Please Reconsider MSQ Changes

[BillyKaplan]

Sad to say I wasn't able to experience it fully because of the player base, not the content itself.

But that's exactly my point - no content at such length should be integrated into a duty. It doesn't matter how good it is, it's the integration itself that's badly designed.

So, no, these changes are not stupid.

These changes are tone deaf. It's possible that the queues won't be hurt as badly as we say they will be, but from a development standpoint, they did the single most intrusive, violent thing they could've done. Forcing your userbase to do anything when it comes to content is the #1 biggest no-no. I'm a software engineer. You only do that sort of thing if you want your users to not use your product. A lot of people in this thread already said they'll never bother again. You yourself said you don't see the point to going in there more than the one time. And from a developer viewpoint, that's the worst outcome regardless of how bad the queues will or won't be. Because it shows your users just how deep in the sand your head is as a developer, and leaves a roulette that will see a lot less usage besides. And when they created an entire new roulette and locked a shiny mount behind 2000 runs of it because they need people to run content, I don't think that's something they could afford, really.

[Jellybums]

But that's exactly my point - no content at such length should be integrated into a duty. It doesn't matter how good it is, it's the integration itself that's badly designed.

These changes are tone deaf. It's possible that the queues won't be hurt as badly as we say they will be, but from a development standpoint, they did the single most intrusive, violent thing they could've done. Forcing your userbase to do anything when it comes to content is the #1 biggest no-no.

I said it's just not something I would do daily. But after actually trying it today with sprouts and vets, it's not as bad as people are making it out to be. I've had longer runs in 50/60 and leveling with non-sprouts. How are these two dungeons flawed just because veterans can't do speedruns on them anymore? A lot of people in this thread won't bother with Toto-Rak either which is a staple to new characters and would rather eat penalty. Is it then flawed, too? Judging content from the standpoint of someone it's not even designed for in itself is flawed. Anyway the numbers will speak for themselves. Business decisions are based on data, stats, numbers, not just some value judgment and unsupported claims especially when real money's at stake. If the memo reads budget request for revamping old content, what is this, new toys not enough? Good luck getting money for the we think and it will. Is what you're asking for within reason and is the premise of it even sound/solid/backed by data? SE doesn't exactly have fairy godmothers on staff.