There needs to be more single player content

[Biomega]

And you want to tell me gameplay for millions which creates millions of loyal customers does not justify that investment?

You thinking they can just make content for a 15-year old game that will attract "millions" is exactly what I was talking about. Players have a skewed perspective, they think everything is so easy and so obvious, because they haven't got the first clue about how any of it actually works.

Was it the Pokemon dev who said if he listened to all the players who say they know how to make the perfect Pokemon game, he'd end up with the worst game ever made?

[Caiphon]

And is there any progression in matchmade dungeons beyond heroic dungeons? Or is there any progression in LFR? And in which way is raiding endgame for many if the completion rate of the last raid is at 12%?

Mythic+ only adresses a notable minority, but no majority. The only gameplay that adresses 80%+ currently was Torghast first levels and leveling.

Low M+ is ridiculously easy to find a group for, and with group finders you don't even have to spam chat like you had to back in the days. Casual means you don't dedicate a lot of time and effort to a video game, it does not mean you're afraid of the bare minimum social interaction required to apply for a low M+ group.

LFR gives you epics and lets you experience the entire raid and the plotlines associated with it. If you want more you are free to join YOLO normal groups which, again, require minimal social effort.

And consider that Torghast and leveling have something in common - they're mandatory, you can't even start your endgame without leveling to 60 and getting your legendary first. If Torghast was not the sole source of soul ash and cinders very few people would have entered that hellhole regularly - prior to 9.2 every single WoW community was filled with people screaming how much they hated being forced into that content.

[Biomega]

Yeah, i believe they can. And no, it does not cost the world. It simply needs a focus change.

Cool. The devs and execs who have all the numbers think they can't do it profitably, but lucky for us Random Forum Poster #3590 knows better.

Sounds legit, gotta say.

[Caiphon]

Yeah, i believe they can. And no, it does not cost the world. It simply needs a focus change.

Boy are Activision Blizzard fools for not hiring this man, I mean he could literally boost profits to some ridiculous number over 10000%, every employee would have a yacht by now if they had embraced this genius.

No, they are not mandatory. People can quit before they hit level 60. As a fact, 13% of all players never leveled up to 60.

So if people do not like leveling, they simply could quit earlier. Currently, 80-90% of all players level up and around 30% play some kind of endgame.

Seems many like leveling that much they buy the entire expansion only for that.

Mandatory as in required to access any form of endgame content, which was the topic of discussion. No matter where your endgame is at, be it raiding, M+, battlegrounds or arena, you need to get to 60 and pick up your legendary. This is like saying some 90% of the population work so work must be humanity's favourite pastime.

[Biomega]

Well, better than random forum poster #374, who does not even know Blizzards mission statements

I wasn't going to comment on that because it seemed too sad to point out how little you understood my point, but...

Yeah.

To think that "We want to reach a massive audience" as a mission statement somehow equals "What matters to us is number of players, not profits" is some next-level ignorance, ngl.

[Caiphon]

But you forget those that have no endgame in WoW currently. You know, the millions that quit one or two months after expac launch.

And no, leveling is not mandatory for them. They could quit anytime. Yet, a large majority levels to 60. Just to disover there is nothing in endgame they like to play.

Leveling seems to be one of the most successfull components ever in WoW. And the fun part is that Hazzikostas really talked about removing leveling. I mean.. ok, Ion. I am sure your raiding bros will like it.

Again, a large majority levels to 60 because it is neccessary to access any sort of endgame content. That 80% of players reach max level does not mean said 80% enjoys the leveling process, as the number is made of people who enjoy raiding (but must level to 60 first), who enjoy m+ (but must level to 60 first), who enjoy battlegrounds (but must level to 60 first), who enjoy collecting mounts/transmog/pets (but must level to 60 first) and then finally people who play solely for the joy of leveling. Same applies to Torghast - the community despised it yet went through it every week anyway in order to do the things they actually enjoyed.

Hopefully this explains why 'n% of the playerbase did x so x was a success' is faulty logic - you need to see what the numbers are actually made of.

[Ashana Darkmoon]

But you forget those that have no endgame in WoW currently. You know, the millions that quit one or two months after expac launch.

And no, leveling is not mandatory for them. They could quit anytime. Yet, a large majority levels to 60. Just to disover there is nothing in endgame they like to play.

You don't know that is the reason people stop playing, that's the thing. Nobody does. It's pretty frustrating, especially to the companies! But it's true.

This stuff always reminds me of people talking about swing/unlikely voters in elections. Political campaigns (in the US) spend ungodly amounts of money trying to court them, but a lot of research shows that it's basically an impossible task (or as Biomega said, the cost is so high that it isn't worth it). Many successful campaigns (especially the lower you go) focus on the bang-for-the-buck reliable voters instead, which is one reason so many ads are targeted at old people. Why spend $1000 to reach one swing voter when you could get 100 reliable ones for the same price?

Anyway, in wow terms, even the "perfect" mmo is never going to get 80% retention or participation. The reachable section of your audience is much, much smaller than that.

Most players will never even get to the level cap in a new game no matter what that game does or how good it is. I remember back in the day Bioware had some stat where like ~10% of people who bought the game even finished it, and this was an early mass effect title with excellent reviews

[Biomega]

You really should tell Ion how you want to make millions with a hundred mythic raiders.

But yeah, i am sure a thousand rated pvp players bring way more money than millions of subs from casual gamers.

Again, you are displaying MASSIVE ignorance as to the actual point.

That point being that while sure 1 million players would bring in more money than, say, 10,000 players, YOU DON'T JUST GET THOSE PLAYERS FOR FREE.

Given a large enough investment requirement, the math can absolutely work out so that you make more money off of 10,000 players than you do off of 1 million. This is a fundamental principle of business mechanics. You need to actually make PROFIT, and everything else is important only insofar as it furthers that goal. To just ignore the underlying details and go "lol 1mio > 10k derpaderp" says nothing other than that you are unfamiliar with the basics of basics of business economics.

[Biomega]

Right, you dont, you have to make gameplay for them.

Which costs money. A lot of money. More money than they'd hope to gain (or at the very least to offset the risk of uncertainty of success).

That's my point.

Pro-Tip to Ion: Create gameplay for them.

Pro Tip to you: "just create gameplay lol" is not how any of it works.

[Relapses]

You don't know that is the reason people stop playing, that's the thing. Nobody does. It's pretty frustrating, especially to the companies! But it's true.

This stuff always reminds me of people talking about swing/unlikely voters in elections. Political campaigns (in the US) spend ungodly amounts of money trying to court them, but a lot of research shows that it's basically an impossible task (or as Biomega said, the cost is so high that it isn't worth it). Many successful campaigns (especially the lower you go) focus on the bang-for-the-buck reliable voters instead, which is one reason so many ads are targeted at old people. Why spend $1000 to reach one swing voter when you could get 100 reliable ones for the same price?

Anyway, in wow terms, even the "perfect" mmo is never going to get 80% retention or participation. The reachable section of your audience is much, much smaller than that.

Most players will never even get to the level cap in a new game no matter what that game does or how good it is. I remember back in the day Bioware had some stat where like ~10% of people who bought the game even finished it, and this was an early mass effect title with excellent reviews

Ghostcrawler had some pretty fascinating insight on this particular phenomena. I'd encourage a read through because it's one of the few insider takes we've had from somebody who has actually looked at WoW's retention data.

This part, in particular is what I find most damning about all the arguments we see on forums about how {x-} or {y-feature} "ruined the game:"

"Dropping a game because of a specific design change (despite what you might read on forums / Reddit) is actually pretty rare. I know it happens, but if you’re stack ranking the reasons why people quit, those specific responses end up being so far down the list that it is hard for a development team to take actionable feedback. It’s really rare you see “Wow, that change we made cost us 10,000 players. Let’s revert it!” So overall, I would not advocate boycotting a game as a way to make a statement, especially if deep down you still love the game. You’re just not likely to drive change as a result."

[Caiphon]

So you think you can argue that if a component is played by 1% it is the most successfull thing ever?

Surprise me with your arguments. Tell me, and Ion, how you want to pay the game development with a thousand mythic raiders. And how much fewer money you would get if it was played by millions of loyal casual gamers as well.

Why would you need to pay for the game exclusively with mythic raiders when there are four difficulties to raiding? Creating difficulties is a relatively minor endeavor - we have four times the number of raid difficulties we had up until Ulduar. LFR is extremely, extremely accessible and normal YOLO raids aren't that far behind. Low M+ is even easier as it requires a 5 man group that can be arranged very quickly through the group finder.

I'll say this again as it seems to fly right over your head - 'casual' means you're not willing to expend great amounts of time and effort to gaming. It does NOT mean you're pathologically afraid of using the group finder function or joining YOLO parties. Grinding hundreds of hours to craft gear is not casual gaming. Using 30 minutes of your time to join a group to clear m+ is. Don't equalise casual gaming to your personal gaming preferences.

[Biomega]

Not more than a raid tier, for sure.

And you know this... how?

You yourself said it would require a shift of focus. You think shifting the focus of endgame to a significant degree is just going to cost as much as a raid tier?

Do you have ANYTHING to back that ass-pull up?

I mean, do you really argue with implementation costs if you do not now know anything about it?

My argument is "it's unlikely that the cause for the observed actions is ignorance and incompetence when they are exactly what you'd predict from the basic mechanics of business".

Your argument is "I don't know anything about business, but it's clear to me they're not doing it because they're stupid and they'd make tons of money if they just did it, I promise you, I really do".

Which of the two sounds more plausible to you?

[Lonedroodx]

And not just world quests and dailies, but rather, meaningful and challenging content that can progress your character through out the entirety of a season.

I envision a solo end game content experience, much like Monster Hunter or Dark Souls/Elden Ring.

As it stands, there is currently very little reason to log on, outside your weekly m+/raid times. There is just nothing to do.

Maybe try a single player game?

[Biomega]

Nothing what you talk about sounds plausible to me. Just mainly because you do not know what you talk about.

So let me sum it up: I've given actual economic principles, explained them, and opened them up to critique - if you think I said something that's incorrect, you're free to argue that.

What you've provided is "lol no, just do this, trust me".

Alright then, Mr. Meme. You sound like a smart person worth listening to.

[Biomega]

No, you did some armchair development by acting as if you knew anything about costs. While you did not.

The only time I talked about costs was either 1) in the abstract (as in, costs don't always scale the same with increasing player numbers) or 2) to point out you don't know any of the costs.

I never claimed to know how much anything costs, I only pointed out YOU don't know, and that as a general business principle, costs are on a scale that's more complicated than more players=more profit.

My explanation for what we see happening is completely in line with basic economic principles.

Your explanation is based on speculation and assumption of incompetence, ignorance, and/or malice.

If you have anything more useful to contribute other than "lol no" or another demonstration of how you don't understand the fundamentals of business, feel free to present it.

[Caiphon]

Ok then, lets add 15 difficulties to matchmade dungeons then with real progression and gameplay based on personal accountability. Et voilat, you would have gameplay for many more than what mythic+ ever could adress.

Your pathological fear of groups and social interactions strikes yet again. There are already more than 15 difficulties within m+, it's not difficult to find the sweet spot that fits your level of skill and gear.

And yet only 12% of the players completed the last raid tier. Including LFR.

Because Sepulcher is the only raid in SL, yes? I didn't bother with Sepulcher either because who even wants to down bald man? Ew. Not to mention gear upgrades mean relatively little at the end of an expansion as there will be no more challenges that require said gear. Let's not forget LFR is run by matchmaking. Perhaps premade groups aren't the issue here, hmm?

If dungeon content was matchmade and had different difficulty levels based on personal accountablity, it could be the most successfull feature since leveling. The way mythic+ is implemented, it adresses a large minority, but will never get those players that quit after level to 60. Because they do not want to take the effort to stay on par with gear to be selected in the premade group finder.

Matchmade dungeons would have ilevel limitations like certain LFR wings at higher difficuties as it would not be plausible to complete said difficulty under a certain level of gear. Imagine entering high m+ and being matched with a 200 ilevel tank. So you would still need to make an effort to get your gear up to scratch in order to access a certain difficulty, which is exactly how it works with the current system. Again, the problem lies not in the game but in your pathological fear of social interactions. Bit ridiculous to think you of all people represent the majority of gamers.

[Relapses]

Not more than a raid tier, for sure. I mean, do you really argue with implementation costs if you do not now know anything about it?



Yeah, because millions of loyal casual gamers subs are not as high as the subs of thousands of mythic raiders.. while last often gain their gametime through boosts they sell to casual gamers.. not sure how you want to monetize them other than asking them to help you in whale hunting token buyers..




I have made different detailed posts about what i would add on this forum including a complete world gameplay overhaul, an overhaul of the progression system and how to add useful gameplay for many. Just check my post history if you are really interested.

- - - Updated - - -



Yeah, but this discussion is not about a game-ruining feature, but about completely disregarding the largest audiences of this game. So you compare apples with oranges, as usual.

If players have no gameplay, they stop playing the game. That is the most logical approach. And not because they suddenly have a life-changing situation whenever someone of them reaches level 60.

Buddy I didn't even quote you so I have no idea where this idea of 'apples and oranges' is coming from.

All that said -- who is to say that cyclical players are a bad thing, anyway? Blizzard gets a new expansion and at least a few months of subscription from these players. They're still insanely profitable even if they don't stay. The real question is whether potentially alienating the people who stay for group content is worth refocusing the game's endgame content to these cyclical players. I'd say that it's incredibly likely that most of these players would quit anyway. The subsection of vocal ex-WoW players who think single player content is the future of MMO gaming will be happy but it'll come at the cost of pushing away the players who've helped keep the game alive for the last twenty or so years.

[Caiphon]

So we are back to gatekeeping. Yeah, that surely made WoW strong.

I dare say that the fact that one cannot complete high m+ with an ilevel 200 tank is more in the realm of common sense. And it does seem to have made WoW strong as walking into ICC with heroic Azjol-Nerub gear in WotLK (highest number of subscribers) would have completely obliterated you in seconds.

And you can have challenges in solo gameplay, matchmade groups (personal accountability) and premade group play. Thing is, they would be distinct and different gameplay. Something the devs do not understand yet.

You are essentially asking WoW to embody Monster Hunter or Sekiro. This is roughly equivalent to Monster Hunter/Sekiro players asking for 20 man raids and competitive PvP - it's never going to happen because the games are built differently and offer different types of enjoyment. There are plenty of things in WoW for a casual gamer to enjoy including LFR, normal raiding, m+, battlegrounds, sub-1800 arena games and collecting. There are relatively less things for people who have a pathologic fear of groups and social interactions. Unfortunate, but there are plenty of single player games out there that they can enjoy.

[Coldkil]

The irony here is that casual players hated mage tower because it was supposedly 'elitist'... folks go on and on about how casuals want solo content but Legion showed that isn't necessarily the case.

Mostly because it wasn't a calewalk. People who complain about MT type of content is usually people who want stuff for no effort, like logging in every day is a feat of something. This said, i'm not against forms of optional that reward consistency.

[Biomega]

Yes, but you also do not know anything about costs, so do not argument with it. How about argumenting with the number of players it could appeal and make more loyal? Instead of Dollars you know nothing about?

Do you, like, ACTUALLY not understand or am I just falling for a troll here?