No flying on Argus - broken promise?

[Raelbo]

It's interesting, because I obviously fall into the Pro-Flight category of player, but I'm not really sure I qualify as a hardline. The reason being that I don't necessarily think that flight must be in from the very beginning. I just think that it shouldn't be shat upon and used as a carrot like it has been since WoD launched.

I classify myself as a moderate pro-flier. I want flying in the game, I think flying is a good thing for the game and leads to a better played experience. But I do accept the argument that for new content it makes sense to withhold flying until the storyline progression is done.

I agree with you that I think it has been "shat upon" ie made the scapegoat for several problems for which it really isn't responsible, and this a huge annoyance. But I don't see why using it as a carrot, like in the pathfinder acheivements is a problem, provided the content they're using it as a carrot for is appropriate and fun.

The way I see it, there should really only be three scenarios for handling flight in WoW:

• Remove it completely and make the supposedly superior ground game that Blizzard keeps talking about.
• Pathfinder with actual consistency(EVERY zone gets flight once the ground content has been cleared, no exceptions, no bullshit timegates).
• Flight as an actual part of the world design, with full integration, updates, balancing, and attention to detail.

The way I see it is that the decision should be based on the fundamentals of why flying is withheld in the first place - which is to make content that is experienced for the first time immersive (and therefore more fun). The main reason for flying is skip the travelling around that was fun the first time but has since become tedious.

From that perspective, withholding flying from Argus makes perfect sense. While it's current content keep flying out. But once we're done with it and the routine of dailies sets in - enable flying.

Now obviously I prefer the last choice in that list. But at this point I would actually settle for the second option, believe it or not. Flight being unlocked account wide after the content had been cleared in each zone, with no surprise No-fly islands released later. No nonsensical 8 month waits for no reason. At least that way I'd know what to expect.

I am generally opposed to this way of thinking. Game design is a creative process that should not be constrained by silly restrictions like you're proposing. When they introduce new content, the decisions around whether to allow flying in those zones should be based on the new content, not on whether some players feel they've "earned" the right to fly. It's not about earning the right to fly, it's about introducing flight at the right time. Earning the right to fly is simply to make the process more interesting and gives them an opportunity to give us something to do (as opposed to simply activating it overnight).

The complete and total removal of flight would be something I'd be sad to see, but at least I could respect Blizzard for actually taking the plunge. But as it stands now they aren't doing any of the above. They keep shifting their stance. And worse, they keep saying one thing and doing another. Even this most recent issue with Argus stinks of a lawyers trap. "We never said we WOULDN'T trick you, so it's fair that we did!"

As others have said, I think some people are reading far too much into Blizzard have said. They've communicated a design philosophy, to help us understand the why of what they do. If you insist on reading that as a promise of certain outcomes that you then feel entitled to, well, sorry to say that's on you.

What annoys me far more is that part of their philosophy I don't agree with. I don't agree that flying is the problem Blizzard think it is and that their reluctance to allow flying earlier stems from a false belief that the introduction of flying breaks their game. They need to understand that while the introduction of flying too early can break their game, the game tends to break itself with or without flying. And when it does break, flying is actually the salve that makes it playable.

- - - Updated - - -

7.1 was way too early for new ground content and due to some reasons Blizzard don't want to have separate pathfinders for 7.0 and 7.2 content - they want to gate flying in whole content behind both. That's why their "bad timing" argument is so hypocritical. They initially wanted to gate flying as much, as possible, and therefore - to shrink amount of time, spent in content with flying as much, as possible. I.e. their intention - to remove flying, not to find some fair compromise between flying and no flying.

I find your use of the word "fair" very interesting. It also highlights the flaw in your mode of thinking.

This is not, nor should it be, about what is "fair". It is about when the time is right. The "compromise" in Blizzard's view is between when they think the time is right and our desire to have it now.

Really, this argument is very similar to a parent rewarding a child with sweets. A child may think that a parent who doesn't give it all the sweets it wants is being "unfair", since the child views the transaction as a reward for doing something. The parent on the other hand also has to consider the health of the child and recognises that too many sweets would be detrimental to the child's wellbeing.

Maybe there is an argument to be made that Blizzard is to blame for feeding this (false) perception of flying as a "reward" (as opposed to something that happens when the time is right). But then again I never really saw it that way - which is why I tend to view this attitude as a player problem.

I can respect arguments around when the right time to release flying should/shouldn't be. But this idea that I should have flying now because I want it/deserve it/have earned it, or it was promised to me, is just puerile.

[caervek]

The crux of the problem is that the new dev team no longer considers flying a core game feature just a convenience/luxury. And unless this changes it's unlikely we will see future expansions where you can fly as soon as you reach max level, no matter how low the subs fall because of it.

- - - Updated - - -

I’m all for flying. I don’t believe they ever promised flying in Argus though...if so, where did they say it?

They promised that flying would be added sometime after Legions launch and remain until the next expansion, they never mentioned that they would add a new zone where you couldn't fly then refuse to ever enable flying there, that's what has caught people by surprise. And considering how late flying was (should have come in with 7.1 or 7.2 at the very latest) many people are understandably upset/annoyed.

[WowIsDead64]

I find your use of the word "fair" very interesting. It also highlights the flaw in your mode of thinking.

This is not, nor should it be, about what is "fair". It is about when the time is right. The "compromise" in Blizzard's view is between when they think the time is right and our desire to have it now.

Really, this argument is very similar to a parent rewarding a child with sweets. A child may think that a parent who doesn't give it all the sweets it wants is being "unfair", since the child views the transaction as a reward for doing something. The parent on the other hand also has to consider the health of the child and recognises that too many sweets would be detrimental to the child's wellbeing.

Maybe there is an argument to be made that Blizzard is to blame for feeding this (false) perception of flying as a "reward" (as opposed to something that happens when the time is right). But then again I never really saw it that way - which is why I tend to view this attitude as a player problem.

I can respect arguments around when the right time to release flying should/shouldn't be. But this idea that I should have flying now because I want it/deserve it/have earned it, or it was promised to me, is just puerile.

"Compromise" by definition - is when both sides end in equal conditions, i.e. if they need to sacrifice something - both sides should sacrifice equally. And in this case I just don't see, how such big sacrifice, as no flying for 8 months, earning it via doing whole content for about 1.5 months, no matter, if I like it or not, only to have it taken away just a few months later - can be equal to few months with flying for players, who prefer game without flying, while they can do content, how they prefer, during all other time, including most important parts of xpack, like it's release and culmination of it's story.

[Deleted]

"Compromise" by definition - is when both sides end in equal conditions,

Yeah, but no-flyers think they are compromising when they "have to" fly at the end of an expansion.

[davesurfer]

Who expected to fly on Argus? This is part of a long line of patch zones where you cannot fly. Even in flying-friendly expansions like BC and Cata you had Isle of Quel'danas and Molten Front.

This is silly topic. Argus is way too small (and the zones separated) for flying. Could probably use one or two more teleporters in Antorus Wastes and Krokuun, though.

I totally agree. Did anyone actually think we were going to fly on Argus? I would have been shocked if the did.

[WowIsDead64]

They promised that flying would be added sometime after Legions launch and remain until the next expansion, they never mentioned that they would add a new zone where you couldn't fly then refuse to ever enable flying there, that's what has caught people by surprise. And considering how late flying was (should have come in with 7.1 or 7.2 at the very latest) many people are understandably upset/annoyed.

When I provided the same proof, that Blizzard said, that their general plan was to offer flying for completing content on a ground, at official forums, some trolls there asked me to prove, that Blizzard said, that they would never add locations without flying in future patches. Of course I couldn't, cuz Blizzard have never said it, as long as opposite statement too. Do you know how it looks like? "Nobody can prove that aliens don't exist - therefore they exist". No, it's anti-flyers, who have to prove, that Blizzard said, that they reserve a right to add content without flying in future patches. And till then we should stick to initial plan - to unlocking flying for completing content on a ground on one character.

- - - Updated - - -

Yeah, but no-flyers think they are compromising when they "have to" fly at the end of an expansion.

Fly where? At Broken Isles? It's obsoleted content. May be it would be compromise (cuz not being able to play, how I prefer, at release of xpack - is big part of problem too), only if there would be any actual content with flying. But we don't have any.

[bufferunderrun]

It's interesting, because I obviously fall into the Pro-Flight category of player, but I'm not really sure I qualify as a hardline. The reason being that I don't necessarily think that flight must be in from the very beginning. I just think that it shouldn't be shat upon and used as a carrot like it has been since WoD launched.

The way I see it, there should really only be three scenarios for handling flight in WoW:

• Remove it completely and make the supposedly superior ground game that Blizzard keeps talking about.
• Pathfinder with actual consistency(EVERY zone gets flight once the ground content has been cleared, no exceptions, no bullshit timegates).
• Flight as an actual part of the world design, with full integration, updates, balancing, and attention to detail.

Now obviously I prefer the last choice in that list.

But at this point I would actually settle for the second option, believe it or not. Flight being unlocked account wide after the content had been cleared in each zone, with no surprise No-fly islands released later. No nonsensical 8 month waits for no reason. Blizzard probably should get fancy and tie the unlock into the story, but that's not REALLY a requirement.

The last option: The complete and total removal of flight would be something I'd be sad to see, but at least I could respect Blizzard for actually taking the plunge. But as it stands now they aren't doing any of the above. They keep shifting their stance. And worse, they keep saying one thing and doing another. Even this most recent issue with Argus stinks of a lawyers trap. "We never said we WOULDN'T trick you, so it's fair that we did!"

every reasoning is null because the "immersion" reason is totally a per excuse, they bar flying because that way they save time, they don't want to put extra time into developing flying into a better thing so everything boil down to what they gain and what they lose, they won't lose a substantial amount of subs by this and only gain so nothing will change.

[Felfaadaern Darkterror]

Honestly I think most players enjoy flying sometimes, but it's just not a critical issue. For most of us. In the poll I started for what's most important to you in the next expansion, access to flight was tied for 4th behind Lore & Story, lots of stuff to do whenever we log on, and less rng. Flying ranked about even in importance with having good world content outside of instances.

[Moggie]

They promised that flying would be added sometime after Legions launch and remain until the next expansion, they never mentioned that they would add a new zone where you couldn't fly then refuse to ever enable flying there, that's what has caught people by surprise. And considering how late flying was (should have come in with 7.1 or 7.2 at the very latest) many people are understandably upset/annoyed.

The problem is, Argus itself was from the beginning told to players it was a no-fly zone. Irregardless of what happened beginning of expansion and the screw up Blizz tried, Argus has always been deemed a no flying dealio. That’s the point of the thread. Argus. Not Broken Shores. Yes, it’s silly to bait and switch (did same in WoD) but we’ve all known about the lack of flying in Argus. An empty promise type of example would be Warlocks would get updated spell effects and animations after 12 years, and devs have gone super silent about that. But ya no time was Argus promised to be a flying zone.

[SirCowdog]

I agree with you that I think it has been "shat upon" ie made the scapegoat for several problems for which it really isn't responsible, and this a huge annoyance. But I don't see why using it as a carrot, like in the pathfinder acheivements is a problem, provided the content they're using it as a carrot for is appropriate and fun.

Because if it's being used as a carrot, then the reward should actually be worth the effort. If we're going to spend 8 months chasing flying, then flying really ought to be worth waiting and working for. In my opinion, if all flight is ever going to be is an afterthought, then it should also have a commensurately low requirement to obtain.

This is just one more aspect of Blizzard needing to make up their mind and stay consistent with how they're going to use flight.

The way I see it is that the decision should be based on the fundamentals of why flying is withheld in the first place - which is to make content that is experienced for the first time immersive (and therefore more fun). The main reason for flying is skip the travelling around that was fun the first time but has since become tedious.

I hesitate to argue your point, because immersion and fun are too highly subjective. Just look at the complaints about Argus. Some people think it's perfect that there's demons everywhere and you have to slog through them. Other people think it's the worst zone to ever exist.

Having said that, however, If Blizzard is going to make immersion their reason for restricting flight, then why wasn't the unlock tied to the story? Why are we constantly bombarded with examples of everyone but our characters flying around like it's no big deal? Why do flight paths still work?

Again, they need to make up their mind and REALLY nail that shit instead of halfassing it. Right now Pathfinder is one of the most immersion-breaking things in the game because of this.

From that perspective, withholding flying from Argus makes perfect sense. While it's current content keep flying out. But once we're done with it and the routine of dailies sets in - enable flying.

I suspect that if they had included a "Pathfinder: Argus" part to the achievement and unlock, there would not be anywhere near as many complaints. But they didn't, so we're left with the current state of affairs.

I am generally opposed to this way of thinking. Game design is a creative process that should not be constrained by silly restrictions like you're proposing. When they introduce new content, the decisions around whether to allow flying in those zones should be based on the new content, not on whether some players feel they've "earned" the right to fly. It's not about earning the right to fly, it's about introducing flight at the right time. Earning the right to fly is simply to make the process more interesting and gives them an opportunity to give us something to do (as opposed to simply activating it overnight).

Apologies, maybe I wasn't clear. Pathfinder is definitely not my preferred stance. I was simply saying that if we're going to be stuck with Blizzard's supposed philosophy of doing the content on the ground first then earning flight later, then they REALLY need to stick to it and be consistent about its implementation. Constantly changing their stance in order to fulfill some new vision every 6-12 months is largely what's causing so much strife.

But in an ideal world Blizzard should be confident enough in their presentation, and flight should be balanced enough, to let players choose if they want to engage with that vision or not. What I find most curious is that this is a balance that was mostly struck pretty well before WoD came along. The complaints about not being able to fly in places like IQD, Firelands, or Timeless Isle were virtually non-existent. Why? IMO it's because they were well balanced against content where you could fly. Wod and Legion have thrown that balance out the window entirely.

Again, I highly suspect that if Legion had followed the format of previous expansions by making flight available at level cap, with Argus being a no-flying island later, we would not have had the level of complaints and criticisms we see now. This entire mess is created by Blizzard attempting to screw with the fundamental "vision" of the game that existed for the previous decade. They've screwed with the balance of the game, and keep making it worse by not taking a clear, consistent stance.

As others have said, I think some people are reading far too much into Blizzard have said. They've communicated a design philosophy, to help us understand the why of what they do. If you insist on reading that as a promise of certain outcomes that you then feel entitled to, well, sorry to say that's on you.

I don't believe that it was ever a promise. However, I do believe that, intentionally or not, the wording that was consistently used and presented when talking about Legion Pathfinder seemed to be pretty indicative of how flight would be handled going forward: Do the work on the ground, get to fly later. I linked several VERY specific cases of this earlier. I also pointed out that if Blizzard knew that their plan was to do another no-flying island after players re-obtained flight, then they also did an ABYSMALLY poor job of communicating that it would be that way.

In my opinion, and given the volatile state of the argument surrounding flight, this level of terrible communication on the subject is inexcusable. There is no way in hell Blizzard should have waited until after players had finished 8 months of Pathfinder to reveal that flying wouldn't be usable later on.

[Moggie]

When I provided the same proof, that Blizzard said, that their general plan was to offer flying for completing content on a ground, at official forums, some trolls there asked me to prove, that Blizzard said, that they would never add locations without flying in future patches. Of course I couldn't, cuz Blizzard have never said it, as long as opposite statement too. Do you know how it looks like? "Nobody can prove that aliens don't exist - therefore they exist". No, it's anti-flyers, who have to prove, that Blizzard said, that they reserve a right to add content without flying in future patches. And till then we should stick to initial plan - to unlocking flying for completing content on a ground on one character.

Trying to backhandedly call me a troll for wanting a link or something that was supposedly promised is silly of you. Facts are facts. If one has them, use them. If not, then pulling a rabbit out of a hat without the rabbit isn’t the most advisable thing. Also, gross misuse of commas makes that horribly difficult to read. For the record, I have always been pro-flying. Might be something in my history someplace.

[Raelbo]

"Compromise" by definition - is when both sides end in equal conditions., i.e. if they need to sacrifice something - both sides should sacrifice equally.

It would help if you started with the correct definition:

"an agreement or a settlement of a dispute that is reached by each side making concessions."

Compromises do not require equal concessions.

And in this case I just don't see, how such big sacrifice, as no flying for 8 months, earning it via doing whole content for about 1.5 months, no matter, if I like it or not, only to have it taken away just a few months later - can be equal to few months with flying for players, who prefer game without flying, while they can do content, how they prefer, during all other time, including most important parts of xpack, like it's release and culmination of it's story.

It's like you didn't even bother reading what I wrote before you hit reply. The compromise should never have been over who got what, but over what makes the most sense for the game.

For what it's worth, I am actually on your side regarding the flying/no flying debate. I just think you're making a poor case for flying which, in effect, strengthens the case for the anti-flier camp.

[SirCowdog]

It would help if you started with the correct definition:

"an agreement or a settlement of a dispute that is reached by each side making concessions."

Compromises do not require equal concessions.

What did Blizzard concede to? They're still designing content to be grounded, which is what they originally wanted for the game despite player backlash. Flying is effectively not part of the content design outside of the bare minimum technical requirements to avoid players falling through the world. We only get flying once it's irrelevant. And even that's thrown out in Argus, where you can't fly at all, ever.

Flight in Legion is only a compromise in the barest, most marginal and technical definition I can possibly think of. Blizzard is getting everything they want, while effectively giving up nothing.

Calling it a "Compromise" is a gross misuse of the word.

[WowIsDead64]

Trying to backhandedly call me a troll for wanting a link or something that was supposedly promised is silly of you. Facts are facts. If one has them, use them. If not, then pulling a rabbit out of a hat without the rabbit isn’t the most advisable thing. Also, gross misuse of commas makes that horribly difficult to read. For the record, I have always been pro-flying. Might be something in my history someplace.

They are trolls. First they asked for proof, that Blizzard said, that general plan was to unlock flying for completing content once. They assumed, I wouldn't be able to find it, as it happened 2 years ago. But I found it. Guess, what they asked next? "Give us a proof, that Blizzard HAVE NEVER SAID, that that they will add content without flying forever" and if I wouldn't - I would be wrong. And kept asking for it, even when they were told, that it's impossible to prove it. How can I prove, that they haven't said it, if they really haven't and there is no bluepost, where they say "We have never said, that we will add content without flying forever", that could prove, that they haven't?

[Moggie]

They are trolls. First they asked for proof, that Blizzard said, that general plan was to unlock flying for completing content once. They assumed, I wouldn't be able to find it, as it happened 2 years ago. But I found it. Guess, what they asked next? "Give us a proof, that Blizzard HAVE NEVER SAID, that that they will add content without flying forever" and if I wouldn't - I would be wrong. And kept asking for it, even when they were told, that it's impossible to prove it. How can I prove, that they haven't said it, if they really haven't and there is no bluepost, where they say "We have never said, that we will add content without flying forever", that could prove, that they haven't?

You’re reaching...big time. If you’re looking for an actual discussion pertaining to why Argus was made without flying then that’s one thing and something nobody except the devs could realistically answer. But using a two year old quote and trying to superimpose that on Argus as irrefutable proof they promised Argus would have flying is just so short-sighted and illogical, no matter the stances on pro or con flying. And trying to call people trolls for wanting proof of any sorts for a so-called promise about Argus itself is just weakening any and all arguments you make now and in the future concerning the topic. You can’t demand everybody get on board else they’re trolls or against flying. It just makes you and the topic appear to be trolling.

[Deleted]

If you’re looking for an actual discussion pertaining to why Argus was made without flying then that’s one thing and something nobody except the devs could realistically answer.

Didn't they say it's because it's tradition that the raid zone has no flying? Which is the funniest shit ever when tradition also dictates that I can fly once I hit max level, but whatevs.

[Moggie]

Didn't they say it's because it's tradition that the raid zone has no flying? Which is the funniest shit ever when tradition also dictates that I can fly once I hit max level, but whatevs.

Honestly, no clues. Not tracking down random quotes. I agree all this would’ve not been an issue if they simply allowed max level flying but meh. Devs know better...lolol yeah nobody could say that last thing and keep a straight face.

[SirCowdog]

Honestly, no clues. Not tracking down random quotes. I agree all this would’ve not been an issue if they simply allowed max level flying but meh. Devs know better...lolol yeah nobody could say that last thing and keep a straight face.

Ornyx posted it HERE:

New zones added in patch content have never to my knowledge had flying allowed. Even when flying was introduced in 2.0, flying was not available on the Isle of Quel'danas when it released in 2.4. The same is true of Isle of Thunder and Timeless Isle from 5.2 and 5.4.

I can't find the exact interview or Q&A, but Ion said something similar, mentioning that same thing: Traditionally new zones added later didn't allow flying.

EDIT: Ah...here we go. It's at the 1:05 mark in the recent Q&A on twitch.

Also resting on the long tradition of, even in expansions that have allowed flying everywhere else, we've had zones like isle of thunder, timeless ilse, molten front and so forth....

The disconnect is real, yo!

[Raelbo]

Because if it's being used as a carrot, then the reward should actually be worth the effort. If we're going to spend 8 months chasing flying, then flying really ought to be worth waiting and working for. In my opinion, if all flight is ever going to be is an afterthought, then it should also have a commensurately low requirement to obtain.

This is just one more aspect of Blizzard needing to make up their mind and stay consistent with how they're going to use flight.

They have been pretty consistent though. Using flying as a carrot has always been subordinate to the whether it should be introduced and if so, when. Basically it's a case of: They have decided to introduce flying at this time; May as well turn it into something for players to work towards.

You seem to be too fixated on the idea that flying is simply a reward for doing something without the understanding that flying is actually a mechanic they want to restrict to where it makes sense. Whether or not you have done enough to "earn" the reward is irrelevant if said reward would break the game.

I hesitate to argue your point, because immersion and fun are too highly subjective. Just look at the complaints about Argus. Some people think it's perfect that there's demons everywhere and you have to slog through them. Other people think it's the worst zone to ever exist.

And some people realise that merit isn't always tied to personal enjoyment of something. WoW is meant to be an RPG, which means the primary point is playing a character in a fantasy environment. I don't particularly like questing on Argus. It's a horrible place, filled with detestable creatures. I would not volunteer to go there unless I absolutely had to. Which is exactly the way our characters would be feeling about the place. I can 100% accept that immersing oneself into the role of character in an RPG is not everyone's cup of tea. But this game is an RPG. It is kinda the point...

Having said that, however, If Blizzard is going to make immersion their reason for restricting flight, then why wasn't the unlock tied to the story?

This is a bit of deflection tbh, but I'll answer anyway: For Blizzard, the inclusion of flying comes with the acceptance that immersion is broken, and they only really concede to it because they realise that withholding flying will result in more harm than good.

Why are we constantly bombarded with examples of everyone but our characters flying around like it's no big deal?

When they talk about immersion they mean the character being immersed in the environment. Flying breaks that immersion by allowing the character to exit and re-enter the environment at will. The fact that npcs may be flying has no bearing on this.

Why do flight paths still work?

Because flight paths don't help you to skip through 3/4 of what you need to do to complete a quest. Here's an example: Your objective is to kill a mini-boss. It is surrounded by a small army of minions. Without flying the immersive quest involves cutting a swathe through the minions to get to the boss. With flying you just fly over, ignore the minions, kill the boss.

I suspect that if they had included a "Pathfinder: Argus" part to the achievement and unlock, there would not be anywhere near as many complaints. But they didn't, so we're left with the current state of affairs.

And it looks like they plan on not including flying on Argus...ever. Which sucks, I agree. Not because I feel entitled to it having "earned" it through pathfinder, but because I think the decision is based on a flawed premise that Blizzard refuse to acknowledge.

What this means for me personally is that I won't hang around Argus for that long. When the annoyances of travelling around start to outweigh the sense of progress and accomplishment of driving the demons from their homeworld, flying would have served to extend the useful life of the zone. Without it I just won't bother anymore.

Apologies, maybe I wasn't clear. Pathfinder is definitely not my preferred stance. I was simply saying that if we're going to be stuck with Blizzard's supposed philosophy of doing the content on the ground first then earning flight later, then they REALLY need to stick to it and be consistent about its implementation. Constantly changing their stance in order to fulfill some new vision every 6-12 months is largely what's causing so much strife.

Well, yes. I really get the feeling that for Blizzard, they still believe that flying this terrible thing that they should try and exorcise from the game. And while I can understand their arguments for why they feel this way, I reckon they're a bit myopic in their thinking here. They're so fixated on what they perceive as the downside of flying: "Flying breaks immersion" that they've lost sight of the bigger picture, namely that sometimes immersion needs to be broken, because immersion is only fun up to a point.

It seems to me that they thought they rid new content of flying, but WoD proved them wrong. The playerbase was very clear that withholding flying would cost them a fuckton of subscribers. The problem is that I don't think Blizzard have really understood or accepted the possibility that they are wrong about flying. That maybe it can be a good thing. So even though they've compromised and allowed the introduction of flight, it seems pretty clear to me that it's a grudge decision. That is what grates about their decision not to include flying on Argus.

But in an ideal world Blizzard should be confident enough in their presentation, and flight should be balanced enough, to let players choose if they want to engage with that vision or not. What I find most curious is that this is a balance that was mostly struck pretty well before WoD came along. The complaints about not being able to fly in places like IQD, Firelands, or Timeless Isle were virtually non-existent. Why? IMO it's because they were well balanced against content where you could fly. Wod and Legion have thrown that balance out the window entirely.

It all comes down to that GC tweet in 2012 where he said he wished they'd never implemented flying. Blizzard have kind of taken that to heart and keep on finding things to validate that opinion. For example, they were able to sell zones like IQD, Molten front, Timeless Isle without flying and because players accepted those zones, they took that as validation of their theory that flying was indeed this big problem they thought it was. But as you say, players only accepted these small zones because flying was available for the majority of the area.

Again, I highly suspect that if Legion had followed the format of previous expansions by making flight available at level cap, with Argus being a no-flying island later, we would not have had the level of complaints and criticisms we see now. This entire mess is created by Blizzard attempting to screw with the fundamental "vision" of the game that existed for the previous decade. They've screwed with the balance of the game, and keep making it worse by not taking a clear, consistent stance.

I'll agree with this. Blizzard did have a change in their vision of the game wrt flying after the GC tweet. The reason they keep making things worse is that their vision is out of whack with reality. They're trying to force players to see that the game is more fun without flying, which would be if they were actually correct.

I think a lot of what trips them up though is their fundamental lack of understanding of how flying actually affects the game. They are not entirely wrong, but they're not entirely correct either. In spite of being a pro-flier, I have to acknowledge that introducing new content without flying makes for a much more enjoyable gaming experience. Where Blizzard get it wrong is that they don't understand that as content becomes consumed, the allure of the immersion wears off. It turns to tedium. At that point the fact that flying breaks immersion stops being a bad thing, and actually becomes a good thing.

I don't believe that it was ever a promise. However, I do believe that, intentionally or not, the wording that was consistently used and presented when talking about Legion Pathfinder seemed to be pretty indicative of how flight would be handled going forward: Do the work on the ground, get to fly later. I linked several VERY specific cases of this earlier. I also pointed out that if Blizzard knew that their plan was to do another no-flying island after players re-obtained flight, then they also did an ABYSMALLY poor job of communicating that it would be that way.

In my opinion, and given the volatile state of the argument surrounding flight, this level of terrible communication on the subject is inexcusable. There is no way in hell Blizzard should have waited until after players had finished 8 months of Pathfinder to reveal that flying wouldn't be usable later on.

I hear you, but honestly, this comes across as whiny and puerile.

The simple fact is this: If you'd been paying attention to what Blizzard have said over the years, it should be pretty clear that they don't want players to be able to immediately fly in new zones. Hell, they actually don't want us to fly at all, but they have conceded that allowing flight in zones where you as a player have completed all the content is an acceptable compromise on the part. So really, this expectation that we should have been able to fly on Argus from the start was nothing more than wishful thinking.

The fact that they are, once again, going to try and persist with their flying-is-bad ideology on Argus is something I don't agree with. I think it's a case of hard headedness on their part, which is unfortunate.

[melodramocracy]

Remember this Dev Watercooler? It was said there, that "Unlocking flying via mastering content on a ground on one character - is general blueprint going forward for content to come". Don't you think, that no flying on Argus breaks this promise?

No, I do not.

I want to clarify one thing. Biggest question isn't why Argus as it is now doesn't have flying. Answer is obvious - because it's designed without flying in mind. Biggest question is why it has been designed without flying in mind in a first place, after it had been promised, that flying would be granted for mastering ground content on one character in all future content? I.e. we don't actually ask Blizzard to enable flying on Argus, cuz it's design is so bad, that flying wouldn't help anyway. We ask them to never make such no-flying only locations again.

It wasn't promised for all future content, the wording is that its a general blueprint. Argus design is indeed bad, but not really for the reasons you might think. And in any case, it would be incredibly awkward to just bump into invisible walls while in the air (though I suppose they could just do the whole fatigue thing once you got out of a zone)

Also. Only BC and MOP had no-flying content in last patches of xpack. All other xpacks had them in a middle of xpack - and therefore such content could have been simply skipped without any harm for culmination of xpack's story and progression of your character.

IoT was no-fly, as was the staging area for Firelands IIRC (but that was a very tiny area)