Page 20 of 21 FirstFirst ...
10
18
19
20
21
LastLast
  1. #381
    Quote Originally Posted by arkanon View Post
    From very early on, there has been an extremely vocal group of players, on this forum and others, screaming that #NoChanges or they will leave. Various claims have been made, saying that if ANY changes are made:

    - No one will play and the game will fail
    - It wont be 'classic', but rather a new game
    - New players wont be interested and will just play retail
    - Vanilla players will reject it and stay on private servers

    Plus many more obviously.

    From day 1, outside of throwing the odd #NoChanges in a sarcastic and ironic way, i have said that Blizzard will make numerous changes to how vanilla was, but will drip feed them to the community, and present them in a way that the community will accept and even embrace them. "No way man, we will see it coming and reject the changes! #NoChanges!"

    The changes are happening, some might be considered smaller (changes to animations, lighting, and graphics in general), some much larger (sharding confirmed for Classic). Now that it is obvious that Blizzard are making many changes from Vanilla into Classic, is the community pretty much just accepting it? Where do you sit with the change;

    - Ignore them (no, those changes are not CONFIRMED, just a rumor)
    - Justify them (Yeah but they HAD to make those changes and its only for launch!)
    - Accept them (It wont ruin the game for me, so i dont mind)
    - Embrace them (I think the changes are mostly for the good of the game)

    But thats just my opinion, i would LOVE to hear your thoughts on the matter in the comments down below.
    LETS JUST JUMP INTO IT.
    My thoughts are this. People who were really truly champions for the inclusion of Classic/Vanilla as optional version to come from the souce (Blizzard) really enjoyed the popular private server that shall not be named (Nostralius). That server did in fact make some changes that were a departure from what a purist would view as solely vanilla. A working 'charge' spell comes to mind. So I think the REAL community (those that have been asking for this for a loooooong time). Are okay with some changes and are rational enough to know that some changes are appropriate and necessary.

    My second thought is this. The more changes you make to the game, the less "vanilla" it is. Without going into my personal thoughts or feelings about what is or isn't vanilla, I will say this. The less vanilla it is, the easier it will be for the community to reject it as NOT what they asked for... IF classic servers are a failure.

    Blizzard: "See we were right all along."
    Blizzard: "You think you do, but you don't."

    Community: "This was NOT what we asked for."

    And truthfully, the community would be right.

    There is a level of brokenness, incompleteness, or thoughtlessness that MUST be accepted and tolerated (from a design/development perspective) for the game to resemble vanilla. Technical hurdles can be addressed for sure, as long as the community can't really tell the difference.

    That being said, I think the struggle this community is going to have (particularly early on) is the number of people who will be playing who aren't/weren't actual fans of vanilla or private servers. Who are both intentionally and inadvertently going to ruin the experience for others.

    My prediction is that it will be THOSE people, who will design mods, that seeks to mirror existing QoL changes that exist in retail that will fundamentally change the experience for everyone.
    Last edited by Boss Lady; 2018-12-06 at 05:50 PM.

  2. #382
    Quote Originally Posted by SirBeef View Post
    Those people were never going to be social or participate in more social aspects of the game to begin with. Not that raiding participation prior to LFR, and currently when ignoring LFR participation rates is 15% or less of the WoW population. 50% of players in game since LFR came out do it.
    this doesnt mean those people wont play classic.

    they will .

    most of them will just do it differently

    they will spend most of time playing it on leveling all classes to max level instead wasting time on gearing up toons .

    i know i will play classic like that . when i will be really bored with modern wow i will spend one or 2 evenings every couple of weeks on leveling my toons then .

    it means it will probaby take me 2-3 years to get 1 toon to max level but i will get there eventually just because leveling 46th alt on retail wont be any more interesting then that

  3. #383
    Give me WC3:R, Blizz! The Stormbringer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    ...location, location!
    Posts
    12,479
    Quote Originally Posted by Craaazyyy View Post
    both are a shitshow.. especially if sharding is implemented permanently in every zone
    Blizzard: We will be implementing temporary sharding in starting zones at launch to alleviate crowding and allow people to progress on to later content.
    Crazy People: OMFG! Blizzard is putting sharding into the whole game FOREVER! RUINEDDDDD!!!!!11

  4. #384
    Quote Originally Posted by Craaazyyy View Post
    social
    Quote Originally Posted by Projectmars View Post
    social
    It always cracks me up when people talk about the social aspect of the game, as if it was a positive experience. Worse is that they ignorantly assume that either:
    (a) Blizzard fundamentally changed something that encouraged such "anti-social" behavior
    (b) that a "new" breed or generation of player showed up and wrecked the experience for everyone

    Let's address (a). If your natural inclination/tendency is to be "less social" if given the opportunity, then the social aspect of the game you refer to is a facade. People who wish to remain social will do so, which is why guilds, and endgame still exists. The fact that the majority of the community flocked to something that required less social interaction speaks volumes of the types of personalities that an mmo resonates with.

    In regards to (b) this couldn't be further from the truth. The fact that WoW had such a relatively short run, and steady decline means that new blood isn't or wasn't being added to the game. This community actually REALLY sucks at times, and has been notoriously aggressive to "noobs" the few that were interested were quickly turned away.

    Being that I am now in my early 30s, having started playing this game at the end of high school I have been able to see this community from start to finish. I teach at the high school level now and my husband teaches at the college level, and we both still play WoW. Through college the game remained strong, and the first few years of teaching I was able to relate to many of the students because of our shared interests (WoW). I was "cool" being not only a female who played video games, but one that played WoW (bear in mind I had no real delusions of my "popularity"). There came a period of time shortly after WotLK where it stopped being "cool" that I played WoW. It became, "Oh I remember that game... you still play it? Lame!" The "new" entitled generation did not ruin the game... they aren't playing it at all.

    The majority of people playing the game, are those that have been here for a LONG time, those of us too attached to our characters and accomplishments to the sensible thing... and walk away. Blizzard saw the writing on the wall. The game was not attracting new blood, and in order to stay relevant, it needed to change WITH the people playing it. I am NOT the same person I was in high school, and had the game NOT changed, I wouldn't be playing it today. At nearly 33 I am the person, (a veteran) that changed the face of WoW. The game would not have lasted as long as it has, if it didn't change. You're welcome!

    Nevermind the fact your entire view of the social aspect of WoW, nay all MMOs is a bright shade of pink. These types of games never were social, at least not in any healthy sense of the word. The game has always bred a level of codependency and narcissism. I don't know a single person who has actually raided at any sort of competitive level, that doesn't have stories of people acting like the most deplorable pieces of shit on the planet.

    Case in point, Mr. "More dots" (the loud guy leading the Onyxia fight) that video/sound clip wouldn't have been nearly as funny as it was, if it didn't strike a chord with people who have raided with such a "leader". The willingness of people to put up with poor behavior all in the pursuit of "phat lootz" speaks to the codependency issues of this social mecca you remember so fondly. The willingness to treat people like that speaks to the narcissism.
    Last edited by Boss Lady; 2018-12-06 at 06:31 PM.

  5. #385
    Quote Originally Posted by Boss Lady View Post
    It always cracks me up when people talk about the social aspect of the game, as if it was a positive experience. Worse is that they ignorantly assume that either:
    (a) Blizzard fundamentally changed something that encouraged such "anti-social" behavior
    (b) that a "new" breed or generation of player showed up and wrecked the experience for everyone

    Let's address (a). If your natural inclination/tendency is to be "less social" if given the opportunity, then the social aspect of the game you refer to is a facade. People who wish to remain social will do so, which is why guilds, and endgame still exists. The fact that the majority of the community flocked to something that required less social interaction speaks volumes of the types of personalities that an mmo resonates with.

    In regards to (b) this couldn't be further from the truth. The fact that WoW had such a relatively short run, and steady decline means that new blood isn't or wasn't being added to the game. This community actually REALLY sucks at times, and has been notoriously aggressive to "noobs" the few that were interested were quickly turned away. Being that I am now in my early 30s, having started playing this game at the end of high school I have been able to see this community from start to finish. I teach at the high school level now and my husband teaches at the college level, and we both still play WoW. Through college the game remained strong, and the first few years of teaching I was able to relate to many of the students because of our shared interests (WoW). I was "cool" being not only a female who played video games, but one that played WoW (bear in mind I had no real delusions of my "popularity"). There came a period of time shortly after WotLK where it stopped being "cool" that I played WoW. It became, "Oh I remember that game... you still play it? Lame!" The "new" entitled generation did not ruin the game... they aren't playing it at all. The majority of people playing the game, are those that have been here for a LONG time, those of us too attached to our characters and accomplishments to the sensible thing... and walk away. Blizzard saw the writing on the wall. The game was not attracting new blood, and in order to stay relevant, it needed to change WITH the people playing it. I am NOT the same person I was in high school, and had the game NOT changed, I wouldn't be playing it today. At nearly 33 I am the person, (a veteran) that changed the face of WoW. The game would not have lasted as long as it has, if it didn't change. You're welcome!

    Nevermind the fact your entire view of the social aspect of WoW, nay all MMOs is a bright shade of pink. These types of games never were social, at least not in any healthy shape of the word. The game has always bred a level of codependency and narcissism. I don't a single person who has actually raided at any sort of competitive level, that doesn't have stories of people acting like the most deplorable pieces of shit on the planet.

    Case in point, Mr. "More dots" that video/sound clip wouldn't have been nearly as funny as it was, if it didn't strike a chord with people who have raided with such a "leader". The willingness of people to put up with poor behavior all in the pursuit of "phat lootz" speaks to the codependency issues of this social mecca you remember so fondly. The willingness to treat people like that speaks to the narcissism.
    literally a pile of shit addressing something i didnt even mean.. especially that point b

    its not players who ruined experience for others its blizzard who started catering to these players for no reason

    also just because for you being social means being bullied, because you cant stand negativity - its your problem, not mine or anyone elses

    also i bet you never really played the game to begin with if you think that the game had to change so drastically to stay afloat

    all the changes actually alienated the current(at the time) playerbase and most of them obviously quit(either completely or they just try each expansion for a month and then quit, cuz the game is being ruined more and more). Also i mentioned that the game being anti-social isnt even the main reason people quit, but whatever..

    also if you believe that the majority of current playerbase are oldschool, then you're delusional

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by The Stormbringer View Post
    Blizzard: We will be implementing temporary sharding in starting zones at launch to alleviate crowding and allow people to progress on to later content.
    Crazy People: OMFG! Blizzard is putting sharding into the whole game FOREVER! RUINEDDDDD!!!!!11

    yeah, imagine in 2018 believing into what blizzard are saying
    Last edited by Craaazyyy; 2018-12-06 at 06:36 PM.

  6. #386
    I’m all for #nochanges. But let me explain my definition.

    #nochanges is a goal I wish the developers to keep in mind with every action they take. The current incarnation of WOW for me is a far cry to what the original was; or as I believe the intent was.

    I don’t want their “new and flashy” ideas permeating my classic experience.

    If sharping in the first few days/weeks results in fewer, more stable servers after timely removal... I’m ok with that. It enhances the community when it doesn’t lead to mergers after removal due to the games population stabalizing.

    If they left in options to increase water shading or fidelity, but there is an option to shut it off then I am alright with that. Those are client side options. Meaning only you will see the better shades. No one else will be forced into it. Even from a competitive stand point, what you see on your screen is not what I see on mine. People used to have polar bear skins in classic. They were illegal, but no one else saw you as a polar bear.

    Any other QOL changes I would be against. Classic wasn’t about QOL in your daily gameplay. Communities should by and large be left alone to govern themselves (outside of normal expected Blizzard actions for 3rd party hacks etc).

    All said, I want the return of vanilla because I loved it, even it’s downsides. I don’t have rose tinted goggles, I know the game wasn’t perfect. But the social requirements inherent in the systems were far closer to perfect than I feel in the retail version. And I have only recently quit retail due to lack of trust in the current development stages (when you have to kick class development down the road because you have to try and fix a system fuck up that was easily foreseeable... yeah, some people will lose their trust in you).

    I do not speak for anyone else, just myself. I’m excited about a vanilla release that may eventually get stale, but it sure beats wondering what part of a game I used to love will be cut next patch/expansion in the name of “ease of gameplay”. I’m not the masses that Blizzard develops for anymore. It used to be you found your own enjoyment off the rails. Some people never walked into a raid or bg and enjoyed the hell out of vanilla. Now, Blizzards target demographic is akin to sitting on the sidewalk as the Blizzard parade drives down Main Street throwing “content” and “rewards” out as they drive by. You either like the candy you get or wait for the next parade. Only to find out the next parade only delivers the same cheap candy only this time it doesn’t even have a wrapper on. Doesn’t matter where you sit, doesn’t matter if you are there all day or only 2 minutes. You get the same candy bounced off your face.

  7. #387
    Quote Originally Posted by Boss Lady View Post
    (a) Blizzard fundamentally changed something that encouraged such "anti-social" behavior

    Let's address (a). If your natural inclination/tendency is to be "less social" if given the opportunity, then the social aspect of the game you refer to is a facade. People who wish to remain social will do so, which is why guilds, and endgame still exists. The fact that the majority of the community flocked to something that required less social interaction speaks volumes of the types of personalities that an mmo resonates with.
    Your thesis of A is incorrect. The expansion of it only has loose correlation in the way you explained it, IE. not well.

    Blizzard did indeed fundamentally change aspects of the game which took away and chipped at the need to communicate or be social all together. It doesn't matter if players naturally are or want to be social.

    From 1.12 and onward, servers and communities completely faded from what they had been previous to 1.12 which was the first nail. This systematic dismantling continued all the way up to what we have now with the culmination of CRZ/sharding technologies. Various aspects of the game, in lobby style format, that require absolutely no interaction from player to player to 1) meet up and 2) do the thing that they joined the lobby to do. This has been painted on-top of every single system apart from only the most competitive aspects of the game, IE. mythic groups, heroic+ raiding, rbgs/arenas.

    Speaking about myself. I'm extremely social, both in real life and in multiplayer games I play. In present day, I not only don't have to communicate to accomplish anything casual (anything below mythics/rbg) that I might seek to do - across the board no exceptions, but there is no incentive from purely a social aspect to do so. I'm not some one off. This is the general experience for every player now. Unless I particularly and oddly really enjoy the XYZ of whatever it is that I'm doing with another player who randomly joined into my group from a menu, high odds that I'm never going to see or play with that person again. Why bother? For the sake of being social to prove your ideas on social interaction correct? Spare me.

    It's no cohencidence that one can go play on a Vanilla private server (for example) and quickly realize that the game systems did facilitate and encourage social behavior - at the very least for the purpose of getting anything worthwhile done. Fast forward today, completely different systems, completely different player interaction (largely faceless and non-existent).
    Last edited by evogsr; 2018-12-06 at 08:38 PM.
    Noob Blocker share link - https://drive.google.com/file/d/1fgD...ew?usp=sharing

    I am not the original author of this addon.

  8. #388
    The people that want #NoChanges are fucking zealots.

  9. #389
    Quote Originally Posted by AceofH View Post
    for the mass majority of the playerbase retail is even more mindless then vanilla was.
    unless you do mythic +, heroic or mythic raiding, vanilla was harder for any content you do.

    - - - Updated - - -



    naxx would disagree. but that was the outlier.
    Nah mop rares were harder than any rare in vanilla and tbc leveling was better as a hunter or warlock. You can avoid a lot of stuff and using your brain matters more.
    Violence Jack Respects Women!

  10. #390
    Copied from the changes mega thread, since it seems a bit dead and here seems to be where the discussion is at the moment:

    Possibly unpopular opinion at this forum but, I'm personally fine with most changes *within the context of being vanilla*. Adding new content and mechanics is a bad idea IMO, but I for one would be happy with having more visible specs. I used to play Warlock back then, and then you either played SM/ruin or DS/ruin, which is essentially the same, you spam shadow bolts all day long, all game long.

    I'd be happy if it was viable to change between demons, fire, dots and shadow bolts, which are the four principle modes of a warlock in vanilla instead of being locked into only one of those. By all means, release it with 1.12, but release balancing patches as we go along. After all patches *was* a part of the classic experience, changing things up every once in a while in terms of strategy.

  11. #391
    Quote Originally Posted by Craaazyyy View Post
    literally a pile of shit addressing something i didnt even mean.. especially that point b

    its not players who ruined experience for others its blizzard who started catering to these players for no reason

    also just because for you being social means being bullied, because you cant stand negativity - its your problem, not mine or anyone elses

    also i bet you never really played the game to begin with if you think that the game had to change so drastically to stay afloat

    all the changes actually alienated the current(at the time) playerbase and most of them obviously quit(either completely or they just try each expansion for a month and then quit, cuz the game is being ruined more and more). Also i mentioned that the game being anti-social isnt even the main reason people quit, but whatever..

    also if you believe that the majority of current playerbase are oldschool, then you're delusional

    - - - Updated - - -




    yeah, imagine in 2018 believing into what blizzard are saying
    Feel free to back any of that drivel with facts or data... I'll wait.

  12. #392
    I'm still hardcore no changes. We haven't left, it's just pointless to argue with people, some people don't seem understand what Classic is meant to be, which is sort of like a museum. It's suppose to be as accurate as possible, anyone lobbying for changes or things that weren't in Vanilla either doesn't understand that or doesn't care, so I simply avoid them most of the time. I won't be able to change their mind and they won't accept that Blizzard is trying to make a product that's not for them, so it's just a waste of my time.

    Classic isn't meant to be some weird WoW remake. It's meant to be as close to Vanilla as possible. Tons of people have done "WoW+" private servers, and they all bomb compared to normal Blizzlike ones. Your vision of Classic WoW and how "good" it could be with XYZ changes is bad, accept that and move on, and let Classic be Classic for people who actually want Classic.
    Last edited by Jazzhands; 2018-12-06 at 11:49 PM.

  13. #393
    Quote Originally Posted by evogsr View Post
    Your thesis of A is incorrect. The expansion of it only has loose correlation in the way you explained it, IE. not well.
    Starting off with a logical fallacy.

    Quote Originally Posted by evogsr View Post
    Blizzard did indeed fundamentally change aspects of the game which took away and chipped at the need to communicate or be social all together. It doesn't matter if players naturally are or want to be social.
    Let me just stop you right there. A player's desire to be social is ABSOLUTELY relevant. Whether or not the necessity to do so exists. It is a forced interaction and eventually the anti-social people (which is the majority of the community) will reject it, and resent being forced to do something they don't want to do.

    Quote Originally Posted by evogsr View Post
    It's no [coincidence] that one can go play on a Vanilla private server (for example) and quickly realize that the game systems did facilitate and encourage social behavior - at the very least for the purpose of getting anything worthwhile done. Fast forward today, completely different systems, completely different player interaction (largely faceless and non-existent).
    This should go here. This idea of social interaction being "faceless and non-existent" has ALWAYS been true. People didn't care about you in vanilla, they needed bodies. They checked your FR gear, and/or your bis slot gear. If you didn't appear to be a retard or were blacklisted for ninja looting you made the raid. Shut up, follow instructions, and you'll get loot. That isn't "social" interaction at least not "healthy" social interaction.

    Quote Originally Posted by evogsr View Post
    Speaking about myself. I'm extremely social, both in real life and in multiplayer games I play. In present day, I not only don't have to communicate to accomplish anything casual (anything below mythics/rbg) that I might seek to do - across the board no exceptions, but there is no incentive from purely a social aspect to do so. I'm not some one off. This is the general experience for every player now. Unless I particularly and oddly really enjoy the XYZ of whatever it is that I'm doing with another player who randomly joined into my group from a menu, high odds that I'm never going to see or play with that person again. Why bother? For the sake of being social to prove your ideas on social interaction correct? Spare me.
    You've actually just proven my point completely. A healthy interaction is developing relationships with people who share similar interests. In the absence of necessity, or imperative, you choose NOT to be social. You aren't the social butterfly you claim to be. You aren't. Period. I'm not sure I understand the defensiveness, or this weird need to "prove me wrong". Why is it so bad for you to think you are "anti-social" accept it, own it, move on. Your need to fight against that fact is a character defect. I have people I work with that I am not friends with. I don't dislike them, but they aren't my friends. I don't NEED more friends. I have people I play WoW with, I don't invite them over for the Super Bowl. We play WoW together, let's leave it at that, I don't have a desire to meet up with them at Blizzcon, or even as little as a guild photo op. I don't care. At the end of the day it's a game, and I don't need a GAME to facilitate a FAKE social interaction. I didn't need it 2004, I don't need it in 2018.

  14. #394
    Quote Originally Posted by evogsr View Post
    Your thesis of A is incorrect. The expansion of it only has loose correlation in the way you explained it, IE. not well.
    Starting off with a logical fallacy. I couldn't eyeroll any harder right now.

    Quote Originally Posted by evogsr View Post
    Blizzard did indeed fundamentally change aspects of the game which took away and chipped at the need to communicate or be social all together. It doesn't matter if players naturally are or want to be social.
    Let me just stop you right there. A player's desire to be social is ABSOLUTELY relevant. Whether or not the necessity to do so exists. It is a forced interaction and eventually the anti-social people (which is the majority of the community) will reject it, and resent being forced to do something they don't want to do.

    Quote Originally Posted by evogsr View Post
    It's no [coincidence] that one can go play on a Vanilla private server (for example) and quickly realize that the game systems did facilitate and encourage social behavior - at the very least for the purpose of getting anything worthwhile done. Fast forward today, completely different systems, completely different player interaction (largely faceless and non-existent).
    This should go here. This idea of social interaction being "faceless and non-existent" has ALWAYS been true. People didn't care about you in vanilla, they needed bodies. They checked your FR gear, and/or your bis slot gear. If you didn't appear to be a retard or were blacklisted for ninja looting you made the raid. Shut up, follow instructions, and you'll get loot. That isn't "social" interaction at least not "healthy" social interaction.

    Quote Originally Posted by evogsr View Post
    Speaking about myself. I'm extremely social, both in real life and in multiplayer games I play. In present day, I not only don't have to communicate to accomplish anything casual (anything below mythics/rbg) that I might seek to do - across the board no exceptions, but there is no incentive from purely a social aspect to do so. I'm not some one off. This is the general experience for every player now. Unless I particularly and oddly really enjoy the XYZ of whatever it is that I'm doing with another player who randomly joined into my group from a menu, high odds that I'm never going to see or play with that person again. Why bother? For the sake of being social to prove your ideas on social interaction correct? Spare me.
    You've actually just proven my point completely. A healthy interaction is developing relationships with people who share similar interests. In the absence of necessity, or imperative, you choose NOT to be social. You aren't the social butterfly you claim to be. You aren't. Period. I'm not sure I understand the defensiveness, or this weird need to "prove me wrong". Why is it so bad for you to think you are "anti-social" accept it, own it, move on. Your need to fight against that fact is a character defect. I have people I work with that I am not friends with. I don't dislike them, but they aren't my friends. I don't NEED more friends. I have people I play WoW with, I don't invite them over for the Super Bowl. We play WoW together, let's leave it at that, I don't have a desire to meet up with them at Blizzcon, or even as little as a guild photo op. I don't care. At the end of the day it's a game, and I don't need a GAME to facilitate a FAKE social interaction. I didn't need it 2004, I don't need it in 2018.

  15. #395
    Quote Originally Posted by evogsr View Post
    Your thesis of A is incorrect. The expansion of it only has loose correlation in the way you explained it, IE. not well.
    Starting off with a logical fallacy.

    Quote Originally Posted by evogsr View Post
    Blizzard did indeed fundamentally change aspects of the game which took away and chipped at the need to communicate or be social all together. It doesn't matter if players naturally are or want to be social.
    Let me just stop you right there. A player's desire to be social is ABSOLUTELY relevant. Whether or not the necessity to do so exists. It is a forced interaction and eventually the anti-social people (which is the majority of the community) will reject it, and resent being forced to do something they don't want to do.

    Quote Originally Posted by evogsr View Post
    It's no [coincidence] that one can go play on a Vanilla private server (for example) and quickly realize that the game systems did facilitate and encourage social behavior - at the very least for the purpose of getting anything worthwhile done. Fast forward today, completely different systems, completely different player interaction (largely faceless and non-existent).
    This should go here. This idea of social interaction being "faceless and non-existent" has ALWAYS been true. People didn't care about you in vanilla, they needed bodies. They checked your FR gear, and/or your bis slot gear. If you didn't appear to be a retard or were blacklisted for ninja looting you made the raid. Shut up, follow instructions, and you'll get loot. That isn't "social" interaction at least not "healthy" social interaction.

    Quote Originally Posted by evogsr View Post
    Speaking about myself. I'm extremely social, both in real life and in multiplayer games I play. In present day, I not only don't have to communicate to accomplish anything casual (anything below mythics/rbg) that I might seek to do - across the board no exceptions, but there is no incentive from purely a social aspect to do so. I'm not some one off. This is the general experience for every player now. Unless I particularly and oddly really enjoy the XYZ of whatever it is that I'm doing with another player who randomly joined into my group from a menu, high odds that I'm never going to see or play with that person again. Why bother? For the sake of being social to prove your ideas on social interaction correct? Spare me.
    You've actually just proven my point completely. A healthy interaction is developing relationships with people who share similar interests. In the absence of necessity, or imperative, you choose NOT to be social. You aren't the social butterfly you claim to be. You aren't. Period. I'm not sure I understand the defensiveness, or this weird need to "prove me wrong". Why is it so bad for you to think you are "anti-social" accept it, own it, move on. Your need to fight against that fact is a character defect. I have people I work with that I am not friends with. I don't dislike them, but they aren't my friends. I don't NEED more friends. I have people I play WoW with, I don't invite them over for the Super Bowl. We play WoW together, let's leave it at that, I don't have a desire to meet up with them at Blizzcon, or even as little as a guild photo op. I don't care. At the end of the day it's a game, and I don't need a GAME to facilitate a FAKE social interaction. I didn't need it 2004, I don't need it in 2018.

  16. #396
    Quote Originally Posted by evogsr View Post
    Your thesis of A is incorrect. The expansion of it only has loose correlation in the way you explained it, IE. not well.
    Starting off with a logical fallacy.

    Quote Originally Posted by evogsr View Post
    Blizzard did indeed fundamentally change aspects of the game which took away and chipped at the need to communicate or be social all together. It doesn't matter if players naturally are or want to be social.
    Let me just stop you right there. A player's desire to be social is ABSOLUTELY relevant. Whether or not the necessity to do so exists. It is a forced interaction and eventually the anti-social people (which is the majority of the community) will reject it, and resent being forced to do something they don't want to do.

    Quote Originally Posted by evogsr View Post
    It's no [coincidence] that one can go play on a Vanilla private server (for example) and quickly realize that the game systems did facilitate and encourage social behavior - at the very least for the purpose of getting anything worthwhile done. Fast forward today, completely different systems, completely different player interaction (largely faceless and non-existent).
    This should go here. This idea of social interaction being "faceless and non-existent" has ALWAYS been true. People didn't care about you in vanilla, they needed bodies. They checked your FR gear, and/or your bis slot gear. If you didn't appear to be a retard or were blacklisted for ninja looting you made the raid. Shut up, follow instructions, and you'll get loot. That isn't "social" interaction at least not "healthy" social interaction.

    Quote Originally Posted by evogsr View Post
    Speaking about myself. I'm extremely social, both in real life and in multiplayer games I play. In present day, I not only don't have to communicate to accomplish anything casual (anything below mythics/rbg) that I might seek to do - across the board no exceptions, but there is no incentive from purely a social aspect to do so. I'm not some one off. This is the general experience for every player now. Unless I particularly and oddly really enjoy the XYZ of whatever it is that I'm doing with another player who randomly joined into my group from a menu, high odds that I'm never going to see or play with that person again. Why bother? For the sake of being social to prove your ideas on social interaction correct? Spare me.
    You've actually just proven my point completely. A healthy interaction is developing relationships with people who share similar interests. In the absence of necessity, or imperative, you choose NOT to be social. You aren't the social butterfly you claim to be. You aren't. Period. I'm not sure I understand the defensiveness, or this weird need to "prove me wrong". Why is it so bad for you to think you are "anti-social" accept it, own it, move on. Your need to fight against that fact is a character defect. I have people I work with that I am not friends with. I don't dislike them, but they aren't my friends. I don't NEED more friends. I have people I play WoW with, I don't invite them over for the Super Bowl. We play WoW together, let's leave it at that, I don't have a desire to meet up with them at Blizzcon, or even as little as a guild photo op. I don't care. At the end of the day it's a game, and I don't need a GAME to facilitate a FAKE social interaction. I didn't need it 2004, I don't need it in 2018.

  17. #397
    Quote Originally Posted by evogsr View Post
    Your thesis of A is incorrect. The expansion of it only has loose correlation in the way you explained it, IE. not well.
    Starting off with a logical fallacy.

    Blizzard did indeed fundamentally change aspects of the game which took away and chipped at the need to communicate or be social all together. It doesn't matter if players naturally are or want to be social.
    Let me just stop you right there. A player's desire to be social is ABSOLUTELY relevant. Whether or not the necessity to do so exists. It is a forced interaction and eventually the anti-social people (which is the majority of the community) will reject it, and resent being forced to do something they don't want to do.

    It's no [coincidence] that one can go play on a Vanilla private server (for example) and quickly realize that the game systems did facilitate and encourage social behavior - at the very least for the purpose of getting anything worthwhile done. Fast forward today, completely different systems, completely different player interaction (largely faceless and non-existent).
    This should go here. This idea of social interaction being "faceless and non-existent" has ALWAYS been true. People didn't care about you in vanilla, they needed bodies. They checked your FR gear, and/or your bis slot gear. If you didn't appear to be a retard or were blacklisted for ninja looting you made the raid. Shut up, follow instructions, and you'll get loot. That isn't "social" interaction at least not "healthy" social interaction.

    Speaking about myself. I'm extremely social, both in real life and in multiplayer games I play. In present day, I not only don't have to communicate to accomplish anything casual (anything below mythics/rbg) that I might seek to do - across the board no exceptions, but there is no incentive from purely a social aspect to do so. I'm not some one off. This is the general experience for every player now. Unless I particularly and oddly really enjoy the XYZ of whatever it is that I'm doing with another player who randomly joined into my group from a menu, high odds that I'm never going to see or play with that person again. Why bother? For the sake of being social to prove your ideas on social interaction correct? Spare me.
    You've actually just proven my point completely. A healthy interaction is developing relationships with people who share similar interests. In the absence of necessity, or imperative, you choose NOT to be social. You aren't the social butterfly you claim to be. You aren't. Period.

    I'm not sure I understand the defensiveness, or this weird need to "prove me wrong". Why is it so bad for you to think you are "anti-social" accept it, own it, move on. Your need to fight against that fact is a character defect.

    I have people I work with that I am not friends with. I don't dislike them, but they aren't my friends. I don't NEED more friends. I have people I play WoW with, I don't invite them over for the Super Bowl. We play WoW together, let's leave it at that, I don't have a desire to meet up with them at Blizzcon, or even as little as a guild photo op. I don't care. At the end of the day it's a game, and I don't need a GAME to facilitate a FAKE social interaction. I didn't need it 2004, I don't need it in 2018.

  18. #398
    Quote Originally Posted by Jazzhands View Post
    It's meant to be as close to Vanilla as possible.
    Meant by whom? By You? By Blizzard? This community? Because I haven't seen any official statement that it's supposed to be an absolute pristine copy. Quite the contrary, a pristine copy it won't be, read e.g. their post on anti-cheating / boting. There won't be any "Chinese farmers" running around with some crudely written -- even comical -- script farming silithus. Is that a bad thing? It'll cost me a few laughs to be sure, but also it'll make the game more fair and it will impact the in game economy, and overall I believe it's a good thing.

    I believe the crucial question to ask is: Why do you want to play vanilla wow? To me the answer is that I want to experience the same community, the same spirit, and the same environment as I experienced 15 years ago when the undead warlock Storluffarn was travelling the land. Which of course leads to the question: What made that those things? I believe this is a notoriously hard question to answer. I would even venture that this is one reason why Blizzard hasn't started a legacy server already, because the answer probably is different for different people, and it's a near impossible task to please everyone, making it a high risk project.

    I for one though, do not think that the exact metrics and data tables used in 1.12 was what made vanilla wow what it was. I believe that it has a lot more to do with concept, which is also hard to capture, but here's some examples of changes I think made wow unvanilla: parallel specs, teleportations to dungeons, flying mounts, rewards for doing mostly nothing, not having 40-man raids, etc. In particular, I *don't* think e.g. changing the values in talent trees to make more specs viable will change the overall in game environment. Quite the contrary, I believe that it's the typical kind of thing you *could* change while still preserving the vanilla core. And if you can make the game more enjoyable while maintaining that it is still vanilla wow, then that seems to be a good thing to me. If we all can get the vanilla experience, just with even more enjoyment, how can that then be a bad thing?

    Even disregarding the abstract discussion above, I believe balancing patches had a natural place in what made vanilla wow what it was. The theory crafting, the testing out new PvP specs, ironing out how to peak DPS in instances. It added crucial variance in my opinion, it challenged the players to try new things, and also added to the individual uniqueness of your character.

  19. #399
    Quote Originally Posted by arkanon View Post
    No one will play and the game will fail
    This might happen regardless, once people find out how quickly the players now-a-days can power through content.

  20. #400
    Quote Originally Posted by storluffarn View Post
    Meant by whom? By You? By Blizzard? This community? Because I haven't seen any official statement that it's supposed to be an absolute pristine copy. Quite the contrary, a pristine copy it won't be, read e.g. their post on anti-cheating / boting. There won't be any "Chinese farmers" running around with some crudely written -- even comical -- script farming silithus. Is that a bad thing? It'll cost me a few laughs to be sure, but also it'll make the game more fair and it will impact the in game economy, and overall I believe it's a good thing.

    I believe the crucial question to ask is: Why do you want to play vanilla wow? To me the answer is that I want to experience the same community, the same spirit, and the same environment as I experienced 15 years ago when the undead warlock Storluffarn was travelling the land. Which of course leads to the question: What made that those things? I believe this is a notoriously hard question to answer. I would even venture that this is one reason why Blizzard hasn't started a legacy server already, because the answer probably is different for different people, and it's a near impossible task to please everyone, making it a high risk project.

    I for one though, do not think that the exact metrics and data tables used in 1.12 was what made vanilla wow what it was. I believe that it has a lot more to do with concept, which is also hard to capture, but here's some examples of changes I think made wow unvanilla: parallel specs, teleportations to dungeons, flying mounts, rewards for doing mostly nothing, not having 40-man raids, etc. In particular, I *don't* think e.g. changing the values in talent trees to make more specs viable will change the overall in game environment. Quite the contrary, I believe that it's the typical kind of thing you *could* change while still preserving the vanilla core. And if you can make the game more enjoyable while maintaining that it is still vanilla wow, then that seems to be a good thing to me. If we all can get the vanilla experience, just with even more enjoyment, how can that then be a bad thing?

    Even disregarding the abstract discussion above, I believe balancing patches had a natural place in what made vanilla wow what it was. The theory crafting, the testing out new PvP specs, ironing out how to peak DPS in instances. It added crucial variance in my opinion, it challenged the players to try new things, and also added to the individual uniqueness of your character.
    There are a lot of interviews and such that aren't posted here. Take a look over https://us.battle.net/forums/en/wow/topic/20764016465, but more specifically, https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...-big-questions, and a bit more specific:

    -Do you think there'll be a line to walk for the team, then? Somewhere between creating that authentic experience that people have asked for, while also figuring out what doesn't make sense anymore? For example, with the Intellect buff, is it important to you that players do need to drink after casting it?

    -J. Allen Brack:
    Yes. That's part of the level 60 experience. Our goal is to recreate that classic 1-60 gameplay. Some things changed as time went on, with different patches. How does that get manifested? That's one of the outstanding questions. But yeah, the goal is to recreate that exact experience, for better or for worse.

    In order to recreate the exact experience, first and foremost all the numbers and stuff need to be the same, if Balance druids are suddenly viable and balanced you have no chance of having the same experience they had back in the day, no matter how good or bad that experience is. Blizzard seems intent on keeping every upside and downside of Classic. After that, they can try to help push the community towards what it was back in the day, but it was the people that made the community back then, not Blizzard, so it's up to us to do what we can to create that part, like we did back then. Mostly all Blizzard can do is do what they did back then, and hand us a client, one that's as close to what we had back then as they can manage, and that's seemingly what they want to try to do. Some things are going to change of course, we know that a 100% pristine copy isn't going to happen, I never expected it to, but 99% is pretty good for me.

    And if you read over those articles, in one of them J Allen directly says they don't care how populated the servers will be, so as long as that stays the same they won't be making changes just to make Classic more popular. Just based on private servers, they will be plenty populated, and those strive for 100% no matter what. And no, people don't just play them because they're free, there are TBC/WoTLK servers just as good as Vanilla ones, and people choose Vanilla, and if you have a PC and internet, 15$ isn't an amount of money to be sweating over, especially given how much time people put into WoW compared to, say, a 60$ AAA game. And on top of that, I've lost a lot of characters (and time) to private servers vanishing, Classic won't have that problem, I'll gladly pay 15$ a month just for that.


    Last edited by Jazzhands; 2018-12-07 at 01:51 AM.

Posting Permissions

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