Not really, I rarely buy pots (or any consumables) and I would still rather port to quests. Make the wilderness rewarding and people will run it anyway. Theres no need to force people to run it when they want to run something else.
Totally understandable, but it does make sense for SSG to ensure those that are ransacking quests in full zerg raising lag to shorten the burn on their pots might have to atleast run back and forth to a quest guaranteeing they burn a little more quickly in order to get the rewards that can be had. This is fiscally responsible and because of that i dont mind spending an extra minute running to quests knowing it is burning pots and generating more income for the game I play.
I personally don't see it that way. It comes down to viewpoint essentially, which varies from player to player. I don't view the runs as something the devs "force" because I've always viewed them as part of the doing the quest even if they happen before the quest entrance window. When I run up the mountain in stormhorns, or around and up the tree to get to seeds of decay, I just view it as part of doing that quest and not a waste of time and not as a separate activity. The devs should take runs into account when calculating the XP though so the xp/min is the same as quests without runs, i.e. a quest that takes 10 minutes to do but has a 2 minute run should be worth 20% more XP than a quest of the same level that takes 10 minutes and is in a public area. Someone could ultimately argue anything you don't particular like inside a quest that isn't an optional is something the devs "force" players to do. Which is why I don't think "force" is a fair way to word it, because ultimately most things in any video game could be viewed as the devs forcing players to do things. Shoot, Myth Drannor in its entirely can be viewed as totally optional, especially with it not being near as meta defining as Isle of Dread was, so it could even be argued it can be ignored entirely if a player wants and players aren't forced to do anything. So what is "forced" is really a matter of perspective.
I don't think wanting to have players burn XP pots has anything to do with how they design wilderness areas. Wilderness areas have existed since launch, they're just part of the game. But as I said above I do think wilderness runs should be accounted for so quests with the runs have the same xp/min in total as quests without runs. In other words the quest XP received should be boosted to the level where it balances out the pot time burned doing the run.
Well its not just XP pots that get burned and generally this game has more xp than is needed so xp is not in short, but it is a well designed mechanic to prevent the zerging thats involved in loot running with a discovery pot or increased loot bonus pot.
Sorry I cant agree with this view point. Running the Wilderness is just a timesink. There is really no comparison running to a quest on normal where you just ignore everything trying to hit you vs an R10 quest. The gameplay is almost polar opposite.
Well...many aspects of quests such as puzzles and platforming are in R10 quests and that's a completely different type of gameplay than fighting R10 mobs, but it's still part of doing the quest. The runs to quests are more about story/immersion/setting etc. than fighting the mobs in the wilderness as you go, even if grabbing rares and such on the way is also part of it. I get where you are coming from though.
You keep using the term fiscally responsible in a way not intended. I think what you mean to say is maximizing profits or even revenues.
How much value is story, immersion, setting beyond the first run through?
It is fiscally responsible from the perspective i look at it, they invested a certain amount of their resources to create Myth Drannor and now they are insuring that they make the appropriate amount of return, the fact that there is a presale so that they can measure how much return they need from the prepurchases leads to that conclusion, deductively of course.
So you describe raising taxes as fiscally responsible? No that is a wrong use of the term. Raising taxes is usually a result of being fiscally irresponsible.
