Insight Into Game Company Decision Making
I stumbled across this article, and wanted to share/start a discussion about it.
With all the solo-q requests and "dont become the new blizzard" comments, i feel like Hazzikostas clarifies a lot of issues with community feedback and game changes. Most importantly, how "many people mostly communicate within groups that prefer similar elements of the game". There isn't a direct comparison with the "nothing in WoW caters to the majority of players" part, and if we were to try and make it i think casual, normal players would make up the majority. Of course, the difference in number of ranked players is much less significant than any group in WoW.
The article concludes with a choice:
Either give everyone all the same stuff—cater to everyone and please no one—or give individual groups specialized treatment from time-to-time and piss off the majority of players until, inevitably, it’s their turn.
Right now, it seems like Riot has chosen the later, 'catering' to group players by giving them better ranked queue options. Also, having only one queue (in theory) favors people who value short queue times over matchmaking (although that hasn't gone exactly smoothly, particularly in high ranks), and the nature of New Champ Select benefits people who confidently play more than one role.
High-placed, pure-solo, one-trick-ponies are taking the brunt of the negative changes. If Riot follows their currently system, the next thing they ought to put out is a 1v1 arena, with a separate global ladder for each champion.
Or they could switch to the "cater to everyone, please no one" plan, by modifying DynamicQ to restrict premades.
#So what do you think Riot should do?#