Has Blizzard lost sight of its audience? Or has its audience genuinely changed?

[goldlock]

Blizzard chases a new audience after every expansion from classic to current. I would argue it is one of their greatest weaknesses and why so few sections of wow appeal to certain players.

[arkanon]

I'm not talking about wow vs other games, I'm talking about OG wow vs current wow

And as i pointed out, you are completely wrong there - it has got much, much more "hardcore" over the years, not less.

[Eazy]

I agree. Warcraft is in desperate need of some male badassness.

I agree with it. The last badass who died was Varian. We had him, Arthas, Illidan, Garrosh etc. What do we have now?

Anduin, Wrathion, Sylvanas, Taelia, Talanji, Tyrange... That's ridiculous.

[arkanon]

The hardcore part has gotten harder, this is true

But, the need to play hardcore has severely diminshed. Before - you had raiding, and that was it.

Then we got difficulties
Then we got lfg
Then we got lfr
Then we got M+

You can clear all the content you want without ever having to step into a raid - the game is undoubtedly more casual now - that doesn't mean the hardcore factor is gone or easier, it's just so much less important

I've never killed a mythic boss in nyalotha, I'm as geared/ within 5 item levels as people who have cleared 12/12

Classic raiding is equal to LFR. Normal is harder than classic. Heroic is harder than classic. Mythic is harder than classic. M+ is harder than Classic. The game has got harder in every respect other than the time it takes to level.

[arkanon]

But that's not what I'm talking about

Difficulty has nothing to do with hardcore/casual
There are people that never raid who play 8 hours a day
Ther are people that raid mythic who play 2 hours a day

This is what you said:

WoW is a game for casual play, farming cosmetics and very easy gratification - the opposite to how it began.

You say wow is a game for casual play, the opposite of how it began. And yet you agree that all the content in wow is more difficult now compared to how it began. You are completely contradicting yourself.

[pewpmeiser]

Audiences are constantly changing. Overall every company needs to roll with it or get left behind.

[arkanon]

Nope. In classic even the simplest of goals required a huge time dedication, you want to cap? You want to get raid gear? You want to get pvp gear? All of those demanded weeks, if not months of effort - even if not actually difficult themselves. It was a hardcore game, it wasn't necessarily a hard game.

Now it's different - people bitched about getting the mechagon rep for flying - which could be done in 6 days. There are so many different avenues of gameplay in retail, so many different sources of gear, cosmetics and power that you can always have a goal within reach. Classic you had raiding or pvp. Not to mention systems Blizzard added to grant players consistent rewards, you have the weekly chests, emissaries/ paragon rewards - all of which are ways you progress your character in an easy, accessible way.

You are wrong because you fail to see the difference between hardcore/casual and difficulty - they are not the same thing.

For gods sake, not this again - Classic has proven everything you say to be wrong - you didnt need weeks or months to get gear in vanilla. This is entirely wrong. You didnt only have raiding and pvp in vanilla - and the fact you think raid gear was the best in the game shows you dont actually know anything about vanilla.

You are the one presenting an argument that at its core is flawed - nothing, and i mean NOTHING in vanilla was hard - and even BC you could just farm 5mans and pug for the best gear in the game.

Even the easiest content in retail is more difficult than the hardest in vanilla, and again, classic has proven that without a doubt. There were players who just ran around doing quests and enjoying vanilla, and there are players who run around doing quests in retail - that hasnt changed.

So that weekly chest, you have to complete content that is much, much harder than anything vanilla had to get anything meaningful from that chest though. Retail throws gear at you, absolutely - and most of it is absolute trash compared to the gear you get from difficult content. Again, that hasnt changed, however what has changed is that content is exponentially more difficult than it used to be.

[alturic]

*snip*

The "original" gamers are now older, the "Blizzard born" gamers are now the majority, and the majority of the world has an entirely different view of the world and what's expected.

If anything, I'd say they haven't lost sight, they actually are following their demographic.

[Exystredofar]

I'm not sure if Blizzard has lost sight of their audience, but I can confirm 100% that the WoW playerbase itself is no longer recognizable from what it was even just a few years ago. It's lost that sense of camraderie, and has picked up a mob mentality that revels whenever certain groups have things taken away from them, but whines and cries the second that same behavior is used against them. I think it's mainly because the old crowd has mostly packed up and quit, and WoW has been overrun by these new people who want to change things just for the sake of change, without caring who it impacts.

[korijenkins]

The audience they used to appeal to, mmorpg players, they feel is a waste of time to bother with. Ignoring the fact that, at WoW's peak in Wrath, it had 12 million subs, and now has somewhere under 6, it would be safe to say "appealing to the general market, including women, gays, etc. is a good idea"

The problem with that line of thinking is that it cost them the 6 million other subs they had in Wrath. They essentially tanked their game's revenue by appealing to an audience that was never going to play their game. Why? Because other games beat them to the punch. Guild Wars 2, Final Fantasy, etc. are all more inclusive than WoW, and will be unless WoW literally shifts their game to a women-only focus.

But if they do that they also lose whatever remains of the mmorpg crowd.

[arkanon]

I give up - you keep going on about difficulty when that's not at all what I'm talking about.

As for the vanilla thing - yes, there was gear outside of raids that was good, but you're lying if you're seriously claiming getting raid geared/ fully pvp geared didn't take a huge time commitment.

Please, just tell me this - do you get that difficulty and casual are not the same thing?

My whole point is this - classic was a hardcore game, retail is not. You have so far failed to explain why this isn't accurate

I have explained over and over again why you are wrong. You keep using fluff words like casual and hardcore that dont have an actual definition in this context, and havnt provided one tangible piece of evidence to support your claim - i have provided multiple examples that are supported by Classic.

Give me one piece of evidence to support your claim, without any word salad or buzz words - just tell me what made classic more "hardcore"

[Ielenia]

The audience has changed. You're in denial if you think it hasn't. Look how many people actively progress mythic raiding - it's barely any. WoW is a game for casual play, farming cosmetics and very easy gratification - the opposite to how it began. And that's okay - it just depends on what player you are.

Actually... no. World of Warcraft has always been about 'casual'. It was never made "for hardcores". WoW players were made fun of in other MMOs for playing "the casual MMO". WoW was never developed to be "hardcore", but actually to be inclusive, to be "casual".

[kranur]

Blizzard has actually kept up with their audience. Multiple difficilties, more types of cotent, lfr .. all came as an answer to the audience needs. And yes, contrary to what some may believe the audience is not the mythic raiders.

[arkanon]

Hardcore =/= Difficulty, I don't know how to explain this to you any simpler

How hardcore something is means how much time and effort does it demand from you to progress - Classic demanded more time to make progress, it's really that simple

Retail is a harder game on many levels - but actually making progress doesn't ask that much of you

Compare getting 1-60 back in classic to 1-120 in bfa - which takes longer?
Compare getting raid ready back in classic to raid ready in bfa - which takes longer?
Compare getting full BiS back in classic to fully BiS in BFA - which takes longer?

BiS takes much, MUCH longer in BfA compared to vanilla / classic. Getting raid ready takes SUBSTANTIALLY more commitment and time in retail - unless you consider LFR to be "raid ready". The only way any of your argument works is when you compare the absolute hardest content vanilla had to offer with the absolute easiest content retail has to offer - this is a false equivalency we see in this argument every single time.

Comparing the hardest content retail has with the hardest content vanilla had - retail is more demanding in both time and effort.
Comparing the easiest content vanilla had with the easiest content retail has, nothing has changed - its still extremely accessible and very easy - something wow was based around from day one - being casual friendly. They have added layer upon layer of more challenging content, slowly making the game more hardcore.

Just a reminder - early raids in vanilla were cleared by people in greens with ZERO time commitment other than leveling, and that was not just the best in the world - it was normal, and still is. You think vanilla hard these arduous grinds that took "months" (your word) and that everything took weeks/months to do - classic has proven without a shadow of a doubt that this is completely false.

Also all you've provided is emotion and falsehoods, I fail to see any evidence so far

Nothing i have provided is either emotion, or a falsehood - mythic raiding is exponentially more challenging and time consuming than anything that existed in Vanilla. This isnt an emotional response, and isnt a falsehood - you even agree with me.

[Ielenia]

Read my other posts, I'm not talking about WoW vs other games, I'm talking about vanilla back in 2004 vs wow in 2020

Reread my post, too: "Wow was never developed to be "hardcore", but actually to be inclusive, to be "casual"."

The World of Warcraft game was created to be easier, to be inclusive, to be casual. That was the philosophy from back then, and is still the philosophy of today.

[XDurionX]

I'm bored by the game after 15 years, part 67456354623

[Marrilaife]

It's about getting women.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure making 3rd expansion in a row about edgy undead elf female in a tight leather bodice is all about pandering to female audience. Vast majority of female characters are designed by men for men to look at and that's the truth, vast majority of female toons in wow have a male behind the keyboard playing it. You're delusional if you think otherwise.

If designers wanted to pander to female audience there would be many more romantic sub plots that are atm mostly in the realm of fan fic. And not have stories like Aggra who disappears after 1 expansion just to be "an invisible mother of Thrall's kids". Tbh outside of Katherine Proudmoore I'm not sure if there's 1 mother figure that actually plays any role. Or they're like Alleria who just left her son behind to go around for 1000 years to kick ass and consume void.

The "strong female character" is basically a carbon copy of male superhero just with boobs. With personality of a shallow pond and looks of eternal 20yo. Plays a role of an eye candy and "mandatory minority representation" (in the same way as there must be nowadays a token black, gay and transgender person in nearly every game, movie or tv show).

And don't worry, Activision already has a game in their portfolio that is a massive success among female audience. It's called Candy Crush.

[arkanon]

Reread my post, too: "Wow was never developed to be "hardcore", but actually to be inclusive, to be "casual"."

The World of Warcraft game was created to be easier, to be inclusive, to be casual. That was the philosophy from back then, and is still the philosophy of today.

Same argument i am trying to make, although i would add that they have tried to cater to the hardcore crowd over the years by adding some pretty tough content, while still maintaining that casual player base. Vanilla was extremely casual, and if you want it to be, so is BfA. The difference is, if you want BfA to be hardcore, it can be.

[Jonnusthegreat]

You've made a fundamental mistake in assuming that there is, or ever was, a singular 'audience' for their games. There's a huge spectrum of players that play this game, with a huge spectrum of playstyles. It might feel like doom-n-gloom on forums like this one, but for every person screeching about Blizz and whether or not they even play their game (narrator: yes, they play it), there's probably a thousand or more that don't give a shit about whatever has the vocal minority in an uproar.

Yes, the game has changed. Yes, gamers have changed. That's the world for you. But there are still plenty of people who enjoy Blizzard games just fine.

- - - Updated - - -



I don't even know where to begin with how dumb this post is.

Are you disagreeing with well documented marketing strategies?

- - - Updated - - -

Yeah, I'm pretty sure making 3rd expansion in a row about edgy undead elf female in a tight leather bodice is all about pandering to female audience. Vast majority of female characters are designed by men for men to look at and that's the truth, vast majority of female toons in wow have a male behind the keyboard playing it. You're delusional if you think otherwise.

If designers wanted to pander to female audience there would be many more romantic sub plots that are atm mostly in the realm of fan fic. And not have stories like Aggra who disappears after 1 expansion just to be "an invisible mother of Thrall's kids". Tbh outside of Katherine Proudmoore I'm not sure if there's 1 mother figure that actually plays any role. Or they're like Alleria who just left her son behind to go around for 1000 years to kick ass and consume void.

The "strong female character" is basically a carbon copy of male superhero just with boobs. With personality of a shallow pond and looks of eternal 20yo. Plays a role of an eye candy and "mandatory minority representation" (in the same way as there must be nowadays a token black, gay and transgender person in nearly every game, movie or tv show).

And don't worry, Activision already has a game in their portfolio that is a massive success among female audience. It's called Candy Crush.

That's the thing - that's one game. Imagine if those players expanded to a different genre. Females dominate the mobile market. It's about bringing them to other markets as gaming becomes more mainstream.

[Marrilaife]

That's the thing - that's one game. Imagine if those players expanded to a different genre. Females dominate the mobile market. It's about bringing them to other markets as gaming becomes more mainstream.

Females also have a tendency to play games that revolve around non-violent themes, like Sims. I'd swear pet battles and collection menus (transmog, mounts) hooked more females onto wow than all the "strong female Lara Croft style protagonists" that are all created surprise surprise for male audience.