Key Questions for Blizzard about Classic Implementation

[Deficineiron]

Having had a few weeks to think through the topic and some of the ways it could tend to work out, I pose some questions which I hope some blogger/reviewer/someone with the ability to interview blizz blues could ask.

As always, please ask and frame these questions neutrally. Don't claim prior actions as establishing the basis for the question (e.g. retail changes over the years). These people are just doing their job and you don't want them defensive or more wary than they already are.

These questions are intended to be fairly specific on 'numbers' rather than feelings, and may clarify some of blizzard's thinking on objective topics.

1). In classic, speaking in general, a class at a given level in 'average' gear could not kill more than 2 or 3 outdoor mobs of the same level, and then sometimes only with difficulty, or not at all. A physical dps character in poor gear/poor weapon might struggle to not die to 2, or have their health greatly reduced by fighting only 1 mob. Is the intent to retain this tight balance between player power and outdoor mob power, which is key to the leveling experience? [another way of saying it is easy to die in outdoor leveling - yes I know certain classes/spec's could do all kinds of stuff, but trying to get the basic question across without drowning in minutiae.]

2) Instances done at-level typically required substantial coordination and/or CC, and an average instance run might take up to 2 hours assuming a decent pug party (more in BRD, etc.). Does blizzard intend to re-tune instances to reduce this time? [obviously, you do this by reducing trash, lowering mob damage, and/or moving graveyards closer, though the latter only saves a little time unless they do the first 2 also. Think 2.3. The more radical approach is what was done to sunken temple and scholomance, which I doubt they would do]?

3) For raid content, is the intent to make sure all players are able to see the classic raid content? How may this be accomplished? Has including raid difficulty levels been considered?

3a) Resist gear served as a gear-check on certain fights in certain raids. Is the intent to preserve resist gear as a hard requirement, and/or to reduce the actual time needed to gear a raid for this?

3b) May a token-type gear reward system (e.g. BC BOJ 2.3 or later iterations of similar systems) be enacted for raiding, and/or will raid bosses have drop rates increased?

4) In classic (and even today on 'blizzlike' (allegedly) server, /played time to max can average around 10 days for a knowledgeable but patient playe. Does this seem an appropriate /played time target for the Classic servers, or may it be reduced? How would it be reduced, lower xp/level, higher quest xp, or faster completion of objectives via weaker mobs, more centralized objectives, etc? [yes, speedlevelers can go faster, we all know that, but speaking in general about time to max here]

5) Linear quest structures have been used for years in retail now, providing players with structured goals in a clear order. Classic quests often were hodge-podge, quest givers at far edges of map unknown unless the player stumbled across them, with many quests having no follow-on's and thus being optional within a zone. Has consideration been given to modernizing quest structure, or, if not, to implementing UI features such as showing where quest givers are on mini-map (essentially the 2.3 changes)?

edit -

The best bet is an interview from someone from the financial press side of things, and the question would be

"The Classic Warcraft project could potentially attract millions of former customers. Classic wow itself is often seen as the most inaccessible WoW version ever made - how do you intend to make sure it attracts as much of the former customer base as possible, including people who started later?"

end edit


I may add more. Please note that I wrote these questions the way I would ask them of blizzard if I could. They do not reflect my own opinion on the topic.

[Daggot Ur]

Dear OP,

Thank you for taking the time to postmon this forum. However, please allow me to disagree with you completely because in short what you are suggesting is - make it easier please.

We want exactly the same Vanilla as it was. Levelling was a huge part of the game and it was so amazing exactly because you had to explore, cooperate with other, actually think when you were playing and not just smashing 1-2 buttons on your way to max level. Dungeons were actually difficult and required concentration and not "pull half of the instance - AOE". This design was amazing and should be preserved without changes. It was intended that way.

Thank yo for taking the time to post on this forum.

[Deficineiron]

Honestly, this just sounds like their current design philosophy being implemented in a Vanilla setting.

While there is a lot of back and forth regarding changes, I wouldn't expect anything you just listed to be changed; it's part of the "heart" of Vanilla's charm.

Right, it is certainly a key part of why classic worked the way it did.

But I don't think I have seen published responses to such detailed, specific questions. I consider these questions critical to what the PVE experience will actually be.

Think of how leveling 1-60 was in 3.0.2 vs. 1.x (any point in classic). That is more or less where I am going with the questions.

- - - Updated - - -

Dear OP,

Thank you for taking the time to postmon this forum. However, please allow me to disagree with you completely because in short what you are suggesting is - make it easier please.

We want exactly the same Vanilla as it was. Levelling was a huge part of the game and it was so amazing exactly because you had to explore, cooperate with other, actually think when you were playing and not just smashing 1-2 buttons on your way to max level. Dungeons were actually difficult and required concentration and not "pull half of the instance - AOE". This design was amazing and should be preserved without changes. It was intended that way.

Thank yo for taking the time to post on this forum.

You have located a tree- but do you see the forest?

I am asking for blizzard to be asked these questions. I think the way they are answered would illustrate some of the thinking at blizzard on how this should be implemented. That is a far more important factor that what people here want, or whether it 'feels classic.'

Wouldn't you be interested in seeing how blizzard answers questions as specific as these? Do you realize how critical the items listed here are in the PVE experience?

as far as how I framed the questions - it is normal when interviewing to not ask hostile questions. I have tried to frame the questions the way blizzard itself may look at them.

[reppeh]

Will everyone see the raid content? No.

Thats whats great about Vanilla. You have to put in the effort and earn it.

[alturic]

The first key question, in all honesty, is what patch they are considering vanilla to be set at. It's telling how early they are in development that they haven't even touched on that.

[Perryn]

The issue with framing the questions like this is that it implies that this is something that would be wanted, without giving context. Furthermore, I think it's naive to assume that Blizzard aren't considering each of the topics (and probably much much more) during the process of implementation as well as before making the call to announce it.

But yes, would be interesting to see how strong their stance are on some of the topics even if I suspect they wouldn't want to be too clear about any of them, for fear of pushing away people, particularly this early.

[Deficineiron]

The issue with framing the questions like this is that it implies that this is something that would be wanted, without giving context. Furthermore, I think it's naive to assume that Blizzard aren't considering each of the topics (and probably much much more) during the process of implementation as well as before making the call to announce it.

But yes, would be interesting to see how strong their stance are on some of the topics even if I suspect they wouldn't want to be too clear about any of them, for fear of pushing away people, particularly this early.

to your first point - remember, this is a list of questions as I would ask them of blizzard - AND I HOPE SOMEONE DOES. The point is not to emotionalize 'are you gonna nerf classic!!???' but to just ask a numbers question - will outdoor mobs be tuned down?

remember, these are the way you would ask a blizzard blue who is doing you the favor of letting you interview them. hostile/gotcha questions are not the adult way to approach this. ask respectful questions not loaded with heavy overtones. surely this is common sense.

and as you note, evasive answers would in themselves be very interesting. I would expect evasive answers on most of these questions, fyi.

Does blizz pre-screen questions when doing interviews? some of them might not be allowed if this is so.

i added this to OP

The best bet is an interview from someone from the financial press side of things, and the question would be

"The Classic Warcraft project could potentially attract millions of former customers. Classic wow itself is often seen as the most inaccessible WoW version ever made - how do you intend to make sure it attracts as much of the former customer base as possible, including people who started later?"

[epLe]

Think of how leveling 1-60 was in 3.0.2 vs. 1.x (any point in classic). That is more or less where I am going with the questions.

Leveling 1 to 60 was changed vastly in 1.12. More than at any other time before cataclysm revamp.
This was mostly thanks to the re-allocation of stats on lower gear from quests and dungeons in this patch.
Then leveling characters suddenly got way more power along the way, and leveled significantly faster.

[Deleted]

The point is not to emotionalize 'are you gonna nerf classic!!???' but to just ask a numbers question - will outdoor mobs be tuned down?

It's the same thing! Come on...... mobs are "tuned down" or nerfed? Lol

[superhumanj]

this is a lot of words that can be answered in a few words I believe Ion said "vanilla means vanilla"

[Deficineiron]

It's the same thing! Come on...... mobs are "tuned down" or nerfed? Lol

If you are adult, you may have noticed that sometimes you get different results when you ask the same question phrased differently.

Being polite and not loading questions up with negative overtones rarely is a negative.

- - - Updated - - -

this is a lot of words that can be answered in a few words I believe Ion said "vanilla means vanilla"

well if it 'feels classic' then I guess that is that, right?

why are you opposed to these questions being asked in detail? If all is as you claim his statement means, the answers should be quite explicit and clear?

[Daggot Ur]

Right, it is certainly a key part of why classic worked the way it did.

But I don't think I have seen published responses to such detailed, specific questions. I consider these questions critical to what the PVE experience will actually be.

Think of how leveling 1-60 was in 3.0.2 vs. 1.x (any point in classic). That is more or less where I am going with the questions.

- - - Updated - - -



You have located a tree- but do you see the forest?

I am asking for blizzard to be asked these questions. I think the way they are answered would illustrate some of the thinking at blizzard on how this should be implemented. That is a far more important factor that what people here want, or whether it 'feels classic.'

Wouldn't you be interested in seeing how blizzard answers questions as specific as these? Do you realize how critical the items listed here are in the PVE experience?

as far as how I framed the questions - it is normal when interviewing to not ask hostile questions. I have tried to frame the questions the way blizzard itself may look at them.

I am afraid you're deluded - we don't need to ask these questions because we know how it should be - exactly how it was originally.
So thank you for your time and let's move on

[Deficineiron]

I am afraid you're deluded - we don't need to ask these questions because we know how it should be - exactly how it was originally.
So thank you for your time and let's move on

You proceed from an erroneous assumption. You assume that what you want is relevant to what blizzard intends to do. This is in error.

[Daggot Ur]

You proceed from an erroneous assumption. You assume that what you want is relevant to what blizzard intends to do. This is in error.

No, you just don't want to agree with what we are saying. It was already pointed to you what Ion said "Vanilla is Vanilla" it means everything question that you aksed is already answered - it will be exactly how it was back then. No need to waste time.

[Deficineiron]

No, you just want to agree with what we are saying. It was already pointed to you what Ion said "Vanilla is Vanilla" it means everything question that you aksed is already answered - it will be exactly how it was back then. No need to waste time.

I do agree that the intent of that comment was to try to put to rest any specific, unaddressed doubts.

How do you feel an a/b IR (investor relations) rep would answer this question?


"The Classic Warcraft project could potentially attract millions of former customers. Classic wow itself is often seen as the most inaccessible WoW version ever made - how do you intend to make sure it attracts as much of the former customer base as possible, including people who started later?"

[kamuimac]

Will everyone see the raid content? No.

Thats whats great about Vanilla. You have to put in the effort and earn it.

i just cant wait for people like this to see how desperate your guilds will be for filling 40 man rosters with warm bodies just for numbers.

anyone who will want to raid will raid because people will be desperate like fuck to fill up raids.

if you think filling 20 man roster for mythic is bad just wait for classic

[Daggot Ur]

I do agree that the intent of that comment was to try to put to rest any specific, unaddressed doubts.

How do you feel an a/b IR (investor relations) rep would answer this question?


"The Classic Warcraft project could potentially attract millions of former customers. Classic wow itself is often seen as the most inaccessible WoW version ever made - how do you intend to make sure it attracts as much of the former customer base as possible, including people who started later?"

The answer is very simple - we give them exactly what they asked for "Vanilla Vanilla".

You should know your taget market - and it's those people who asked for original Vanilla and played private servers because they don't like current WoW. If you give that target audience not "Vanilla" that's when you fail because they will just go back to private servers.

Let's not reinvent the wheel here. We can argue about changes that were made during Vanilla but not something outside of it.

[Deficineiron]

I can only answer for myself, but I'll do so to the best of my ability.

For myself, WoW Classic is going to be a "downtime" game; something you play out of nostalgia or because you're bored with the current expansion but still feel like playing WoW. It's akin to going back to an old game you haven't played since your childhood; a lot of the inconveniences are what give it charm.

I personally don't mind difficult, slow paced leveling because that's how the game was back then; that's the experience I am looking to get out of it. If things take longer or are unfair to the leveling/gearing experience of my chosen class, I personally won't mind because the game is a break for me; I'm not playing it to race to the top/be competitive/complain if things are unfair. I'm playing it to reexperience a game I haven't played in years.

Part of that experience did include long, tedious dungeons that required a commitment to work your way through; sometimes that ended in disappointment when someone dropped midway through and trash respawned before you could replace them. That was part of the experience then; they have addressed that in the current game, but it is unnecessary to do so in Classic (at least, in my view).

Raids are a different subject. Early design philosophy was that only the most determined, dedicated, and time-spending players really progressed far in raiding (just hitting level 60 was considered an accomplishment in itself). I see no reason for this philosophy to not be reflected in Classic. If anything, as a game that I only play in my "downtime" and has a hard cap for content (Naxx), I don't mind the concept of progressing slowly over the course of years to get where some people will within the first few months. I never got passed Ony/ZG/Early MC in my actual Vanilla days and didn't mind that one bit.

Resist gear is something that, again, is part of the charm of Vanilla which no longer exists (for a good reason). Was it annoying to have to throw on a bunch of greens so you didn't instantly burn to death? Yeah. Did to add to the experience as a whole? Depends on who you ask I suppose.

I'm firmly against adding tokens and increasing droprates; while this may be one of those QoL issues on which others disagree (for, again, I can only speak for myself), I feel that certain experiences from Vanilla need to be preserved. Yeah, it was frustrating at the time. However, again, it is something which has been addressed in live and (in my view) doesn't need addressing in Classic.

Experience/leveling taking longer in Classic is (in my view) a good thing. As mentioned above, hitting level 60 in Vanilla was an accomplishment in itself. The game focused very much on the journey rather than the destination. Those that want to play Vanilla hardcore will likely want to maintain the integrity of the slower leveling system and those who aren't as hardcore shouldn't mind leveling at the original pace. As someone playing Classic as a "downtime" game, I personally don't mind taking longer to level as it gives me more time to replay the experience.

I actually dislike the current linear structures. I feel the older "just stumble upon quests" method felt more organic/immersive. Having to read the quest logs was also something that I never personally minded (I still remember spending an entire day wandering Hillsbrad searching for Ravenholdt).

A lot of your questions seem to be applying current design philosophies to Classic WoW. However, Classic WoW is something I view as a break from current design philosophy. While, again, I can only represent my own opinions and don't pretend to be speaking on the behalf of anyone but myself, I feel as though these seemingly outdated mechanics/ideas are exactly what I'm looking for in WoW Classic. If I get tired of poor itemization, cumbersome leveling, giant raids, needing resist gear, etc. I'll just play on the current expansion's servers. There's a WoW for both sides of the argument.

Thanks for your very thought-out reply.

The underlying issue for me is I don't know where a/b may find it best to take classic wow in the areas I list. you have surely seen the odd phrases some blues use 'feels classic' or 'classic experience.' also they are a major part of a publicly traded corporation with a very clear track record on making accessible games. Honestly that to me almost decides the issue - I think they have to market classic as broadly as possible, and that entails a lot of what I list above being changed.

Shareholders would be justified asking why a niche product was released vs. something more broadly marketable (code for accessible). Look at my hypothetical question to an a/b IR rep and imagine the possible answers, spoken or not.

[hulkgor]

Dear OP,

Thank you for taking the time to postmon this forum. However, please allow me to disagree with you completely because in short what you are suggesting is - make it easier please.

We want exactly the same Vanilla as it was. Levelling was a huge part of the game and it was so amazing exactly because you had to explore, cooperate with other, actually think when you were playing and not just smashing 1-2 buttons on your way to max level. Dungeons were actually difficult and required concentration and not "pull half of the instance - AOE". This design was amazing and should be preserved without changes. It was intended that way.

Thank yo for taking the time to post on this forum.

This is it, in a well written manner. Thanks!

[Deficineiron]

The answer is very simple - we give them exactly what they asked for "Vanilla Vanilla".

You should know your taget market - and it's those people who asked for original Vanilla and played private servers because they don't like current WoW. If you give that target audience not "Vanilla" that's when you fail because they will just go back to private servers.

Let's not reinvent the wheel here. We can argue about changes that were made during Vanilla but not something outside of it.

right, classic forums argue over 1.1 vs 1.12 etc. etc. that is all and good for posters on those forums. I am interested in something very different.

the former wow playerbase is so large it is hard to imagine. they say 100m (inc. china, which will get classic too). Do you think blizzard will not take those players into account, most of whom would have played later expansions (I assume bc and wotlk most common)?

- - - Updated - - -

They'll likely use Old School Runescape as a reference point. I believe they've more-or-less successfully (don't really follow Runescape) captured the feel of the original game while still offering various changes including new content. They also mentioned Classic as something which will take heavily from community input (another thing OSRS does).

It's likely the approach will be similar.

I haven't played eq or rs, but am otherwise familiar iwth OSRS and its relative performance vs. the 'main' version. I agree, OSRS would be the 'best case' model for how blizzard approaches classic.

you see in my post above my concern about the former playerbase being more concentrated in former bc/wotlk players than classic players. wotlk players in particular had a very different leveling/dungeon experience 1-60 than prior players, despite the 1-60 zones being nearly unchanged from 1.12 (a few exceptions, mainly 2.3). main issue was player power buffs at level and mob power nerfs at level making players much, much more powerful in the world.

the short version of all of this is I am concerned they find it a better plan to do lip service to vanilla means vanillla etc etc. and make a version which more closel replicates the 3.0.2 experience in order to make it more broadly attractive/accessible.