Should Blizzard release Vanilla servers?

[Kithelle]

If you say so.
Remove LFG / LFR then: Is the game social any longer? Would your definition of friends be with those you will never meet / see / hear from again? This is social?

To myself and others, this is not even close to social. NOT.. EVEN.. CLOSE..

If you want to friend them then friend them...there isn't anything stopping you from asking for even their battletag...except yourself. Pretty much everything is cross server these days...

- - - Updated - - -

A tiny fraction of what? Is playing on a Legacy server mutually exclusive? Do you have numbers so support this fraction? I guess Blizzard should of never done WoW to begin with since there wasn't any indication people would pay. There was a demand for MMOs, but no proof people would play WoW.

Nost has only a fraction of the player base of even wow now...just because 10,000 people play on it doesn't mean 10k will sub...even if you could guarantee every single person of that 10k would sub...it may still not be worth the large investment Blizzard would have to put into it.

[ComputerNerd]

If you say so.
Remove LFG / LFR then: Is the game social any longer? Would your definition of friends be with those you will never meet / see / hear from again? This is social?

To myself and others, this is not even close to social. NOT.. EVEN.. CLOSE..

Group finders did not make players behave that way.
They did it before LFR/LFD/LFG.
You dictate how disposable other players are.
Group finders did not create that behaviour, as it was still common before.

Interaction alone is never social.
There is a reason that yelling at people is called anti-social.
Because there is interaction that isn't social, because of how it is approached.

[Vineri]

Group finders did not make players behave that way.
They did it before LFR/LFD/LFG.
You dictate how disposable other players are.
Group finders did not create that behaviour, as it was still common before.

Interaction alone is never social.
There is a reason that yelling at people is called anti-social.
Because there is interaction that isn't social, because of how it is approached.

I do not dictate.

Current WoW has no internal community.

Formal WoW had an internal community. Call this anti-social 'til you are blue in the face, but it's a heck of a lot more than what exists now. With Vanilla, folks had pretty much 1 maxed character. TBC, maybe 2 or 3 .. WotLK 3+. Perhaps you are thinking of the later expansions when it became possible to hide behind alts?

[ComputerNerd]

I do not dictate.

Current WoW has no internal community.

Formal WoW had an internal community. Call this anti-social 'til you are blue in the face, but it's a heck of a lot more than what exists now. With Vanilla, folks had pretty much 1 maxed character. TBC, maybe 2 or 3 .. WotLK 3+. Perhaps you are thinking of the later expansions when it became possible to hide behind alts?

It has always been possible to hide behind alts.
You keep throwing it out that some specific behaviour is a new thing that blizzard allowed or created, but it always existed.
The players changed.
You do dictate how disposable other players are.
Because you decide if your interactions are purely one-sided.
If you talk to someone, interact with them for some other reason than them being "useful" to you, then that is being social.

You just jump onto the blame blizzard bandwagon, the one where players make their own decisions but blame someone else for them.

[Vineri]

It has always been possible to hide behind alts.
You keep throwing it out that some specific behaviour is a new thing that blizzard allowed or created, but it always existed.
The players changed.
You do dictate how disposable other players are.
Because you decide if your interactions are purely one-sided.
If you talk to someone, interact with them for some other reason than them being "useful" to you, then that is being social.

You just jump onto the blame blizzard bandwagon, the one where players make their own decisions but blame someone else for them.

Have a cookie, and relax.

Begin again by talking about yourself and how you act, and not how you expect others to behave. Use "I", instead of "You" and heck, you might start making sense!

You do not speak for me

[ComputerNerd]

Have a cookie, and relax.

Begin again by talking about yourself and how you act, and not how you expect others to behave. Use "I", instead of "You" and heck, you might start making sense!

You don't like the truth, that is all.
It has been proven clearly to anyone not in denial.
Look at the group finder and the requirements placed above what is actually needed.
That is deliberate to minimise the amount of interaction with other players, gaining the full benefits with less work.

Believe what you want, since you aren't going to be convinced by the truth.
Players are making their own decisions, and blaming someone else for it.

[Barnabas]

Yes they should but not at this point.

[NickCageFanatic]

...except where I think you're research is pretty thin.

My research was actually very accurate and thorough but it's like you say "I think you're research is pretty thin" and I won't argue people who "think"

[Chrno]

You don't like the truth, that is all.
It has been proven clearly to anyone not in denial.
Look at the group finder and the requirements placed above what is actually needed.
That is deliberate to minimise the amount of interaction with other players, gaining the full benefits with less work.

Believe what you want, since you aren't going to be convinced by the truth.
Players are making their own decisions, and blaming someone else for it.

I'm glad the LFD works well for folks like you , let's leave it at that and stop the bickering between you two.

[Vineri]

You don't like the truth, that is all.
It has been proven clearly to anyone not in denial.
Look at the group finder and the requirements placed above what is actually needed.
That is deliberate to minimise the amount of interaction with other players, gaining the full benefits with less work.

Believe what you want, since you aren't going to be convinced by the truth.
Players are making their own decisions, and blaming someone else for it.

Group finder ended the peak subscriptions during WotLK (~2010). Downward trend commenced.

It's unclear where you are going with this. Players are making their own decisions. They stopped playing. Subs fell the quarter after auto-LFG and every quarter there-after.

[lunarforce]

They should release it, I mean why not, whats the harm?

[Daffan]

People loved the genre because it was engrossing.

Uhh Legendary quest.. the rogue daggers or others?

There is literally no effort required
Impressive statement. No effort, eh. Yeah.

Notice how I said going back on LFR? So basically ring and cloak.

[Deleted]

Yes, they should... and they should also remove Crossrealm, phasing flying mounts and LFR/LFG/CROSSREALM BG from Legion... ONLY THEN... will they survive what's coming.

crossrealm fucked up the community totally... feels like a stupid single player game now >_< even NPC say more than an actual player...

[Lilija]

People hate it because its boring.

Going back to LFR to do your legendary quest is like putting pins in your eyes. There is literally no effort required.

Then why aren't they doing it on higher difficulties? Just food for thought.

- - - Updated - - -

They should release it, I mean why not, whats the harm?

It costs money and potentially won't bring enough profit to justify it. Especially, that if Blizzard does it they will be held to higher standards than some random private server.

[Daffan]

Then why aren't they doing it on higher difficulties? Just food for thought.

- - - Updated - - -


It costs money and potentially won't bring enough profit to justify it. Especially, that if Blizzard does it they will be held to higher standards than some random private server.

Why would people do the old raids on anything higher when it drops no items they need and since they over-gear it, it's not the same experience. It' a multiplayer game so its very competitive, if people can skip the old raids they will - then complain there is no content.

[Lilija]

Why would people do the old raids on anything higher when it drops no items they need and since they over-gear it, it's not the same experience. It' a multiplayer game so its very competitive, if people can skip the old raids they will - then complain there is no content.

And whose fault is that?

[Morbownz]

My research was actually very accurate and thorough but it's like you say "I think you're research is pretty thin" and I won't argue people who "think"

Fair enough. For future reference I wouldn't start posts with "AFAIK", because for someone who's only interested in absolute facts it doesn't really help you form a solid basis for an argument.

Secondly since you only like to discuss facts I will point something out to you that is factually incorrect.

2) A warrior tank's best (only) chance at securing threat was...sunder armor.

This is not true. Shield slam and revenge generated much more threat, these were the abilities that secured threat. If you didn't want to be chasing a boss around MC because one of your mages had just landed a critical strike within 10 seconds of combat, you'd open with shield slam.

So as you can see, you're research is slightly on the thin side. My research comes from personal experiences in the game, recent too.

[glowpipe]

No, they should not. They should start getting more players back into the game. Not divide the playerbase even more. Altho. most of the vanila hype crowd will dwindle off from the nostalgia rush rather fast.

[Daffan]

And whose fault is that?

Human nature and the game? I'm sure if you let everyone get full 750 item level for free, people would do it even if they knew it ruined their content.

[Gaidax]

No, I'd rather them focus on current WoW and not on some archaic crap.