Classic World of Warcraft Discussion [Megathread]

[Murictavis]

you really call WolTK is hardcore?
I could finish a heroic dungeon in 5 mins. you call that hardcore.
please tell me what is not hardcore then.

[aethermachine]

In my opinion, I believe the entire Nostalrius argument is a outcry of a bigger problem, it isn't just that people want legacy servers, it makes a statement about the current game and the meta. Legacy servers will only provide content for so long, before it comes the need to have a TBC server, WotlK server, and so on. I think the bigger picture here is that people want the current WoW to reflect its more traditional roots, slowing things down a bit enough to smell the flowers so to speak, perhaps Legion addresses this a bit with scaling (total shot in the dark there) I'm not totally sure.

From a preservation standpoint, it would be nice to have the original game preserved and available to play. But this point is also kind vague, as it is the nature of MMO's to change and be persistent in progress. It is kind of a can of worms no matter what angle you look at it, and it has no easy solutions.

[Eapoe]

Again, its about the public image, not about what you or i think.


yeah a wow 2 would be also option, a clean state


the problem with wow 2 is tho:

Ok IF the game gona play like wow, why make a new game? Only for a clean state? i dont know this gonna piss off people i think


when its gona play not like Wow, why wow 2? why not a new ip?


I dont know how blizzard gains from this and there is hard data that MMO sequels are destnied to be less profitable then their successors

Well, you are "public" and I am "public" and we have different ways of interpreting events, so a blanket statement that Blizz admits their game is crap is pretty far off point. You can say 1 way while other (potentially the majority) says the other. It's all on how Blizz spins it honestly.
Not wanting to get too far off topic (not the right thread for this discussion), but the majority of vocal people all state things that are wrong with the game with very few spins on the positive. Ending WoW 1 and going into WoW 2 gives Blizzard free reign to base things in a whole new timeline with new lore and NPC's, gives free reign to make/change classes as they see fit, and still keep the same fundamentals of WoW. Yes, there's potential to piss people off, they take that risk with every new xpac they debut. There's also potential to keep the same playerbase and bring in completely new people if done correctly.

[Queen of Hamsters]

well then stop quoting me imbecile and tell youre storys how 5 millions is pure win in lfr

...talk about spewing nonsense, and you accuse me of not reading posts properly.
Oh well, with the mentality and language you're flaunting, I'm not expecting better.

[Eliseus]

I said i don't care about copyright yesterday?

Can you ever response without lying in some form?

"Hey you're a liar liar pants on fire. Therefore I win in an argument of ad hominems though I don't care about any of this!"

Congratz.

[Murictavis]

well you have extended information about what i bitching you little dumbwit!

I see only the reality of crying in forums, like in vanilla, tbc, and woltk and cata ONLY with the difference they give in in cata and i see only bleeding subs. But im sure catering more to casuals make blizzard the most money, as the subs shows.


Im guessing blizzard not annoucing subs numbers because they make TOO MUCH money so wrath babye like i would not bitch of right they are with changing the game, am i right?=

If you take a look their financial report and stock market. their stock price increased from 20ish in 2014 to 30ish in 2015. So I am pretty sure they are doing well in income even with the sub loss. And I rather believe it's because people like you enjoying bitching about "oh, wow lose subs, wow is dying" they stopped releasing the number.

[Murictavis]

OK then, have fun
Sad for you not get your dreamed "legacy server" up .

[BananaHandsB]

I saw this coming the moment vanilla servers went online and they weren't instantly shut down. What better way to develop vanilla servers than let a bunch of guys develop it for free outside your company, let them go on developing as long as possible before shutting it down before a major quarter. Then all that's left is to either hire those guys, buy their code, or legally strongarm the code out of them. The latter wouldn't be in blizz's best interest due to bad PR and it would be an interesting legal dispute as to whether they have rights to the modified code at all so in the end I can almost gurantee blizz is either going to hire these guys to develop a vanilla server off their current code, or buy it from them and set one up themselves, in the end costing them way less dev time and money than had they actually developed it themselves to begin with. I think a lot of guys at blizzard wanted this but it was just too hard to justify internally within the company, but Nost and the guys that made it happen and have now opened the door. Thanks guys!

[Queen of Hamsters]

Because you are a mythic raider and always beating the latest content the fastest it does not matter to you because you beat the tiers before any catchup gear effects you. For everyone between LFR and Mythic it does in a sense.

LFR gear + PVP gear + tanaan gear is better then older content, therefore making the older content irrelevant even if you never beat it. The rewards from older content get made obsolete, and the actual content is boring because you get free gear to over gear and zerg it. Seriously the expansion was out for 8 months, they released HFC and all of a sudden 90% of WoD became obsolete instantly.

LFR is not that big of a problem anymore compared to 700 pvp and 695 bale tho IMO. But remove those two and it returns to it's place of "content obsolete maker"

Essentially, this all wraps around into player retention. People quit because they have nothing to do anymore. Nothing in WoD is worth doing except for HFC, because as soon as you hit level 100 you are given a full set of item level 700 gear, if it wasn't for the 700 pvp, you'd get lfr gear and the same problem would basically apply (This exact scenario happened in Dragon Soul with 378 and SoO with 528)

Because WoD had so little content outside of raids to begin with.

The kind of burnout which raiding with mechanics of today (Method wiped 900 times in HFC M) and then also being forced into doing older raids to funnel gear onto new recruits would spark...it would be epic, and not in the good way. And those people that now stood without their path of progression, LFR, would have even less content at hand...

The end of MoP showed retention power done right, and it did have LFR just fine.

Oh, and people still do the older raids through LFR/Other means just fine. Not for gear, but for other reasons. Which is perfectly acceptable The people with interest to see those instances, will always find a way to go back. Everything doesn't have to happen with gear in mind.

- - - Updated - - -

If you take a look their financial report and stock market. their stock price increased from 20ish in 2014 to 30ish in 2015. So I am pretty sure they are doing well in income even with the sub loss. And I rather believe it's because people like you enjoying bitching about "oh, wow lose subs, wow is dying" they stopped releasing the number.

They earned 800 million dollars from WoW alone, on a bad year.
If that is from "a dying game", I sure as hell wish I could own said "dying game"...:P

[aethermachine]

- - - Updated - - -



see i thought that too and wanted to adress that


but then i got told how the game is fucking sucess and legion gonna be total win when it gona have 5 million subscribers at the end.

so i guess we are wrong

Don't see how we're going to really know the exact subscriber count unless Blizzard starts reporting those numbers again. Maybe Legion will be awesome, I will give it the good old college try, I'm cautiously optimistic, but I'm not going to get excited like I was WoD and be let down like that again, that shit hurt.

[kensim]

Guys you have to think about this from the business perspective. The realistic business perspective. What does the genre require for a game to be successful. What does the industry require? Right now most genres of gaming don't have actual difficulty as a priority, and more focus is on broad accessibility, engaging game concepts, flexible platforms, and extended monetization opportunities. So much so that there are certain games based around a punishing experience (dark souls).

Gaming as a whole is moving towards ease of use and casual capable, because that is where the wealth of money is. If vanilla's attraction was the content, and the lack of aides, Blizzard can implement methods for that experience within retail using current game functions. So why do you need a vanilla server?

[Bapestar]

I saw this coming the moment vanilla servers went online and they weren't instantly shut down. What better way to develop vanilla servers than let a bunch of guys develop it for free outside your company, let them go on developing as long as possible before shutting it down before a major quarter. Then all that's left is to either hire those guys, buy their code, or legally strongarm the code out of them. The latter wouldn't be in blizz's best interest due to bad PR and it would be an interesting legal dispute as to whether they have rights to the modified code at all so in the end I can almost gurantee blizz is either going to hire these guys to develop a vanilla server off their current code, or buy it from them and set one up themselves, in the end costing them way less dev time and money than had they actually developed it themselves to begin with. I think a lot of guys at blizzard wanted this but it was just too hard to justify internally within the company, but Nost and the guys that made it happen and have now opened the door. Thanks guys!

Very well said.

[Vineri]

I've been watching this situation for the past week, or so.

I am a former subscriber (cancelled in Cataclysm). I all but gave up on Blizzard since then, never gave them a second thought, seeing as how they ruined the once-good game they had, as I saw it. I would have been done with them for life, but ....

I got interested again after watching JonTron's video "rant" about the situation. It was a good video and brought back my passion for a game lost in time.

I would be very much interested in playing a Legacy server. I'd pay, as I did before when I enjoyed the game. I will not pay for a game I don't enjoy .. essentially modern WoW. No thank you. Even if free, no thanks. Stopped paying during Cataclysm, no plans to return. Shitty expansion.

Blizzard is missing a great opportunity to catch folks who liked the old game, built upon the original EverQuest, but with an open world. People loved that. They hate games built around casuals who want everything handed to them. Games where no social interaction is required (second half of WotLK, BLEECH!, auto LFG BLEECH!, Cataclysm PUKE!!). I tried GW2, and I'd rather play an actual solo player game, not one trying to be as such.

I see many folks actually complain about those who want legacy servers, getting into arguments, calling names. I don't get it. What is it to them? Why do they hate it so much? People might leave the servers they are on to play the "real game"?

TLDR: Last I played, the game stinks .. More people cancelled accounts than currently play WoW [2011-2012] (Dev quote as I remember). Legacy accounts should be the focus of Blizzard. The hidden dollar. Let casuals have their casual game, let those who want an awesome adventure RPG have theirs.

[Eapoe]

I saw this coming the moment vanilla servers went online and they weren't instantly shut down. What better way to develop vanilla servers than let a bunch of guys develop it for free outside your company, let them go on developing as long as possible before shutting it down before a major quarter. Then all that's left is to either hire those guys, buy their code, or legally strongarm the code out of them. The latter wouldn't be in blizz's best interest due to bad PR and it would be an interesting legal dispute as to whether they have rights to the modified code at all so in the end I can almost gurantee blizz is either going to hire these guys to develop a vanilla server off their current code, or buy it from them and set one up themselves, in the end costing them way less dev time and money than had they actually developed it themselves to begin with. I think a lot of guys at blizzard wanted this but it was just too hard to justify internally within the company, but Nost and the guys that made it happen and have now opened the door. Thanks guys!

Not trying to be insulting, but this is very conspiracist theory. I had a post like this in an attempt to be funny (stated to not take it to heart and have a laugh). The problems with yours is that Blizzard is very not likely to incorporate 3rd party code into their servers or involve 3rd parties to have any modicum of control over their game(s). Blizz has stated they talk about Legacy a lot but would have a difficult time doing it, and that's with their own current coding and anything they have saved, I don't see how a 3rd party's code that hasn't been tested on their own servers for compatibility issues alone would be something they pursue either.
But hey, maybe I'm wrong.

[Eliseus]

Time investment doesn't equal difficulty.

https://inanage.com/2016/04/25/vanil...ge-levels-1-5/

1 hour 15 minutes to hit level 5. DIFFICULT AS FUCK.

Patience is a characteristic that is in fact difficult for some (raising kids is a great example of this). Leveling to some can be perceived as difficult. Although I view time sinks, for example killing the same mob repeatedly for days on end, to not be difficult, it's understandable that some would. Since it is also feels rewarding, some could perceive this as not necessarily difficult, but just that, more rewarding due to the time investment. People may be using the wrong words to represent how they feel, but it can infact be portrayed as difficult, especially when put on a scale to be weighed against other similar things.

Ignoring the way things are perceived though, the things they were killing back than were literally more difficult. The same elite killed in a quest literally was harder to kill then than that same elite now. Is it HARD? No. Is it harder? Yes.

- - - Updated - - -

Haven't been keeping up with the thread, have they made their announcement yet?

Probably wise to not keep up with it tbh. A lot of negative in it. Only real announcement is they are meeting with Blizzard within the coming weeks and would like community feedback to present to Blizzard.

dif·fi·cult
ˈdifəkəlt/
adjective
adjective: difficult

needing much effort or skill to accomplish, deal with, or understand.
"she had a difficult decision to make"
synonyms: hard, strenuous, arduous, laborious, tough, onerous, burdensome, demanding, punishing, grueling, back-breaking, exhausting, tiring, fatiguing, wearisome; More
informalhellish, killing;
archaictoilsome
"a very difficult job"
hard, complicated, complex, involved, impenetrable, unfathomable, over/above one's head, beyond one, puzzling, baffling, perplexing, confusing, mystifying;
problematic, intricate, knotty, thorny, ticklish
"she found math very difficult"
antonyms: easy, simple, straightforward
characterized by or causing hardships or problems.
"a difficult economic climate"
synonyms: inconvenient, awkward, inopportune, unfavorable, unfortunate, inappropriate, unsuitable, untimely, ill-timed More
"you've come at a difficult time"
bad, tough, grim, dark, black, hard, adverse, distressing;
straitened
"the family has been through a difficult year"
antonyms: convenient, happy
(of a person) not easy to please or satisfy.
"Lily could be difficult"
synonyms: troublesome, tiresome, trying, exasperating, awkward, demanding, perverse, contrary, recalcitrant, unmanageable, obstreperous, unaccommodating, unhelpful, uncooperative, disobliging; More
hard to please, fussy, finicky;
formalrefractory
"a difficult child"
antonyms: accommodating

to assist with determining what some may consider difficult.

- - - Updated - - -

So why do you need a vanilla server?

I think the issue is undeniably to play Classic WoW. Arguments have been spewed as to why not just give feedback for the current game. The issue isn't just the way the game was for some in classic. It's also they want to play exactly that era. There is even a plethora of examples in this thread itself of people who never even played the era as it was then that want to experience it. It's a part of the game that does not exist in any shape or form anymore, and people want that exact shape and form.

[Deleted]

Haven't been keeping up with the thread, have they made their announcement yet?

They will meet with Blizz.

Nostalrius source code and database won’t be released.

Their version of Bunny Emu was released.

[Uurdz]

Very weak argument, it gets no stronger the more you repeat it.

Agreed. This is a childish argument anyway. You can't have a toy because it means less toys for me.
Uh, how about stop being so dam selfish.

[Relapses]

Agreed. This is a childish argument anyway. You can't have a toy because it means less toys for me.
Uh, how about stop being so dam selfish.

Is it selfish to care about the current state of the game and worry about what the effect Legacy realms would have on present development? It's just as selfish for the pro-Legacy folks to shove down our throats this narrative that the current game is so irrevocably flawed that the only way to fix it is to revert to a version that's 12 years old.

[Uurdz]

Guys you have to think about this from the business perspective. The realistic business perspective. What does the genre require for a game to be successful. What does the industry require? Right now most genres of gaming don't have actual difficulty as a priority, and more focus is on broad accessibility, engaging game concepts, flexible platforms, and extended monetization opportunities. So much so that there are certain games based around a punishing experience (dark souls).

Gaming as a whole is moving towards ease of use and casual capable, because that is where the wealth of money is. If vanilla's attraction was the content, and the lack of aides, Blizzard can implement methods for that experience within retail using current game functions. So why do you need a vanilla server?

Business perspective is this: one side says revenue generated by demand is greater than costs to implement by a sufficient amount to justify the capital expenditure. The other side says no, don't wast capital expenditure on vanilla servers because it's not worth it or I don't want it or it will take money from retail wow or a mixture of all three.

That's all there is to it. Anything else is just providing an opinion on the state of gaming. Someone would have told Apple that all the money in IT was in software for computers and he said no fuck that I'm making a cool ass phone that will make me mega rich.

[Eliseus]

Is it selfish to care about the current state of the game and worry about what the effect Legacy realms would have on present development? It's just as selfish for the pro-Legacy folks to shove down our throats this narrative that the current game is so irrevocably flawed that the only way to fix it is to revert to a version that's 12 years old.

What worry? I've already been through this like it's on loop. You guys claim we are a vocal minority, you shouldn't worry about it effect current WoW (just lol what). Are you afraid they are going to stop current WoW? This makes no sense, and if all of Blizzard time ends up being into Legacy servers because of how huge it turns out, you are irrelevant in the game to make money anyways. So which is it? Are we a vocal minority or is there a legitimate fear that there is more of us than you?