Lol Arthas 10-mannable

Q u o t e:
http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=6408021060&pageNo=1&sid=1#4

So we go from 40 manning random baddies nobody cares about, to 25 manning some of the major villians in WC3, to 10 manning one of the most (if not THE most) powerful entities in the universe.

What's next, COT instances where we go back and kill Arthas + Illidan + Kil'jaedan with 4 other random pugs?

Screw lore!

Your home city was invaded and is still held by level 28's.

I think it's fairly early on that you should learn the relativity of level and power, and that it isn't intended to be a benchmark for the difficulty of what exists in the world in comparison to each other.

First and foremost our goal is to create a fun game.

Also, I hope that no one thinks the 10 person versions are going to be easy simply because they don't require the same amount of player coordination. They aren't going to be 'gimme' dungeons, it's going to be a difficult progression.

Q u o t e:


Will the 10 and 25 man versions of the same raid instance share a lockout, or will we be able to do both versions with a separate lockout for each?

Separate.

I fully expect the larger guilds who can do the 25 person progression to still invest a lot of time in the 10 person versions.

Q u o t e:
Hi Drysc, what's your opinion on the idea of 10 man encounters? Does it seem like less epic, welfare, pve to you or equally epic?

Its nothing but a step in the right direction. It opens it up so that hopefully more people will be able to experience the story. I think story is one place where it shouldn't be restricted to the few that have player coordination and time to dedicate to the larger raids.

Now, as I've been trying to say, that doesn't mean its going to be easy. Guilds that aren't really clearing Kara, or not really clearing Zul'Aman, are going to REALLY have to step it up if they hope to face Arthas.

Q u o t e:
Why would you wan to restrict access to the game content to a small amount of players?

Its just trolling. Show me an actual end game raider that claims separate progressions on the same story line diminishes their efforts and can keep a straight face, and I'll show you someone that takes themselves too seriously.

Q u o t e:


Honestly, people have been calling for this for a long time, but you and the devs have no credibility to all of a sudden care about it, pandering to the lowest common denominator is good for business and the game as a whole, that you are just doing this now is good,but nothing more then pandering, like the failure that was arena, but don't act like you gave a crap about it before, because anyone can see that clearly you didnt.

So should we then be strung up or be forced to ask forgiveness for old design philosophies? Things evolve, the game has evolved, the player base has evolved. Its positive for us to continue to adapt and change and cater to our players the best way possible. To create a fun and accessible game for as many people as we can. I don't feel in any way that by continuing to evolve and change and update our core design philosophies that we in any way owe apologies or need to feel bad. We're moving forward, we're not just sitting in one place we're constantly trying to make the best game possible, and that's not something we should feel sorry for.

Q u o t e:


I don't think people have evolved, they've just grown bored. They're tired of the same things they've either done 400 times, or they've never been able to do because it didn't fit their playstyle, ie going with 24 other people on a raid.

The problem with continuously going forward is that you're going to hit a brick wall soon and have nothing left to improve, or you're not going to do anything and people will claim the developers are doing nothing, their suggestions and feedback are meaningless, etc.

I think game development has a ways before we reach that wall. :)