Posted by hughesjr on 10/5/2016 2:18:00 AM (view original):
Posted by poncho0091 on 10/5/2016 1:26:00 AM (view original):
Posted by thinair on 10/5/2016 12:15:00 AM (view original):
Posted by jsajsa on 10/4/2016 10:50:00 PM (view original):
It's not about whether it will be a better game. It's about the idiocy of driving away what looks to be at least a third of your customers. It could end up being a better game and still be a massive failure if WIS can't recoup the losses from the exodus, and it looks like that's going to be an extremely tall task.
I hear you, and you may be right. But I just paid my first $2 in about 6 months to play this game. Whatif does not lose much if they lose me. I've recruited a few friends to play this game, and they are all STOKED about the changes, especially the use of it on a phone (I never really used my iphone to play). If that's true, then as long as their is some kind of marketing to do with the rollover, I can't imagine it's a huge issue. But that's assuming a few things that I probably should assume...such as, all the ****** off vets that are leaving are not really paying to make this game....and two....that a new enhanced game will actually attract more people. You are 100% right that it may be a tall order, and if that stands true, you'll for sure correct.
Apologies for having not read most of this conversation, and if this is redundant.
Like I said, I still am on the side of not liking the changes, and it's for the reasons you have mentioned, the loss of comradery. If this rollover pushed out my immediate friends on this game I would probably be on the verge of quitting myself. But all that said, I feel that all of my reasons for disliking this game, from a technical perspective, lie with me being a 28 year old dinosaur that finds change abrasive.
All I know is that if I was a perspective client, and I read these forums, I sure as hell wouldn't sign up. It would be too bad if the forum banter were to negatively affect any recruiting.
Thinair, there is a very common misconception in your statement of how much WIS would miss you, because you barely pay in. People keep saying the winners who are playing for free won't be missed, but that prize money is still going to go to someone. If I have 10 players and the top 2 play for free due to winnings, then I have 8 paying players. If those top 2 leave, the next 2 on the list are now playing for free, and I only have 6 paying players. It's one of the most flawed statements I've seen from people happy to see the winning coaches leave (not saying you are saying that). Maybe those that say it are just jealous, because they want to be the one playing for free.
And if they bring in 4 new players (who don't quit after one or two seasons), who don't think the game is completely rigged and feel that they can actually get a decent player every once in a while .. then they have won overall.
If the winners are not always the same people, but it gets spread around, and instead of only 2 guys who always play for free .. 8 guys all play for 75% and all of them are happy that they can win .. then WIS ends up with more people and more people who are happy.
I suppose we will see in a couple years what the outcome is.
BTW .. I do understand why some people hate the 'added randomness' that this kind of recruiting introduces. My only real issue was with the over exaggeration of calling it 'completely' random. It is not completely random, but is certainly more random.
Some people like it and some people don't. Not alot that can be done about that .. certainly name calling in both directions accomplishes nothing constructive.
I think we have hit our closest agreement that we will reach on the randomness. At least we have an equal understanding of why people would dislike it.
In terms of the lost user and free money, I was trying to give an example of known variables. We can't even begin to speculate how many new users are going to join until we see their ads. What we know is that some players are at the top and may play virtually free. We also know for certain that people are leaving. We have no clue how many people might join. We're making an assumption (1) that more people are going to join and stay, and we are making an assumption (2) that when a top notch coach leaves, that the next guy down the line won't just come in and dominate the same way. If the first assumption does not hold true, then WIS is losing money and we are worse off for the "free playing" coach leaving. If the second assumption does not hold true, then we have accomplished nothing, but chase off veteran coaches and WIS will lose money.
Only time will tell with assumption 1. The positive WIS will have is that new users won't have the old game to compare to. Even if they would have thought the old game would have been better, they won't know any better.
The bigger concern tied to assumption 2 is simply related to carryover cash and firings imo. No matter what game WIS implements, we can't control that some coaches just aren't that good and will never reach the top, and some coaches will learn the system and dominate. WIS trying to artificially fix that is flawed. An overhaul in carry over cash would have bridged the gap for some and would have addressed the concern of people hording money and being unbeatable. Firings would have allowed big 6 jobs to open up, letting people feel like movement upward was achievable.
Another concern I've seen is super classes. If that is such an issue, reduce the max number of true freshman. Honestly, it's way better than it used to be when there was no limit on freshman and people had 10 Seniors in a class (something like that). That was way back and that was a legitimate complaint that needed fixing and was fixed with a minor change.