Why do people use the term "Special Snowflake" in a derogatory manner?

[Seriss]

Special snowflakes are the likes of people who begrudge someone having a slice of dry bread when they themselves already sit at a buffet. They have it better than the aforementioned, but if the dry bread isn't removed they'll not be happy with their buffet.

[Tydrane]

But it does correlate. WoW has increasing subs every quarter steadily until the "more accessible raiding", it's a very, very clear correlation.



But it did instantly tank compared to TBC's sub trend. It's simply not possible to instantly lose all customers in a game like WoW where people are highly invested in and addicted, but what we saw in WotLK is most definitely "tanking" for a game like WoW.

Perhaps Kaleredar didn't use the right word there. Just because there is correlation, that doesn't mean you're so much as a step towards demonstrating causation.

You don't seem to make any allowances for player fatigue (in a game four years old at the time), availability of other games, etc. To put your complaints into perspective, at or around the launch of WotLK, WoW had 11.5~ million subscribers. By the end of WotLK, WoW had 11.5~ million subscribers (according to charts available on MMOData). Chinese subscriptions took a hit to the tune of 5-6 million when the local service provider (not Blizzard) had its WoW servers down for over a month in July 2009 (licensing issues, I think - I remember reading about it at the time). WotLK wasn't released in China until August of the following year, 2010, months before the Western release of Cataclysm.

Frankly, I don't think you quite understand what you're talking about. You're making vastly oversimplified statements that happen to support your argument, based on a very narrow, cherry-picked analysis of subscription numbers. I'm sure other MMOs would dearly love to "tank" from 12 million to 11.5 million subscribers - they'd love to have either number.

Just musing here, but would you deem The Burning Crusade a dismal failure of an expansion, given that (according to the charts on MMOData), it raised less than half the number of subscribers that Vanilla did (8~ million vs. 3.5~ million)?

[Nobleshield]

The connotation is that since all snowflakes are unique, you're saying someone wants to stand out from the crowd. It's usually used in a derogatory manner because the people who are most vehement about this tend to demand/expect special treatment (e.g. special heroic-only bosses/gear/etc.) and seek to curtail the enjoyment of others because of some perceived "But they'll be kind of like me!" horror (e.g. LFR). Thusly, it's used insultingly.

[Deleted]

I like how people are saying WotLK was the expac of welfare epics when that term was actually spread around during late VANILLA. Yea, bitches, during late Vanilla when the Honor system was changed is when people starting crying about Welfare epics. TBC was packed all throughout with people crying about welfare epics and how TBC killed the game. So I wonder if any of you praising that shit actually played through BC or even WotLK for that matter (every single expansion and pretty much every single major features has been pointed out as the real WoW killer so, yea).

[Konker]

"Special Snowflake" is used to dismiss arguments in favor of a system that adequately rewards excelling beyond ordinary standards as vanity

It is a vain attempt to seek a perceived moral high ground to promote a system that values maximizing participation over rewarding excellence.

[Tsuna]

Raiding should not be the endgame for the masses, but there should be capped content for all types of people in the game. Solo content, 5-man content, crafting content, world pvp, etc.

As much as subscriptions would probably suffer for this approach I think I would love the game far more if only the people who really cared about their pursuits went for that kind of endgame. The dream of "Being a raider" only existed back when raiding was so far out of reach for a new player, and it honestly is amazing how far some people will go motivated by such a dream. Oh where did those seven years of my life just go...

[melodramocracy]

I'm not asking "is LFR a success." I guess what I mean to say is... does doing LFR make someone "successful?"

Because people are saying "Oh, you can do nothing in WoW, ease your way to level 90, and then be successful by doing nothing but LFR," a point predicated on the fact that LFR is apparently not "success," and yet people can somehow achieve success from it and only it... which is then apparently perceived by some as some sort of "threat to raiders." It appears to be quite a paradoxical mindset.

I would contend that LFR makes someone no more successful than running heroic dungeons. In essence, they've become the exact same thing... they give you gear necessary to enter real raids, or they act as a content cap for players that can't raid because of time restraints. And yet people flip their shit about LFR and not heroics? Even when heroics were easy?

I don't know... that bar is set where ever the individual chooses to set it. There's no right answer.

---------- Post added 2013-06-12 at 08:20 AM ----------

But it does correlate. WoW has increasing subs every quarter steadily until the "more accessible raiding", it's a very, very clear correlation.

But it did instantly tank compared to TBC's sub trend. It's simply not possible to instantly lose all customers in a game like WoW where people are highly invested in and addicted, but what we saw in WotLK is most definitely "tanking" for a game like WoW.

I could create just as successful of an argument that Cata and MoP both saw losses because they're both 5 level expansions, rather than the 10 that BC and Wrath were.

Raid content plays less of a part in sub swings than people think. It's a factor, but I don't think it's the primary one.

[Belisaurio]

#OP

You have all the answers in 6 pags.

Being a raider that is primarily concerned with clearing the most amount of 25m Heroic content possible, I'm really not bothered by what gives other people enjoyment in the game. I chose to raid the difficulty and raid size that I do because I find it the most fulfilling and practical and others do the same exact thing. Unless I have to sit for a fight that drops Titan Runestones I have absolutely no reason to do LFR, but often just do it anyway for the extra chance at the pets that drop off of bosses. If other people either choose to raid 10 mans, Normals, or LFR for pretty much any reason it doesn't make the game a bit less enjoyable for me, at the end of the day I still get my 549 gear which is good enough for me.

LFR makes more sense than ever now that flex-raids are going to be going live as it serves an additional purpose of bridging the gap between the two difficulties. I think that the fact that many LFR raiders might end up finding a more enjoyable experience getting to raid Flex-Raids is awesome, and if they decide to stick to LFR then that's fine too! The more people who enjoy World of Warcraft the better, I might raid harder content than you, but you have every right to enjoy the game as much as I do.

I'm the other side of the coin. I was a hardcore player that become casual gamer. And, since I become casual (and start raidind LFR), I don't like LFR for too many arguments. Lot of people think that only hardcore players are LFR-haters, and that it's not true.

I don't want to remove LFR, but I want to find a solution. Some people said that LFR don't need a solution, but nobody can believe that If you read all the topics in every wow-forum.

[LeperHerring]

Frankly, I don't think you quite understand what you're talking about. You're making vastly oversimplified statements that happen to support your argument, based on a very narrow, cherry-picked analysis of subscription numbers.

Except I didn't make any of the arguments you're claiming I did. I have no idea why you are even replying to me.

---------- Post added 2013-06-12 at 12:31 PM ----------

I could create just as successful of an argument that Cata and MoP both saw losses because they're both 5 level expansions, rather than the 10 that BC and Wrath were.

You don't understand what I'm saying. I made two simple points: 1) sub growth was great when the end-game model that I argue for was in the game. This proves that it is possible to have that model and be wildly successful. I did not claim that the success was necessarily because of that model. 2) the "accessible" model that people argue for did not stop WoW's sub numbers from stagnating and then plummeting. Which proves that it's not some great solution to WoW's problems that absolutely must be kept in the game.

[DeadmanWalking]

If anyone doesn't understand why being a Special Snowflake is in essence a bad thing for our community I suggest reading (or if thats too hard you can watch the animated version) Dr. Seuss's Star Bellied Sneeches.

It is not okay to treat others like crap just because you happen to be wearing a star on your stomache. It is not okay to throw a fit because someone who didn't have a Star on their bellies now has one just like you. Having something does not make you better than someone else, we should be striving to be a better community.

[Deleted]

I know the term from some communities where a special snowflake is someone desperately trying to be different from everyone else. for example someone who wears special (or strange-looking) clothes not because they like them but because they like the attention they get from wearing them.

it's often used negatively because on one hand those people want to be part of a social group, but on the other hand they want to be recognized as someone special (often they consider themselves superior to others, for whatever reason ("hey look, I'm more individual than all of you!")).

so as far as I know the term not everybody is a special snowflake, though everybody might be special (in ways of being different from all the other people in one way or another).

[Vaelorian]

Personally I started out as wanting to be a "special snowflake". Someone that would stand out of the crowd. What I did (during leveling in vanilla) was buy matching greens from the AH. As I was such a newb I didn't really know what gear was good. If it had higher armorlevel, it was good enough for me. But it made me stand out of the crowd. After reaching the level cap, I searched for a raidingguild. It was just awesome being one of the "few" to be able to enter Molten Core and raids like that, while others could only dream of entering. It was awesome to have a reputation based on your guilds progress on the server. It was fun being /w on how badass your gear was compared to the nonraider public. It was fun being known by almost an entire server. And yes I am talking about the non-raider folk aswell. Why? Because I pugged the whole time. I enjoyed PuG's to Scholomance etc. I enjoyed PuG's to BRD etc. So in the end I think I was known more by the non-raiders then by the raider population.

And as such I was a special snowflake for all those factors combined.

Now I do not raid anymore (except LFR). I do not have time to do it, nor do I need to do it anymore. I lost the drive to do so. I cannot have a nice reputation anymore either. CRZ/LFR/LFD has made that impossible. And no, who would want to make a server PUG? Its not convenient compared to the tool, so no one would use it. But I still try to "be special" by having a nice transmog-set. As everything ingame can be easily acquired nowadays, I try to stand out with my gear.

Actually the only thing that keeps me in the game are 3 things:
- former raidbuddies whom I had the pleasure with doing heroic content
- transmog
- the story (and I am alliance...)

But I could live without all these new "features that give access". I will keep living in my own dreamworld (as the naysayers will say) in remembering that TBC was the sweetspot (minus perhaps the strict attunements)

[Wildtree]

Being a raider that is primarily concerned with clearing the most amount of 25m Heroic content possible, I'm really not bothered by what gives other people enjoyment in the game. I chose to raid the difficulty and raid size that I do because I find it the most fulfilling and practical and others do the same exact thing. Unless I have to sit for a fight that drops Titan Runestones I have absolutely no reason to do LFR, but often just do it anyway for the extra chance at the pets that drop off of bosses. If other people either choose to raid 10 mans, Normals, or LFR for pretty much any reason it doesn't make the game a bit less enjoyable for me, at the end of the day I still get my 549 gear which is good enough for me.

LFR makes more sense than ever now that flex-raids are going to be going live as it serves an additional purpose of bridging the gap between the two difficulties. I think that the fact that many LFR raiders might end up finding a more enjoyable experience getting to raid Flex-Raids is awesome, and if they decide to stick to LFR then that's fine too! The more people who enjoy World of Warcraft the better, I might raid harder content than you, but you have every right to enjoy the game as much as I do.



What is all of this "OUR" nonsense? You definitely don't speak for me or any other heroic raider that's for sure. Looking over your post history all you have done is complained about the game and whined about how features that Blizzard have added are awful. You also seem to see through a pretty thick pair of rose-tinted glasses and don't show a single piece of evidence that you've even completed any raids this expansion, let alone any Hardmodes.

You are exactly what is wrong with this game and exactly the type of person that this thread had in mind. You say that you speak for heroic raiders yet you harass and demean others and try to make people feel that their game experience is less significant than yours through some intense form of arrogance.

Most likely you're probably just some low-skill player with low self-respect/self-esteem who has to put down other people just to make yourself feel better about your own stagnant mediocrity. I'm sure you've found little success in most of the games iterations and seek approval by putting down others who do enjoy the game and feel like they are successful, even if they raid a raid size or content level that you deem insignificant.

This is one of the best posts in that matter, I've ever seen.
I am one of those players who quit raiding, BECAUSE of people like the person you've quoted. I've raided once with a lot of enthusiasm and fun. The gear from bosses has never been the whole motivation for me. It was the raiding itself, as an highly enjoyable social event, much like playing some team sport IRL for the same matter.
Sure, when you play you want to win the match. When you raid you want to succeed. But it's the team itself that makes it special. Whether you win or lose together.
I've simply got fed up with the raging attitudes of many players, that spread out in the game. Those bad apples are what destroys the game, if anything else.
For those - community mechanism - the term special snowflake became custom.

Every snowflake is special, that's a fact. There's none alike. We all are snowflakes in that regard, if you will. Because there's no 2 humans alike either.
Someone exaggerating their own position, trying to advocate how others suppose to play, and what they are entitled for. Hence the double dipping special snowflake....

I have yet to see any "lowly" player demanding the same gear, the same titles and achievements a heroic raider has and gets, or a top notch PVP'er. That is not the case... On the contrary, I've seen countless clear demands from wanna be elitists to remove, or exclude content for others..

You don't deserve it, you don't want to put efforts into it... Lousiest argument ever.
Everyone puts efforts into it. Spending time with something is effort right there. It may be less effort, and that's not argued. Therefore the reward is accordingly.
Where a heroic raider spends more time, and gets rewarded with 549 gear, the LFR raider gets rewarded with 502 gear.

And to clear this once and for all..... Why do we even have LFR?
Because of the fact that raiding attendance was in a huge decline. Unreasonable community behavior contributed (and still does to date) to that decline. People were (and still are) asking the most ridiculous requirements even for old tiers. You are totally out of your mind when you ask for iLevel 510 for a stupid MSV run. This is not how you win new players to raiding at all. They would be stuck outside of the raid instances forever.
Blizzard wouldn't have had a need for the LFR system, if the communities took care of the matter by themselves.
In the fact of the matter, anyone who wants to remove LFR, anyone who has a problem with that system, needs to step back for a moment, and take a deep breath, because the very system saved your ass. If the decline would have continued, at some point the costs for raiding content would be impossible to be justified anymore.
Every single player who steps into LFR then there gets the hang of raiding, and moves on to the higher difficulties, is a win for even the special snowflakes.
So instead of talking and looking down on others, the snowflakes should be actually happy... It's those people who enable you to even feel so special.

[DeadmanWalking]

Except I didn't make any of the arguments you're claiming I did. I have no idea why you are even replying to me.

---------- Post added 2013-06-12 at 12:31 PM ----------



You don't understand what I'm saying. I made two simple points: 1) sub growth was great when the end-game model that I argue for was in the game. This proves that it is possible to have that model and be wildly successful. I did not claim that the success was necessarily because of that model. 2) the "accessible" model that people argue for did not stop WoW's sub numbers from stagnating and then plummeting. Which proves that it's not some great solution to WoW's problems that absolutely must be kept in the game.

There are many reasons why Wow was successful at that time but it wasn't the end game content or raid model. It was a case of right place right time. An entire generation of young people were introduced to MMO gaming who were open to online gaming. These people grew up, got jobs and families, they got burned out, they tried other games. Since this time console games have gone online which means hundred of online games per console system. There are 2 dozen MMO's out there now with 4 more about to drop. Theres 4 dozen tiny MMO's out there. Theres F2P, P2P.

Frankly there are 4.5 million reasons why people quit subbing and to think its all because of reasons why you dislike aspects of is pretty self centered. Time to look outward and realise that you are not everyone.

[GrieverXIII]

Spite and jealousy, nothing more, nothing less. Video games are probably one of the only hobby where skill, dedication and success can be frowned upon. Its pretty damn sad.

[LeperHerring]

It is not okay to treat others like crap just because you happen to be wearing a star on your stomache. It is not okay to throw a fit because someone who didn't have a Star on their bellies now has one just like you. Having something does not make you better than someone else, we should be striving to be a better community.

I have no idea what wanting to be a special snowflake has to do with treating others like crap. Treating people like crap is completely orthogonal to wanting to be special. It's perfectly fine and normal to want to be special. Why would I want to play a game that makes me feel like I'm just another drone on an assembly line? Wanting to be special does not make the community worse, what makes the community worse are the whiners that cannot stand that others have something they don't have.

It's possible to design a game that makes everyone feel special. Take pets, for example: Create a large number of different pets with very low drop rates. This means that everyone is likely to get some pet but the likelihood that two players get the same pet is very small, making everyone special because they have a rare pet. The problem is that there is a loud, whiny minority that cannot be happy with their rare pet because someone else has another rare pet they don't. Also, it's cheaper to just create one pet and give it to everyone and pretend like you're being "accessible" when really you're just being lazy and greedy.

---------- Post added 2013-06-12 at 12:50 PM ----------

There are many reasons why Wow was successful at that time but it wasn't the end game content or raid model.

That's just conjecture based on no concrete evidence, and it doesn't refute the points I made in any way.

[dryankem]

It's not the dislike of people wanting to feel special, or original, it's the arrogance that some portray and the spoiled brat syndrome that most of these such forum posters have. The special snowflake term is used for such people that can't tolerate other people having (or at the least having a chance to obtain) nice things.

Basically this. There is nothing wrong with wanting to be different or special, it's the crying when someone else gets what they have or even something similar. It's like watching kids play and you see the one kid that doesn't want anyone else to have a truck because he has a truck.

[Wildtree]

I have no idea what wanting to be a special snowflake has to do with treating others like crap. Treating people like crap is completely orthogonal to wanting to be special. It's perfectly fine and normal to want to be special. Why would I want to play a game that makes me feel like I'm just another drone on an assembly line? Wanting to be special does not make the community worse, what makes the community worse are the whiners that cannot stand that others have something they don't have.

It's possible to design a game that makes everyone feel special. Take pets, for example: Create a large number of different pets with very low drop rates. This means that everyone is likely to get some pet but the likelihood that two players get the same pet is very small, making everyone special because they have a rare pet. The problem is that there is a loud, whiny minority that cannot be happy with their rare pet because someone else has another rare pet they don't. Also, it's cheaper to just create one pet and give it to everyone and pretend like you're being "accessible" when really you're just being lazy and greedy.

You making a lot of sense there.

It needs to be looked at also with some psychological aspect.
I believe that there's something wrong essentially with anyone who puts too much emphasis into their uniqueness. Especially when it's a simple game. Something created to enjoy for fun in ones spare time. It is natural, and there's nothing wrong with trying to get as far as possible in what one achieves in the game. Before computer games I've had a hell of a fun playing pinball machines. And of course I always went for the high score. It was fun.. But it wasn't something that made me special. It was a game, nothing more than that. Beating the high score on the pinball machine did not reward me with anything of real value. I had zero benefit from it.
I didn't get a discount at the store, I didn't get a raise at my job, I didn't get any academic title. I didn't get more laid. Nothing that really mattered came to me easier.
If I was lucky I got a drink from the buddy whose high score I've just beaten, and we had a bet going about it.

And this is where I mean psychology comes into play.. People need to stop exaggerating the value of the game itself, and everything within. The moment you (general term) turn the computer off, everything you've done in the game has a whooping value of ZERO. If you clinch to these accomplishments, you are doing something horribly wrong.

As for the pets, that made me smile.. I am a pet collector. Sitting at 508 unique pets atm. I am having fun doing this. And I truly couldn't give more or less than a flying fuck whether someone else has more or not. I collect them for myself, and not to prove others that I am better than they are.

[Tydrane]

Except I didn't make any of the arguments you're claiming I did. I have no idea why you are even replying to me.

---------- Post added 2013-06-12 at 12:31 PM ----------



You don't understand what I'm saying. I made two simple points: 1) sub growth was great when the end-game model that I argue for was in the game. This proves that it is possible to have that model and be wildly successful. I did not claim that the success was necessarily because of that model. 2) the "accessible" model that people argue for did not stop WoW's sub numbers from stagnating and then plummeting. Which proves that it's not some great solution to WoW's problems that absolutely must be kept in the game.

I notice that you didn't care to respond to my explanation of how subscriptions differ between East and West, or that TBC was less than half as effective as Vanilla in generating subscriptions.

If the argument you describe in point 1 of your response was indeed your original point, why did you later try to claim correlation between subscription numbers and ease of access/availability of content? In other words, how can you at once insist that an aspect of game design (inaccessible high-end content) can be part of a successful formula for an MMO but not necessarily have any bearing on its nature as successful, while at the same time arguing that there is a link between subscription numbers and the shift to a more accessible model for end-game content (which, looking at the data, there is not)? Are you suggesting that inaccessible end-game content is the 'Schrodinger's Cat' of WoW subscription analysis?

It seems like you're changing whatever your point is to avoid losing face under the guise of clarifying your it ("I'm not wrong, you just don't understand what I'm saying!").

In response to your second point, subscriptions have fallen, but at no point have they "plummetted" - except for the one occasion in July of '09, exclusively in China, when their server host went down for over a month and 5-6 million subscribers were lost (and almost immediately recovered upon resumption of service).

What you're saying just doesn't make any sense, according to available data. The only logical conclusion is that you're wrong and don't know what you're talking about.

[Deleted]

Special snowflake is actually compliment, everyone who thinks it's a bad thing is one of the sheeps.