Page 28 of 69 FirstFirst ...
18
26
27
28
29
30
38
... LastLast
  1. #541
    Quote Originally Posted by Tomana View Post
    Nah, that's because the MMO market saturated at that point, making TBC level churn impossible to sustain. However, they could have handled Cata way better and lengthen the plateau by a lot if they didn't make Cataclysm.
    "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."

    https://twitter.com/Ghostcrawler/sta...70645528641537

    "We've always had a lot of churn. Historically we were able to attract more new players."

    https://twitter.com/Ghostcrawler/sta...31672934182913
    "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

  2. #542
    Quote Originally Posted by Osmeric View Post
    "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."

    https://twitter.com/Ghostcrawler/sta...70645528641537

    "We've always had a lot of churn. Historically we were able to attract more new players."

    https://twitter.com/Ghostcrawler/sta...31672934182913
    But those new players were hardcore. Also the 220,000 disenfranchised raiders from BC are responsible for 2 million sub losses a year, and it's all LFR's fault. What have I been thinking? All content is catered to casuals now. That's why we've had a new raid every other patch and 0 new dungeons for the entire expansion. Casual all the way!

  3. #543
    Quote Originally Posted by LeperHerring View Post
    You left you the bit where you provide any kind of facts to figures to back up your opinion.
    After TBC launch every single AAA MMORPGs failed to meet their goals and F2P revolution started in FB.

    Neither of those are absolute proof either way, but have very strong correlation and would make more sense than any tinfoilhat theory people seem to love.
    Never going to log into this garbage forum again as long as calling obvious troll obvious troll is the easiest way to get banned.
    Trolling should be.

  4. #544
    I guess blame-wise you can't blame the casuals, they are the targeted demographic now but the main theme being the bar has really lowered, so it it is becoming casuals being the hardcore and the new casuals are just entitled and unaware, and so it will be. Amen.

  5. #545
    Quote Originally Posted by Grogo View Post
    I guess blame-wise you can't blame the casuals, they are the targeted demographic now
    Which part of "WoW was casual MMO from day one" you don't understand?

    Ten years ago WoW was the easiest MMO around with no death penalties or any of that hardcore grind other games did. Every single expnasion from the launch onwards has been clearly an attempt to keep up with the times and add more features that keep the game more casual friendly than the competition. There is no change of direction or demographic, but a natural continuation of what the game aimed to do when it was started nearly 15 years ago.
    Never going to log into this garbage forum again as long as calling obvious troll obvious troll is the easiest way to get banned.
    Trolling should be.

  6. #546
    Quote Originally Posted by Grogo View Post
    I guess blame-wise you can't blame the casuals, they are the targeted demographic now but the main theme being the bar has really lowered, so it it is becoming casuals being the hardcore and the new casuals are just entitled and unaware, and so it will be. Amen.
    So Grogo, who is more entitled? The casual who is asking Blizzard to cater to a majority customer demographic, or a hardcore who is asking Blizzard to design the game around a minority hardcore demographic?

    Obviously, the latter is the one showing "entitlement". The casual is just asking Blizzard to act in their own best interest.

    It's kind of odd you can't see this, but, as you say, the entitled are so annoyingly clueless.
    "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

  7. #547
    Quote Originally Posted by Sharuko View Post
    I am a casual player, but Blizzard's mistake is to cater to the casual player. You do not focus and cater to casual players. You should focus and cater to your top 10% or top 20% of the playerbase. That doesn't mean you shouldn't have content for casuals, you should have plenty of content for casuals. But you should not focus your game around casuals. Casuals are gamers that have no investment in the game, they will quit if they don't like the game or if they find a better game.

    The casual gamer is not the ones laying the foundation of a community, it is usually the top 10% or top 20% of gamers that are. Builds, specs, strats, websites, fansites are usually not created by casual games (with exceptions). Casuals are the ones that consume that content.

    A perfect example is a company like Zynga, pretty much the Mecca for super casual gamers. Zynga was flourishing will millions of players. Then it literally all stopped and they almost went bankrupt. Catering to casuals means your game will be extremely volatile and not stable. If you want to make a quick buck then focus on casuals, if you want stability focus and cater to the top 10% to 20% but also give the casuals content.

    The point should be to try and convert casual players to hardcore players. What WoW is recently doing is converting hardcore players into casuals.
    And how, pray, does Blizzard "cater" to the casuals, theres ton of content for them, bu there have been 3 raids this exp: with 16, 13 and 14 bosses, The heroic bosses while not lasting longer (in weeks) lasted A LOT MORE in "pulls" (there was a post calling it the historical highest). You have challenge modes, you have heroic raids with heroic only bosses, you have the (in the higher tiers) very casual unfriendly brawler's guild

    Sure there is content for the casual... lfr? there aren't even new 5 man dungeons... While i agree with what you say i fail to see how blizzard doesn't abide by the rules you laid out

  8. #548
    More like the massive exodus of hardcore progression raiders who burned themselves out by trying too hard to stay elite.

  9. #549
    Moderator MoanaLisa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Pacific Northwest, USA
    Posts
    10,389
    Everyone needs to ramp back on the hostility a bit. Especially given a subject where people's ideas are set in cement. Everyone is free to go after those ideas but it doesn't need to be hostile, condescending or insulting.
    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!

  10. #550
    High Overlord Guruftw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    185
    Well LFG is nice and all but im not a fan of LFR or CRZ, those things runied the game. That is my opinion!
    Case: Bitfenix Prodigy (White) | MB: ASUS P8Z77-I DELUXE | CPU: i7 3770K (4.5GHz)
    CPU Cooling: Corsair H60 (v2) | PSU: Corsair AX 760i 80+ Platinum | GPU: EVGA GTX 680 Classified 4GB
    SSD: 256GB Samsung 840 Pro | RAM: 16GB Corsair Vengeance 1866Mhz | Monitor: Asus 27" VG278H 120Hz

  11. #551
    Quote Originally Posted by WeaponXAnimosity View Post
    More like the massive exodus of hardcore progression raiders who burned themselves out by trying too hard to stay elite.
    There are too few hardcores for their loss to make up any substantial fraction of the former player population.
    "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

  12. #552
    The Lightbringer
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Silvermoon City
    Posts
    3,623
    Quote Originally Posted by LeperHerring View Post
    You left you the bit where you provide any kind of facts to figures to back up your opinion.
    http://users.telenet.be/mmodata/Charts/TotalSubs.png
    You clearly see that starting from 2009, the total number of sub-based MMOs plateaus at ~22M before declining. In marketing terms, that means the market is saturated. When a market is saturated, you can only attract new players from other games. Also, you need to reduce the churn, which was huge in BC (the devs discussed that back in the days). So, you can no longer afford a lot of players leaving before lvl 10 like it used to be the case. Fact.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by WeaponXAnimosity View Post
    More like the massive exodus of hardcore progression raiders who burned themselves out by trying too hard to stay elite.
    There is not enough hardcore players for that. Unless you insinuate that 4M players who left since Cata are all hardcore, in which case you have problems with stuff other than maths.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Osmeric View Post
    "We've always had a lot of churn. Historically we were able to attract more new players."

    https://twitter.com/Ghostcrawler/sta...31672934182913
    Precisely.
    And you can't attract new players when the market is obviously saturated. That's kinda the definition.

    BC/LK raider ('07-'10)

  13. #553
    First off can we stop saying casuals? You can be casual and not a god awful player. True casuals have still been able to do heroic raids since WotLK if they were a decent player. Being casual had NOTHING to do with your ability to clear heroics or hard modes before it was 2 different settings. You did not have to raid 20 hours a week to clear normal or heroic if you had any semblance of skill at the game.

    That being said casuals did NOT kill the game. Terrible players claiming to be casuals did. "I'm casual I can't raid every night for 5 hours like Paragon etc do. Pls make this easier for me". That is a bad player with misconceptions not a casual. The top end guilds raid the crazy hours they do in order to get world firsts. Let that sink in. Of all the guilds in the world they are raiding those numbers to be first. Your guild even if it's going for server first unless it's on the server with a world top guild does not have to raid that much.

    MoP is a prime example. I pugged the first half of MSV the second week of opening or so. People had trouble pugging it even beyond that. We raided maybe 3 nights for 2 hours a piece as a pug. Still pretty casual and damn early before getting LFR gear(maybe a sprinkling of pieces among us). So please tell me how being casual has anything to do with not being able to clear raids? Once again it's not being casual it's being terrible. Casuals can clear raids other than LFR just fine.

  14. #554
    The Lightbringer
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Silvermoon City
    Posts
    3,623
    Quote Originally Posted by purebalance View Post
    MoP is a prime example. I pugged the first half of MSV the second week of opening or so. People had trouble pugging it even beyond that. We raided maybe 3 nights for 2 hours a piece as a pug. Still pretty casual and damn early before getting LFR gear(maybe a sprinkling of pieces among us). So please tell me how being casual has anything to do with not being able to clear raids? Once again it's not being casual it's being terrible. Casuals can clear raids other than LFR just fine.
    And yet, according to WoWprogress, almost 20% of raids who kill the first boss in MSV fail to kill the last boss. Less than 50% kill the Empress.

    BC/LK raider ('07-'10)

  15. #555
    The Patient Bloodydemize's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    WA State
    Posts
    249
    I have been so annoyed by people that when I think of casual I imagine this http://us.battle.net/wow/en/forum/topic/9882178141 now and not someone like my dad who used to play and only got on like 4 hours a week to raid. LFR was originally intended for people to see content, but people are just greedy and just gimme gimme gimme, they want to put no work in and still get rewarded for it.

  16. #556
    Purebalance: if it helps, replace "casual" with a nonsense word like "mumblefrotz", if your preconceptions about what the word should mean are interfering with your understanding of what is being discussed.

    Casual, in the context of discussions like this, refers to players who, for whatever reason, aren't being served by the hardcore raid endgame design (ignoring PvP as these threads tend to do). WHY they aren't being served -- lack of time, lack of skill, lack of socialization, lack of give-a-damn -- is a secondary issue. In particular, being "terrible players" doesn't mean Blizzard should, or will, ignore them. Being a better player doesn't mean that one is a better customer.
    "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

  17. #557
    Quote Originally Posted by Tomana View Post
    And yet, according to WoWprogress, almost 20% of raids who kill the first boss in MSV fail to kill the last boss. Less than 50% kill the Empress.
    It's all dependent on the realm you rolled on. On the realm that I used to play on, Sentinels, the top guild is only 6/13H (10-man) and only eight guilds have completed normal mode. There is only one 25-man guild and it hasn't completed normal mode yet. In contrast, the top nine guilds on Stormrage are all 13/13H (10-man) and 279 guilds have completed normal mode. Three 25-man guilds on there are 13/13H and twenty-six 25-man guilds have finished normal mode. For that reason the pool of raid-capable puggers on well-progressed servers is vastly larger than the raiding pool on the smaller servers. It's easy to fall under the misconception that just anyone can pug their way through the game if they only take the time when you had the good fortune to roll on a decent server. This is why queues on the high pop servers continue to grow while the low-pop servers continue to die off. There's a reason they had to add "virtual realms."

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Bloodydemize View Post
    I have been so annoyed by people that when I think of casual I imagine this http://us.battle.net/wow/en/forum/topic/9882178141 now and not someone like my dad who used to play and only got on like 4 hours a week to raid. LFR was originally intended for people to see content, but people are just greedy and just gimme gimme gimme, they want to put no work in and still get rewarded for it.
    Get your facts straight. This is taken directly from the Raid Finder Q&A that was released in November of 2011 to explain LFR's purpose:
    Raid Finder is primarily intended for players who don’t already raid consistently. These are players who may not have had the opportunity to take part in raid content due to scheduling conflicts, playtime constraints, limited access to other raid-capable players, or a lack of experience with higher-end content. These players may want to experience World of Warcraft’s raid content and storyline without being able to commit to the additional time investment of a raiding guild. The Raid Finder is also a great way to quickly and easily gear up alternate characters without having to worry about raid lockouts.
    This commonly repeated misconception about LFR being strictly "to see content" came from players, not from Blizzard.

  18. #558
    We already know there is more players who have quit the game then there are those who played at its peak and that was at the start of Cata. The saturation argument only really shows that WoW would have not peaked any higher. I think most of the quarterly reports of losses had Asia as the majority of losses as well just showing how large that market was. WoW in Asia is run differently than in US and EU and the players wants from Asia varies from the quibbles of those of us on the NA and EU side. Despite this the core of the game is relatively the same which just adds that much more of a variety of players that Blizzard is trying to please.

    You can try and make the argument that Cata is at fault for the huge sub losses, but MoP is showing no better. It certainly did not help that unhappy "hardcore fans" went around as casuals and created a gigantic negative shit storm defaming Blizzard and WoW which caries on to this day. Subs was going to go down in Cata anyways and even if the heroics was easier there was a lack of content problems that was being complained from day one and continually by even those who had no problems running their seven heroics week after week. Blizzard was unable to push out enough content all the way until its end. If Blizzard chose to stay stagnant and change nothing from end of WotLK going into Cata there would have been a lack of content and bitching about RDF groups. So easily players forget the complaints early WotLK about multi-hour heroics, healer imbalance, lack of epics, lack of epic shards, costs of mats being too high, not enough dailies, and a plethora of other complaints. On top of that players would once again bitch that non-raiders progression was far slower than raiders including the badges. There still would have been a minority of the playerbase raiding with a minority of that clearing the whole raid while current.

    Players are also forgetting that it was Cata where a larger percentage of players hit level cap and did endgame compared to WotLK. Blizzard had their data and they was seeing far too much loses in WotLK to remain stagnant. The developers certainly made a bunch of missteps going into Cata, but like it or not it was fed by their data given by the playerbase just as it was going into MoP.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ronduwil View Post
    This commonly repeated misconception about LFR being strictly "to see content" came from players, not from Blizzard.
    That Q&A came out after the first talks about LFR hit. I do not recall any statements saying "strictly" while there was posts referring to the purpose being a response to those who want to see the content. At least from what I saw on the forums the players who asked to see content took a back seat to those complaining about exhausting the gear on the VP vendors with months left and wanting the full tier set on the vendors. Unfortunately for those stricken by poor RNG, Blizzard goes and tries to stick it to the VP gear complainers by pulling the gear off the vendors and telling them to go and do the raid.
    Last edited by nekobaka; 2013-09-07 at 10:46 AM.

  19. #559
    I think that LFR bring the experience of endgame for more casual players, and that i think its fair, ubt they should do Normal raid more dificult....

  20. #560
    Quote Originally Posted by Zyga View Post
    ubt they should do Normal raid more dificult....
    Normal mode is already way too difficult. The gap between LFR and normal mode is ten times bigger than the gap between normal and heroic which is major problem, and why so few of LFR players ever move on to the next level.
    Never going to log into this garbage forum again as long as calling obvious troll obvious troll is the easiest way to get banned.
    Trolling should be.

Posting Permissions

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