9.0 General Discussion

[Aeluron Lightsong]

Fine with that personally. Mists was an "anti-hype" expansion and was great. Cata and WoD were hype expansions and crashed. It's all about how well Blizzard executes the systems and content, and so far I cautiously liked what I heard and saw. Proof's in the pudding of course, but still.

In fairness a lot of "Anti" was about Pandas but.... I rather not open that can of worms again.

[Queen of Hamsters]

Fine with that personally. Mists was an "anti-hype" expansion and was great. Cata and WoD were hype expansions and crashed. It's all about how well Blizzard executes the systems and content, and so far I cautiously liked what I heard and saw. Proof's in the pudding of course, but still.

That postersaid the same thing about Legion and BfA. They confuse their own lack of hype for how everyone feels.

[Jastall]

In fairness a lot of "Anti" was about Pandas but.... I rather not open that can of worms again.

Sure. Just saying people get hyped about the most immediate themes and features, when the quality of the expansion is rated over its duration.

[Trout]

Just watched the Shadowlands trailer on youtube and I can unequivocally say that the entire Shadowlands expansion is going to be bad and Blizzard is bad and Activision is bad and I'm predicting a Q3 2024 release.


/s

[goldentforce]

Just want to post that, don't have reliable source but preach said in stream today that he heard from good channels that alpha would be soon (he said possibly today or tomorrow) and that the friends and family/influencer list is being changed/way more picky cause of the amount of people that don't play the alpha, dont play blizzard games, hate blizzard,etc. So could be another factor they are working out.

[ercarp]

Just want to post that, don't have reliable source but preach said in stream today that he heard from good channels that alpha would be soon (he said possibly today or tomorrow) and that the friends and family/influencer list is being changed/way more picky cause of the amount of people that don't play the alpha, dont play blizzard games, hate blizzard,etc. So could be another factor they are working out.

That sounds ridiculous. How would they even determine who "hates Blizzard"? That makes it sound like they only want yes-men who won't criticize their terrible design decisions. Which is not how an Alpha/Beta for anything should work.

[ExiHext]

That sounds ridiculous. How would they even determine who "hates Blizzard"? That makes it sound like they only want yes-men who won't criticize their terrible design decisions. Which is not how an Alpha/Beta for anything should work.

Indeed that sounds a bit difficult to sort out. What I can imagine is that they analyse their playtime metrics to sort out guys like me who get alpha access but then don't test at all.

[Craaazyyy]

Sure. Just saying people get hyped about the most immediate themes and features, when the quality of the expansion is rated over its duration.

this is true, but for with some things like class design you can figure out whether it's gonna be good or not almost immediately

like in Legion and BfA it took me 10 minutes of Beta to realise that it's gonna suck and i'll quit within a month or two(if not earlier)

they tend to never change classes during the expansion(outside of balancing and some minor fixes)

[Eurhetemec]

I'm not defending anyone, simply criticizing you since you're stooping down to their level. If you feel that strongly about it, maybe don't act like they do and argue in a respectful manner. Had you done so, you'd already have my support.

Huth immediately pointed out that this utter nonsense. I'm not "stooping to their level". I'm miles above them. I'm pointing out that they're not interested in actual discussion or argument or reasoning. But I'm not saying, for example, as one of them did, that people who disagree with me AREN'T EVEN HUMANS, that they're "bots". This is what you ARE actually, de facto, defending, despite claiming otherwise. You're claiming people who say others are "bots" should be "argued with" in a "respectful manner", even though they don't even recognise that you're human.

No.

They can't be argued with at all. What needs to be said is that they aren't worth wasting time on because their views are so extreme. As Huth says, they don't even acknowledge competing opinions as real enough to even disagree with - they just claim people are "bots" and "shills" and "fakes" and "dupes" and so on. You're operating from cloud cuckoo land if you think you can reason with someone who has dismissed you as a "bot" or a "shill" mate. You haven't been following this thread and you don't know what you're talking about.

[Craaazyyy]

How can you say you liked earthliving weapon for class fantasy but you don’t care for totems? Earthliving weapon was something you pressed every hour lmao, it was a set and forget kind of thing.

he definitely meant earthliving weapon with unleash... every shaman spec used to have unleash baseline and based on what enchant they were using it was doing different things

[Eurhetemec]

That sounds ridiculous. How would they even determine who "hates Blizzard"? That makes it sound like they only want yes-men who won't criticize their terrible design decisions. Which is not how an Alpha/Beta for anything should work.

Be real, dude. It sounds ridiculous because it's a ridiculous story someone made up, like the millions of other ridiculous stories people make up. All it would take is for someone who worked at Blizzard to say "We're changing the requirements for alpha entry", and then people will be interpreting that shit to mean whatever they like, and making up stories like this one - stories which have "no reliable source". So take it as a seriously as it deserves - not at all.

[Sarethion]

That sounds ridiculous. How would they even determine who "hates Blizzard"? That makes it sound like they only want yes-men who won't criticize their terrible design decisions. Which is not how an Alpha/Beta for anything should work.

Uhm, not necessarily - take someone like Heelvsbabyface. I watch his videos from time to time and I'm under the impression that no matter what Blizzard did, he'd only be interested in yelling how awful Blizzard/WoW is. That's not helpful and if they're prunning people like him from the alpha list then I'd say that's fine. But if the idea is, like you said, to cut people who are critical (but fair) and only leave yes-men then I agree - that's not going to do them any good.

[Dioporco]

That sounds ridiculous. How would they even determine who "hates Blizzard"? That makes it sound like they only want yes-men who won't criticize their terrible design decisions. Which is not how an Alpha/Beta for anything should work.

I am quite sure that people like HvB hates Blizzard.

[Eurhetemec]

Uhm, not necessarily - take someone like Heelvsbabyface. I watch his videos from time to time and I'm under the impression that no matter what Blizzard did, he'd only be interested in yelling how awful Blizzard/WoW is. That's not helpful and if they're prunning people like him from the alpha list then I'd say that's fine. But if the idea is, like you said, to cut people who are critical (but fair) and only leave yes-men then I agree - that's not going to do them any good.

It's not something that's going to happen though, either. That's the thing. People have totally outrageously bizarre ideas of how much time Blizzard have for sorting through the likely very high hundreds to low thousands of people who the alpha will go out to. Sure, someone who has been completely and loudly outspoken about how "Blizz sucks lol" may get cut (and probably should be - they won't give honest feedback because they don't even like the game - they are worse than a shill, because a shill won't criticise but will give honest balance/bug/etc. feedback). But anyone who isn't loudly hating on Blizzard, they're not going to have time to micro-analyze their Twitter feed, let alone watch through all their Twitch, in order to detect if they're "too critical".

This whole "Blizz will weed out those who are critical!!!!" thing is just not realistic.

[Edward Wu]

Huth immediately pointed out that this utter nonsense. I'm not "stooping to their level". I'm miles above them. I'm pointing out that they're not interested in actual discussion or argument or reasoning. But I'm not saying, for example, as one of them did, that people who disagree with me AREN'T EVEN HUMANS, that they're "bots". This is what you ARE actually, de facto, defending, despite claiming otherwise. You're claiming people who say others are "bots" should be "argued with" in a "respectful manner", even though they don't even recognise that you're human.

No.

They can't be argued with at all. What needs to be said is that they aren't worth wasting time on because their views are so extreme. As Huth says, they don't even acknowledge competing opinions as real enough to even disagree with - they just claim people are "bots" and "shills" and "fakes" and "dupes" and so on. You're operating from cloud cuckoo land if you think you can reason with someone who has dismissed you as a "bot" or a "shill" mate. You haven't been following this thread and you don't know what you're talking about.

There's no need to get this hysterical. Getting called a shill/bot isn't that bad of an insult, and it certainly doesn't mean you're not human. I clearly wasted my time criticizing you because you're so riled up by these guys that there was never any hope for productive discourse. Generally when someone calls me out for being a Blizzard shill, and that's happened in the past, I've tried to use evidence and reason to get them to open up. Sometimes, it's been successful. I know MMO-C posters can easily rile you up since the passive-aggressiveness here is off the charts, and I didn't mean to criticize you because I am against you, but because I did actually think better of you than the people you were arguing with.

[Dioporco]

Or they just feel hating Blizzard is good marketing.

but that is more the case of Asmongold?

[Eurhetemec]

There's no need to get this hysterical. Getting called a shill/bot isn't that bad of an insult, and it certainly doesn't mean you're not human. I clearly wasted my time criticizing you because you're so riled up by these guys that there was never any hope for productive discourse. Generally when someone calls me out for being a Blizzard shill, and that's happened in the past, I've tried to use evidence and reason to get them to open up. Sometimes, it's been successful. I know MMO-C posters can easily rile you up since the passive-aggressiveness here is off the charts, and I didn't mean to criticize you because I am against you, but because I did actually think better of you than the people you were arguing with.

Oh for god's sake dude... Just try to actually follow the conversation, rather than slapping your own exotic nonsense on it.

You've literally just arrived here. You have 33 posts. You're acting like you know this place. You don't. You're acting like you know the posters I'm discussing. You don't. You're acting like a sweet summer child. You're Jon Snowing it up. Not in a good way.

I'm not talking about some rando who one time called you a "shill". I'm talking about people who call EVERYONE who disagrees with them a "bot" or "shill". Not individually. You're not getting it. This isn't someone calling ME a shill, or you a bot. This is people labeling LITERALLY EVERYONE who disagrees with them as a "bots" or "shills" or "fakes".

You've got this weird obsession, which is all on you, about "that bad of an insult", but you're hard-proving that totally not getting it. It's not about "insult". Why the hell would it be? It's about people who aren't willing to argue. I'm not "insulted" when some guy say "Everyone who disagrees with me is a Blizzard shill". Rather, because I'm not a total noob, I am aware that people who say stuff like that aren't interested in "rational argument" or "mature discussions". They're just interested in negativity and ranting. There's a huge difference between someone who individually discusses stuff and is childish enough to call someone a "shill", and someone who just blanket-claims everyone who disagrees with them is a "shill", "fake", or "bot" or the like.

Also this deal: "because I did actually think better of you than the people you were arguing with" - just sigh - I don't care. I don't mean that in an insulting way, but I don't care. Actions speak louder than words, and you're arguing with me, not with the dudes blanket-labeling everyone as "shills" or insisting the expansion will definitely be shit because Cataclysm-era class design was shit or the like. The only reason I'm still responding is that you don't seem to understand the problems (for example, hence you talking about whether it's "insulting" or not, which is irrelevant).

[Dioporco]

Or they just feel hating Blizzard is good marketing.

but that is more the case of Asmongold?

[Dracullus]

Calm down, they won't remove anyone, maybe beside shits like HvS and his mighty 50 views on twitch.

Alpha serves both as initial testing and promotion of expac. That's why they invite top players and/or (usually or) streamers. They will invite people like sodappopin even if he has nothing constructive to say.

[Gurahk]

I don't see the problem in removing people like Heels. In fact, he'll probably "quit" this expansion and come back in one expansion or two like he did with Legion.