Will Blizzard nerf your "meaningful choice"?

[SirCowdog]

Blizzard has been under pressure from some elements of its audience to reintroduce RPG elements back to the game. RPG design, in the most basic sense, is about making choices for your characters.

It's obvious that when there are several options available that can change the nature of your character and it's stupidly easy to move between those choices then they really aren't choices at all. Just switches that are turned on and off at will.

Covenants are very much an RPG element: Who will you be? What do you choose? Everyone should make that choice if it's to have any meaning.

I think Preach said it best. Or maybe it was from an Asmongold video where he quoted one of his viewers:

Anyway, it went something like "It's not that we want to switch covenants on the fly, and change our entire appearance and place in the lore. It's the systems and abilities tied to those covenants that are the pressure point."

The problem is that Blizzard has tied everything under a single umbrella: Covenant signature abilities, soulbinds, and conduits. They're attempting to mesh the RPG roleplay choice of covenant identity to the underlying gameplay mechanics. And quite frankly, I and many others believe that they're failing to do that in a manner that's going to be fair or balanced.

I'm not against having more impactful roleplaying choices. But they do not need to be needlessly tied to important performance-related abilities and attributes when they don't even make any sense within the context of the story. Bellular made this point in one of his lore videos about how the Maw-Walker(the PC) is helping everyone, and it actually makes a LOT of sense that he/she would have access to multiple abilities from several or all of the covenants.

And I will grant: If this was a permanent choice, such as a sub-class or something that would alter our characters for the remainder of the game's lifespan, I could stomach it. But it's not. It's a choice about a rental power that will change from patch to patch, and go away next expansion.

Players constantly switch specs. They constant switch talents. They can change their appearance on the fly via xmog, and even their hair, skin, and gender in the barber shop. They swap gear CONSTANTLY. But suddenly we're supposed to accept that a rental power that's little better than a talent is meaningful enough to warrant being semi-permanent? That's just now how WoW is played!

[Rageonit]

And yet THOUSANDS of players are constantly yelling "Go go go!" or wondering why players in their group are so slow, or flipping them crap because their DPS is bad. All of M+ is based almost entirely on speed running to beat a timer, FFS!

On another note, imagine what would happen if they capped m+ at 15 today. So much discussion & angst on class discords is based around meta specs: best tanks, best healers, best DPS... But the highest reward you can get is 15. Cap it at 15, imagine what happens. Therein lies the biggest sin of Blizzard. Content like that (infinite difficulty scaling) should have no place in an MMORPG game. It only invites the destructive min-max behaviour.

[ablock87]

no one is buying that.

OP brings up a good point.

What is choice when decisions made above change what you picked through no power or player agency of your own.

I am. I want to base my choice more on story and aesthetic than how strong an ability is. Not everyone makes their choice based on performance, believe it or not.

[SirCowdog]

go at the 39.22 timestamp https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEcXvDDtarc

I actually found this part VERY interesting:

(Blizz) also feels that having complete freedom to choose may take away Players' freedom by forcing them to be optimal

However, isn't the argument that at the lower levels of content(LFR, Normal, and even heroic) are easy and accessible enough that players don't need to be optimal in order to clear them? Wouldn't the solution be to clarify to the players that easier content doesn't require optimal builds, while allowing min-maxing for harder difficulty is ok?

The problem is that this is an issue of community perception. Players are not forced to be sub-optimal; nor does being sub-optimal actually matter at the lower end. Likewise, being sub-optimal doesn't matter to a player who operates at the lower end of the game's difficulty.

But forcing players to be sub-optimal, by taking away their choice to do so, DOES matter at the higher end, where players want it and enjoy it!

- - - Updated - - -

This will follow the usual iterative process. I don't think anyone can fairly expect them to conjure perfection from a get go.

Except they've already had the iteration of the past 2-3 expansions. At this point I believe it's MORE than fair to expect them to get it right by now. :/

That's the entire point we've been trying to make for the past few pages.

[Baconeggcheese]

Path of Exile is probably the strongest example I can give in favor of designing for min-maxing.

Granted, WoW is not POE. The playerbase is different. WoW has a more broad spectrum of players from Casual to Hardcore. However, POE is a perfect example of how min-maxing gameplay and design can absolutely be incredibly fun and engaging, both in terms of raw calculation of performance, and the actual execution of the gameplay.

Yeah PoE is very much making a niche game and just owning that, where WoW is trying to be a themepark that is attractive to a broad spectrum of different kinds of players.

I definitely don't want to see WoW (or god forbid diablo 4) become PoE, but there's definitely inspiration to take from there.

Did he actually say that? o_O

Yup, in the preach interview / discussion iirc.

[SirCowdog]

I actually think that this beta did backfire there somewhat.

I and others are part of CE raider invites and it does not take a genius to figure out that CE raiders will be very critical of a system that does not allow them 100% optimal base everywhere.

After playing beta extensively, I believe the generated noise far surpasses the actual state of things. Overall, SL so far, as I seen it - is one of the most player friendly expansions in past several cycles. The negativity generated is completely disproportionate to real state of things there.

Unfortunately this noise causes people to "pre"-hate the whole deal, despite them not really even knowing what they are talking about. There are many here making doomsday scenarios, but not even having beta access to see this for themselves.

At the end of the day we're still going to play the game. It's going to be fun. It's just frustrating to have to deal with the problems identified in testing, that don't get fixed until the last third of the expansion because Blizzard doesn't want to admit they were wrong about it.

- - - Updated - - -

Oh..it is more along the lines that everyone has an opinion that Blizzard "should" listen to. A casual Hexweave bag crafter fits in perfectly...because...why should one only listen to the "professional" gamers? It is not they who make up the biggest group of people who shell out the 15 dollars a month.

And at the end of the day...it is what it's about for a company. Get as many people as possible to pay for your product.

If a professional in the business of air quality and particulates tells you that your mask design has a lot of flaws with it that will make it less effective, do you listen to that guy, or do you listen to the rando off the street who says that just putting your T-shirt over your nose is going to work just fine?

Yes, I get it: The WoW playerbase is massively diverse, and the game caters to a LOT of different playstyles. But when it comes down to who Blizzard should listen to, maybe it should be the players who play it for a literal living, and spent dozens of hours every week on their Beta and PTS servers, and not the guy who uses "Hexweave bag crafting casual" as his credentials(unless, of course, the question is about hexweave bags).

- - - Updated - - -

It only invites the destructive min-max behaviour.

I strongly disagree that min-maxing is destructive. I made this point earlier with the example of POE.

Destructive to what, exactly?

- - - Updated - - -

I am. I want to base my choice more on story and aesthetic than how strong an ability is. Not everyone makes their choice based on performance, believe it or not.

Then disconnect the choice of power from the choice of story and aestetic.

- - - Updated - - -

I definitely don't want to see WoW (or god forbid diablo 4) become PoE, but there's definitely inspiration to take from there.

Neither do I! But there are very important lessons to be learned from it.

[Rageonit]

I strongly disagree that min-maxing is destructive. I made this point earlier with the example of POE.

We might just disagree on this point, it's fine. Better try to imagine what would happen if they'd capped m+ at 15 today.

[Baconeggcheese]

go at the 39.22 timestamp https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEcXvDDtarc

Man you got me watching the whole damned thing again shit... was such a good discussion.

Not even from the parts people like to harp on or anything, just genuinely awesome to have a developer having such a thorough discussion with someone as opposed to the usual Q&A. I still really hope they continue to do more of those like that in the future, especially with all kinds of different players where preach tends to represent a more high end player as far as youtubers are concerned.

This will follow the usual iterative process. I don't think anyone can fairly expect them to conjure perfection from a get go.

As usual they will see how it goes, make adjustments, introduce new stuff down the road and when SL is done and gone, we might see some of it incorporated in whatever reskin+evolution system v5.0 they conjure in 10.0.

It's more of the usual. This time their theme is customization, guess they want to mix things up a bit and I'm cool with that, personally.

As you pointed out, this is just a new version of the same kind of system from legion. They've been iterating on this for 4 years and they're still repeating the exact same mistakes... and somehow people are still defending it with the best defense being "it won't matter".

[Rageonit]

Not even from the parts people like to harp on or anything, just genuinely awesome to have a developer having such a thorough discussion with someone as opposed to the usual Q&A. I still really hope they continue to do more of those like that in the future, especially with all kinds of different players where preach tends to represent a more high end player as far as youtubers are concerned.

I'd say this is rather doubtful, because it seems like the vocal crowd has drawn only one conclusion from this discussion: that Blizzard should "pull the ripcord". So if I was in Ion's shoes, I'd probably think: "Why even try"? But to be perfectly honest, the moment Ion said those words during the live, I instantly knew people will use them against him. And now you have "influential" personas like Bellular suggesting that no ripcord ever existed and Ion is basically a liar. If you think this kind of reaction will incline Blizzard to do more stuff like that in the future, you're in for a disappointment (and rightfully so).

[Gaidax]

As you pointed out, this is just a new version of the same kind of system from legion. They've been iterating on this for 4 years and they're still repeating the exact same mistakes... and somehow people are still defending it with the best defense being "it won't matter".

That's not the only argument there, but for the sake of this specific reply. Yup, in the end it did not matter. If the expansion will be good, a restriction or two they put in won't matter any.

It's basically like Legion and if you'd think about it there was a whole lot of headscratchers there starting with RNG legiondaries, multispec and alts nightmare and ending with hundreds of MoS runs and what not. But in the end, after it was done - it was a good expansion.

Same will be here, except that starting point is much better than Legion because we play with Legion Systems v3.0 with a fresh coat of paint and much less grind and RNG. If in the end Shadowlands will offer good content, it will be a good expansion, despite this relatively small annoyance for some.

- - - Updated - - -

I'd say this is rather doubtful, because it seems like the vocal crowd has drawn only one conclusion from this discussion: that Blizzard should "pull the ripcord". So if I was in Ion's shoes, I'd probably think: "Why even try"? But to be perfectly honest, the moment Ion said those words during the live, I instantly knew people will use them against him. And now you have "influential" personas like Bellular suggesting that no ripcord ever existed and Ion is basically a liar. If you think this kind of reaction will incline Blizzard to do more stuff like that in the future, you're in for a disappointment (and rightfully so).

Ion does not seem to me as a person who lets these "feels" get in front of his job.

He's really good at his lawyertalk and he has no problem "admitting" things and making himself the public enemy no.1, as long as it keeps the train chugging along.

Pretty sure once stream is over he goes to cry in the corner wiping tears with all those heaps of money he gets for what he does. /s

Wait and see, he might yet end up being the next President of Blizzard.

[Rageonit]

Ion does not seem to me as a person who gets these "feels" get in front of his job.

Is doing lives with youtubers his job though? I don't know, maybe it is. If I was Ion, I'd probably know beforehand that what I'm doing is not that different from driving really really fast in a direction of a brick wall. Do you think he genuinely believed he can win over people like Preach?

[Gaidax]

Is doing lives with youtubers his job though? I don't know, maybe it is. If I was Ion, I'd probably know beforehand that what I'm doing is not that different from driving really really fast in a direction of a brick wall. Do you think he genuinely believed he can win over people like Preach?

His job is pumping those expansions and patches every 6 months and making the whole thing tick. This is part of making the whole thing tick, he does not mind taking these interviews to release some community pressure and at the same time make a target dummy of himself, as long as it lets rest of the team do their work in peace.

I'm not terribly sure about why we should even pit Ion and Preach. Preach is an influencer, Ion is a game director. Their goals and targets are very different.

[Ganksinatra]

Of COURSE it will be nerfed if it's too high power. It would be one thing if we had no idea what sort of change these things would make to our rotations or dps or hps or tps. But we do know. And we know some are FAR better than the other.

Imagine watching that Bandersnatch Black Mirror thing in the 80s, before the internet. You could make a choice and never be the wiser about how it changed the movie unless you played through again. Now, we ALL know. And here is the shitty part:

If Blizzard made these perks the same with just some different flavor, to make sure that one wouldn't be different than the other outside of your "meaningful choice", people would bitch about that, too.

[SirCowdog]

So if I was in Ion's shoes, I'd probably think: "Why even try"?

Because, presumably, it would be to test your ideas and improve them based on live reactions and beta feedback.

Unfortunately Blizzard isn't doing that. They're just digging their feet in and refusing to acknowledge the flaws with these kinds of systems.

[MoanaLisa]

And I will grant: If this was a permanent choice, such as a sub-class or something that would alter our characters for the remainder of the game's lifespan, I could stomach it. But it's not. It's a choice about a rental power that will change from patch to patch, and go away next expansion.

Agree with you about the permanence of it however a lore case could be made that the covenants and powers only matter while in the Shadowlands (i.e. expansion). Patch to patch? Yeah, no.

I suppose the justification for the umbrella design is just that: You're in the Shadowlands and that changes you once you choose a side. You don't necessarily get to pick and choose what changes once you pick a covenant. I'm OK with that. I understand why others are not but a huge majority of the negativity seems to be coming from high-level min-maxers and raiders. It's easy enough to argue that due to their small numbers they shouldn't carry an out-sized influence. They do though. They always have and likely always will.

I've not been shy about saying that the future of the game lies more with story and actual injections of character to the game than ticky-tacky math-based theory-crafting tricks (e.g. Corruption). So that's where I'm coming from.

[Ganksinatra]

Because, presumably, it would be to test your ideas and improve them based on live reactions and beta feedback.

Unfortunately Blizzard isn't doing that. They're just digging their feet in and refusing to acknowledge the flaws with these kinds of systems.

I agree with this. MMOs are not the place for "meaningful decisions". Because by definition, decisions means taking a different path. And when one path is CLEARLY the "right" path (based on class/spec), it removes choice. It's like someone once told me about the concept of "God" and the need for faith. If "God" (however you see them) just granted every desire you had, you'd be a moron to not believe. MMOs are the "God isn't a genie" choice. Single player games can be.

[SirCowdog]

Agree with you about the permanence of it however a lore case could be made that the covenants and powers only matter while in the Shadowlands (i.e. expansion). Patch to patch? Yeah, no.

Can you clarify? Abilities always change from patch to patch. Are you saying you don't think that will happen this time...or just that there's no lore explanation for the patch-to-patch shift?

I suppose the justification for the umbrella design is just that: You're in the Shadowlands and that changes you once you choose a side.

Except that it doesn't really make sense to "choose a side", since all the covenants work together against the jailor and to keep help keep the machine of death running. There's even quests for one faction to help another. This isn't aldor vs scryer, or horde vs alliance. It's not the same mutually exclusive dynamic at all.

a huge majority of the negativity seems to be coming from high-level min-maxers and raiders. It's easy enough to argue that due to their small numbers they shouldn't carry an out-sized influence. They do though. They always have and likely always will.

The point I made about this earlier still stands:

If min-maxing is less important the lower you go in difficulty, then why are players who operate at harder difficulties, who enjoy min-maxing, having what they enjoy curtailed based on a design decision for players who don't operate at that level?

If it's an important RP decision, fine. Make it so that it ONLY effects the RP side of things and not the mechanical aspects. Let the RPers play whatever they hell they want at the casual level. But allow min-maxers to also have their enjoyment by making abilities more accessible or interchangeable.

- - - Updated - - -

Just thought of something. Is there any reason why a stacking buff that adds up each week couldn't be applied to staying in a covenant? Let the Min-Maxers swap as they please, but reward people for sticking with a choice?

[Echo of Soul]

I misjudged you then i thought you disliked the idea of people being able to focus on performance should they wish it.

Minmaxers can focus on performance all they want. It's when they demand changes to the game that affect the rest of us that we have a problem

- - - Updated - - -

I think Preach said it best. Or maybe it was from an Asmongold video where he quoted one of his viewers:

Anyway, it went something like "It's not that we want to switch covenants on the fly, and change our entire appearance and place in the lore. It's the systems and abilities tied to those covenants that are the pressure point."

The problem is that Blizzard has tied everything under a single umbrella: Covenant signature abilities, soulbinds, and conduits. They're attempting to mesh the RPG roleplay choice of covenant identity to the underlying gameplay mechanics. And quite frankly, I and many others believe that they're failing to do that in a manner that's going to be fair or balanced.

I'm not against having more impactful roleplaying choices. But they do not need to be needlessly tied to important performance-related abilities and attributes when they don't even make any sense within the context of the story. Bellular made this point in one of his lore videos about how the Maw-Walker(the PC) is helping everyone, and it actually makes a LOT of sense that he/she would have access to multiple abilities from several or all of the covenants.

And I will grant: If this was a permanent choice, such as a sub-class or something that would alter our characters for the remainder of the game's lifespan, I could stomach it. But it's not. It's a choice about a rental power that will change from patch to patch, and go away next expansion.

Players constantly switch specs. They constant switch talents. They can change their appearance on the fly via xmog, and even their hair, skin, and gender in the barber shop. They swap gear CONSTANTLY. But suddenly we're supposed to accept that a rental power that's little better than a talent is meaningful enough to warrant being semi-permanent? That's just now how WoW is played!

You don't understand RPGs do you? Building your character (player power) is one of the core parts of the genre. Cosmetic crap isn't.

- - - Updated - - -

Agree with you about the permanence of it however a lore case could be made that the covenants and powers only matter while in the Shadowlands (i.e. expansion). Patch to patch? Yeah, no.

I suppose the justification for the umbrella design is just that: You're in the Shadowlands and that changes you once you choose a side. You don't necessarily get to pick and choose what changes once you pick a covenant. I'm OK with that. I understand why others are not but a huge majority of the negativity seems to be coming from high-level min-maxers and raiders. It's easy enough to argue that due to their small numbers they shouldn't carry an out-sized influence. They do though. They always have and likely always will.

I've not been shy about saying that the future of the game lies more with story and actual injections of character to the game than ticky-tacky math-based theory-crafting tricks (e.g. Corruption). So that's where I'm coming from.

Some things in the game come with that umbrella design. You wouldn't demand that they decoupled class abilities because you want to look like a death knight when playing your shadow priest?

[SirCowdog]

Minmaxers can focus on performance all they want. It's when they demand changes to the game that affect the rest of us that we have a problem

How does allowing easier switching of abilities effect "the rest of us"?

You don't understand RPGs do you? Building your character (player power) is one of the core parts of the genre. Cosmetic crap isn't.

I think it's both. And I think there's easily room for both. Roleplaying involves a lot of different things. RPGs can have aspects of enjoyable gameplay and mechanics as well as enjoyable themes and cosmetics.

The only thing I'm disputing is the idea that cosmetics or RP choices MUST be tied together with mechanical functionality in WoW, if not any MMO. Or at the very least, that a meaningful RP choice does not necessarily have to come along with an equally meaningful mechanical consequence. Especially when Blizzard has shown a repeated inability to fairly balance the two.

[Whitedragon]

I think most people know normies put in zero effort and expect to be carried. And when blizz makes that a challenge they cry on forums about it

Just like most people know that try hards will grind any stupid requirements you put in front of them, so may as well make it insane to keep them good and occupied, because lord knows they don't care about anything else.