Classic World of Warcraft Discussion [Megathread]

[Kyanion]

Kyan, it's difficult to prove to anybody posting in this thread that they're the vocal minority because there are so many active pro-Legacy supporters here. It creates an echo chamber of self-affirming smugness where the people who want this to happen do nothing but slap each other on the back and remember "the good ol days" while viewing anybody with a dissenting opinion as a personal attack on their intellectual freedom. Granted, some people are more moderate... but the ones who are the most outspoken also tend to have the most extreme views on the subject.

I personally find myself somewhere in the middle despite my best efforts debunk the near-infinite issues Legacy realms would represent. I'd likely play on Legacy realms if they were introduced at some point but I personally believe they shouldn't be added until the core WoW team has given up on creating new expansions and the games' current business model is no longer sustainable. And as long as the majority of people in this thread believe bringing Legacy realms are as easy as a flip of a switch -- or that Blizzard is a company with near-infinite resources so they can just will into existence anything they want if enough people ask for it -- this movement is going to continue to "gain traction" in the eyes of the vocal minority. It's not like the petition is going to suddenly stop gaining signatures (though it's being signed at a much slower rate than it was immediately following the shutdown of Nost: only 5k in the last 2 weeks as apposed to the nearly 100k who signed it in the first 2 weeks)... as long as that numbers continues to grow, they're going to claim their voice is getting louder.

You make some great points, as we've seen throughout this thread the echo chamber is quite real. I think it is the extreme viewed ones that have really made this thread painful to read at times though.

And yeah the just 'flip a switch' and bam instant legacy realm from Blizzard....I dunno why they have kept up with that part, it just shows how clueless they are about it all.

[Zyster]

You can't prove a vocal minority in an issue that a vocal minority or majority is irrelevant. Can you guys stop and come up with any proof to these servers not working and Blizzard only inviting Nost and Mark to meet with them to "put them in handcuffs" or a "pr stunt". If not stop preaching that your opinions are fact.

BTW Kyan good job dodging proof again you said you could get. Not relevant to the convo but just fun to watch your already non-existent credibility dwindle even lower.

[Dormie]

I don't have to play any cards. I'm not part of a vocal minority 'movement'. I don't HAVE to play any cards. But I got one for you. I'm playing WoW right now, how bout you? Ooops shut down server.

Ya it's not like there aren't 1000+ private servers running at this moment or anything.

[Kyanion]

You can't prove a vocal minority in an issue that a vocal minority or majority is irrelevant. Can you guys stop and come up with any proof to these servers not working and Blizzard only inviting Nost and Mark to meet with them to "put them in handcuffs" or a "pr stunt". If not stop preaching that your opinions are fact.

BTW Kyan good job dodging proof again you said you could get. Not relevant to the convo but just fun to watch your already non-existent credibility dwindle even lower.

I wasn't one of the people making handcuff comments. Maybe something will come out of that meeting and maybe nothing does. But plenty of the pro-Legacy people were viewing it as a sign from the prophets that Legacy is happening.

I don't even know what proof you are blathering on about? You wanted me to go sign that stupid petition as Duke Nukem or some shit? And do you think I really give a fuck what you think about my credibility? Oh man I'm all broken up about this that Zyster does not view me as credible. If you think signing the petition as a fake name is going to prove some point or not be my guest.

- - - Updated - - -

Ya it's not like there aren't 1000+ private servers running at this moment or anything.

Cool, then stay on those PS and don't bitch too much when they get shut down. The quality of PS with some of them being questionable at best, such fun, much WoW.

[Relapses]

You can't prove a vocal minority in an issue that a vocal minority or majority is irrelevant. Can you guys stop and come up with any proof to these servers not working and Blizzard only inviting Nost and Mark to meet with them to "put them in handcuffs" or a "pr stunt". If not stop preaching that your opinions are fact.

I'm not preaching my opinion as a fact. I'm offering the reasoning I have to believe Legacy realms are an idea that cannot happen at this point in time. You can disagree with my reasoning but it doesn't change the very real concerns I have nor the very real, nearly insurmountable technical issues simply creating Legacy would represent.

The meetings between Kern, Blizzard and the Nost folks are going to happen, that's not up for debate. For the countless reasons I've mentioned in other posts, I can't imagine a situation where Blizzard comes out of these meetings with an announcement of Legacy realms. That's my personal viewpoint on the matter and you're free to disagree with it. But I think if you look at this from an angle that isn't jaded by nostalgia or fueled by the desire to be part of a movement, you'd at least understand why people who are against Legacy realms feel the way they do.

[Zyster]

Why argue if you don't care what people think about your opinion? It's basically stating that here's my opinion, it's fact, you should believe it, but fuck you if you don't. This is directed at kyanion.

I'm not stating you specifically, but in general has been common among people against the idea. Then when asked for a source they give you the finger.

[Dormie]

Cool, then stay on those PS and don't bitch too much when they get shut down. The quality of PS with some of them being questionable at best, such fun, much WoW.

Seen everything in retail. Once Legion comes out it will take a month or two to see everything and get bored again. I don't really play them but private servers offer a much wider array of activities.

[Relapses]

Why argue if you don't care what people think about your opinion? It's basically stating that here's my opinion, it's fact, you should believe it, but fuck you if you don't. This is directed at kyanion.

I'm not stating you specifically, but in general has been common among people against the idea. Then when asked for a source they give you the finger.

I'm one of the few people who at least tries to provide a source when I can. As an example, in the post before my last I linked a Reddit post from a software engineer who goes through the innumerable technical issues Legacy represents. (You can read the thread where other software engineers disagree with him but it's still a pretty good breakdown of just a few of the problems.)

But at the end of the day, it's difficult to source an opinion. It's a gut feeling. And some of us are going to feel stronger about our opinions than others. That's why debate exists. I realize I'm probably never going to change the opinion of somebody who feels strongly in favor of Legacy realms, but at least I've done what I can to back up my personal disillusionment on the matter.

[Kyanion]

Seen everything in retail. Once Legion comes out it will take a month or two to see everything and get bored again. I don't really play them but private servers offer a much wider array of activities.

Wider array? It is content that will NEVER update, never get patched, nothing. And you may get bored after a month or two of Legion but you are just one person. We'll see how long Legion lasts and what happens during a lull this time around.

I don't see how you could want to play Vanilla for years at a time, I was more than happy to leave Vanilla and do TBC when it was current.

[RickJamesLich]

Wider array? It is content that will NEVER update, never get patched, nothing. And you may get bored after a month or two of Legion but you are just one person. We'll see how long Legion lasts and what happens during a lull this time around.

I don't see how you could want to play Vanilla for years at a time, I was more than happy to leave Vanilla and do TBC when it was current.

The problem is on retail, the content isn't really open ended. With legacy servers, yes, there won't be new content after the final tier hits, but the whole process to get to that point takes a lot longer then it takes to see everything on live. We're taking about a month or two on retail, compared to a year or two on the legacy server... and that's just for vanilla. If you get bored and wanna check out BC afterwards, that's another year or two.

Compare that now to people who play retail, "see it all" and then unsub after a month or so.

It's not just the open ended content though, if you're a pvp'er, you will have a lot more fun on legacy servers where the world is populated and there are no flying mounts. The community is better because you have to socialize in order to succeed, so the chance of you making buddies is a lot better as well.

And I'm just speaking anecdotally here, but I was on Nost for a year and still had a shit load of stuff to do. I was actually in the middle of grinding CC rep when I found out the server was done, getting ready for the AQ40 release. It's easy to forget but the amount of content vanilla actually had was *massive*. You never ran out of things to do or places to go.

[tanksin the enhance shamy]

so did we hear what happened at the meeting yet or does blizz have the guys chained up in their replica goldshire basement?

[Neteyes]

Wider array? It is content that will NEVER update, never get patched, nothing. And you may get bored after a month or two of Legion but you are just one person. We'll see how long Legion lasts and what happens during a lull this time around.

I don't see how you could want to play Vanilla for years at a time, I was more than happy to leave Vanilla and do TBC when it was current.

The problem is though that whenever Blizzard releases new content, the old content is automatically useless because they've gone with a replacing standpoint instead of a continuation. The point people who are in favor of legacy server is trying to make is that there's a whole mountain of old content that alot of people either never played or would like to play again for different reasons (probably because they think it's more interesting than the current content).

Personally, I would likely never play on a legacy server because I don't have enough time. I don't see why you're so against the idea though. I haven't followed your posts, but I'd assume you're arguing that it would take away players from the main game? Maybe take away developers too, making the main game "lesser"? Or maybe it's just that you can't bear to have people disagree with you, so you have to make your stand, going out with as much mayhem created as possible?

I don't know, but I'll tell you this; any person who would go from the main game to a legacy server wouldn't be an active participant in the main game anyways, he'd likely be there to do the new content only, providing only a small (most likely not perceivable) increase in your overall experience. Taking away manpower from the main game is something you've already stated won't happen, because as you say, it's content that will never update.

That's all assuming that they can actually create legacy servers economically of course. That would largely depend on wether they have the old code saved or not. You can make all the usual arguments about hardware compatibility and what not, but the main issue will always be; do they have the code or not? If they have the code, getting it up and running is only a cursory issue, maybe they'll have some problems, but it's not a huge thing.

[Relapses]

That's all assuming that they can actually create legacy servers economically of course. That would largely depend on wether they have the old code saved or not. You can make all the usual arguments about hardware compatibility and what not, but the main issue will always be; do they have the code or not? If they have the code, getting it up and running is only a cursory issue, maybe they'll have some problems, but it's not a huge thing.

Even if they have the source, how exactly would Blizzard go about adapting a 12-year-old version game to the current Battle.net framework without making significant changes? If you think that's as easy as copy and pasting a few lines of code, you are greatly, greatly underestimating the amount of programming such an undertaking would entail.

[Deleted]

That's all assuming that they can actually create legacy servers economically of course. That would largely depend on wether they have the old code saved or not. You can make all the usual arguments about hardware compatibility and what not, but the main issue will always be; do they have the code or not? If they have the code, getting it up and running is only a cursory issue, maybe they'll have some problems, but it's not a huge thing.

I would be shocked if they truly didn't keep a copy of the old game. It's quite unprofessional if you ask me. I think it was more of a bluff to not feel forced to open them up in the first place.

[Absintheminded]

Legacy realms would be good for business, regardless it takes one month or one year to implement. I'm one (of very many, I presume) who would come back to WoW and remain subbed "indefinitely" if legacy realms were to be presented. That's a bit of money up for grabs, no?

[Uurdz]

Kyan, it's difficult to prove to anybody posting in this thread that they're the vocal minority because there are so many active pro-Legacy supporters here. It creates an echo chamber of self-affirming smugness where the people who want this to happen do nothing but slap each other on the back and remember "the good ol days" while viewing anybody with a dissenting opinion as a personal attack on their intellectual freedom. Granted, some people are more moderate... but the ones who are the most outspoken also tend to have the most extreme views on the subject.

I personally find myself somewhere in the middle despite my best efforts debunk the near-infinite issues Legacy realms would represent. I'd likely play on Legacy realms if they were introduced at some point but I personally believe they shouldn't be added until the core WoW team has given up on creating new expansions and the games' current business model is no longer sustainable. And as long as the majority of people in this thread believe bringing Legacy realms are as easy as a flip of a switch -- or that Blizzard is a company with near-infinite resources so they can just will into existence anything they want if enough people ask for it -- this movement is going to continue to "gain traction" in the eyes of the vocal minority. It's not like the petition is going to suddenly stop gaining signatures (though it's being signed at a much slower rate than it was immediately following the shutdown of Nost: only 5k in the last 2 weeks as apposed to the nearly 100k who signed it in the first 2 weeks)... as long as that numbers continues to grow, they're going to claim their voice is getting louder.

So number of issues with this view. The echo chamber-you're-a-minority argument. While there is no way to prove or disprove this I think your logic is a bit off here. The question I have for you is - a minority of what? If you mean current players then sure, but if you mean gamers current and past then I don't think you can really safely make this assumption given the total player base is 100million and that the current player base is 5% of this or less. I'm not saying that it makes us a majority. I am saying that labelling pro-legacy players as a loud minority is a disrespect to those rational and well balanced pro-legacy posters who really want this.

Saying "your a vocal minority" is often said along the lines of "piss off and stop posting your shit here we don't like you" which isn't anything about good argument and instead is about hate.

The idea that you, as a poster, are somewhere in the middle is pretty odd. At no point have I ever read anything by you that comes close to being positive so a bit confused as to this statement. Given the tone of most of your posts, I would expect you to be anti-legacy or strongly-anti legacy rather than moderate especially given your attitude that it shouldn't exist until no more expansions are coming.

I accept many dissenting views and have previously posted accepted the genuine concerns that legacy servers could take away from the investment in retail WoW. Often this discussion doesn't last or get fleshed out with any great measure.

Instead people refer to certain posts they prefer, like the one you've posted to, which tries debunk the possibility of legacy servers. In your case you've linked a self proclaimed software engineer who seeks to claim that there is no scenario where it is technically feasible to provide legacy servers. He makes a common assertion that there is not enough demand to justify servers, equally others assert their is. While I would respect his views on the DIFFICULTY and people need to accept that YES IT WILL BE DIFFICULT, he does not have any more qualifications than I - to assert it would not make a good business decision.

Given our lack of facts we have regarding demand or lack there of, neither side is right nor have the data capable to prove it. It's a clash of opinions which is close to arguing about a glass being half full or half empty.

I think the facts as follows:
-Nost is closed, numbers of 150k reported as active players
-Numerous forum posts made, all of them deleted on offical BNet forums except for the EU thread which included a blue post
-Petition starts and grows
-Mark "all aboard the bus" Kern joins the discussion
-Numerous streamers/youtubers cover the topic
-Numerous news publications cover the topic
-Blizzard makes an official response RECOGNISING PRIVATE SERVERS and providing an olive branch to the Nost Devs
-Nost devs claim a meeting with Blizzard to discuss legacy - Blizzard don't deny this

All of those indicate this is a significant movement. Is it growing? No probably not. It has reached peak tide and will crest and drop over the coming weeks until another announcement of note.

[MardestyGSOG]

I doubt that will be the case as it's the reason we're arguing for Legacy servers in the first place. If you introduce a bunch of post-Cataclysm shit to the Vanilla game you managed to both increase production cost and alienate a large chunk of the people you're doing this for in the first place.

As a long time PS player, we don't play vanilla servers for the lack of QOL features. of they implement legacy servers with cheaper mounts and easier GY run a but the overall difficulty and rewarding feeling is there then most of us would likely enjoy it More than pure blizzlike vanilla servers, because we acknowledge that vanilla had lots of issues. Its the content and 40 man raids and group composition and communication and rewarding feeling of getting a long grinded epic that we want.

If they allow p2w though then it will definitely make some players angry. I'd buy a 60 on a legacy server though just because I wouldn't wanna level again, but many would complain.

[Jeniwyn]

The big issue with changes is that you'd get huge discrepancies in what people think is acceptable changes.

Really small stuff like the price of a respec is one thing. Changes to spells and talents or dungeon difficulty or the like in the name of balance/availability is however stuff we don't wanna see. If the fixed pure bugs (e.g blink bugs) that would be fine. We just don't want them to apply the methods of "improvement" that led to the game as it exists on retail today.

I don't wanna see legacy realms go down a bad road paved with good intentions.

[karatakor]

They would need to hire a complete different team with a different mindset, and Nostalrius guys are ready.
I would be half surprised to see a legacy server with character boost P2W gold seller pet WOD style, that would be hilarious and a complete fail!

[Struggle]

As a long time PS player, we don't play vanilla servers for the lack of QOL features. of they implement legacy servers with cheaper mounts and easier GY run a but the overall difficulty and rewarding feeling is there then most of us would likely enjoy it More than pure blizzlike vanilla servers, because we acknowledge that vanilla had lots of issues. Its the content and 40 man raids and group composition and communication and rewarding feeling of getting a long grinded epic that we want.

If they allow p2w though then it will definitely make some players angry. I'd buy a 60 on a legacy server though just because I wouldn't wanna level again, but many would complain.

You're fine with it, but what about everyone else? What if the next guy's "bottom line" is a WoW in-game shop, but anything else is "wrong"? While all of us on this side of the argument want Legacy servers, there is MUCH to debate in what that entails. Do we stay on 1.12? Start at 1.0 barebones WoW and progress? What about AoE loot, flightpaths? What about bugs that altered gameplay? What about bugs that didn't?

We each have our own opinion on them, which is why I think it's safest to just leave it alone. I wouldn't mind AoE loot, wouldn't mind shorter corpse runs, but that's just me and I'm one of hundreds of thousands, if not millions that would be playing on these realms. There are likewise staunch Legacy proponents who want NOTHING changed. Not even bug fixes.

I don't see an easier path than to just 'let it be.'