Casual player vs consecutive yearly player
-
@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
@Untchable704 said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
Casual players make a game grow more than anybody. If you take out that top 10% that’s leave 90%. 60% of the time that 80 more percents.
casual players grow the game the first three months then fortnite releases an update and they are gone, loyal fan bases keep the franchise going.
Why? Do you keep putting money into the game for 12 months? If not you’re useless to them business wise. You’re goiNg to buy the game regardless.
-
@maskedgrappler said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
@bonion said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
@Untchable704 ok but do you believe that there are more first year players then returning players? 19’ was the best year for sales correct? I would believe there to be more returning players but I’m not certain. A returning player would want to see better input then the game / yr before they played would they not? I’m not certain of these answers just would like insight
Not necessarily. A casual player probably isn't studying the swing feedback after every swing the way more competitive players are, as an example. Im sure there are a lot of casual players that liked 18 too, and 19.
The fielding stuff is pretty bad and easy to spot, but the hitting and pitching is a lot more nuanced and I would bet most people just take it as it is.
Classic case of Stockholm Syndrome
-
@Harrisville318 said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
@maskedgrappler said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
@bonion said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
@Untchable704 ok but do you believe that there are more first year players then returning players? 19’ was the best year for sales correct? I would believe there to be more returning players but I’m not certain. A returning player would want to see better input then the game / yr before they played would they not? I’m not certain of these answers just would like insight
Not necessarily. A casual player probably isn't studying the swing feedback after every swing the way more competitive players are, as an example. Im sure there are a lot of casual players that liked 18 too, and 19.
The fielding stuff is pretty bad and easy to spot, but the hitting and pitching is a lot more nuanced and I would bet most people just take it as it is.
Classic case of Stockholm Syndrome
I don't know what you're talking about, I'm not a casual player, I don't think anyone that logs into an internet forum to talk about the game is.
I'm talking about my buddy that has been buying this game since day 1. He plays mostly offline, but jumps online every once in a while. He's probably not cursing every time someone gets a hit on good/OK or he flies out on a squared up ball.
-
@MathMan5072 i agree with what your saying and I like your dice analogy. All star difficulty just presents the largest player pool. It has taken the name of All-Star H3LL. I wonder why it has been nicknamed that? Don’t get me wrong, I don’t miss the small ball 3-2, 2-1 games but your spot on with the good/ok homerun. HR’s dictate too often how these outcomes are determined and I can see why it feels like robbery the last 3 innings when you went 5 for 14 on good/goods and lost the game to an opponent on a 2 for 11 good/goods and a HR on a good/ok
-
@maskedgrappler said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
@Harrisville318 said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
@maskedgrappler said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
@bonion said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
@Untchable704 ok but do you believe that there are more first year players then returning players? 19’ was the best year for sales correct? I would believe there to be more returning players but I’m not certain. A returning player would want to see better input then the game / yr before they played would they not? I’m not certain of these answers just would like insight
Not necessarily. A casual player probably isn't studying the swing feedback after every swing the way more competitive players are, as an example. Im sure there are a lot of casual players that liked 18 too, and 19.
The fielding stuff is pretty bad and easy to spot, but the hitting and pitching is a lot more nuanced and I would bet most people just take it as it is.
Classic case of Stockholm Syndrome
I don't know what you're talking about, I'm not a casual player, I don't think anyone that logs into an internet forum to talk about the game is.
I'm talking about my buddy that has been buying this game since day 1. He plays mostly offline, but jumps online every once in a while. He's probably not cursing every time someone gets a hit on good/OK or he flies out on a squared up ball.
My comment was to Bonions comment.
Stockholm Syndrome is when people that have been kidnapped begin to trust or have affection for their captor.
-
@bonion said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
@MathMan5072 i agree with what your saying and I like your dice analogy. All star difficulty just presents the largest player pool. It has taken the name of All-Star H3LL. I wonder why it has been nicknamed that? Don’t get me wrong, I don’t miss the small ball 3-2, 2-1 games but your spot on with the good/ok homerun. HR’s dictate too often how these outcomes are determined and I can see why it feels like robbery the last 3 innings when you went 5 for 14 on good/goods and lost the game to an opponent on a 2 for 11 good/goods and a HR on a good/ok
you lost to a guy with same lineup but went 2/11? sounds like SDS..I mean EA sports to me. Just buy more packs that's the answer.
-
@Untchable704 said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
Casual players make a game grow more than anybody. If you take out that top 10% that’s leave 90%. 60% of the time that 80 more percents.
60% of the time that statement is right every time.
-
@ChuckCLC said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
@Untchable704 said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
Casual players make a game grow more than anybody. If you take out that top 10% that’s leave 90%. 60% of the time that 80 more percents.
60% of the time that statement is right every time.
I sure hope for the sake of SDS that 60% is still there in July. I doubt it, but I hope for this franchise's sake they do. Let's all hope that fortnite doesn't release another patch that steal's these loyal 1 time players away from the franchise.
-
@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
@ChuckCLC said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
@Untchable704 said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
Casual players make a game grow more than anybody. If you take out that top 10% that’s leave 90%. 60% of the time that 80 more percents.
60% of the time that statement is right every time.
I sure hope for the sake of SDS that 60% is still there in July. I doubt it, but I hope for this franchise's sake they do. Let's all hope that fortnite doesn't release another patch that steal's these loyal 1 time players away from the franchise.
That's not what casual players mean. They aren't one-time players. They still buy the game every year, (and perhaps some microtransactions early on), but they just don't stay or invest as much time each year. The game maker still gets that revenue once a year from the same casual players. It's expected that casuals start to drop off as the game progresses, that wouldn't be a surprise to any company.
If they don't make the game appeal to those people, those people don't buy next year, and they are always the largest majority of buyers
-
@eatyum said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
@ChuckCLC said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
@Untchable704 said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
Casual players make a game grow more than anybody. If you take out that top 10% that’s leave 90%. 60% of the time that 80 more percents.
60% of the time that statement is right every time.
I sure hope for the sake of SDS that 60% is still there in July. I doubt it, but I hope for this franchise's sake they do. Let's all hope that fortnite doesn't release another patch that steal's these loyal 1 time players away from the franchise.
That's not what casual players mean. They aren't one-time players. They still buy the game every year, (and perhaps some microtransactions early on), but they just don't stay or invest as much time each year. The game maker still gets that revenue once a year from the same casual players. It's expected that casuals start to drop off as the game progresses, that wouldn't be a surprise to any company.
If they don't make the game appeal to those people, those people don't buy next year, and they are always the largest majority of buyers
I know they aren't 1 time buyer's, but how many player's joined this franchise after they released it free-to-play through PSN?. Those are the people they are appealing too, the people who couldn't give a sh#$ about their game until its F2P. Do Casual players dictate how terrible the game plays? no, do they dictate your outfielder fielding the ball like an infielder? no, But they also don't help make change's either. Why? because they benefit from this garbage gameplay.
-
@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
@eatyum said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
@ChuckCLC said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
@Untchable704 said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
Casual players make a game grow more than anybody. If you take out that top 10% that’s leave 90%. 60% of the time that 80 more percents.
60% of the time that statement is right every time.
I sure hope for the sake of SDS that 60% is still there in July. I doubt it, but I hope for this franchise's sake they do. Let's all hope that fortnite doesn't release another patch that steal's these loyal 1 time players away from the franchise.
That's not what casual players mean. They aren't one-time players. They still buy the game every year, (and perhaps some microtransactions early on), but they just don't stay or invest as much time each year. The game maker still gets that revenue once a year from the same casual players. It's expected that casuals start to drop off as the game progresses, that wouldn't be a surprise to any company.
If they don't make the game appeal to those people, those people don't buy next year, and they are always the largest majority of buyers
I know they aren't 1 time buyer's, but how many player's joined this franchise after they released it free-to-play through PSN?. Those are the people they are appealing too, the people who couldn't give a sh#$ about their game until its F2P. Do Casual players dictate how terrible the game plays? no, do they dictate your outfielder fielding the ball like an infielder? no, But they also don't help make change's either. Why? because they benefit from this garbage gameplay.
That statement is wrong, there were plenty of casual players before they ever put it as the free game of the month in 19. The bulk of the game has always been casual, way before it was ever free.
You don't have to like it, I certainly don't like it, but those are the facts. Casual players do bring in the most money, they aren't all just waiting for a free game.
-
@eatyum said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
@eatyum said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
@ChuckCLC said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
@Untchable704 said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
Casual players make a game grow more than anybody. If you take out that top 10% that’s leave 90%. 60% of the time that 80 more percents.
60% of the time that statement is right every time.
I sure hope for the sake of SDS that 60% is still there in July. I doubt it, but I hope for this franchise's sake they do. Let's all hope that fortnite doesn't release another patch that steal's these loyal 1 time players away from the franchise.
That's not what casual players mean. They aren't one-time players. They still buy the game every year, (and perhaps some microtransactions early on), but they just don't stay or invest as much time each year. The game maker still gets that revenue once a year from the same casual players. It's expected that casuals start to drop off as the game progresses, that wouldn't be a surprise to any company.
If they don't make the game appeal to those people, those people don't buy next year, and they are always the largest majority of buyers
I know they aren't 1 time buyer's, but how many player's joined this franchise after they released it free-to-play through PSN?. Those are the people they are appealing too, the people who couldn't give a sh#$ about their game until its F2P. Do Casual players dictate how terrible the game plays? no, do they dictate your outfielder fielding the ball like an infielder? no, But they also don't help make change's either. Why? because they benefit from this garbage gameplay.
That statement is wrong, there were plenty of casual players before they ever put it as the free game of the month in 19. The bulk of the game has always been casual, way before it was ever free.
You don't have to like it, I certainly don't like it, but those are the facts. Casual players do bring in the most money, they aren't all just waiting for a free game.
Casual's bring as much if not less than the loyal fan base of this game in term's of monetary value, I have dropped quite a few dollars on this game since DD was introduced. RS6 is the best comparison, the game has a learning curve, you either learn and succeed or you don't and you drop off. They do not compromise and that is what keep's their player base and their fan base loyal. I had to learn and adapt to this franchise why shouldn't everyone else?. All I know is this is the last year I buy MLB the show, I am moving on to PC games, I'd rather deal with hacker's than having to fight with this game to field or hit a ball a properly.
-
Ranked season should not be geared towards casual players.
-
@Harrisville318 said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
Ranked season should not be geared towards casual players.
but it is, so here we are.
-
@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
@eatyum said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
@eatyum said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
@ChuckCLC said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
@Untchable704 said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
Casual players make a game grow more than anybody. If you take out that top 10% that’s leave 90%. 60% of the time that 80 more percents.
60% of the time that statement is right every time.
I sure hope for the sake of SDS that 60% is still there in July. I doubt it, but I hope for this franchise's sake they do. Let's all hope that fortnite doesn't release another patch that steal's these loyal 1 time players away from the franchise.
That's not what casual players mean. They aren't one-time players. They still buy the game every year, (and perhaps some microtransactions early on), but they just don't stay or invest as much time each year. The game maker still gets that revenue once a year from the same casual players. It's expected that casuals start to drop off as the game progresses, that wouldn't be a surprise to any company.
If they don't make the game appeal to those people, those people don't buy next year, and they are always the largest majority of buyers
I know they aren't 1 time buyer's, but how many player's joined this franchise after they released it free-to-play through PSN?. Those are the people they are appealing too, the people who couldn't give a sh#$ about their game until its F2P. Do Casual players dictate how terrible the game plays? no, do they dictate your outfielder fielding the ball like an infielder? no, But they also don't help make change's either. Why? because they benefit from this garbage gameplay.
That statement is wrong, there were plenty of casual players before they ever put it as the free game of the month in 19. The bulk of the game has always been casual, way before it was ever free.
You don't have to like it, I certainly don't like it, but those are the facts. Casual players do bring in the most money, they aren't all just waiting for a free game.
Casual's bring as much if not less than the loyal fan base of this game in term's of monetary value, I have dropped quite a few dollars on this game since DD was introduced. RS6 is the best comparison, the game has a learning curve, you either learn and succeed or you don't and you drop off. They do not compromise and that is what keep's their player base and their fan base loyal. I had to learn and adapt to this franchise why shouldn't everyone else?. All I know is this is the last year I buy MLB the show, I am moving on to PC games, I'd rather deal with hacker's than having to fight with this game to field or hit a ball a properly.
But rainbow six is geared towards those markets. They certainly aren't selling copies on the levels of a franchise like Call of Duty. The baseball market can't sustain selling to only fans of that type of gameplay because it's already a way smaller market then the first-person shooter market, so equating those two games doesn't work.
The competitive first-person shooter market is massive compared to any type of baseball game market. You can't compare the two, it's not even close
Most casual baseball fans are not going to adapt. They just won't come back because it's not a fun experience. Rainbow Six gets away with that because of the large FPS market, so even the smaller niche markets are quite large.
-
@MathMan5072 said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
I think it’s how you define the word casual. Im a casual player, but have logged 100 hours. My goal is not to be an elite player. I just like to collect the cards, do the missions, and play against other people sometimes. I don’t play on a monitor, although I’ve thought about it. After three years of playing a lot, I still can’t hit an inside fastball when thrown from the same side as my batter. When you look at the ranking at the end of every season, this group far outnumbers the groups that make the higher levels.
From my perspective there is a wide skill gap. I can tell in the first inning if my game is going to be evenly matched or if I’m going to have to catch some breaks to win. I might be able to hang around on all star setting, but if I make it into the ds, it’s going to be a lot harder for me.
I don’t know if I’m trying make a case against your post. I guess I just want to define what a “casual” player is.
Yeah same here. I get mad if I lose but it’s my competitive nature. As far as the game goes I am casual. User input should always be the main factor, that on top of card attributes. User input favors everyone imo. The casual guy will feel great when he hits it hard and the tryha.... i mean “elite” players will just hit the ball better as it should be
-
If you want to see what happens when a game caters to only casuals or bad players, look at cod MW. The better players hate the game bc it’s so noob friendly, this game has a good balance imo other than the screwed up hit feedback that happens sometimes.
-
@Crimson_Monk said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
If you want to see what happens when a game caters to only casuals or bad players, look at cod MW. The better players hate the game bc it’s so noob friendly, this game has a good balance imo other than the screwed up hit feedback that happens sometimes.
And yet, COD is still massive, and that's because of the casual's providing the bulk of the player base and money. Which is why COD is so noob-friendly. There is a reason companies do it.
-
@eatyum said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
@eatyum said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
@eatyum said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
@ChuckCLC said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
@Untchable704 said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
Casual players make a game grow more than anybody. If you take out that top 10% that’s leave 90%. 60% of the time that 80 more percents.
60% of the time that statement is right every time.
I sure hope for the sake of SDS that 60% is still there in July. I doubt it, but I hope for this franchise's sake they do. Let's all hope that fortnite doesn't release another patch that steal's these loyal 1 time players away from the franchise.
That's not what casual players mean. They aren't one-time players. They still buy the game every year, (and perhaps some microtransactions early on), but they just don't stay or invest as much time each year. The game maker still gets that revenue once a year from the same casual players. It's expected that casuals start to drop off as the game progresses, that wouldn't be a surprise to any company.
If they don't make the game appeal to those people, those people don't buy next year, and they are always the largest majority of buyers
I know they aren't 1 time buyer's, but how many player's joined this franchise after they released it free-to-play through PSN?. Those are the people they are appealing too, the people who couldn't give a sh#$ about their game until its F2P. Do Casual players dictate how terrible the game plays? no, do they dictate your outfielder fielding the ball like an infielder? no, But they also don't help make change's either. Why? because they benefit from this garbage gameplay.
That statement is wrong, there were plenty of casual players before they ever put it as the free game of the month in 19. The bulk of the game has always been casual, way before it was ever free.
You don't have to like it, I certainly don't like it, but those are the facts. Casual players do bring in the most money, they aren't all just waiting for a free game.
Casual's bring as much if not less than the loyal fan base of this game in term's of monetary value, I have dropped quite a few dollars on this game since DD was introduced. RS6 is the best comparison, the game has a learning curve, you either learn and succeed or you don't and you drop off. They do not compromise and that is what keep's their player base and their fan base loyal. I had to learn and adapt to this franchise why shouldn't everyone else?. All I know is this is the last year I buy MLB the show, I am moving on to PC games, I'd rather deal with hacker's than having to fight with this game to field or hit a ball a properly.
But rainbow six is geared towards those markets. They certainly aren't selling copies on the levels of a franchise like Call of Duty. The baseball market can't sustain selling to only fans of that type of gameplay because it's already a way smaller market then the first-person shooter market, so equating those two games doesn't work.
Baseball has sustained selling to only fans for year's, only recently have they made comprimises to their game in terms of length of play. Other than that they don't give a s$%# whether you like their game or not and I applaud them for that, one of the reason's I still follow baseball and have completely erased the NHL from my sports viewing agenda. When game companies start focusing on the people who got them to where they are, they will succeed, if they continue to focus on the demographics who pay them out for 1-2 months they will fail. Why do you think Battlefield V was such a colossal failure? because they said F@#$ you to the people who got them there and opened their arms to people who never gave a sh#$ about their games for more than 2 months. This game IMO is a colossal failure.
-
@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
@eatyum said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
@eatyum said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
@eatyum said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
@ChuckCLC said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
@Untchable704 said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:
Casual players make a game grow more than anybody. If you take out that top 10% that’s leave 90%. 60% of the time that 80 more percents.
60% of the time that statement is right every time.
I sure hope for the sake of SDS that 60% is still there in July. I doubt it, but I hope for this franchise's sake they do. Let's all hope that fortnite doesn't release another patch that steal's these loyal 1 time players away from the franchise.
That's not what casual players mean. They aren't one-time players. They still buy the game every year, (and perhaps some microtransactions early on), but they just don't stay or invest as much time each year. The game maker still gets that revenue once a year from the same casual players. It's expected that casuals start to drop off as the game progresses, that wouldn't be a surprise to any company.
If they don't make the game appeal to those people, those people don't buy next year, and they are always the largest majority of buyers
I know they aren't 1 time buyer's, but how many player's joined this franchise after they released it free-to-play through PSN?. Those are the people they are appealing too, the people who couldn't give a sh#$ about their game until its F2P. Do Casual players dictate how terrible the game plays? no, do they dictate your outfielder fielding the ball like an infielder? no, But they also don't help make change's either. Why? because they benefit from this garbage gameplay.
That statement is wrong, there were plenty of casual players before they ever put it as the free game of the month in 19. The bulk of the game has always been casual, way before it was ever free.
You don't have to like it, I certainly don't like it, but those are the facts. Casual players do bring in the most money, they aren't all just waiting for a free game.
Casual's bring as much if not less than the loyal fan base of this game in term's of monetary value, I have dropped quite a few dollars on this game since DD was introduced. RS6 is the best comparison, the game has a learning curve, you either learn and succeed or you don't and you drop off. They do not compromise and that is what keep's their player base and their fan base loyal. I had to learn and adapt to this franchise why shouldn't everyone else?. All I know is this is the last year I buy MLB the show, I am moving on to PC games, I'd rather deal with hacker's than having to fight with this game to field or hit a ball a properly.
But rainbow six is geared towards those markets. They certainly aren't selling copies on the levels of a franchise like Call of Duty. The baseball market can't sustain selling to only fans of that type of gameplay because it's already a way smaller market then the first-person shooter market, so equating those two games doesn't work.
Baseball has sustained selling to only fans for year's, only recently have they made comprimises to their game in terms of length of play. Other than that they don't give a s$%# whether you like their game or not and I applaud them for that, one of the reason's I still follow baseball and have completely erased the NHL from my sports viewing agenda. When game companies start focusing on the people who got them to where they are, they will succeed, if they continue to focus on the demographics who pay them out for 1-2 months they will fail. Why do you think Battlefield V was such a colossal failure? because they said F@#$ you to the people who got them there and opened their arms to people who never gave a sh#$ about their games for more than 2 months. This game IMO is a colossal failure.
Battlefield V had a lot of issues, but it's not why you say. COD MW appeals to casuals and is very successful. As someone said above, better COD players are unhappy with the game, but it's still widely successful. You can't just cherry pick things and say "This proves it doesn't work", because there are way more examples of why it does work
I think you are letting your emotion blind to the cold-hard facts. Like I said, you don't have to like it, I def don't, but it's still facts.
