Classic World of Warcraft Discussion [Megathread]

[Zandalarian Paladin]

His follow tweet saying he doesn't blame them doesn't mean he doesn't disagree with them.

I'll try to help better understand this since I know you guys are going to argue even dumb crap like this just for the sake or arguing.

You don't want a Legacy server. I don't blame you for wanting that. There is a lot of great things in current WoW. I however disagree because of the opportunities that exist in classic for fans who prefer that era. That is not a neutral stance.

To be honest, anyone who disagree outside of Blizzard do it either because they're annoyed of always seeing the same thing, are devil's advocates, have a genuine fear of having live server impacted or have just too much free time on their hands. Only the third reason is valid, while the other three are basically just people who don't really care about the issue and are just looking for a bit of intelectual sport. It wouldn't be that bad if the two third weren't meaningless and devoid arguments. But there's still a good portion of interesting posts, on both sides.

[ls-]

He doesn't need to say they are wrong to not be neutral. Sharing an opposing view (IE NOT AGREEING ON COMMUNICATION) IS NOT NEUTRAL.

He isn't throwing them under the bus, or committing to anything to damage him, but he clearly disagrees with how Blizzard communicates.

I think you should stop putting words in his mouth

[PenguinChan]

Au contraire. Look at how piracy in general still plagues pc gaming. People will always gravitate with more ease towards the place where the service they want is provided for free. Vanilla is just what the most of those cheapstakes want.

Steam certainly defies this statement and allows a lot of cheapskates to buy games and what not. Ease of use, obtainment, and such is definitely a hamper on how people purchase products and these digital platforms have proven to increase sales. Of course people will pirate for their own reasons, but there is definitely a certain degree of where people avoid private servers knowing their progress is null and void over time, since shut downs.

Even that trumps being extremely stingy with money.

[Eliseus]

I think you should stop putting word into his mouth

I shared a literal quote from him.

[Tome]

Whatever response we get, if any, it's been an interesting ride, both good and bad arguments on both sides.

[NightZero88]

He doesn't need to say they are wrong to not be neutral. Sharing an opposing view (IE NOT AGREEING ON COMMUNICATION) IS NOT NEUTRAL.

He isn't throwing them under the bus, or committing to anything to damage him, but he clearly disagrees with how Blizzard communicates.

Disagreeing with how they communicate in no way means he agrees with creating legacy servers.

[Eliseus]

Disagreeing with how they communicate in no way means he agrees with creating legacy servers.

disagreeing to how they communicate in response to a legacy server question does indicate something. Unless you think he just randomly said that out of nowhere.

Not stating he is or isn't for a legacy server which you have oh so much concocted, but he obviously feels there is a communication issue on the matter, which again, means he isn't neutral. That comment can be interpreted to either be for or against, not one way. If it was neutral, there would of been no reason to say that all. For example, he may KNOW Blizzard will never do it, so feels they need to just get it out already, everything on the table and just be done with or. Or he feels that Blizzard needs to communicate better how to do it. These are just examples mind you.

[PenguinChan]

Disagreeing with how they communicate in no way means he agrees with creating legacy servers.

It seems to be more on the safe side of replying to these discussions until Blizzard has spoken out (if they do). He could actually be solely opposed to these legacy servers for all we know.

[NightZero88]

disagreeing to how they communicate in response to a legacy server question does indicate something. Unless you think he just randomly said that out of nowhere.

I think he said that exactly out of nowhere because he doesn't want to get involved in this dispute as well he shouldn't. He dodged the question as best he could without giving an answer one way or the other.

[Zandalarian Paladin]

It seems to be more on the safe side of replying to these discussions until Blizzard has spoken out (if they do). He could actually be solely opposed to these legacy servers for all we know.

Yes, he was very careful not to take any side. He understand the players who've lost something, he also disagree with how Blizzard handle the public relation on this issue and in general, but he doesn't take any clear position about legacy servers themselves. He does imply that he regrets the way things went, though, for whatever that means.

[MoanaLisa]

Disagreeing with how they communicate in no way means he agrees with creating legacy servers.

Exactly. They are two distinct things. I cannot even begin to imagine the size of the mushroom cloud that would blossom over his twitter feed if he said anything pro or con about it. I'm supposing he thinks it's time for Blizzard to say something and start closure. He's probably right.

[Deleted]

Exactly. They are two distinct things. I cannot even begin to imagine the size of the mushroom cloud that would blossom over his twitter feed if he said anything pro or con about it. I'm supposing he thinks it's time for Blizzard to say something and start closure. He's probably right.

Do you think any answer other than yes we are doing it, eventually, will be good enough? I am betting, they talk about it shortly after the movie and expansion release.

[Zandalarian Paladin]

Do you think any answer other than yes we are doing it, eventually, will be good enough? I am betting, they talk about it shortly after the movie and expansion release.

I don't think so. At least, not as long that there are no places where the game can be accessed. And it's comprehensible; why would a company enforce rules against others to not host a product they love, yet refuse to offer said product on their platforms?

So I see two way this can go. Blizzard says yes, bring in customers and develop it on a legal and safe basis, or a private server will take over where Blizzard has no legal recourse (IE not France where Nostalrius was).

[MoanaLisa]

Do you think any answer other than yes we are doing it, eventually, will be good enough? I am betting, they talk about it shortly after the movie and expansion release.

If they come outright and say no certain things happen. There's this initial spasm of reaction. After that, a lot of people lose interest. Creating threads about it all the time becomes pointless. The Wall of No gets longer. Some new thing will become the outrage of the month. It's how it works. If they say yes then that's something else depending on how they say yes and what the conditions are.

[Deleted]

I just saw this video comparison between vanilla and WoD, its pretty accurate.

<video snipped>

It's also been posted to the thread multiple times and doesn't need to be posted every 15 minutes. {MoanaLisa}

[MoanaLisa]

...or a private server will take over where Blizzard has no legal recourse (IE not France where Nostalrius was).

Those already exist.

[Zandalarian Paladin]

Those already exist.

I mean literally take over. Right now the community is split between a lot of mediocre servers. Nostalrius was a high-quality dedicated team. Some servers are starting to grow really strong, as they're absorbing the players from Nostalrius, but it's not too late for Blizzard to come in and reap these users. in the end, by keeping the servers private, it's both them and players who look for legal options that are being penalized.

[McNeil]

Wow, you poor bastards are really getting milked ;P

And what has Blizzard been doing to you guys then...?

[Gasblossom]

He's taking every precaution to appear neutral with every response. As someone on his position should.

Not at all neutral. He is very clear in those tweets that he and Riot have a different philosophy than Blizzard currently does and that is to cater to core gamers rather than casuals. Didn't seem vague at all.

[Zandalarian Paladin]

Not at all neutral. He is very clear in those tweets that he and Riot have a different philosophy than Blizzard currently does and that is to cater to core gamers rather than casuals. Didn't seem vague at all.

Yes, but he did not specifically comment on Legacy servers situation. He disagree with the direction Wow has taken, he also disagree with Blizzard communication and empathize with the closure of Nostalrius. Everything else - as much as I'd love him to take for a pro-legacy approach - is pure speculation, sadly.

EDIT: Update from Mark Kern about the video.