Nobody talking about Suramar? Could be Legion's saving grace.

[Deleted]

I surely not mind having a zone which is only relevant to tell a story. I would then quest through on my main and possibly return on an alt to re-run the story, if I feel so.

[Zandalarian Paladin]

It's a good thing, although I'm a bit afraid of what may happen in the future. A single run-through zone doesn't seems like it's going to be efficient.

Don't get me wrong, though. I'm actually really interested in it.

[Segus1992]

Suramar HYPE! Looks like it's gonna be one of the most awesome, most played and most beautiful zone in the game imo. The art team went balls to the wall with Suramar, and its totally worked, huge ammount of quests, freaking deadly, and it's all lore too. Freaking sweet imo!

Why would it be the most played? Everyone else is saying that there's only a one-time questline (+ world quests I assume) that you won't be repeating on alts due to little rewards.

[Deleted]

The zone only unlocked quite recently, so reward structure may not be fully in place yet. At the very least I would expect the conclusion of the storyline to rewards the typical artifact power that the level up zones had as well. I would also imagine that rewards include reputation to some degree.

While questing for the story is fun for some, having some basic rewards would be nice. Nothing to make people start screaming mandatory, but maybe just some basic 110 gear (think green, to fix up some of those slots you may have a bit lower) and a few odds and ends here and there.

There is
Just like every other teritory all chain quest gives you something some gives nice 810 gear other 200 AP some gives teritory currency
Atm teritory is not that madratory so you may not do all quests there with every alt except artefact and profession ones who actually do not need you to have any quests done in the zone.You will go there for achievements hunt mostly and lore

[Zuben]

It's such a pretty city I hope Blizz won't go Valley of Eternal Sorrows on it.

[taishar68]

Well I am glad I filled you in on that fact. My favorite games are story driven too, but they will never be as good as mario 64, oot and the like with no story and are just pure gameplay. Just remember, you liking something doesn't mean it's good.

Throughout this thread, you have continuously stated your opinion as fact; even if a majority of people agree with that opinion, it doesn't make it a fact.

Also, if you think about it logically, there is no reason why a game can't be great and story driven; if Mario 64 had a great story interwoven with the great gameplay, would that not conflict with your opinion? I don't think great gameplay and great story need to be mutually exclusive, even if, in your opinion, that is how it has been.

[Lady Dragonheart]

It does sound like fun, I will admit that I am looking forward to it.

[nazrakin]

Throughout this thread, you have continuously stated your opinion as fact; even if a majority of people agree with that opinion, it doesn't make it a fact.

Also, if you think about it logically, there is no reason why a game can't be great and story driven; if Mario 64 had a great story interwoven with the great gameplay, would that not conflict with your opinion? I don't think great gameplay and great story need to be mutually exclusive, even if, in your opinion, that is how it has been.

Yeah, and thats exactly what we've had over the last 10-15 years. Excluding competitive multiplayer games for obvious reasons, the most celebrated games in recent history largely have emphasis on gameplay plus narrative. Nintendo is one of the few that put little effort into storytelling and you could argue that thats probably reflected in how they are regarded today vs 1996 when expectations were much different.

[TheWindWalker]

My favorite games are story driven too, but they will never be as good as mario 64, oot and the like with no story and are just pure gameplay.

Bit of a stretch to say that a Zelda game isn't story driven. You aren't constantly getting calls over your earpiec-Wait no, actually you are. You aren't seeing cutscenes where things are expla-crap, yeah that one, too. In any case, there isn't a lot of dialog on the scree... nevermind.

[Fenderxx]

I personally am looking forward to this content. I enjoy the story and lore of WoW.. It's no "Lord of the Rings" but I always enjoyed the story and books. I can see some people not doing this content, but that is fine. I do not enjoy Pet Battles.. but I know a lot of people in my guild that enjoy collecting and battling pets. So I am happy any time they get new content, even though it's not something I will partake in. I like the idea of WoW feeling more like an RPG, with a story.

[Super Kami Dende]

Well I am glad I filled you in on that fact. My favorite games are story driven too, but they will never be as good as mario 64, oot and the like with no story and are just pure gameplay. Just remember, you liking something doesn't mean it's good.

Did you just imply OoT had no story?...Wuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuut.

[Mazaxist]

Suramar HYPE! Looks like it's gonna be one of the most awesome, most played and most beautiful zone in the game imo. The art team went balls to the wall with Suramar, and its totally worked, huge ammount of quests, freaking deadly, and it's all lore too. Freaking sweet imo!

Is there any phasing? Also will this be the PVP zone to go for world pvp?

[Deleted]

Suramar seems like a wonderful concept. Content for the sake of content! Something that makes WoW feel more like an RPG and less like a facebook game.

For those that haven't paid attention to it, let me sum it up:

-Max level only zone.
-200+ Quests
-Very little in the way of gear or artifact power rewards. Mainly just gold rewards, and they'll probably throw some cosmetic stuff in there at launch, making the zone pretty much totally optional.
-Story driven quests, not "Fill up the bar" quests.
-Larger zone than it looks due to underground tunnels and such, will take a long time to fully explore.
-Questing for the sake of experiencing a story, not as a means to reach an end.

I'm not seeing much discussion on here, or the official forums, or on youtube from content creators. Only Preach Gaming has made a comprehensive video on the subject.

I don't have privelege to post videos yet, but I assume y'all can figure out how to go on the youtubes and find Preach's video about it.

So basically, we have a completely optional zone available at max level, full of lore-heavy quests that are there solely for the sake of enjoying the questing content itself instead of a means to be rewarded with gear. It's the complete opposite of Tanaan Jungle which was a boring grind for gear and gear upgrades.

While this doesn't seem to be alt-friendly, I think this is the right direction for the game. WoD tried to be alt-friendly, but ended up being alt-intensive. If you weren't running multiple garrisons, you were way behind in making gold compared to those who were.

Now I'll have content to experience for a while after launch. I imagine after launch I'll be levelling, then running dungeons and doing world quests for gear so I'm ready to raid ASAP. Then after I start raiding, I'll have something to explore and experience in between raids.

This zone also has potential to be a system for adding more post-launch content. Maybe they'll revamp the zone for 7.2 and advance the story.

What do you guys think?

How is it you define RPG as less focus on gear?

Offtopic: Just got A Link between worlds for my 3ds. The nostalgia from alttp is real. its very real

That seems odd to me

- - - Updated - - -

Did you just imply OoT had no story?...Wuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuut.

I am also not getting this.

[Video Games]

Throughout this thread, you have continuously stated your opinion as fact; even if a majority of people agree with that opinion, it doesn't make it a fact.

Also, if you think about it logically, there is no reason why a game can't be great and story driven; if Mario 64 had a great story interwoven with the great gameplay, would that not conflict with your opinion? I don't think great gameplay and great story need to be mutually exclusive, even if, in your opinion, that is how it has been.

They aren't mutually exclusive, but the people who say story is the most important part of a GAME are wrong.

Bit of a stretch to say that a Zelda game isn't story driven. You aren't constantly getting calls over your earpiec-Wait no, actually you are. You aren't seeing cutscenes where things are expla-crap, yeah that one, too. In any case, there isn't a lot of dialog on the scree... nevermind.

Yeah, a few text bubbles popping up here and there sure make a great story! Or are you saying the first mario had one too? Miyamoto has always said he puts gameplay first. Or do you think it's a coincidence that the more story they put in zelda, the worse they get?

Did you just imply OoT had no story?...Wuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuut.

Yeah save the princess. Oh my god what a masterpiece of story telling. Zelda ad mario are the pinnacle of video game narrative and should get oscars and grammys and nobel peace prizes.

[Deleted]

They aren't mutually exclusive, but the people who say story is the most important part of a GAME are wrong.



Yeah, a few text bubbles popping up here and there sure make a great story! Or are you saying the first mario had one too? Miyamoto has always said he puts gameplay first. Or do you think it's a coincidence that the more story they put in zelda, the worse they get?



Yeah save the princess. Oh my god what a masterpiece of story telling. Zelda ad mario are the pinnacle of video game narrative and should get oscars and grammys and nobel peace prizes.

There is a lot of text in zelda games and there always have been. YOu can skip it pretty fast but you cant deny its there.

What Zelda games do you see as having more story and being worse exactly?

Just because a game is virtually sandbox doesnt mean it cant have a lot of story.

It sounds like you missed a lot of whats good about the zelda games to me

Edit:

Just as a personal sidenote. For me games without story rarely excite me for longer periods of time. An exception of this is highly competitive games where the story part comes from interacting with other human players.

[Deleted]

Yeah..there are people here on the forum claiming they'd do stuff for the sake of it...if it is "cool" and they don't need rewards (like "back in Vanilla I did things just because they were cool, yada yada)....but really I think people want rewards.

Cosmetic items can be reward enough tho

[Spacewalrus2010]

While I like the idea, I wouldn't mind a "means to an end." Maybe not as rewarding as the alternatives, thus it's not required?

There's no reason there not be character progression in some fashion as far as I'm concerned. Lore is great and I'll probably do it even if it ends up like it is now, but I see no bad side to adding like small reputation gains or resources. Given that those who'd be fine the way it is aren't exactly punished and those who wouldn't, get something more out of it.

This doesn't come out of need of more alternatives, as there is already plenty to do that would inevitably progress your character. It just seems rather pointless to actively remove any sort of character progression from a content path.

[Video Games]

There is a lot of text in zelda games and there always have been. YOu can skip it pretty fast but you cant deny its there.

What Zelda games do you see as having more story and being worse exactly?

Just because a game is virtually sandbox doesnt mean it cant have a lot of story.

It sounds like you missed a lot of whats good about the zelda games to me

Edit:

Just as a personal sidenote. For me games without story rarely excite me for longer periods of time. An exception of this is highly competitive games where the story part comes from interacting with other human players.

There is only a lot of text in tp and ss which are the worst zelda games because there is too much story and not enough gameplay, especially in the opening. There's a reason why the community is so split on liking them compared to lttp which is universally loved. The good parts about zelda has been exploring and solving puzzles, not the story.

Also I hate sandbox games and like I said my favorites bar banjo kazooie are story driven, but gameplay first games are always at the top of most beloved games of all time.

[Coils]

I'm all for this zone and what they appear to be doing with it.

I don't care if its alt-unfriendly. Nothing in the game used to be alt-friendly. I have a ton of alts that I waver in commitment to because its so easy to catch them up these days. I'd almost prefer if content directed me to stick to fewer alts.

I'm all for actually having world quest content that extends beyond leveling. That said, I am concerned with the lack of rewards. I might do it for the lore, but many will not unless there is something to gain. Has to be a somewhat desirable cosmetic reward at least, or else you're not encouraging people to play content you spent time to design.

[Deleted]

There is only a lot of text in tp and ss which are the worst zelda games because there is too much story and not enough gameplay, especially in the opening. There's a reason why the community is so split on liking them compared to lttp which is universally loved. The good parts about zelda has been exploring and solving puzzles, not the story.

Also I hate sandbox games and like I said my favorites bar banjo kazooie are story driven, but gameplay first games are always at the top of most beloved games of all time.

I personally cant stand MM because of the masks. I didnt like TP because of wolf form.

I guess i'm different. I find there to be a lot of story in albw and i really like it. The cutscenes need to be short, the text long but skippable. Thats how i prefer it