Blizzard trying to dictate what is "meaningful".

[Soon-TM]

How many more times must they try solo content, minigames, timed features before YOU think they should give social a SHOT??????????

Well, "social" these days equals to !@#$ like toxic.io, so I can see where that reluctance comes from. However, they cannot fight it because it's ingrained in how the game is being designed, so it seems that toxic.io will be incorporated into the game, if the news on MMOC main page were any true.

[El Gucaragua]

choosing the most powerfull option is STILL a choice, you dont have to do that (unless you play on hall of fame level) at all, you CHOOSE TO do that...

If the ability is the easiest to use, and mathematically does the best in most of the games content, then sure you are by definition making a choice to pick that. But the point is whether that choice is meaningful, and in that scenario... not even. There are legendary items that I feel are thematically cooler than what I am using for single-target that I do not use because I cannot. At that point, I do less damage in the game. So yes, I made that choice - but it has no meaning to me. Nor was it really following the guidelines of meaningful choice to begin with because it all revolves around math - and that is completely fine. Same with talents. But things like representing a faction that presents to the world your ideals through membership, is not the same thing. That does not impact gameplay.

"if the choice was different some people would choose differently" ...does that even need to be said? i mean ofc people make the choice based on the potential results...

Yes, it does need to be said because it is supporting the foundations of the objective stance on meaningful choice that I laid out, considering Blizzard's complete lie that Covenants are said meaningful choice. Not as in-depth as it could have been, but it is a forum post after all.

[Lolites]

Yes, it does need to be said because it is supporting the foundations of the objective stance on meaningful choice that I laid out, considering Blizzard's complete lie that Covenants are said meaningful choice. Not as in-depth as it could have been, but it is a forum post after all.

i understand some people are so obsessed with power they would screw others who rather have the choice to be meaningful, just so they can be 1% more effective in all situations, but why should those who want the choice to matter care about selfish assholes who will pick whatever is "best" for them anyway?

and yes, covenants truly are meaningful choice, you and some other people choosing power above all doesnt change that, its choice YOU made, other people did different choice and are happy with covenant as they are, and there is ABSOLUTELY NO REASON to change it to your liking and f*ck everyone who disagree...

you think the choice is meaningless? then pick whats "best" and let others have their fun, you are not the center of the universe... or if its soo horrible quit the game and let others enjoy what they like...

[Jotaux]

The problem I have is I want to play two specs, the best for one is the worst for the other and visa versa. So either I play one with the best, the other with the worst or play both mediocrely.

[El Gucaragua]

i understand some people are so obsessed with power they would screw others who rather have the choice to be meaningful, just so they can be 1% more effective in all situations, but why should those who want the choice to matter care about selfish assholes who will pick whatever is "best" for them anyway?

and yes, covenants truly are meaningful choice, you and some other people choosing power above all doesnt change that, its choice YOU made, other people did different choice and are happy with covenant as they are, and there is ABSOLUTELY NO REASON to change it to your liking and f*ck everyone who disagree...

you think the choice is meaningless? then pick whats "best" and let others have their fun, you are not the center of the universe... or if its soo horrible quit the game and let others enjoy what they like...

I did in fact pick what's best, because if I didn't I as a Fury Warrior would be gimped. If I had actually been allowed to make a meaningful choice, I would've gone with Necrolords. Strength coming from the bonds with your family is far more appealing to me as a concept than atoning for one's sins, which I still like but again, not as much. Plus the plate armor is cooler in my humble opinion.

And if anyone being objective about the flaws of the system is ruining your 'fun' with the system, because I take it at this point you really like the system, too bad. Sometimes it's better to avoid the brick wall than attempt to plow through it - in regards to your attempts at dismantling my points.

[ZazuuPriest]

you should heed you own advice and use your brain...

you have 3 soulbinds and 3 specs (unless you play druid or DH ofc), unless you play on absolute peak (hall of fame or similar level in pvp/M+) you can absolutely have each soulbind set for different spec, its perfectly viable, just not 100% optimal...

so people should be forced to gimp themselves because they are not world first raiders? that's your argument? are you intentionally retarded or was it an accident?

[huth]

so people should be forced to gimp themselves because they are not world first raiders? that's your argument? are you intentionally retarded or was it an accident?

Not optimal is not the same as gimped. There's a wide range between perfect and not usable. You're the one that should be asked this question if you can't grasp that.

[Tronski]

This actually answered the original post's introduction :



You're obviously the one confused here. You're telling me I'm blindly following Blizzard because I say that game >DESIGNERS< are shaping the many path player are meant to take when they play, which is true for any game as they are defined by a set of rules - no matter if it's meant to be sold or not. And it's even more accurate when a game has to sell because there's plenty of other games with other rules on the market.

I haven't even expressed my opinion on whether or not those rules are right because I think people are overreacting or simply not understanding what Ion attempted to say (here, OP complained because he thought Blizzard was saying him what he has to enjoy). Yet you're thinking I'm telling the decisions Blizzard takes are right. And for reasons, taking this stance would make me a "blind follower". Well done.

You still added nothing to the discussion, but thanks for clarifying that you in fact did not add anything, and I apologize for confusing your statement with support for your own statement in this case.

I'll rephrase my first post: We all know it's their game and that they can design it as they want, hence why you stating this adds nothing, but we are trying to tell them why there's less and less people that want what they make for each passing day and that they have to change something before it actually is too late.

[Popokolara]

Not optimal is not the same as gimped. There's a wide range between perfect and not usable. You're the one that should be asked this question if you can't grasp that.

Do you know what is the difference between a venthyr disco priest and a necrolord one? Or a fae? Give me an estimate of what you would consider acceptable in number difference, a percentage.

[Yarathir]

Actually, Blizzard trying to dictate what is meaningful in their game is totally legitimate as it is, you know, their game. And they're the one shaping the rules of this game.

Not how it works. What is meaningful isn't some decree from up above. Blizzard can make decisions and justify them by saying they're for the sake of making it meaningful, but that doesn't make it so.

- - - Updated - - -

If you can swap whenever you want, as many times as you want, what's the point in having to make a choice in the first place?

This is entirely a game development conundrum that they made themselves. Who said there had to be a point in it?

That's right, no one but Ion.

[huth]

Do you know what is the difference between a venthyr disco priest and a necrolord one? Or a fae? Give me an estimate of what you would consider acceptable in number difference, a percentage.

Do you know what anecdotal evidence is? Besides, relative difference isn't important. What matters is that the weakest combination is still viable, and i'm not talking about the community fostered delusion that viable = best there is, but the real world definition of being usable for the purpose.

[Crimson Spears]

Not how it works. What is meaningful isn't some decree from up above. Blizzard can make decisions and justify them by saying they're for the sake of making it meaningful, but that doesn't make it so.

- - - Updated - - -


This is entirely a game development conundrum that they made themselves. Who said there had to be a point in it?

That's right, no one but Ion.

I did find the whole theme of locking players in a confusing one. Before this expansion I can't recall a similar system to it beyond artifact weapons for the first patch. This expansion strikes me as a grand experiment to see if they could stop players from forming metas and adhering to them rigidly. The player base of course reacted as it always has when given a choice and simcrafted the fuck out of it and became even more ridged then it was before.

[WintersLegion]

this here is the point you (and a lot of other people) seem not to understand, they dont tell you what to enjoy, they serve you the game as they made it, and if you dont enjoy it you should LEAVE ffs

wanting them to change the game to your taste is equivalent of going into vegetarian restaurant and demanding steak - its not your choice what they will sell, however its your choice if you want to have it or if you will go elsewhere...

- - - Updated - - -



was it? as far as i remember it was developers making games the way they decided, and players buying the game or not, thats it, no other options for players... when was this magical time when they changed games according to every whim of every player?
that actualy got better with developers, blizzard included have feedback and if they see it as a good idea they do change game accordingly (and yes they do, just bcs they didnt change it according to YOUR feedback doesnt mean they ignore feedback)

I remember when players kept saying they wanted the Developers to make the game Developer wanted and now it's become make the game I want you to make or you are an evil company that needs to go out of business.

[Lolites]

I remember when players kept saying they wanted the Developers to make the game Developer wanted and now it's become make the game I want you to make or you are an evil company that needs to go out of business.

well, nowadays everyone think they know best, and going by most "do this to save game" threads, they dont know shit...
i mostly love when people dump on changes in game that came literaly from what people wanted thats always amusing

[huth]

I did find the whole theme of locking players in a confusing one. Before this expansion I can't recall a similar system to it beyond artifact weapons for the first patch. This expansion strikes me as a grand experiment to see if they could stop players from forming metas and adhering to them rigidly. The player base of course reacted as it always has when given a choice and simcrafted the fuck out of it and became even more ridged then it was before.

Choosing your class. You still can't change that one. Seems like you weren't looking very hard.

[Popokolara]

Do you know what anecdotal evidence is? Besides, relative difference isn't important. What matters is that the weakest combination is still viable, and i'm not talking about the community fostered delusion that viable = best there is, but the real world definition of being usable for the purpose.

would you like to answer the question though?
i dont know how anecdotal evidence are relevant.

[Stormwolf64]

Im not the first to defend blizzard, but its their game to do with as they wish. But you're allowed to disagree with their developments.

[huth]

would you like to answer the question though?
i dont know how anecdotal evidence are relevant.

You got your answer. And the whole point is that it isn't, so you trying to bring it up isn't, either.

[Zyrinx]

Tell me about it. I hate having to choose a name for characters, their class and which spec to play. Why can't I swap all of it on the fly? If my current priest wants to suddenly be dual dagger stabby stabby rogue, why can't she? Mid combat too, preferably. Down with the restrictions!

I suspect you're being sarcastic here, but other MMOs do exactly this. Maybe not "on the fly" but yeah.

[Thelxi]

They've had long enough to prove their point about "meaningful choices", but so far the only thing they've produced in my eyes is a barrage of choices between quality of life/preference and performance. Taking away shit only to give it back towards the end of the expansion has gotten old too. Legion is widely regarded as the best expansion, and it was nothing but excess with everyone and their mother getting a car.

Something isn't adding up here, but hey nothing ever fully adds up when it comes to WoW's game design since they never talk about the business and retention side of the design which is like talking about house construction without ever talking about walls or foundations.