I wonder how much of this eventually becomes self-selection & like a positive feedback loop? E.g. people who hate variance burn out / stop playing, so more people playing/engaging are those who like variance, so Riot incorporates more variance...
Ya I get that & it makes sense. What I mean is TFT's playerbase evolves over time and Riot's decisions impact that evolution. If 51% of players like variance & 49% of players don't, and Riot adds more variance into TFT, maybe they gain&retain more players that like variance & lose players that don't
so the next time they take a look at the player base, maybe it's become 55% of players who like variance and 45% of players who don't. and so "hey, most people want variance!" and so they push more variance in again and it becomes 60/40 next time. and so on...
A shift only in preference for variance isn't that interesting. A shift that comes along with a meaningful increase in the player base... That's something worth investigating.
I don't think more points of variance is bad. When a single point (and early one)
I feel like these %'s have some flawed metrics though. For example, I have never received a questionaire on them (even so, it'd need to be "players polled" then), I also am not v vocal. If the main test was pick rate when it was portals, that's super flawed as herd behavior/peer pressure heavily
impacted peoples portal choices in games from what I saw. I actively saw people switching to whatever portal most people were stood on after having originally wanted a different one, I also actively saw pressure from people (whether chat or ping), also target griefing of a 1player who successfully
managed to get a portal only they stood on.
FWIW, my main issue w/trainers is how 1 person can have 3emblems for a top tier comp while another can be stuck having to decide on -one- emblem to have active due to combo. Either all should have decent, or all shitty. Having to play outside box is ok.
Comments
I wonder how much of this eventually becomes self-selection & like a positive feedback loop? E.g. people who hate variance burn out / stop playing, so more people playing/engaging are those who like variance, so Riot incorporates more variance...
A shift only in preference for variance isn't that interesting. A shift that comes along with a meaningful increase in the player base... That's something worth investigating.
I don't think more points of variance is bad. When a single point (and early one)
If I wanted a deterministic game I'd play chess!
Having said that I understand why some people feel like TFT variance takes away player agency. Maybe it's just not the game for them.
FWIW, my main issue w/trainers is how 1 person can have 3emblems for a top tier comp while another can be stuck having to decide on -one- emblem to have active due to combo. Either all should have decent, or all shitty. Having to play outside box is ok.