Classic World of Warcraft Discussion [Megathread]

[Dacien]

Have you tried to do them in random greens/whites? And you didn't really had "leveling dungeons", you had just dungeons, main source of experience were quests, and you run deadmines only after getting a quest which reward you with a blue item. Well, maybe couple of times, because you really want that item that you know that drops from this boss because atlassloot. But leveling in dungeons? Such a waste of time

I just remember leveling in late Wrath and just steamrolling content. I had no heirlooms, but none of the bosses in any of the dungeons were like they were when I played in Vanilla. I don't think leveling in dungeons was a waste of time at all. That was the game. End game raiding was there when you reached max level, but getting to 60 was part of the journey, the game. I loved Deadmines. I loved Scholomance. Heck, I loved just killing mobs in Western Plaguelands, with no quest associated with my indiscriminate ghoul-slaying. It was fun!

[Uurdz]

The size of the thread means nothing, because a thread can reach over a hundred pages by having just two people talking to each other for over half of the pages. And, honestly, despite how many pages this thread has, the number of people actually posting here isn't really that big. And it's usually the same people that posted in other threads, so pointing at thread sizes as some kind of evidence is meaningless.

And like @Thanatoss said: you don't have the criteria Blizzard established to consider the interest 'financially sufficient', so to say that there is sufficient interest is, at best, very dishonest of you.

There is sufficient interest to seriously consider it again, something they have done before and then decided to wall of no.
Also my opinion wouldn't be dishonest in this case it would be ill advised or unfounded.

[Deficineiron]

The message they should get - is make a better game. That's a solution that will overcome any perception problems. Unfortunately, I think his conclusion is exactly how Blizzard does think these days. The other big con is the game with sub numbers. They've always used them to bludgeon all opponents into submission with the staggering millions count. Except more than half come from regions no other mmo is in. Maybe there's a million left in NA and another million in EU? Even that doesn't matter because much smaller mmo's give you access to more people since they aren't divided into archaic realms.

actually, there are many mmo's in china on the same or similar pay methods as wow which are larger than wow's WORLDWIDE number, using methodology such as used by blizzard/netease in china to calculate wow subs. Heck, netease itself has the westward journey mmo's which are much larger than wow.

now if you are saying blizzard effectively doubles their na/eu sub number by being in china and uses that to manage perceptions in those markets, right, you are dead on.

[Charge me Doctor]

I just remember leveling in late Wrath and just steamrolling content. I had no heirlooms, but none of the bosses in any of the dungeons were like they were when I played in Vanilla. I don't think leveling in dungeons was a waste of time at all. That was the game. End game raiding was there when you reached max level, but getting to 60 was part of the journey, the game. I loved Deadmines. I loved Scholomance. Heck, I loved just killing mobs in Western Plaguelands, with no quest associated with my indiscriminate ghoul-slaying. It was fun!

Sure wotlk bosses weren't as vanilla ones were. Wotlk had far more interesting and hard bosses. Can you remember any of the mechanics of, say, van clief fight? Or the-bat-balcony-boss-from-scholo-that-requres-an-urn-to-summon? And compare it to, say, king dred, that mangles your tank that increases the bleed damage, puts on a bleed effect that persist up until it's healed, and shreds tanks armour, while having 6 or so seconds AoE fear. If anything - vanilla dungeons were hard not because they were complex, they were hard because they weren't balanced properly. With proper party you had no issues in dungeons, with crappy party you usually never go past 1st boss.

You had to run scholo, like, 20 times to get a single level, iirc, it was far more profitable to level on quests (granted it was the times when extra quests were added, before that - yes, leveling in dungeons was way to go). End game wasn't really the point of vanilla wow - plenty of things you did on level 60 you could do pre level 60 (mostly mats, weapon skills, blue-gear-that-often-was-better-than-MC-epic-gear, etc)). You still can enjoy killing mobs in X location without quests for fun.

[Deficineiron]

Sure wotlk bosses weren't as vanilla ones were. Wotlk had far more interesting and hard bosses. Can you remember any of the mechanics of, say, van clief fight? Or the-bat-balcony-boss-from-scholo-that-requres-an-urn-to-summon? And compare it to, say, king dred, that mangles your tank that increases the bleed damage, puts on a bleed effect that persist up until it's healed, and shreds tanks armour, while having 6 or so seconds AoE fear. If anything - vanilla dungeons were hard not because they were complex, they were hard because they weren't balanced properly. With proper party you had no issues in dungeons, with crappy party you usually never go past 1st boss.

You had to run scholo, like, 20 times to get a single level, iirc, it was far more profitable to level on quests (granted it was the times when extra quests were added, before that - yes, leveling in dungeons was way to go). End game wasn't really the point of vanilla wow - plenty of things you did on level 60 you could do pre level 60 (mostly mats, weapon skills, blue-gear-that-often-was-better-than-MC-epic-gear, etc)). You still can enjoy killing mobs in X location without quests for fun.

with the exception of loken and I think one other boss, wrath heroics could be overpowered at launch while ignoring boss mechanics. I am specifically talking 3.0.8 and I said so and can document a thread I started on this subject in 3.0.9. This was in start contrast to bc heroics - typically ignoring the boss mechanics was a good path to a wipe. heck, just letting occasional trash packs get their special spell off was trouble (thinking of summoners before murmur but there were others I cannot recall now).

if you actually ran scholo 20 times you would hit 60 assuming you started around 55? I cannot recall what level the skeletons right beyond the door were. also scholo had a very long quest chain that called for doing parts of it various times.

[Charge me Doctor]

with the exception of loken and I think one other boss, wrath heroics could be overpowered at launch while ignoring boss mechanics. I am specifically talking 3.0.8 and I said so and can document a thread I started on this subject in 3.0.9.

if you actually ran scholo 20 times you would hit 60 assuming you started around 55? I cannot recall what level the skeletons right beyond the door were. also scholo had a very long quest chain that called for doing parts of it various times.

Probably with some cheesy strats, but i do remember wiping in wotlk heroics a lot until we've got proper gear or understanding of wtf is happening. I also remember people skipping oculus, dungeon-with-boss-that-used-gruul-like-mechanic-of-not-stacking-on-top-of-each-other-for-shatter, dalaran dungeon when certain boss was spawned.

Wasn't it 3 quest chains of 2 or so quests? I remember running it just two times to finish all quests associated with it. It barely gave you a level when you did them at 56-57? plus experience being divided between party member without "party bonus" like it is now doesn't really help.

Anyways, i 100% sure that leveling in dungeons was the slowest way to level in vanilla (worse than grind or questing), considering things like assembling the group, replacing left players, dealing with toilet/food/homework breaks, rogues, paladin healers, etc.

[Mormolyce]

We've seen millions drop since the beginning of WoD, it only makes sense that millions more have left since they stopped posting subscription figures, especially since zero new content has been released. As for Legion, we will see, blizzard burned their fan base pretty hard with Cata and WoD was even worse, you seem very optimistic here.

And I thought nothing could be worse than the stupid arguments we had over subs back when they DID publish them.

Anyway, this is a non sequitur, WoW didn't lose millions in previous content droughts. The impact of those on subs is always massively overstated.

[Sury]

I'll be honest: I may not have initially dived in if there was an entry cost. But after just a couple hours of play, I would have. The community is amazing, and I was sucked in pretty quick. So I think a "free trial" type promotion would be appropriate for any kind of legacy server.

Yea I think it would be a big mistakes if these hypothetical servers existed not to provide a free trial. It would surely be in Blizzards best interest.

I personally feel like the user base of Vanilla WoW is high enough to elicit subscription payments from most of those 150,000 Nost players, in addition to the communities of myriad other private Vanilla servers. I can't say whether this would outweigh the costs, but people who play on these classic servers don't invest months and years into their characters simply because it is free. The gameplay is fun, so it keeps them coming back.

Well no I did not infer it was the only motivating factor but it can be a good reason for a lot of people. Plenty of people on this forum have stated they unsubbed simply because they could no longer justify the cost. Private servers do a good job of scratching that gaming itch when you know all it will ever cost you is time. If it ever goes away you still had fun in the process. I would like to think most people willing to invest time on a private server know it is at their own risk of time lost.

If a nominal monthly payment is asked for, I have no doubt most would pay it. It's not about the cost, it's about enjoying a game you really like to play. I feel like it's no different paying a fee to play Vanilla than it is to play retail; They're very different games at this point.

I agree completely the two versions of the game are so different it is like playing a completely different game. If there is a legitimate server available and people are willing to pay the cost I am all for them playing whatever game they see fit to pay for. They are given the security of knowing their time and monetary investment is a safe one since there is no risk of the service being removed (until the game maker stops providing the service).

Ya I'm super stoked about it. I already know what I'm going for next, but I can already see the difference when I'm killing Hill Giants.

Quick google search, I am going to guess Runescape?

[Deficineiron]

Probably with some cheesy strats, but i do remember wiping in wotlk heroics a lot until we've got proper gear or understanding of wtf is happening. I also remember people skipping oculus, dungeon-with-boss-that-used-gruul-like-mechanic-of-not-stacking-on-top-of-each-other-for-shatter, dalaran dungeon when certain boss was spawned.

i skipped oculus just out of preference to avoid vehicle gimmick events.

I never had issues with violet hold, certainly not compared in any way to heroic black morass. there was one tough boss there i cannot recall name of.

not sure where 'cheesy strats' came from. I mean just attack and ignore the special mechanic because it wasn't a wipe except loken.

Here is the thread. the responses run the gamut of future these we would see more often later, but since this was right after tbc, you didn't have the fantasy claims we see of folks steamrolling tbc heroics at gear level you see here now.

a comment from this thread that seems to explain my comment best is

By MrFredII on 2009/02/03 at 5:52 PM (Patch 3.0.8)
There is a difference between instances that are doable in quest blues and those that are trivial. The OP refers to the almost universal AoE pulls and that most bosses can be rolled over with little or no regard to fight mechanics.

These complaints are not a result of out gearing the instance. They reflect that for the most part, no effort nor understanding of the fights is required. Further, the 5 man groups that I generally ran with were in quest and regular instance blues when we started heroics and with a very few exceptions found them unchallenging. Not because we are exceptional players, but because the instances require no tactics nor thought even when tackled at gear level.
Last edited by MrFredII on 2009/02/03

[Charge me Doctor]

There was plenty of dungeons in wotlk that were really hard without overgeared players, even thread that you linked mention it. But heroics in wotlk wasn't on the same "level" of content as BC heroics were - you were supposed to farm gear first (normal dungeons, craft, random drops, rep), then do BC heroics, in wotlk you farmed heroic dungeons to get gear.

Problem with wotlk heroics was that they were hard to deal with in blues (tank getting literally one shot on some trash packs/bosses), but were too easy when you get at least couple of epics from naxx.

Even in thread you linked people doubt words of OP about dungeons being easy.

[Atelniar]

So you wonder what a strawman arguement is and now you say it would be good for blizz to offer these legacy servers for free why?
Because you like playing for free?
Why on earth would blizz if they ever did legacy servers would they even consider doing them for free?
To be nice?
Just keep making more things up. What are you now in the third side of your mouth now?

Implies I don't know what a strawman is, then proceeds to make a strawman by asking the following: "Because you like playing for free?"

My motivations have never been the center of my argumentation, also, if I may add. B2P and F2P are monetization methods, F2P implies that the core of the gameplay is free, but there are still many ways for developers to make a profit using such a payment method. Hence, why I brand Ielenia and you as down-right naive or unconstructive for branding subscription models as the only viable choice of payment method. I have spent more money on a F2P title like World of Tanks than I ever did on WoW in a period of 3 years. And I feel less awkward about it because the core gameplay doesn't cost me jack-shit. So, by questioning my motivation and misconstructing a F2P model as "free" you create a strawman. You artifically fabricate a dilemma that doesn't exist. Stop being silly, and I may ask that you completely cease and desist bringing my personal motivations into question. Instead I insist that you try to argue against my logic. Which you fail at, like a wombat trying to keep up with a cheetah.

Second strawman: "Why on earth would blizz if they ever did legacy servers would they even consider doing them for free?" I NEVER SAID THIS, holy shit!

I am not making things up, you are. Strawman. You reek of straw.

[RickJamesLich]

And I thought nothing could be worse than the stupid arguments we had over subs back when they DID publish them.

Anyway, this is a non sequitur, WoW didn't lose millions in previous content droughts. The impact of those on subs is always massively overstated.

We've already seen WoW lose millions during WOD, then have stopped since then releasing the numbers, since then we've been in a massive content drought. This isn't really a shocking conclusion, no need to be overly dramatic lol.

- - - Updated - - -

People cancel and repay their subs, like, every two or so months. Releasing sub numbers every year is just not worth it - people used to pay their sub for a whole year - now people sub for 1-3 months, take a break for half a year and then return

Now why do you think that is?

[Atelniar]

Yeah, I do, because it's a fact not 100% of the guys that play on free illegal server would pay a subscription fee to play on an official vanilla server.

Yet, by doing so you fail to admit to the fact that it is irrelevant. The server being illegal is irrelevant. Your attempts to brand them as criminals when they are not abiding copyright laws are irrelevant (to the concept of interest and demand). That's just your attempt at building a negative reputation to devalue the topic. There is no logic behind your claim that these people even should pay an equally expensive subscription, seperate from the retail subscription, as those partaking in the retail product. Or is it just because you want them to pay more for less, as a sort of punishment? It is inherently unfair buisness practise and would only serve to scare people away from the project (which may be your agenda here?). Alternative payment methods better suited for the concept exist, you refuse to address them by wafting your hand at them (ironic, for someone who accused me of hand-waving arguments). If you want legacy servers to be at all successful you need to understand the difference between a stale product and an ever-developing product with expansions (which is why you have a fucking subscription to begin with, expansions are the means with which companies justify that payment model).

Your attempt to refute interest by branding private servers as free and illegal becomes irrelevant. The core of the discussion is interest and demand. People's interest is not guided by the stamp "free", this isn't a mall filled with women's clothing on sale for 0.01 USD. This is an outdated Classic version running in emulator mode on shady servers set up by eager fans of the franchise (ironically). As illegal as it may be, or as dodgy as it may be (which only serves to lessen the interest, ironically). They are still popular enough for Blizzard to force a shutdown, in fear of competition for the potential playerbase. A single server that topple the size of 3-4 of the largest WoW-servers combined. And it was merely one private server.

Your attempt at refuting anything by attatching labels with the term "free" doesn't do jack-shit to your argument. It is irrelevant in terms of genuine interest. It solely relies on your idea of legacy servers having a subscription model. Which is, at best, a far-fetched assumption with no logic supporting it. And it is also the subjective view of someone clearly disliking the idea of legacy servers.

TL;DR: you are unobjective and your logic doesn't make sense.

[Charge me Doctor]

Now why do you think that is?

Because the game is less time consuming that it used to be

[Gilian]

The thing people are missing though if they were to create a few servers in doing this they'd have to get a team dedicated to fixing bugs, patches, class balance, etc, because people WILL expect it. That is the major problem with all of it. As much as people are saying "yeah I want the old stuff and that's it" honestly I feel they'd be the first to post on the forums going "man X/Y/Z doesn't work, isn't balanced, not fun", and except them to work on it.

While I take no stance on if they did or didn't make a "nostalgia" server (because I don't care and played in Vanilla, so been there done that) people making it to be just a simple switching a light on thing and expecting people to be content with just that are fooling themselves.

That makes no sense whatsoever. There is no balancing needed at all. People ask for these servers because they want the old game back not a remake.

[RickJamesLich]

Because the game is less time consuming that it used to be

No other reasons?

[Idoru]

No one is saying that millions don't play it. The argument is its at a fraction of its former population and that people want to play vanilla instead/as well as retail.

And that wasn't the argument I replied to.

Your signature is also hilariously ironic

Not really, since as a rational adult I can disagree with you without having to hate your cause.

[Atelniar]

I wonder when did I ever claim there was no interest in classic servers... Oh, right: never.

This might indeed be true, however I have to deal with your grasping at straws whenever you attempt to ridicule the interest. Terms such as "criminals", "free", etc, etc. You might not have said that there is no interest, but your attempts at arguing the interest is unsubstantial borders on the inane. No logical reasoning that doesn't rely on building arguments which are wholy unrelevant to the concept of interest and demand. The idea of stubbornly insisting there is only one viable payment method. The list continues from there and onwards. There is evidence, actual evidence, that classic content is in demand for a certain demographic (how large it is can be debated, but not by your current means, as you try to kill the debate indirectly). We have a petition heading for 150k signatures. We have a multitude of Youtube-videos with anything from 80k to 2 million views. We have streamers who actively streamed footage from these illegal private servers (which you enjoy pointing out are illegal). We even have the sheer existence of private servers (which has been a fact for many, many years). At every turn you fail to address these points as relevant and misconstruct new arguments, which you hope to beat the topic with, some of whom are completely irrelevant to the idea of supply and demand. Such as the matter of legality (the music and movie industry would like a word with you, they know this for a fact).

Please, don't be so dishonest. You may not say no interest at all, but you certainly beat around the bush and try to ridicule the idea that there is plenty of interest. Even if there is a mountain of evidence against you, which has slowly been built up over more than half a decade. Good lord.

[Charge me Doctor]

No other reasons?

There are plenty of reasons why people sub and unsub that varies from person to person - but the main reason why this happens - because the game is more fast paced now. You don't have to grind gear for months just to be able to see last raid in expansion - you do "catch-up jungle", ask friends for inv in their farm raid, raid for a month, that's it, you are done.
I can also throw "many people already experienced the whole game and only crave for end game content sitting on numerous amount of alts that they leveled over 12 years time span" argument here, but i won't for obvious reason.
Also "there are plenty of other games to play". And "the game is old".

[Atelniar]

There are plenty of reasons why people sub and unsub that varies from person to person - but the main reason why this happens - because the game is more fast paced now. You don't have to grind gear for months just to be able to see last raid in expansion - you do "catch-up jungle", ask friends for inv in their farm raid, raid for a month, that's it, you are done.
I can also throw "many people already experienced the whole game and only crave for end game content sitting on numerous amount of alts that they leveled over 12 years time span" argument here, but i won't for obvious reason.
Also "there are plenty of other games to play". And "the game is old".

Main reason is simple: LFD and LFR. Not because people neccessarily dislike LFD or LFR, but because they are tools of convenience that increase content consumption rate.

Aka: you can clear content to the point where you get fed up long before new content is added.

A tad too convenient, some might say. It's bad design for a subscription model. Also, different difficulties isn't "new" content. It's replayability. WoW has plenty of that with mythic raiding, but replayability doesn't address the fact that there is not enough content to faciliate the content consumption rate, nor is replayability relevant for everyone.

Summary: WoW has an issue it can't fix. Not even with the largest development team in its history.

- - - Updated - - -

Because the game is less time consuming that it used to be

And that neither improves or lessens gameplay, necessarily. But it can indeed kill the community of an MMORPG.