What new class will we get?

[Ielenia]

No, you just showed yourself as a hypocrite.

You know your comparison would apply perfectly to anything because it's a broad generalization, right? You compared entertainment and technology to people.

Not really. I compare one young rookie to an old veteran. No matter how good the veteran is, one day the 'young rookie' will beat the 'old veteran' simply because of old age and because the 'old veteran' won't have anything else new to give to keep itself on top. If such a simple comparison is too much for you, not my problem.

Also, Star Wars is not popularly known as a TV series. Are you thinking Star Trek? Cuz fuck Star Trek.

Actually, you compared WoW to Star Wars, and when I accused you to comparing a video game to a movie, you responded with:

Videogames can't be compared to (sic) TV series

So it was you calling 'Star Wars' a 'tv series'.

[Thimagryn]

Actually, you compared WoW to Star Wars, and when I accused you to comparing a video game to a movie, you responded with:

So it was you calling 'Star Wars' a 'tv series'.

You know what sic means right? Said in Context. Meaning I was reiterating what you said.

[Ulfric Trumpcloak]

Demon Hunter is really the only one that makes sense. I have no idea what a shadowstalker is but we already have rogues. Tinker doesn't make sense as a class, lorewise tinker = engineer...

I guess 4th spec could happen as well. Things like Crusader, Shadow hunter, Necromancer, etc.

[Deleted]

People are saying "new class wont happen because they cant even balance the existing ones"
Then other people are saying "I guess 4th spec could happen as well"
How many classes we got? 11? One has already a 4th spec so 10 new specs is even worse than a new class.
IF the arguement is balance then we'll get a new class with 3 specs.
BUT did blizz cared about balance when released DKs? No.
I bet they will release unbalanced/unfinished content,but lots of them to keep us engaged and I prefer that from no content that we had now

[Ielenia]

You know what sic means right? Said in Context. Meaning I was reiterating what you said.

Regardless, no matter how you aim it, your comparison is still all wrong. If you're going to compare two things, make sure said two things belong to the same category. MMOs with MMOs, movies with movies, TV series with TV series, whatever.

[Thimagryn]

Regardless, no matter how you aim it, your comparison is still all wrong. If you're going to compare two things, make sure said two things belong to the same category. MMOs with MMOs, movies with movies, TV series with TV series, whatever.

Then you can't use a metaphor with chain smokers and old olympic runners either. Comparing unrelated things that are the same is the entire point of metaphors. Your metaphor can be applied to movies or TV or whatever medium whether you like it or not, because you're using it as a broad generalization. We could be talking about dogs, cars or TV shows, your metaphor will retain the exact same message.

[Ielenia]

Then you can't use a metaphor with chain smokers and old olympic runners either.

Yes, I can. Because both are human beings. And one is known for their shortness of breath while the other is known for their athletic prowess. The 'veteran runner' will beat the 'chain smoker' in a race if both are of the same age, but if the chain smoker has 16 years, and the 'veteran runner' has, let's say, 90 years, the 'smoker' has a much greater chance of winning. WoW has five times the age FFXIV:ARR has, so the comparison works.

"No king rules forever." No matter how good WoW is, age is definitely a factor. The more expansions it gets, the least room for improvement it has, whereas FFXIV still have lots and lots of room for improvement.

[Thimagryn]

Yes, I can. Because both are human beings

But I'm not comparing WoW to Star Wars. I said were there any Sci Fi movies that trumped Star Wars on the sole basis of being new. That's Movies to Movies.

[Ielenia]

But I'm not comparing WoW to Star Wars. I said were there any Sci Fi movies that trumped Star Wars on the sole basis of being new. That's Movies to Movies.

I said here: "In other words: what merit is there in beating your opponent, when your opponent is five times as old as you are, has few avenues on where to improve without pissing off big chunks of its player base, and is struggling to try tell a coherent story without using of retcons to allow new elements into its lore?"

To which you replied here: "Has there been any sci fi series that's really trumped Star Wars after all these years?"

Yes. You did just compare WoW to Star Wars.

[Thimagryn]

"Has there been any sci fi series that's really trumped Star Wars after all these years?"

Yes. You did just compare WoW to Star Wars.

How is WoW a Sci Fi series?

[Ielenia]

How is WoW a Sci Fi series?

Hmm... Alright. You know what? Fine. If you want to play dumb, just go ahead. So I ask of you: what does Star Wars has to do with WoW and FFXIV?

[Thimagryn]

Hmm... Alright. You know what? Fine. If you want to play dumb, just go ahead. So I ask of you: what does Star Wars has to do with WoW and FFXIV?

It doesn't. I was trying to prove the point that your chain smoker/olympic runner metaphor was wrong by applying it to Star Wars and other, new Sci Fi movies. Star Wars stands the test of time in the face of new movies.

But I guess you misread it and jumped to conclusions thinking I was somehow comparing it to WoW. But frankly, it's just as comparable, because Warcraft in general has stood the test of time in the face of all of its competitors.

Do you think FF14 is somehow more successful than WoW? Because in reality, it's not. WoW is still doing better, despite what complaints people have with the game.

[Ielenia]

It doesn't. I was trying to prove the point that your chain smoker/olympic runner metaphor was wrong by applying it to Star Wars and other, new Sci Fi movies. Star Wars stands the test of time in the face of new movies.

I wasn't applying that to Star Wars. I was applying it to WoW and FFXIV. Star Wars wasn't anywhere near this picture. You, for some unknown reason, decided to bring it up.

[Thimagryn]

I wasn't applying that to Star Wars. I was applying it to WoW and FFXIV. Star Wars wasn't anywhere near the picture it. You, for some unknown reason, decided to bring it up.

I'll admit that this isn't going anywhere because you're reading what you want to hear rather than what I'm actually saying.

I'm pretty sure if I say 'cat', you'll read it as "Cats are just like WoW".

Here it is again blatantly.

WoW is to other, newer MMOs (FFXIV) - just as
old Olympic runners are to Chain smokers - just as
Star Wars is to other Sci Fi series.

It's. The. Same. Metaphor.

So when you asked 'What does Star Wars have to do with WoW' then you have to ask yourself 'What do old Olympic runners have to do with WoW?' If you want more clarification, I could have just as easily stated 'Which Chain smoker has beaten an old Olympic runner in a race?', or 'Which new MMO has trumped WoW?'

-edit- and just an FYI, I feel really stupid having to explain all this shit that should be so obvious to anyone reading it. Feels like explaining why a joke is funny.

[Deleted]

get a room maybe? :P

[Ielenia]

I'll admit that this isn't going anywhere because you're reading what you want to hear rather than what I'm actually saying.

I'm pretty sure if I say 'cat', you'll read it as "Cats are just like WoW".

Here it is again blatantly.

WoW is to other, newer MMOs (FFXIV) - just as
old Olympic runners are to Chain smokers - just as
Star Wars is to other Sci Fi series.

It's. The. Same. Metaphor.

No. No, it's not. Because movies (Star Wars) don't need to be watched every single month, every single week, every single day, to stay relevant. Movies are only watched a few times, while they're still up in theaters. MMO games don't work that way. They need relevance, to be played as much as possible. If you buy a movie DVD, you watch it at home once... maybe twice... then up into the shelves it goes, to be left there until a special occasion shows up that makes you decide to watch it again. MMO games don't work that way.

Meanwhile Olympic runners need to keep up their fitness to stay ahead of the competition. Just like MMO games need to keep up their mechanics, story telling and gameplay to stay ahead of the competition.

When you compare Star Wars to World of Warcraft you're comparing a franchise to a game. And that is not only an unfair comparison, but also one that doesn't work.

[Thimagryn]

Meanwhile Olympic runners need to keep up their fitness to stay ahead of the competition. Just like MMO games need to keep up their mechanics, story telling and gameplay to stay ahead of the competition.

TBH the metaphor doesn't work with MMO's in the first place. Consider that the metric for runners is winning a race. There is a clear and defined goal. What metric do you use to compare WoW to other MMO's? Sub numbers? Funfactor? Replayability in hours played? It's a completely different metric with different standards. It doesn't work anyways.

At no point can you point at two different games and say one wins. It's a subjective value. Winning a race can't be argued subjectively. You either win or lose. That's not how games are compared to other games.

Also, World of Warcraft is a franchise as well as a game.

[Ielenia]

TBH the metaphor doesn't work with MMO's in the first place. Consider that the metric for runners is winning a race. There is a clear and defined goal. What metric do you use to compare WoW to other MMO's? Sub numbers? Funfactor? Replayability in hours played? It's a completely different metric with different standards. It doesn't work anyways.

At no point can you point at two different games and say one wins. It's a subjective value. Winning a race can't be argued subjectively. You either win or lose. That's not how games are compared to other games.

Kinda true, but we don't need a 'specific metric' for judging who 'wins' between WoW and FFXIV, in this specific instance. No matter which metric you choose, assuming both games continue the same tendencies they have right now, at some point in time FFXIV will surpass WoW, no matter the metric chosen, with FFXIV eventually 'winning' simply for being the newer game around.

Also, World of Warcraft is a franchise as well as a game.

No. 'World of Warcraft' is a game, and 'Warcraft' is the franchise. Just like 'Star Wars: Return of the Jedi' is a movie, and 'Star Wars' is the franchise.

[Thimagryn]

Kinda true, but we don't need a 'specific metric' for judging who 'wins' between WoW and FFXIV, in this specific instance. No matter which metric you choose, assuming both games continue the same tendencies they have right now, at some point in time FFXIV will surpass WoW, no matter the metric chosen, with FFXIV eventually 'winning' simply for being the newer game around.

You're literally saying we should treat 'Which racer do you think is doing better' the same as 'who won the race'.

Preference is a subjective, and frankly, trivial value. Again, there is no clear definition for when you think FF14 may win, because it may never win just like FF11 never 'beat' WoW (or vice versa). You either like FF11/FF14 more, or you don't. There's no definition of winning here.

I'll pose this as an obvious example - Who wins, DOTA2 or League of Legends. It's a trick question, because no matter which game you say wins, you'll always be wrong. There is no 'winner' when there is no winning condition.

[Ielenia]

You're literally saying we should treat 'Which racer do you think is doing better' the same as 'who won the race'.

Except it's not really a race, more like an endurance marathon. The one who 'wins' is the last one to stop.

Preference is a subjective, and frankly, trivial value. Again, there is no clear definition for when you think FF14 may win, because it may never win just like FF11 never 'beat' WoW (or vice versa). You either like FF11/FF14 more, or you don't. There's no definition of winning here.

I am merely saying that FFXIV is most likely to outlast WoW. Simple as that.