Would you still play WoW if it was totally single-player?

[NineSpine]

Something ironic about "community" in this game, is that some of the most skillful players in the world aren't that much into the community aspect of it. They are mostly restricted to their tight group of a raid team and do not pay any attention whatsoever to the MMO aspect and some of them are even explictly single-player-ish since they mostly do well in things like the Mage Tower or queuing in LFGs with different teams every time or having a new premade every time.

That’s why games should not center their designs on what the top 0.1% do.

[Ielenia]

What I constantly try to say - is that this principle should work both ways. When somebody here says "You don't represent all solo players", exactly the same should be applied to himself. I.e. he also doesn't represent all solo players and therefore he doesn't have right to say "You're wrong". Speak for yourself.

People are literally "speaking for themselves" when they tell you that your ideas are wrong, because then don't agree with your ideas. When people tell you that you don't speak for them, guess what? It means you don't get to speak for everyone.

Also, remember me telling you this?

Literally no one is "belittling" you. We're just pointing out the fact that you do not speak for everyone, or the majority, or even the minority. You speak for yourself and only yourself. And that goes for everyone here. We all only speak for ourselves only.

Say something like "I don't agree with you". I would accept it. But saying "You're wrong" is, yeah, wrong.

It's not wrong, because you're not here just voicing your opinion. You are attempting to speak for everyone who likes solo play, and every time someone who enjoys solo play chimes in to tell you that you don't speak for them, you engage in the "no true Scotsman fallacy". Remember these?

You aren't true solo player,

then may be you aren't true solo player.

My arguments are self-obvious.

"Self-obviously" wrong, considering even solo players are popping out of the woodwork to say that your ideas don't appeal to them.

Like more solo-friendly game is, surprise, better for solo players.

Not when they come at the expense of the game itself. What about those people who like to do leveling world quests/dailies and enjoy seeing other players around them and even helping them? It puts the "world" in "world of warcraft".

Again. If you're solo player, then why you're against making game more solo-friendly? Sounds like pretending.

Once again, "no true Scotsman" fallacy...

Examples? Simple questions. Why would you be against instanced leveling? Why would you be against instanced dailies/WQs? Why would you be against outdoor difficulty settings?

You have "instanced leveling" already: it's called "dungeons" and "battlegrounds". Instanced dailies and world quest? What would even be the point of those, considering the whole point about dailies and world quests is literally to get people to engage with the world? Outdoor difficulty setting? What's the point? Save for the very few rare elite mobs that are almost equivalent to dungeon bosses in health and damage, the outside world is already incredibly easy. Even in quest greens you can kill mobs with relative ease.

What I see - is standard old "Blizzard know better what we want => game is perfect as is => no improvements are needed".

On the other hand, what I see is a strawman.

[WowIsDead64]

I can give you the actual game design reason not to do those things, although it can be argued that Blizzard has already violated these principles so much that it doesn't matter:

WoW is a social game with a community. Even if you play by yourself, you are involved in the large milieu of the game's culture. This even applies to you personally because you are here talking about it for entertainment. This makes it important that a significant portion of the game is a shared experience that we can communicate about. If you fracture this too much, the community breaks down. For an example of why this design principle matters, look at Dark Souls and the lack of an easy mode. A core component of the culture around that game is the shared understanding of the difficulty level of the game, and knowing we all encountered it the same way.

It is one thing to fracture the community around wholly distinct experiences, such as Classic and Retail. It is another to fragment it into a long series of isolated decisions each player makes about customizing their gameplay experience. Our shared language goes away if you do that too much. There is a reason that the content made before the game was awash in difficulty settings is regarded so broadly as iconic and memorable, compared to the content that came later. A big part of that is the shared understanding of it. If you did Naxxrammas in Classic, that is notable, and if you tell someone that, they either had that same experience or they recognize what an interesting accomplishment that is. If Naxx had a solo easy mode, all of that would go away.

These cultural touchstones have significant value to the game and its players, and we have already seen the incredible damage done by going as far away from that design as they have.

I understand it. But it's exact problem, such games have. They're niche. Due to that "You either accept difficulty or not". My "Making game more solo-friendly" isn't about removing social interaction. No. It's exactly about "When content is shared between all players - it has to be compromise, that doesn't suit anybody". Making game more solo-friendly - is mostly about making it more tunable for your personal preferences.

- - - Updated - - -

Something ironic about "community" in this game, is that some of the most skillful players in the world aren't that much into the community aspect of it. They are mostly restricted to their tight group of a raid team and do not pay any attention whatsoever to the MMO aspect and some of them are even explictly single-player-ish since they mostly do well in things like the Mage Tower or queuing in LFGs with different teams every time or having a new premade every time.

Also this. I also wanted to say, that there is content like Mythic raids, that is completely separated from all other players. For example I don't care about it at all. So, question is - if hardcore raiders have their own dedicated content, then why solo players can't?

[NineSpine]

I understand it. But it's exact problem, such games have. They're niche. Due to that "You either accept difficulty or not". My "Making game more solo-friendly" isn't about removing social interaction. No. It's exactly about "When content is shared between all players - it has to be compromise, that doesn't suit anybody". Making game more solo-friendly - is mostly about making it more tunable for your personal preferences.

- - - Updated - - -


Also this. I also wanted to say, that there is content like Mythic raids, that is completely separated from all other players. For example I don't care about it at all. So, question is - if hardcore raiders have their own dedicated content, then why solo players can't?

Your mistake is thinking that you need to be able to do everything in the game in a solo easy mode instance in order for it to be “friendly” to you. Some of the content isn’t for you, and that’s fine. Some of the content isn’t for mythic raiders. Some of the content isn’t for people that like pvp. Everything doesn’t need to be for you.

[epigramx]

That’s why games should not center their designs on what the top 0.1% do.

The ones seeking the "most community" are also probably a minority. E.g. people who are deeply into the RPG aspect of it and hang out in Inns to role play.

Most players just want to have fun for a less than an hour a day and those are neither the super hard core guilds or the super RPGers.

[NineSpine]

The ones seeking the "most community" are also probably a minority. E.g. people who are deeply into the RPG aspect of it and hang out in Inns to role play.

Most players just want to have fun for a less than an hour a day and those are neither the super hard core guilds or the super RPGers.

It's not a binary between people who "seek community" and people who don't. The community is an intrinsic part of the game, no matter how you play it or view it. You don't need to be socializing, but even the guy who comes here to relentlessly post the same shit over and over about wanting the game to be single-player is coming to a forum to discuss his weird desires with the community.

Similarly, I'm sure some people would play WoW even if the graphics looked like Everquest 1, but that doesn't change the fact that the art style and general aesthetics of the game are intrinsic to the game.

[WowIsDead64]

Your mistake is thinking that you need to be able to do everything in the game in a solo easy mode instance in order for it to be “friendly” to you. Some of the content isn’t for you, and that’s fine. Some of the content isn’t for mythic raiders. Some of the content isn’t for people that like pvp. Everything doesn’t need to be for you.

I don't want to do everything solo, that's why I don't ask for solo raids or solo M+. What I want to do solo - is what I like to do. Leveling, outdoor content.

[NineSpine]

I don't want to do everything solo, that's why I don't ask for solo raids or solo M+. What I want to do solo - is what I like to do. Leveling, outdoor content.

You can do all of that solo already. You can't do it in your own private instance, because this isn't a single-player game, and that's the way it is and the way it is always going to be.

[WowIsDead64]

You can do all of that solo already. You can't do it in your own private instance, because this isn't a single-player game, and that's the way it is and the way it is always going to be.

Well, leveling has always been more or less solo-friendly, if you don't play on release and join xpack little bit later. Leveling suffers much more from being story-centric and therefore boring. But endgame is completely different story.

[Lolites]

Funny thing, but you don't even need to know game's name. It's true for all games. Average player = majority. Top or bottom player = outlier. All you need to know - is your rating, so other players wouldn't be able to say, that you're bottom. Some top players being majority - is myth, created by devs, hiding their census data. Problem with Wow - devs, pulling their average towards top 10% of playerbase. As result - they cut 80% of their population. That's why according to analysis of 0.1% playerbase achievement, current Retail's playerbase is estimated to be just 1.5M, while xpack releases can attract up to 10M. Only Classic saves Wow from total disaster. Problem is - some devs seem to have suicidal business models, where they cater to top players, no matter if their game dies or not.

pulling numbers out of your ass wont make you right, just shows everybody else that you dont care for reality just for pushing your opinion

also i laughed at this

Only Classic saves Wow from total disaster.

as all the data (however little we have) and guesses and estimates, and the fact classic had to be re-released multiple times with different twists to stay somehow relevant tells us opposite story

then again, as said before and proven by your "arguments" many times, you dont care for reality, you prefer your delusions, like blizz being after you bcs random dropchance is random...

[NineSpine]

pulling numbers out of your ass wont make you right, just shows everybody else that you dont care for reality just for pushing your opinion

also i laughed at this

as all the data (however little we have) and guesses and estimates, and the fact classic had to be re-released multiple times with different twists to stay somehow relevant tells us opposite story

then again, as said before and proven by your "arguments" many times, you dont care for reality, you prefer your delusions, like blizz being after you bcs random dropchance is random...

The fact that Classic can have minor iterations and still keep a player base is a sign of how strong it is, not how weak it is. How long do you think people would tolerate no new content on retail?

- - - Updated - - -

Well, leveling has always been more or less solo-friendly, if you don't play on release and join xpack little bit later. Leveling suffers much more from being story-centric and therefore boring. But endgame is completely different story.

What are you talking about? You can level solo day one of the expansion.

[Coidon]

I play to level up by questing by myself, what does having other players around me improve? besides harassment, stealing chests & veins, player humanoids jumping around like bunnys & frogs when I want to be my character/be someone else & be in the zones & worlds, it improves nothing, it detracts heavily.

Seems like most players play for gear which is really stupid, it's a mean to an end not the main purpose.

Cataclysm was the last expansion I bought directly instead of waiting a year. I will not buy the current or any more expansions since I don't want to pay to be griefed or harassed or whatever I am but I'd pay for content, my favourite expansion is The Shivering Isles for The Elder Scrolls 4, not everything has to be multiplayer believe you me.

There should atleast be an option to phase out other players if & when a player wants, not everyone likes or plays multiplayer or even can.

Tada & so long.

[Lolites]

not everyone likes or plays multiplayer

MASS MULTIPLAYER games are odd choice if you dont like multiplayer...
even weirder when people want/expect such game to change to accomodate their odd choice...

its as if i, who dont like moba, played LOL and whined on forums why its not a single player RTS, instead of just going to play a game that IS what i like...

- - - Updated - - -

The fact that Classic can have minor iterations and still keep a player base is a sign of how strong it is, not how weak it is. How long do you think people would tolerate no new content on retail?

ehm... people dont tolerate it on classic either? original vanila classic was slowly dying out, and had to be re-released... if the game is doing amazing you dont have to start it again... and blizz progresing to cata (soon to mop) instead of iterating more on vanila-wrath trilogy should also tell you something about how well would classic do without new content...
SOD is also not pulling in numbers it did in the begining when it was new, despite HAVING new content, which is kinda point of SOD...

most important, i did NOT say classic is not doing good, just laughed at the incredibly braindead take that classic is somehow saving wow, when for all we know retail is still doing better...

[NineSpine]

ehm... people dont tolerate it on classic either? original vanila classic was slowly dying out, and had to be re-released... if the game is doing amazing you dont have to start it again... and blizz progresing to cata (soon to mop) instead of iterating more on vanila-wrath trilogy should also tell you something about how well would classic do without new content...
SOD is also not pulling in numbers it did in the begining when it was new, despite HAVING new content, which is kinda point of SOD...

most important, i did NOT say classic is not doing good, just laughed at the incredibly braindead take that classic is somehow saving wow, when for all we know retail is still doing better...

Do you think "Hey, instead of a new expansion, we are going to let you start War Within over again!" would generate 1% of the hype that fresh Classic realms do? The only thing it would generate would be DDoS attacks on the Blizzard website from outrage.

It is odd to say they aren't iterating on Vanilla, and then going on to talk about SoD... where they iterate on vanilla. SoD lost players because some of their experiments failed miserably, but if you knew anything about why SoD exists, you'd know that that is expected by the developers. They anticipated that some of their ideas were going to go over poorly. The whole season exists to test ideas for later. It's not a coherent vision. It's an experiment.

Classic, across all its variations, has about 300,000 active raiders. Since lots of people never raid, especially if they play hardcore, and running multiple characters is much less likely in Classic, 300,000 is probably closer to an absolute minimum than the total. That's not nothing. That could very easily be 25% of the people playing WoW these days, and it is managing that with a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of the resources. That's incredibly impressive. I certainly wouldn't say retail is failing or anything stupid like that, but WoW as a holistic product would be doing dramatically worse without Classic.

[Tarx]

Most of the content I do is single player but there is some times I like to communicate with other players and the world looks more alive if there is people rather npcs.