So...VIPs are apparently getting hosed.

[SkyJ89]

Sorry I'm having trouble how you can't figure out someone interested in zerging will see LFM's auto-populated with Zerg for groups interested in zerging. I'm having trouble how you can't understand that someone interested in going slow paced could join only those LFM's. Or any other preference that devs can easily match preference to player.

Why would everyone need to unify to one preference?

Why couldn't some who hates zerging just avoid the zerg groups?



Given your responses, I would say you don't understand my posts. Having the choice of a red, blue, green, or white car doesn't make everyone pick one color. The reality is that people don't post preferences very well, even though they have that ability. That is where technology can help. There are probably a half dozen to a dozen major different preferences, and the LFM does not provide that kind of space. The relevant question is how easily a player with a particular preference can match that preference, and the answer is that it is difficult, particularly for newer players. People zerging don't always post zerg - because they are in a hurry and zerging. That fact that can do it doesn't mean that they do.

SSG hired a UI person, so unlike you, they think making interactions better is important.

The question is whether your preference should trump that of everyone else, or whether you can allow others to suggest things you disagree with.



I think the player ability to read suggestions is really poor. I think talking about spaghetti code is inappropriate, when I could take each and every suggestion you make and use the same argument. It is a poorly thought out response, because it adds zero value to the discussion, or to your own preferences.

Give specific reasons why having the option to see/filter the groups you are most-interested in is a bad thing.

Are you offended by the current level range option? Tell us how it forces everyone to play the same level quests.



Relevant to this thread, if people had the choice to pick things they valued in a VIP package, would this also offend you?

I personally am amused that people can tell other people VIP is a great deal because gold rolls are worth X dollars. The idea that someone else would value its worth differently is incomprehensible to those that can't allow or understand preferences other than their own. Such thinking is common here, although definitely not universal.

Overall, it seems both of us think the different way. To avoid further unnecessary argument and personal attack, I'll just have to agree to disagree. Good luck with your proposal.

[Chai]

The problem is u can't equate everyone behavior under the same category. Not all vets zerg and there are group that help new player. The same can be said not all new player dislike zerg. Some new player enjoy fast pace gameplay and enjoy learning how people play. Its often this misconception that people use this as a problem to fuel their exaggeration statement. Not that I deny such thing isn't in the game but one needs to look at all angle before dropping such conclusion. We can't simply say all the new player left are because of the one reason, zergers. Because there are other reason beside zerging. Zerger are just one of them. We can't make a decision to diverse the community based on the reason of a fraction that left, neglecting the other reason and thinning out the population without doing research and survey and weighing on different option. We are in no position to do this anyway.

So the best thing we as a community could help new player is to treat them right. Sometime its not the zerging that chases them away. Its the rude attitude that some player are giving them. Leave your suggestion for the developer to decide and refrain make any wild conclusion that base on a fraction of what u see. No one here are capable to fully see a developer perspective since no one here has the full data to judge without causing harm to the game.

By showing an example of 2 different gamespaces I oversimplified the example to illustrate a point without having to list every type of player and unnecessarily write a Tolstoy's War and Peace length novel to highlight the issue, while showing a two part example makes the valid point. Simplifying does leave an opening for an overly on purpose literal interpretation which leads to classic and equally on purpose misrepresentation.

In reality, games have more than 2 gamespaces, and can have as many as needed. Water makes things wet. The sky is blue on a clear sunny day.

For those inclined to be so literal, there is precisely and exactly zero coincidence that the MMOs succeeding the most right now are the ones that are a theme park full of isolated sandboxes. There is also the same zero coincidence in knowing the ones that fail the hardest attempt to cram all their players into the same gamespace, then wonder why the vast majority of accounts have less than a full month of log in time (not play duration mind you, but time between very first and very last log in). When the surveys roll in, there is also no coincidence (see the theme forming here?) that single biggest reason for leaving by far is "community toxicity"

No one here are capable to fully see a developer perspective since no one here has the full data to judge without causing harm to the game.

False, but Im not inclined to out several companies data to win an argument on the internet. Our team has seen, analyzed, and done the homework on this subject. If you believe this to be incorrect, feel free to let us know why the single most recognizable IP in RPGs in the last 40 years has a fraction of the players many cookie cutter clone MMOs have, a fraction of the players another D&D themed MMO that is a much worse representation of the franchise has, and also a fraction of the players this very same game once had. "Old game" doesnt work here, because I can name several older games with multiplicitively higher player base concurrency. "Bad grafix" also doesnt work here either, as with this 80s reboot era we are in the middle of, companies are making pixelated graphics games on purpose and they sell like hotcakes. They also dont have system requirements just shy of Pixar's render farm to play on medium settings. Heck I can name games with worse graphics that are far older, that people left this game to go play.

What are those games doing correctly? Multiple gamespaces for different minded players. This is not a new concept in multiplayer game design, after all.

[SkyJ89]

By showing an example of 2 different gamespaces I oversimplified the example to illustrate a point. In reality, games have more than 2 gamespaces, and can have as many as needed.

The MMOs succeeding the most right now are the ones that are a theme park full of isolated sandboxes. The ones that fail the hardest attempt to cram all their players into the same gamespace, then wonder why the vast majority of accounts have less than a full month of log in time (not play duration mind you, but time between very first and very last log in).

Yeah I just added my last post regarding this but since u mention this, I'll just copy paste it here.

Isolating player is a risk for player to leave the game. Player has less chance to interact with each other and less chance to build a relationship with the community. They might be safe from other influence but in the long run, they will have nothing attach to the game that will make them stay. That's why most MMO encourage grouping and discourage solo play.

I agree MMO with sandbox and theme park genre has their attraction. But categorizing LFM base on preference does not quite fit the term sandbox or theme park. Maybe I have a different understanding of the term than yours but I feel sandbox and theme park are more towards diversify player's activity in the game other than questing. For example introduction of housing, farming, castle siege etc. Regardless, all of those theme still encourage player to group and participate by reward. It is to compensate the diversity that might cause to the community.

[SkyJ89]

False, but Im not inclined to out several companies data to win an argument on the internet. Our team has seen, analyzed, and done the homework on this subject.

Sure show me your study and the analytic data so I may change my stance. Because Its quite the opposite from what I'm experiencing in my server.

[pSINNa]

Just to get back to the OP's statement, and Topic line for this, I've just jumped in to mention that as a VIP for over a decade, and still paying my sub with no plan to discontinue in the future, I think that this was an astute move by Standing Stone.

I do not feel shorted in any way despite being an almost exclusively solo player these days.

In fact, I may be tempted to put up some LFM's in the near future for my own relaxed 'do it all' quest style I tend to these days - having left my zerg crazy phase behind after running lives on characters into the triple figures, and taking into account that I never really enjoyed Reaper, preferring to relax on Elite and Hard settings for the majority of the game these days as well - I play for fun, not so much to 'win DDO' now.

There may be more raids being run, more LFM's up, and some interesting people getting out and about, and that's just fine.

My take, Coit out

[myliftkk_v2]

You are making an assumption that the Devs do not collect suggestions from what users post on the forums. If the VIP subscription rate drops then they will look for additional benefits. If it doesn't drop, I don't suspect it will, then there is no reason to add anything. keep in mind they need to factor the cost in lost point purchases for anything they add to VIP. This is a business.

That's actually not what I'm doing at all. I'm pointing out the silliness that says VIP is some immutable product that has input costs.

And not a surprise, they can charge different rates for different flavors of VIP.

Really, if the VIP subscription drops? How many years have we been watching it go up?

[myliftkk_v2]

Sure show me your study and the analytic data so I may change my stance. Because Its quite the opposite from what I'm experiencing in my server.

What you experience is anecdotes. What Chai does is work with data.

Part of the problem is the inability or unwillingness to differentiate between the two.

[KBBQ]

If you don't like it drop your VIP and go somewhere else, sounds like the game and forums will be a better place without you.

Ah the classic "if you don't like it, leave" 'argument'. Completely devoid of any value and pointlessly trying to drive away people who clearly care about and like this game would like to see it be improved/flourish. Similar to Sky's "umm I like it right now, people are going to choose what they choose u cant do anything about it or suggest anything" argument. Please tell me how you've made the forums a better place, while there are people here trying to discuss suggestions and alternatives in a critical way.

[Red_Knight]

That's actually not what I'm doing at all. I'm pointing out the silliness that says VIP is some immutable product that has input costs.

And not a surprise, they can charge different rates for different flavors of VIP.

And yet, the devs clearly do assign a dollar value to each component of the VIP benefits. Want proof? Well, over at LOTRO's vip info page they specifically call out the "value" of the benefits in order to convince you it's a good deal. I'm sure if the DDO page for that had been updated at all since the game went F2P it too would do so.

[Bjond]

The benefit of VIP is not in tangible game boosts, but in a "one stop shop". Pay the sub and don't worry about ANY access other than the major expansions. IMHO, I'd even appreciate it if the most recent expansion included all previous ones. I paid for all the expansions and it would not be any skin off my nose if they bundled all the older ones with the latest.

Why? I want people to group with not yokels yammering about how their F2P doesn't have access.

[Holgar]

The benefit of VIP is not in tangible game boosts, but in a "one stop shop". Pay the sub and don't worry about ANY access other than the major expansions. IMHO, I'd even appreciate it if the most recent expansion included all previous ones. I paid for all the expansions and it would not be any skin off my nose if they bundled all the older ones with the latest.

Why? I want people to group with not yokels yammering about how their F2P doesn't have access.

Just wanted to jump in and say that yes, being a VIP is still worth it, but if you are a solo VIP player, you literally just got nothing while those who pay nothing just got a lot. I think a nice way to thank your steady subscribers is to give some kind of one-time perk, even if it's just a one-time boost to DDO Points as a thank-you.

[Chai]

Yeah I just added my last post regarding this but since u mention this, I'll just copy paste it here.

Isolating player is a risk for player to leave the game. Player has less chance to interact with each other and less chance to build a relationship with the community. They might be safe from other influence but in the long run, they will have nothing attach to the game that will make them stay. That's why most MMO encourage grouping and discourage solo play.

I agree MMO with sandbox and theme park genre has their attraction. But categorizing LFM base on preference does not quite fit the term sandbox or theme park. Maybe I have a different understanding of the term than yours but I feel sandbox and theme park are more towards diversify player's activity in the game other than questing. For example introduction of housing, farming, castle siege etc. Regardless, all of those theme still encourage player to group and participate by reward. It is to compensate the diversity that might cause to the community.

No true at all. Players have equal chance at interacting with anyone they want in games with multiple game spaces. Theres also multiplicative higher probability that game with multiple game spaces has a mode the player likes, over a game with one single game space. Probably the single biggest example (and the most polarizing example) is games with open world PVP. They often end up as niche games. When they open a few servers with open world PVP turned off, they attract the PVE crowd. This doesnt mean the PVP crowd goes away, as they still have their gamespace.

[Chai]

You replied to this:

...but Im not inclined to out several companies data to win an argument on the internet. Our team has seen, analyzed, and done the homework on this subject.

With this:

Sure show me your study and the analytic data so I may change my stance. Because Its quite the opposite from what I'm experiencing in my server.

Which in and of itself is false, as you havent experienced the impact of multiple game spaces on one server in a game with one gamespace. You have zero basis to refute a comparison of single gamespace versus multiple gamespaces using anecdotal experience of only a single gamespace as a source. This smacks of fear of change.

The refutation of the premise that multiple game space fragments the population is as follows:

"Im having fun in my single gamespace so dont give anyone else who plays differently than me their own game space" is a bad argument, because you are not impacted one bit when people who dont play with you anyhow (because they dont play the single game space game where the parameters of the gamespace do not cater to them) still dont play with you when the game has more gamespaces (are in another instance where their gamespace parameters are met).

There is no fragmenting of the population here. Per my previous example people who hate open world PVP dont play that open world PVP game because its the only gamespace in the game. They go play a PVE game. Your argument is based on an incorrect assumption that if the game has fewer game spaces that means the headcount stays the same and more players are in each space, and this is proven false as players will leave the game that doesnt cater to them for one that does before they will play a game which doesnt cater to them.

[Red_Knight]

No true at all. Players have equal chance at interacting with anyone they want in games with multiple game spaces. Theres also multiplicative higher probability that game with multiple game spaces has a mode the player likes, over a game with one single game space. Probably the single biggest example (and the most polarizing example) is games with open world PVP. They often end up as niche games. When they open a few servers with open world PVP turned off, they attract the PVE crowd. This doesnt mean the PVP crowd goes away, as they still have their gamespace.

Please note that the niche that open world pvp games draw in is the "hang out just outside the low level safe areas with a max level character and kill new characters that dare poke their head out of safety, repeatedly. They then wonder just where the player base went, never understanding that they chased off the player base. I've seen it happen many a time. In Age of Conan for example the PvP servers are usually barren, and have been since about a month after the game launched. And that's entirely because of griefers hanging out in White Sands (the first open world pvp area) after grinding out max levels so they can easily kill the level 5-20 players trying to run their quests. Note that you know these people ground out their levels in White Sands 1 or 2 xp at a time because once you hit level 21, you can't enter White Sands anymore. I had a character I ground out to level 45 (cap was 50 at the time) in White Sands who I left parked there. I did this not to grief new players, but to hunt down any griefers, kill them, and force them to respawn outside of White Sands since these a-holes never had a spawn point unlocked in White Sands. Thus they would respawn in town, and be unable to get back to their favored griefing area.

[HungarianRhapsody]

Individual codes for major consumable items.

That's not just an Otto's Box. That's Otto's Box THX-1138-OU812-8675309

Oh, it looks like Otto's Box THX-1138-OU812-8675309 has already been redeemed. It cannot be redeemed again.

Edit: Whoops. I put this in the wrong place. Was intending to comment on "what would you like to see added to the game"

[Red_Knight]

Point of fact, VIP are so "hosed" by the impending coupon that... I just decided to pay for a one year sub. Or in other words, the coupon doesn't "hose" VIP at all.

[SkyJ89]

What you experience is anecdotes. What Chai does is work with data.

Part of the problem is the inability or unwillingness to differentiate between the two.

The real problem is how trustworthy is a player data to SSG compare to SSG own data? Its true my experience don't matter. But can u tell the data player collected is without bias or tampered? Can u trust my data if I were to submit my own copy? U see no matter what we say as a player or what data we collect, its only a player feedback to the developer. In the end, the developer would only use their own data. That's why I said leave this kind of job to the developer. Post your suggestion/idea and don't leave ultimatum. Let the developer decide. I find squabbling over such a matter is a waste of time. Not that we are able to see what the developer had on their meeting board. But yeah, if people wish to play developer on the forum, I guess its not my business anyway. Feel free do what u guys want.

[niknight]

Point of fact, VIP are so "hosed" by the impending coupon that... I just decided to pay for a one year sub. Or in other words, the coupon doesn't "hose" VIP at all.

It doesn't hose VIP at all... for you. That's kind of been the entire point of the thread. There are multiple ways to play the game, and there are multiple value judgements one can have about a VIP sub. None of them are wrong. For example, a previous poster pointed out that there's a decent population in this game that likes to solo. For them, the permanent buddy bonus doesn't make up for the fact that their sub won't get access to any content above F2P until sometime in 2021 (since U47 should be out before the coupon expires, and U48 is Feywild). We, as a community, need to recognize that their viewpoints are valid and attempt to mollify them... not treat them to some version of "bye Felicia".

[SirValentine]

It doesn't hose VIP at all... for you. That's kind of been the entire point of the thread. There are multiple ways to play the game, and there are multiple value judgements one can have about a VIP sub. None of them are wrong. For example, a previous poster pointed out that there's a decent population in this game that likes to solo. For them, the permanent buddy bonus doesn't make up for the fact that their sub won't get access to any content above F2P until sometime in 2021 (since U47 should be out before the coupon expires, and U48 is Feywild). We, as a community, need to recognize that their viewpoints are valid and attempt to mollify them... not treat them to some version of "bye Felicia".

It's just so overblown. Nothing proposed "hoses" VIP for anybody. No VIP is losing a single thing. Even dedicated I-only-ever-solo players who don't gain any benefit from a buddy bonus still don't lose anything.

If anyone (who hasn't lost anything) decides a different option (which admittedly has been made more attractive) is now the better option, then they are perfectly free to switch from VIP to Premium.

How much does SSG care whether people are VIP versus Premium? I don't know. If they want people to stay VIP instead of Premium, is there enough of an advantage to VIP? I don't know. But all this talk about being "hosed" is pure nonsense.

[Kebtid]

By showing an example of 2 different gamespaces I oversimplified the example to illustrate a point without having to list every type of player and unnecessarily write a Tolstoy's War and Peace length novel to highlight the issue, while showing a two part example makes the valid point. Simplifying does leave an opening for an overly on purpose literal interpretation which leads to classic and equally on purpose misrepresentation.

In reality, games have more than 2 gamespaces, and can have as many as needed. Water makes things wet. The sky is blue on a clear sunny day.

For those inclined to be so literal, there is precisely and exactly zero coincidence that the MMOs succeeding the most right now are the ones that are a theme park full of isolated sandboxes. There is also the same zero coincidence in knowing the ones that fail the hardest attempt to cram all their players into the same gamespace, then wonder why the vast majority of accounts have less than a full month of log in time (not play duration mind you, but time between very first and very last log in). When the surveys roll in, there is also no coincidence (see the theme forming here?) that single biggest reason for leaving by far is "community toxicity"



False, but Im not inclined to out several companies data to win an argument on the internet. Our team has seen, analyzed, and done the homework on this subject. If you believe this to be incorrect, feel free to let us know why the single most recognizable IP in RPGs in the last 40 years has a fraction of the players many cookie cutter clone MMOs have, a fraction of the players another D&D themed MMO that is a much worse representation of the franchise has, and also a fraction of the players this very same game once had. "Old game" doesnt work here, because I can name several older games with multiplicitively higher player base concurrency. "Bad grafix" also doesnt work here either, as with this 80s reboot era we are in the middle of, companies are making pixelated graphics games on purpose and they sell like hotcakes. They also dont have system requirements just shy of Pixar's render farm to play on medium settings. Heck I can name games with worse graphics that are far older, that people left this game to go play.

What are those games doing correctly? Multiple gamespaces for different minded players. This is not a new concept in multiplayer game design, after all.

This is a excellent post. Worth highlighting