LFR and whether it still has a place in WoW

[InfernalDark]

Never had, never will.

[Raelbo]

This, add some incentive to people learning the game instead being able to say they "beat the final boss" while afking with a finger up their noses.

Removing LFR won't give people that incentive. Nor will adding more tools to "help" people become better raiders. Because this was never what stopped people from raiding.

Before LFR came along, most players simply didn't participate in raiding because of what raiding entails. I would say that several common issues included:

• Having to join a group of people and fit into the social circle
• Having to fit a schedule
• Feeling the pressure of others relying on you to perform
• Feeling judged for your lack of ability - relative to others who put in a lot more time and effort to becoming great at the game

The simple fact is that proper raiding isn't for everyone. And that's ok. But it does mean that the game needed to find a way to accommodate the vast majority of its players who might have liked some aspects of raiding - like fighting awesome bosses and being the hero of the story (even if on a relatively easy setting).

LFR is what makes the game truly inclusive of everyone who plays. And that can only be good for the game. If you're just too conceited to see that, I suggest it's time for some introspection.

[Raelbo]

I have already stated several times in this thread I think they could improve the "see the raid-experience" for players who dont wish to interact with other people or do "hard" mechanics like raid-encounters can provide. They could rebrand it "cinematic mode" and have the player able to queue up instantly with a raidgroup of NPC's for any role he likes, be guaranteed victory and provided the same reward as you can get today.

I am not sure what problem you think you're trying to solve with this solution that LFR doesn't already do better.

Personally I think it's nice to know that the rest of the people in your LFR group are real people instead of a bunch of bots. Also, being able to fail in LFR is important because it gives meaning to success. And I highly doubt that the idea of "cinematic mode" would appeal to anyone because even people who "suck" at this game (ie aren't as good as you) don't appreciate being condescended to like this.

- - - Updated - - -

You have completely misread my post, it was never about removing anything only improving on it, read it again.

Dude, if your response to someone suggesting "send LFR to the scrap heap" is "this", the problem isn't with the reader.

[shise]

I think normal mode doesn't have a place anymore. Remove it and tune LFR to normal difficulty. Then just have heroic and mythic.

No need for 4 difficulties. If shadowlands is anything like the last 2 expansions then you get better loot from world quests anyway.

People stand on fire on lfr, imagine if it was normal lol

[Raelbo]

In all your posts promoting LFR (and there is a lot of them)

I am not promoting LFR. Simply responding to poor arguments made (mostly) against it.

one of the things you say it "protects" players from is getting "judged" on their performance from other players, which is completely false since you are getting thrown in together with 19 other random people who can and will judge you there just as much.

Not even close to the same thing.

Firstly, just joining a raid group entails putting yourself in a position to be judged by others and possibly rejected. In LFR you're never put in that position.

Secondly LFR anonymises the experience, so while others may be judging your performance, it's a judgement of a random person out of 25 random people instead of you. There is a world of difference between being potentially judged by a stranger who doesn't know you and you're never going to see again, and people who know you and who you have to face again the next day.

The cinematic mode could have options in the interface panel to include visual cues to be able to learn a specific boss mechanics for a certain role, for example.

As I already said, I am not sure what problem you think you're trying to solve here. Who is it that you think wants or needs such a feature?

And what are you rambling about with condescended? From who and how?

Telling people that instead of being allowed to go and kill bosses, they need to be taught how to play by a special "cinematic mode" comes across as very condescending.

Looks to me like you're just looking for problems for a presented solution.

There is a massive difference between "looking for problems" (which implies that they are minor or non-existent) and pointing out blatantly obvious problems.

As I already said, I have no idea (because you still haven't tried to explain it) what problem you're trying to solve, or how/why you think your proposed solution will solve it.

That is problematic.

[Super Kami Dende]

LFR will always have a place in WoW. Since it makes making raids worthwhile in Development time.

Every raider that cries about LFR for any type of reason, tends not to realise without LFR their Raiding would be much worse.

Basically, accept that most People do LFR and shut the fuck up about it. It's been in the game now longer than it wasn't. It isn't going away and you benefit from it being there yourself.

[catalystical]

As a casual, LFR is my end game. A decent LFR can sustain the entire duration of it's patch throughout the expansion, like the ones we got in Legion. BfA LFRs generally suck so I've stopped since March and now just waiting for pre-patch to hit in a few months.

[Vorkreist]

But your data is not accurate, as it only includes raiders. It does not take into account how many people do NOT enter any raid at all. 78% of the player base has not killed heroic Wrathion.

I always wondered why those "raider" stats are so low compared to "the player base". By player base I assume you would put every person that logged at least once in that time frame. So vast majority would be players that barely had if at all any interest to engage in meaningful end game activities with questionable activity and yet that vast majority is used as a fake reference in comparison to raider numbers trying to make a fake narrative of 80% are avid casuals that play pet battles and lfr every day because raiding is bad.

[Kyriani]

I suspect if one could grab the numbers of who runs what that LFR is still far and away the most utilized of all the raid difficulties. So yeah, it has a place. It's end game for a lot of players. It's not really about gearing as such so high-end M+ is irrelevant to the topic. It's a guaranteed spot in a raid group for players who don't bother with guilds or pugs.

I've been saying this for years but people need to get onboard with the idea that many people, perhaps most, aren't overly interested in being challenged. They play to relax and that's OK. LFR is for them.

This is me. While I used to be a hardcore raider till MoP (and still got suckered into our first SoO heroic (now mythic) clears by my guild (because they needed a competent body to fill), I no longer "real" raid with any sort of regularity.

I have no interest in being challenged, I simply want to be entertained. And heck, I've hardly even touched LFR in BfA because it just hasn't been entertaining or worth my time due to the "difficulty". By "difficulty" I mean I personally can handle the mechanics in BfA LFR's, but a lot of people can't or won't, making it a slog to get through. I did it once for the story completion and didn't go back because it just felt like a waste of my time even though I could have used it for crafting/essence progression. The carrot wasn't worth the frustration to do it any more than that.

The more difficult LFR is for a random pug to clear, the less interest I have in engaging with it. I am looking to kick back and relax, not beat my head against a wall. Those days are long behind me.

[tommyhil622]

1. that's false. it takes very little dev time to make lfr.
2. forcing people to do anything NEVER ends well

why are we having this discussion AGAIN? if you don't like LFR; don't fucking do it! why are people so fucking obsessed with removing things that they don't even use??? let people play how they want to play; if that includes LFR then so be it. jesus fucking christ

100% agree with you.

At the very core is the elitist point of view dictating the view of thousands of people that use LFR lol. It's so weird but also an old point view. Saldy a good number who share "there should no be LFR" are the same people forcing casuals to link AOTC before joining a normal Nyalotha Raid. Btw i can add the "save development time" to literally anything in the game that i don't use, it's just bad reasoning and single minded.

[richiecqc]

I don’t see a problem with LFR I mean when it was brought in one point of it was for the casual to have the end game experience without the grind. Yes gear is usually lower then heroic’s and mythic but goes back to the start to enjoy raiding without the commitment.

[Raelbo]

I always wondered why those "raider" stats are so low compared to "the player base". By player base I assume you would put every person that logged at least once in that time frame. So vast majority would be players that barely had if at all any interest to engage in meaningful end game activities with questionable activity and yet that vast majority is used as a fake reference in comparison to raider numbers trying to make a fake narrative of 80% are avid casuals that play pet battles and lfr every day because raiding is bad.

I am really not sure exactly what you're trying to say here.

Yes, the vast majority of people who play and enjoy the game (and pay subscriptions - thus keeping the game alive) aren't raiders. And while I get what you mean by "meaningful" content, I think it's fair to say that this majority find other types of content meaningful to them, whether it's casual PvP, collecting things, levelling alts or playing pet battles. There is nothing "fake" about taking this majority into account when discussing a feature like LFR.

[goldlock]

that's still trying to shove people into content they don't want to do just so that they can continue justify making the content very few are actually into. also probably not as simple as you think it would be.

That isn't how this medium of entertainment works...

Games ship with last bosses that most players never see I would argue that if you make a normal game so simple everyone is expected to beat it you make a game almost no one wants (some genres don't subscribe to this obviously it would be weird if animal crossing had a final boss fight where you duel with axes against the tom Nook)

[Firebert]

That isn't how this medium of entertainment works...

Games ship with last bosses that most players never see I would argue that if you make a normal game so simple everyone is expected to beat it you make a game almost no one wants (some genres don't subscribe to this obviously it would be weird if animal crossing had a final boss fight where you duel with axes against the tom Nook)

Why would I buy (for example) Assassin's Crossing 2 if I couldn't beat Assassin's Crossing?

I beat Portal, bought Portal 2. I couldn't beat Rainbow Six Vegas 2, haven't bought another Rainbow Six game.

Completion helps sell sequels.

[Vorkreist]

I am really not sure exactly what you're trying to say here.

Yes, the vast majority of people who play and enjoy the game (and pay subscriptions - thus keeping the game alive) aren't raiders. And while I get what you mean by "meaningful" content, I think it's fair to say that this majority find other types of content meaningful to them, whether it's casual PvP, collecting things, levelling alts or playing pet battles. There is nothing "fake" about taking this majority into account when discussing a feature like LFR.

All that you listed (including raiders) would at best cover 50-60% of that "player base". The rest a people that are barely active log once a week. Why are those people relevant when comparing raider numbers? If you could show the percentage of those actively engaging in specific end game activities there would be a different story.
How many do casual pvp regularly or the collectors etc. instead of about 2 mil bought a sub in the last few months , 1 mil are almost inactive but hey its just 10% raiders.

[keldarepewpew]

They should cut normal mode out it has no place in todays game.

[goldlock]

Why would I buy (for example) Assassin's Crossing 2 if I couldn't beat Assassin's Crossing?

I beat Portal, bought Portal 2. I couldn't beat Rainbow Six Vegas 2, haven't bought another Rainbow Six game.

Completion helps sell sequels.

I bought xcom 2 and I have never been able to beat xcom in its entirety on impossible without save scumming. The problem I have with lfr is it seems to breed apathy and misery. It has this weird defeatist vibe to it where if a boss does have a mechanic that cant be ignored their usual answer is to simply throw bodies at it till ten stacks before trying to overcome it.

If lfr awarded gear on par with its difficulty (capping out at heroic dungeon loot) I don't think anyone would run it... if content is only prompted up by its reward I would argue the prize is being valued more then the experience.

[Firebert]

I bought xcom 2 and I have never been able to beat xcom in its entirety on impossible without save scumming. The problem I have with lfr is it seems to breed apathy and misery. It has this weird defeatist vibe to it where if a boss does have a mechanic that cant be ignored their usual answer is to simply throw bodies at it till ten stacks before trying to overcome it.

If lfr awarded gear on par with its difficulty (capping out at heroic dungeon loot) I don't think anyone would run it... if content is only [propped] up by its reward I would argue the prize is being valued more then the experience.

Did you beat original XCOM on any difficulty?

I have been in ten stack N'zoth groups, brute forcing through inflated stats doesn't work.

LFR is one step more difficult than Heroic dungeons via a combination of mechanics and increased group size, hence the small item level increase in completion rewards.

[Raelbo]

All that you listed (including raiders) would at best cover 50-60% of that "player base". The rest a people that are barely active log once a week. Why are those people relevant when comparing raider numbers?

To answer that, how about figuring out why you're even comparing raider numbers in the first place: which is to establish the relevance of LFR in the bigger picture. I think all that really matters here is the fact that significantly more players are participating in LFR than in organised raiding.

If you could show the percentage of those actively engaging in specific end game activities there would be a different story.

Only Blizzard has access to that information. And they're the ones who have told us that those numbers are reason for the existence of LFR. I am not sure what more there is to discuss here.

- - - Updated - - -

I bought xcom 2 and I have never been able to beat xcom in its entirety on impossible without save scumming.

And >98% of WoW players don't get Cutting Edge.

The problem I have with lfr is it seems to breed apathy and misery. It has this weird defeatist vibe to it where if a boss does have a mechanic that cant be ignored their usual answer is to simply throw bodies at it till ten stacks before trying to overcome it.

I don't think that's a fair assessment of what is normal in LFR. I am not saying that said things don't happen, but in my experience, it's not the norm.

If lfr awarded gear on par with its difficulty (capping out at heroic dungeon loot) I don't think anyone would run it...

You're wrong. LFR gear is already low enough that I reckon that gear is barely an incentive anymore. You can get significantly better gear (as I have on multiple alts) simply by doing emissary quests. Yet still plenty of people run it. I seriously doubt many of them are there primarily for the gear.

if content is only prompted up by its reward I would argue the prize is being valued more then the experience.

The same can be said of any content. Also, the fact that people will generally not do content for which there is no reward (especially when other content does have rewards) does not mean that people do content only for the reward. It simply means that the reward is part of the equation.

- - - Updated - - -

LFR is one step more difficult than Heroic dungeons via a combination of mechanics and increased group size, hence the small item level increase in completion rewards.

Yeah, it's difficult to take someone seriously when they make such a ridiculous comparison. Even mythic dungeons are easier than LFR. If nothing else they're substantially quicker to complete successfully.

The other day I decided to do some LFD heroic dungeons on my DH in order to finish up my heirloom quest that has been sitting in my quest log for a few years. Even though I was tanking, every single group asked me to switch to DPS spec because the content was that trivial. And I was able to complete many heroics in the time it took to get a single N'zoth kill in LFR.

Also, the N'zoth kill LFR was 10 times more fun and satisfying. Just sayin'....

[Utrrabbit]

But your data is not accurate, as it only includes raiders. It does not take into account how many people do NOT enter any raid at all. 78% of the player base has not killed heroic Wrathion.

Your issue is that you think only 10% of players raid which is also false. If I had to guess with thr current mentality of the playerbase. More like 70% of the playerbase raids. Maybe not mythic. Most of those do not even go pasr normal. However they do raid.

The only issue with using sites like warcraft logs is you have to upload those logs. Which I would say only about 30% of raiders do.