Where have all the Raiders Gone?

[Vaelorian]

I don't know. I suspect to get gear? And why some people pay money to go afk or be dead in LFR is beyond me. Or be on follow or auto-attacking.

While I detest these people with a passion. The other day I grinded Terrace for about 8/9 times in a row. Around the 5th time, I started to feel like "fuck this, if I die I die and I'll go afk". I went this many times cause I had gotten so many coins and I still needed the tier shoulders to drop from Lei Shi.

Ofcourse they never dropped. So perhaps I should have stopped going there after the 5th time. Cause at the final 9th time I did absolutely nothing. I was so done with Terrace and the constant "gold" flow that I received.

So hypocrite much (at myself)? Yes perhaps... but I know now that my patience has a limit.

On the other hand people I call out via /w about being dead on purpose or running around "like you are doing something" - I get a load of crap thrown on me - like I should stfu and mind my own business - "it is LFR, so who cares!!!" etc

Yeah that really grinds my gears.

[Lord Blackmore]

So yea social interaction is actually kind of great instead of being a loner freak in a basement paying for playing a single player game.

Could you be more insulting next time, please?

Stupid stereotypes are stupid. The idea that someone who prefer to play alone is some kind of "freak" or "loner" is laughably ridiculous. It's just as bad and just as wrong as when people claim raiders, especially hardcore raiders, are "no life losers".

People play (mostly) alone for all kinds of reasons. Being free from constraints and schedules is a very attractive proposition for some. I spend years being held to
guild raiding schedules and I like the fact that now I can do things when I want. If I'm not running some sort of group content, I can AFK if I want and go do something else. It doesn't make me a "loser freak". What it makes me is very happy that I set my own schedule.

---------- Post added 2013-03-20 at 07:29 AM ----------

Of course they never dropped

I feel your pain. I've been to terrace in LFR more times than I can count and still not sha weapon (staff in my case)

[Osmeric]

YThe people who are allegedly too good for LFR, but aren't good enough for normal raiding are the exception, not the rule.

They appear to be much more numerous than the really elite players. And yet, Blizzard produces content for the latter.

[Firecrest]

You do realize, historically, VERY FEW people have raided at any point in the history of the game. I mean... really, at it's highest points, like when ICC was super nerfed for a long ass time, or DS was super nerfed for a long ass time, even then, very few people raided. Something around 20-30% of players, total, IIRC, killed a single boss in those. And that's at their HIGHEST POINT. Not many people raid. What you find valuable in the game, clearly, most of the players do not. The sense of community that people pine after is something they're looking at through tunnel vision, and ignoring the rest of what happens in the game for the sake of what's better for themselves, and that is a pretty big problem.

It's not fair to say "30% of players raided" as that is simply untrue. The way this figure is attained is by counting the number of characters with a certain achievement and then relating it to the "number of subs" figures that Blizzard posts every quarter. So, 30% of accounts raided. This is a huge difference. You're counting people with active subscriptions who didn't even log on during the tier as "non-raiders" and trying to say that because they didn't raid, they must've done other things. Truth is a large portion of Blizzard's sub numbers are non-raiders because they are non-players.

Better ways of achieving a relevant statistic here would be to do things like find out how many active accounts have raided. Or how many hours of the average log in was spent raiding. Or what percentage of the active population would self identify as a raider. Unfortunately, these types of statistics are ones that only Blizzard can get. Nonetheless, the figures you use are misleading and irrelevant.

---------- Post added 2013-03-20 at 09:17 AM ----------

In -your- opinion. Newsflash: I don't need or want to have "friends" in game. I never did.

And NO, that's not what makes a game multiplayer. People all playing at the same time make it multiplayer, even if it doesn't measure up to your "standards".

Newsflash: That's why I said "in my opinion" and not "everyone thinks like I do". Last I checked, this forum allowed opinions. The really funny part here is that you berated me for posting an opinion and then went on to post your own. Seriously, WTF? Maybe you should read your own signature from time to time. Or, you know, at least salt your foot a little before you cram it down your throat.

"People all playing at the same time" does not make a game multiplayer. If that were the case, then solitaire is multiplayer because somewhere out there, someone else is playing solitaire at the same time as me. If Blizzard inverted CRZ so that everyone got their own phase of the entire game and you never saw another player, no matter how many were logged on - would you still call it a multiplayer game?

Multiplayer requires some interaction between the players. Just having them all there is not enough.

[Mad_Murdock]

Multiplayer requires some interaction between the players. Just having them all there is not enough.

How are you defining "interaction" ? Do I need to speak to a person ? Just see them ? By seeing them I need to do something or change something ? all of the above ?

[Grogo]

Straight up, LFR is just more convenient. Raid when you want, get the same loot, see all of the bosses. Generally speaking there are fewer wipes than progression normals and heroics.

Well one, it is not raiding. Two, it is really hard to wipe, it is not even in the same universe as nornal/heroic. Three, it is nothing more than a loot pinyata.

[Vaelorian]

Also love the comment saying "people grow up". Like WoW is only being played by "kids". Sure a lot of kids play it, sadly...

But my guild consisted of very succesful people who even had their own businesses. Ergo growing up has nothing to do with not playing WoW anymore. Perhaps people who say this think that one day, they'll grow out of playing games. I've yet to see people do so. I'm not that old tho 34. A lot of my guildies are above that maxing around 55 (still they have the skills). Sure some people won't play games anymore - but this has only something to do with other matters being more important for that person.

[Velerios]

I also only raid LFR, because i can no longer raid on fixed shedules. Yes, it would be nice if it would be harder (LFR heroic), but until then i can raid and i can see the content that i want, raid when i want and so on.

[Grogo]

Let's just all be honest, LFR has nothing to do with seeing content, that is the biggest lie we all tell ourselves for using LFR. It is nothing more than getting gear and getting it easily. No more no less.

[Firebert]

I cannot even bring myself to run LFR most of the time, what is it exactly people enjoy about it?

It's raiding (the content you're paying monthly for) that is accessible to the masses with no loot drama and temporal restrictions.

That's why I love it. I don't want to be stuck on the outside for an entire patch cycle (Firelands) again.

[Deleted]

Its none of what any of you guys said so far .

Its Blizzard putting more and more effort into the game .

Why make new raids when u can have same raid with more difficulty levels ? It kills the excitement , the "new" feeling .
Oh its the same crap as LFR only with more hp and an extra spell , oh and lets make him do more dmg , yesssss , that will be great .

So why should i bother with normal and hc ? i already seen the content , there's no point doing it again on a "harder" difficulty , there's nothing new to see . And besides , all that loot wont make any difference, since when the next tier comes the LFR loot will be on par if not better than normal gear from the last tier .

This is why people are raiding less and less .

Also leaving aside all of that , most of the old players left the game , leaving behind a sea of new players that dont know and probably will never know what real raiding is .

[Lord Blackmore]

Newsflash: That's why I said "in my opinion" and not "everyone thinks like I do". Last I checked, this forum allowed opinions. The really funny part here is that you berated me for posting an opinion and then went on to post your own. Seriously, WTF? Maybe you should read your own signature from time to time. Or, you know, at least salt your foot a little before you cram it down your throat.

If you think that was "berating", you are either thin skinned or are new to the internet. In any case, you're free to have any opinion you want. But I'm free to criticize your opinion or hold your opinion in low regard, if I choose. Which I absolutely do choose.

[Firebert]

...Normal raiding but guilds have to put aside their bias about LFR for that to happen. As easy as LFR may be, it's worth something to know the rooms, know what the bosses look like and have a general feel for the fight if one intends to step up.

Problem is, people see LFR as too easy, and this makes the LFR achievement worthless when you apply to a guild (I know from first-hand experience).

[Firecrest]

How are you defining "interaction" ? Do I need to speak to a person ? Just see them ? By seeing them I need to do something or change something ? all of the above ?

I think that would vary by game. But, at a minimum, I would say that in order to be a multiplayer game, you have to have the ability to affect someone else's play. In RPG's this generally consists of 1) grouping together to meet a goal that can't be reached individually or 2) through direct PvP interactions. There are various degrees of this interactivity though, right? For example, the shared growth of the Isle of Thunder through individuals doing dailies technically meets the criteria of item 1 - but just barely. While the PVP that happens on the Isle is a very strong example of item 2.

Since this little sub-conversation has strayed a bit, I should probably clarify some things before someone who didn't read it all makes some incorrect assumptions. I'm not saying WoW is no longer multiplayer. The example given was that a WoW without guild organized raiding would lose a lot of what makes it an MMO. Namely, the vast majority of item 1. LFR is raiding. And it does, weakly, meet the individual collaboration of item 1. However, guild organized raiding builds a much stronger connection and thus is "more" multiplayer than WoW would be without it.

Basically, I view "multiplayer" as more than just people playing the same game. The term is more defined by the connections you make. If that makes any sense. As an example, WoW and SC2 are both multiplayer. However, I would say WoW is more indicative of a true MMO by virtue of the fact that you are more likely to build significant and lasting connections. In WoW, you have guilds of people that you see daily and communities within servers that you interact with constantly. Unless you're significantly vested in a particular custom community, your social interactions in SC2 are mostly limited to "glhf" and "gg" with someone you'll likely never see again.

I would prefer to see the “multiplayer” aspect of WoW stay more like WoW and less like SC2.

If you think that was "berating", you are either thin skinned or are new to the internet. In any case, you're free to have any opinion you want. But I'm free to criticize your opinion or hold your opinion in low regard, if I choose. Which I absolutely do choose.

Oh yes. You're totally allowed to make an ass of yourself. That is definitely your God given right. Feel free to continue. lol

[Lord Blackmore]

How are you defining "interaction" ? Do I need to speak to a person ? Just see them ? By seeing them I need to do something or change something ? all of the above ?

I'd like to know the answer to this as well. I tend to think that most players interact with other players to some degree, be it LFD, LFR, being in a guild or just killing rares on the Isle.

[Firebert]

Well one, it is not raiding.

Groups of 6 or more players are raids, and they're in an instance that can handle a group of larger than 5 players, making it a raid instance, and they're killing bosses, so they're raiding.

[Lord Blackmore]

Oh yes. You're totally allowed to make an ass of yourself. That is definitely your God given right. Feel free to continue. lol

I'm not making an ass of myself for calling you out over your idea that "continuing relationships" are important in a multiplayer game. In any case, WoW continues to provide ways for people to have those kinds of relationships while at the same type allowing people to not bother with it at all.

[Firebert]

LFR has nothing to do with seeing content.

True.

LFR has everything to do with keeping raids coming as end-game content.

[Mad_Murdock]

I would prefer to see the “multiplayer” aspect of WoW stay more like WoW and less like SC2.

Well, you're right it's a bit subjective based on the game. From what you wrote, it sounds like you're applying Multiplayer to mean the same as MMO. And that's where I would split the hairs. I've played First person shooters for many years before ever loading up WoW (or any MMO) Counter-Strike had a fairly strong and large community in it's day and still has a very surprising large player base given it's 15 years old. Before the internet, we played on LANS and it was still consider "Multiplayer", because the basic definition was that you had multiple players in the same game at the same time. Your interaction was killing the other guy and if you so desired, you typed something out to heckle them.

Now it seems everyone wants to add on to what it means to be a Multiplayer game and what MMO really means. Even today, most all First preson shooters can't support more than 64 people at a time. So any game that can have several hundred to a couple of thousand people on the same server is a MMO. Where I think many people add too much, is this notion that in order to be a MMO, is that I must be forced into interacting with hundreds of people daily else it's just a single player game. As usual, it's the extremist that muddy the water too much.

In the real world, I can fly from ghost town Montana to ghost town Russia, along the way I can come in contact with 15,000 people (at the airports alone), I'm not required to have any real interaction with them at all. Oddly in WOW, if I choose not to interact with more than 3-4 people, I'm some how a loner, anti-social, nut job. Yet, I'm 99% confident that same label isn't applied in my travels from Montana to Russia

[Firecrest]

I'm not making an ass of myself for calling you out over your idea that "continuing relationships" are important in a multiplayer game.

Correct. As stated, there's nothing wrong with debating opinions. That's why we're here. You're making an ass of yourself for telling someone they shouldn't share their opinion, then sharing your own as though it were the end all of everything and then having a signature that states in part, "Opinions are not fact". Duh.