Harder Content = Better?

[NeverStop]

Players in general dont do any of this.

They never have.

They never will.

If it's not in th game and it's not in and of itself fun, they don't care. And I have no idea why they should. Can you give me a reason?

I have fun when I wipe. Why can't other people be like me?

[Injin]

I have fun when I wipe. Why can't other people be like me?

No idea, but they ain't.

[Rinoa]

Well, then those players probably belong in LFR - and that is totally okay. In my opinion it's important that players who do not care about performing well also get to see the content, if only for lore and funness (yes, that is now a word) reasons. They should not, however, expect to do even normal mode without putting at least a couple of hours of effort in to ensure that they know the basics of their classes.

[Injin]

Well, then those players probably belong in LFR - and that is totally okay. In my opinion it's important that players who do not care about performing well also get to see the content, if only for lore and funness (yes, that is now a word) reasons. They should not, however, expect to do even normal mode without putting at least a couple of hours of effort in to ensure that they know the basics of their classes.

Then normal mode needs to be renamed "hard mode" because unless it's doable by the norm it's not normal, is it.

The clue is in the word "normal" which means average, the mean. And then, once we've renamed things so they match what they are really like, we can have a normal mode of raids, slightly harder than LFR but still doable by average players - i.e. a "normal mode"

[daltron]

Everyone is so eager to blame early cata for the loss. Cataclysm went through a major roller coaster in terms of game direction, from hard to easy and it really made no difference in terms of numbers.

Game is too hard people left. Game is too easy people left. Which is it? Oddly enough, more people left when the game was becoming "too easy"

[Ytlayol]

Harder content does not mean better content. Most people play video games as they were created for, mild enjoyment and to pass the time - not an alternate life style most posters seem to think.

[Firebert]

If I whine in the real life about school being too hard for me to grasp, do you think the teachers will go ahead and say: Well ok we'll just lower the requirements for the knowledge you need, or do you think they will tell me to work harder and seek addiontional help?

This is why GCSEs are tiered in UK schools. Not good enough to learn about stuff, you'll get put in for the Foundation paper instead of the Higher paper.

They'll always tell you to work harder but some common sense is supposed to be applied if they think you're not currently capable of completing enough of a hgher difficulty paper.

Also, WoW isn't a place of learning either.

---------- Post added 2013-03-02 at 05:59 PM ----------

They should not, however, expect to do even normal mode without putting at least a couple of hours of effort in to ensure that they know the basics of their classes.

The 89 levels prior to the cap is more than enough time for people to get to know the basics of their classes. Anything outside this isn't required.

[Otiswhitaker]

This is why GCSEs are tiered in UK schools. Not good enough to learn about stuff, you'll get put in for the Foundation paper instead of the Higher paper.

They'll always tell you to work harder but some common sense is supposed to be applied if they think you're not currently capable of completing enough of a hgher difficulty paper.

Also, WoW isn't a place of learning either.

---------- Post added 2013-03-02 at 05:59 PM ----------


The 89 levels prior to the cap is more than enough time for people to get to know the basics of their classes. Anything outside this isn't required.

Simply put, most raiders live in a fantasy land, and Blizzard is happily giving them hats and playing a flute.

See: Staggered LFR release.
See: All other decisions
See: How raiders act

[Pencil]

People comparing difficulty and fixed difficulty with educational experiences, standards and examination criteria take games far too seriously.

"If in school you can't do something, a teacher doesn't just make the exam easier". It saddens me to hear the difficulty of a game being compared to this.

---------- Post added 2013-03-02 at 06:14 PM ----------

Harder content does not mean better content. Most people play video games as they were created for, mild enjoyment and to pass the time - not an alternate life style most posters seem to think.

Truth right there.

[Dax75]

Harder content does not mean better content. Most people play video games as they were created for, mild enjoyment and to pass the time - not an alternate life style most posters seem to think.

Mild enjoyment does not necessarily mean that you have to win everytime. If you win everytime there is no risk and that is fun element.

[Osmeric]

Oddly enough, more people left when the game was becoming "too easy"

This is simply false. Stop being a lying liar who lies, ok?

[Tomana]

Everyone is so eager to blame early cata for the loss. Cataclysm went through a major roller coaster in terms of game direction, from hard to easy and it really made no difference in terms of numbers.

Of course it did, when 4.3 was released Cata maintained it subs despite a year of DS, while early cata made a 2 Mil sub drop.

Game is too hard people left. Game is too easy people left. Which is it? Oddly enough, more people left when the game was becoming "too easy"

This is just plain false, the biggest sub drop was at early Cata and its retarded 5 mans.

[Dax75]

Of course it did, when 4.3 was released Cata maintained it subs despite a year of DS, while early cata made a 2 Mil sub drop.


This is just plain false, the biggest sub drop was at early Cata and its retarded 5 mans.

According to the wikipedia page about cataclysm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_o...aft:_Cataclysm

Subscriptions

Even with the success of Cataclysm, World of Warcraft saw a gradual decline in subscribers through 2011. Following the release of Cataclysm, subscription levels reached a peak of 12 million subscribers but soon dropped to pre-Cataclysm levels of 11.4 million by the end of March, 2011.[37] In early November, 2011, subscriptions declined even further to 10.3 million users.[38] In 2012, the subscription numbers stabilized at around 10.2 million users, holding steady for two consecutive quarters. On August 2nd, 2012 it was revealed that subscription numbers had continued to decline, landing at an approximate 9.1 million subscribers.[39][40][41]

So drop from beginning of cata till 4.3 1.7 mio.
4.3 til just before MoP release a drop of 1.2 mio.

But if you say beginning of cata till firelands its a drop of 600k
compared to firelands till before MoP release 2.3 mio drop.

So no the biggest drop was not at the beginning of cataclysm.

[Osmeric]

So no the biggest drop was not at the beginning of cataclysm.

The net drop in Q3 2011 was mostly in China, which got Cataclysm on July 12. So, yes, that loss is mostly "beginning of Cataclysm".

[Chiefy]

Of course it did, when 4.3 was released Cata maintained it subs despite a year of DS, while early cata made a 2 Mil sub drop.


This is just plain false, the biggest sub drop was at early Cata and its retarded 5 mans.

While this is true, the fact still remains that during some of the hardest raids (end tbc) 2,5 million more people started playing wow, and subscribed. And throughout WotLK addionationally 1 million subscribers, until cata. WotLK was hard, and we had both 10 and 25 man raids such as naxx, ulduar which did have hardmodes, EoE etc. (with different difficulties). When they implemented the HC/Non hc raiding system, with 10/25 man being optional for same loot, where they made space for "bad raiders" and heroics for "exceptional raiders" the number of additional subscribers stopped.
http://www.statista.com/statistics/2...d-of-warcraft/

[Marooned]

The net drop in Q3 2011 was mostly in China, which got Cataclysm on July 12. So, yes, that loss is mostly "beginning of Cataclysm".

Well we cant say that, I can also claim the net drop of US started few months after WotLK thats why "US only reports" stopped. My analysis on that WoW sub chart, is WotLK got its peak after it was released in China. Anyways not a big deal.

I think its not about being easy or hard its about being exciting or boring, Which I personally think the game got instantly boring right after that stupid Naxx25 in WotLK where WoW amazing growth stopped, but again its not important for me how others feel, for me personally as a super casual player wotlk make game boring, donno why. Its so hard to analyse the reasons.

[Lizbeth]

Well, yes, it is better.. but not a harder game. I think a perfect MMO would be one where most activities are tiered and players have a lot of freedom. In other words, progression in every area of the game without cheapening it with nerfs to the harder content (unless its warranted and a balance issue).

Since they can't let players to pick difficulty at the beginning of the game, they should provide content for each difficulty level with appropriate rewards as standalone. Easy dailies, quests, instances, even raids for casuals with low quality rewards without the need to "progress" into medium difficulty level. If they find it too easy, they of course should move up on their own. Same with medium and hard difficulty. This way they should make everyone happy without complaints that casuals are ruining the game or hardcores are taking over and also without cheapening players achievements and taking out real progression.

[Chiefy]

Well we cant say that, I can also claim the net drop of US started few months after WotLK thats why "US only reports" stopped. My analysis on that WoW sub chart, is WotLK got its peak after it hit China. Anyways not a big deal.

I think its not about being easy or hard its about being exciting or boring, Which I personally think the game got instantly boring right after that stupid Naxx25 in WotLK where WoW amazing growth stopped, but again its not important for me how others feel, for me personally as a super casual player wotlk make game boring, donno why. Its so hard to analyse the reasons.

Because the hard things you could do as a casual player, such as HCs, where taken away?
Because there is no one to admire and glance at anymore who impresses you, just by looking at gear?
Because epics aren't truely epic now so meh? ^^

Well, yes, it is better.. but not a harder game. I think a perfect MMO would be one where most activities are tiered and players have a lot of freedom. In other words, progression in every area of the game without cheapening it with nerfs to the harder content (unless its warranted and a balance issue).

Since they can't let players to pick difficulty at the beginning of the game, they should provide content for each difficulty level with appropriate rewards as standalone. Easy dailies, quests, instances, even raids for casuals with low quality rewards without the need to "progress" into medium difficulty level. If they find it too easy, they of course should move up on their own. Same with medium and hard difficulty. This way they should make everyone happy without complaints that casuals are ruining the game or hardcores are taking over and also without cheapening players achievements and taking out real progression.

To me, the game you are discribing sounds much like TBC. Tier 4 and 5 was still fun even when BT was out, but ZA made is dumb.

[Osmeric]

Well we cant say that

Of course we can say that. Morhaime himself said most of the net loss in Q3 2011 was in China, and we know for a fact that China got Cataclysm on July 12, 2011.

What exactly are we supposed to interpret differently here?

[Otiswhitaker]

While this is true, the fact still remains that during some of the hardest raids (end tbc) 2,5 million more people started playing wow, and subscribed. And throughout WotLK addionationally 1 million subscribers, until cata. WotLK was hard, and we had both 10 and 25 man raids such as naxx, ulduar which did have hardmodes, EoE etc. (with different difficulties). When they implemented the HC/Non hc raiding system, with 10/25 man being optional for same loot, where they made space for "bad raiders" and heroics for "exceptional raiders" the number of additional subscribers stopped.
http://www.statista.com/statistics/2...d-of-warcraft/

The thing you really got to look at, though, is that even with so and so million more subscribers or whatever, you gotta look at how many were raiding. I doubt at it's peak, more than 1 million players -total-, or even close, killed a single raid boss in TBC. With WOTLK, it's probably a little higher, but, traditionally, not many people raid/step foot in raids. So to think that has that much of a large impact on subscriber numbers good or bad is a bit silly.

Hell, that's why LFR was made. To try and get more people into those instances that barely anyone was seeing/even really wanted to see.

I imagine, if anything, the biggest thing that kept old subs afloat was how long it took to level (people played pre-end game longer, and there were a lot of numbers back then stating a lot of people didn't even get to level cap. A lot of people STILL don't get to endcap, even), and what had an even bigger impact later in the game's life, is there simply not being enough to do once you get to the endcap (Which they made super easy to get to in Cata). So, you hit 85, and you didn't raid? Your choices were heroics or PVP. I know that's why -I- stopped playing for a long while in cata, I simply ran out of things to do.