Since some people are so against layering/sharding that they are talking about not playing at all, instead of losing their money, blizz should cater to them.
Instead of letting them leave, offer them an alternative. A separate specialty subscription for say 18 bucks a month that features servers with NO layering/sharding. Blizzard would know exactly how much the population would be because of the separate sub and they would make more money for doing less work. Everybody wins.
I think the retail casual player will be the majority. But thatâs just my opinion.
OR they can wait to phase 2 which will have more content including Dire Maul anyway, and zero layering.
They plan on removing it eventually but if you played the stress test you know it is 100% necessary or people just wont be able to play at all.
They are expecting thousands, or maybe tens of thousands of players. so 20 or so get miffed off about sharding. So what.
I donât actually believe anyone will skip Classic purely because of layering. Sounds like a typical forum bluff to me.
The majority of them are not going to skip classic. For most of them its hyperbole. For the others they would have left anyway as soon as they didnt get an item or found whatever the new complaint of the weeks is as an excuse. A popular one being âWhy does this cost a sub?! im just going to go play a private server!â Those people were never going to play Classic anyway.
All the more reason to offer them a choice. They play, they spend more, and blizz makes more money, everyones happy.
The point im trying to make is those people arent going to play unless you basically cater to there every whim. Free Game in the way they want it to be with the versions of how they want it.
Or they can suck it up for the few weeks it will be there. If they truly care about Classic theyâll support what Blizzard can do to ease the launch of the game, not create ultimatums.
Like if they threaten to jump ship, Iâd simple tell them âhope you can swimâ.
It does make sense to have 5+ or so servers with no layering- thereâs really no reason for them not to.
Those realms would end up being more attractive out the gate and would have a very good long term population because they would be 100% guaranteed to be free of phasing, sharding, layering and the likes- forever.
Iâd accept this if the price was $30 a month. If you want a bloat of servers, you gotta pay for it.
It doesnât âreallyâ. Because people would pretend those servers were âmore authenticâ and everyone would want to use them, then complain that there werenât enough of them, then demand Blizzard open more, all the while the layered servers wouldnât have enough players on them for more than one layer, and suddenly the unhappy people who are never satisfied are dominating the conversation.
All or none. And none = launch failure.
That is true- and I think thatâs a testament to players preferring those servers without layering. An âall or noneâ approach is usually the best way to go but due to the nature of layering and how many people are outspoken against it, a few dedicated realms is a smart move with the understanding that they are at a premium and will have large queues attached to them- such a thing would encourage players to choose layered servers anyway which ensures a sizeable pop spread across those realms.
Not sure how some people seem to ignore the very clearly stated plansâŚ
For those who donât believe you, and I know they existâŚ
Not really. You missed the implications in my last post.
Iâm pretty sure many of the âno-layeringâ fanatics will play the Classic in phase 2 anyway. So in a way, itâs benefit to Blizzard as it indirectly help to smooth out the initial burst load, so there is really no real incentive for Blizzard to change their layering policy.
Iâll play, but if they donât remove it after level 10 then duces