Nerf it and they'll lose those who are ataying in the game just because they say they WON'T nerf it.
...and at the same time they will gain n-times more casuals.
Implying that catering to majority is bad for business is not smart.
WoW always catered to the majority - thats why it was a huge hit in Vanilla and BC and was growing each and every quarter. You think that making the game easier and easier is 'catering' to the majority. But its not..
It does two obvious things.
#1) It lets people eat through your content very quickly. So you either end up putting out lots of sloppy content or have people just give up in between patches or worse unsubscribe altogether.
#2) It ruins the incentive for people to play. In 'pre-cata' WoW there was the haves and have nots. You want this dynamic so that the have nots will try their best to achieve more in the game. If everyone is a winner - then really no one is. This is a failure of Blizzard and its not a road you want to go down.
You can spin it all you want - but logically in your heart you know that I am right. Let's imagine that you are right and nerfing things leads to more players. Well then games would continue to nerf ALL their content down till every single boss and mob would be killed with one key and everyone could have the greatest loot. Why? These games are pure profit businesses. So they would be forced by their shareholders to do this - if it actually worked.
In reality - there is a point where nerfing hurts your playing base - for the reasons I outlined above and lots more. As a niche game bent on capturing the former WoW addicts nerfing would be suicide for Wildstar.
We already had an AMAZING effort at an incredibly casual game - its called GW2. It's actually a very good game - however its 'horizontal progression" and 'everyone wins' model does not lead to the long term addictions that modern MMOs want. You want your players to feel like heros - you can't feel that way if everyone in your game facerolls the new 'big bad" the first time it comes out.
No, like all good games you want your difficult to be hard enough to be challenging to skilled players but easy enough such that the average human can do well with practice. Wildstar - has done this - and so has many other games. Human reaction times are actually very similiar - so this is easier to achieve then you might think.
The practice part - even in a video game helps create this sense of mastery where people feel 'good' about their play. And this makes your game even more addictive then it would be with just the virtual world and cool voice acting and such.
Nerf it and they'll lose those who are ataying in the game just because they say they WON'T nerf it.
...and at the same time they will gain n-times more casuals.
Implying that catering to majority is bad for business is not smart.
WoW always catered to the majority - thats why it was a huge hit in Vanilla and BC and was growing each and every quarter. You think that making the game easier and easier is 'catering' to the majority. But its not..
It does two obvious things.
#1) It lets people eat through your content very quickly. So you either end up putting out lots of sloppy content or have people just give up in between patches or worse unsubscribe altogether.
#2) It ruins the incentive for people to play. In 'pre-cata' WoW there was the haves and have nots. You want this dynamic so that the have nots will try their best to achieve more in the game. If everyone is a winner - then really no one is. This is a failure of Blizzard and its not a road you want to go down.
You can spin it all you want - but logically in your heart you know that I am right. Let's imagine that you are right and nerfing things leads to more players. Well then games would continue to nerf ALL their content down till every single boss and mob would be killed with one key and everyone could have the greatest loot. Why? These games are pure profit businesses. So they would be forced by their shareholders to do this - if it actually worked.
In reality - there is a point where nerfing hurts your playing base - for the reasons I outlined above and lots more. As a niche game bent on capturing the former WoW addicts nerfing would be suicide for Wildstar.
We already had an AMAZING effort at an incredibly casual game - its called GW2. It's actually a very good game - however its 'horizontal progression" and 'everyone wins' model does not lead to the long term addictions that modern MMOs want. You want your players to feel like heros - you can't feel that way if everyone in your game facerolls the new 'big bad" the first time it comes out.
No, like all good games you want your difficult to be hard enough to be challenging to skilled players but easy enough such that the average human can do well with practice. Wildstar - has done this - and so has many other games. Human reaction times are actually very similiar - so this is easier to achieve then you might think.
The practice part - even in a video game helps create this sense of mastery where people feel 'good' about their play. And this makes your game even more addictive then it would be with just the virtual world and cool voice acting and such.
LoL, i wish people who werent there wouldnt talk nonsense.
WoW was VERY CASUAL when it was released THATS why it grew so fast and games like EQ/L2/AC/DAOC/SWG... were losing people lightnning fast.
WoW was/is in NO.1 spot becasue it WAS and IS casual adapting to the times. Yes WoW always adapted to casuals. In fact it lost big chunk of subs with their "more hardcore" CATA edition. But they returned to established track very fast.
WS will have same fate as Rift as it has pretty much SAME premises with odd sideatrraction (like housing).
"Hardcore" is not viable demographic to cater unless you are indie company and can survive with very few subs (reference DF)
Originally posted by Malabooga LoL, i wish people who werent there wouldnt talk nonsense.WoW was VERY CASUAL when it was released THATS why it grew so fast and games like EQ/L2/AC/DAOC/SWG... were losing people lightnning fast.WoW was/is in NO.1 spot becasue it WAS and IS casual adapting to the times. Yes WoW always adapted to casuals. In fact it lost big chunk of subs with their "more hardcore" CATA edition. But they returned to established track very fast.WS will have same fate as Rift as it has pretty much SAME premises with odd sideatrraction (like housing)."Hardcore" is not viable demographic to cater unless you are indie company and can survive with very few subs (reference DF)
But logically in your heart you know that he is right, don't you...?
I guess back then people who did'nt manage to clear a supermario level on the first or second try just gave up. Yes I know in raids you have to deal with other players you can have little to no impacton on and you pay a monthly fee etc.
Difficulty trough bad design is one thing but assuming that next game plays the same way like the couple of games before... just a wrong assumption, not necessarily the creators fault.
Give it time, make friends and take up the challenge.
But since WS is or wants to be a big one, they eventually dumb it down. The mob is rome.
One of the major reasons i moved to WS is the challenge and the difficulty. I want to play with my guild & friends, not pugs. If this means that i m going to miss, lets say the 40man raid (i guess i wont miss it because i m in a fine guild) then i ll take it. I don't believe that i must be able to play every aspect of the game if i don't meet some standards. If i have the skills, the team, the time etc then yes. Else i ll pass the 40man raid to others that can. I prefer skipping this, than doing it with a retarded LFR system. Even this way i can still play and enjoy the rest of the game and there are tons of content already in by launch.
So, imo there are many games that you can play as a casual, go with pugs or using LFR. Let this one a bit challenging. Don't nerf anything pls.
All Time Favorites: EQ1, WoW, EvE, GW1 Playing Now: WoW, ESO, GW2
I can see why people don't want the game nerfed as they like the challenge. Surely you can add some easier content without nerfing anything, thus not only protecting the tastes of the 'better' players who have more time on their hands, but also keep the door open to the more casual players?
Is there a downside to having dungeons with less rewards and lower difficulty? (in addition to the more hardcore content)
By adopting this attitude, it gives Carbine the best change to retain and grow their subs which, at the end of the day, is the number 1 bottom line, above all else. Anyone that thinks Carbine will not measure their success on sub numbers/income, is deluded into forgeting that the game is a business to sell. More sales = more success.
Because designing and delivering an MMO is not a holy grail i.e. many companies can do it, the only thing to compete with is providing interesting and varied game content that appeals to the masses - and essentially does things as well as or better than other games.
Sorry for anyone that thinks the game should be niche, but the only reason Eve is successful whilst being niche is because it has no competition for what it does. And, yes it can be difficult/steep learning curve, but anyone can play it as you don't HAVE to do pvp - so using EVE is not a great arguement.
Wildstar needs subs, bottom line, and it's best chance is to continue to cater to those that want it to be more difficult, but to also add content that will appeal to the casuals.
Those against this idea might like the thought that 'their' game remains more exclusive, but lower sub numbers don't pay the development bills and will be the fastest route to F2P.
You are wrong, WotLK, the totality of it, had a higher player count than BC...BC peaked at 10 mil, wotlk brought it up to 12 and kept it that way, and the highest point of WoW was actually early Cata....the subs didnt drop until they tried to make WoW more hardcore again with the cata dungeons...
Don't believe me? Read this. You cant argue with cold hard facts.
Hey, it's another one of these "spin" posts. If this was a few years ago you might be one up on the rest of the MMO players, but by now, everyone is aware of this spin tactic and you aren't really fooling anyone.
The most growth in wow, was during vanilla.
TBC showed steady growth, most of any xpac.
WotLK was the slowest growth xpac before cata.
WotLK retained sub numbers but only grew 500k in the entire xpac life.
The biggest Loss period in Cata was during Firelands.
"The highest numbers in Wow being in early Cata" , had to do with the launch in China, of course it boosted the numbers and then began to lose them with Firelands.
Blizzard made the choice to go in the direction they did, there were no "casuals" in the dev studio telling them to make Naxx 25 one of the easiest raids ever ( their words ), or to introduce even easier 10man versions of that raid. All through Wrath they trained the playerbase to be entitled and continued to enforce that behavior by nerfing content to accommodate them, so of course something like the Cata dungeons weren't going to work, it was a design direction that was already made with the launch of Wrath.
Wildstar isn't Wow, and people that so desperately want it to be Wow, should really just continue to play Wow, because it gives them all of the concessions they are looking for in an MMO, and really...being the "White Knight" on the forums to champion the cause of all the players who "really do mind it being hard" is self projecting and putting words into other people mouths, not to mention the completely vague and made up phrase of " all those people".
First of all, the person I responded to said that BC had the most players, then "conceeded" that "EARLY wotlk" had the most, but something changed during wotlk. This is absolutly incorrect. Also, the first ever resported sub losses for WoW was in Blizz's Q1 2011 filing, which was May 9th 2011. Considering Cata released Dec 7th, 2010, and MoP launched Sept 25th, 2012, that would put comencement of their sub losses smack dab right in EARLY cata....(on a side note, Firelands didnt launch until late June 2011, which is still before the midway point of cata, therefore STill "eary cata", so you are also wrong about both points). What is it with people who are wrong, being super sarcastic while presenting their incorrect points?
If you want to bring arbatrary new topics into the equasion such as which expac had the most growth, I will not disagree as long as they are factual. But if you want to bring new topics into the equasion while trying to accuse me of spining information, esp when everything I stated is 100% accurate and backed up by provided fact sources, I am going to let you do that in a corner without me.
And the slides you posted are wrong, Q4 2010 did not lose subs (and if it did, it would also prove that "early cata started the sub loss"), If you actually compare it with Blizz's actual findings here, you will see that its not the only Q point that is wrong....where in the world did you find that? lol
Im only in this calling out inaccuracies. You are obviously in this for other reasons, consideirng you are attemtping to argue with me over facts by introducing new arguemnts into the discussion that i never disagreed with, while the poster I replied to goes untouched by you.
Originally posted by inemosz WoW is casual, what a joke. You must never been in a heroic raid that takes hours to complete even once.
So, when 0,00001% of content is hard game is "hardcore"
Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.
But you are right, WoW has things for hardcores and casuals alike. And WS doesnt.
How many "modes" will WoWs raids have in WoD again (kinda lost count lol)?
Thats the point of a few of my posts. If carbine adds an easier version of anything, even if they leave all the hardcore stuff in tact, their entire game will get labled as "easymode" WoW has as much hardcore PVE systems as Wildstar (Heoric raids, challengemode lvl 90 dungeons), yet as you can see by the poster above, just because it has a difficulty scale, it gets labled as an easy game.
EDIT: I won't remove my original post, but I will add to it my current thoughts. Perhaps calling for a nerf was a bit rash. I think what would be better is a more in-depth guided tutorial for new players, that teaches them mechanics like armor interrupting, not standing in telegraphs, what stats mean for their class and how it varies between DPS/Tank/Heals, etc. That way, when players do get into the first dungeons, it's not just BAM! Right in their face with the increased difficulty (compared to most other dungeons in MMOs).
No point, people won't read it. I think previous posts in this thread have already proved my point. I like to research the crap out of everything so I can figure out what I'm doing wrong. Others just jump in, ninja all the loot and jump out... that's modern society for you.
EDIT: I won't remove my original post, but I will add to it my current thoughts. Perhaps calling for a nerf was a bit rash. I think what would be better is a more in-depth guided tutorial for new players, that teaches them mechanics like armor interrupting, not standing in telegraphs, what stats mean for their class and how it varies between DPS/Tank/Heals, etc. That way, when players do get into the first dungeons, it's not just BAM! Right in their face with the increased difficulty (compared to most other dungeons in MMOs).
No point, people won't read it. I think previous posts in this thread have already proved my point. I like to research the crap out of everything so I can figure out what I'm doing wrong. Others just jump in, ninja all the loot and jump out... that's modern society for you.
That's a fair point. Perhaps make it required to complete at least once (that way people who roll alts dont have to constantly go through it), and add voice acting to it, so people with shorter attention spans don't have to read it.
I don't know. The amount of people who don't know how interrupt armor works, or how bad standing in telegraphs is (believing that healers can just easily heal through it), is sort of staggering. There needs to be something there to make it more apparent to players.
EDIT: I won't remove my original post, but I will add to it my current thoughts. Perhaps calling for a nerf was a bit rash. I think what would be better is a more in-depth guided tutorial for new players, that teaches them mechanics like armor interrupting, not standing in telegraphs, what stats mean for their class and how it varies between DPS/Tank/Heals, etc. That way, when players do get into the first dungeons, it's not just BAM! Right in their face with the increased difficulty (compared to most other dungeons in MMOs).
No point, people won't read it. I think previous posts in this thread have already proved my point. I like to research the crap out of everything so I can figure out what I'm doing wrong. Others just jump in, ninja all the loot and jump out... that's modern society for you.
That's a fair point. Perhaps make it required to complete at least once (that way people who roll alts dont have to constantly go through it), and add voice acting to it, so people with shorter attention spans don't have to read it.
I don't know. The amount of people who don't know how interrupt armor works, or how bad standing in telegraphs is (believing that healers can just easily heal through it), is sort of staggering. There needs to be something there to make it more apparent to players.
Flashing red circles is not apparent enough? Why do games need to hold peoples hands? Carbine teaches you the game its up to the players to play the game they have been given. Give it time and the dim wits will quit or will wake up and play the game. Thing is when you die, you know why you died in WS. Everyone knows why the team died. Its that guy who was standing in the red crap. Was that tank that never moved 2 inches to the left to stand in the healing aura. You dont need to read a combat log, its so easy to see. If people are to lazy to learn thats not Carbines job to wrap them in a snuggy and tell them everything is going to be ok.
Well I just finished Stormtalon's Lair for the first time. Pug group (was an amazing group of people honestly). We wiped 3 times.
1) Bad pull at the beginning.
2) Second Boss (tank got tornado raped)
3) Third boss (healer didn't get into marked players circle in time)
But we did it. And it really wasn't THAT bad (like I said in the original OP).
But, I feel that my main concern still stands. That the majority of MMO players would either not be able to, or willing to learn how to, adapt to the type of difficulty of WildStar.
Of course, if their target market is hardcore raiders, then awesome. But I'm wondering how financially viable that is. Now, I don't believe dungeons should necessarily be nerfed, but I still maintain that there should be some way of teaching new players about dungeon mechanics with some sort of guided tutorial.
Grats =-) I bet you were pumped when you finished it!!!
Now an in depth tutorial for one of the dungeons IS a good idea imo, special trainer mode for the first dungeon, which can also still be played in normal mode. Purely to teach mechanics, not an 'easy mode' for all dungeons. A good compromise. Personally I still think its not needed, this underestimation of people ability is crude - considering we are a couple weeks into the game.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Training mode would have that VoiceOver that is used when you die normally to question why you just stood in the fire, or why you were too dense to apply an interrupt
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
First, WoW was always easy - and always had a large appeal to the casual gamer. But the net result of the 'Dungeon Finder" nerfs (DF was introduced mid-wrath) was a SLIDE in the games popularity. Raid finder did nothing to halt the slide - nor did the easy mode raiding.
So I will ask again - WHY should Carbine follow this losing path? Why not follow what they did RIGHT in the beginning! Low and behold this is pretty much exactly what they have done. They have LOTS of easy content and some hard exclusive content for people who want it. Better yet they have a progression from easy to hard! Brilliant. This is what the old WoW had. And its what Wildstar has.
Why not have "modes" like WoW? The reason is that people just CHOOSE the easy mode - even when they COULD do the hard mode. And your game ends up sucking and cratering. Do that and your player base will fall to 2/3 of its peak.
That's not bad when your peak is 12 million. But if your peak is only 3 million that's really stupid.
"First of all, the person I responded to said that BC had the most players, then "conceeded" that "EARLY wotlk" had the most, but something changed during wotlk. This is absolutly incorrect"
Near the end of Wrath Blizzard switched gears. Dungeon Finders was introduced. Dungeons became AOE fests and relatively easy. The very tough raid instance (and the very best one) Ulduar was ignored gearing wise and for first time ever Blizzard had an at best flat quarter. (the numbers I saw indicated slight losses - its immaterial though this marked the beginning of the end).
This was a company that grew every single quarter. They tried some random concessions to the hardcore (namely the tough heroics in Cata) but basically continued down the path of making the game easier - and have done nothing but shrink their playing base. Whether it was the nerfs associated with dungeon finder (no crowd control needed) or the LFR - or the "multi-mode" design..
Blizzards recent design and progression changes have been abject failures..
Like I said the OLD model worked like this.
Easier Content Questing, Farming, Crafting .... (gets a little harder as you level until you manage to gear up some).
Harder content (regular dungeons/Heroic Dungeons). .... can get a little harder as you progress through the dungeons.
Hardest Content (Raids) Gets a little harder as you progress though the raid levels - until say Sunwell.
Most normal humans given time would be able to handle all the easy content, all the dungeons and some of the raids. Only the very skilled and very committed could handle the tough raids. And it was a progression - it all flowed from kinda easy to eventually kinda hard.
The NEW model of WoW throws all this out the window.
Everyone can do..
Easy Content. All the questing (easy) All the dungeons (on easy mode) and ALL the raiding (On LFR aka faceroll mode).
Hard Content Some crazy hard raids (harder then any in BC!) if you feel like doing the same stuff you already did again.
There is no natural progression. There is no learning curve. Yes.. sure there still exists some EXTREMELY hard raids. These raids are actually HARDER then the hardest of BC. But no one does them. Because its not needed to do anything in the game. You can kill the big boss the first day he comes out. There is no reason to get better. WoW doesn't train you up - its just a ride.
No doubt some will say "but we get to see all the content now!" But that not a game designers goal. They want a game that builds the community and builds up the playing base so that MORE people want to play via word of mouth. The goal isn't to make sure everyone "sees' the content. With LFR people "see" raiding and they decide THEY DO NOT LIKE IT!
Blizzard changed strategies mid-stream and it did nothing for them. You can say they would have lost players anyway .. But if we actually look at the data the 'everyone wins' model isn't success. And nerfing DOES NOT ALWAYS INCREASE YOUR PLAYING BASE!
"First of all, the person I responded to said that BC had the most players, then "conceeded" that "EARLY wotlk" had the most, but something changed during wotlk. This is absolutly incorrect"
Near the end of Wrath Blizzard switched gears. Dungeon Finders was introduced. Dungeons became AOE fests and relatively easy. The very tough raid instance (and the very best one) Ulduar was ignored gearing wise and for first time ever Blizzard had an at best flat quarter. (the numbers I saw indicated slight losses - its immaterial though this marked the beginning of the end).
WoW's net subscibers did not decline at all during Wotlk. The proof backing this up is overwhelming, why do people keep implying/stating otherwise? Yes, it didnt grow as many subs compared to past xpacs(1.5 mil, is still pretty amaizing), but it certainly didnt lose any.
BTW, you do realise Cata had some harder raid instances than ulduar (firelands for example), right? Even ToT in MoP is hailed as better than Ulduar. This goes back to what I keep saying, if Wildstar adds an easier version of anything, even if they keep all of the hardcore stuff perfectly intact, it will get labled as an "easy game", as people keep dong with WoW. I mean, a poster just implied that Ulduar was WoW's "best" raid, when Method, Dream Paragon, and pretty much all world first guilds have written blogs stating specifically otherwise.
This is all Interesting, but I as a gamer don't give a crap about subscrition levels, I care that a mmorg development team has an ethos where they don't whore their game at whatever brings in the greatest number of bums on seats regardless of the desires of their current players . what wow offer is something different to what they offered in tbc, and that's fine - Carbine is offering something different, and well done to them.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Well I just finished Stormtalon's Lair for the first time. Pug group (was an amazing group of people honestly). We wiped 3 times.
1) Bad pull at the beginning.
2) Second Boss (tank got tornado raped)
3) Third boss (healer didn't get into marked players circle in time)
But we did it. And it really wasn't THAT bad (like I said in the original OP).
But, I feel that my main concern still stands. That the majority of MMO players would either not be able to, or willing to learn how to, adapt to the type of difficulty of WildStar.
Of course, if their target market is hardcore raiders, then awesome. But I'm wondering how financially viable that is. Now, I don't believe dungeons should necessarily be nerfed, but I still maintain that there should be some way of teaching new players about dungeon mechanics with some sort of guided tutorial.
Grats =-) I bet you were pumped when you finished it!!!
I was. It was awesome. Never made it past the first boss with any other groups I played with. Think I might steer clear of PUGs from now on. Got into an active and large guild so I should be able to group with more aware people from now on. But yeah, it was most certainly intense when I finished it. I didn't hit so much as bronze status, but hey, still awesome.
Originally posted by Gdemami Originally posted by DeddmeatNerf it and they'll lose those who are ataying in the game just because they say they WON'T nerf it.
...and at the same time they will gain n-times more casuals.
Implying that catering to majority is bad for business is not smart.
They'll gain casuals who have limited interest in the game due to their short playing time, may be looking for the next game, free trial and f2p since they play short amount of time.
I play for hours a day and would have said I was casual, then read that casuals were more people who play for short snatches of time
Comments
WoW always catered to the majority - thats why it was a huge hit in Vanilla and BC and was growing each and every quarter. You think that making the game easier and easier is 'catering' to the majority. But its not..
It does two obvious things.
#1) It lets people eat through your content very quickly. So you either end up putting out lots of sloppy content or have people just give up in between patches or worse unsubscribe altogether.
#2) It ruins the incentive for people to play. In 'pre-cata' WoW there was the haves and have nots. You want this dynamic so that the have nots will try their best to achieve more in the game. If everyone is a winner - then really no one is. This is a failure of Blizzard and its not a road you want to go down.
You can spin it all you want - but logically in your heart you know that I am right. Let's imagine that you are right and nerfing things leads to more players. Well then games would continue to nerf ALL their content down till every single boss and mob would be killed with one key and everyone could have the greatest loot. Why? These games are pure profit businesses. So they would be forced by their shareholders to do this - if it actually worked.
In reality - there is a point where nerfing hurts your playing base - for the reasons I outlined above and lots more. As a niche game bent on capturing the former WoW addicts nerfing would be suicide for Wildstar.
We already had an AMAZING effort at an incredibly casual game - its called GW2. It's actually a very good game - however its 'horizontal progression" and 'everyone wins' model does not lead to the long term addictions that modern MMOs want. You want your players to feel like heros - you can't feel that way if everyone in your game facerolls the new 'big bad" the first time it comes out.
No, like all good games you want your difficult to be hard enough to be challenging to skilled players but easy enough such that the average human can do well with practice. Wildstar - has done this - and so has many other games. Human reaction times are actually very similiar - so this is easier to achieve then you might think.
The practice part - even in a video game helps create this sense of mastery where people feel 'good' about their play. And this makes your game even more addictive then it would be with just the virtual world and cool voice acting and such.
The tutorial is called "Adventures"
/thread
Please do explain to me then who was WoW with major market share and all other mainstream titles catering to if not a majority.
LoL, i wish people who werent there wouldnt talk nonsense.
WoW was VERY CASUAL when it was released THATS why it grew so fast and games like EQ/L2/AC/DAOC/SWG... were losing people lightnning fast.
WoW was/is in NO.1 spot becasue it WAS and IS casual adapting to the times. Yes WoW always adapted to casuals. In fact it lost big chunk of subs with their "more hardcore" CATA edition. But they returned to established track very fast.
WS will have same fate as Rift as it has pretty much SAME premises with odd sideatrraction (like housing).
"Hardcore" is not viable demographic to cater unless you are indie company and can survive with very few subs (reference DF)
But logically in your heart you know that he is right, don't you...?
So, when 0,00001% of content is hard game is "hardcore"
Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.
But you are right, WoW has things for hardcores and casuals alike. And WS doesnt.
How many "modes" will WoWs raids have in WoD again (kinda lost count lol)?
What has become of games and players. saddening.
I guess back then people who did'nt manage to clear a supermario level on the first or second try just gave up. Yes I know in raids you have to deal with other players you can have little to no impacton on and you pay a monthly fee etc.
Difficulty trough bad design is one thing but assuming that next game plays the same way like the couple of games before... just a wrong assumption, not necessarily the creators fault.
Give it time, make friends and take up the challenge.
But since WS is or wants to be a big one, they eventually dumb it down. The mob is rome.
One of the major reasons i moved to WS is the challenge and the difficulty. I want to play with my guild & friends, not pugs. If this means that i m going to miss, lets say the 40man raid (i guess i wont miss it because i m in a fine guild) then i ll take it. I don't believe that i must be able to play every aspect of the game if i don't meet some standards. If i have the skills, the team, the time etc then yes. Else i ll pass the 40man raid to others that can. I prefer skipping this, than doing it with a retarded LFR system. Even this way i can still play and enjoy the rest of the game and there are tons of content already in by launch.
So, imo there are many games that you can play as a casual, go with pugs or using LFR. Let this one a bit challenging. Don't nerf anything pls.
All Time Favorites: EQ1, WoW, EvE, GW1
Playing Now: WoW, ESO, GW2
I can see why people don't want the game nerfed as they like the challenge. Surely you can add some easier content without nerfing anything, thus not only protecting the tastes of the 'better' players who have more time on their hands, but also keep the door open to the more casual players?
Is there a downside to having dungeons with less rewards and lower difficulty? (in addition to the more hardcore content)
By adopting this attitude, it gives Carbine the best change to retain and grow their subs which, at the end of the day, is the number 1 bottom line, above all else. Anyone that thinks Carbine will not measure their success on sub numbers/income, is deluded into forgeting that the game is a business to sell. More sales = more success.
Because designing and delivering an MMO is not a holy grail i.e. many companies can do it, the only thing to compete with is providing interesting and varied game content that appeals to the masses - and essentially does things as well as or better than other games.
Sorry for anyone that thinks the game should be niche, but the only reason Eve is successful whilst being niche is because it has no competition for what it does. And, yes it can be difficult/steep learning curve, but anyone can play it as you don't HAVE to do pvp - so using EVE is not a great arguement.
Wildstar needs subs, bottom line, and it's best chance is to continue to cater to those that want it to be more difficult, but to also add content that will appeal to the casuals.
Those against this idea might like the thought that 'their' game remains more exclusive, but lower sub numbers don't pay the development bills and will be the fastest route to F2P.
First of all, the person I responded to said that BC had the most players, then "conceeded" that "EARLY wotlk" had the most, but something changed during wotlk. This is absolutly incorrect. Also, the first ever resported sub losses for WoW was in Blizz's Q1 2011 filing, which was May 9th 2011. Considering Cata released Dec 7th, 2010, and MoP launched Sept 25th, 2012, that would put comencement of their sub losses smack dab right in EARLY cata....(on a side note, Firelands didnt launch until late June 2011, which is still before the midway point of cata, therefore STill "eary cata", so you are also wrong about both points). What is it with people who are wrong, being super sarcastic while presenting their incorrect points?
If you want to bring arbatrary new topics into the equasion such as which expac had the most growth, I will not disagree as long as they are factual. But if you want to bring new topics into the equasion while trying to accuse me of spining information, esp when everything I stated is 100% accurate and backed up by provided fact sources, I am going to let you do that in a corner without me.
And the slides you posted are wrong, Q4 2010 did not lose subs (and if it did, it would also prove that "early cata started the sub loss"), If you actually compare it with Blizz's actual findings here, you will see that its not the only Q point that is wrong....where in the world did you find that? lol
Im only in this calling out inaccuracies. You are obviously in this for other reasons, consideirng you are attemtping to argue with me over facts by introducing new arguemnts into the discussion that i never disagreed with, while the poster I replied to goes untouched by you.
Thats the point of a few of my posts. If carbine adds an easier version of anything, even if they leave all the hardcore stuff in tact, their entire game will get labled as "easymode" WoW has as much hardcore PVE systems as Wildstar (Heoric raids, challengemode lvl 90 dungeons), yet as you can see by the poster above, just because it has a difficulty scale, it gets labled as an easy game.
No point, people won't read it. I think previous posts in this thread have already proved my point. I like to research the crap out of everything so I can figure out what I'm doing wrong. Others just jump in, ninja all the loot and jump out... that's modern society for you.
That's a fair point. Perhaps make it required to complete at least once (that way people who roll alts dont have to constantly go through it), and add voice acting to it, so people with shorter attention spans don't have to read it.
I don't know. The amount of people who don't know how interrupt armor works, or how bad standing in telegraphs is (believing that healers can just easily heal through it), is sort of staggering. There needs to be something there to make it more apparent to players.
Flashing red circles is not apparent enough? Why do games need to hold peoples hands? Carbine teaches you the game its up to the players to play the game they have been given. Give it time and the dim wits will quit or will wake up and play the game. Thing is when you die, you know why you died in WS. Everyone knows why the team died. Its that guy who was standing in the red crap. Was that tank that never moved 2 inches to the left to stand in the healing aura. You dont need to read a combat log, its so easy to see. If people are to lazy to learn thats not Carbines job to wrap them in a snuggy and tell them everything is going to be ok.
Grats =-) I bet you were pumped when you finished it!!!
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
First, WoW was always easy - and always had a large appeal to the casual gamer. But the net result of the 'Dungeon Finder" nerfs (DF was introduced mid-wrath) was a SLIDE in the games popularity. Raid finder did nothing to halt the slide - nor did the easy mode raiding.
So I will ask again - WHY should Carbine follow this losing path? Why not follow what they did RIGHT in the beginning! Low and behold this is pretty much exactly what they have done. They have LOTS of easy content and some hard exclusive content for people who want it. Better yet they have a progression from easy to hard! Brilliant. This is what the old WoW had. And its what Wildstar has.
Why not have "modes" like WoW? The reason is that people just CHOOSE the easy mode - even when they COULD do the hard mode. And your game ends up sucking and cratering. Do that and your player base will fall to 2/3 of its peak.
That's not bad when your peak is 12 million. But if your peak is only 3 million that's really stupid.
"First of all, the person I responded to said that BC had the most players, then "conceeded" that "EARLY wotlk" had the most, but something changed during wotlk. This is absolutly incorrect"
Near the end of Wrath Blizzard switched gears. Dungeon Finders was introduced. Dungeons became AOE fests and relatively easy. The very tough raid instance (and the very best one) Ulduar was ignored gearing wise and for first time ever Blizzard had an at best flat quarter. (the numbers I saw indicated slight losses - its immaterial though this marked the beginning of the end).
This was a company that grew every single quarter. They tried some random concessions to the hardcore (namely the tough heroics in Cata) but basically continued down the path of making the game easier - and have done nothing but shrink their playing base. Whether it was the nerfs associated with dungeon finder (no crowd control needed) or the LFR - or the "multi-mode" design..
Blizzards recent design and progression changes have been abject failures..
Like I said the OLD model worked like this.
Most normal humans given time would be able to handle all the easy content, all the dungeons and some of the raids. Only the very skilled and very committed could handle the tough raids. And it was a progression - it all flowed from kinda easy to eventually kinda hard.
The NEW model of WoW throws all this out the window.
Everyone can do..
There is no natural progression. There is no learning curve. Yes.. sure there still exists some EXTREMELY hard raids. These raids are actually HARDER then the hardest of BC. But no one does them. Because its not needed to do anything in the game. You can kill the big boss the first day he comes out. There is no reason to get better. WoW doesn't train you up - its just a ride.
No doubt some will say "but we get to see all the content now!" But that not a game designers goal. They want a game that builds the community and builds up the playing base so that MORE people want to play via word of mouth. The goal isn't to make sure everyone "sees' the content. With LFR people "see" raiding and they decide THEY DO NOT LIKE IT!
Blizzard changed strategies mid-stream and it did nothing for them. You can say they would have lost players anyway .. But if we actually look at the data the 'everyone wins' model isn't success. And nerfing DOES NOT ALWAYS INCREASE YOUR PLAYING BASE!
WoW's net subscibers did not decline at all during Wotlk. The proof backing this up is overwhelming, why do people keep implying/stating otherwise? Yes, it didnt grow as many subs compared to past xpacs(1.5 mil, is still pretty amaizing), but it certainly didnt lose any.
BTW, you do realise Cata had some harder raid instances than ulduar (firelands for example), right? Even ToT in MoP is hailed as better than Ulduar. This goes back to what I keep saying, if Wildstar adds an easier version of anything, even if they keep all of the hardcore stuff perfectly intact, it will get labled as an "easy game", as people keep dong with WoW. I mean, a poster just implied that Ulduar was WoW's "best" raid, when Method, Dream Paragon, and pretty much all world first guilds have written blogs stating specifically otherwise.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
I was.
It was awesome. Never made it past the first boss with any other groups I played with. Think I might steer clear of PUGs from now on. Got into an active and large guild so I should be able to group with more aware people from now on. But yeah, it was most certainly intense when I finished it. I didn't hit so much as bronze status, but hey, still awesome.
NOOOOOOOOO
just NOOOOO
let it be. difficulty curves, even steep ones, are necessary to this and all game's design. Please play as intended.
...and at the same time they will gain n-times more casuals.
Implying that catering to majority is bad for business is not smart.
They'll gain casuals who have limited interest in the game due to their short playing time, may be looking for the next game, free trial and f2p since they play short amount of time.
I play for hours a day and would have said I was casual, then read that casuals were more people who play for short snatches of time