Poll: If they announce legacy would you play them?

  1. #2161
    Quote Originally Posted by Torrasque View Post
    Unless you plan to farm gold on live realms to pay for both your live realm subscription and a legacy realm subscription, then you'd have essentially little to no time to "enjoy" a theoretical legacy realm.
    Still I'm not gonna farm my ass off for hours and hours to save a measly 15 bucks.

  2. #2162
    Quote Originally Posted by HuxNeva View Post
    If you want to go with that, fine, but nothing in this world is free. So for you, F2P doesn't exist.
    Love the hyperbole. Last time I played, for example, TERA, was over a year and a half, but if I fire up the launcher, download all the updates, I will be able to log into the game without having to pay them with cash, or work in-game to earn enough in-game currency to keep my account active. That's "free to play". If you want an example from Blizzard, Hearthstone is a "free to play" game. I can take as long a break from the game as I want and my count would remain always active, and I don't need to grind gold or dust to be able to keep my account active.

  3. #2163
    Quote Originally Posted by JustRob View Post
    I don’t know when they stated this, but there’s no way they have to rebuild the whole fucking game just to add an authenticator to the login screen. And that statement that they couldn’t legally release vanilla WoW as it is, is total bullshit. There are no laws for security protocols in an online game.
    The infamous "Wall of No"

    THE WALL OF NO!

    Summary of Blizz’s public stance:

    1. Blizz does not believe there are enough people interested in utilizing this idea long term to justify the various costs necessary to bring it about.

    2. Blizz feels this idea is counter to the nature of MMO’s; non-progression equates to stagnation and eventual boredom.

    3. The original game code does not exist in that form anymore. All the old data has been replaced, with the newer data which was not saved (archived) for later reuse. It was over-written and destroyed. “There is no switch to flip on the realms to roll back years of patches and changes…” In keeping with the sentiment in expressed in #2, above, it’s gone, never to return. Even if it were “recoverable” by other means it would still require lengthy and expensive rewrite.

    4. They have no plans or desire to recreate the original version from scratch. They refer to the notion of attempting to do so as “a logistical nightmare,”… and in keeping with their stance in #1, above the time, money and resources required are prohibitive and unjustified.

    To paraphrase it all: “Too much cost, too little interest and it’s not what the game is about… we’re not doing it.”

    Proponents are adamant it is a good thing and continue to post it (in various forms), sometimes multiple times a day despite heavy resistance.

    Analogies:
    Those who argue for “Classic”, “Vanilla”, “Old Content”, “Old Style”, “Realm Specific”, “Locked Progression”, “Throwback”, “Retro”, “Premium” (or any other variant thereof) servers frequently fail to put real thought into their idea. Consider how this would work in similar situations in other venues.

    The movie industry:
    “The earliest days of film were so much better; we really had fun and such a sense of adventure. We really had to work at understanding what was going on and those that couldn’t read the subtitles were just bad. We want special theaters that play only silent films (Vanilla), those were so awesome and we miss them so much. For those that want black and white “talkies” (BC) we can maybe have some that do those too, but no further. Technicolor (WotLK) is where the studios went wrong and this fancy Bullet-Time fx (Cata) junk is just taking the whole thing in the wrong direction…Blizz, fix it now! Give us our silent films back!”

    The auto industry:
    We want our Model-T’s back (Vanilla)… Henry Ford’s stuff was so awesome (blah, blah)…We could support maybe the Mustang (BC), but no further (blah, blah)… Datsun’s 280Z (WotLK) is where it all went wrong (blah, blah)…Chrysler Minivans (Cata) are just too bad to deal with (blah, blah)…

    Proponents are asking either for (a) regression to the past where things were not better than they are now…and want to drag everyone else in the game with them… or (b) the ability to segregate themselves from everyone else so they can indulge in their nostalgia. Not only does the majority of the player base not want that, neither does Blizz. Not enough people want it to justify the costs of doing it and… most importantly… it goes against the progressive vision the company -- and players -- have for the game as a whole.

    You will have no better chance of getting Blizz to do this than you would convincing the movie industry to revert to silent or even black and white only films or the auto industry to revert to producing nothing but cars like the Model-T or Edsel.

    Blizzard specific references on the issue:

    They were going to, long ago…
    We were at one time internally discussing the possibility fairly seriously, but the long term interest in continued play on them couldn't justify the extremely large amount of development and support resources it would take to implement and maintain them. We'd effectively be developing and supporting two different games.
    Drysc (CM), Feb 21, 2008
    http://blue.mmo-champion.com/topic/6...lassic-servers

    We occasionally see requests for us to open pre-TBC realms, or classic realms if you prefer. Lately there have also been requests for pre-WotLK realms, and I am sure that once the next expansion pack is released there will be requests for pre-Cataclysm realms as well. We have answered these requests quite a few times now saying that we have no plans to open such realms, and this is still the case today.

    We have no plans to open classic realms or limited expansion content realms, and you should not expect to see the opening of such realms with the launch of Cataclysm either.

    We realize that some of you feel that the classic game was more fun than the current game, and as a result would like to revel in nostalgia; the developers however prefer to keep the game moving forward as they want the game to continuously evolve and progress.
    Vaneras (CM), Nov 28, 2009
    http://blue.mmo-champion.com/topic/1...igional-realms

    We have no plans of making pre-TBC realms. This goes against the very nature of an MMO and would be a logistical nightmare. There's no switch to flip on the realms to roll back years of patches and changes, and we don't intend to invent one so that a very small minority of players can play what we feel would be an inferior cousin of the World of Warcraft of today.
    Zarhym (CM), April 27, 2010
    http://blue.mmo-champion.com/topic/1...the-wow-killer

    Question: The whole topic of classic servers has been popping up on the forums, always on yours - I assume with the release of Cataclysm there's this huge wave of nostalgia here because you can't play in the old world anymore. Is this something you might consider doing after the Cataclysm launch?

    Chilton: Currently, my answer would be probably not. The reason I say that is because any massively multiplayer game that has pretty much ever existed and has ever done any expansions has always gotten the nostalgia of, "Oh God, wouldn't it be great if we could have classic servers!" and more than anything else that generally proves to be nostalgia. In most cases - in almost all cases - the way it ends up playing out is that the game wasn't as good back then as people remember it being and then when those servers become available, they go play there for a little bit and quickly remember that it wasn’t quite as good as what they remembered in their minds and they don’t play there anymore and you set up all these servers and you dedicated all this hardware to it and it really doesn't get much use. So, for me, the historical lesson is that it's not a very good idea to do *laughs* - it's a great idea to talk about.
    Tom Chilton (lead game designer), Aug 20, 2010
    http://www.wowhead.com/news=166540/e...tails-and-more (approx. half way down page)

    https://twitter.com/ghostcrawler/sta...81503165054976
    Greg “Ghostcrawler” Street, Dec 31, 2012

    Additionally, read this player post that might remind you of some of what you “miss” about Vanilla WoW:

    http://us.battle.net/wow/en/forum/to...1718715?page=1

    WowInsider has a similar negative view:
    May 2, 2012
    http://wow.joystiq.com/2012/05/02/5-...one/#continued

    Also –

    http://us.battle.net/wow/en/forum/to...0659727?page=2
    I work for a software company with corporate customers. Each of them has rather more invested in equipment than a PC gamer, and they like paying for upgrades even less.

    Our products have been advancing technologically over time in a gradual fashion, so as not to lose the customers with the oldest equipment. However, things like operating system support and hardware version support are outside our control--which means we have to keep slowly advancing the requirements, and adjust existing code to match. Over time that means stuff eventually falls off the list of what we can support, because our code, gradually upgraded as it is, starts to require OS or hardware features the oldest equipment can't support.

    We couldn't turn the clock back ten years, or probably even five, if we wanted to.

    Blizz is no doubt in the same pickle. They've changed their database structure, upgraded the graphics, and likely done a lot of more subtle stuff over the last seven years that makes it fundamentally impossible to support Vanilla code, even assuming that code still exists in pristine form somewhere.

    MOP will, as I understand it, very likely require at least a duo core CPU. That's another significant difference that can't be rolled back.

    Therefore: what the Vanilla crowd is actually asking for is the development of new code to duplicate old code. That's not easy or cheap, and is going to compete directly for resources with development of current content. There would have to be a monumental ground surge of interest to make it feasible, an order of magnitude greater than what has ever been exhibited on the forums.

    TLDR: That's not how software works.

    From the EU forums, Feb 23, 2011

    http://eu.battle.net/wow/en/forum/topic/1751857331

    MMOChampion poll about whether Blizz should have such servers:
    (June 19, 2012)
    http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...a-or-BC-server

    It's a line Blizzard has drawn from way back when, yet suggestions or requests for classic realms continue to pop up on the forums. Let me tell you here and now... don't bother. Blizzard will eventually just lock your thread or delete it entirely simply because it's not in their best interests to provide such a service.

    http://wow.joystiq.com/2009/03/13/no...realms-really/ Mar 13, 2009

    Finally: Here’s a link to a past post dedicated to a deeper discussion of the idea. Please read it all the way through – it is very thorough.

    http://us.battle.net/wow/en/forum/to...0659727?page=1

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8HoaFWI5S0Q
    http://i.imgur.com/Xw1Dx.gif

    Lakota tribal wisdom says that when you discover you are riding a dead horse, the best strategy is to dismount.

    How the forums are dealing with the “problem.”
    Buy a stronger whip.
    Change riders.
    Say things like, “This is the way we always have ridden this horse.”
    Appoint a committee to study the horse.
    Arrange to visit other sites to see how they ride dead horses.
    Create a training session to increase our riding ability.
    Harness several dead horses together for increased speed.
    Declare the “No horse is too dead to beat.”
    Provide additional funding to increase the horse’s performance.
    Declare the horse is, “better, faster, and cheaper,” when dead.
    Study alternative uses for dead horses.
    Promote the dead horse to a supervisory position
    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Embriel View Post
    Still I'm not gonna farm my ass off for hours and hours to save a measly 15 bucks.
    Good, that's my point. People wouldn't do it, it's stupid, time consuming, skinner-box, Grade-A horrible. The thought of forcing that upon the legacy crowd, one of which is already a minority, being forced to upkeep two subscriptions, most of which with gold through live-realm tokens, is a fantasy at best.

  4. #2164
    Quote Originally Posted by Torrasque View Post
    The infamous "Wall of No"



    - - - Updated - - -



    Good, that's my point. People wouldn't do it, it's stupid, time consuming, skinner-box, Grade-A horrible. The thought of forcing that upon the legacy crowd, one of which is already a minority, being forced to upkeep two subscriptions, most of which with gold through live-realm tokens, is a fantasy at best.
    The Wall of No is not even their latest official response, so linking it makes no sense whatsoever.

    https://eu.battle.net/forums/en/wow/...3734129?page=1

    That is their latest response, which was one year ago. We haven't had any official response since then.

    So you can pretty much delete that "Wall of No" from your bookmarked websites and add this new one.

  5. #2165
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    One of the SW:TOR's and WildStar's main complaints is the complete lack of endgame. Other than 'money spent in development', WildStar and SW:TOR were never even close to WoW in terms of "size and stature", no matter if you're looking at population size, server list size, content, etc.
    And yet they still exist and are running. Despite a low population, it's still around. You have been making the argument that Legacy can't sustain itself off unless it costs more than a regular WoW sub. I'm showing you here that games with SMALLER populations than WoW and with similar development budgets are still around; despite whatever lack of content and whatever excuse you can come up with.

    Why ignore the people who are still playing those games despite all the problems you listed? Low population MMOs are proven feasible by every legacy MMO on the market.

    At no point am I suggesting Blizzard will make boatloads of money; or will even decide to greenlight a project that is intended to simply stay afloat. I'm simply providing the argument, based on other MMOs with stupidly low populations, that Legacy is likely to be able to sustain itself off a small maintenance team even if it doesn't require a subscription to play.
    Last edited by Thimagryn; 2017-11-02 at 05:46 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    "Real" Demon Hunters don't work as a class in modern WoW
    Quote Originally Posted by Talen View Post
    Please point out to me the player Demon Hunter who has Meta.

  6. #2166
    Quote Originally Posted by Tome View Post
    The Wall of No is not even their latest official response, so linking it makes no sense whatsoever.

    https://eu.battle.net/forums/en/wow/...3734129?page=1

    That is their latest response, which was one year ago. We haven't had any official response since then.

    So you can pretty much delete that "Wall of No" from your bookmarked websites and add this new one.
    I'm not looking over 70 pages of a "Return to Karazhan" thread. If you have a serious blue post, then I'd like to see it.

  7. #2167
    Quote Originally Posted by Thimagryn View Post
    And yet they still exist and are running. Despite a low population, it's still around.
    And World of Warcraft has been around for four times as long as WildStar (released June 2014) and twice as long as Star Wars: The Old Republic (released December 2011). And both the games' population likely barely amounts to 10% WoW's last known population number (2016). So what's your point?

    Why are you ignoring the people who are still playing those games despite all the problems you listed?
    I'm not. I just fail to see the relevancy of their numbers considering they're so very small.

  8. #2168
    Best idea i read about legacy servers would be to make seasons like Diablo.

  9. #2169
    Quote Originally Posted by Torrasque View Post
    I'm not looking over 70 pages of a "Return to Karazhan" thread. If you have a serious blue post, then I'd like to see it.
    It's the very first post, page 1. The blue posted even made the thread.

    Go figure.

    Just because you don't like it, it doesn't make it "less serious" because it goes against your sorry excuse of an old player made "wall of no"

  10. #2170
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    Love the hyperbole. Last time I played, for example, TERA, was over a year and a half, but if I fire up the launcher, download all the updates, I will be able to log into the game without having to pay them with cash, or work in-game to earn enough in-game currency to keep my account active. That's "free to play". If you want an example from Blizzard, Hearthstone is a "free to play" game. I can take as long a break from the game as I want and my count would remain always active, and I don't need to grind gold or dust to be able to keep my account active.
    Tbh, from what I hear, it would be much harder to be viable in Hearthstone without spending cash then it is in WoW. Sure, you need a bootstrap in WoW. Past that , it's up to you.

  11. #2171

  12. #2172
    Brewmaster Nemah's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Central US
    Posts
    1,391
    I would do the same thing everyone else would do. I'd play for a month and then stop. Vanilla was great for its time, but I wouldn't want to go back.

  13. #2173
    Quote Originally Posted by Nemah View Post
    I would do the same thing everyone else would do. I'd play for a month and then stop. Vanilla was great for its time, but I wouldn't want to go back.
    It's not what everyone else would do.

  14. #2174
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightsight View Post
    It's not what everyone else would do.
    The issue is proving that there are, in a matter of fact, enough people that would actively continuously pay for both a live account and a legacy account.

  15. #2175
    Quote Originally Posted by Torrasque View Post
    The issue is proving that there are, in a matter of fact, enough people that would actively continuously pay for both a live account and a legacy account.
    Could just include it in the normal subscription fee, or an option to pay a little more, or an option to pay exclusively for them.

    There are options.

  16. #2176
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightsight View Post
    Could just include it in the normal subscription fee, or an option to pay a little more, or an option to pay exclusively for them.

    There are options.
    They've already stated that their marketing team doesn't find that financially viable, else they would have done it a very long time ago. So, no, that wouldn't work.

  17. #2177
    Quote Originally Posted by Torrasque View Post
    Good, that's my point. People wouldn't do it, it's stupid, time consuming, skinner-box, Grade-A horrible. The thought of forcing that upon the legacy crowd, one of which is already a minority, being forced to upkeep two subscriptions, most of which with gold through live-realm tokens, is a fantasy at best.
    People would do it, but not to save 15 damn dollars, unless you're insanely poor.

  18. #2178
    Quote Originally Posted by Torrasque View Post
    They've already stated that their marketing team doesn't find that financially viable, else they would have done it a very long time ago. So, no, that wouldn't work.
    Things change.

  19. #2179
    Quote Originally Posted by Torrasque View Post
    They've already stated that their marketing team doesn't find that financially viable, else they would have done it a very long time ago. So, no, that wouldn't work.
    I'm gonna have to ask for a source on that one since it sounds made up.

  20. #2180
    Deleted
    I think the smartest thing would be to purchase the virtual box of vanilla legacy servers.
    Let's say....20 bucks or something.
    Even if people didn't keep playing they already gave some money for the costs.

    As for a subscription...i would say 5 bucks. Seperated from the retail WoW.
    The problem with this is players who would leave retail to play on legacy...they would be paying half of what they usually payed.

    I think the "virtual box" is a pretty good idea since A LOT of people always try the game.
    As an example some special servers have 1 million registered accounts on the first year.

Posting Permissions

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