Why cant we queue to golden saucer attractions from anywhere?

[ElHeggunte]

As it stands, nearly no one does Chocobo Racing and LoV, and I can bet my Lalanuts that if we could queue to them from anywhere, there'd be much more people doing them. I'd say that's worth risking the 'immersion' for, because as it stands, those minigames are pretty much wasted space.

I beg to differ. I highly doubt it would make any appreciable difference in participation if you could queue for them anywhere. The majority of the people who aren't doing them aren't doing them because they simply aren't interested. It has very little, if anything, to do with having to be on location to participate.

If there are people out there who want to participate in Chocobo Racing and/or Lord of Verminion, but don't because they have to spend all of a few minutes in the Golden Saucer they would be part of an incredibly small minority.

[Zojha]

I beg to differ. I highly doubt it would make any appreciable difference in participation if you could queue for them anywhere.

But then you'd logically have to assume the same for dungeons. Which then leads to very curious implications about roulettes.

Heh. Now I have to imagine a crowd in front of Alexander.

[Preypacer]

But then you'd logically have to assume the same for dungeons. Which then leads to very curious implications about roulettes.

Heh. Now I have to imagine a crowd in front of Alexander.

If queuing for dungeons required people to be on location at the dungeon entrance, that's what people would do, so long as they found that content, or more specifically, the rewards, worth their time.

I say this because, generally speaking, people will do whatever is required to participate in content they want to participate in, especially if they deem the rewards worth it (e.g. Relic, both the original and the new versions).

Those interested in doing GS content, because they find it enjoyable and worth the time, are going to the GS to do it.

I agree with ElHeggunte... there's no reason, or precedent, to believe that adding GS events to DF would somehow increase people's interest in it, or that fewer people are doing it because it isn't. It's pure conjecture to claim it would somehow increase interest.

The claim seems to be more in line with people who want some feature implemented, and claim "if they do this, it will make more people play, which means more money for the developer. Of course developers want more money, so there's no reason they shouldn't do it". It sounds compelling on its face, for about 2 seconds. But it's really just someone trying to put as positive a spin as they can on something, because they personally want it.

The opposite of that is, "if they don't do "x", people will leave the game, and it will fail". Same idea, just in the other direction.

[Zojha]

If queuing for dungeons required people to be on location at the dungeon entrance, that's what people would do, so long as they found that content, or more specifically, the rewards, worth their time.

Indeed. But dungeon participation would most certainly go down, because you can no longer quest, FATE or gather while you wait in queue. Especially as DPS, that's a large amount of time you'd spend doing absolutely nothing. You get the travel time on top, all of which now has to be compensated by the dungeon. So without changing dungeon rewards to match, dungeon participation would go down, as per your own argument.

As for precedents...we could ask Blizzard how their looking for group history has worked out. They pretty much went from "Gather people yourself, then walk all the way to the dungeon entrance on foot" to what we have right now:"Queue for anything from anywhere". I wonder what the reasons might have been.


You know...when I think about it, I'm surprised SE didn't actually enforce being at the dungeon. It's a great way to waste player time, and oh so subtle.

[StouterTaru]

I agree with ElHeggunte... there's no reason, or precedent, to believe that adding GS events to DF would somehow increase people's interest in it, or that fewer people are doing it because it isn't. It's pure conjecture to claim it would somehow increase interest.

Sure it probably won't directly increase interest, but it will increase participation. So more people actually get to try it, rather than sitting in square waiting for a match for 20 minutes, then saying "meh, this sucks."

[Arashmin]

Sure it probably won't directly increase interest, but it will increase participation. So more people actually get to try it, rather than sitting in square waiting for a match for 20 minutes, then saying "meh, this sucks."

This. And that would also likely lead to loss of attrition (players won't just give up for finding the game unplayable), which then means the word of mouth will be generally more positive, and therefore people won't shy away from it, thus, increase interest. It's pretty much math.

Why would we need a precedent anwyho? It's not like we're talking about a trial involving old historic laws. It's a game.