the title.

[mosely]

It's good that they're focusing on adding variety, but scenarios don't interest me in their current state. My best advice would be to have them woven into the leveling experience as a means of obtaining meaningful gear upgrades (i.e., for slots that don't have heirlooms).

[Deleted]

I did a total of 3 scenarios until today and all sucked so yes

[McNeil]

I wish the scenario feature atleast does a better job looking at players specs when putting into groups. In my last scenario we were with 3 tanks, took forever to clear the place. Don't want to imagine if you were with 3 healers...

[Oerba Yun Fang]

I wish the scenario feature atleast does a better job looking at players specs when putting into groups. In my last scenario we were with 3 tanks, took forever to clear the place. Don't want to imagine if you were with 3 healers...

Would kinda defeat the purpose (i.e. quickly thrown together groups, no role check required). Besides, I think Blizzard generally assumes that most people have at least one spec capable of DPSing as it's more or less what's expected (reason why they don't, as far as I'm aware, balance tank/heal specs with the intention of allowing them to do non-group content, at least not easily and/or quickly). Which, honestly, isn't an unreasonable assumption. Odds are at least ONE of the three will have a tank or DPS spec. In the case of three healers with no tank OR DPS offspec... well, that's just incredibly bad luck.

[DireDragoness]

I enjoy doing scenarios. That way I get a chance at some gear, and I dont have to tank LFD. I win. So no, its not a waste of Dev time.

[Elegiac]

They advance the story, they are a good way to kill time, as well as earning points without having to wait for a tank or healer.

So no, if you want wasted development time you might want to look at pet battles.

[Deleted]

Yes it's a complete waste of time for something almost everybody doesn't give two shits about.

[yurano]

I enjoy doing scenarios. That way I get a chance at some gear, and I dont have to tank LFD. I win. So no, its not a waste of Dev time.

True, scenarios have the 'no tank', 'no healer' advantage. The problem is, scenarios are either too trivial or too frustrating. They are no better than grinding quests.

[Deleted]

Scenarios are great fun. They offer a more bite sized experience, great if you're push for time and just want to get a bit more VP towards cap. Some of the rewards (if you're luck enough to get the one you want!) are even better itemized for pre-raid gearing.

I can't imagine they take up too much development time either.