It dose it cuts down on the pool of available players.
Assumptions, have never used? You cant avoid it once its in the game. OFC I exclude some people after I have had bad experiences with them. Bad things happen to me and my party all the time most likely because I dont exclude because of class or spec.
As I have explained it dose affect me. Your selective reading is starting to get a bit on my nerves though
What makes someone happy is not necessarily whats best for them. Give a addict a bunch of what ever they are addicted to and they will be happy but you will have doomed them. Not that RDF can be compared with that but the point is making people happy is not always whats best for them or for people around them.
I like how people are cutting their own branch ⊠literally the same thing can be said about anti-RDF crowd ⊠you will have your "Social Interactionâą " and everyone else will have garbage game âŠ
Just because you will be happy without RDF doesnt mean its good âŠ
Not to put too much of a point on it, but do you realize that, even with RDF in the game, raids still exist? If anything, as a person who actually mains a tank, Iâd be glad if people didnât have to depend on me every time (or the other two main tanks in the guild - it doesnât help that most guilds are built for 25m raids which require a lot less tanks than dungeons do) just because they want to get a dungeon run going.
And yes, it might surprise you but if I log on, Iâd rather be able to start playing outright, not having to wait 20-30 mins to do so. I mean, we can do that in PvP, why not in PvE? Why canât we have both queuable and non-queuable PvE content, the same way we have in PvP? Dungeons/BG for filling in time, and raids/arenas for serious play? Why do you guys keep treating dungeons as if nothing else existed PvE-wise whereas the large majority of guilds exist for raids, NOT for dungeons?
Do you realize how this sounds? That you know better than the others what is best for them. And you even advice them to do what you did. Advice is fine, but wanting things a certain way because âyou know better that is best of themâ is a huge no no.
This sort of rhetoric is unhelpful. Itâs called âmoral grandstandingâ. What you write reads âI think everyone deserves to have fun and you want to force people to play your way!â ⊠but this matter isnât that clear cut. It is not black and white.
âInclusivityâ can be good, and retail is both inclusive and notoriously convenient. But if inclusivity and convenience is only good then why did so many people flock to Classic in 2019? Not only that, but many of us chose to stay in Classic and not play Retail at all.
I think inconvenience is a great tool that developers can use to make their worlds feel more immersive. Consider taking the boat across the great sea. What if they were to open a portal that would simply teleport you to the other side of the world. What effect would that have on the worldâs immersive qualities? And secondly, to who would such a change cater to?
Opening a portal would make it so that impatient players can just get to where they need to go, but players seeking immersion can stay there and wait for their boat if they want their âlol immersionâ, right? But realistically how would such a change pan out? Is it not better then to just⊠not cater to those impatient players? To let the virtual world be a virtual world with its occasional inconveniences. I know this is not a 1:1 comparison to the Dungeon Finder, but thatâs not really my point. My point is that the player seeking immersion is not an oppressive tyrant for not wanting a âconvenience portalâ in their game.
This I agree with, but I donât think developing more convenient tools will alleviate these problems. Isnât GDKP, boosting and what have you a problem in retail as well? That is not a rhetorical question, I genuinely donât know. But if the answer is âyesâ then what positive change would the RDF truly bring?
Because we wanted to decide how to play, and not be directed by Blizzâs linear Questing and hand-holding.
Because we wanted Azeroth like it was originally.
Because we wanted professions, classes and racese to be meaningful
Because we wanted upgrades to be upgrades
Because we wanted to play the game, not the game to play us or autoplay.
I canât believe that people still pull that âif people really wantâ bullcrap.
People really want to save the planet, still they use cars.
People really hate sweat shops in China, but look⊠this piece of clothing is much cheaper than that one.
People really hate big companies and conglomerates but Apple just works so well.
Ubisoft is the most hated publisher right now, but what if the new Assassinâs creed is still really good? Donât want to miss out.
Here we had completely different experiences. In my guild whenever I asked somebody to join a guild run, everybody suddenly became silent. Thatâs why I did about 90% of my dungeons with randoms in the first place. But thatâs not so bad. Because for me begging guildies to run a dungeon with me isnât the social interaction I am looking for. Neither is running dungeons with guildies the social interaction I am looking for.
For me itâs important, that the guild chat is alive. I want people to actually chat in guild chat. And I donât mean the dungeon forming process. I mean about some stuff outside of the game or maybe how horrible or great the group is, they are running with right now. Thatâs a valuable social interaction for me. The group building stuff is just an unfun necessetiy for running dungeon, so I am perfectly fine with giving it up.
I disagree. If you search a guild with like minded people those things wonât disapear. As I said, I value a guild chat, that is alive. Therefore I specificly look for guilds like that. Why canât you look for a guild, that values the same things as you do and therefore doesnât use the RDF?
True but neither does regular group building. Because most guilds donât work anymore like they used to back then. We have different understandings, of what valuable social interactions are. And my understanding of valuable interactions will not be altered by the RDF in any war. Your understanding of a valuable interaction might not happen in most guilds with the RDF. But itâs mostly because the people donât value this intereaction, not because they trade their values for convenience. Or would you run dungeons only with the RDF if it got implemented? Again just look for likeminded people instead of forcing other people, that have different values to play like you want to.
This is just your opinion and not an objective truth. In my opinion PUGing is an essential feature of every MMORPG. Because PUGs are where you actually interact with other players outside of your bubble.
Again this is only your opinion and not an objective truth. In an MMORPG you play with others. Thatâs the essence of it. How you play with others should be up to the player. Sure you can just play with the same few people all the time, and never leave your bubble. But in my opinion itâs pretentious to say this is how an MMORPG should be played, and that people, who actually play with a much larger part of the Community are playing it wrong.
And again I am not avoiding social attachments. I just have different values than you. I do value social interactions. Else I wouldnât be playing an MMORPG. But there isnât just your way of interacting with other players.
It did increase and reached itâs peak in WotLK. Your logic is totally flawed.
Letâs assume there is a series of games, where the first game got a metascore of 40 the second got a metascore of 80 and the third got a metascore of 90.
By your logic the first to games are the better ones, because they increased the rating by 40.
Growth is not a good meassure for quality.
And the dead Vanilla Era servers show you how much the people value Vanilla. So much, that they would rather go to TBC instead of playing the âbestâ version of the game.
Like I said before. If this happens itâs just because your guild values different thing than you. Just get a guild that has the same values like you, instead of blackmailing others to play the way you want to. If they hate the RDF as much as you, I can guarantee you, they wouldnât use it even if their life would depend on it.
Here you even realised it yourself. This makes everything you wrote before the sentence pointless.
Ok here you are just cherry picking. You are fine to ignore the fact, that the community changed, if it serves your purpose of argumenting, that the RDF did destroy the community back then. But if somebody else makes an argument about the past, you just dismiss it, because the community changed.
You my friend are biased.
Oh man you are a piece of work. In your last comment you just realised your guild values different things than you. But here again you rather force people to play your way instead of finding a guild that fits your needs.
Plus in the beginning you realised the community did change and here you completely ignore this change again, just to make your point.
This is exactly what it is about. Cupid just wants to dictate others how to play the game.
Now it getâs really absurd. So if you wouldnât have a problem with running guild groups even if the RDF is implemented, what are we even talking about?
There you have your group forming within the guild!
Or are you arguing on behalf of other hypothetical people that might have the same ideals as you do and donât play tanks. If thatâs so let them speak for themselves if they exist.
No you do this just fine yourself, by the way you constantly contradict your own statements.
No it will make people quit. Itâs not that all the people, that want RDF never have been in a guild. They tried to join a guild and the guild didnât solve the problem of building groups. So why should they keep paying for a game, that they actually canât play?
At this point I better stop, because the post is allready very long. But seriously Cupid you donât even have a point. You change your opinion on whatever you need right now, to argue against the RDF. Even if it means contradicting your own statements from before. At some points you even realise things, that render your arguments nonsense. But in the very next sentence you brush it away, like it never happened.
And the worst thing is. You realised yourself, that nothing will change for you with the RDF arround. And yet you argue here to push your ideals and values onto others.
And yet there are people, that explicitly look to not buy clothes like this.
Here I would acutally argue that there are still people that donât even own a phone. But this example is especially stupid, because unless you move to some indigenous tribe somewhere in the jungle there is no avoiding to consume products of big companies. You are even forced by law to be a customer of some big companies.
Because apparently also a lot of people also like ASSassinâs Creed games. I myself stoped buying Ubisoft products completely, because itâs always the same formula and I hate that formula. But saying it doesnât have itâs fans is just delusional.
All the examples youâve made have one thing in common. Some people really care about that stuff and those people act according to it. A lot of people pretend to care, but actually they donât. They just repeat what everyone is saying. Thatâs why they still consume that stuff. And the majority of people just doesnât care. Which might be a problem when itâs about saving the planet or getting rid of sweat shops. But this is a game. So just let pleople, who donât care about the things you value play the way they want to.
Becaus with the RDF there will also be a few hardliners, that avoid it by all means and you just have to connect with them and you are golden.
Lets see. Vanilla increased from 0 to 8 million (8 million increase). TBC increased from 8 million to 11. Million.
WOTLK âincreasedâ a tiny bit with 500k to 11.5 million and that increase is the natural new expansion pack increase. After that it stayed flat on 11.5 million. Cataclysm release gave it the usual 500k and ended with 12 million in the start and when the pack was done it was down to 9âŠ
And even it it really were just 500k growth from TBC to WotLK. Itâs actually hard to see in the chart. WotLK still was the peak. And growth still is a bad metric to determine quality. Growth is finite. I just think WoW reached itâs maximum possible market share at WotLK.
Saying Vanilla and TBC where better because they had more player growth is ridiculous. By your logic WoW would have kept growing until at some point 8 trilion people would play WoW, if they kept the game like Vanilla or TBC. In that case it would have been vital for us to find extraterestical life, because there are only 7.7 trilion people on the planet.
Also you completely ignore the fact, that WotLK was already the second expansion. A lot of people just grew tired of the game and nobody would have been able to change that. There were people turning their back to WoW ever since the launch of the game. Up to WotLK there were just more people joining than leaving. In WotLK the contingent of possible you players seemed to just have ran out.
WotLK was the peak of subscriptions. Thatâs a fact. The subscriptions also stayed consistent throughout the whole expansion. This is a fact to. So WotLK was enjoyed by more players than Vanilla or TBC period. Trying to say WotLK was not the most successful expansion because it had the less growth than Vanilla or TBC is just stupid and a bad try to discredit WotLK.
CupĂŹd is a self proclaimed autistic that fears for his loss of ingame experience, that he currently enjoys. He doesnt care how many people quit, even if its 90%, as long as he and his friends still have fun, its alright for him. He is unable to change his pov, unable to emphasize with someone who thinks differently, so its unrealistic to think he will understand any of what we are trying to tell him.
I have a feeling I begin to understand why the debates here feel so frustrating. Because if Blizzard listens to players for once, its the ones who think its better for the game if the majority quits.
I have seen this argument many times (and unfortunately on US forums where I cannot post) and find it incomplete so to say.
While it is true that Vanilla and TBC grew more and faster than WotLK, the one very important thing is missing - the MMORPG (potential) market size. There just might have not been any more people interested in this genre so there was no space where to grow the WoW playerbase. This is called a âpoint of satiationâ (at least in economics). Sure, one can say that the upper limit should be overall Earthâs population, a number of computer or internet users, video games players but that would be very misleading.
There could be many other reasons for WotLK not increasing its playerbase and at this point (of time) we can only speculate what they could have been. Without sufficient data, we cannot prove or deny which factors contributed (and to what extend) and which did not.
We can freely discuss whether the points we are making in this thread are valid or not but at the end, many of them just cannot be verified (sadly). I am curious thought, what changes to WotLK would you have made (as a developer) to increase its playerbase by the same rate as Vanilla/TBC? (I am asking this question everyone in the forum.)
Furthermore, I would like to add my opinion on some things Vanillataur and others are discussing:
I like when I am able to solo some of the elite monsters or mobs by using my entire (or almost entire) class toolkit at my disposal like damage mitigation abilities (including heals), stuns, fears, slows, roots, pets and dps cooldowns. That way I feel satisfied conquering a strong foe by virtually solving a puzzle. However, at the same time, I can invite other players who then help me defeat the enemy (and in a way making the fight much more trivial).
Mended for you.
Maybe there was not a big market any more, but had WotLK really been that great, more would have bought subs. Many were account sharing back then because sibings, children and parents became interested in the game - or old enought to actually play it - but generally speaking in Wrath they did not any more buy separate accounts, but shared.
I know this is anecdotal evidence, but a thing I heard consstently during Wrath in several guilds.
I do not disagree with you - doing things alone and group quests even more! makes me feel an accomplishment too.
But thatâs not the real argument. The argument is that Group Quests were made for groups because we should be social.
And with what youâre writing here
youâre kinda confirming what I was saying ⊠namely that all classes became OP in Wrath and no longer needed to group up to beat the big baddies out in the world.
Sure, some people will probably join a guild, or try to. Because as Krutoj is saying, joining one wont solve the group making issues for everyone of them.
And itâs not even only about joining a guild or not. What about those on lowpop realms?
So yea, alot of people will most likely just quit instead. Myself included.
Iâd agree with you that is the usual new expac increase. But there is a flaw in your argument here.
Because if those ânew expac tryoutsâ hadnât liked it all that much, would they have stayed for the entire lifespan of it? Iâd say no.
The fact that the playerbase dropped to 9 mill after Cata really doesnât point to anything more then that people disliked Cata. Sure, RDF might have a little part in that, but thatâs nothing other than an assumption, not a fact of any kind.
here, I was more or less referring to the current version of the game (TBCC):
Still, I agree with you that player power basically grew out of the bounds but rather over time while not adjusting other content for it. Personally, I find it hard to even think of a proper balance to the game as it is - is making monsters scale with player power level a good thing? Simple answer is no, it is not. But, on the other hand, having the same difficulty level of a content (especially the one you have to grind), leads to rushing it or forcing it into mind-numbing experience. This, in my opinion, led Blizzard to introducing mythic+ difficulty but sadly, it made other difficulty content practically useless (apart from a one-time stop during the leveling). Which is why I really liked Ulduar with the Hard Mode options for many bosses, especially when the drop improved for players when then completed the encounter on higher difficulty.
