Page 12 of 13 FirstFirst ...
2
10
11
12
13
LastLast
  1. #221
    The Insane Aquamonkey's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Universe
    Posts
    18,149
    Quote Originally Posted by El Plastico View Post
    No actually, making your current customers happy helps grow your customer base. If they subscribers are happy they'll tell their friends good things about wow and those people might be inclined to try the game for the first time, or even return to the game.

    I just don't see a lot of people going out and saying man this game is so much better now that they squished the stats, you should really come back.
    Focusing on keeping players is focusing on the wrong thing. It's still important, but it doesn't grow the game. People will leave no matter what Blizzard does. The constant growth of the game from Vanilla to WotLK wasn't because nobody left the game. 2x as many people had quit the game than were actively subscribed in 2009. The game grew because more people came in than people left.
    Last edited by Aquamonkey; 2013-08-07 at 08:25 PM.

  2. #222
    Pit Lord Odina's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Montreal, Quebec, Canada
    Posts
    2,259
    Quote Originally Posted by huth View Post
    Actually, you can keep that up for a pretty long time. There's no upper cap to numbers.

    While this is true at a glance it's much more easy to calculate things under 1000 when in a raid. A fast glance over at skada and you can see who is where if the cap is abotu 1000 when it's current numbers not so much! The difference between 298658 and 218658 is huge but at a fast glance it doesnt look so bad. However 988 vs 918 jumps out at us really fast!

  3. #223
    Immortal SL1200's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Chicago Illinois.
    Posts
    7,577
    Quote Originally Posted by Aquamonkey View Post
    Focusing on keeping players is focusing on the wrong thing, it doesn't grow the game. People will leave no matter what Blizzard does. The constant growth of the game from Vanilla to WotLK wasn't because nobody left the game. 2x as many people had quit the game than were actively subscribed in 2009. The game grew because more people came in than those who left.
    I don't agree with you when you say that they're going to lose subscribers no matter what. People say the game is old, but so are Star Wars and Star Trek. There is a lot of potential subscribers out there, a squish isn't the thing that's going to bring them back.

  4. #224
    Quote Originally Posted by Odina View Post
    While this is true at a glance it's much more easy to calculate things under 1000 when in a raid. A fast glance over at skada and you can see who is where if the cap is abotu 1000 when it's current numbers not so much! The difference between 298658 and 218658 is huge but at a fast glance it doesnt look so bad. However 988 vs 918 jumps out at us really fast!
    Human can comprehend at glance numbers with upto 8 digits. They can comprehend at glance 5%+ difference between numbers if they consist of same amount of digits, no matter how many digits there are.

    I mean no offense here, but If someone has problems comprehending numbers with more than 3 digits, they have some kind of mental degradation. I don't think that there should be changes to make WoW more "approachable" for such people. Hopefully everyone agrees.

    If people don't want to see numbers growing, they could always choose some other genre, where there is no such thing as character progress, where numbers are static and everything is represented in %s or single digits.

  5. #225
    Quote Originally Posted by Odina View Post
    While this is true at a glance it's much more easy to calculate things under 1000 when in a raid. A fast glance over at skada and you can see who is where if the cap is abotu 1000 when it's current numbers not so much! The difference between 298658 and 218658 is huge but at a fast glance it doesnt look so bad. However 988 vs 918 jumps out at us really fast!
    No, it's easy at a glance to calculate things under 4 digits. Whether that's 999, 999k, 999M or 999G doesn't matter.
    The difference between 298658 and 218658 may be big, but the last three digits barely affect things. If you want to make quick comparisions, look at the first 3-4 digits, don't worry about the rest.
    Also, if you want to analyse numbers, don't do it in the middle of a fight.

  6. #226
    Quote Originally Posted by Khanis View Post
    Sorry but they're gonna have to sort this out eventually, 13157568421 appearing all over the screen in coming expansions isn't gonna register within the human mind as 'high damage' compared to 13157568.

    How can they fix this?
    No they are not too big, you are just too TBC/Vanilla...

  7. #227
    Deleted
    Welll I dont mind them. I actually like big fat numbers on my screen

  8. #228
    The Insane Aquamonkey's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Universe
    Posts
    18,149
    Quote Originally Posted by El Plastico View Post
    I don't agree with you when you say that they're going to lose subscribers no matter what. People say the game is old, but so are Star Wars and Star Trek. There is a lot of potential subscribers out there, a squish isn't the thing that's going to bring them back.
    In WoW's prime, 2x the active subscriber base had already quit the game. "I don't know what the exact number is off-hand, but the total number of subscribers we've had is easily more than double - maybe closer to triple - the current subscriber base." Players will always leave the game, the best plan is to bring in more new/old players than those who leave. "The fact is, WoW always lost lots of players. In the past, we tended to get as many or more new ones as we lost. Lately, less."
    Last edited by Aquamonkey; 2013-08-07 at 08:57 PM.

  9. #229
    Quote Originally Posted by El Plastico View Post
    Blizzard should concentrate on the subscribers they have, and not chase people who already quit.
    Im not sure what your point is here.. Thats basically what I said.

    By not doing squish, people wont quit over it.
    By doing squish, people MIGHT quit over it. (Or throw a hissy fit saying they quit, anyways).

    By doing squish, do the risks outweigh the rewards? Thats why Blizzard hasnt done it yet. It's a minor issue that might cause outcry. I still think it should be done ASAP. I'm not implying that doing an item squish would bring people like me back into WoW.

    Quote Originally Posted by huth View Post
    Actually, you can keep that up for a pretty long time. There's no upper cap to numbers.
    It's not a matter of caps, its a matter of aesthetics.. MMOs look absolutely stupid hitting for millions and soon to be tens of millions of damage.

    Id rather hit for 5k's instead of 11,801,115, if it meant the same % done to the mob, personally.

    Look at damage meters right now, does it says 140,230 DPS? No it probably says 140k... there is a reason.. excessive numbers are not neccessary and look awful.
    Last edited by Trakanonn; 2013-08-07 at 09:01 PM.
    Free-To-Play is the future.

  10. #230
    Quote Originally Posted by Emfg View Post
    Except right now loads of people aren't enjoying WoW anymore because of the huge numbers, me included. You can't just ignore those people just because a small group who likes to solo old content. If it takes 1 week to fix soloing old content when the item squish hits, it's well worth it. If you don't think it's worth it, then you're just being selfish and ignorant.
    'loads of people' is not a fact, but your opinion; so is your claim 'f 'small group who likes to solo'. If you do think it is worth it, then you're just being selfish and ignorant.

    Don't like the numbers, turn them off and just have % displayed. Simple, clean fix. What really matters is execution of mechanics, execution of your class, time to kill. The numbers are for analyzing issues to increase performance, the numbers themselves don't matter. What counts is how far off the curve you are, what you can do to improve as an individual and as a group. Only reason to be worried about numbers outside of that is for narcissistic ego inflation/bragging rights; then wouldn't bigger numbers be better?

    You can't just ignore people who like big numbers or like to solo old content because you don't like big numbers.

    It would not take '1 week to fix'. It has a chance of -breaking the game-. They had a working version; but they supposedly do all the time with patches and xpacs; then server crashes, game breaking bugs, etc. happen all the time as well. This would be modifying every piece of gear for level 60+. Every mob level 60+. Every instance. Every zone. Every ability of every mob. Every aura. Every mechanic.

    This 'squish', to be done properly, would take a massive undertaking and amount of resources; and could cause underlying problems for months or years.

    Think of it this way; they say they can't give us bigger standard backpacks without breaking the game. They say they can't give us much more bank space without breaking the game. Now think about all the code that has to be edited, double checked, then tested, bug checked ... then as players find major bugs, all the work needing to go through and fix all the stuff they could've never anticipated or things they can't pinpoint spending even greater time tracking down issues.

    This doesn't mean just for older content; it can affect more fresh content as well.


    It won't hurt user CPUs or server CPUs for a couple decades worth of expansions.


    In my humble opinion; what they need to do when they make this leap ... a 'level' squish with the item squish. It will already be a major time and resource investment; make it worthwhile. We will be hitting at least level 100 by xpac after next. That is almost insurmountable for new players coming in. 1-100. Especially after they took away the 'rewards' of leveling. They've been considering reducing ability bloat (which I agree with). People going 100 levels barely getting spells, talents, anything. Leveling should be meaningful and rewarding ... it cannot be with 100 levels.

    How can they go about it? I don't know. Maybe Vanilla be 1-20, BC 20-25, LK 25-30, Cata 30-35, Mists 35-40, new xpac 40-45. It would be as weird as the ilvl squish, but the perfect time to implement it. The goal could be about 1 zone per level on average, letting people experiencing most of the (new) old content before moving to BC, while the xpacs work very well with that as well. This keeps the level bloat from getting out of hand for a very long time. This makes the lowered ilvl work or 'feel' better as well (makes more sense to be low level and doing lower damage).

    What they need to do, going forward, is NOT do the damn exponential gear progression ever again. So what if you can use the last tier of the last xpac to start the new tier in new xpac ... you did kill heroic super badass boss for 6 mos+, you should have something to show for it; and the ones that are power leveling don't care about questing gear rewards or even the zones or quests at all ... they are just trying to get to max level and start raiding. Just tune everything the same way they do now. T17 would be just a bit harder to complete in T16 gear than T16 was in T15 ... that is all they really have to do. Why? Because it eliminates the need for normal/heroic raiders to feel they 'need' to do LFR/Flex. Let them focus on the raiding they want to do. If not, there will be serious progression raider fatigue for the first month or two.


    I've been using 64 bit processors in my PCs since the early 2000s. In 03 you had XP 64 and OSX 10.3 that both supported 64 bit; and AMD released their Athlon 64 line, which made them affordable for the general public. It isn't like 64 bit is anything new, it was around a long time before that. A lot of servers have been running 64 bit for quite some time.

  11. #231
    Quote Originally Posted by zeropeorth View Post
    I've been using 64 bit processors in my PCs since the early 2000s. In 03 you had XP 64 and OSX 10.3 that both supported 64 bit; and AMD released their Athlon 64 line, which made them affordable for the general public. It isn't like 64 bit is anything new, it was around a long time before that. A lot of servers have been running 64 bit for quite some time.
    Pretty much every consumer grade processor available today is 64bit, and has been for more than 5 years by now.

  12. #232
    Herald of the Titans
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    all over the world
    Posts
    2,931
    in my opinion the numbers are getting ridiculous, but some people enjoy seeing big numbers. i just dont really understand why they decided the numbers had to go up at such a sharp rate. i felt like the jump from vanilla to BC was the best but even it i felt was too high. i can remember having 5k health and 5k mana in my hwl gear back in vanilla and there towards the end of season 4 in BC i had about triple that, and it just took off with each expansion after that.

    /boggle

  13. #233
    Quote Originally Posted by dokilar View Post
    in my opinion the numbers are getting ridiculous, but some people enjoy seeing big numbers. i just dont really understand why they decided the numbers had to go up at such a sharp rate. i felt like the jump from vanilla to BC was the best but even it i felt was too high. i can remember having 5k health and 5k mana in my hwl gear back in vanilla and there towards the end of season 4 in BC i had about triple that, and it just took off with each expansion after that.

    /boggle
    Two reasons. They don't want you to use previous expansion gear, and they want to give the bleeding edge guilds a challenge while still allowing more average players to be able to finish the content.
    I'm sure there're more, but those are the ones they told us about.

  14. #234
    While we're at it, lets stop having 3 phases of 1 boss, along with bosses dying at 10% and 5%.
    Free-To-Play is the future.

  15. #235
    I'm pretty indifferent to the subject. I'm not going to feel any stronger next patch when I'm doing 600k dps as I am now when I do 300k, and I'm not going to feel any weaker when I'm doing 3k as I will by doing 1mill. Its all relative to what my peers are doing, if they're doing 3k and I'm doing 2k I'll feel weak. If they're doing 3k and I'm doing 3k, I'll feel strong.

    As far as dev time, well I'd imagine its been talked about a good bit, and if the beta stays in beta for any amount of time, they should be able to knock it out pretty quickly as long as they have a system put in place prior to actually doing it.

    As far as the benefits go, for a game of this age when it comes to stuff like this, simpler is always better, you have to do everything you can to appeal to a larger group of people. Sure we joke about people being stupid, but when you're talking about single abilities doing 1,254,869 damage, sure parsing it is going to require more work than 1,254. No, it isn't that I can't process the higher number, it's that it is in fact easier for EVERYONE to parse the smaller number.

  16. #236
    Quote Originally Posted by rederoin View Post
    Uneeded. the K's and M's behind the numbers will fix it.
    Exactly this and /Thread

  17. #237

  18. #238
    As long everything else is scaled to be the same then why not. You gotta be nuts just to quit the game for that. And people wont even care after awhile im betting on it

  19. #239

  20. #240
    The Insane Aquamonkey's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Universe
    Posts
    18,149
    Quote Originally Posted by huth View Post
    None of which disagrees with what he said. At least read what you quote.
    It directly disagrees with him "this"ing and "/thread"ing, "Uneeded. the K's and M's behind the numbers will fix it." If K's and M's fixed it, Blizzard wouldn't keep pushing for the squish after implementing K's and M's. Perhaps you should read what you quote.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •