Can we get one thing straight about the introduction of pathfinder?

[rda]

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 - - -

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.

[SirCowdog]

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.

[Sansnom]

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.

[Zantera]

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.

[cparle87]

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.

[AeneasBK]

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.

[SirCowdog]

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.

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.

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 - - -

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.

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.

[Dhrizzle]

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.

[SirCowdog]

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.

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 - - -

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.

[FelPlague]

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 - - -

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?

[SirCowdog]

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.

[Noradin]

And yes, your french fry excuse is laughable. Flying doesn't get stale when you don't have it, so try again.

Actually, it does.
I'm just about done with waiting for it to finally be allowed again.
At this point I have pretty much stopped caring about seeing this world.
It is dead to me.

[Dhrizzle]

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".

It's way more likely that after a few years talking about how they're using a no-flight design and how most expansions has added a final zone without flying, Argus was never intended to have flight and the visual effect was a no-cost bonus with nothing having to be "switched off," although I admit I could be wrong, where are you getting the quote that they had other options for that effect that "presented challenges to development?"

That should tell you everything you need to know about what Blizzard thinks of their players.

No, but the way you keep taking design decisions as a personal or calculated affront should tell you everything you need to know about why I seldom take your posts seriously.

[SirCowdog]

No, but the way you keep taking design decisions as a personal or calculated affront should tell you everything you need to know about why I seldom take your posts seriously.

I don't take it personally. But I also don't make excuses and treat Blizzard like they're some benevolent friend who wants to give players a warm fuzzy, either.

They're a corporation, and WoW has a number-crunching spreadsheet wizard in the position of lead developer. It's not hard to see what motivates their decisions.

[Sansnom]

No one complained about flight in TBC.
No one complained about flight in WotLK.
No one complained about flight in Cataclysm.
No one complained about flight in MoP.
In WoD, suddenly, flight was a problem..

Flight was never the problem: WoD was..

No. I think there were some complaints. It was relatively minor at Cata but gathered momentum during MoP. I think it was due to some blue post that at least some people in Blizzard were having second thoughts about flying and that maybe they should not added.

This started the flying vs no no-flying which resulted in flying initially removed to "test the water" so to speak in WoD.

[SirCowdog]

No. I think there were some complaints. It was relatively minor at Cata but gathered momentum during MoP. I think it was due to some blue post that at least some people in Blizzard were having second thoughts about flying and that maybe they should not added.

This started the flying vs no no-flying which resulted in flying initially removed to "test the water" so to speak in WoD.

If someone posted in Blue posted "We think dog-feces sandwiches are a really good idea!" it would have a largish following from some of the community. The real problem is that there are too many people that think Blizzard can do no wrong, and anything the suggest is a good idea.

Which isn't to say that Blizzard never has good ideas. But people are WAY too ready to assume everything Blizzard does is lined with gold.

[Dhrizzle]

If someone posted in Blue posted "We think dog-feces sandwiches are a really good idea!" it would have a largish following from some of the community. The real problem is that there are too many people that think Blizzard can do no wrong, and anything the suggest is a good idea.

Which isn't to say that Blizzard never has good ideas. But people are WAY too ready to assume everything Blizzard does is lined with gold.

Meanwhile if Blizz announced they were removing dog faeces from the game there are people who would complain that dog faeces were an integral part of the experience, accuse the devs of removing faeces because it magically makes the game cheaper, cast doubt on the intelligence of a person who dislikes consuming faeces and declare any developer worthy of the name would integrate faeces more closely to the core experience

[SirCowdog]

Meanwhile if Blizz announced they were removing dog faeces from the game there are people who would complain that dog faeces were an integral part of the experience, accuse the devs of removing faeces because it magically makes the game cheaper, cast doubt on the intelligence of a person who dislikes consuming faeces and declare any developer worthy of the name would integrate faeces more closely to the core experience

It's an admittedly funny turn about on my post.

Metaphor vs literal, however.

[Sansnom]

If someone posted in Blue posted "We think dog-feces sandwiches are a really good idea!" it would have a largish following from some of the community. The real problem is that there are too many people that think Blizzard can do no wrong, and anything the suggest is a good idea.

I do not know about the "largish" following, but while there are people who support Blizzard for everything, there are those on the other side of the spectrum who are opposite and derides Blizzard decision.

Which isn't to say that Blizzard never has good ideas. But people are WAY too ready to assume everything Blizzard does is lined with gold.

And not everything Blizzard does are covered with feces.

I think part of the problem is that some players feels the game should focus on them, that they are the important customer and everyone else are secondary.

[SirCowdog]

I do not know about the "largish" following, but while there are people who support Blizzard for everything, there are those on the other side of the spectrum who are opposite and derides Blizzard decision.



And not everything Blizzard does are covered with feces.

I think part of the problem is that some players feels the game should focus on them, that they are the important customer and everyone else are secondary.

Oof...ok, that's not technically wrong, but that's not what I was saying either. While I agree there are genuine haters who dont think any part of WoW is good, that's not me.

Granted, I think a lot of what Blizzard is doing recently is anti-consumer, and could stand to be improved(like Pathfinder), but Im not going to say everything is bad, and I resent the implication that I'm more important than everyone else simply because I stick to my guns. (EDIT: If that's not what you meant to imply, then I apologize, and suggest that maybe you word the idea better, given the context of the conversation.) If that's what you're getting from my posts, either you're not understanding what I'm trying to say, or I'm not doing a very good job of saying it.

For example: The addition of Classic servers is one of the better, more customer friendly things they've done recently. Not only giving players more options to choose the style of play they enjoy most, but including in the existing sub without taking anything away from players in the process. I would LOVE to see more of this kind of content release!