Reading through the feedback about the weekly quests, one of the biggest, most consistent objections is to having to do co-ops. Sifting through the various comments about co-ops themselves it's interesting to note that while some people object to having to round up four people for Whirlwind others have no problem whatsoever with rounding up four people for a Tomb Raider and suggest changing to it as a fix.
So what's the difference and more importantly… why does it matter?
Tomb Raider is the one co-op adventure I know of that doesn't require walls or some other obstacle to be overcome before everyone can continue. In other words, for all players in Tomb Raider, it's like a loot spot with a multiple attack tag. There's no waiting on anyone else to be able to finish your part of it. Whoever is the slowest finishes the final attacks, ends the adventure, and everyone's done.
With Whirlwind (and other co-ops), there are multiple choke points where a player has to wait around (more than once) for other players to complete their part before being able to continue.
If Whirlwind were to be structured like Tomb Raider, where each player can do their entire section from start to finish would there be as much objection? If all co-ops were structured like Tomb Raider, where all players could finish their part independently of all the other players, would more people run them? Just wondering……..