15 Zeros.

"gufu21;c-1592972" wrote:

"DarkHelmet1138;c-1592942" wrote:

"gufu21;c-1592778" wrote:

"Waqui;c-1592702" wrote:

"gufu21;c-1592694" wrote:

"Waqui;c-1592680" wrote:

"gufu21;c-1592561" wrote:

"Waqui;c-1588377" wrote:
I disagree that phases 1 and 4.1 are too hard and not fun. . . .
. . . The problem here is not the design.

You know, there are about 36 pages (and counting) worth of posts that disagree with you. Just saying.

I disagree with them, yes. What's your point?

My statement still stands:
If they have plenty of the teams that work in those phases, but many still don't play them, then the problem is not design. The problem is still that the guild has a mix of actively participating players and 15 freeloaders, who don't care to invest the same time as the others. It's not unusual. It's a challenge for any guild management to have a homogenous well—functioning guild. Most guild officers know that.

My point is that when maybe 90% of players are saying that an aspect of a game is so frustrating, aggravating, tedious, overtuned, and unfun that they simply don't want to play it—yes, that really is bad design.

On an individual level, it's a subjective evaluation, and you're perfectly free to enjoy it. Some people surely do. I wish I did.

But if we're talking about on the whole, do most players enjoy this content and want to engage with it, then that's an objective answer. And the answer is no.

You are mistakingly viewing those many pages of posts as representing 90% of the player base. That's wrong. However, don't be ashamed of yourself. It's a common mistake. Many people have done something similar before you.

I understand your point. However, your conclusions are wrong.

Added : It's quite ironic, that you claimed to be objective :—)

This is probably going to devolve pretty quickly into an argument about what constitutes evidence (like has happened with lots of these discussions). But here goes.

First, that's a fair criticism. You're right that (1) I don't have have an exact percentage to represent the STR feedback thread—I took a ballpark estimate that it seemed at least 9/10 negative—and (2) I don't know that the STR feedback thread represents the player base as a whole.

But there are some factors that lead me to believe that that thread and the opinions voiced there represent something real and extrapolatable.

First is my own experience in my own guild: We're in the middle of p4 on a t5, and about 15 people have put in minimal to no effort. These are players are otherwise very active and contributing in all other guild events and raids. Most of the rest of us who do put in effort have voiced opinions about our disliking the raid strongly and finding it not really worth the investment, but we do it anyway out of a sense of duty to our guild.

Second, I read a lot of posts by a lot of other players whose experiences ring true to my own. It leads me to believe that my own limited, anecdotal experiences aren't just anomalies. They seem to be representative of broader effects seen in many guilds.

Third, there's a surprising amount of consensus among those who dislike the raid about what exactly isn't working for them, both on the forums and in the opinions of guildmates who don't really go on the forums. This suggests to me that these particular design aspects are actual pain points for a great portion of players, even committed players.

So while I accept your criticism that my estimate of 90% is very arguable, I don't think my conclusions are unreasonable.

While 90% negative seems close to what I see on the forums and in my guild, let's just assume that the negative is vastly overrepresented. But I don't think the specific number matters for my point. Even if it's only 60% negative, or 50%, or even 30%, that's still a very significant chunk of players who find the STR awful and not worth playing.

If you design a product, and you find that 30% of your users find it frustrating and nearly unusable, chances are that you're going to start digging to find out why. And if most of those responses start hitting on some the same specific complaints, the logical thing is to think that maybe they're onto something. Think about designing an web application: If 30% of users find it difficult or aggravating to use, do you call that acceptable? Or do you start to wonder how you could have designed it better?

But really, can we agree that it's probably a lot more than 30% who dislike STR? Can you concede that it's probably the majority?

Help me see how concluding that players hating STR and not wanting to do it is not due to its design.

First there are a certain percentage that hate anything that is the least bit hard. They also seem more vocal than the rest.

This very true. When it's a small number, you say there will always be some people displeased. When it's larger, you being to see that you could have done much better. In your estimation, given what you've seen on the forums or in guilds, what percentage of players really enjoy the STR?

Second, just because a majority agree on something doesn't make them right. I base my opinions on my observations and evidence not on majority opinion. I would hope you would do the same. The argument, that everyone agrees, is not a valid argument.

It's also true that a majority's opinion isn't necessarily correct. But in business, it's also true that often perception is reality, especially when your product's success is tied to user perception and engagement. CG doesn't design content for people not to play it. They want people to engage with it and enjoy it so that they keep playing the game. But given my own observation in my own guild and the evidence here on the forums, I think there's a strong basis to say that CG did not fully meet that design goal here. If a significant portion of the player base do not want to engage with the STR (we agree on that, right?), then that's a reality that matters.

Also, even though a majority's opinion isn't necessarily right, do you agree that a majority's opinion actually can be a form of observation and evidence? If you're trying to find out why a product isn't performing well and you get loads of user feedback about certain points, are you just going to dismiss that just because a majority's opinion isn't necessarily right? Or do you take that feedback as valid evidence of something to improve?

Third, I agree the raid rewards could be better. Mostly from removing challenge gear but I do not agree that the raid itself is broken. The challenge gear issue is an issue across all raids. Also the raid is an endgame event designed for the whole guild to participate. I have been in a guild with anchors and am now in one that requires a min amount of participation. Most of the issues of the raid taking forever go away if you have full participation. It is working as intended other than some of the rewards and CG says they are working on that.

Yes, full participation clearly helps. But do you know why it's hard to get that? Because a lot of players don't enjoy playing STR. Again, that perception—whether or not you share it—is a reality that reflects on the design.

And can we also agree that there is far more wrong with STR than just the rewards? For starters, the insane amount of RNG involved in p1, p3, and p4 that causes runs to be trash and require a restart by no fault of the player.

I can't estimate the number that hate the raid from forums alone no one can. But the alternative is making it too easu and having whales soloing in within weeks. It's designed with power creep in mind. For example, I woukd bet the new kotor toons being released will be better in the raid than most teams. As more players build teams it will get easier. And I don't agree that good runs are all that rng dependant. I'll use p1 as an example since it is most hated. You won't get consistent tm reduction and his speed increases with each attack and he has stacking tenacity so debuffs don't land. That is all by design to stop most haat and rancor solo teams from working. And realistically if you don't want solos that is necessary. A large portion of complaints are about that and I think they are wrong. The two things that kill you are nihilas's aoe if you are low health and anhilate. The first only really happens if your team is underpowered for your tier. The second is prediciable if you understand the mechanics. Unlike the playable nihilas, drain force only reduces cds if you have debuffs. It never increases it for more than the number of characters with debuffs. The other mechanics are not all that dependent on rng either. Yes it sucks if you don't time unbreakable will right and lose a character early but if you take the time to learn the mechanics, it can be avoided in most cases with minimal restarts. I would say that many that hate p1 do so because they don't understand the mechanics. That doesn't mean the phase is broken.