Classic World of Warcraft Discussion [Megathread]

[MoanaLisa]

<long but thoughtful post snipped>

Good post. I advise everyone to read it.

[Darkeon]

Still doesn't change the actual definition of the term. I don't agree that 2+2=4. That's just you forfeiting and still trying to claim victory.

I got no interest in claiming "victories" on video-game discussion boards. Sorry.
I'm here for a civil discussion.

[Grym]

"It's Illegal! Can't hear you!"
Supply and demand is a bitch. And until Blizzard supplies an official method, these people will continue to seek the next private server that allows this experience to be relived.

I, for one, don't see them as "Entitled" - merely someone who wants to play something, that is unavailable to them from official sources, so they have to find alternatives.

I guess we'll agree to disagree on the term.

In my opinion, cannot rightfully get what you want, so you go through illegal channel in order to get what you want, just because you must have it, is "entitled".

But I guess everyone's opinion on that is different.

[Deleted]

Just that there is a desire for them.

I said just because 5 players want a legacy server doesnt make that automatically into a desire for them.

I would bet that if 10 million people signed it, they would heavily consider making legacy servers.

thats tempting to fill this crap petition per script to 20 mill signs.... and even then Blizzard wouldnt care.

So, we can deduce that there is some point between 0 and 10M signatures that it will have an effect.

Care to share where you get your ball of glass?

[Darkeon]

In my opinion, cannot rightfully get what you want, so you go through illegal channel in order to get what you want, just because you must have it, is "entitled".

But I guess everyone's opinion on that is different.

Exactly. Some people see this as "stealing", while I personality can't connect this - and other similar events - to the literal act of "Stealing".
And that's alright. It's a tricky topic. That's why we got to these many pages.

[MoanaLisa]

Have you even read the thread? Its more of tons of discussing then solution and in the longrun nos WOULD have run out of funds cause in the thread I counted an astonishing 4(!) people donating money to keep nos alive - which is a joke compare to 150k active players.... and alot of complains about chinese players....

In fact I read through the entire thread yesterday (including comments) and I understand what it says. I don't really have much to say about it other than quite apart from whether or not they donation ideas would work efforts to gather funds to keep the server on a self-sustaining basis are yet another problem with the entire infringement.

[zorkuus]

I got no interest in claiming "victories" on video-game discussion boards. Sorry.
I'm here for a civil discussion.

"Agree to disagree" is usually used when someone has lost an argument but is pretending to be the better person. But whatever.

[Darkeon]

"Agree to disagree" is usually used when someone has lost an argument but is pretending to be the better person. But whatever.

If more people would "agree to disagree" more often - and if people would stop to see it in a condescending fashion - the world would have much less drama.
People have different opinions. I was raised with that in perspective. So the notion of it isn't foreign to me.

[Deleted]

In fact I read through the entire thread yesterday (including comments) and I understand what it says. I don't really have much to say about it other than quite apart from whether or not they donation ideas would work efforts to gather funds to keep the server on a self-sustaining basis are yet another problem with the entire infringement.

You'd think that Blizzard would be grateful that dedicated players really care about their game.

[Deleted]

Agreed, but it is still fun and a small number of people enjoy that version of the game.

fixed that for you.

There are no legal ways to enjoy that version of the game. We would like that to change. Not a hard concept to understand.

Well setting up a private server and then pissing off blizzard by spammin their forums is not the way to achive that ever....

[Collected]

I, for one, don't see them as "Entitled" - merely someone who wants to play something, that is unavailable to them from official sources, so they have to find alternatives.

Well the "entitled" part comes in not from the desire to play vanilla WoW but from the "How dare they do this" reaction to the take down request. I'm sure millions of people have a churning inside to play vanilla WoW with the old rule set. That's perfectly normal. Although a large % of those millions of people would probably quit 1 week in realising vanilla wasn't all that great. But it's the people who attack Blizzard as if they are in some way obliged to allow this emulated server situation to happen due to the demand. They simply aren't. It's their game, their code, their product. They are not obliged to offer any "vanilla experience" no matter what the demand or how that service is provided. Playing WoW does not grand you an expectation to be able to play vanilla. MMOs are patched. They never remain static. No one can say "Well I bought WoW before BC so I should always be able to play vanilla rules". It doesn't work like that. So when people stomp their feet and demand it.. and get angry when it's taken away.. they're coming across as entitled.

[Grym]

"Agree to disagree" is usually used when someone has lost an argument but is pretending to be the better person. But whatever.

I use that from time to time too, but the way I see it is more:

"I can see where you are coming from, but I still cannot agree with you, and I know you will not agree with me either, so let's both keep our own opinion."

[zorkuus]

If more people would "agree to disagree" more often - and if people would stop to see it in a condescending fashion - the world would have much less drama.

Agreed. Doesn't make my statement wrong though.

[Mullet Man]

fixed that for you.
Well setting up a private server and then pissing off blizzard by spammin their forums is not the way to achive that ever....

MMO-C is allowing this discussion to continue. If you don't like the topic, bring it up with them.

[Lorianus]

MMO-C is allowing this discussion to continue. If you don't like the topic, bring it up with them.

He obviously means the official forum/facebook/twitter where your so called community goes full on troll mode now.

[MoanaLisa]

I invite you to carry on in this discussion, but I am not the first person to think that "theft" and "infringement" are interchangeable and often the word theft is used to represent how someone feels about an infringement.

It is infringement. Whether or not it is theft is irrelevant and partially a matter of semantics.

The basic legal issue is that Blizzard has the right to grant or deny people from providing access to its copyrighted content and game assets. In this case, the server was clearly operating without Blizzard's blessing as most everyone here is willing to acknowledge. I have said for some time that the only way to make this work is for someone to form their own corporation, devise a business plan, and do what I think would be the nearly impossible task of convincing Blizzard to grant them a license for this with a sweet enough deal that it's a win for everyone. I can't imagine how that would happen but a quote--legal--unquote legacy server is likely to only happen with this sort of framework barring Blizzard going back on eight years of having no interest in the idea.

[Deleted]

You'd think that Blizzard would be grateful that dedicated players really care about their game.

well dedicated players dont play on private

[Darkeon]

Well the "entitled" part comes in not from the desire to play vanilla WoW but from the "How dare they do this" reaction to the take down request. I'm sure millions of people have a churning inside to play vanilla WoW with the old rule set. That's perfectly normal. Although a large % of those millions of people would probably quit 1 week in realising vanilla wasn't all that great. But it's the people who attack Blizzard as if they are in some way obliged to allow this emulated server situation to happen due to the demand. They simply aren't. It's their game, their code, their product. They are not obliged to offer any "vanilla experience" no matter what the demand or how that service is provided. Playing WoW does not grand you an expectation to be able to play vanilla. MMOs are patched. They never remain static. No one can say "Well I bought WoW before BC so I should always be able to play vanilla rules". It doesn't work like that. So when people stomp their feet and demand it.. and get angry when it's taken away.. they're coming across as entitled.

Okay, from that stance and perspective, I have to agree. Some people are taking an extreme reaction to the situation. And I can see how the most petty whining (because there are displays of unhappiness worded in a proper manner and then there is also plenty of whining) can be taken as Entitlement from those specific people.

However (As I mentioned earlier - maybe very earlier.. - in this thread), if I was to bet I would, that any portion of the Live World of Warcraft player-base would have people, showing similar behavior, if their preferred play-style would be radically changed\removed. (read, if PvP would be entirely removed, a portion, or more, of the more dedicated PvPers would complain and whine about the issue).

[Deleted]

MMO-C is allowing this discussion to continue. If you don't like the topic, bring it up with them.

He obviously means the official forum/facebook/twitter where your so called community goes full on troll mode now.

exactly! MMOC is NOT a blizzard ownd forum

[Darkeon]

well dedicated players dont play on private

Plenty of examples, popping up on this thread, of cases of players playing both Nostralius (for the Vanilla WoW experience) and official, retail WoW (for the ever-evolving world and current experience).

Now, if you'd change that to "Dedicated players don't play on private servers that emulate perfectly the current live version of WoW", then yes, I would have to agree. As the sole motive would then be "it's free".