Dragonflight Alpha/Beta General Discussion

[Catastrophy349]

And worrisome. Mostly worrisome.

What's worrisome? If your answer is "not knowing what crap they could possibly come up with to ruin the lore" then you are wrong. Keeping story hidden (regardless of what it is) is FAR superior to spoiling ALL of it on the PTR/Alpha/Beta.

[Xilurm]

What's worrisome? If your answer is "not knowing what crap they could possibly come up with to ruin the lore" then you are wrong. Keeping story hidden (regardless of what it is) is FAR superior to spoiling ALL of it on the PTR/Alpha/Beta.

I'd agree if this was FFXIV. But it's not. Actually this is pretty specific to WoW. I don't know any other popular video game franchise that has writers that handle the story with such indifference and makes the fanbase so divided.

[Nymrohd]

I'd agree if this was FFXIV. But it's not. Actually this is pretty specific to WoW. I don't know any other popular video game franchise that has writers that handle the story with such indifference and makes the fanbase so divided.

I mean on rare occasion we've managed to get them to slightly moderate frankly insulting storylines (Vol'jin and the Alliance before SoO? Tyrande Night Warrior going from absolutely useless to only moderately useless in Darkshore?)

[Shrouded]

I'd agree if this was FFXIV. But it's not. Actually this is pretty specific to WoW. I don't know any other popular video game franchise that has writers that handle the story with such indifference and makes the fanbase so divided.

I agree, but I also don't think it matters if it's encrypted or not in that sense - there's nothing we can do or say to affect it anyway. I'd much rather have the story beats (and mostly everything else, tbh) encrypted, even if they end up being disappointing. Better than to have everyone know everything months before the expansion launches.

[Catastrophy349]

I agree, but I also don't think it matters if it's encrypted or not in that sense - there's nothing we can do or say to affect it anyway. I'd much rather have the story beats (and mostly everything else, tbh) encrypted, even if they end up being disappointed. Better than to have everyone know everything months before the expansion launches.

100%. Doesn't matter if it's going to be good or not. I rather it stay encrypted. However, I also do a REALLY good job at not spoiling the story for myself even when it is available (I simply ignore story related threads, videos, etc. or at-least glance over them just barely).

[CalamityHeart]

I'd agree if this was FFXIV. But it's not. Actually this is pretty specific to WoW. I don't know any other popular video game franchise that has writers that handle the story with such indifference and makes the fanbase so divided.

I don't think having a poorly-told story is WoW-specific. It's really not the sacrilegious travesty of fiction that people like to blow it up as.

I agree that it's better for them to keep as much under wraps as they can. Blizzard doesn't really gain anything worthwhile by being fully transparent about every major endgame story beat with this community just because they've been telling a bad story recently. Some teasers and synopses of the zones are more than enough. Keep the rest encrypted until launch, there's no reason not to.

[Nebron]

So, I love everyone’s response to this question so far and some really good ideas. However, here’s my opinion on lore/bosses/etc.

Personally, I hate the whole “big bad of an expansion” and “defeat big bad at the end of the expansion” theme. What would I prefer? Regardless of your personal feelings on Garrosh, Guldan, and Sylvanas, something I really liked about these characters was the fact that they were built up over the course of an expansion and moved into the next.

For example, Sargeras and the Burning Legion. It was SO cool to see that story build up in WC3, then we had the Burning Crusade, Wrathion questline in MoP, WoD Guldan and HFC ending, and finally, the Legion expansion and Argus.

Then, there’s Zovaal (the complete opposite). His character was basically “rickrolled” onto us at the VERY end of BFA (kind of), then introduced “properly” in SL and, unfortunately, discarded in SL (the same expansion), too. This felt awful.

What I don’t want to see in Dragonflight is another SL “big bad then kill”, and instead, a Burning Legion, Sylvanas, Guldan, or Garrosh situation where maybe Murozond is finally introduced and takes us into 11.0 similarly to Garrosh (MoP to WoD) and Guldan (WoD to Legion), and Sylvanas (BFA to SL). That would be awesome, again, IMO.

Hmm, I'm somewhere in the middle
I like the seemless transitions between expansions. On the other hand, I don;t believe that MMORPG is not a proper genre to tell ambitious and mysterious stories, since the timespan between content deliveries is just way too broad. At some point I simply lose interest, especially when the storywriting is poor and too complex to keep track on that.
That's why "big bads" come handy. You can still introduce a character, develop it and put it to the final rest within a single expansion. Better - you can do that within a single PATCH (Lei Shen). On top of that, have secondary characters, leave some breadcrumbs, to lead the story into another expansion.

Zovaal is just a bad example - it was a lackluster, one-dimensional character, which served no other goal than to be a "big bad".
But then... Sylvanas - she was being developed since the beginning of Legion - just to become a total failure and possibly the biggest disappointment I ever experienced in this game storywise.

I guess there's a middle ground

[Makorus]

WoWs story would be better if they just didn't give a shit about the whiny playerbase complaining about "unfair treatment" or "I don't care about that character" and just told a coherent story without changing it 5000 times because baby Timmy doesn't like Sylvanas and wants more Arthas and how it's not fair that the Night Elf tree burns down.

[Kiivar86]

Ion kinda confirming we will have more classes added in the future:

"This is something we talk about a lot. Evoker not having a tank spec, I think, is more a reflection on the fantasy of what being a draconic being is and how you would expect it to act. A breath weapon and wings and mobility and all that felt like it lent itself more to a ranged-based class, a caster. And caster abilities don’t always work well with tanking, so we didn’t go in that direction with that fantasy. Future classes may have tank specs."

I mean, yeah? Why would they stop adding them?

[Lahis]

I mean, yeah? Why would they stop adding them?

BREAKING NEWS! World of Warcraft will add more content in the future!

[Kiivar86]

BREAKING NEWS! World of Warcraft will add more content in the future!

Yeah I saw some people posting this bit elsewhere too like that and again just leaves me scratching my head.

It'd be news if they confirmed they wouldn't add new classes.

[Nebron]

Ion kinda confirming we will have more classes added in the future:

"This is something we talk about a lot. Evoker not having a tank spec, I think, is more a reflection on the fantasy of what being a draconic being is and how you would expect it to act. A breath weapon and wings and mobility and all that felt like it lent itself more to a ranged-based class, a caster. And caster abilities don’t always work well with tanking, so we didn’t go in that direction with that fantasy. Future classes may have tank specs."

Funny, their "reflection on the fantasy of what being a draconinc being is and how one would expect it to act" seems to be way off from what people conceptualized for so many years on these forums. They made them slim AF, and caster suits this concept well. But then, they could have implemented bulkier guys to serve as tanks or something? And in the end... this logic doesn't work really. What keeps a DRAGON that embraced the power of all 5 ASPECTS from being able to tank. Kinda meh. I guess it's about the lack of time/resources to go for three specs. But the feedback from playerbase may still change their mind about it in the future.

[Berkilak]

Funny, their "reflection on the fantasy of what being a draconinc being is and how one would expect it to act" seems to be way off from what people conceptualized for so many years on these forums. They made them slim AF, and caster suits this concept well. But then, they could have implemented bulkier guys to serve as tanks or something? And in the end... this logic doesn't work really. What keeps a DRAGON that embraced the power of all 5 ASPECTS from being able to tank. Kinda meh. I guess it's about the lack of time/resources to go for three specs. But the feedback from playerbase may still change their mind about it in the future.

They need playable Drakonids as a more typical draconic humanoid race with access to normal classes.

[Lahis]

Funny, their "reflection on the fantasy of what being a draconinc being is and how one would expect it to act" seems to be way off from what people conceptualized for so many years on these forums. They made them slim AF, and caster suits this concept well. But then, they could have implemented bulkier guys to serve as tanks or something? And in the end... this logic doesn't work really. What keeps a DRAGON that embraced the power of all 5 ASPECTS from being able to tank. Kinda meh. I guess it's about the lack of time/resources to go for three specs. But the feedback from playerbase may still change their mind about it in the future.

Dragons are primarily magical beings and Evoker's spellcasting focus mirrors that.

Sure, dragons are also physically strong, but that is merely a byproduct of their immense size, something which the Dracthyr lack.

[Nymrohd]

Dragons are primarily magical beings and Evoker's spellcasting focus mirrors that.

Sure, dragons are also physically strong, but that is merely a byproduct of their immense size, something which the Dracthyr lack.

I'd say that is a product of their anatomy, not their size. Plenty of animals are extremely lethal in a physical fight without being huge. Dracthyr possess claws, talons as well as wings strong enough to produce a wing buffet and a tail strong enough to produce a tail sweep.

[The Stormbringer]

Ion kinda confirming we will have more classes added in the future:

"This is something we talk about a lot. Evoker not having a tank spec, I think, is more a reflection on the fantasy of what being a draconic being is and how you would expect it to act. A breath weapon and wings and mobility and all that felt like it lent itself more to a ranged-based class, a caster. And caster abilities don’t always work well with tanking, so we didn’t go in that direction with that fantasy. Future classes may have tank specs."

Not sure why they think the fantasy doesn't include a big, beefy, POWERFUL dragon that just beats the crap out of people using its massive bulk, huge claws, giant tail, and bitey jaws. Dragons aren't "quick and swooshy casters". They're GIGANTIC enemies who have presence and weight. Maybe little DRAKES are quick and swooshy casters, but DRAGONS are not.

[Makorus]

More or less every single dragon humanoid race in the fantasy genre is slim, tall, elegant and not beefy at all.

Even actual dragons are very slim in WoW. Dracthyr are literally dragons on two legs.

[CalamityHeart]

Eh. In my opinion, they went in the correct direction as far as the Evoker class design leaning all the way into the ranged/magical/mobile traits of dragons rather than their more mundane animal traits like their 'scratchy claws' or their 'bitey jaws'. Or, rather than 'correct', I'd say I think they went in the much less boring direction. I probably would not be half as interested in trying out Evoker as I am now if the bulk of their kit was different flavors of 'scratch/bite your enemy for X to Y damage'. I already have a feral druid.

[Nebron]

Dragons are primarily magical beings and Evoker's spellcasting focus mirrors that.

Sure, dragons are also physically strong, but that is merely a byproduct of their immense size, something which the Dracthyr lack.

Well, that's precisely why so many people were upset about the size of dracthyr - because it didn't reflect on the nature of dragon. But that's Blizzard's game, and that's what they decided to provide. Not that I'm okay with that, but yup, in the end, they are the devs, not me

Also, as far as I know, Neltharion created dracthyr as a "perfect soldier". I'd assume one would add upon the dragon, not take some away from it, to create a Dragon+ They wield the power of 5 aspects, yet they clearly lack the black essence in that whole concept. And since black drakes are often represented as the biggest, the strongest and lorewise are connected to the idea of 'protecting' (Earth-warden), it only seems natural for them to become tanks.

[huth]

Well, that's precisely why so many people were upset about the size of dracthyr - because it didn't reflect on the nature of dragon. But that's Blizzard's game, and that's what they decided to provide. Not that I'm okay with that, but yup, in the end, they are the devs, not me

Also, as far as I know, Neltharion created dracthyr as a "perfect soldier". I'd assume one would add upon the dragon, not take some away from it, to create a Dragon+ They wield the power of 5 aspects, yet they clearly lack the black essence in that whole concept. And since black drakes are often represented as the biggest, the strongest and lorewise are connected to the idea of 'protecting' (Earth-warden), it only seems natural for them to become tanks.

When you consider logistics and the natural weaknesses of dragons, it makes sense. They don't need help with large open terrain battles. They need something for when there isn't enough room to accomodate a dragon.

Besides, this makes for easier logistics, and that's the backbone of every army. They are perfect soldiers. Not perfect fighters.