Page 25 of 26 FirstFirst ...
15
23
24
25
26
LastLast
  1. #481
    Quote Originally Posted by Jaylock View Post
    So we get another expansion with 10 levels to level up like TBC and Wrath...
    Why do people get confused by this?

    Cata and MoP had just as much leveling as Wrath and TBC, just in half the levels. The levels were twice as 'long'.

  2. #482
    Quote Originally Posted by Throne View Post
    Why do people get confused by this?

    Cata and MoP had just as much leveling as Wrath and TBC, just in half the levels. The levels were twice as 'long'.
    And yet TBC had twice the amount of dungeons... seems fitting though for Blizzards lack of effort. This is as cookie cutter MMO as you can get with the direction they have been moving with pandaria.
    Flaks - My Pally
    Keep Flight OUT of Current Content. You want to fly on Argus? hahahahahahahaha
    To all my fans, thank you for your support over the years. ~sincerely Jaylock
    "The trouble with our liberal friends isn't that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn’t true." - Ronald Reagan

  3. #483
    I'd really choose 7 dungeons over 15 dungeons. Some might ask me why and I'll tell you exactly why.

    First of all, the 5man dungeon content (for me and for many others) lasts for a few days at most. I plan to farm my pre-raid gear as fast as possible and after that 5mans to me are something I rarely get into. Second reason for choosing only 7 dungeons over 15 has to do with gearing up aswell. If there's a single item in one dungeon you really really want and it doesn't drop from the daily specific queue dungeon, going on a random heroic dungeon queue spree is a lot more enjoyable with just 7 dungeons than 15. Chances of getting into the one you want is higher.

    I would also like to believe than focusing on just 7 dungeons allows for better content (as in better 5 mans and better raid dungeons for not having to "waste" time for a shitload of 5man dungeons).

    That's just me and my opinion, I kind of see the point why some want a lot of dungeons but unfortunately I can't relate to that preference at all.
    Main: Rogue - Alt: Balance Druid

  4. #484
    Quote Originally Posted by Jaylock View Post
    And yet TBC had twice the amount of dungeons... seems fitting though for Blizzards lack of effort. This is as cookie cutter MMO as you can get with the direction they have been moving with pandaria.
    TBC was also in development long before WoW was even released. And many of the TBC dungeons reused art assets and mobs; call it what you will, but they can do just as many dungeons now if they were willing to do the same thing (which they evidently aren't).

  5. #485
    The Lightbringer thunderdragon2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    scotland
    Posts
    3,964
    Quote Originally Posted by Jaylock View Post
    And yet TBC had twice the amount of dungeons... seems fitting though for Blizzards lack of effort. This is as cookie cutter MMO as you can get with the direction they have been moving with pandaria.
    tbh not many people care for dungeons and the fewer dungeons the faster it is to get the peices you need since they will all be crammed in there also quality over quantity plz

  6. #486
    Quote Originally Posted by Chickat View Post
    They compared the difficulty to pre nerf Vortex Pinnacle.
    Vortex Pinnacle was hard?

  7. #487
    Quote Originally Posted by zozobra View Post
    Vortex Pinnacle was hard?
    It was terrible for randoms. Most Cata dungeons were.

  8. #488
    TBC had a lot less overall content than WoD will have. We needed a lot of dungeons back then, but we don't now. Why don't people understand this?

  9. #489
    Quote Originally Posted by Pendragon View Post
    TBC had a lot less overall content than WoD will have. We needed a lot of dungeons back then, but we don't now. Why don't people understand this?
    Because people only like to look at things on the surface.

  10. #490
    Quote Originally Posted by Pendragon View Post
    TBC had a lot less overall content than WoD will have. We needed a lot of dungeons back then, but we don't now. Why don't people understand this?
    Because it's a Jaylock thread.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by zozobra View Post
    Vortex Pinnacle was hard?
    It was when it first came out. It was promptly nerfed before most people were even ready to attempt it, from groups trying to Wrathroll through dungeon content without CCs.

  11. #491
    OP's avatar is quite fitting.
    http://us.battle.net/wow/en/characte...arrod/advanced Fire for Mythic Raiding
    <Side Project> - Eonar/Velen 7/7 Mythic Highmaul 5/10 Mythic Blackrock Foundry

  12. #492
    Well from what I remember, most BC patches did little to the actual game other than add new raids. With MOP they added events, more ways the play the game with LFR and FLEX, along with multiple features. My guess is that there is less dungeon content, because there is more game content now. All of the game content has to be added as well as kept up. So they are actually doing more now than in BC, it just isn't concentrated on one aspect of the game.

  13. #493
    Mechagnome Santoryu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Staples Center
    Posts
    679
    That means 15 dungeons with unique bosses, loot for each boss, and varied environments.
    Not to mention that normal and heroic had different loot tables.

  14. #494
    Quote Originally Posted by Santoryu View Post
    Not to mention that normal and heroic had different loot tables.
    but they still had the same skins, and the PVP gear was the same as well, just different colors.

  15. #495
    Quote Originally Posted by Kezzik View Post
    WoW Community (especially MMO-Champion):

    Casual: "Blizzard, please enforce Dungeons! We hate scenarios! I'm unsubbing if we don't get dungeons in Patch 5.2/5.3/5.4!"

    *WOD Announced, 7 Dungeons, less than WOTLK/TBC Expansions*

    Casual: "7 is fine guys"
    You would think people would ask for more and better content instead of collectively making excuses on behalf the developer why just as much, just as bad, less or worse is perfectly fine like some sort of groupie fandom. Especially after Blizzard released no content for months and raised the price of the expansion.

  16. #496
    Quote Originally Posted by Conscience View Post
    You would think people would ask for more and better content instead of collectively making excuses on behalf the developer why just as much, just as bad, less or worse is perfectly fine like some sort of groupie fandom. Especially after Blizzard released no content for months and raised the price of the expansion.
    Well the majority of the people playing wow and posting on forums are mostly uninformed idiots. I mean in what other universe can a company sell less content for more money?

    WoD recap:
    recolored/rehashed zones and dungeons
    garrisons = farm 2.0
    $49.99 price tag.

    I'd bet that WoD sells half the copies that MoP did.

  17. #497
    Quote Originally Posted by ihyln View Post
    Well the majority of the people playing wow and posting on forums are mostly uninformed idiots. I mean in what other universe can a company sell less content for more money?

    WoD recap:
    recolored/rehashed zones and dungeons
    garrisons = farm 2.0
    $49.99 price tag.

    I'd bet that WoD sells half the copies that MoP did.
    Well the numbers prolly get fudged since they always count the Asian accounts, and they don't really have to buy the expansions over there.

  18. #498
    Quote Originally Posted by ihyln View Post
    Well the majority of the people playing wow and posting on forums are mostly uninformed idiots. I mean in what other universe can a company sell less content for more money?

    WoD recap:
    recolored/rehashed zones and dungeons
    garrisons = farm 2.0
    $49.99 price tag.

    I'd bet that WoD sells half the copies that MoP did.
    Well if were talking content, Cataclysm had by far the most "content" but is generally know as one of the worst expansion. Perhaps quality over quantity?

  19. #499
    The Lightbringer Manabomb's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Probably laying somewhere frozen and cold.
    Posts
    3,915
    Quote Originally Posted by Jettisawn View Post
    Well if were talking content, Cataclysm had by far the most "content" but is generally know as one of the worst expansion. Perhaps quality over quantity?
    Then take time and define quality content? Then consider this, why is it do we as a consumer have to settle with one or the other in terms of quality and quantity. Why can there not be a middleground in terms of being able to push quality content in an amount that is acceptable to a general consumer base?

    This is the disconnect. WoD on a consistent level is "the redux" expansion. Redoing how cc works, redoing how mobility is played in the caster/healer role, redoing subsystems and removing archaic things like hit and exp and bringing in a more refined system base. Is that a lot of work, or is that a few key presses an unpaid intern could do?

    Take for example flying, they say it's better to remove flying to enhance the narrative to the game rather than offer a world with 3 dimensions to offer a full range of exploring. Is this Blizzard being lazy with art and landscape development, or is this Blizzard actually giving a damn about their story?

    Another example, garrisons. On the one hand they are visitable, placeable, semi modular set of structures in the world, but on the other they are (as most recent posts have confirmed) completely stationary, have no customization beyond building placement and offer no real player expression beyond "I have a blacksmith AND a mine and I put them RIGHT next to each other.". Is this Blizzard trying to combat the rise of housing services that many other mmo's are selling themselves on, or is this something else entirely? A whole new way to progress your character without needing to grind?

    There are multiple ways to look at these topics, and I have defined two of them in each topic. One could say one is outlandish, while another could argue a different point entirely. The point is, at the end of the day, the only thing Blizzard truly cares about beyond pleasing their profit mongering board of investors, is trying to assure the consumer base that their best interest is in the consumer, even if never making a promise yet always coming short is a common theme. That's business 101.
    There are no worse scum in this world than fascists, rebels and political hypocrites.
    Donald Trump is only like Hitler because of the fact he's losing this war on all fronts.
    Apparently condemning a fascist ideology is the same as being fascist. And who the fuck are you to say I can't be fascist against fascist ideologies?
    If merit was the only dividing factor in the human race, then everyone on Earth would be pretty damn equal.

  20. #500
    Pit Lord finskee's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Winterfin Retreat
    Posts
    2,338
    Quote Originally Posted by Manabomb View Post
    Then take time and define quality content? Then consider this, why is it do we as a consumer have to settle with one or the other in terms of quality and quantity. Why can there not be a middleground in terms of being able to push quality content in an amount that is acceptable to a general consumer base?
    You get that not even half the population of wow has killed garrosh on LFR right? On my server, every guild is still progressing, except one who killed garrosh on heroic, but they are getting ready for mythic, and so they are working on getting their team 2 running. The generall consumer base hasn't yet used up the content, and there is really many ways of showing this.

    Blizzard gives you quality and quantity at a verifiable level. Maybe it isn't fast enough for you, or good enough for you. Then complain, quit, do whatever you want, but don't tell me you're only getting quality or quantity. There is both. Plenty of both. More than enough. If your opinion is that it isn't enough, I propose you go call Blizzard and explain this to them, and see if you can get your money back. Good luck to you. (Obviously you really are just saying you want faster content, I get it.)

    This is the disconnect. WoD on a consistent level is "the redux" expansion. Redoing how cc works, redoing how mobility is played in the caster/healer role, redoing subsystems and removing archaic things like hit and exp and bringing in a more refined system base. Is that a lot of work, or is that a few key presses an unpaid intern could do?
    Disgusting. An unpaid intern couldn't do stat squish. The people that code that engine, they are the only ones in the world who know it, it is proprietary, and they have been working on it for 15 years. The thought that an intern could do all of stat squish could only come from the mind of someone rationalizing their own reasons for wanting more content. Beautiful minds you all have.

    Take for example flying, they say it's better to remove flying to enhance the narrative to the game rather than offer a world with 3 dimensions to offer a full range of exploring. Is this Blizzard being lazy with art and landscape development, or is this Blizzard actually giving a damn about their story?
    Well, we know that you don't really care about wow's quality, so someone has to care about it. Funny that you can't figure out who is on your side.

    Another example, garrisons. On the one hand they are visitable, placeable, semi modular set of structures in the world, but on the other they are (as most recent posts have confirmed) completely stationary, have no customization beyond building placement and offer no real player expression beyond "I have a blacksmith AND a mine and I put them RIGHT next to each other.". Is this Blizzard trying to combat the rise of housing services that many other mmo's are selling themselves on, or is this something else entirely? A whole new way to progress your character without needing to grind?
    They practically invented the multiplayer strategy game, with Warcraft 1, it was a copy of Dune in a way, but Dune was single player. Warcraft was multiplayer, and had things like selecting groups of units, no other game had that. What they want to do is put a little of the strategy genre into their MMO. Hard to understand? No. Player housing? No. Garrisons will be probably be fun, at least for anyone who liked the farmville aspect of MOP.

    There are multiple ways to look at these topics, and I have defined two of them in each topic. One could say one is outlandish, while another could argue a different point entirely. The point is, at the end of the day, the only thing Blizzard truly cares about beyond pleasing their profit mongering board of investors, is trying to assure the consumer base that their best interest is in the consumer, even if never making a promise yet always coming short is a common theme. That's business 101.
    If they always made a promise and came up short, how do they have the most popular mmo, best selling game of 2012, and the most pirated game in the history of torrents? You really think they trick people into playing video games? Candy crack says hello.

    Reduce-bag clutter and button bloat
    Reuse-the golden age of warcraft 1 and 2
    Recycle-Patchwerk wut lol

    Have you played the alpha or are you just making doom and gloom predictions because personal reasons?
    Last edited by finskee; 2014-05-28 at 12:45 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •