Classic World of Warcraft Discussion [Megathread]

[Relapses]

It's not an ad hominem, it's literally what you said in the post he replied too. Some people who play private would pay, some wouldn't.

Your argument of "they won't pay" is as credible as us saying "they will pay," not at all. Hence him replying that you have none in this case.

I wasn't referring to the post in question. I was referring to the debate in general. It's lost its allure for me. I've aligned myself on this issue and there isn't anything anybody else can say or do which will change that perspective and I've accepted that no amount of reasoning will sway anybody on the other side. If I comment, it's mostly to point out things which are, imo, too far in left field to be accepted by anybody as a universal truth.

[Deleted]

There are people who would for sure, but the people who play on private because it is free is a much larger chunk then most know lol.

Why wouldn't they play on WoD private servers if the primary concern was to play on a free server ?

[Gavan]

Interesting how the debate has shifted to if people would actually pay for/buy a legacy version of the game now.

I wonder if that comes from the revelation that the code and technical challenges were addressed and acknowledged, but not said to be an unobtainable possibility yesterday.

So now we're on, yes they would, no they wouldn't. Which is a pointless argument without the actual real marketing research in place. If Blizzard goes for this, which isn't starting to look like they are genuinely and seriously looking at, the marketing data supports it already. You wouldn't get this far into even the talking stages of a development project if you didn't already have that data. Vocal groups one side or another or not.

[Unholyground]

What does this even mean?

It means of my personal sample size most won;t pay for it and will continue to play on private even if it does happen, we have our communities regardless of what Blizz does and we aren't going to move and do it all over if it becomes a reality. My Vanilla experience was 11 years ago, and this nostalgic experience ends if the server ends and I will never go back lol.

- - - Updated - - -

Why wouldn't they play on WoD private servers if the primary concern was to play on a free server ?

Ask them? WoD we all pretty much agree had a lot of potential and was fun for a bit, but lack of almost any class changes an no content updates made it a sad panda.

[Struggle]

I wasn't referring to the post in question. I was referring to the debate in general. It's lost its allure for me. I've aligned myself on this issue and there isn't anything I can say or do which will change that perspective and I've accepted that no amount of reasoning will sway anybody on the other side. If I comment, it's mostly to point out things which are, imo, too far in left field to be accepted by anybody as a universal truth.

Reasoning isn't synonymous with agreeing with your opinion. Anti-Legacy has some solid arguments. Budget worries being the most credible one in my opinion since WoW isn't ActiBlizz's cash crop anymore. It might take funding away from live retail, that's possible. Its also possible that it would be a massive success and breathe new life into the community as a whole. It might lead to spreading live WoW's resources too thin leading to content delays, very possible. It might also be successful enough to warrant a massive budget boost so they can multiply the dev team. I've got polls and signature campaigns, but that's anecdotal evidence that no one would (or should) consider proof from the other side.

The fact is no one knows. I could be right and you wrong, or vice versa. There is no solid evidence that can be considered objective proof for either side of our debate. Because of this, reasoning is merely opinion based. That's why you're not going to change my mind, nor me yours. Not until something solid comes.

This thread is more about helping people see both sides, possibilities they hadn't thought of, or to educate themselves on the positions of both sides. I doubt a whole lot of minds have changed throughout the thread at all honestly, for your side or mine. Its still good to share opinions.

[Thimagryn]

Why wouldn't they play on WoD private servers if the primary concern was to play on a free server ?

Because WoD Live is run better, and with the token system, is effectively F2P.

- - - Updated - - -

Interesting how the debate has shifted to if people would actually pay for/buy a legacy version of the game now.

Financial reasonings are (IMO) the core reason why Legacy hasn't been considered for so long. Corporate execs are the people who need to be convinced for this to be greenlit, no one else. Designers and CM's only work on the project, they aren't the ones that make it happen.

At this point, we simply don't have any evidence towards a sustainable Legacy system. All examples of popular Vanilla servers have mixed factors, like being F2P and heavily promoted by popular streamers. These aren't guarantees for an official Legacy server, especially if there are some changes, fixes or features that go against what a large chunk of the playerbase expects.

Polls and petitions provide insight on general opinion and interest. If it was strong enough to be evidence, Blizzard wouldn't have to be in 'Listen Mode' and there would be no Legacy debate; it would've already happened.

- - - Updated - - -

I've got polls and signature campaigns, but that's anecdotal evidence that no one would (or should) consider proof from the other side.

The fact is no one knows. I could be right and you wrong, or vice versa. There is no solid evidence that can be considered objective proof for either side of our debate. Because of this, reasoning is merely opinion based. That's why you're not going to change my mind, nor me yours. Not until something solid comes.

I'm thankful to see other people saying the same thing. This has been grossly understated. Polls simply don't prove either side of this debate; it's not evidence towards or against Legacy.

[Unholyground]

The fact is no one knows. I could be right and you wrong, or vice versa. There is no solid evidence that can be considered objective proof for either side of our debate. Because of this, reasoning is merely opinion based. That's why you're not going to change my mind, nor me yours. Not until something solid comes.

One thing we do know that will always matter is money. How much the players are willing to pay and how much Blizzard needs to make for it to be a worth while revenue.

[kary]

One thing we do know that will always matter is money. How much the players are willing to pay and how much Blizzard needs to make for it to be a worth while revenue.

which is what people have been saying pretty much forever.

That the number of people who signed the petition and will actually pay aren't the same, and it's impossible to know how many people will actually pay for it, and whether or not there will be enough paying subs for it to be worthwhile.

[Deleted]

Because WoD Live is run better, and with the token system, is effectively F2P.

towards or against Legacy

Why would those people ask for legacy servers then ? The "people ask for legacy server to play for free" makes no senses on a logical standpoint, because people who want to play for free can already do it.

[Saucerian]

Just got caught up. Interesting stuff. This looks like The Big One for Classic servers.

Sounds like Bliz is genuinely investigating the possibility this time, and after meeting with the Nost team, will arrive at a decision once and for all.

Best thing probably for Classic fans to do now is keep providing data that shows they can agree on a single implementation and there is sufficient demand for it.

[Thimagryn]

Why would those people ask for legacy servers then ? The "people ask for legacy server to play for free" makes no senses on a logical standpoint, because people who want to play for free can already do it.

Why do people ask for flight on Draenor when they can already fly anywhere else in the world, when Draenor has little open world content and people barely leave their Garrisons in the first place? Why can't they treat Draenor like a continent-wide Timeless Isle?

People ask for things they want, not for things to be logical. Everyone has their own personal reasons. The question is whether Blizzard thinks these reasonings are substantial for change in the game.

[Deleted]

Why do people ask for flight on Draenor when they can already fly anywhere else in the world, when Draenor has little open world content and people barely leave their Garrisons in the first place? Why can't they treat Draenor like a continent-wide Timeless Isle?

I don't really see the connection with the topic at hand.

People ask for things they want

So basically they do want to play vanilla wow, not necessarily to play a video game for free.

[Gadzooks]

I'm still waiting to hear from Gadzooks on how my post explaining various types of NDAs was a conspiracy theory post.

Your butthurt is none of my concern.

[Thimagryn]

So basically they do want to play vanilla wow, not necessarily to play a video game for free.

The ambiguity comes from your definition of 'they'. The ones asking for vanilla don't represent all the players petitioning or playing on Vanilla servers; especially those who may solely be playing for free. That's the issue with using petition and poll numbers, that's the issue with using server account stats.

I signed the petition. If I'm already subbed to WoW and Legacy shares the sub fee, why wouldn't I want more for my money? That being said, I'm not currently subbed to WoW, I'm still deciding on Legion, and Legacy isn't a factor towards me resubbing. I signed the petition because I think Legacy is worth having. This is me as a customer.

But customers don't decide what gets into the game. The best we can do is voice what we want. The decisions are made by corporate execs who weigh all the options. It's blatantly obvious that things aren't so simple. Even Mark Kern admits so, and has said there are no promises with the meeting and handover. It's not as simple as a technical issue that needs to be resolved.

[Unholyground]

Why would those people ask for legacy servers then ? The "people ask for legacy server to play for free" makes no senses on a logical standpoint, because people who want to play for free can already do it.

Not everyone is asking for legacy, a lot of us are 100% ok with it being a blizzlike private server. A lot of people are saying they would pay for it so they don't look bad I guess?

[Gadzooks]

And so it begins.

Before; "They don't have the code anymore!"

Now; "It's not the same thing!"

I've posted it before, and I'll keep posting it - they never said they lost all the code. At all. The best I can remember is they said they didn't have ALL of it. And that most of it was unworkable now, and would have to be rewritten.

Besides, it's all deflection away from the failure of the Kern Crusade.

- - - Updated - - -

You sound like a well adjusted adult that's capable of holding a mature discussion.

It also sounds like you know you called me out on a non existent issue, and you can't back your claim up.

Your butthurt is still not my problem. But keep posting, it's entertaining.

[Normie]

Why would those people ask for legacy servers then ? The "people ask for legacy server to play for free" makes no senses on a logical standpoint, because people who want to play for free can already do it.

People have only EVER played "vanilla" or "legacy" servers for free.

Doesn't really sound like something that is the underpinning of a new way for Blizzard to make a shitload of cash. Sounds more like a way to give a few hundred fans willing to pay extra $$ per month what they want, while just generally setting fire to a barrel of $100 bills.

[Gadzooks]

One thing we do know that will always matter is money. How much the players are willing to pay and how much Blizzard needs to make for it to be a worth while revenue.

Or, if the live game can be fixed to provide an experience/playstyle that a legacy server solution isn't needed, which would be more cost effective and good for the game in the long run. They're listening, but that doesn't guarantee that "legacy servers" is the only outcome of their listening. Which I think is the path they're taking, if you look objectively at Ion's comments and Kern's.

[Thimagryn]

Or, if the live game can be fixed to provide an experience/playstyle that a legacy server solution isn't needed, which would be more cost effective and good for the game in the long run. They're listening, but that doesn't guarantee that "legacy servers" is the only outcome of their listening. Which I think is the path they're taking, if you look objectively at Ion's comments and Kern's.

Live isn't likely to be affected by these discussions much. Live is free from these discussions, as it's pretty obvious anything done to Live will not satisfy people any more than Pristine servers. They're separate features for a separate audience. You can't satisfy people wanting pizza with pizza-flavoured food.

[Gadzooks]

Live isn't likely to be affected by these discussions much. Live is free from these discussions, as it's pretty obvious anything done to Live will not satisfy people any more than Pristine servers. They're separate features for a separate audience. You can't satisfy people wanting pizza with pizza-flavoured food.

I disagree. I read them finally realizing leveling is broken as being entirely from this whole thing. They got faced with the question "Why are people playing illegal servers instead of our game?"

The people who won't be satisfied are the problem, they won't compromise on something that isn't theirs to demand. Blizzard is clearly trying, but they won't get credit for that because of childish "I want!"

I think the effort here is to determine what people get from a private server that the game doesn't provide anymore, and fixing that. Which makes perfect sense - except to those who can't see past their childish demands and attitudes.