STOP making the game for the top 0.01% of the players! It’s killing this game

[Celement]

lol what? None of that is difficult. The main difference between catching a Dace and a Tuna is for the Tuna to actually spawn. There's no skill involved in catching the Tuna, just throw the line out and click when it bites, either the game decides you caught it or you didn't.

As for bugs, yeah, you gotta walk slowly up to some. Ok? That's not difficult. there's no "clear difficulty curve" in "walking slowly"

This was a bad analogy, you should just walk away from it now. I get that you can't, because the existence of Animal Crossing and it's popularity demolishes your entire argument on these forums, but to see you pretending that Animal Crossing has a "difficulty curve" to try to justify your position is just laughable. Five-year olds can play every aspect of Animal Crossing while digging the boogers out at the same time.

Animal Crossing is popular because they made a fun game that is rewarding at every point, not because of "challenge" or "difficulty". Those things are expressly avoided because the game is meant for everyone, not just some small group the developers think play the "right way" and everything should be funneled into that "right way".

I don't really argue with people who start their argument with " yeah your right but let me redefine a word to split hairs"

It seems like a waste of effort rather just take the win no offense.

[VMSmith]

I don't really argue with people who start their argument with " yeah your right but let me redefine a word to split hairs"

It seems like a waste of effort rather just take the win no offense.

I recommend taking a look into a mirror, because the only person trying to redefine "difficult" to suit their purposes is yourself. That's why you're trying to redirect here rather than actually address the fact that your idea that Animal Crossing is difficult is balls and that everyone desires challenge and difficulty or they don't have fun.

But go ahead, take a stab at describing exactly what is "difficult" in Animal Crossing. You said rare fish and catching bugs, I explained how neither of them is difficult in any way. I told my wife about this conversation and her first thought was "You push the button to swing the net, you catch the bug. What's difficult?"

This is the same game you play with the word "casual". You define things in a way that only you believe and that has nothing to do with reality, and then claim those things support your positions.

I'll go ahead and "take the win" though and be done with you. You have nothing of value to say and when backed into a corner try to huff and puff like you are here, all because you honestly know your position is bollocks.

I'm still laughing at the idea that Animal Crossing is difficult

[Celement]

I recommend taking a look into a mirror, because the only person trying to redefine "difficult" to suit their purposes is yourself. That's why you're trying to redirect here rather than actually address the fact that your idea that Animal Crossing is difficult is balls and that everyone desires challenge and difficulty or they don't have fun.

But go ahead, take a stab at describing exactly what is "difficult" in Animal Crossing. You said rare fish and catching bugs, I explained how neither of them is difficult in any way. I told my wife about this conversation and her first thought was "You push the button to swing the net, you catch the bug. What's difficult?"

This is the same game you play with the word "casual". You define things in a way that only you believe and that has nothing to do with reality, and then claim those things support your positions.

I'll go ahead and "take the win" though and be done with you. You have nothing of value to say and when backed into a corner try to huff and puff like you are here, all because you honestly know your position is bollocks.

I'm still laughing at the idea that Animal Crossing is difficult

Different fish and bugs have different methods and allowances for how long you have to catch them. For fish it is reaction time for bugs it is usually distance.

They say never ascribe malice, that which can be explained by stupidity.

[potis]

If those hobos, as you so quaintly call them, outnumber hardcores by a factor of 10, they don't need to be retained very long to exceed the revenue that hardcores would deliver. Remember, as much as 99% of the players who have ever played WoW no longer do (if you believe that 100+ M accounts being created for WoW number that Blizzard shared some years ago; even a 30+ M estimate for total paid active accounts over time would give a quit percentage in the high 90s.)

So what? What matters it that players quit, not that the players understand or can express why they quit. It doesn't let game designers off the hook if their customers can't explain why they're gone. That's for the dev team to figure out. It's why they, not the players, are being paid.

Hey, now you are viewing it towards the right angle, but just wrong numbers.

Those numbers were at 130mil 9 years ago or so, they are probably over 200mil accounts now, and thats the point with the money and design.

We do know WoW peaks at the first month of the expansion, and then loses subs, but everyone forgets that people leave, and many others come back later, everyone is acting like first month is the only time people start the expansion, because thats logical to do, but it doesnt work like that.

The average true casual doesnt even know the expansion is out, trust me, i still get baffled 18 years after how someone that plays EVERY EXPANSION, always asks me "When did this release lol" 3 months after, cause he finally launched B.net cause his wife took the kids to their grandparents for the weekend, and trust me, they are a lot like that just in my circle of familiars or people i used to know, friends of friends, you get it, in my vicinity.

The majority of the players is people like that, its not people that log on often and do things, the problem as i see mostly, without the random goofy insults to trigger the weirdos on here is that people refuse to accept they have gotten better at the game and the game has changed to accommodate the true casuals even more, which means if you are slightly better than the average casual, but refuse to engage in higher tier content, then the game does run out of things to do semi-fast.

And thats okay, unsub and come back, cause who is Blizzard supposed to cater too? If they change the game to extend things with irrelevant farm and bullshit of the past like badges, and we go back to daily Heroics and 1 item per 2 months, compared to as it is now, the true casual will never even finish the basic campaign, so the average complainer that has been playing so long, but is shit at the game, has something to do, and the raiders will complain they are forced to do irrelevant shit for hours upon hours.

Which % of the players is the best to cater too and why do you think the game is so easy and feeds loot like hell?

TLDR: You are not supposed to play the game for 8hr/day anymore for at least the last 4 expansions, accept it and quit it if you run out of things to do or engage in higher tier content.

[Monkiy]

They should just remove all combat add-ons, then we'll no longer have an arms race between WoW devs and Add-on devs. Raiders won't have ten add-ons telling them exactly where to stand and when anymore, or to prep for interrupt, adds, etcetera, and will have to actually learn fights and pay attention to markers and raid leader calls. Then it no longer has to be stupidly difficult to pose even the slightest challenge.

Tell me you don't know how addons work, without telling me you don't know how addons work.

This reads as someone way outside the raiding scene just imagining what addons actually do.

[Zardas]

I recommend taking a look into a mirror, because the only person trying to redefine "difficult" to suit their purposes is yourself. That's why you're trying to redirect here rather than actually address the fact that your idea that Animal Crossing is difficult is balls and that everyone desires challenge and difficulty or they don't have fun.

But go ahead, take a stab at describing exactly what is "difficult" in Animal Crossing. You said rare fish and catching bugs, I explained how neither of them is difficult in any way. I told my wife about this conversation and her first thought was "You push the button to swing the net, you catch the bug. What's difficult?"

This is the same game you play with the word "casual". You define things in a way that only you believe and that has nothing to do with reality, and then claim those things support your positions.

I'll go ahead and "take the win" though and be done with you. You have nothing of value to say and when backed into a corner try to huff and puff like you are here, all because you honestly know your position is bollocks.

I'm still laughing at the idea that Animal Crossing is difficult

He never said that catching a fish was "difficult", he said that the later fishes were more difficult to catch, with seems to be the case. If you have A requiring a click to complete, B that requires two clicks, and C that requires three clicks, then passing from A to C is getting more difficult, even if none of those three are "difficult".

[VMSmith]

He never said that catching a fish was "difficult", he said that the later fishes were more difficult to catch, with seems to be the case. If you have A requiring a click to complete, B that requires two clicks, and C that requires three clicks, then passing from A to C is getting more difficult, even if none of those three are "difficult".

Do you know how to catch fish in Animal Crossing?

You push a button to cast the line. The fish nibbles, eventually bites. You push a button to catch the fish.

That's it. For every fish. Even the rare fish. The game decides if you caught it or not when you push the button to catch it. There's no "one click, two clicks, three clicks" or whatever you seem to think is going on. And fuck me that someone in this world would even think that "pushing a button three times is more difficult than pushing it one time, that means people WANT difficulty!".

He never said that catching a fish was "difficult"

What he said was: "Fishing gets harder for rarer fish". And no, it doesn't. Catching a tuna is exactly the same as catching a tadpole. You cast the line, the fish nibbles, the fish bites, you push the button and either catch the fish or not. There's no "harder" to any of it.

Please, for the love of God, stop pretending that anything about Animal Crossing is difficult, hard, challenging, or any of this nonsense bullshit that feeds into the idea that every video game must be challenging or no one will want to play it. Most people want fun and don't give a damn about challenge, except for you small minority that thinks everything in life must be earned, even our entertainment.

Mario Kart is one of the most popular games on the planet and it literally gives you better rewards the more you suck at it And it's FUN! Fun is all that matters, not challenge. Challenge can be fun, for some, and it's good that there are games that offer that for those people. But you challenge-fetishists can't seem to accept that anyone is allowed to have fun differently than yourselves.

[Zardas]

Do you know how to catch fish in Animal Crossing?

You push a button to cast the line. The fish nibbles, eventually bites. You push a button to catch the fish.

That's it. For every fish. Even the rare fish. The game decides if you caught it or not when you push the button to catch it. There's no "one click, two clicks, three clicks" or whatever you seem to think is going on. And fuck me that someone in this world would even think that "pushing a button three times is more difficult than pushing it one time, that means people WANT difficulty!".

Damn, you really seems to have some trouble understanding the difference between "hard" and "harder", as well as understanding the purpose of analogies, so I'm going to start from the very beginning.

Do you agree that clicking three times is harder than clicking one time. Don't bother thinking if this is related to the subject of Animal Crossing, or any other games, just answer the question. Now, I'm gonna assume that you agree that clicking one time is harder than clicking three times because it requires less movements and concentration from you.
Now is clicking one time or clicking three times hard ? Again, I'm gonna assume that you answered no, because none of those tasks are hard, the skill and concentration they require is so minimal that it doesn't pass the barre needed to qualify for being hard.
So now do you understand how you can have a, increase in difficulty without any of it component being actually hard ? I sure hope so.

In the context of Animal Crossing, I indeed don't know if it's harder to catch a late game fish compare to an early game fish (or even if such things as early game and late game stuff exist in Animal Crossing), but I assumed so based on what the other guy told. But I am then asking, is there no difference between a "early game fish" and a "late game fish" (again, assuming that such things exist in this game) ? Is the window to catch not smaller for late game fish (not asking if it's small, just if it's smaller).

What he said was: "Fishing gets harder for rarer fish". And no, it doesn't. Catching a tuna is exactly the same as catching a tadpole. You cast the line, the fish nibbles, the fish bites, you push the button and either catch the fish or not. There's no "harder" to any of it.

You write it yourself man, he said "harder", not hard. Now, if catching a tuna and the tadpole is stricly the same, there is indeed no difficulty curve in this game. But if the window to push the button is even 1 second smaller for the toadpal, then it's harder to get them (harder, not hard).

Please, for the love of God, stop pretending that anything about Animal Crossing is difficult, hard, challenging, or any of this nonsense bullshit that feeds into the idea that every video game must be challenging or no one will want to play it. Most people want fun and don't give a damn about challenge, except for you small minority that thinks everything in life must be earned, even our entertainment.

The other guy never said that anything in Animal Crossing was hard, challenging or "any of this nonsens", and neither did I. And I most definitely play for fun, and don't think that "everything in life must be earned". So please, stop assuming anything about people you don't know anything about, because it's definitely not helping your discours...

[VMSmith]

The other guy never said that anything in Animal Crossing was hard, challenging or "any of this nonsens", and neither did I.

They said:

Even games designed to be easy like animal crossing and minecraft have progressively increasing difficulty systems to complete them.

My entire point has been that ACNH does not have "increasing difficulty systems". You've admitted you know nothing of the game so why are you even opining about this? You took his word that it did because ... ???

Further, this posters history has been a consistent position that increasing difficulty and challenges is a necessity for a good game. They used Animal Crossing as evidence that even the most casual of games follows his assertion. They are, frankly, grossly in error.

The game decides if you caught the fish or not. There's no "quickdraw" bonus to catching fish, regardless of rarity. The only difference between a common fish and rare fish is frequency of spawn.

There's no "extra clicking" like you made up. And even if there were, pedantry is not a defense. Technicalities matter in a courtroom, not in normal life. Or do you really think there's someone out there thinking "this game was boring when I clicked once to catch a fish. Clicking twice makes it so much more fun!", because that's the point that's being asserted. But, again, this doesn't even actually happen in the game.

TLDR - Animal Crossing is NOT an example of increasingly difficult gameplay spurring a desire to play the game.

[Zardas]

They said:



My entire point has been that ACNH does not have "increasing difficulty systems". You've admitted you know nothing of the game so why are you even opining about this? You took his word that it did because ... ???

Further, this posters history has been a consistent position that increasing difficulty and challenges is a necessity for a good game. They used Animal Crossing as evidence that even the most casual of games follows his assertion. They are, frankly, grossly in error.

The game decides if you caught the fish or not. There's no "quickdraw" bonus to catching fish, regardless of rarity. The only difference between a common fish and rare fish is frequency of spawn.

There's no "extra clicking" like you made up. And even if there were, pedantry is not a defense. Technicalities matter in a courtroom, not in normal life. Or do you really think there's someone out there thinking "this game was boring when I clicked once to catch a fish. Clicking twice makes it so much more fun!", because that's the point that's being asserted. But, again, this doesn't even actually happen in the game.

TLDR - Animal Crossing is NOT an example of increasingly difficult gameplay spurring a desire to play the game.

I'm not sure if you ignore everything I say on purpose or if the problem is you in general, but any way that's quit painfull to read. Why can't you consider the fact that something being harder doesn't mean that said thing is hard ? Walking two meters is harder than walking one meter, but both are easy, what don't you understand in it ? And why do you think that my clicking analogy have anything to do with Animal Crossing when it's about making you understand the difference between hard and harder ? To make you understand that a game having a difficulty curve doesn't mean that any of it is hard ?

[Celement]

I'm not sure if you ignore everything I say on purpose or if the problem is you in general, but any way that's quit painfull to read. Why can't you consider the fact that something being harder doesn't mean that said thing is hard ? Walking two meters is harder than walking one meter, but both are easy, what don't you understand in it ? And why do you think that my clicking analogy have anything to do with Animal Crossing when it's about making you understand the difference between hard and harder ? To make you understand that a game having a difficulty curve doesn't mean that any of it is hard ?

I capped off my last post to him perfectly. It is better to simply ignore a troll then feed it.

[VMSmith]

And why do you think that my clicking analogy have anything to do with Animal Crossing

Because we were specifically talking about fucking Animal Crossing? I didn't give a shit about other games, I was talking about "increasing difficulty systems" in Animal Crossing ... which do not exist! Not once have I talked about other games. I don't care about "hard' and "harder" ... I'm talking about Animal Crossing having "increasing difficulty systems" ... which it does not.

Now, do you understand? Or do I have to repeat this over and over. We are talking about Animal Crossing. Not hypothetical game with "x click", "xx click", and "xxx click" that you pedantically want to call evidence of things being "harder" in this imaginary game you've invented. It's not. That's not harder. That's more clicking. More clicking is not "harder", in any way, except the most pedantic and tedious way of "well, technically it's more things!". Bravo, have a fucking apple. If LFR required one click by every participant, Normal took two clicks per, Heroic was three click each, and Mythic was a whopping four clicks by every player ... can you say Mythic is harder than LFR in any meaningful way other than pedantically? Would you be satisfied and call it "challenging"?

But, I'm done. You haven't kept up with the conversation to know what it's really about (hint: it was Animal Crossing). You admit you haven't played Animal Crossing so you don't even know what you're talking about. And you made an analogy about something no one in the conversation was talking about and act all offended that we haven't addressed it to your satisfaction! So, there's no point in speaking with you. Have fun, get the last word, yada yada. I've addressed your foolishness enough.

edit: What is the hardest fish to catch in Animal Crossing New Horizons? Answer: No fish is harder to catch than any other. The only factor is rarity, with bigger fish generally being more rare.

[Lady Atia]

Mythic players are way more than 0.1% of the player base. Today its more likely that you can swap the numbers and remove the dot, 10%.

In SoO 9000 guilds killed at least one boss on mythic. 22k on normal. We are closing in on half of the amount of normal players(41%ish). Which wasn't the case just a few years ago. In Tomb of Sargeras it was 9k vs 31k. Less than 30%. Going back in time, the raiders were even at even lower percentages simply because it had more players and more players are likely to have a bigger spread on what content they are playing.

If anything, blizzard should cater more to those who already play the game and has done for years, the raiders.

You aren't really thinking that people who killed the first "boss" on mythic are mythic raiders, right?

[Akka]

I raid both LFR and in TBC Classic, and I can tell you, LFR is 10 times harder. 3 Rygelon kills, 5 Rygelon wipes. 10 Illidan kills, 0 Illidan wipes. That's one example. And for Illidan it's chill, like very casual, alts in the raid. In LFR, it feels like everyone tryhard like insane. If my dad gamer group from Illidan would try Rygelon, we prolly wipe 20 times before being close to a kill.

Are you doing LFR with the same people who are doing Illidan ?
Or are you doing LFR with a bunch of unknow people without coordination and running all over the place like headless chickens ?
Because that could certainly explain the difference. I highly doubt that the average LFR clueless group wouldn't wipe on the Shard of Azeroth ten times in a row.

[Mendzia]

I raid both LFR and in TBC Classic, and I can tell you, LFR is 10 times harder. 3 Rygelon kills, 5 Rygelon wipes. 10 Illidan kills, 0 Illidan wipes. That's one example. And for Illidan it's chill, like very casual, alts in the raid. In LFR, it feels like everyone tryhard like insane. If my dad gamer group from Illidan would try Rygelon, we prolly wipe 20 times before being close to a kill. You can call us bad, but if we can do TBC endbosses but not LFR, it proves LFR is quite hard these days.

I am not saying TBC is hard - it is not. It is joke for moderately coordinated and T5+ geared guilds...
But now try to clear BT with TOTALLY RANDOM people with 0 consumes, one shot machanics, not pulling and aoeing all trash, no voice coms, no 234232 raid cooldowns, AFKing players and much, much more.
It is like comparing orange to apple.

[La]

Unfortunately most casual progression is through M+ or LFR, both of which are absolutely miserable forms of progression for casual players, which is why badges that keep gear mostly relevant and a raid that was somewhat challenging but could be done by casuals in lower numbers, made Wrath so popular. Whatever the case is, the fact there's no changes to M+ is a little disappointing.

There is very little ever added to this game as side content, similar in scale to pet battles. And don't even get me started on Mythic raiding, which is overtuned for world first races because Blizzard has to make every one of their games nonsensically an E-SpOrT. In fact, I'd say even those people got fucked over. I don't know how it became but the reality when I did it early in this expansion, raids dropped so little gear it felt like it was a waste of time, to the point you just obtained most of your gear as a mythic raider.. from the fucking weekly slot machine.

[Celement]

I am not saying TBC is hard - it is not. It is joke for moderately coordinated and T5+ geared guilds...
But now try to clear BT with TOTALLY RANDOM people with 0 consumes, one shot machanics, not pulling and aoeing all trash, no voice coms, no 234232 raid cooldowns, AFKing players and much, much more.
It is like comparing orange to apple.

I feel it's safe to compare it to modern day heroic more or less at least. I am sure you could argue it's a little off..

Is it possible to pug? Sure but you would want to filter the group.

[Imaginekekw]

This guy is just bad

- - - Updated - - -

This guy doesnt know this fucking game is design for trash casuals

[Azharok]

You aren't really thinking that people who killed the first "boss" on mythic are mythic raiders, right?

They technically are Mythic raiders, since they are raiding in mythic difficulty. I don't know why you wanna argue that.

[Lady Atia]

They technically are Mythic raiders, since they are raiding in mythic difficulty. I don't know why you wanna argue that.

It's not raiding if you only kill the first free-loot boss. Also clearly "designing the game for 1% of the players" means Cutting Edge players. And honestly, I wouldn't even bother with raiding if I couldn't get Cutting Edge lol.

Or in other words - if they would change the reward structure to match the upcoming fated raid+ season (normal gives a mount, heroic a title and mythic the portals) I wouldn't bother with mythic anymore, because I play for the mount, which is catering to the 1%.