We got MoP 2.0, and we're still complaining

[Nightstalker]

People just want less chores and more optional side-content with some sort of depth and investment.

[Voidwielder]

This is not MoP. You clearly did not play it enough or your memory is failing you. You pick.

[unbound]

Players have been asking for MoP 2.0 for years. For an expansion just like MoP to play with once again. And when Blizzard finally delivers with BFA, all we hear is constant complaining:

- Garrosh 2.0 with Sylvanas
- Scenarios 2.0 (island expeditions)
- Legendaries 2.0 with Heart of Azeroth
- Timeless Isle 2.0 with Mechagon
- Return of faction conflict
- Troll lore expanded upon
- Touches of old god content

They have even corrected some of the mistakes of MoP and that still was not good enough. Is there nothing that Blizzard can do to satisfy the playerbase?

Look! Blizz gave us cheap versions of Garrosh, scenarios, Legendaries, timeless isles, faction conflict, troll lore, and touches of old god content, and combined it with the same watered-down specs from Legion (with virtually no differences for going on 3 years now)...and you aren't satisfied!

What do you want? Actual effort by Blizz on these things with compelling class designs? You should be thankful that you got anything at all!

/facepalm

[Rampant Rabbit]

Players have been asking for MoP 2.0 for years. For an expansion just like MoP to play with once again. And when Blizzard finally delivers with BFA, all we hear is constant complaining:

- Garrosh 2.0 with Sylvanas
- Scenarios 2.0 (island expeditions)
- Legendaries 2.0 with Heart of Azeroth
- Timeless Isle 2.0 with Mechagon
- Return of faction conflict
- Troll lore expanded upon
- Touches of old god content

They have even corrected some of the mistakes of MoP and that still was not good enough. Is there nothing that Blizzard can do to satisfy the playerbase?

- Garrosh 2.0 with Sylvanas
Who asked for this, really?

- Scenarios 2.0 (island expeditions)
What? Scenarios were lore driven. IE are not.

- Legendaries 2.0 with Heart of Azeroth
Are you thinking of Legion now? Heart of Azeroth was given to you after a few tutorial quests. MoP's legendary was obtained by a LOT of serious questing.

- Timeless Isle 2.0 with Mechagon
Sure, that's cool.

- Return of faction conflict
Any sane person knows that a faction conflict focussed expansion will ruin the game.

- Troll lore expanded upon
And shat on.

- Touches of old god content
Yet hardly the focus of the expansion.

[Mister Cheese]

- Garrosh 2.0 with Sylvanas

Nobody wanted this. Nobody wanted Garrosh to turn out the way he did in the first place.

- Scenarios 2.0 (island expeditions)

Island expeditions are not nearly as in depth or advanced as scenarios. I don't know why you think they are.

- Legendaries 2.0 with Heart of Azeroth

Having your one legendary handed to you on a platter is not better. I find it also fucking stupid you call it "legendaries 2.0" because first of all. The capes were the first time Blizzard had decided to let everyone work toward a legendary over the expansion. Then the rings in WoD. Then everyone got the weapons in Legion. Now we have the heart. This is the fourth iteration of "everyone gets a legendary."

- Timeless Isle 2.0 with Mechagon

I beg your pardon here?

- Return of faction conflict

Weakest part of the story every time it's focused on. It's failed even harder here than ever before.

- Troll lore expanded upon

And ruined, predictably. Zul was turned into a Generic bad guy who serves the "greater threat." Everyone knew Rastakhan was going to die once Talanji was introduced. Zandalari are just fancy trolls that sit in a gold city and now that their story is over we will never hear from them again.

- Touches of old god content

Not the focus. Again even though N'zoth should have been.

Let's not forget that in MoP that classes were the most in depth they ever were even without the three tier "Cookie cutter" talent trees. They had the most abilities. They had the most ridiculous things that you could do with them if you had the right talents. (double spirit link with EoTE? sign me the fuck up.) Blizzard decided that classes were too hard to play in WoD and removed so much of what gave classes depth. Your list is just nitpicks of things that you're trying to make sound good. And you're not even doing a very good job of it because you're wrong on many issues. So no.

Mists of Pandaland > Beta for Azerite traits.

[threads]

you forgot the great class design. just like blizzard did.

[Zorachus]

LOL BfA being MoP 2.0. Ha, not. BfA wishes it was MoP 2.

MoP had arguably the best class design in all of WoW. BfA has the worst class design of all time.

Where are the Tier sets in BfA ? Oh that's right, they have the shitty Azerite crap.

[trapmaster]

Cmon dude, speak for yourself. I having a blast on my mistweaver monk. BfA is failing for several reasons, not just class design.

Several? There were a long list... i'm not going to bother listing them cuz i am pretty sure ppl are picky which content is good and pretend to play and ingore the bad and act like bfa is the best xpac without a single complain. PPL need to lay off white knighting blizzard/activistion bs.

- - - Updated - - -

Thr classes are FAR from MoP level. That's the main issue with bfa. Most classes just plain aren't fun. No talent mix-ups to make a single target cleave. No baseline streamline of talents. More gutted abilities. Classes are the downfall of bfa.

wayy wayy off the chart, HELL MOP classes OUTPERFORM BETTER THAN THIS BFA GARBAGE IDEAS.

[Chromell]

Players have been asking for MoP 2.0 for years. For an expansion just like MoP to play with once again. And when Blizzard finally delivers with BFA, all we hear is constant complaining:

- Garrosh 2.0 with Sylvanas
- Scenarios 2.0 (island expeditions)
- Legendaries 2.0 with Heart of Azeroth
- Timeless Isle 2.0 with Mechagon
- Return of faction conflict
- Troll lore expanded upon
- Touches of old god content

They have even corrected some of the mistakes of MoP and that still was not good enough. Is there nothing that Blizzard can do to satisfy the playerbase?

BfA has similarities to MoP, I'll give you that, but the gameplay experience is far different. And by different I mean inferior.

[Segus1992]

Island Expeditions are the same goal, over and over and over again. Each Scenario had it's own story to tell and it's own goals to accomplish.
In other words: Island Expeditions are not Scenarios, unless you were one of the cheap bastards who picked one of the dozens of Scenarios MoP introduced and spammed it instead of rando-ing. And yes, different islands hasn't helped Island Expeditions, because there's no reason to do them outside Azerite for the Heart of Azeroth.

Which brings us to Azerite Armor and the heart. Azerite Armor sucks significantly worse than the legendary cloak, not because it's less interesting, but because you have to keep re-farming for the right azerite piece every patch. When you get a 430 chest next patch, and it doesn't have the trait you need, what are you going to do? Well, you can either cry to Blizzard, or get over it - You never had to replace the legendary cape, so it never ran into this problem. Not to mention how terrible the system was through the first patch - Now that they're finally changing it in 8.2, we're once again going to have to say "Well, we don't know how it's going to feel since it's not out yet" - Little early to say it's 'more interesting' when we hated the first part and haven't tried the second.

Never hated it because I've never overplayed the game to the point of feeling the "need" to farm the right pieces, at least not since I hunted for BiS when I was hardcore raiding in WotLK. In concept I don't even mind that idea anyway, but I'm sure it's annoying to get the wrong piece. If it's an upgrade from your old "right" piece, I don't see an issue big enough to hate.

MoP cloaks were just pointless and uninteresting. Gave you something to farm for sure, but the goal was not good, as basically everyone had it and it just became visual clutter with all the shitty wings spawning constantly.

[Ihavewaffles]

--- snip ---

This expansion is nowhere near MoP levels of quality.

Yeah, don't think i have done a single island expedition this year...

[Nebron]

Players have been asking for MoP 2.0 for years. For an expansion just like MoP to play with once again. And when Blizzard finally delivers with BFA, all we hear is constant complaining:

- Garrosh 2.0 with Sylvanas
- Scenarios 2.0 (island expeditions)
- Legendaries 2.0 with Heart of Azeroth
- Timeless Isle 2.0 with Mechagon
- Return of faction conflict
- Troll lore expanded upon
- Touches of old god content

They have even corrected some of the mistakes of MoP and that still was not good enough. Is there nothing that Blizzard can do to satisfy the playerbase?

It's hard to read it.

MoP has started as a war for resources. Like, real resources. Not some magical dying-titan's blood bullshit.

Garrosh had a clear purpose. He wanted war to empower the Horde - and make it 'great again'. Sylvanas by contrast is meddling with dark magic, Old Gods and her purpose is unknown and absolutely unattractive.

MoP introduced a continent with original culture, race based on asian philosophy.

We had some interesting villians like Lei Shen. Story was coherent and had a clear main plotline.

Scenarios weren't a thing I loved, but it was definitely more interesting than island expedition grind.

When it comes to troll strory - agree. That's the strong point of this expansion.

Your guild and story were not build around these Legendary cloaks. That's the opposite to Heart of Azeroth, which is the main factor of your power. The entire gameplay has been built around this necklace and it's serves a sole purpose of plot device.

Timeless Isle? You can say the same thing about Broken Shore, Taanan Jungle and maybe even Argus, which included things which Timeless Isle introduced.

Honestly, your arguments are horribly forced. And to be honest, there is more in common between Legion and BfA, than when you compare BfA to MoP.

This post is simply dishonest and there is no srgue about it. And people instead of fighting for good story, nice gameplay or whatever what could make this game better, prefer to shit on those who oppose Blizzard. Ridiculous.

[Hotmail]

It's not MoP unless a race of delusional, developmentally arrested things are getting roasted, cut, punched, and BARELY left alive. Blood Elves should do nicely.

[SirKickBan]

Players have been asking for MoP 2.0 for years. For an expansion just like MoP to play with once again. And when Blizzard finally delivers with BFA, all we hear is constant complaining:

- Garrosh 2.0 with Sylvanas
- Scenarios 2.0 (island expeditions)
- Legendaries 2.0 with Heart of Azeroth
- Timeless Isle 2.0 with Mechagon
- Return of faction conflict
- Troll lore expanded upon
- Touches of old god content

They have even corrected some of the mistakes of MoP and that still was not good enough. Is there nothing that Blizzard can do to satisfy the playerbase?

-Garrosh 2.0, except the story around it is horrible.
-Scenarios were at least somewhat interesting. You had a bit of variety. Island expeditions are always the exact, same thing, again and again.
-Legendaries weren't a part of MoP.
-I'll give you Mechagon. That's a good step.
-Faction conflict isn't inherently a good thing. Having faction conflict wasn't what made MoP a good thing, either.
-Same goes for troll lore.
-And old god content.

..Meanwhile, what don't we have?

-Classes are the simplest they've ever been. ..Whereas in MoP, arguably, they were at their most complex.
-Raids are made completely obsolete when the new one comes out, thanks to M+ and World Quests.
-PvP gearing and progression is a joke.
-There's no end-point to the gearing process. The grind just goes on forever, and ever, and ever, thanks to titanforging and the Heart of Azeroth.
-The storytelling borders on total incoherence, most of the time, and trying to predict what could come next is almost impossible, because there's almost no rhyme or reason to the sequence of events.

[lockybalboa]

What about class design? The most impt factor?

[Alkizon]

Zantos
Scenarios were story driven, but still a crappy system that was quickly abandoned.

Scenarios were normal, even no! - good solution for plotting, and their main task is to get rid of world phasing. Expeditions have nothing to do with scenarios, it’s just open world group farm content, there isn’t any real plot in them, just "work hours". There shouldn't be any world layers associated with individual character progress, server is united and only measure of progress... just NONE. Therefore, "phased" parts basis world organization (and here I'm talking not about it only, but about all similar mechanics) is unacceptable, it doesn’t matter if it’s “bronze dragons time travel help” or some other nonsense, people are obliged to see each other being within same territory except for intervenes directly by lore's supported mechanics (abilities/magic/other dimensions), or it had to be instances' content - scenarios. It was in this way how competitive spirit "between servers" (it's hard for guilds, of course, since beta testing advantage, but it possible for open world progression - where each participant contribution is important) was achieved, and it makes no sense to pay attention to "defectors" if process of "run-away" itself is as difficult as possible (almost impossible, very expensive, has certain substantial penalties in terms of time and amount of allowed taken junk)... but now they have CRZ, micro-transactions with tokens, phasing, shards and other rubbish, with which they help themselves to close their eyes to all real problems associated with current "accounts" activity.

Zantos
The legendary cloaks were a lot better since they gave a unique effect and were not tied to a crummy system like the Hearth of Azeroth.

These are two completely different systems, both in terms of game design as a whole, and in terms of influencing gameplay. There is nothing to compare.

Zantos
The only 2.0 is the Garrosh.

As I understand there is no complete confirmation of this, but even if trend is similar, it all depends on how to arrange story nodes, and here they seem to not intersect very much with each other.

Remaining listed comparison "planes" aren't have particularly power when comparing.

In general, it's impossible to compare these two expansions normally, because they have almost as much in common as new and old models. Another organization of characteristics, progress, content delivery (lore) and classes in general, and even those models already mentioned above. It's easier to say that they are literally different without fear of a strong error. Funny and stupid thread

ps. Easier and more appropriate to compare Cataclysm with Legion (BfA role here serves mostly as "Legion's end pre-patch for following expansion", purely to take your time between, not a small pre-patch, but still...)

Therefore, statement that “WotLK influenced failure of Cataclysm” have place for existence (only that problem here isn't in sequence, but in methods' inheritance), since they began “familiarize” with subsequently realized unsuccessful design solutions in it. WotLK was an inappropriate experiment, results of which were misinterpreted, and Cataclysm became consequences, Pandaria was result of cleansing Cataclysm, WoD was PR bomb and great overestimation of current own capabilities without correcting wrong design trends (in theory, it should have been excuse for 3 previous expansions, maybe they even understood that they were wrong, but it was already late and they only made even more critical errors, my personal experience ends here in connection with new models advent, everything further is more likely theoretical sampling speculation), Legion - is already corporate experiment to obtain long-term profits (this time experiment was a success, just its goal was no longer respectable, but fully money based, because they urgently needed something to "pay" for WoD compensation), BfA is "based on reduced budget" dried rot of ideas left after Legion.

[Lionwoman]

MoP was good. BfA is not.

[Powerogue]

I believe they were referring to the class balance of that era, rather than rehashing the same story.

On that note I still think Legion class balance was better, though I played far less classes in MOP to really weigh the two fairly.

I also did want more faction conflict, and we've gotten it, but that doesn't mean I'm not still disappointed in the excessive overlap to MOP's story and lack of Alliance interaction in the primary story. I don't think it would be unfair to say the expansion has been 75% about the Horde, 25% about the Alliance.

Think of Suramar as a good example. It clearly took the main points from the blood elves' backstory (elf leader sells out celestial body-themed well of magic to Burning Legion), but, critically, took that in a very different direction and angle by focusing on that slowly stirring rebellion leading up to a civil war.

[Bhorin]

The good thing is you can look @ rotations from icy-veins from MoP and compare them to the current class design.

Here is the webarchive of Icy-Veins.

Hilariously, most of the specs have nearly identical play and a lot of them have more interesting rotations now than then. The only specs that were really more interesting back then was Warrior (Fury/Arms) and Enhancement Shaman. Most of the rest are about the same though I do consider BM/MM Hunter, Spriest and Ele shaman much more interesting now than then.

I guess not that it actually matters since this class balance / class design argument is a complete cop out argument. Plus it likely based on a flawed memory (ala mandela effect) rather than any real evidence.

[Osmeric]

The good thing is you can look @ rotations from icy-veins from MoP and compare them to the current class design.

Here is the webarchive of Icy-Veins.

Hilariously, most of the specs have nearly identical play and a lot of them have more interesting rotations now than then. The only specs that were really more interesting back then was Warrior (Fury/Arms) and Enhancement Shaman. Most of the rest are about the same though I do consider BM/MM Hunter, Spriest and Ele shaman much more interesting now than then.

I guess not that it actually matters since this class balance / class design argument is a complete cop out argument. Plus it likely based on a flawed memory (ala mandela effect) rather than any real evidence.

That's a Thanos-level OH SNAP there, man.