Page 15 of 15 FirstFirst ...
  1. #281
    Quote Originally Posted by Montyishere View Post
    People are funny. When they think that giving something MORE means less. Somehow, my playing Tri spec will mean something to them. This is not a zero sum game. It is a communal game made up of small groups and having the option of having more opportunities to enjoy does not take away from those that choose NOT to use all three or four specs.
    While I won't focus on the tri-spec argument (because to me, it really is an irrelevant one no matter if it's implemented or not), you might want to consider the notion that decisions without consequences, have an effect of having less importance to them. Granted, consequences is a heavy word and has a negative connotation to it... lets instead use 'limitations'. This is true in video games, and it's true in 'real' life as well.

    I think folks who have played a lot of older MMO's probably get this, even if it's on an unconscious level, because 'back then', when you decided what you wanted to do in the game, well... that's the road you traveled. And in many games, unlearning what you knew and choosing a different path often had a penalty along with it. The games were, as you know, such a time investment that alts were sort of a rarity unless you had a LOT of time, or were just starting over completely. So you put effort, and a lot of thought into what you wanted, and you just played... and likely didn't change unless you felt quite hampered.

    So we now have this game, in which the only irreversible decision you have for a character is what class he's going to be. EVERY single other aspect can be changed at any point, there is no effective risk of loss, or setback (unless your account is compromised). Actually, the most severe 'decision' made in this game is that when you re-gem or re-enchant, you destroy the old one.

    All of these things naturally make the daily ins and outs of the game fairly trivial, and fairly forgettable. People take them for granted as conveniences, and of course want more of them.

    Lets look at things from a different view. What if Blizzard implemented an option in the game where, if you already have 1 max level character, you can make as many more as you like, PTR style? These characters would start out fully decked in last tier gear, have 5 or 10k gold, and 1 profession of your choice already maxed. This of course, would be completely optional, and if you wanted to continue leveling alts the old fashioned way, you could.

    This is certainly a convenience, and again, isn't something you have to use if you don't like it. Is this something you'd vote for?
    Beautiful veins and bloodshot eyes.
    "If you are not capable of cruelty, you are absolutely a victim to anyone who is" - J. Peterson

  2. #282
    You make some good points but avoid the main point of Tri spec.

    As to your example of getting alts. To answer your question, no I would not do that because I did enjoy leveling up my alts but I would have no problem with someone doing that if they wished as it does not limit or effect me. Blizz is trying to do this in some way with the Refer a Friend program. They also did it almost to the point with DKs. Remember you can get a level 55DK if you had a max toon. I don't remember a big scream about that.

    As to your point of older games. Although that has some merit to your argument, it is not germain to the topic as it has not bearing on it. We are discussing the idea and merits of Tri Spec.

    I would appreciate your input into that as it is very apparent you are one of the better writers in this forum and give things good thought.

  3. #283
    Don't tell us about "old games" as it brings us back to "why line is drawn here" topic. I mean before Cata's beta or may be before WotLK there really was some "rules", "logic" and etc. in this game to deal with. And both players and developers was defending them. But eventually Blizzard started to "brake" this "rules". First they were trying to find some strong explanations for this changes: mana should be meanfull, threat must be meanfull, you have to make choices, blah blah blah (total BS, as we know now). And at some point they became too lazy to even provide some explanations - now changes are made without any strong reasons. Why we need heroic scenarios? Nobody knows and nobody asked for this. And players became too sick of all this fighting for old things, that they now just don't care about it anymore. And so it just looks so funny, when GC pretends, that he is BC/Vanilla oldfag and he protects this old sweet values due to old logic and rules. Don't make me laugh. It's just looks so hypocritical. The whole game is "broken" for sake of convience. Almost nothing left from your old game. And he stopped at the point, where long awaited feature, very usefull for many and many players, should be at least implemented? I don't belive in this BS. I mean, if you and GC defend "old rules" so much, may be we should bring back old talent system, remove CRZ, remove flying mounts in Azeroth, bring back arrows, remove some spells from classes, who hasn't them in old times and etc.? No? Why? There were some reasons to implement this: the game is evolving and it brings more and more convience to players. Tri-spec - is just a QOL change too.
    Last edited by AVPaul; 2013-05-03 at 03:43 AM.
    Sorry for my bad english.
    WOW Signature.(Warning! 10.9Mb gif animation!) MWO Signature.(Warning! 3.9Mb gif animation!)
    I think it's really easy and even attractive to people to daydream about worst case scenarios┬ęBashiok
    "No flying - no sub" Club "No tiers in LFR - no sub" Club

  4. #284
    I would lovev to have Tri-Spec but if they still b... about it after 8 years to bring a simple feature like that then i dont care anymore.
    A Trip-Spec was way more important in the past where you could choose your own Talents, nowadays there is no big reason to have one.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts