The Anti "No Changes" FAQ

[Deleted]

Can you cite some court cases that show it's been proven -- preferably something strong enough to be considered precedent setting? Not settling -- I mean actual rulings that I could look up and read the Judges thoughts on the matter he presided over.

Thing is -- those people playing on those vanilla servers, ya know, actually played. I'm not sure why it makes you so angry that they enjoy such a thing. What they want is that experience and not a half arsed attempt at that experience. No one is back-peddling. Contrary to what you feel and no matter how much it upsets you -- this is what they want. Mocking them is only fluffing your ego.



Firstly, You're being silly. How is implementing Battle.net considered breaking the Vanilla experience? You know what they meant but decided to be pedantic.
Secondly, what you're wanting is basically Vanilla WoW 2.0 and I sincerely do not think that is going to happen.

- - - Updated - - -



Going to disagree here. Classic had much more of a grind and was far more social than it was today. Not because it was "new" -- classic was actually different as was all other MMO's of the day.

The only reason classic was more social is because people choose to opt out of social groups today.

I've been in the same wow social group since late wrath and we are still having a blast. I'm not just talking a guild here

[Celarent]

The key is for Classic to match the "billboard" impression: you speed past a billboard along the freeway and in 3 seconds its headline and art succeed in exciting you about Vanilla.

What are you anticipating? Populated world with few portals or separate zones to lose players to, quest layout focused on storytelling instead of efficiency, idiosyncratic class design with some charming simplicity alongside pockets of esoteric metagaming, emergent behavior, slower and calmer pace.

Give players that, and no one's going to mind that certain items can be carried without bags, mounts don't despawn in water, or mechanics don't bug like they used to.

[Deficineiron]

The only reason classic was more social is because people choose to opt out of social groups today.

I've been in the same wow social group since late wrath and we are still having a blast. I'm not just talking a guild here

blizzard actually disagrees with you. They have clearly stated that they are responsible for building the world and the mechanisms/circumstances in which players need/want to/have to interact, and limitations/incentives thereof, among other things.

Of course, they were talking about diablo 3.

- - - Updated - - -

The key is for Classic to match the "billboard" impression: you speed past a billboard along the freeway and in 3 seconds its headline and art succeed in exciting you about Vanilla.

What are you anticipating? Populated world with few portals or separate zones to lose players to, quest layout focused on storytelling instead of efficiency, idiosyncratic class design with some charming simplicity alongside pockets of esoteric metagaming, emergent behavior, slower and calmer pace.

Give players that, and no one's going to mind that certain items can be carried without bags, mounts don't despawn in water, or mechanics don't bug like they used to.

the billboard analogy is why we are getting the 'classic is classic' blue statement treatment - this early pre-release impression is critical for getting the vocal community on board. If later it is something more tuned/geared towards 3.0.2 players in the classic world, that is probably fine in the big picture to them.

[ManiaCCC]

If Blizzard doesn't provide the exact same Vanilla experience, we will see private servers go back up again, and Classic will probably die.

This is so perplexing to me. Not a single Vanilla private server is blizzlike. Not even close.

[Deficineiron]

This is so perplexing to me. Not a single Vanilla private server is blizzlike. Not even close.

best to look at this as a 'best efforts' issue - nothing besides the better classic servers out there is as close to classic as they are. If they remain closer to classic than blizz's version, lightbull's point applies.

[Ealyssa]

The ONLY sane way is to release classic as vanilla as possible. And from there move in the direction people ask for.

The few first months will all be chrome and shiny. Then when the nostalgia effect slows down and the community is making request, start discussing how it can be changed and improved.

Any changes before launch asked by old nostalgic players or even worse, by mostly people who never played vanilla, is crazy.

[ManiaCCC]

best to look at this as a 'best efforts' issue - nothing besides the better classic servers out there is as close to classic as they are. If they remain closer to classic than blizz's version, lightbull's point applies.

Well, not according purist. Change a letter, they will go back to private, where almost nothing is like it was on original servers.

Let's be real. Even if they will change shitload of code, adding optional new character models and spell effects, rebalance some classes, make changes to mail or flight system, it will be still more blizzlike than any other private server currently running.

[Deficineiron]

Well, not according purist. Change a letter, they will go back to private, where almost nothing is like it was on original servers.

Let's be real. Even if they will change shitload of code, adding optional new character models and spell effects, rebalance some classes, make changes to mail or flight system, it will be still more blizzlike than any other private server currently running.

class balance is a big question mark in terms of your statement being correct.

Also, I think most of the posters here don't expect blizzard to stop 'improving' things with something resembling your list. I personally find it hard to imagine they won't tune down (weaker mobs, more powerful players) and speed up leveling, for one example. I know blue says things implying the opposite, but I won't really believe it until there is a beta up and running where this can be actually quantified. We are still in the 'coming soon' billboard phase, and you don't put 'nerfed content!!' on your coming soon billboard.

I recommend watching this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVzgWmNJIY4

look at the 7:45 minute mark for pardo talking about 'make it overpowered' and ask how they aren't going to do that to classic the way they have to retail. This is a fundamental design approach that was quite different in classic.

it is intersting he seemed to deviate from the written text on 'make it overpowered.' many years ago he spoke directly against a lot of the present core values (before they were values, before the merger I beleive) early in wow history.

a great question for a big name blue would be to bring up this core value and mention pardo's discussion of it, and ask how much they will need to buff players, nerf mobs and mechanics, to implement it in classic. this value and players aoe'ing through outdoor and dungeon content are related to each other.

[Deleted]

raids didnt remain CURRENT you where FORCED to run em over and over because of the attunement bullshit that tbc was so yes, there was catching up to do all the time.

Can you try to rephrase that? I cannot decipher what your point might be or how attunements are relevant here. Point I'm making is that if you got into raiding late in TBC, none of the content was obsolete for you—while if you got into raiding late in the following xpacs, everything except the most recent patch raid was obsolete.

That, of course, doesn't mean you automatically got to see all the raids, for that you actually had to play the game at a high level in a good guild—but those opportunities were there until very late in TBC (like I said, I experienced just that).

attunemnet done wrong = all of tbc

I'm not at all arguing TBC attunements were particularly well done. The ideal attunement model to me would be one solo attunement before raiding (similar to Kara attunement) and guild-bound attunements for each of the raid tiers.

[Deleted]

So you're saying not a single person is at Blizzard right now that was there since the beginning?

No, you silly, I said: "no one that created wow is working on it today"

Or that there's not new employees that started years later but had played WoW from the beginning?

so you think a wrath babies opinion is the same as someone who created wow?.....

- - - Updated - - -

No you made an assumption, I didn't claim anything. I stated a fact and specifically listed out the ways that the game has been made both easier and less time consuming.

are you prettending or REALLY that silly? and no, you DIDNT state fact. you claimed the game is easier today (which also it includes that you silly think it was harder before = that is logic 1on1) - which is wrong.

[Zyky]

are you prettending or REALLY that silly? and no, you DIDNT state fact. you claimed the game is easier today (which also it includes that you silly think it was harder before = that is logic 1on1) - which is wrong.

No I literally stated a fact followed by evidence that supports the fact. Obviously you have nothing to contribute to this thread other than trying to shove words down my throat, so I'm done replying to you.

[Demithio]

Graphically I think the game looking better really doesn't change the experience. You can still (iirc) use old character models if you want. Not sure how people can argue that having improved graphics (like water not looking like shit) somehow changes the actual experience. Ocarina of Time for N64 aged really terribly graphically (as did every N64 game), but the updated one for 3DS looks quite a bit better without actually changing anything in the game. It's not like they can polish Vanilla to look that amazing anyway, just like you can't really make OOT look that much better. Who cares if water, weather, and view distance is actually improved.

My friends and I have been gaming since the early 90s and one thing we have repetitively discussed is the affect of graphics on game / player immersion. An argument can be had stating that too much graphical fidelity can cause a loss of the 'use our imagination' aspect of a game, especially one like WoW. Some would argue that the game would become less 'stimulating' due to this. YMMY of course, and I do like where WoW has gone graphically over the years.

[ydraw]

That, of course, doesn't mean you automatically got to see all the raids, for that you actually had to play the game at a high level in a good guild—but those opportunities were there until very late in TBC (like I said, I experienced just that).

Did you actually play BC though? If you got into raiding late, you didn't get into a good guild. Because of attunements, you couldn't raid with them. If you didn't have your vials from VashJ and Kael, you couldn't zone into tier 6 raids, period.

If a guild wanted a new member who hadn't raided previously, the entire 25-man roster would have to go back and run obsolete raids in order to attune that 1 player to the current raids. Something that never happened.

Attunements basically shut 90% of the player base out of 90% of the content as a result of this. And what's really sad, this was the favourite part of that period for people who continually claim that Vanilla/TBC were the best periods of WoW. The fact that the 'casual filth" - as one poster described them a few posts back - couldn't do anything and were frustrated with the entire experience as a result, was the best part of the game for them. They loved the fact that they could set themselves apart from the "casual filth" because they started playing the game earlier.

[Varvara Spiros Gelashvili]

The only edition I'd want to older realms is unfinished content and mythic+ dungeons. They could both reward unfinished gear that statless.

[garfeeld]

No, you silly, I said: "no one that created wow is working on it today"

so you think a wrath babies opinion is the same as someone who created wow?.....

- - - Updated - - -

are you prettending or REALLY that silly? and no, you DIDNT state fact. you claimed the game is easier today (which also it includes that you silly think it was harder before = that is logic 1on1) - which is wrong.

Who is Mike Morhaime?

[Deleted]

Did you actually play BC though? If you got into raiding late, you didn't get into a good guild. Because of attunements, you couldn't raid with them. If you didn't have your vials from VashJ and Kael, you couldn't zone into tier 6 raids, period.

Like I said, that is simply not true. I got into raiding late, got into a great guild that was just starting in Kara (core was a group of veteran re-rollers), progressed through Kara (and ZA), scaled up to 25, and killed everything up to Brutallus, including Vashj and Kael. Of course you're not going to get into a guild that is in T6 if you're just starting with Kara, that's what it means to have all content remain current rather than obsoleted. But there were Kara guilds starting all the way through TBC for you to join—most of them crappy, just like most of all guilds at all times are crappy.

If a guild wanted a new member who hadn't raided previously, the entire 25-man roster would have to go back and run obsolete raids in order to attune that 1 player to the current raids. Something that never happened.

Of course not. You'd apply to a guild that was doing content at your progress level (or below), not one that was way beyond you in progress. Although at least my guild did a (very) few exceptions to old friends that we boosted up to our progress.

Attunements basically shut 90% of the player base out of 90% of the content as a result of this.

Not true. It shut people out from skipping ahead in progress. If you progressed in the content with players of your own level, attunements were not shutting you out of anything—you'd get as far as your skills and dedication could take you. Besides, Blizzard kept lifting raiding attunements all the way through the xpac.

[Deleted]

Who is Mike Morhaime?

Are you that silly and belive the President of Blizzard Entertainment is doing grunt work on wow?

[Deleted]

Why not just have different types of servers?
Some for the original, no changes vanilla type.
And one with QoL changes, more experience and stuff like new models.

[Felfaadaern Darkterror]

Seems to me that a lot of players lobbied long and hard for Vanilla, and now a bunch of johnnie-come-latelys keep trying to make it metropolitan. Guys they fought for this; let them enjoy it.

Me? I'll be playing the game with transmog. I don't mind slow leveling or carrying arrows, but don't ask me to step outside my garrison where people can see me without my transmog.

- - - Updated - - -

Why not just have different types of servers?
Some for the original, no changes vanilla type.
And one with QoL changes, more experience and stuff like new models.

Yeah we could do that any other time players disagree, right? Like servers where Alliance get Nightborne and brown skinned orcs, servers where Garrosh is still Warchief...

[SlayStation13]

Classic will 100% ship with updated macro system and APIs for addons, improved graphics and group finder functionality at a minimum.

Got a source for this?

I've played Vanilla but I'd welcome almost any quality of life improvements they'd throw in - including Portals, Social system, cross-character mounts, Transmogrification, Guild management tools as well as Achievement system and more. No flying mounts tho...