Can we stop with the slippery slope arguments

[Biged781]

Is it so difficult to understand that the people who started this want Vanilla exactly as it was in its day?

If you don't like that game, if you want to implement changes, legacy is NOT for you. I don't know what Blizzard is going to release as Classic though, as it is entirely up to them, but Legacy Vanilla = no changes

That's not true; there's an entire spectrum of people who want this and they all have different views.

I, for example, will be playing classic on day 1 and want the experience to be that of vanilla wow. I do _not_ think e.g. adding mass loot changes that experience. Shutting down any discussion of change is just intellectually lazy, and I'm pretty sure the people you're referencing do _not_ want 1.0 (probably 1.12)

[Powerogue]

I've never once suggested a change that would in any way impact the social element or difficulty of the game. Only QoL changes to things that were objectively badly designed the first time around. No challenging gameplay or social experience is added by having to mail items one at a time. I would never suggest flying, heirlooms, pet battles, or anything else particularly iconic or game-changing from later expansions.

I think the closest thing I've suggested to that is summoning "meeting" stones not being a useless and redundant feature and actually being usable for summoning, but even that came in the BC prepatch and I still count that as vanilla.

[evogsr]

Ok then excuse me, I assumed that reading comprehension was high enough to detect small exaggerations sprinkled through my post. You are correct technically I said nobody. Ya got me beaten

In case you were worried, I'm not actually worried I will have to literally wait forever, that was just another small exaggeration I put in for flavor

So it's all just exaggerating, and a certain level of reading comprehension should have caught this completely regardless of how much emphasis and importance that updated graphics are to you in almost every post you make?

With even low reading comprehension you could see that your explanation looks a lot like back peddling.

Let me make it clear. It was evident where you being facetious and where you weren't. I know you weren't being completely literal about every last person being in agreement with you about graphics, but that bit is muddied by your investment about the graphics debate- moreso when you tell someone else that they're naive if they believe differently. Given two or three posts now, you've said it with different words that you believe graphics are important to people only being supported by its importance to you. The part about waiting forever isn't as it was embellished.

Chalk it up to poor choice of words friend. You have some misguided notion that I'm trying to "beat" you. I'm not. I will point you to previous statements you made and hope you can reason it out, which is exactly what I was doing.

Anyway, I'm done with all of this. You can have the last word and to the topic at hand: Purist here who is a-okay with toggle graphics being a thing or not being a thing.

[chrisnumbers]

that's like saying that shop lifting and murder are just as bad.

I'm talking about a video game, not taking someone's life.

[Armourboy]

I will admit poor word choices, but I was reflecting off of what I have seen in my many years of gaming experience, not just my own personal views. For me personally graphics aren't that important to me, but I acknowledge that that is not the case for a lot, if not most. I do appreciate you taking the time to explain all that, and though my 'beating' comment was more directed at that weidz guy. All I want is to see the game succeed and I believe that graphics are important enough to enough people to warrant that to be looked at at the very least. That's all. All the other hyperbole crap that we all been slinging back and forth is neither here nor there.

I don't want the last word, but happy early New year

If graphics were that important to people they wouldn't be playing MMO's which have been known to be behind the times since they started being created. There is an exception or two ( SWG cranked up was gorgeous, but even SOE didn't have a PC capable of actually playing at that graphic level at the time ) but for the most part if graphics mattered that much you would be playing something else.

In reality the problem with all of this is that there isn't much to discuss and frankly I fault Blizzard for that. They should have came out with the announcement and said exactly what they were looking at and what was up for discussion.

Personally I believe that when Brack said that we will get as close as possible including the warts, that what he meant was that there will be some changes due to battle.net integration, and tieing everything into the current reporting system. Outside of the the main conversation should be about what patch the game is.

The problem is they didn't do that and have probably left us wasting a whole lot of time on things they wouldn't even consider in the first place.

[PaterMDx]

Is it so difficult to understand that not everyone shares your opinions?



Wanting to change something does not mean "not liking it"

Thinking that there is room for improvement does not mean "not liking it"

I could rant and rave and shitpost for hours about all the things I hate in vanilla, but it's still one of my favorite games.

Vanilla is not perfect. Stop acting like it is.

this boi gets it, Ainsley approved.

[Lord Pebbleton]

It's what they've been doing for ten years.

Shocking, I know.

I don't know what the aggressivity is about, but I was referring to quality of life changes that exist nowadays and make the game more enjoyable for everyone, I wasn't hinting that they should go a completely different way from scrap.

[Wiedzemir]

I don't know what the aggressivity is about, but I was referring to quality of life changes that exist nowadays and make the game more enjoyable for everyone, I wasn't hinting that they should go a completely different way from scrap.

Are those the same QoL changes that drove a lot of people out of the game? They sure did me!

[Echocho]

No, adding battle.net support won't automatically lead to transmog. If you seriously think that it will you might as well move on right now because battle.net support is already confirmed.

[Aydinx2]

All over this subforum, the most common response to any, ANY request for ANY change, no matter how small, is this idiotic slippery slope argument of:



Please educate yourself: https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/slippery-slope

Is it impossible to make just one or two changes? If you change one thing, then EVERYTHING else *MUST* change, 100% guaranteed? The problem with retail was not changes themselves, rather, that Blizz changed too much and didn't know where to draw the line. Most, if not all vanilla players liked TBC, even though it had a shitload of changes from vanilla. So why is it such a massive sin to make any little change to vanilla?

No, adding in minor QoL features like AoE looting will not lead to "LFR, flying, heirlooms, instant 60" or any of that bullshit, and such minor QoL features will not affect the "feel" of the game or whatever other emotion-based argument you want to use. I dislike retail as much as the next vanilla fan, but there are plenty of GOOD changes that retail has made, that would be very useful in vanilla.

Furthermore, addons in vanilla already add a fuckton of QoL, yet you don't see anyone advocating that those are "not vanilla" or that they should be removed. Vanilla was full of addons, specifically because players weren't satisfied with the game's base offerings, and wanted to add things to improve it. Things like LazyPig automating tons of things, or EzDismount, which auto-dismounts you when you try to cast a spell, movable cast bars, better unit frames, chat modifications, easy dispel addons...players have been making their own QoL changes to the game ever since it released.

--------------

Point is, please come up with actual arguments for why a change is bad, instead of just plugging your ears and screaming "NOT VANILLA!" or "SLIPPERY SLOPE!".

Using only a "fallacy" as the basis for your argument as to why the other person is wrong is ALSO a fallacy.
Unless you have an actual argument that proves that they don't have a reason to worry about a slippery slope, they have every right to.

[LaserChild9]

Is it so difficult to understand that the people who started this want Vanilla exactly as it was in its day?

If you don't like that game, if you want to implement changes, legacy is NOT for you. I don't know what Blizzard is going to release as Classic though, as it is entirely up to them, but Legacy Vanilla = no changes

This is exactly it, it's like Blizzard announced this and all the people that weren't interested in Legacy servers before started going "Well, I wasn't interested but if you are making it, I will play it if you add x". Most of these people didn't care about it then, but now its happening they feel like they are entitled to want to change the whole thing to suit them so that they can play it.

If people don't like a game then they shouldn't play it, pretending they are trying to be constructive by complaining about how dated certain aspects of it are is irrelevant because they are obviously not the people it is being targeted at.

[Xecks]

the only qol change should be meeting stones able to summon. thats it. no other changes.

[Deleted]

If there are addons to "fix" these QoL things, maybe keep them as addons so people who doesnt want that shit can play the classic we want?

Like massloot and duallspec?
Yeah right.

[stomination]

People asking for changes are a small minority which mostly consists of trolls and their suggested changes are trolling too.

Recently, there has been a thread at the Official WoW forums where people debated Classic WoW vs Classic QoL Nerfed.

The OP, which called for Blizzard to deliver unchanged Vanilla experience got repeatedly upvoted and ended-up being very popular whereas people who called for Classic QoL nerfed got downvoted to oblivion.

Even amongst Retailers, the unchanged Classic experience is most popular.



There is no point in debating the issue anymore. People who ask for QoL changes are a small and insignificant minority even amongst Retailers.

Thread can be found here: https://eu.battle.net/forums/en/wow/...7026611?page=1

Then the tread basically became like this one where both claim majority and argued with each other.

- - - Updated - - -

That is just the thing. Where does it stop? Literally anything that people ask to NOW put into Classic as QoL is something that somebody has claimed was the worst addition ever and killed WoW

We gotta keep it pure is what they say. And I'm not talking about the white supremely people.


You know they sound like them

[Lord Pebbleton]

Are those the same QoL changes that drove a lot of people out of the game? They sure did me!

Clearly not, since I said "those that made it more enjoyable for everyone". I have no idea what those would be, supposedly Blizzard has that info, but I'd wager one of them is transmo, since it allowed to give alternatives to ugly sets. You either use it and get better looking or you ignore it and stay ugly as you please.

[Molis]

Mods could close this entire sub forum down and just say Vanilla is Vanilla.

Any and I mean any QOL changes will drive away the customer Blizzard is trying to attract.

[Wiedzemir]

Clearly not, since I said "those that made it more enjoyable for everyone". I have no idea what those would be, supposedly Blizzard has that info, but I'd wager one of them is transmo, since it allowed to give alternatives to ugly sets. You either use it and get better looking or you ignore it and stay ugly as you please.

Or you get screwed over in already sparse loot drops by skin chasers that want the item just for its looks. Don't forget, vanilla wasn't like the current epic loot pinata, it too much more effort to get an item you want due to low drop chances and rather low amount of loot dropped by the mobs, like 2 items for 40 people.

- - - Updated - - -

Mods could close this entire sub forum down and just say Vanilla is Vanilla.

Where's fun in that?

Any and I mean any QOL changes will drive away the customer Blizzard is trying to attract.

And the response to that by the local geniuses of business is "but what about new players! It's not attractive to them! Think about new players ... and me ofc!"

[bottled]

Can we stop with the "I think there is room for things in Classic WoW that were not in classic wow"? Why are people so dense that they think there is room for debate on this? You don't make a WWII movie with stealth fighters, and you don't put dual spec in classic wow. It's just that simple.

[Occam-OC]

I don't care if you don't share my opinion. I care that you can ruin the product we asked for so many years, so you can play 15 minutes and drop it.

Well isn't that a huge assumption.

[bottled]

Well isn't that a huge assumption.

So you will play Shit Wow (classic wow that was ruined by kiddies asking for QoL changes ) while players like me who remember the actual vanilla wow don't play at all because Classic wow sucks. Is that what you want?