Page 26 of 34 FirstFirst ...
16
24
25
26
27
28
... LastLast
  1. #501
    Quote Originally Posted by melodramocracy View Post
    Constant pleading for convienence and speed = yep, pretty much the fault of the playerbase.
    Erh, removal of responsibility much? lol.
    Who added the changes and content? Blizzard.

    They don't have to make changes unless they wanna.

  2. #502
    Moderator Nobleshield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Tampa Bay, Florida
    Posts
    5,015
    Thing is, I don't fault them for trying what they did in Cata; it was a fair option to see if the community would "man up", but one that ultimately backfired. What's more of a shame is that they looked at that and, rather than change direction, just added more layers (i.e. LFR and soon to be Flex) instead of taking a good, long look at what the real issues are. The solution isn't to add another layer and say "Go in the kiddie pool because you can't go in the grownup pool".

    I personally hope that the current version of Flex is a temporary fix and the next expansion will actually make normal modes accessible as they once were for the average raiders, and leave heroic for the "good" raiders.
    Last edited by Nobleshield; 2013-07-17 at 06:35 PM.
    NOBLESHIELD
    <Meliora> of Turalyon-US
    Raids & Dungeons Moderator | Mod Voice


  3. #503
    Quote Originally Posted by Arothand View Post
    Thing is, I don't fault them for trying what they did in Cata; it was a fair option to see if the community would "man up", but one that ultimately backfired. What's more of a shame is that they looked at that and, rather than change direction, just added more layers (i.e. LFR and soon to be Flex) instead of taking a good, long look at what the real issues are. The solution isn't to add another layer and say "Go in the kiddie pool because you can't go in the grownup pool".

    well, from their viewpoint, they have this unique asset, wow, which was doing over a billion bucks in high-margin revenue every year for years, and now it is slowing down, and they want to keep the current revenue stream as high as possible for as long as possible. That is the overriding priority - if we can put pokeman in and keep/gain 100k subs in the west, that is huge, 20m$ or so for a year. make some things which seem to have been new-sub stumbling blocks almost insultingly easy or nerfed, and maybe get some more. If you slowly alienate and annoy parts of your existing sub base, who care? you are expecting a long-term decline in subs anyway, and folks who complain probably won't leave immediately.

    Just look at Morhaime's bonus agreement - he gets mid-7 digits a year based on various criteria, the only one of which he didn;t hit in the last reported period involving WoW. He has a huge incentive to get wow revenue as high as he can for as long as he can, and that is good, because it is his job.

    Think of Wow like McDonalds. How much does having that potentially toxic, made-in-china toy in the happy meal bring in for them in revenue annually?
    Last edited by Deficineiron; 2013-07-17 at 06:40 PM.
    Authors I have enjoyed enough to mention here: JRR Tolkein, Poul Anderson,Jack Vance, Glen Cook, Brian Stableford, MAR Barker, Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle, John Steakley, Joe Abercrombie, Robert Silverberg, the norse sagas, CJ Cherryh, PG Wodehouse, Clark Ashton Smith, Alastair Reynolds, Cordwainer Smith, LE Modesitt, L. Sprague de Camp & Fletcher Pratt, Agatha Christie, Steven Erikson & Ian Esslemont, Stephen R Donaldon, and recently Jack L Chalker.

  4. #504
    Moderator MoanaLisa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Pacific Northwest, USA
    Posts
    11,967
    Quote Originally Posted by Deficineiron View Post
    I am sure there were folks inside saying they couldnt go putting tbc-heroics in an LFD world, but it was done anyway.

    I suspect what happened since then may be the external manifestation of what I would loosely call the 'harder game' faction inside bliz losing most influence over overall game tuning decisions, and the 'accessibility' and 'money' factions (these can overlap of course) pretty much directing game direction by themselves. a million lost western subs likely represents over 200M$ of high-margin revenue over a year. At that point the money faction (which includes A/B mgmt) says the harder game faction blew it, make the damn thing (even) more accessible.
    Of course they overlap. It's not unusual in any corporate environment to have the ideal product compromised to make a more sellable product. Blizzard--for better or worse depending on your point of view--was able to do the former even though it cost them greatly and probably came closer to destroying the franchise than people realize. Hard lesson learned. LFR was a very strong signal, even as unfinished as it was, saying, "OK, you win." Which is why it was rushed into the game.

    As an aside, I don't mind people leaving because the game is too easy, convenient or whatever you want to call it. I do mind that people still have some faith that the way to return WoW to its former glories and bag a huge number of subscriptions in the bargain is to go back. Really, this whole issue is a dead horse at this point. It's never going back. It will remain an entity with a little something for everyone and if it goes anywhere it will most assuredly go more toward convenience than anything else going forward.

    We can be sad or happy about that but it's very much the most likely scenario. My own feeling is that MoP is very good in terms of game design philosophy but that they had some things to learn about their new direction. We'll start to see the results of those lessons learned relatively soon; flex raiding being one of them.
    If you have anything to contribute to a thread topic, please do so. Discussing moderation or calling out specific people is against the rules and makes a post liable for an infraction. Please report problem posts. If anyone is unclear about the rules please read our FAQ. Thanks.

    It's a magical world, Hobbes, ol' buddy...let's go exploring!

  5. #505
    Quote Originally Posted by Khanis View Post
    Yeah cause promoting a 'Sit in city and click queue button' gameplay style isnt blizzards fault, its clearly the consumers fault.

    HERNIA. INCOMMING.
    The other methods are still there. If players choose to do things solo and easy as often as possible, they obviously prefer it that way.

  6. #506
    Quote Originally Posted by Seefer View Post
    If people don't want to be good at something why do it? I never suddenly got a hair up my ass to go try and play football because I had no desire to be good at it! If people want to raid they should be a good player! If they don't want to be good at it do other things!
    It's really tough not to respond patronizingly. I'll do my best.

    People are different from one another and play WoW for different reasons.

    For instance, some people really enjoy raiding, but also enjoy more relaxed environments. They enjoy playing their class the way they like, not the way the numbers tell them to play. At best, they might perform at 85% of their potential, but that doesn't bother them at all. They pay $15 to play the way they like, and they feel the game should allow that kind of freedom.

    Explain to me why that viewpoint is somehow less valuable or important than yours? Hint: It isn't.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Arothand View Post
    They kinda did, in one way at least: You are encouraged to use the tools to go to a dungeon instead of, for example, traveling their yourself. If you enter say Shado-pan Monastery as a group, you get nothing out of it; if you queue using LFD you get your bonus. Not a major thing since you can still form a group on your own, but you are required to use the in-game tools which for some might indicate a loss of being social by having to travel to the dungeon.
    I completely agree with this. But then, finding a group and traveling could take 2x or 3x the actual length of the dungeon. And everyone had to stay in the main cities to find people (or join massive guilds). So the trade-off of losing a bit of player interaction for the sake of being able to see more content faster is probably worth it, especially for someone who could only play an hour or so each night after work.

  7. #507
    People don't argue for it because they're stupid an don't know what's best for them or the game in general. It's Blizzard's fault for giving into the player demands, and that's why the game isn't as fun anymore.

    Like a stupid little kid who wants to eat candy and cake for breakfast, lunch and dinner (the player base wanting the game to be OMGSUPER accessible and non time-consuming). It's Blizzard's role (as the parent in this analogy) to force us to eat our fruits and veggies (actually getting invested in the game, building a community etc).

  8. #508
    Quote Originally Posted by Kazim View Post
    Like a stupid little kid who wants to eat candy and cake for breakfast, lunch and dinner (the player base wanting the game to be OMGSUPER accessible and non time-consuming). It's Blizzard's role (as the parent in this analogy) to force us to eat our fruits and veggies (actually getting invested in the game, building a community etc).
    I see what you're saying. Fruits and veggies are healthy for us and so is WoW. Since WoW is so healthy for us Daddy Blizzard's job is to make us play every night for our own good. Thanks for clarifying that.

  9. #509
    Quote Originally Posted by Manhands View Post
    It's really tough not to respond patronizingly. I'll do my best.

    People are different from one another and play WoW for different reasons.

    For instance, some people really enjoy raiding, but also enjoy more relaxed environments. They enjoy playing their class the way they like, not the way the numbers tell them to play. At best, they might perform at 85% of their potential, but that doesn't bother them at all. They pay $15 to play the way they like, and they feel the game should allow that kind of freedom.

    Explain to me why that viewpoint is somehow less valuable or important than yours? Hint: It isn't.
    i feel like the onus is on you to explain why that viewpoint is valid.

  10. #510
    Quote Originally Posted by jakeic View Post
    i feel like the onus is on you to explain why that viewpoint is valid.
    I believe he already did:
    Quote Originally Posted by Manhands View Post
    They pay $15 to play the way they like, and they feel the game should allow that kind of freedom.
    That's all that needs to be said. If there's nothing for them to do they can take their money to a different game. You might not miss them, but Blizzard's stakeholders certainly will.

  11. #511
    Quote Originally Posted by Ronduwil View Post
    I believe he already did:

    That's all that needs to be said. If there's nothing for them to do they can take their money to a different game. You might not miss them, but Blizzard's stakeholders certainly will.
    but why does paying $15 entitle you to anything?

  12. #512
    Quote Originally Posted by melodramocracy View Post
    And you appear to be missing the point entirely.
    Your example of bias from polling is what's called "nonresponse bias". This is known in the polling industry, and polling firms take steps to estimate and correct for it. It's also believed to be a small effect.

    Forums and forum polls, on the other hand, go far beyond this bias. Here, the people answering the polls select themselves into the poll, they are not randomly sampled. The analogy would be if a polling firm conducted a survey by waiting for people to call IT, rather than by doing its own calling. Internet polls of this kind are known to be nearly worthless, for example being subject to coordinated campaigns to skew the results.
    "There is a pervasive myth that making content hard will induce players to rise to the occasion. We find the opposite. " -- Ghostcrawler
    "Almost every time I have gotten to know a critic personally, they keep up with the criticism but lose the venom." -- Ghostcrawler
    I hate these casual Fridays ruining it for real Fridays.

  13. #513
    Quote Originally Posted by jakeic View Post
    but why does paying $15 entitle you to anything?
    It doesn't "entitle" you to anything, but if you're not getting what you want out of a product you're not obligated to pay for it either. Welcome to free enterprise market economies. If Blizzard is going to put out 16 raid bosses every three months with 0 heroic dungeons why should non-raiders maintain a subscription? They'll find something else to do. That's why we have LFR. If you don't like it then don't do it. This is the price raiders pay for getting massive quantities of unpopular content. Blizzard has to put out a popular fast-food version of it to maintain revenues.

    Why does being good at a game entitle you to dictate future content releases for it?

  14. #514
    Quote Originally Posted by jakeic View Post
    but why does paying $15 entitle you to anything?
    It's not entitement, it's brute consumer power. The great unwashed masses of players don't have to resort to entitlement arguments; that's the domain of the hardcore (who can't win on the straight economic argument without dubious special pleading.)
    "There is a pervasive myth that making content hard will induce players to rise to the occasion. We find the opposite. " -- Ghostcrawler
    "Almost every time I have gotten to know a critic personally, they keep up with the criticism but lose the venom." -- Ghostcrawler
    I hate these casual Fridays ruining it for real Fridays.

  15. #515
    Quote Originally Posted by jakeic View Post
    but why does paying $15 entitle you to anything?
    Care to explain why raiders are somehow more entitled?

  16. #516
    Quote Originally Posted by MoanaLisa View Post
    Of course they overlap. It's not unusual in any corporate environment to have the ideal product compromised to make a more sellable product. Blizzard--for better or worse depending on your point of view--was able to do the former even though it cost them greatly and probably came closer to destroying the franchise than people realize. Hard lesson learned. LFR was a very strong signal, even as unfinished as it was, saying, "OK, you win." Which is why it was rushed into the game.
    Cata was lets see how far we can get with so little while also listening to casuals who complained about grinds and letting players consume the little content we do have in a fraction of the time of WotLK. Cata was not the act of going back to BC or raid lockouts would not have been combined, you would not be able to get most or all of your VP from five mans, and a whole plethora of more lengthy grinds and roadblocks. Blizzard did not have enough long term grind content out to keep non-raiders entertained in part due to LFD accelerating burn out. LFR was a new long term grind to keep players busy during a time that Blizzard could not produce the content that these players wanted as these resources was being spent on MoP instead. The "magic" of LFR is wearing off and we got casuals leaving again despite all this content targeted towards casuals. Well actually a large heap of this content targeted to casuals is one spectrum of casuals which makes it non-engaging for the other spectrum. Another benefit of launching an unfinished product at the end of an expansions is giving an opportunity to get feedback and fix issues to start with a clean slate the next expansion.

    Cata was casual friendly to one spectrum of casuals while MoP is casual friendly to the other spectrum of casuals. Not all casuals want the same thing and just because someone is a casual doesnt mean they cant get out of a fire. Cata lacked options for the other types of casuals just as MoP does.

    Quote Originally Posted by jakeic View Post
    but why does paying $15 entitle you to anything?
    Only thing it entitles players is access to the servers.
    Quote Originally Posted by Itisamuh View Post
    Care to explain why raiders are somehow more entitled?
    If we are going to get into this then why should PVPers have to pay for the development of PVE content? Particularly when they get the least amount of content updates and have been getting shit on this expansion.

    The purchase of the game unlocks the content while the subscription gives access to the servers. There is a lot of stuff to do in WoW for all different types of players and not everyone can do all the things nor are they intended to do it all. If you want to do it all then accept the reality that you will need to put more time and effort into WoW to get the most out of it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Osmeric View Post
    It's not entitement, it's brute consumer power. The great unwashed masses of players don't have to resort to entitlement arguments; that's the domain of the hardcore (who can't win on the straight economic argument without dubious special pleading.)
    And yet the so called self proclaimed masses do resort to entitlement arguments.
    Last edited by nekobaka; 2013-07-17 at 07:53 PM.

  17. #517
    Quote Originally Posted by Osmeric View Post
    It's not entitement, it's brute consumer power. The great unwashed masses of players don't have to resort to entitlement arguments; that's the domain of the hardcore (who can't win on the straight economic argument without dubious special pleading.)
    the question is, "why should paying $15 put everyone on equal footing regardless of effort, time invested, or working within game mechanics?"

  18. #518
    Quote Originally Posted by jakeic View Post
    the question is, "why should paying $15 put everyone on equal footing regardless of effort, time invested, or working within game mechanics?"
    I don't see a lot of people arguing that Johnny AFK should be getting Heroid Raid-level gear. So it's not "equal footing". It's letting people have fun with what they like to do. If a player likes playing Sub Rogue because it's fun, then they damn well should be allowed to and get rewards based on their effort and performance. Said player is likely not going to get Heroic Siege of Orgrimmar gear, but that's not what people are arguing about when they say they pay their 15 dollars like everybody else.
    Trying to argue anything with any sort of nuance over Twitter is the intellectual equivalent of trying to trying to squeeze a cow through a keyhole. Sure, you might even be able to do it with enough brute force, and whatever comes out the other side might even still be considered to be "cow" in the technical sense, but it will be so mangled as to be completely unrecognizable.

  19. #519
    Quote Originally Posted by jakeic View Post
    the question is, "why should paying $15 put everyone on equal footing regardless of effort, time invested, or working within game mechanics?"
    Because the purpose of a game isn't to glorify its own mechanics. The primary purpose of a game is to make money. Having a game reward skill (or other player attributes) is only useful insofar as that enables to game to fulfill its primary purpose.
    "There is a pervasive myth that making content hard will induce players to rise to the occasion. We find the opposite. " -- Ghostcrawler
    "Almost every time I have gotten to know a critic personally, they keep up with the criticism but lose the venom." -- Ghostcrawler
    I hate these casual Fridays ruining it for real Fridays.

  20. #520
    Quote Originally Posted by nekobaka View Post
    Only thing it entitles players is access to the servers.
    Mumble, Ventrillo, and Skype give me access to chat servers for free. If my choice on a given WoW server is between chatting, dailies, and raids, I'm just going to save myself $15 a month and cancel my sub. Blizzard isn't entitled to my $15 if it's not going to put out enjoyable content. It's that simple. Blizzard is a gaming business. It doesn't exist to distribute awards to the "best" players. It exists to make money.

Posting Permissions

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