Well, impressions are relative/individual, but from mechanics point of view - this was the worst option of "old system". For example,
MoP was the best option of "new system" but! new one is worse than old in coherence with RPG component of this game. Ie, I can say that I liked MoP classes design, but I continue to argue that in general it's bad system for this particular game. Is that more clear? Mastery was crap in way they implemented it, but reforging was good. Glyphs was added
during WotLK, in fact, they were additional "talent" options and could be easily realized inside talent trees, but they found a good place for a new profession, which isn't bad in itself.
- I could like smoking, but this still doesn't mean that it's healthy for my organism.
I may like system, but this doesn't mean that it's correct/better. Just as for current game design, todays class system design is appropriate (*shudders&frowns* it's disgusting to associate this filth with word "design" in general, but let's say this way), but here already conflict is much more global and flawed is
entire game design, because it was created in attempt to divide indivisible (аnd the first steps were laid exactly by Cataclysm with its "separation into specs"/LFR/CRZ/phasing attempts). Most evident and obvious present ex.
Originally Posted by Blizzard Entertainment
The team wants to see more class representation in Mythic + and the MDI and will consider this when adding affixes in the future.
- it was
needless to take into consideration such shitty additions during class design in MoP (as well as in previous expansions), so... but
exactly Cataclysm was transition from old global design to new one, and it fully concerns class design too -
it wasn't old and it wasn't new, it was transitional hybrid that had no independent future, because it had disadvantages of both systems together.
Originally Posted by
Alkizon
What follows from this +:
- game rules (design) are more important than desires and capabilities of subscribers AND! developers together.
Ie it's necessary to listen to everyone whenever possible, but make decisions according to rules for not disturbing game world harmony and not spoil relations with/within community. There is no reason to blame community for what happened, decisions weren't ultimately taken by them. Something like this.
Originally Posted by
Alkizon
I repeat, opinion is a non-permanent and relative thing, there is nothing wrong with any opinions, but... Rules and laws (basics of your game design: you change it - you get another game,
other clients, another attitude towards yourself, you make someone unhappy; maybe it's worth to stop right away on creating another game?) should always be higher than opinions when making a decision, then you don't have to justify it for someone. By adhering to this you will preserve game and customer base integrity. Moreover, they will be much more confident and kinder (psychological climate) because they won't be afraid that someone else will come tomorrow, then ask to change something and company will find it expedient (more profitable = money are worth of loss reputation, trust, fairness and people together). And all responsibility for this lies solely on developers. They must be
guardians, not intruders.
ps. Do you know why so-called Blizzard fans' behavior is very offensive sometimes? Is it because they also aren't trust developers, understanding that they can just same way change/return everything back? Is it because these developers have already done so in the past (neglected rules, betrayed their old customers), which means that this can happen with current ones?
There's a world behind the world, Professor Robinson. Lie once, cheat twice and everything becomes clear. Do not mistake my deception for a character flaw. It is philosophical choice, a profound understanding of the universe. It is a way of life. (
c)