Classic World of Warcraft Discussion [Megathread]

[A dot Ham]

You sound like a completely self-absorbed, arrogant asshole.

Guilty! Enjoy your ban.

[Dead Moose Fandango]

No, you paid for the access and being able to play on blizzard servers. Just like a Park with rides where you pay once an entry fee and can ride the rides as long as you want.

And sometimes they upgrade those rides to be more fun. Or less fun, depending on some views.

[Tuesdays]

You aren't very good with the whole making arguments thing are you

I don't know what more of an argument can be made after 655 pages of the same answer.

[Deficineiron]

Yeah. He also made the comment that making games shouldn't be "fun" -- that is, game developers should not be making games that they would want to play, since (I am reading into this) they are not typical customers. This caused all sorts of outrage when he said it.

Given that Legion may be the first expansion developed with Kotick's power totally unhindered (after the rewrite of ATVI's bylaws that took effect in February), I'm interested in what effects of that we'll be able to discern in its design.

right, with the caveat that the right kind of customers are not necessarily what were considered 'gamers,' or even the sort of people who would ever know he said that. I think that was part of the reaction. He has for a long time been very explicit about marketing his games by making them more accessible to larger groups of people/customers.

the oddity with wow and kotick is that he inherited a game that had been extraordinarily successful despite having a whole slew of features which artifically limited who might play it and the devs were very explicit in saying they did this knowingly (despite being more accessible than extant mmos'). I hope one day we get some reasonably objective insight into the first few years of the merger with regard to wow.

[Deleted]

Because they are Nosdrones and don't have any real, tangible evidence to provide that Classic was OBJECTIVELY better than what we have now.

5 million people quited on classic

[Osmeric]

right. I can make a good argument for a classic server (as-was, not some LFR job, that is another topic) getting low to mid 8-digit revenue over some number of years. I cannot make an honest argument for a 100m/yr performer, though who knows if it could happen (blizzard also didn't expect wow to hit >5m western subs, not even close).

I wonder if Kotick would be open to licensing the code to another developer to make a classic server, though. His words don't rule that out, since Activision-Blizzard wouldn't be doing the development (or putting up the money).

[Namalia]

5 million people quited on classic

Nost had less than 20% retention, live has had more.

[Darkeon]

No, its NOT down to the personal moral code. using that you would live in anarchy. Both crimes get the SAME punishment cause its the SAME crime.
The law is without MORAL and it has to be otherwise we'd be back to eye for an eye.....

You do realize morality has nothing to do with legality right?
One doesn't affect the other in any way. Something legal can be immoral and something illegal can be moral.

[A dot Ham]

It was. Well thought out and written, thank you.

I would agree, most would at least appreciate an attempt to reimplement some of the mechanics, etc., that we miss back into the game. My only concern then is, would that really be beneficial to the community as a whole? How comfortable has the playerbase become with the current state of things, and how would changing these aspects effect their gameplay as well?

As much as I want legacy servers or some aspects of the game reinstated, would the latter actually be a positive for the remaining community? Or would it tank subs even more? It's a complicated situation as it stands, and most would agree we don't want to ruin the game for those that currently enjoy it, but some kind of compromise would be ideal.

Who gets to say what mechanics stay and what mechanics go... things like this make it even more complicated than it already is.

You can't pick and choose the pieces you liked that have developed, but change the things you don't like.

I think the part that you are missing a key word he used several times is novelty, and that wears off pretty quick.

[Propainn]

No, you paid for the access and being able to play on blizzard servers. Just like a Park with rides where you pay once an entry fee and can ride the rides as long as you want.

Only problem I have with this analogy is, we paid an entry fee, then paid to ride it every month anyway. I get what you're saying, but the big thing really is the disclaimer "Gameplay subject to change." That analogy just doesn't equate.

[Deleted]

Nost had less than 20% retention, live has had more.

How could you know?

[Deficineiron]

I wonder if Kotick would be open to licensing the code to another developer to make a classic server, though. His words don't rule that out, since Activision-Blizzard wouldn't be doing the development (or putting up the money).

I don't know obviously but I also don't know of any a/b precedent which might indicate they even look at their properties with that kind of flexibility.

[Deleted]

Nost had less than 20% retention, live has had more.

Jesus you are dumb as fuck

Btw i love the fact that you need so bad to convince yourself that retail is better than vanilla

Deal with the fact that wod is pure shit and everybody is and was bashing it

[Propainn]

Who gets to say what mechanics stay and what mechanics go... things like this make it even more complicated than it already is.

You can't pick and choose the pieces you liked that have developed, but change the things you don't like.

I think the part that you are missing a key word he used several times is novelty, and that wears off pretty quick.

Novelty to some is immersion and fun for others, so much of this discussion is subjective, and that's the issue.

I don't want to nitpick design choices, and I'm not all for having what I'd like implemented at the expense of others, I did my best in the last post to convey that, and I'll reiterate that here.

But ideally, some kind compromise in terms of the design direction would be healthy for the community and ideal for both sides of the equation, in my opinion at the least.

[Perkunas]

Doesn't matter.

You are claiming the game World of Warcraft is not available officially. That is simply untrue. World of Warcraft has been a game with changing features available since 2004. Just another lie perpetuated by the pro-legacy crowd.

I just don't understand the hatred that inspires you to post in this thread toward the legacy fans. You're being intellectually dishonest and this is coming from somebody who doesn't play private realms and is a subscriber to retail. The product that Blizzard sells as World of Warcraft is a vastly different game from what was released. All you have to do is listen to the devs themselves. "We don't have the old code!" "The old software wont work on the new servers" those comments alone blow your argument apart. Remember I play retail I am a subscriber I am not on private servers. Annnnnnnnnnd scene...

[Deleted]

The social system has been shattered and just like the world today - online anonymity is destroying social culture. Think about it. Are you going to go talk to that guy everyday about Transmog? I doubt you added eachother on Bnet so you can go hunt new shit for your collection.

You seem to be VERY butthurt ;p yes in fact I added him - people I talk to I add. WoW 12th birthday is coming up and I still make friends.
But go on blame the game for your flaws....
And I dunno why you are so butthurt, but I started collecting "shit as you call it" back in vanilla when every pet was taking up space.

[Namalia]

Jesus you are dumb as fuck

Btw i love the fact that you need so bad to convince yourself that retail is better than vanilla

Deal with the fact that wod is pure shit and everybody is and was bashing it

Do I like WoD? Not really.

Do I like WoD better than Classic? Absolutely.

Is WoD factually "pure shit"? In your limited mind perhaps.

Now, I'll just report your post and move on. Thanks for playing.

[A dot Ham]

Novelty to some is immersion and fun for others, so much of this discussion is subjective, and that's the issue.

I don't want to nitpick design choices, and I'm not all for having what I'd like implemented at the expense of others, I did my best in the last post to convey that, and I'll reiterate that here.

But ideally, some kind compromise in terms of the design direction would be healthy for the community and ideal for both sides of the equation, in my opinion at the least.

There is no compromise, otherwise it becomes a different game entirely. Even small things like functional stealth and a 100% working charge change the experience.

[Zoldam]

Nost had less than 20% retention, live has had more.

Are you comparing peak subscribers on live to the amount of Nost accounts? Because that's a dumb comparison considering live has had 100M subs throughout it's lifetime (And by that logic, about 5% retention).

EDIT: gramerz

[Propainn]

There is no compromise, otherwise it becomes a different game entirely. Even small things like functional stealth and a 100% working charge change the experience.

If you truly believe there is no way for Blizzard to meet the playerbase somewhere in the middle when it comes to design choices, then there is no discussion to be had.

There has to be a system of give and take from both halves of the community if we don't want to stay fractured like this, and continue the freefall of subscribers.