"We want Vanilla" "No wait we want a FIXED Vanilla!"

[Aldarana]

Just wanna clarify the "change anything and its not vanilla" position:
So suppose they release the Classic servers with no changes at all, all the old bugs and everything still there. If someone finds a new exploit that wasn't discovered in 2004-2007, something that lets say allows them dupe any item or one-shot any raid boss by themselves, would you want Blizz to fix it?

Say they release patches exactly like the did back in the day and don't just have the game run on the last version before the TBC pre-patch. Some of those old patches fixed exploits and bugs, this time everyone will know what the exploits are from the start, should Blizz fix all of those exploits earlier than they did in the past or just let people use them for however long they existed back in Vanilla?

What about addons? If people create new addons that give players access to tools that didn't exist back then should Blizz break the API to prevent that? What about malicious things you used to be able to do with the WoW API like steal all the gold from a character when they went to mail something. I'm not familiar with the Vanilla API so maybe none of the things I mentioned are possible but if they are should Blizz stop it?

If with these kinds of things in mind you still don't want any changes made at all I guess I just wonder why. These sorts of things seem to me like they have the potential to destroy the Vanilla experience as it existed back in 2004-2007 but maybe you see it differently?

[Kynario]

"The essence of vanilla" is one of those concepts that's going to differ for everyone. Better that they just avoid the essence and do it like it was.

But it’s not 2004 anymore... they’re still actively balancing and fixing Wacraft 3, right? Pretty sure they fixed some things for Starcraft Remastered too. WoW Classic will have to be fixed just based on the fact that the code is outdated, bad, and exploits via addons used to be possible. Other balance changes to knock specs into an equilibrium will have to be made too. Will it still be “Vanilla” though? That’s up for debate and subjective for sure. Still... It just doesn’t feel right saying: here have a broken and unbalanced game exactly as it was, enjoy.

[clevin]

You understood.

That you're some loser on the web who nevertheless thinks he's a real man? Yeah, I got it. You, though, got /Ignore.

[Requimortem]

What if we get Vanilla and they still update it with patches? Say it's 1.13, still WoW before tBC or 2.0 patch.

As long as they're the same patches with the same changes/content in vanilla then that's fine. Of course at that point it'll stagnate and players will complain there's nothing else for them to do.

[clevin]

I don't get the logic "If they change anything, it isn't Vanilla". Adding AOE loot doesn't make it vanilla? Why?

Because while that change might not be breaking every little thing you add or change takes it farther from what vanilla really was.

I mean, as a hunter you had to level a tamed pet if you were higher than it. You had to feed that pet to keep it happy or it would eventually run off. Different pets would only eat certain food so you couldn't just buy some generic Pet Food and feed it to any pet. Why not do away with all of that? Would that REALLY break the game? Well, no. But it's that much further from being vanilla then.

They should deliver as pure a vanilla experience as is possible, fixing only the worst, breaking bugs and security exploits. No QoL changes. No class or spell updates. IF that's not OK with you... did you really want vanilla? Or some theoretical, fantasy version of the game that never existed except in your mind?

[Deleted]

https://go.twitch.tv/hotted89

Vanilla discussion happening right now

Watch if you want (With Sodapoppin and Asmongold)

[Sariengrey]

If Blizz releases the classic version exactly the same as it was "at the end" aka right before TBC launched, and they should imo, or you are not really playing Vanilla.They can't change 1 single thing or its not THE SAME EXPERIENCE! Say this is the case and again it should be.......all I got to say is most everyone who haven't played it, private or otherwise, are going to be in for a shock! Forums should be quite entertaining........I just don't see many folks going the long haul, just can't see it, sorry......

[Deleted]

Because while that change might not be breaking every little thing you add or change takes it farther from what vanilla really was.

Vanilla was many different things. It was an ever-changing game. Many things were added, removed or changed during its lifetime. What do you presume is the "purest" vanilla experience? All the patches in order in which they were released? Or one specific patch? And if you think it was one specific patch, I have to ask: why that one? Because that one changed something that you didn't like about the game in a previous patch? And, if so, weren't there things about that patch that you deem the "purest" that, at the time, you would've liked to see changed? So why not just change them? Are these classic servers supposed to be like an artifact in a museum, untouchable, unchangeable? Is that what we really want? I don't believe so. At its core, there are a number of features that made vanilla WoW what it was, yes, and they shouldn't be changed, I can agree on that. For example, I believe that vanilla was all about the world and social interaction, and there are things like LFG that would kill that. But outside of what's really the core of vanilla, I don't see why things shouldn't be changed, if that makes for a better experience while preserving what made vanilla what it was.

[Coconut]

Watch if you want (With Sodapoppin and Asmongold)

Don't take this the wrong way, but I just love watching Sodapoppin, who was the ripe age of 11 in Vanilla, pull those smug, all-knowing faces as he thinks about those times And I remember many Vanilla raiding guilds had an age requirement of 14 or older because younger members had issues with their bed time.

[Deleted]

Don't take this the wrong way, but I just love watching Sodapoppin, who was the ripe age of 11 in Vanilla, pull those smug, all-knowing faces as he thinks about those times And I remember many Vanilla raiding guilds had an age requirement of 14 or older because younger members had issues with their bed time.

Oh im loving the stream dude. He is not 11 anymore ^_^

[Deleted]

I was never crying for Vanilla/Classic servers, but I'm welcoming them. I played in Vanilla and I sucked. I had no idea back then what the "real" goal was like (obviously raiding l.a.m.f). My main reachded ~40lvlish, so I guess I'm not even certified to take part of this conversation. I would like to have authentic "vanilla experience" but I don't really give a f*ck if our beloved corporate gods decide to make it accesible experince. I might be wrong but it's possible they cave in to balance classes and stuff....

[Aqua]

I suppose this doesn't make sense to me. If you didn't play Vanilla, why would you want to change it when the campaign was for "Authenticity?"

Well Authenticity is many things to different people. I mean there are certainly bugs in the game that can be ironed out, but no one wants them to change the core gameplay, the difficulty curve, the grind. I see nothing wrong with smoothing the old blanket out, After all it's what all the private servers strived for too and I'd say it worked more or less. You had a core vanilla experience with a few polished bits here and there that detracted from nothing.

Maybe a little less of a bullshit Horseman fight in Naxxramas, that'd be the only thing I'd be interested in seeing change. If they decide to leave it as is, I'm cool with that too, nothing ...months and months of grind and tears won't fix. Heh...heh... euuurgh...

[RemasteredClassic]

I don't believe it's hard to make everyone happy when it comes to Classic WoW servers. The group wanting Vanilla exactly as it was and the group that wants to play with enhanced Legion-quality graphics can both be made happy without forcing one to play the others' desired version. Kronos private server proves this to be 100% possible. I don't advocate private servers and only experimented with new graphics on them to prove it can be done effortlessly.

The difference is an option toggled on or off. Blizzard would simply need to add a patch-#.MPQ with new models for everything in the world, not just player models, and whenever the option to see them is toggled on, the game would load enhanced versions of pretty much everything in game from players to npcs to mounts and even buildings from the modern models database in said .MPQ file (references to all the Legion-quality DB entries for all in-game objects shared with Classic?) and whenever it's toggled off, it would default to the original pure vanilla graphics.

Another incentive to keep the same group that wants enhanced graphics and possibly even the vanila-only hardcore purists "I wont touch anything but pure vanilla" group wanting to play both versions of the game would be to give achievements unlocking cosmetic rewards on current wow whenever a player earns or achieves something challenging to get/do in Classic wow WITHOUT touching Classic wow. In other words, the crazy elitists who have absolutely no life and don't care about the enjoyment of seeing their favorite game with new visuals won't be forced to play a modified game and those who want changes won't be forced to play the ugly looking World of Warcraft. I personally don't want any play-ability changes, and am just asking for updated visuals WITHOUT forcing them on everyone.

I believe that if Blizzard doesn't do this, all the new players who are just getting to know of WoW's existence (the kids still in their early teens) won't be attracted to it at all and it will eventually die out.

[Cheerbleeder]

I believe that if Blizzard doesn't do this, all the new players who are just getting to know of WoW's existence (the kids still in their early teens) won't be attracted to it at all and it will eventually die out.

You made some fair points but have you not seen the success of Nintendo relaunching its classic NES and SNES systems. They're selling so fast, that they aren't even on the shelves at your local store. Granted they did boost the quailty so it could be played on 4k televisons but thats because late 80s, early 90s graphics were 256x224 pixels. So there I could see why Nintendo did it. World of Warcarft Classic does not need to do this in my opinon. That old timeless look from the old models should stay and the game should just get a modern restoration - and when I say modern, only working on current Operating Systems.

Also why should classic appeal to new players? If millions of people are playing it when it goes live, word of mouth and twitch streamers will market the game for us. No need to make a flashy new box with new features!

[clevin]

Vanilla was many different things. It was an ever-changing game. Many things were added, removed or changed during its lifetime. What do you presume is the "purest" vanilla experience? All the patches in order in which they were released? Or one specific patch? And if you think it was one specific patch, I have to ask: why that one? Because that one changed something that you didn't like about the game in a previous patch?

I think there are different valid answers to those questions. One way would be to progress from 1.0 to 2.01. Another would be to take 1.12 or 2.01 as the truest expression of what they intended Vanilla to be. Of course, there were non-bug/tuning changes over time - the opening of raids, the move from UBRS/Strat/Scholo as raids to 5 mans, etc.

Are these classic servers supposed to be like an artifact in a museum, untouchable, unchangeable? Is that what we really want? I don't believe so.

For years people asked for vanilla. Because it was so good. Start there. But changing things at launch means you were all lying... yo didn't want Vanilla, you wanted Vanilla plus some stuff in your head.

But outside of what's really the core of vanilla, I don't see why things shouldn't be changed, if that makes for a better experience while preserving what made vanilla what it was.

And who decides what those core features are?* You? Someone else? Are short pally Blessings really core to Vanilla? Poison reagents for rogues? Feeding pets? AOE looting? Most important... why do some of you not really want vanilla in any form but want some other game based off it? Were you all lying when you kept screaming for Classic because it was SO GOOD?



*(Obviously, Blizzard will in reality...)

[Deleted]

alot did. i asked myself when i did, and ALOT of them play because it is free, and would not play retail ones if they cost anything more then a one time purchase

Well thats just not my impression. But ill guess we will see

[Deleted]

I think there are different valid answers to those questions. One way would be to progress from 1.0 to 2.01. Another would be to take 1.12 or 2.01 as the truest expression of what they intended Vanilla to be. Of course, there were non-bug/tuning changes over time - the opening of raids, the move from UBRS/Strat/Scholo as raids to 5 mans, etc.

Why would that be the truest expression of what they intended Vanilla to be? What Blizzard intended the game to be at the start was probably a very different thing than what it became as the game went on, due to player demand, due to changes in the design philosophy, etc. I started playing the game around patch 1.7, when the Dressing Room appeared. In the previous patch, 1.6, Battlemasters were implemented, so you didn't have to travel to the physical entrance of a battleground to join it. My Vanilla experience was, thus, vastly different from those who started playing before. If I join Classic servers, I expect battlemasters and dressing rooms to be around, but another player who has joined before 1.6 or 1.7 won't expect those things. So, whose expectations should prevail? The expectations of the player that joined later? Thing is, he didn't actually live the full, "truest" vanilla experience. I can't consider 1.12 to be the "truest expression" of Vanilla because a player who joined around that time didn't live everything that people who joined at launch lived. So what is it then?

For years people asked for vanilla. Because it was so good. Start there. But changing things at launch means you were all lying... yo didn't want Vanilla, you wanted Vanilla plus some stuff in your head.

Look, I can see why someone that wants to play Vanilla wouldn't want to have the LFG system or quest markers. I can't understand why someone wouldn't want to have at least the OPTION to have remastered graphics, AoE loot or the ability to keep riding a mount even after getting in water. Those are very minor things that don't change the core of Vanilla.

And who decides what those core features are?* You? Someone else?

We, the community. That's why we're discussing this. Blizzard will pick up on which side of discussion outweights the other and make decisions accordingly.

Are short pally Blessings really core to Vanilla? Poison reagents for rogues? Feeding pets? AOE looting? Most important... why do some of you not really want vanilla in any form but want some other game based off it? Were you all lying when you kept screaming for Classic because it was SO GOOD?

No one is lying. People still want Classic. But some people still want to play an improved game. You can actually have both, unlike some people would make believe. Keep the core, fix minor issues, and everyone will love it.

[Deficineiron]

I think this is what Blizzard was most afraid of when people were crying for legacy servers.

To the people who want the same experience, this post isn't aimed at you. It's more aimed at the 10+ threads I've seen for the day begging for changes to classes, "QOL" changes, questing changes, XP changes etc.

I'm not here to say be "grateful" that you're getting Vanilla servers, in fact I'm happy for you guys. During this entire campaign, I've been curious as to how the "good ole days" were since I wasn't exactly old enough to enjoy Vanilla properly. I'm actually excited to try it. That being said, I know I'm not gonna stick to it and spend that much time on it. But I'll gladly try it out.

But why ask for changes now? Was it such a dream for Vanilla servers that you guys didn't expect Blizzard to do it, and now you want a "Fixed Vanilla?"
If this experience really is changed can it even be considered Vanilla? I'm genuinely curious about this, because I feel like the fight before was "Retail vs Classic" and this is going to devolve into "Vanilla w/changes vs. Vanilla without changes"

I will be very surprised if in fact there are not substantial changes to classic to accomodate the modern, impatient playerbase.

- - - Updated - - -

No one is lying. People still want Classic. But some people still want to play an improved game. You can actually have both, unlike some people would make believe. Keep the core, fix minor issues, and everyone will love it.

The issue as you doubtless know is that while some changes are almost mandatory, it is a slippery slope.

What if they decide to target this classic thing towards their CURRENT playerbase as well as former players, for example?

What if what I suspect is a increasing reliance on participation.completion metrics which started sometimes after bc or wotlk is brought to classic (hard to see why, none of the content is new, but they are a really big company now...)? the way you get those numbers up is to nerf it into the ground, speed it up, and improve rewards.....

[Hanto]

I don't think wanting a "fixed" Vanilla is the same as not wanting Vanilla (or the idea of an authentic experience) at all. Adding things that future expansions introduced (like group finder, for example) takes away from that experience, thus is not conducive with the experience. Having bugs and exploits fixed on launch that were prevalent at the game's end seems like it's better for everyone.

Honestly it sounds like the people saying it SHOULD launch with the bugs and players have to deal with them (when there's already a freaking fix known and available) just sound like the people that are against this whole Classic WoW idea completely.

[Morssoe]

I don't think wanting a "fixed" Vanilla is the same as not wanting Vanilla (or the idea of an authentic experience) at all. Adding things that future expansions introduced (like group finder, for example) takes away from that experience, thus is not conducive with the experience. Having bugs and exploits fixed on launch that were prevalent at the game's end seems like it's better for everyone.

Honestly it sounds like the people saying it SHOULD launch with the bugs and players have to deal with them (when there's already a freaking fix known and available) just sound like the people that are against this whole Classic WoW idea completely.

Yep, ppl who want changes are salty legion players trying to sabotage better game.