Dev Watercooler: World of Warcraft Classic

[XorMalice]

Simple solution is to allow the players to toggle between old and new models, imo.

Nah, that's not a shared experience. If I choose a player character, that should be the one everyone sees. Especially given how ludicrously different the modern models are than the older ones. If they had tried to port over everything perfectly instead of create a new vision, this line of reasoning might be kinda acceptable.

New models is not vanilla. Period.

- - - Updated - - -

I would assume the main benefit is that different spells apply the same aura (i.e. sharing spell auras) - and that many spells only have aura or effect; but this example doesn't show that.

I would assume the main benefit is that you are keeping only the stuff you need, at the cost of access time. If you make a single data structure that needs to remember everything, you end up with, like they showed, the fact that fireball has three auras, one of which is empty, and then it has three aura data points, one of which is periodic damage and two of which are nothing, and then it has three damage data points, two of which are populated and one of which is empty. In the other model, fireball has a reference to its damage and a reference to its periodic thing and then some termination concept, and then each of the damage and its dot has that value and nothing else. They probably made the change because they wanted to be able to decrease the memory weight of the database at the cost of a couple more references, and didn't keep support for the older model.

I feel what they should be doing is adding in the support for the older model of thing so they can use the old data in place, because that's a truer emulation of the server side. But that's clearly not the direction they are going. This way should, in theory, work just as well, at higher initial effort cost.

[Koward]

The example with the table doesn't explain the benefit; their original table 20 entries - 7 of which are nothing. The new tables have 20 entries in total - 1 of which is nothing.

I would assume the main benefit is that different spells apply the same aura (i.e. sharing spell auras) - and that many spells only have aura or effect; but this example doesn't show that.

The benefit is not about the number of entries. With the new tables you can share the same effects between spells, and(edited) have any number of effects per spell.
This is just an example but basically there are properties that a DB should have to become better (more efficient to read, easier to expand..).

Back in the early 2000s not all engineers knew or cared about DB design. Now it would be weird for a big company like Blizzard not to go for the objectively better solutions.

If you want to learn more, check "Database normalization" on Google.

[TheDeeGee]

im still constantly amazed that people say classic is going to fail.

when there is 10+ years of classic servers proving you wrong.

and to say it's because these servers are free which is why people play them... LOL... a very small amount of PServer players dont play because it's just a free game..

1, before all of this hype you actually had to seek out a server on purpose, you didnt see an add for it on steam.

people actually WANT to play classic so they will of course pay for it.

Those Pirate Servers are free.

For the Official Classic people need an active subscription.

Let's see how many people want to pay for that.

[Cathfaern]

For the Official Classic people need an active subscribtion.

Do you have a source for that claim?

[TheDeeGee]

Do you have a source for that claim?

Was mentioned at BlizzCon.

[Forogil]

The benefit is not about the number of entries. With the new tables you can share the same effects between spells, and have any number of effects per spell.
This is just an example but basically there are properties that a DB should have to become better (more efficient to read, easier to expand..).

I'm not denying the benefits of the new DB, just stating that the example doesn't show the benefit they claim relevant for 1.12 client: much less wasted space.

If they wanted to show that spells share the effect - they could have shown two spells with the same aura, or if they wanted to show that the new way handles variable number of effects better they could have shown one spell with only damage - and no aura.

[kamuimac]

Classic will allow people like you and me to experience the original game, that's fine. it will also allow younger people just getting into WoW to see the origins of the game. that's great. but i really foresee a couple years down the line a headline here or on the main website "Classic Servers Closing." and that will happen because of the lack of players.

it will all be for naught. a waste of time and resources, even if they were designated specifically for classic.

lol god no - for young people this game both looks like shit and plays like shit

there is exackly 0 % chance it will bring any new players to game.

there is a reason why games change over years - to accomodate players taste.

and the taste in 2018 is not taste from 2004.

[Forogil]

I would assume the main benefit is that you are keeping only the stuff you need, at the cost of access time. If you make a single data structure that needs to remember everything, you end up with, like they showed, the fact that fireball has three auras, one of which is empty, and then it has three aura data points, one of which is periodic damage and two of which are nothing, and then it has three damage data points, two of which are populated and one of which is empty.

Apart from the example not showing that there is also an interaction between what is possible and what is done. If there are three columns for spells they are more likely to add three effects for spells.

That means that the new data-base format isn't necessarily that beneficial for 1.12 WoW; but better supports updates and later versions.

Another more interesting question is how can they use the fact that 1.12 could be in theory played in the same client as modern WoW. Time-walking would be one possibility.

Another more interesting possibility is that during the cataclysm there was a change in the world data-base format as well (as far as I understand) - they have to convert that as well it seem, i.e. have a pre-cata world in a format usable by a modern client. And there are now multiple leveling paths; it seems that this could bring a rather obvious possibility: pre-cata leveling to 60 after BfA.

[Psygon]

Those DB changes are not required for Classic.

We want classic 1.12. Stop changes or just don’t do it. Clearly Blizz doesn’t get it.

[Blayze]

Those DB changes are not required for Classic.

We want classic 1.12. Stop changes or just don’t do it. Clearly Blizz doesn’t get it.

Are you insane or just ideologically deluded? It's back-end shit you won't even see, that they're bringing up-to-date so they can work with it easier.

[Wramp]

"Whoever thinks classic was amazing clearly have never played it".

I played it. And yes, I think WAS amazing, fking amazing!

i shall second this, and for me it wasn't/isn't nostalgia, it was the time i made a large amount of friends in the game, and 13 yrs later, im still playing with alot of them

[Gorsameth]

Apart from the example not showing that there is also an interaction between what is possible and what is done. If there are three columns for spells they are more likely to add three effects for spells.

That means that the new data-base format isn't necessarily that beneficial for 1.12 WoW; but better supports updates and later versions.

The benefit for 1.12 is quicker database lookups, which means less pressure on the hardware and therefor a more stable system and better performance.

[caervek]

Last patch of vanilla (which 1.12 was, in case you confused it) was always the most reasonable choice.

Agree, I thought it was 1.1.2

[Winterstrife]

1.12
Looks like they are deliberately setting Classic up to fail so they can claim "we told you so"

Why would a development team go through all that trouble, spend the time & resources just for an "I told you so"? Do the people who demand for classic even hear the crazy conspiracies y'all overreact from every bit of classic WoW news?

I'll say what I've always said since the announcement of classic WoW server: For me Vanilla was great because of the community back then, the sense of experiencing something new for the first time, you won't get that 1:1 experience you had when you first started playing this game a decade ago, with none of the aforementioned classic WoW was just a boring. Y'all can bring up how much more choices we had with talent trees back then all you want, but you know you'll end up following a meta build either way because that's want going to be the most efficient for whatever you are doing in-game.

[Forogil]

The benefit is not about the number of entries. With the new tables you can share the same effects between spells, and have any number of effects per spell.

Actually I realized I missed this in my earlier reply: the new tables don't allow you to share effects between spells (look more closely and you see why), however, as blizzard already noted it does allow you to have any number of effects per spell.

- - - Updated - - -

The benefit for 1.12 is quicker database lookups, which means less pressure on the hardware and therefor a more stable system and better performance.

I'm not claiming that you are wrong. However, Blizzard didn't make that claim - and their example doesn't indicate any reason why it would be true.

I would also expect that hardware, and other software changes, during the last decade have increased stability and performance in a more significant way.
However, part of those software changes are in the new WoW-version so it was probably easier to change DB-format than back-port the other changes.

[ranzino]

attunement quests will become a thing again. remember the Onyxia questline, oh how i liked the alliance side with Jail Break and the walk with Reginald in SW
and yes, somebody will have to have a chat with Duke Hydraxis after lot of reputation grind or your MC raid will lead to nowhere, you do remember the doused runes ? and "Attunement to the Core" is still a thing for everyone, warlocks will just refuse to port your lazy asses down there. no LFR tools, you have to travel on your own to dungeons and raids.

a slight discomfort for horde players: you'll never get your ravasaur mount (the missing questline was not included in vanilla), but alliance was always able to obtain its winterspring frostsaber.

[Craaazyyy]

You know can revert to the old busted looking models in the current game right?

no u cant.. they look almost exactly the same as the HD ones.. they dont look nothing like old pre wod models

[Zantos]

Two pages of mature comments, and then I come to this ...

Your post? Not sure what you're implying about my statement. If its a lack of maturity, then you are sorely miss informed on the meaning of that term.

- - - Updated - - -

Except they didn't say that.

They said something that could be misinterpreted in that way by people that don't understand how companies operate.

What they said was that there is no switch they could flip to roll back years of changes to the code. Meaning, they had over written the code and couldn't undo that. Sadly, the original interview source from 2010 concerning this seems to be gone. MMO-Champion had a link on it, but that is gone.

The fact is, they stated they had no way to retrieve or use the old code in anyway as an excuse. They had a massive amount of flat out No. So much so, the wall of no was born. A wall of all of their no responses complete with links to interviews, blizzcons and dev statements all stating a blunt no.

I guess I shouldn't be surprised by this really. I mean, this is a company that compacted raiding in wrath by saying that 4 tiers of gear for a single raid was too much, just to go back on that within two expansions.

[Gadzooks]

There is no way it's going to be free, the only reason they're investing time and money into this is so they can make money off of it. When it was first announced, I was happy for the people that wanted it despite having no interest in myself. It's been a challenge to stay that way reading the forums here though and the vitriol that gets spread around. It would be curious to be if Blizzard offered this as a 5 dollar a month extra fee beyond the current monthly sub of retail. It's always felt like a lot of the people that play on private servers do so because it was free just as much as missing the original game, let them put their money where their mouth is.

It's not entirely impossible. One of the main motivations that they brought up, from the dev point of view, was to preserve the legacy of the game - so if it's just a "look what we did back when" kind of project, that a large company like Blizzard can afford, then why not make it free? It's not like once it's up and running they'll be making new content for it.

I don't really have a horse in this race - if it's free, or paid, it's fine. I was never against them doing it, I get why people would be curious and try it - and I still maintain 6-8 months before the bulk of the new players go back to current WoW. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong.

I just laugh at the grandiose claims of the usual suspects - "Classic will kill WoW!" is about as meaningful as the predictions of doom WoW has gotten from day one - yet here it still is, actively being developed. The core of the classic server crowd here has been blowing things out of proportion for years, it's to be expected. They're expecting the whole world to stop spinning when it releases, because they think it's that important - the reality is, outside of their very small community, nobody is really that invested in it.

- - - Updated - - -

Your post? Not sure what you're implying about my statement. If its a lack of maturity, then you are sorely miss informed on the meaning of that term.

- - - Updated - - -

What they said was that there is no switch they could flip to roll back years of changes to the code. Meaning, they had over written the code and couldn't undo that. Sadly, the original interview source from 2010 concerning this seems to be gone. MMO-Champion had a link on it, but that is gone.

The fact is, they stated they had no way to retrieve or use the old code in anyway as an excuse. They had a massive amount of flat out No. So much so, the wall of no was born. A wall of all of their no responses complete with links to interviews, blizzcons and dev statements all stating a blunt no.

I guess I shouldn't be surprised by this really. I mean, this is a company that compacted raiding in wrath by saying that 4 tiers of gear for a single raid was too much, just to go back on that within two expansions.

Just to be that guy yet again, they have said repeatedly it's the data they don't have anymore, the numbers in the database. Most of the code for the client is there. There's a huge difference there. The whole "They're lying!" or accusing them of making up excuses was tired and proven wrong years ago, it needs to stop, but i don't think certain people are capable of change.

- - - Updated - - -

As someone who actually raided during vanilla, yes, about 30 people per 40-man raid were bumbling idiots. But it didn't matter, because raids weren't difficult enough to demand bleeding-edge coordination and optimization to beat. It was about having fun, and ideas like "hardcore" or "casual" weren't exactly in everyone's minds at the time. Naxxramas was the first raid were things got noticeably more demanding, and that's contributed to its reputation - but it still wasn't anywhere near as difficult as modern raids, even "just" on heroic difficulty.

Excuse me?

I'm guessing you didn't go to the WoW forums during vanilla. "Filthy casuals" was born then - the "Casual vs. Raid or Die" war raged for all of vanilla. It's practically all the General forums talked about - and then the fits of rage with TBC when Blizzard admitted Raid Or Die didn't really work, and were actively supporting casual players AND "hardcore" raiders. I distinctly remember whole threads of people saying "filthy casuals" didn't deserve drops - at all - including stuff off trash and open world mobs. To say it wasn't in anyone's mind is hysterical, but you ran face first into it in the forums, on websites, and in chat in the game. You couldn't escape it!

I really wish there were archives of the first year of General Chat from the WOW site. It paints a completely different picture from what a lot of people claim happened back then.

[Sinte]

Maybe one wing of Mauradon. And even then, it took a while. I don't remember doing the whole place in one run, because it took so long. Getting to the Princess was the point.

I didn't run the live side of Strat until nearly the end of vanilla, because nobody wanted to run it, because it took too long, and the drops weren't that good.

You couldn't really even do the whole place in one run. The level difference between bosses made sure of that (on top of miss% because of needing more +hit on higher level enemies).

You ran a wing of mara every couple of levels, and when you were high enough for Princess, you were not about to do the wing with the Satyrs because the gear it dropped was on par with your greens anyway (and the blue for finishing the last quest).