Page 17 of 19 FirstFirst ...
7
15
16
17
18
19
LastLast
  1. #321
    Quote Originally Posted by Eggroll View Post
    And here is an example of player reactions on the WoW forums... 511!! pages thread - yeah, seems like nobody really cared.. rofl
    https://us.battle.net/forums/en/wow/...7939626#post-5
    That doesn't count all the threads that were capped and then deleted either.

    There's no doubt that Blizzard forced this issue. This wasn't about making players happy, or giving a better experience. It was about forcing a single vision of how the game "should" be, regardless of player feedback, suggestions, complaints, or legitimate criticisms.

  2. #322
    Quote Originally Posted by SirCowdog View Post
    I get what you're trying to say, but you're not accounting for the fact that different people experience things differently. Flying is a core aspect of wonder for human beings since time immemorial.
    No, flight itself is not.

    The wonder of what is beyond our own capabilities is. We can't fly. We have no way to. But we CAN make something that will, and what we could potentially experience due to it is where the wonder is.

    Do you think a bird considers flying wonderous? They do so every day. They can see the perspective from the sky every day of their lives. It is wonderous because we can't do it ourselves.

    Just because you don't find it wondrous doesn't mean it isn't.
    Then you should be able to argue in it's favor.

    You're making a very strong case for the way you want to play, but at the same time completely ignoring that just as many people get just as strong of a sense of enjoyment out of the sense of freedom and ability to look down at the world as you do being on the ground looking up.
    Because 'enjoyment' and 'wonder' are two different things. I enjoy flying - It makes the game a lot easier. It does not, however, inspire wonder in me. It kills any wonder I have, because I simply go where my wonder takes me, and then it is satisfied, never to come back, because I have already found the answer my wonder would have me go find.

    Wonder only exists when the unknown exists. You cannot 'wonder' about something you KNOW. You already know the answer.

    THAT is the mistake Blizzard is making. They're only looking at one side and saying it's the only way, despite knowing at least half their players didn't want it(both from their own internal data, AND from the backlash of WoD).
    In fact, Pathfinder is the opposite of what you claim here.

    Pathfinder WAS their solution when they took a look at both sides. One side was upset because flight fundamentally changed the way the game was played. The other side was upset because they didn't want to lose the ability they've had for a long time and enjoyed.

    Blizzard took the middle ground. You cannot fly in the early stages of the game, so you can play the game the way it was designed from day 1 of the expansion, and then Pathfinder allows flight to be added at a later date.

    Do I think Pathfinder could be changed to be better? Yes. Do I think it's bad? No, it is exactly what Blizzard wanted it to be - A middle ground between experiencing the game the way it is designed, and having flight, the two sides of the debate as presented.

    And yet here we have pathfinder, a joke version of flying. Taking away everything that people enjoyed about flying and giving it back in a shriveled, diminished version. It's taking a part of the game, draining all the life out of it, wiping their asses with it, holding it for 9 months, then giving it back and saying we should be happy about it.
    How, exactly, does giving flight later in the expansion after you've experienced the content, ruin the wonder of flying?

    If anything, once you get it you should have so much wonder left to experience, because you haven't seen those tree tops yet.

    Or are you saying that your wonder is satisfied on the ground? In which case, why do you need flight?

    Take ANY part of the game you enjoy and give it the pathfinder treatment, then get back to me about how it's supposed to be good for the game.
    I don't have to.

    Other parts of the game don't change the fundamental way players experience the game like flight does.

    When you can point me to one that does, I'll explain it. Otherwise, this is a waste of my time.
    Quote Originally Posted by smrund View Post
    I'm sorry sir, but we do not serve complimentary cheese when you bring your own whine.

  3. #323
    Quote Originally Posted by rda View Post
    This does not reduce time to test, all zones are de-facto built in full 3D for years now
    One would think, but sadly this isn't the case at all.

    Did you know that Argus is built like Silvermoon City? Why would they do that if it weren't easier?

  4. #324
    Quote Originally Posted by SirCowdog View Post
    Snip
    I'm gonna snip you down since you made a lot of good points, and I'd like to apologize for my previous hostility towards you. Coming onto these forums and seeing the constant, neverending negativity is really quite depressing. There's been some times I've quit these forums because they were legit making me depressed.

    As for the whole "give us cave structures, mountains, and other 3D things to explore" part, we actually had that before. We had Vashj'ir. Take away the water and pretend it's air. We had mobs, huge caves, even towns hidden inside of what would be mountains if they weren't underwater. And people HATED it.

    Also baseline flying was originally slower at 60%. I made this statement in another post that there were times I would hop on my land mount and run because it would get me where I wanted more quickly. It was buffed to its current form of 150% in the ToC patch. I do think, though, that Blizzard agrees with you. Since they removed many of the mount speed increasing methods and nerfed the overall speed by having them stack additively not multiplicatively. I personally wish they'd give us a faster level of speed, since 310 hasn't been special since Cata, but that's unlikely.

    As for the last four paragraphs. That's always been a weird dichotomy to me. People say over and over that choices are always good. Giving players more options is always good. If they want to fly let them immediately. They can choose not to if they want. But you have to acknowledge human nature. We instinctively seek the path of least resistance. The non-flyers feel that something important in the game would be missed if flying was enabled right from the getgo, while also acknowledging that if they could fly, they would even if they knew they were going to miss stuff. If I might use an analogy, it's like a little kid who's tempted to steal candy from a store. He knows it's bad, but he'll do it anyway if he can. But if a store clerk is there watching him making sure he can't do it, he'll grumble but go without.

  5. #325
    @Fleugen I've read your post and want to let you know I'm not just ignoring it. But I'm at work on my phone and many of the points you've brought up are too complex to articulate replies while on my shitty phone.

    Quote Originally Posted by cparle87 View Post
    I'm gonna snip you down since you made a lot of good points, and I'd like to apologize for my previous hostility towards you.
    I'm glad I decided to step back and write a more civil reply, then. Trust me when I say I know exactly what you mean about the negativity. I'm exposed to a LOT of it for standing my ground on the Pathfinder/Flight issue.


    Quote Originally Posted by cparle87 View Post
    As for the whole "give us cave structures, mountains, and other 3D things to explore" part, we actually had that before. We had Vashj'ir. Take away the water and pretend it's air. We had mobs, huge caves, even towns hidden inside of what would be mountains if they weren't underwater. And people HATED it.
    As you can imagine, Ive spent longer than most looking into the flight issue. Vashj'ir comes up a lot. I've talked about this with many people, and I don't think it's actually good comparison.

    Mechanically speaking, trying to do combat in mid-air is definitely a problem, I freely admit. There are ways around that, but I think the real reason why people viewed Vashj'ir so negatively was actually more about presentation and atmosphere than mechanical difficulties.

    It sounds very simple to say "just take away the water" and it's the same. But it isn't the same. Being underwater has an entirely different feeling. There are different enemies, different terrain, different lore. A common phobia about sharks had influence. That weird wavering blurry visual effect played a factor. The oppressive feeling of having all that water weighing down. Having to use the seahorse instead of a person's favorite mount. The initial quest introduction being too scripted. Not to mention Hyjal being faster and having both the Firelands dailies and raid entrance.

    All of these little things and more contributed to the relative lack of popularity of the zone. Similar to the PVP issue, most of these reasons don't actually have flight as their source.


    Quote Originally Posted by cparle87 View Post
    Also baseline flying was originally slower at 60%. I made this statement in another post that there were times I would hop on my land mount and run because it would get me where I wanted more quickly. It was buffed to its current form of 150% in the ToC patch. I do think, though, that Blizzard agrees with you. Since they removed many of the mount speed increasing methods and nerfed the overall speed by having them stack additively not multiplicatively. I personally wish they'd give us a faster level of speed, since 310 hasn't been special since Cata, but that's unlikely.
    Raw speed is part of the problem, however. Both because of server response time, mob AI, and the difficulty of a players noticing details when moving that fast. One of the suggestions Ive seen recommends flight speed faster than 100 or 150 should probably be what's actually locked behind Pathfinder. I would accept that as an interim solution while a more comprehensive one was worked on.


    Quote Originally Posted by cparle87 View Post
    As for the last four paragraphs. That's always been a weird dichotomy to me. People say over and over that choices are always good. Giving players more options is always good. If they want to fly let them immediately. They can choose not to if they want. But you have to acknowledge human nature. We instinctively seek the path of least resistance. The non-flyers feel that something important in the game would be missed if flying was enabled right from the getgo, while also acknowledging that if they could fly, they would even if they knew they were going to miss stuff. If I might use an analogy, it's like a little kid who's tempted to steal candy from a store. He knows it's bad, but he'll do it anyway if he can. But if a store clerk is there watching him making sure he can't do it, he'll grumble but go without.
    You mitigate this by making the choices more equal. Again, this is a problem of dropping flight into a world that isn't designed for it. And It's why I always ultimately push for an open world that has a variety of zones; some where flight is better, some where ground mounts had the advantage.

    This could be accomplished with things like making ground and flying mounts have equal speed. To counterbalance the advantage of 3d movement that flying has, maybe allow ground mounts to stay mounted in combat, or while gathering. Or what if flying before Pathfinder is only 60% speed? Or some other buff or advantage to using a ground mount.

    This way it's not always the case that flying is automatically better. This way players actually HAVE a choice instead of having it imposed on them.
    Last edited by SirCowdog; 2019-05-23 at 08:18 AM.

  6. #326
    Quote Originally Posted by Eggroll View Post
    I linked it earlier in this post, it was on Polygon.
    http://www.polygon.com/2015/5/22/864...mo-pc-blizzard

    And here is an example of player reactions on the WoW forums... 511!! pages thread - yeah, seems like nobody really cared.. rofl
    https://us.battle.net/forums/en/wow/...7939626#post-5
    Thanks for reposting the link to that interview. It's funny how the explanations he gave as to why flight was bad for players were exactly the things I liked about it. It also reminded me how much I disliked playing through Tanaan Jungle. I don't usually like to just complain but the whole design of the area seemed to be a big middle finger to the players who were upset about losing flight.
    Last edited by WinningOne; 2019-05-23 at 07:04 AM.

  7. #327
    Quote Originally Posted by Fleugen View Post
    No, flight itself is not.

    The wonder of what is beyond our own capabilities is. We can't fly. We have no way to. But we CAN make something that will, and what we could potentially experience due to it is where the wonder is.

    Do you think a bird considers flying wonderous? They do so every day. They can see the perspective from the sky every day of their lives. It is wonderous because we can't do it ourselves.

    Because 'enjoyment' and 'wonder' are two different things. I enjoy flying - It makes the game a lot easier. It does not, however, inspire wonder in me. It kills any wonder I have, because I simply go where my wonder takes me, and then it is satisfied, never to come back, because I have already found the answer my wonder would have me go find.

    Wonder only exists when the unknown exists. You cannot 'wonder' about something you KNOW. You already know the answer.
    Sigh...



    This is the context I was using the word "wonder" in. It's a feeling of immense enjoyment when flying around a game world that is meant to be entertainment and recreation.

    I understand that you're using the word in a different context, but again, just because you don't gain a sense of wonder from flying doesn't mean other people feel the same things as you. Nor is it grounds for removing something people enjoy. Some people might very well gain a much greater sense of immersion from being on the ground, poking their nose into every little thing. Other people get just as much enjoyment and immersion from soaring through the skies.



    Quote Originally Posted by Fleugen View Post
    Then you should be able to argue in it's favor.
    And here I thought that's what I was doing the entire time.


    Quote Originally Posted by Fleugen View Post
    In fact, Pathfinder is the opposite of what you claim here.

    Pathfinder WAS their solution when they took a look at both sides. One side was upset because flight fundamentally changed the way the game was played.
    Sorry, I hate to cut the post up so much, but there are a lot of points to address.

    When pathfinder was first introduced in WoD, flying had been a normal part of the game for 8 years. It did not, as you put it, "fundamentally change the way the game was played" because by the advent of Pathfinder, flight was already part of the fundamental formula of the game. To such an extent that not having flight was actually more alien to WoW, and more of a fundamental shift than having it.

    This is largely why there was such a massive blowback from the announcement of removing it forever. Since Legion pulled a bait and switch with Argus, and BfA didn't budge on the issue, it's not hard to see why most people who wanted flight to be part of the game gave up and left.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fleugen View Post
    The other side was upset because they didn't want to lose the ability they've had for a long time and enjoyed.

    Blizzard took the middle ground. You cannot fly in the early stages of the game, so you can play the game the way it was designed from day 1 of the expansion, and then Pathfinder allows flight to be added at a later date.

    Do I think Pathfinder could be changed to be better? Yes. Do I think it's bad? No, it is exactly what Blizzard wanted it to be - A middle ground between experiencing the game the way it is designed, and having flight, the two sides of the debate as presented.
    You keep talking about Pathfinder as though it's a "middle ground", which is a gross misrepresentation. Flying used to be a meaningful part of the game for most of an expansion. Flying was obtained at max level, then usable throughout the expansion until new content was released, giving both pro-ground and pro-flight players a period of time where their chosen playstyle was usable in CURRENT content.

    Pathfinder delays and withholds flight until it is virtually useless, making it only be available in non-current content or for alts(which is the same thing as being non-current). In the case of Legion, this was taken a step further with the release of Argus, a zone where you STILL can't use flying, despite the protestations of Blizzard about mastering the ground first then getting to fly above it.

    Flight is being delayed, withheld, used as a carrot, lied about both in terms of calling it a reward, and with the given reasons for unlocking it not matching up with the execution.

    To call Pathfinder a "middle ground" is such a blatant, gross misrepresentation of the situation that I'm finding it difficult to remain civil about it.


    EDIT: I'm cutting it here. The rest of your post had a definite antagonistic and dismissive slant to it. If you don't want to make the attempt to understand other points of view than your own, then just don't post at all. There's no need to make posts claiming you don't have to understand or "Waste your time" not making the attempt. :/
    Last edited by SirCowdog; 2019-05-23 at 01:08 PM.

  8. #328
    Quote Originally Posted by Kataroku View Post
    One would think, but sadly this isn't the case at all.

    Did you know that Argus is built like Silvermoon City? Why would they do that if it weren't easier?
    It was my impression that Argus was built in 3D with a couple of 2D facades added on top to achieve a specific visual effect for panoramic looks. It is true that it would be more difficult to create such an effect in 3D and that's why they used 2D facades, but all this is optional, they could have just done nothing.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Fleugen View Post
    Do you think a bird considers flying wonderous? They do so every day. They can see the perspective from the sky every day of their lives. It is wonderous because we can't do it ourselves.
    No. I enjoy chocolate. I don't stop enjoying it because I can buy and eat however much I want. Same here.

    The end result of not having flying is not that I am suddenly enjoying it when it comes - it's that I am not doing various things in areas that don't have flying unlocked yet and instead am doing things in areas where I can fly (yes, enjoying flying every time).

    This theory of them keeping flying locked for good because we enjoy it more that way is just not true in my case - and I don't think it is true for most.
    Last edited by rda; 2019-05-23 at 02:13 PM.

  9. #329
    Quote Originally Posted by rda View Post
    No. I enjoy chocolate. I don't stop enjoying it because I can buy and eat however much I want. Same here.

    This theory of them keeping flying locked for good because we enjoy it more that way is just not true in my case - and I don't think it is true for most.
    Furthermore, the idea that delaying access will make me appreciate shitty, low-quality chocolate that's been sitting on the counter for months and covered with cat-hair.... is likewise nonsense.

    Pathfinder need a complete overhaul, and flying needs to be worth a damn once you finally get it.

  10. #330
    Quote Originally Posted by Varjo410 View Post
    To me it's about getting to know the world. They are right in saying you don't experience the world they create through flying.
    To this day I still don't know my way around on the ground in Hyjal or any Cata zone for example, while for any other I know the way/roads from memory.
    Personally, I hope they remove pathfinder. Either put flying in or just remove it. This achievement of directing people into contents they may not want just gain something that is really useful is absurd.

    I like Northend. So I tend to travel on ground most of the time. Same with Pandaria. I detest Outland so I fly all the time.

  11. #331
    I'm kinda in the middle on Pathfinder because I like the idea that we don't get flying until ~halfway through the expansion so we get to "enjoy" the zones from the ground. With that said, I don't know if we really need a Pathfinder achievement, to me this could just be like the tome of cold weather flying. Like halfway through the expansion, a vendor sells the training skill that lets you fly. But on the other side of the argument, I'm the type of player who likes to do EVERYTHING on my main character so I've never had that issue of "oh shit I have to grind this rep, or do that thing", because I just do them and then get rewarded.

    So in short - keep flying until halfway through the expansion, but i would be fine if it was just something we could learn too.

  12. #332
    Quote Originally Posted by SirCowdog View Post
    You keep talking about Pathfinder as though it's a "middle ground", which is a gross misrepresentation. Flying used to be a meaningful part of the game for most of an expansion. Flying was obtained at max level, then usable throughout the expansion until new content was released, giving both pro-ground and pro-flight players a period of time where their chosen playstyle was usable in CURRENT content.

    Pathfinder delays and withholds flight until it is virtually useless, making it only be available in non-current content or for alts(which is the same thing as being non-current). In the case of Legion, this was taken a step further with the release of Argus, a zone where you STILL can't use flying, despite the protestations of Blizzard about mastering the ground first then getting to fly above it.

    Flight is being delayed, withheld, used as a carrot, lied about both in terms of calling it a reward, and with the given reasons for unlocking it not matching up with the execution.

    To call Pathfinder a "middle ground" is such a blatant, gross misrepresentation of the situation that I'm finding it difficult to remain civil about it.


    EDIT: I'm cutting it here. The rest of your post had a definite antagonistic and dismissive slant to it. If you don't want to make the attempt to understand other points of view than your own, then just don't post at all. There's no need to make posts claiming you don't have to understand or "Waste your time" not making the attempt. :/
    Then I'll go ahead and only address the part of your conversation that might have a semblance of sense, instead of addressing your questions as well.

    Pathfinder IS a middle ground. You literally described it AS A MIDDLE GROUND while saying calling it a middle ground is a 'misrepresentation.'

    Tell me: What is in the middle of "Don't have flight" and "Have flight?"

    I can assure you, it's not "Have flight." That's not 'in the middle', that is literally one side of the argument. To take that side is to shun the other side.
    I can also assure you, it's not "Don't have flight." Blizzard learned that in WoD when they said they didn't want flight in WoD.

    So if "Have Flight" which you suggest as above, and "Don't Have Flight" which is what blizzard wants, are both not options, where is the middle?

    Well, we look at why people want flight, and we look at why people don't want flight.

    People want flight because it's easy. It's 'wonderous' which you still have yet to explain why it's 'less wonderous' to get flight later. It gets you from one location to another, fastest, while still being in control of your character.

    People don't want flight because it changes the way you experience the game. According many other posters here with no proof whatsoever, Blizzard doesn't want flight because it's 'easier to design the game without flight.' Last but certainly not least, people don't want flight because it's boring. No matter how much you want to describe the CGI sky Blizzard has made for us, you can still see it from the ground, and it won't be any more interesting from the empty air, which Blizzard has made pretty clear by now they have no intention to EVER utilize air combat or anything worthwhile in the air.

    So, now that we've broken it down:
    People want an immersive, easy to traverse, and 'wonderous' world - That's why they want Flight, because it gives them that.
    Other people want an immersive, sensible, and 'wonderous' world - That's why they want no Flight, because with Flight, the way we traverse the world simply doesn't make sense - There's no reason to check out the landscape and hide treasures within when players aren't going to explore.

    So. Since one groups wants the world to make sense from the way the story is being told: Flying before the story is over, makes no sense. However, flying AFTER the story is over still makes total sense.

    Now, can you explain why it's not a middle ground, or are you just going to describe how Flight was in game before again and call it a day as you always do? (Spoiler: It isn't helping your argument.) Hence the dismissive posts.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by rda View Post
    No. I enjoy chocolate. I don't stop enjoying it because I can buy and eat however much I want. Same here.
    Do you find chocolate wonderous?

    I'd find it strange if you do, seeing as it's very easily explained how to make it and what it is.

    The end result of not having flying is not that I am suddenly enjoying it when it comes - it's that I am not doing various things in areas that don't have flying unlocked yet and instead am doing things in areas where I can fly (yes, enjoying flying every time).
    And you consider this a problem... Why?

    You're allowed to play the game as you like.

    If you don't like no flying, that's fine - There's many areas where you can fly, and you can enjoy plenty of content there.

    Current content, however, is meant to be experienced a specific way. Namely: From the ground, not the air.

    This theory of them keeping flying locked for good because we enjoy it more that way is just not true in my case - and I don't think it is true for most.
    Good for you.

    I enjoy it quite enough.
    Last edited by Fleugen; 2019-05-25 at 05:50 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by smrund View Post
    I'm sorry sir, but we do not serve complimentary cheese when you bring your own whine.

  13. #333
    Quote Originally Posted by SirCowdog View Post
    Not to mention Hyjal being faster and having both the Firelands dailies and raid entrance.

    Raw speed is part of the problem, however. Both because of server response time, mob AI, and the difficulty of a players noticing details when moving that fast. One of the suggestions Ive seen recommends flight speed faster than 100 or 150 should probably be what's actually locked behind Pathfinder. I would accept that as an interim solution while a more comprehensive one was worked on.
    Just gonna snip you down to the two things I wanted to comment on again.

    I thought we only had the Firelands dailies were added in 4.2 when the Firelands was unlocked. Wouldn't that be kinda like saying people didn't like levelling in Azsuna because they had Broken Shore dailies to do, which weren't added till later?

    That's also a very good idea, I like it. Let us fly at land speed with a gold purchase, or maybe an easy unlock zone by zone, and wait until pathfinder to get full speed back.

  14. #334
    Remember when people argued that flying was a feature of an expansion and that it was flase advertising to not have it in the game?

    Yeah, some people are fucking mental.
    Quote Originally Posted by AeneasBK View Post
    Damnit hubcap, you are such a retard.
    Seriously guys, this forum would be a better place if everyone just stopped acknowledging Zenkai. It's just demeaning to everyone.

  15. #335
    Quote Originally Posted by Fleugen View Post
    People want flight because it's easy.

    SOME people want it because it's easy. Others want it because they've earned it. Still other, like myself, want it because they think it will lead to more complex and engaging gameplay. By over-generalizing you're missing the arguments that are actually being made in favor of your assumptions. Stop doing that and maybe you'll start to understand where I'm coming from.


    Quote Originally Posted by Fleugen View Post
    It's 'wonderous' which you still have yet to explain why it's 'less wonderous' to get flight later.
    Let me break this down in simple terms. Say you find french fries enjoyable. You LOVE french fries. It's your favorite food. Hot and fresh out of the frier. Crisp, salty, a little greasy sometimes.

    Now take a french fry and drop it in your car for several months, only to discover it later, dried up, and rock hard, with a little bit of mold on it.

    Are you really going to tell me that anology doesn't resonate? That the dried up french-fry is somehow just as good as the fresh ones? Sure, maybe you could cut off the mold, and suck on the fry until it softened up, and MAYBE not get sick, but it's not going to be anywhere near as good.

    Flying in current content allows you an experience that you just can't get when you've already been back and forth across it a million times earlier from the ground. If you still don't understand this then you're not even trying.



    Quote Originally Posted by Fleugen View Post
    people don't want flight because it's boring.
    What people? Because I can point to the entire span of time between TBC through MOP where subscriptions were a hell of a lot higher than current times to prove that it isn't flight that's the source of boredom. Poorly designed content is boring! You're conflating two things (flight and boredom) that aren't actually related.

    And even disregarding ALL of that, you're completely glossing over(or intentionally ignoring) that I am advocating for MIXED content of both ground AND air so that "people" can get the best of both worlds. That's where the "middle ground" is. Read my reply to cparle for more details on how this could potentially be achieved.

    The reason I keep referring to flying being part of the game before WoD is because it's absolute proof that flying is not detrimental the the game or the story. That is a bullshit narrative created out of thin air by Ion with absolute ZERO evidence to back it up. It's virtually just Ion saying "I don't like this". Even the examples he gave for how flying supposedly "detracts from the game" were proven to be ridiculous(the "boss on top of a tower" example).

    I'll repeat: It isn't flying that's bad for the game. It's lazy, weak, formulaic design that's bad.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by cparle87 View Post
    I thought we only had the Firelands dailies were added in 4.2 when the Firelands was unlocked. Wouldn't that be kinda like saying people didn't like levelling in Azsuna because they had Broken Shore dailies to do, which weren't added till later?
    It's because of the way people remember things. People already preferred Hyjal instead of Vashj'ir initially, but adding Firelands to Hyjal made it even more popular. Looking back, most people are going to remember spending more time in Mt Hyjal, and if they DO remember going to Vashj'ir, the negative aspects will stand out more. That's just how the human mind works most times.

    But the point I was making was that there were MANY reasons why people didn't like Vashj'ir. To lump all of those reasons into the 3D nature of the zone as an argument against trying to make an above-ground zone with flying.....is not very fair.


    Quote Originally Posted by cparle87 View Post
    That's also a very good idea, I like it. Let us fly at land speed with a gold purchase, or maybe an easy unlock zone by zone, and wait until pathfinder to get full speed back.
    @Fleugen Read here please. I'm going to give you a real "middle ground" example.

    @cparle87 I'll take it a step further: As blizzard prefers, they obviously want the initial experience to be approached from the ground. Ok. Not much we can realistically do about that unless Hazzikostas gets replaced or has a fundamental shift in his perception(not likely).

    So lets set it up to be where Pathfinder is still in effect, just without the ridiculous 9 month timegate. The moment you finish Pathfinder part 1 in the launch patch of the expansion, you unlock flying at 60%, or perhaps up to 100% speed with an exalted rep grind maybe. Players still have to complete all the initial objectives from the ground, such as exploration and quest completion, but have something immediate to work towards, with a long-term goal as well.

    After that work has been done, players have the option to fly if they so choose, but because ground mounts will be moving at 150% speed or more, they're still the better option in most cases. This is important, because if future content is released in a later patch, ground mounts will still be "the path of least resistance". Players will generally still use their ground mounts even if content is released after flying is obtained.

    To further reinforce this, when necessary, vital story quests or high-value objectives can VERY easily be guarded by traditional anti-flight mechanics. Birds, flak cannons, whatever. With only 60-100% speed it's going to be difficult to avoid these mechanics on a flying mount. I have no doubt Blizzard could even design the anti-air mechanics to completely ignore grounded players(maybe demon hunters would need to be careful I guess), or come up with more advanced challenges and obstacles for flight as I suggested in my earlier posts.

    Then, once Pathfinder part 2 was completed in the second or third expansion patch, a full flying speed to match ground mounts could be unlocked, with an additional bonus of giving ground mounts a slight edge of 10% or something. All of this with the continuous caveat that flight is completely disabled while War Mode is toggled on. And for an added twist, maybe Blizzard could be bothered to actually include an in-game lore explanation for why flight is so restricted.

    Do either of you have any suggestions or insights as to how this could be done better? Or see any deep flaws with such a compromise? Granted, this isn't MY ideal solution, but it is how I see Pathfinder being done more reasonably; accomplishing almost everything Blizzard(Ion) wants, while being more fair to players of either camp.
    Last edited by SirCowdog; 2019-05-25 at 01:22 PM.

  16. #336
    Quote Originally Posted by Kataroku View Post
    One would think, but sadly this isn't the case at all.

    Did you know that Argus is built like Silvermoon City? Why would they do that if it weren't easier?
    The Argus zone isn't, the skybox is made in a way to give the illusion of a much larger landmass and that illusion could be broken by flying mounts.

  17. #337
    Quote Originally Posted by SirCowdog View Post
    @Fleugen Read here please. I'm going to give you a real "middle ground" example.
    I don't need to.

    We already have a middle ground.

    It's called Pathfinder. Get used to it.

    Not to mention: Your idea is Pathfinder, but not restricted. It's the same exact thing. If you want to IMPROVE pathfinder, then Pathfinder isn't a bad middle ground - It just needs to be updated.

    That's precisely the problem. You keep saying "Pathfinder is a terrible, awful, impossible-to-work-with not-even-middle ground." Then you offer us an alternative - And it's Pathfinder, but improved.

    You say Flying is wonderous and that's why you want it - But can't explain why it's not wonderous to get it later. (And yes, your french fry excuse is laughable. Flying doesn't get stale when you don't have it, so try again.)

    You say "you're not taking my arguments seriously!" then pull shit like the blow:

    SOME people want it because it's easy. Others want it because they've earned it.
    completely ignoring that I posted MULTIPLE examples of different reasons why people want flight, to fight against ONE SINGLE THING I said.

    If you want me to take you seriously - You have to make sense. But you never do, so I won't take you seriously.
    Last edited by Fleugen; 2019-05-26 at 12:11 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by smrund View Post
    I'm sorry sir, but we do not serve complimentary cheese when you bring your own whine.

  18. #338
    Quote Originally Posted by Fleugen View Post
    I don't need to.
    Ok, great. So you're clearly stating your complete and total unwillingness to look at other points of view. Glad we cleared that up.


    Quote Originally Posted by Fleugen View Post
    You have to make sense. But you never do, so I won't take you seriously.
    I've made multiple, extensive, articulate arguments and points. Read my replies to cparle and others in this thread. If I'm not making sense to you it's because you're not every trying to understand anything.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Dhrizzle View Post
    The Argus zone isn't, the skybox is made in a way to give the illusion of a much larger landmass and that illusion could be broken by flying mounts.
    Stop and think about that for a second. Blizzard is willing to turn off flight(something they KNOW people enjoy immensely), and invalidate the previous 8 months players had spent working on Pathfinder, all for a visual effect that could have also been achieved by using other methods that "presented challenges to development".

    That should tell you everything you need to know about what Blizzard thinks of their players.
    Last edited by SirCowdog; 2019-05-26 at 12:32 AM.

  19. #339
    The Unstoppable Force FelPlague's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    Ontario,Canada
    Posts
    21,409
    Quote Originally Posted by Kataroku View Post
    One would think, but sadly this isn't the case at all.

    Did you know that Argus is built like Silvermoon City? Why would they do that if it weren't easier?
    its not built like silvermoon.
    all the buildings on argus are entire buildings

    stop making this shit up mate.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by SirCowdog View Post
    Ok, great. So you're clearly stating your complete and total unwillingness to look at other points of view. Glad we cleared that up.

    - - - Updated - - -



    Stop and think about that for a second. Blizzard is willing to turn off flight(something they KNOW people enjoy immensely), and invalidate the previous 8 months players had spent working on Pathfinder, all for a visual effect that could have also been achieved by using other methods that "presented challenges to development".

    That should tell you everything you need to know about what Blizzard thinks of their players.
    so would you rather have waited 6 more months for the patch while they make an entire fucking city in the distance we cant go to?

  20. #340
    Quote Originally Posted by FelPlague View Post

    so would you rather have waited 6 more months for the patch while they make an entire fucking city in the distance we cant go to?


    First, where are you getting this 6 month figure from? I doubt it would take that long to create facade buildings in the distance locked away with either invisible walls like they did with Tanaan, or fatigue bar, or no flying barrier zones like Timeless isle.

    Second, yes, even if for some bizarre reason it took them an additional 6 months to design Argus to handle flight, I'd be ok with it. Not only would I very MUCH like Blizzard to go back to higher quality design and the "when it's done" philosophy, but it would have gone a long way to reassuring players about staying consistent to their stated word("master the ground, fly later") and shown consideration for player efforts towards completing Pathfinder.

Posting Permissions

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