Is argus no flying?

[Jester Joe]

Straw man. You're basing your question off the flawed assumption that the design using flying mounts would automatically be one dimensional and overly simplistic.

It's not a strawman, it's literally your own example.

Hmm...I mostly agree, but I agree there are ways to use existing mechanics to create situations where a ground mount might be preferable to an air mount, while having them both available. An example off the top of my head: Ogri'La. The fel turrets only shoot at flying players, making it more hazardous to be in the air. A ground mount also has to dodge aggro from enemies on the ground, but the core idea is there.

I'm asking what's the difference.

[SirCowdog]

So? Flying in Tanaan lets you avoid "pointless" mobs and ignore "annoying" terrain so you can whizz through the content without "wasting" time interacting with things that don't give you a shiny reward as a pat on the head, isn't that what flight has been offering in previous expansion? And now you can fly in the Broken Isles and Broken Shore or stay grounded on Argus, isn't that what you consider a good mix?

This is why I seldom reply to you, Dhrizzle. You consistently twist the meaning of the points being made.

No, the current setup of being able to fly in exhausted, non-current zones with Legion Pathfinder is no what I'd consider a good mix. I've been very clear about this point in this and other threads. No-flying islands were nominally acceptable within the context of flight being available in the launch patch. It also gives flying time to be used in level-cap zones that come along with the initial release of an expansion. Releasing no-flying islands at a later date provides variety.

Ideally an expansion would launch with a mix of these zones, giving players a taste of both types of content from the beginning, with a continued mix of flying and no-flying zones released later as content patches. Restricting flight for most of the expansion, then only making it available in content which is no-longer relevant, or already played to exhaustion, is not a "good mix".

Also if flying is available Blizz would balance around that (as players will always gravitate towards the quickest/easiest methods) so using a ground mount would put you well behind whatever reward curve they figure out.

Unless that reward curve is restricted by things like daily and weekly lockouts, like it is with emissary chests. A point I keep making, but that people tend to conveniently forget whenever this argument breaks out again.

Also there's the idea of opportunity cost, completing stuff on the ground becomes less satisfying if you know you could be doing twice as much stuff using a flying mount.

I'll grant this point, but only as one of perception. Again, keeping in mind that "doing twice as much stuff" is highly subjective to things like time-gating and people's personal ability of time management.

[Raetary]

Nope, they like to remove stuff remember?

ye no.

not being able to fly in new areas is not "removing flying".

[SirCowdog]

It's not a strawman, it's literally your own example.

I believe you're referring to my example of Ogri'la? That was said with the qualifier that as the "core idea", not the fully fleshed out design. I was using it as a proof that the idea is possible. I'd leave it up to Blizzard to make the fully detailed design. Also, keep in mind that Ogri'la was TBC level technology. I'm sure that with all the advances in server tech and internet speeds since then, Blizzard could do a LOT better today.

I'm asking what's the difference.

When people refer to Blizzard's ground only design as "lazy" it's because Blizzard is taking the easy way out by not actually addressing or attempting to use flying at all. Rather than innovate or change how flying works in order to include it in the content design, they stick their heads in the ground and pretend it doesn't exist. They just removed it in a blanket attempt to simplify their content design.

How is adding flight to the design different? It requires the open world to be design with the acknowledgement of player agency. Instead of everything being on rails, controlled by impassible walls and maze-like terrain, it requires encounters to be more complex, often in three dimensions instead of only two. Thus, it's generally assumed that Blizzard would have to be more creative with the design to make it work.

This, btw, is what Blizzard is referring to when they say "Flying creates too many challenges for the presentation of the content". In other words, "We can't be bothered to deal with it."

[Varitok]

There are plenty of places to fly in the game. Sometimes a no-fly zone is needed to keep people from just swooping in, grabbing stuff, and flying off. As a Druid, and a MAJOR offender of clicking things while IN FLIGHT FORM, I am ok with a Timeless Isle style zone. I can fly everywhere else and usually avoid no-fly zones until the next expac. If you are not enjoying the game, maybe you need to find a new game.

Timeless isle didn't have a nearly as frustrating zone design.

[Jester Joe]

I believe you're referring to my example of Ogri'la? That was said with the qualifier that as the "core idea", not the fully fleshed out design. I was using it as a proof that the idea is possible. I'd leave it up to Blizzard to make the fully detailed design. Also, keep in mind that Ogri'la was TBC level technology. I'm sure that with all the advances in server tech and internet speeds since then, Blizzard could do a LOT better today.

Except they also reused the idea in MoP with the Krasarang Wilds, when they introduced 5.1. If you flew near the opposite faction's base, you'd get shot down. Assuming they could do a lot better is just that, an assumption. Maybe they tried and couldn't get it to work comfortably. I mean, I'd rather truck across an entire landmass on foot rather than get shot off my flying mount repeatedly just for being slightly off track.

Mind you, they specifically mentioned the teleport feature was added to make up for the lack of flying, so it's not like they're not trying something new at all.

When people refer to Blizzard's ground only design as "lazy" it's because Blizzard is taking the easy way out by not actually addressing or attempting to use flying at all. Rather than innovate or change how flying works in order to include it in the content design, they stick their heads in the ground and pretend it doesn't exist. They just removed it in a blanket attempt to simplify their content design.

How is adding flight to the design different? It requires the open world to be design with the acknowledgement of player agency. Instead of everything being on rails, controlled by impassible walls and maze-like terrain, it requires encounters to be more complex, often in three dimensions instead of only two. Thus, it's generally assumed that Blizzard would have to be more creative with the design to make it work.

This, btw, is what Blizzard is referring to when they say "Flying creates too many challenges for the presentation of the content". In other words, "We can't be bothered to deal with it."

Except they flat out said why they do it, you don't need to make up assumptions. They want people to travel the paths they formed. They want people to see the little caves and hidden areas. They want people to have to battle your way into the building, rather than skip past all the mobs by flying into the door.

You can claim it's easier, but if there was flying, then you just end up with flat land masses, because there's no reason to make those large cliffs. There's no reason to make harder to reach areas that you have to navigate carefully to get through. Either that, or the alternative would be awkward, like sudden dismounts or invisible walls.

Also, mind you, I think it's a little unfair to say my claim oversimplified it before while saying that the current design is strictly "on rails and controlled", when it's really not. Rocky layout is to be expected of a mostly destroyed world, you can easily navigate wherever though.

[bryroo]

Blizzard will continue to push their no flying agenda for the simple fact that it takes them less time and resources to develop those areas.

If you don't like it don't suppose them with your time or money. Play another game instead. That's what I'm doing.

[netherflame]

Legion Launch: August 30, 2016.
Patch 7.2 live: March 28, 2017

That's literally 7 months of no flying, plus however long it took you to complete Pathfinder part 2 to actually unlock flying.

Patch 7.3 launch: August 29th, 2017

That's almost exactly 1 year after Legion launched. Giving players ~5 months of flying after waiting 7-8 months to get it. With flying only available in Pre-7.3 zones. Tell me again how this is perfectly ok, and that it's not relevant to "people discussing actual gameplay".

Why do you NEED flying? is there anything on Argus that requires you to have flying?

[SirCowdog]

Except they also reused the idea in MoP with the Krasarang Wilds, when they introduced 5.1. If you flew near the opposite faction's base, you'd get shot down. Assuming they could do a lot better is just that, an assumption. Maybe they tried and couldn't get it to work comfortably. I mean, I'd rather truck across an entire landmass on foot rather than get shot off my flying mount repeatedly just for being slightly off track.

And some people would rather fly where they want instead of having to "truck across an entire landmass". The main point of contention here is that Blizzard isn't giving players a choice in the matter.

As for "getting it to work comfortably", to me that just translates to "It's lazier and easier to just say fuck-it and go with the ground design". Once again, I look to zones Icecrown, Stormpeaks, and Deepholme and wonder what the problem really is. Maybe Blizzard really is creatively bankrupt, and literally can't do that level of open world content anymore. And isn't THAT a disappointing thought?

Mind you, they specifically mentioned the teleport feature was added to make up for the lack of flying, so it's not like they're not trying something new at all.

Teleporting directly to your chosen location IS better than slogging through the ground, but it's not actually a replacement for the enjoyment and sense of freedom that flying gives. Instantly teleports, while super efficient, don't give you the option to see anything from the air, or roam. In effect, teleports are just flight paths that don't suck. And flight paths weren't a replacement for true flying either.

Except they flat out said why they do it, you don't need to make up assumptions. They want people to travel the paths they formed. They want people to see the little caves and hidden areas. They want people to have to battle your way into the building, rather than skip past all the mobs by flying into the door.

Which is absolutely fine SOME of the time. And isn't this what dungeons are? The entire point of the open world is to be OPEN, not constantly restricted and on-rails.

You can claim it's easier, but if there was flying, then you just end up with flat land masses, because there's no reason to make those large cliffs. There's no reason to make harder to reach areas that you have to navigate carefully to get through. Either that, or the alternative would be awkward, like sudden dismounts or invisible walls.

Not necessarily. Sigh...why do I have to keep pointing to icecrown and stormpeaks? Were they flat zones filled with invisible walls?

Also, mind you, I think it's a little unfair to say my claim oversimplified it before while saying that the current design is strictly "on rails and controlled", when it's really not. Rocky layout is to be expected of a mostly destroyed world, you can easily navigate wherever though.

I said it was oversimplified because of the assumption that the only thing that would happen with content designed for flying would be a bunch of turrets everywhere.

- - - Updated - - -

Why do you NEED flying? is there anything on Argus that requires you to have flying?

Circular logic: We designed an area without flying so you don't need flying. Therefore why do you want flying when there's nothing to fly to.

Really? The entire point of this discussion is that the design lacks things to fly to and doesn't use flying.

[Fyla]

Why do you NEED flying? is there anything on Argus that requires you to have flying?

you need it for argus itself .. at the moment argus feels like a big pile of crap which i sadly have to do if i want my character to be able to perform well (netherlight crucible) so i NEED flying to not have to run around for about 2 hours until i managed to find enough rares or chests that dont despawn the moment i reach them to get that stupid quest done, before you say i didnt need to rush that part: true, i didnt need to, i learned that afterwards, not like blizzard told us anywhere
so i NEED flying to be done with that big pile of garbage blizzard tossed at me again so i'm able to do the things i enjoy properly again (raiding, m+)

[Nakotsu]

No flying. No current plans to allow flying. So, like Timeless isle.

No current plans to play anymore...

It must be My Destiny!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!2

[hyphnos]

Blizzard will continue to push their no flying agenda for the simple fact that it takes them less time and resources to develop those areas.

If you don't like it don't suppose them with your time or money. Play another game instead. That's what I'm doing.

You left out the part where no flying also takes more time (as does the Pathfinder "compromise") generating more "player engagement" and hours played and other stats that matter for Wall Street and that have nothing to do with any of the nonsense being spouted about "design intent" or "how content is approached". The Blizzard devs don't give 2 rats asses about the outside world and even if they did they'd still use artificial barriers like travel time to fluff time played to stretch out content and boost the metrics their bosses care about.

[Jester Joe]

And some people would rather fly where they want instead of having to "truck across an entire landmass". The main point of contention here is that Blizzard isn't giving players a choice in the matter.

As for "getting it to work comfortably", to me that just translates to "It's lazier and easier to just say fuck-it and go with the ground design". Once again, I look to zones Icecrown, Stormpeaks, and Deepholme and wonder what the problem really is. Maybe Blizzard really is creatively bankrupt, and literally can't do that level of open world content anymore. And isn't THAT a disappointing thought?

As someone else pointed out though, if you enable flying, the people who enjoy ground mounts are going to feel forced to fly due to how crazy the advantage is. Flight is just that much faster. It would be akin to expecting people to throw on lower gear just to make raids more difficult.

Icecrown was mostly flat, so was Deepholm. Storm Peaks was just mostly wasted space due to how many mountains there were. I'm not sure those are the best examples.
Sure, there were areas that were jagged in Deepholm and Icecrown, but it was mostly wasted space because why bother when the player is just going to fly right over it?

I mean...honestly, I get people enjoyed Icecrown and Lich King, but the design of the zone itself is less than interesting. "Man, look at that threatening Scourge army, we're so at danger by being here!" *proceeds to fly over and completely ignore the army safely*
That's not really immersive at all.

Teleporting directly to your chosen location IS better than slogging through the ground, but it's not actually a replacement for the enjoyment and sense of freedom that flying gives. Instantly teleports, while super efficient, don't give you the option to see anything from the air, or roam. In effect, teleports are just flight paths that don't suck. And flight paths weren't a replacement for true flying either.

I'm not quite sure what freedom/enjoyment you're getting honestly from being able to just fly over stuff. It's just artificial freedom in my opinion. Granted, I enjoy being able to fly myself, but I don't think of it as much more than just time saving.

Which is absolutely fine SOME of the time. And isn't this what dungeons are? The entire point of the open world is to be OPEN, not constantly restricted and on-rails.

Why should they have to be forced to leave creative landscape in dungeons?

I said it was oversimplified because of the assumption that the only thing that would happen with content designed for flying would be a bunch of turrets everywhere

Well, what else could they do then? You make it sound like it's easy, but then just resort back to "Well, Blizzard should be able to come up with something!"

you need it for argus itself .. at the moment argus feels like a big pile of crap which i sadly have to do if i want my character to be able to perform well (netherlight crucible) so i NEED flying to not have to run around for about 2 hours until i managed to find enough rares or chests that dont despawn the moment i reach them to get that stupid quest done, before you say i didnt need to rush that part: true, i didnt need to, i learned that afterwards, not like blizzard told us anywhere
so i NEED flying to be done with that big pile of garbage blizzard tossed at me again so i'm able to do the things i enjoy properly again (raiding, m+)

Uh...Blizzard has been very clear for a while now that the Argus patch will unravel over the next few weeks. Why would you blame them for trying to rush it when it was clear you had a week before the next part hits?

[Fyla]

Uh...Blizzard has been very clear for a while now that the Argus patch will unravel over the next few weeks. Why would you blame them for trying to rush it when it was clear you had a week before the next part hits?

a) where in the game did they say that? oh, they didnt? so i have to inform myself on fansites .. kk
b) where is it stated that this weeks part is over after collecting 50 things? again on fan sites if at all - so if my goal is to be done with this weeks pile of shit asap how do i know that quest is the last? correct, i dont

[netherflame]

Circular logic: We designed an area without flying so you don't need flying. Therefore why do you want flying when there's nothing to fly to.

Really? The entire point of this discussion is that the design lacks things to fly to and doesn't use flying.

So you don't need flying for anything, but you complain you have something you don't need. Seems legit.

[SirCowdog]

As someone else pointed out though, if you enable flying, the people who enjoy ground mounts are going to feel forced to fly due to how crazy the advantage is. Flight is just that much faster. It would be akin to expecting people to throw on lower gear just to make raids more difficult.

Is that a problem solely with flight, or is part of the equation also with the design that ignores that it exists? I can't count how many times I've repeated myself on this topic. OF COURSE simply dropping flight into a design that doesn't use it will give flying an advantage. But if the zones were built to take flying into account, then the "advantage" wouldn't be nearly as huge.

This can be partially addressed by having a mixture of zones that are ground-only, and some which are built for people with flying mounts. But there's also the issue that you mentioned earlier of the core mechanics of flying and how they haven't been addressed, or even changed at all, since it's introduction. You, and others, have pointed out the "Advantage" of flying. Maybe it's time Blizzard equalized the speed disparity(either by increasing ground speed, or more likely by reducing flight speed).

These are ALL things which are being ignored by Blizzard in favor of the more simplistic ground-only philosophy.

Icecrown was mostly flat, so was Deepholm. Storm Peaks was just mostly wasted space due to how many mountains there were. I'm not sure those are the best examples.
Sure, there were areas that were jagged in Deepholm and Icecrown, but it was mostly wasted space because why bother when the player is just going to fly right over it?

Why bother? Because it adds atmosphere and immersion, things which are supposedly what ground-only is doing with false facades and the skybox. Why is one better than the other? In my view flying at least has the advantage of providing player agency, whereas mostly what I'm seeing about Argus' no fly design are complaints that it's a dumpster fire of overly dense, daze-happy mobs. How is THAT good?

I mean...honestly, I get people enjoyed Icecrown and Lich King, but the design of the zone itself is less than interesting. "Man, look at that threatening Scourge army, we're so at danger by being here!" *proceeds to fly over and completely ignore the army safely*
That's not really immersive at all.

It was more immersive than our flying mounts magically refusing to work without any explanation, then magically starting to work again after a list of completely unrelated tasks were finished. It was more immersive than being swarmed and dismounted constantly by a horde of inconsequential mobs while tripping over every root, curb, and steep hill that ground mounts can't even stick to.

Hindsight is 20/20 with Icecrown. Could it have been done a little better, and made so that people in the air actually felt more threatened? Sure! Absolutely! This is part of the complaint, though: Blizzard isn't even trying.

I'm not quite sure what freedom/enjoyment you're getting honestly from being able to just fly over stuff. It's just artificial freedom in my opinion. Granted, I enjoy being able to fly myself, but I don't think of it as much more than just time saving.

I have nothing to say here. This is just a disagreement of opinion, and highly subjective on both our sides. The only difference is that people who enjoy the grounded game are getting what they want, which the people who want to fly are being given a middle finger from both Blizzard and the grounded community. If nothing else, that should be significant.

Why should they have to be forced to leave creative landscape in dungeons?

I'm not saying they should be forced to leave it there. I'm saying that dungeons already serve to cover the "on rails" experience. Why does it need to be extended to every single aspect of the game, especially when it's well known that nearly half the playerbase wants and enjoys flying(for whatever reason)?

Well, what else could they do then? You make it sound like it's easy, but then just resort back to "Well, Blizzard should be able to come up with something!"

I apologize if I wasn't clear. I've replied to this argument so many times that I often go to shorthand concepts. I'll expand: Blizzard has access to everything they've used flying for in the past. Every example of areas where flying was part of the zone. They also have every example and suggestion provided by the community in the nearly four years since the concept of a WoW without flying was first introduced.

I don't mean to imply that I have no answers, or that it would be "easy". I just meant to suggest that Blizzard are the professionals with all the experience and resources to implement these ideas. It's their job to fill in the gaps and details. And while I could post a manifesto describing, in detail, everything that I think would work, I don't think this is really the place or the time for it. These posts are already getting kind of big.

[Jester Joe]

a) where in the game did they say that? oh, they didnt? so i have to inform myself on fansites .. kk
b) where is it stated that this weeks part is over after collecting 50 things? again on fan sites if at all - so if my goal is to be done with this weeks pile of shit asap how do i know that quest is the last? correct, i dont

https://worldofwarcraft.com/en-us/ne...aign-for-argus


Nothing about it being done after the 50 matters though, you could have stopped after 10 minutes and still had 6 more days to finish.
Also, this was posted on the launcher.

[Nozari]

a) where in the game did they say that? oh, they didnt? so i have to inform myself on fansites .. kk
b) where is it stated that this weeks part is over after collecting 50 things? again on fan sites if at all - so if my goal is to be done with this weeks pile of shit asap how do i know that quest is the last? correct, i dont

It actually says on the game calendar. And can be indirectly referenced when you see the Quest name thing on the game map where you have all your quests shown turn from grey to green. And then look at the next one and see whats on the calendar.

[SirCowdog]

So you don't need flying for anything, but you complain you have something you don't need. Seems legit.

Nobody NEEDS flying for anything. Nobody NEEDS mounts of any kind, if you want to get technical. Theoretically, classes don't even NEED multiple specs, or BiS items, so long as the tank/healer/dps roles are filled. Are people making up all kinds of ridiculous arguments to get rid of those?

[Lahis]

Do you really not see the fallacy of this? Defending the grounded experience but immediately going to flight the second it's available, even when the supposed superior experience of the ground is still there? People keep saying they don't want flying to ruin the experience, but they're the ones who are choosing to ruin it for themselves.

What fallacy there is? Ground experience is great, but once it is negated by flight that makes getting to the goal more efficient and faster, who in their right mind wouldn't take the skip route?