"Catering to 5% of your player base will leave you with 5% of your player base"

[Osmeric]

The best games are the ones where Devs make the game they want to make and cater to nobody.

The technical term for games like that is "failures".

[Fitsu]

The technical term for games like that is "failures".

Yes, look at PoE, WoW back in it's prime, God of War, Diablo back in it's prime, Soulsborne series etc. etc. All such failures. Yet look what happened to WoW when they started trying to satisfy everyone, look what happened to Diablo when they started trying to satisfy everyone.

The best games have all been ones where the devs made the game they wanted to make, not the one that tried to satisfy everyone.

[Celement]

Is there 5% of any particular playerbase?

WoW has such a fractured playerbase I doubt there is 5% in any group.

[Osmeric]

Yes, look at PoE, WoW back in it's prime, God of War, Diablo back in it's prime, Soulsborne series etc. etc. All such failures. Yet look what happened to WoW when they started trying to satisfy everyone, look what happened to Diablo when they started trying to satisfy everyone.

The best games have all been ones where the devs made the game they wanted to make, not the one that tried to satisfy everyone.

Ah, survivor bias.

[dacoolist]

I honestly dont care if blizz only cares about the 5%, even if I'm not good enough to get into the top 5%.. I just want them to release good content and care about us - that's all im asking for fam, please.. pls halp

[Necromantic]

there is a lot of sealioning going on

Not really. Asking persistent questions is just people liking to be on forums and debating, trying to be vigilant. That's not trolling. Sealioning is doing so without any intent of having a real conversation.

We really need to stop branding people as trolls incorrectly. Conversations can get heated but that does not mean the person intended to cause an issue, they just got a little worked up is all. I know "Well, I'm not a mind reader, I cannot tell someone's actual intent" is a likely response but if you cannot clearly tell someone's intent, you're just creating unnecessary stigma.

Ah, survivor bias.

He's right though.

Many hugely successful games were created by NOT taking what players say into account. BotW is another.

Listening to what the gamers want has lead to some good games developed like FF7 remake but has lead to a lot more tragic failures like modern WoW.

[Miffinat0r]

What we do know is the WoW Devs do frequent MMO-C compared to their own forums.

What is true is you have two posts on this forum about the same thing both over 30 pages long.

I think there's one thing we can agree upon it's this:

WoW needs to figure out how to service non-competitive players with content that's meaningful, and if they can't they'll continue to lose subs to ESO, GW2, and FF14.

[arkanon]

That’s still you strawmaning

No it's not, it's responding to a specific point raised - the exact opposite of a strawman argument.

[NineSpine]

The best games are the ones where Devs make the game they want to make and cater to nobody. When you start catering to your playerbase your game becomes a confused mess a mechanics trying to make everyone happy.

Imagine what the Souls Series would be if they catered to what the 90% cried for. Instead they stuck to their guns, made the games they wanted to make and look at it now, a huge commercial success.

MMOs are generally not made to just be games. They are made to be complete hobbies for different groups of people, and they are meant to last for years and years within that capacity.

I'm not saying you are wrong completely, just that the comparison is a bit off.

[Osmeric]

He's right though.

Many hugely successful games were created by NOT taking what players say into account. BotW is another.

Every hugely successful game succeeds because it produces something the players want. They may not know they want it, but it's the devs job to figure that out. Devs catering to their own egos is no royal road to success. Most games fail, you know; pointing to rare smashes doesn't mean game design solipsism is the way to go.

[Relapses]

Every hugely successful game succeeds because it produces something the players want. They may not know they want it, but it's the devs job to figure that out. Devs catering to their own egos is no royal road to success. Most games fail, you know; pointing to rare smashes doesn't mean game design solipsism is the way to go.

"Game design solipsism" is no different in polarity than game design by democracy. The closest we have to the latter is OSRS and even there you can tell that a lot of features voted on are pretty controversial and the developers sometimes add shit to the game regardless of player feedback because they can. The sweet spot is somewhere in the middle.

[Necromantic]

Every hugely successful game succeeds because it produces something the players want. They may not know they want it, but it's the devs job to figure that out. Devs catering to their own egos is no royal road to success. Most games fail, you know; pointing to rare smashes doesn't mean game design solipsism is the way to go.

Not always. WoW happened because of developer vision, not a bunch of players tarnishing the concept with their "idiotic" ideas.

And it's not about dev's catering to their egos or their egos at all. It's their experience and ability to envision something bigger. When WoW came out, there were a bunch of very talented developers from prestigious schools. Now it's full of budget developers from community colleges.

Listening to customer feedback is a good thing but when you base all your changes around exactly what a bunch of whiny vocal minority people say, you get what we have now. Then you get to hear those same people complain about getting exactly what they asked for.

[NineSpine]

Not always. WoW happened because of developer vision, not a bunch of players tarnishing the concept with their "idiotic" ideas.

And it's not about dev's catering to their egos or their egos at all. It's their experience and ability to envision something bigger. When WoW came out, there were a bunch of very talented developers from prestigious schools. Now it's full of budget developers from community colleges.

Listening to customer feedback is a good thing but when you base all your changes around exactly what a bunch of whiny vocal minority people say, you get what we have now. Then you get to hear those same people complain about getting exactly what they asked for.

Most of the people that designed wow vanilla has little experience. You have no idea what you are talking about.

[Miffinat0r]

Not always. WoW happened because of developer vision, not a bunch of players tarnishing the concept with their "idiotic" ideas.

And it's not about dev's catering to their egos or their egos at all. It's their experience and ability to envision something bigger. When WoW came out, there were a bunch of very talented developers from prestigious schools. Now it's full of budget developers from community colleges.

Somewhat true. Back in the day it was literally dudes who played Meridan 59 and MUDs. Brad McQuaid and Jon Smedly came up with the formula when making EQ. WoW was in development at the time, but took a ton of influence from EQ. When Verant became part of SOE Blizz picked up a few devs and they went to work on BC. Blizz took Jeff Kaplan and Alex Asfraibi because players in their circle vouched for them. The two of them during their time with FoH and (I forget Kaplan's guild Steel something) because they were seen as influential players in the top tiers of gameplay. The two of them would design WoW around what EQ became in Planes of Power. Literally if you play PoP it's what WoW became. Top heavy game with emphasis on group play with nothing for anyone else.

That's why WoW is where it is right now. They never were able to break out of the cycle of top heavy design. Meanwhile ESO, GW2, and FF14 slowly would build their brands with emphasis on other forms of gameplay. That's the issue right now. The game is designed by people who refuse to let go of what they know about MMOs. Which worked in 2008 but now? Not so much.

[Raisei]

Why exactly do we need two of these factually incorrect threads on the front page? Or is there a difference between the Top 5% that apparently is the reason why the game is failing and the Top 0,1 % that is ruining the lifes of the so-called casuals?

The biggest problem with both of these threads is that the "casuals" keep redefining what that word means so that it fits their demands:

"I am a casual, which are only people like me, that do nothing but farm Marrowroot three and a halve days a week. Where is my content???!"
"I am a casual, which are only people like me, that do only kill the first boss in every dungeon and then log out. Where is my content???!"

The ugly truth you need to finally face is this: If you limit what you do in game, ignoring all the content there is to do, because you don't like it, then the problem is not the game, it is you.
The game's core content was always Dungeons and Raids. Everything else is for amusement inbetween, but it is not meant as main content.

If this core content is not for you then you simply picked the wrong game and I really have not the slightest clue how you could ever make that mistake. The game is 17 years old, it is well known what it offers and what it doesn't. Demanding everything to change because you personally decided to now play this game is literally thinking that the world should revolve around you and thus is incredibly selfish.

[Cthulhu 2020]

"New content that I don't want isn't new content."

More like "New content that people will go 'Ooooo' at for 10 minutes then forget it exists"

Blizzard needs to create activities for non raiders to do. If someone doesn't want to play PvP, raiding, or M+ then they quit the game, because there's nothing beyond mount and pet collecting after that point.

Many people often say they don't care about Blizzard making content other than raiding, but healthy MMO communities are made up of players who do all sorts of things. And yes, 95% of Blizzard's player base could be casual players if they had casual content to keep them engaged. But there isn't. So they don't.

[NineSpine]

Why exactly do we need two of these factually incorrect threads on the front page? Or is there a difference between the Top 5% that apparently is the reason why the game is failing and the Top 0,1 % that is ruining the lifes of the so-called casuals?

The biggest problem with both of these threads is that the "casuals" keep redefining what that word means so that it fits their demands:

"I am a casual, which are only people like me, that do nothing but farm Marrowroot three and a halve days a week. Where is my content???!"
"I am a casual, which are only people like me, that do only kill the first boss in every dungeon and then log out. Where is my content???!"

The ugly truth you need to finally face is this: If you limit what you do in game, ignoring all the content there is to do, because you don't like it, then the problem is not the game, it is you.
The game's core content was always Dungeons and Raids. Everything else is for amusement inbetween, but it is not meant as main content.

If this core content is not for you then you simply picked the wrong game and I really have not the slightest clue how you could ever make that mistake. The game is 17 years old, it is well known what it offers and what it doesn't. Demanding everything to change because you personally decided to now play this game is literally thinking that the world should revolve around you and thus is incredibly selfish.

I think the selfish part is demanding the game keep becoming more and more casual unfriendly because it makes you happy that other people aren't having fun. On the flip side, nobody is saying "delete the raids to make casual players happy".

[Nynax]

Every hugely successful game succeeds because it produces something the players want. They may not know they want it, but it's the devs job to figure that out. Devs catering to their own egos is no royal road to success. Most games fail, you know; pointing to rare smashes doesn't mean game design solipsism is the way to go.

I think the main argument is whether or not you believe games should primarily be developed as an art, with the vision and passion to see an imagined world realized through gameplay, or developed as a service, with the longevity and accessibility to "serve" as many people as possible. The "art" model is what indie devs thrive or die on, while the "service" model is generally prefered by corporate interest and more likely to suffer from design-by-committee.

Obviously the service model tens to be good at making money...but you will never really be able to corporatize the love of art and you can almost always tell when a game is developed with corporate interests over passion. In that sense, the "devs job to figure out what players want" often gets misplaced because of the disingenuous nature of that pursuit (insert faster horse analogy); focus groups will only ever tell you how to not take risks. It's a very different thing when a group of devs gets together and says "we just thought it'd be totally cool to make robot dinos in the jungle....how can we make that make sense?" Yes, the risk is higher, but the potential reward spawns entire new franchises that span multiple games.

Games as a service or as an art. You don't really get to pick both.

[MoanaLisa]

I think the selfish part is demanding the game keep becoming more and more casual unfriendly because it makes you happy that other people aren't having fun. On the flip side, nobody is saying "delete the raids to make casual players happy".

It's true. No one is saying that. What some are asking for is a more rewarding and interesting end game for players who, for whatever reason, cannot raid or do not have the skills to do high-level M+. It's not a huge ask. Despite the questions about whether or not Hazzikostas and his team can deliver such a thing it's good business to maximize the time that players who buy expansions stay around for.

[Echo of Soul]

It's true. No one is saying that. What some are asking for is a more rewarding and interesting end game for players who, for whatever reason, cannot raid or do not have the skills to do high-level M+. It's not a huge ask. Despite the questions about whether or not Hazzikostas and his team can deliver such a thing it's good business to maximize the time that players who buy expansions stay around for.

When Shadowlands launched it didn't even take two months until the casual playerbase realized that Blizzard hadn't given them any meaningful character progression and jumped ship.

It's really bad for business when you design the game in such a way that the bulk of the playerbase just quits immediately. And with all the convoluted systems and currencies the chances of them coming back for the patches shrinks.