Page 17 of 19 FirstFirst ...
7
15
16
17
18
19
LastLast
  1. #321
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    I would agree with your assessment.

    And we also see how that utterly fell flat in its face with he Monk lacking any purpose being playable in Mists of Pandaria. It remains one of the least popular of the expansion classes. It lacked purpose, and not because it didn't match the setting, but because it didn't fit the _story_.

    I can see this being the same reason DR and Necros being passed up in Shadowlands. Demon Hunters may be bland, but what Blizzard did right was finding a class that fit both the setting and story of Legion, and having it actually feel purposeful.

    I am not pointing at this being the only route Blizzard xqn take. I don't even agree with it necessarily. I am pointing out that this is actually the direction they came to because it's worked better than adding a class for generic reasons.
    Eh, I dunno. I think that the issues with Monk adoption run a lot deeper than just expansion integration. I think that not having a bossted starting level and never having that period of stark overpoweredness played a big part in them not being as popular, along with simply the sheer aesthetic. Even if the Monk had been more deeply intertwined with the MoP, I don't think it would have been a massively popular choice.

    When it comes to Demon Hunters though, imagine if Blizzard had added a different class altogether. The same basic narrative as Legion was, Illidan and all that, just no playable Demon Hunters, and instead we had a different class. Tinkers, Necromancers, it doesn't terribly matter. What would the result have been? All we can do is guess, for sure, but I have to wonder. Were Demon Hunters popular because they were integrated into the Legion expansion pretty heabily, or were they popular because they let you start a new character at high level and play a badass elf with ridiculously large weapons?

    I don't think there is one right or wrong answer to any of the questions to be honest. In one expansion it might make perfect sense to tie the narrative of the expansion to that of a new class being added. In another, it might make more sense to decouple them. My concern here is that often times people (not saaying you are doing this, mind you) look for an absolute answer and right it to the point of ludicrous rigidity. I find that things are often wayyy more nuanced than just things like:

    - Well that's how they did it before so that's how they'll do it again
    - They said that nothing matched the theme, so that means a class added in an expansion needs to match the theme
    - If it wasn't in Blizzard game X, Y, or Z it can't be a viable class

    All of those can absolutely be conversation starters, but time and time again in these class discussion threads I see them used as conversation enders, and it honestly makes me sad. Instead of talking about possibilities, too many shift into talking about absolutes, and that just stifles honest conversation.

  2. #322
    Quote Originally Posted by jellmoo View Post

    When it comes to Demon Hunters though, imagine if Blizzard had added a different class altogether. The same basic narrative as Legion was, Illidan and all that, just no playable Demon Hunters, and instead we had a different class. Tinkers, Necromancers, it doesn't terribly matter. What would the result have been? All we can do is guess, for sure, but I have to wonder. Were Demon Hunters popular because they were integrated into the Legion expansion pretty heabily, or were they popular because they let you start a new character at high level and play a badass elf with ridiculously large weapons?

    I don't think there is one right or wrong answer to any of the questions to be honest. In one expansion it might make perfect sense to tie the narrative of the expansion to that of a new class being added. In another, it might make more sense to decouple them. My concern here is that often times people (not saaying you are doing this, mind you) look for an absolute answer and right it to the point of ludicrous rigidity. I find that things are often wayyy more nuanced than just things like:

    - Well that's how they did it before so that's how they'll do it again
    - They said that nothing matched the theme, so that means a class added in an expansion needs to match the theme
    - If it wasn't in Blizzard game X, Y, or Z it can't be a viable class

    All of those can absolutely be conversation starters, but time and time again in these class discussion threads I see them used as conversation enders, and it honestly makes me sad. Instead of talking about possibilities, too many shift into talking about absolutes, and that just stifles honest conversation.
    It personally think its important to objectively take a look at what trends have been considered, what trends did not, and consider how Blizzard chooses to progress their design. Otherwise we really are speculating every possibility without any frame of reference. But we actually do have a frame of reference - every Expansion up to now and all the trends that have progressed since.

    Some things work, some things don't. Whether we personally view something as working as intended or not is not as important as whether _Blizzard_ considers it worth regarding. And that does contribute to some of the frustrations that players have too, like the borrowed power mechanics. Have to say, it's been working well since Legion despite all the hate and fatigue surrounding it. But I hope Blizz is listening this time amd knocking it down a notch.

    As for Tinkers, I'll definitely have to say that as a fan of the class, I don't want to see them shoehorning them where they don't belong. A new class is a big thing. It should be a primary focus feature of an expansion, just like prepping up a major villain or hyping up exploring a brand new setting. I personally see no logical reason they would want to usher in Tinkers into an expansion that doesn't have a proper place in the story.

    If we are talking about a Dragon Isles having a story where Tinkers have a legitimate purpose being there, then I'd be fine with that. But I'm also very critical because the way they've been treating classes, characters or lore is also very very questionable.

    I personally view having a Tinker thrown into an expansion setting and story that isn't tailored for it would just be seen as sloppy implementation. I think the devs recognize this themselves, as per their Shadowlands statement.

    But overall, maybe it won't even matter in the end. WoW is slipping from its place as top MMO, and as it slips further and further, there will be more things to worry about than whether the next class will fit the theme of the next expansion.

    And to me, it all boils down to the eventual release of Class Skins, where they can toss a whole bunch of classes in the game at the same time as a 'last ditch effort' to hit the widest demographics and bring them all back. Go big or go home, as they say.
    Last edited by Triceron; 2021-06-12 at 07:31 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Since Arthas used Frostmourne, which is a Runeblade, and Frostmourne's power eminates from those runes, that made him a Runemaster by default.

  3. #323
    The Lightbringer Wangming's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    Not Azeroth
    Posts
    3,264
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    To be honest I don't think this really applies to Tinker or Dragonsworn since both concepts are flexible enough to fit any role.
    See, that's probably one reason a lot of people dislike Tinker or Dragonsworn as a concept. Cause it is not really a concept. "Anything as long as it involves tech" and "Everything as long as it involves dragons" is just too broad. It doesn't sell it to people who aren't super into tech stuff or don't love dragons.

  4. #324
    Oh hey, another thread where people attempt to shoehorn in the garbage Tinker concept into another inappropriate expansion theme concept!

    Tune in next time as we speculate 11.0 in 1 year... a void-based expansion with a new playable race Ethereals with the setting being K'aresh... and TINKERS!

  5. #325
    Quote Originally Posted by Edward Wu View Post
    Oh hey, another thread where people attempt to shoehorn in the garbage Tinker concept into another inappropriate expansion theme concept!

    Tune in next time as we speculate 11.0 in 1 year... a void-based expansion with a new playable race Ethereals with the setting being K'aresh... and TINKERS!
    This is so true I wish people would just accept it
    Expansion about Dragons Tinkers!
    Expansion about Void Tinkers!
    Expansion with us going underwater Tinkers!
    Expansion other side of azeroth Tinkers!
    Wrath 2.0 Tinkers!

    let the tinkers die already

  6. #326
    Give everyone a 4th spec, way more interesting than a new class that will be overpowered all its xpac long...

  7. #327
    Quote Originally Posted by Edward Wu View Post
    Oh hey, another thread where people attempt to shoehorn in the garbage Tinker concept into another inappropriate expansion theme concept!

    Tune in next time as we speculate 11.0 in 1 year... a void-based expansion with a new playable race Ethereals with the setting being K'aresh... and TINKERS!
    https://ptr.wowhead.com/item=186556/...cal-dragonling

    Added in the 9.1 PTR.

    Vendor is the anni event vendor for 2021, next expansion should be announced by then.

    Matches steam drake, and it wouldn't be the 1st or even second time a store mount had some-kind of appearance in a future expansion.

  8. #328
    Quote Originally Posted by Varx View Post
    https://ptr.wowhead.com/item=186556/...cal-dragonling

    Added in the 9.1 PTR.

    Vendor is the anni event vendor for 2021, next expansion should be announced by then.

    Matches steam drake, and it wouldn't be the 1st or even second time a store mount had some-kind of appearance in a future expansion.
    Holy shit boys its happening

    TINKERS CONFIRMED!!!

  9. #329
    Quote Originally Posted by Edward Wu View Post
    Holy shit boys its happening

    TINKERS CONFIRMED!!!
    IK, thats what I'm saying!

  10. #330
    im not opposed to tinker or dragon themed expansion, but this is not speculation, this is wishful thinking...

  11. #331
    Quote Originally Posted by Lolites View Post
    im not opposed to tinker or dragon themed expansion, but this is not speculation, this is wishful thinking...
    It is speculation.

    Think about it. The Isles are most likely hidden via titan tech like Uldum was, which is why Wrathion cant find it. So now he has MOTEHR with him, but what if she alone isn't enough.

    Undermine has also yet to be added into the game despite many many references in-game. So let's say Wrathion goes to Undermine to gather the world's best techies to combine their tech, with MOTHER's titan tech, and the dragon essences he gathered in 8.3 to locate the isles and create stable transportation.

    Now, in BFA we got the steam drake mount, and if this speculation is correct it wouldn't be the first time a store mount is featured in a future expansion.

    But the icing on the cake is https://ptr.wowhead.com/npc=179125/t...ng#summoned-by

    Added in 9.1 for the anniversary event vendor. WoW's anni is in Nov and 10.0 will most like be announced by then.

    I know this is Pyromancer level's of speculation but still, cant deny there might be something there.

  12. #332
    Quote Originally Posted by Varx View Post
    It is speculation.
    saying we will (sooner or later) go to dragon isles is speculation, but claiming it have anything to do with tinkers or technology is wishful thinking, dragon isles could be hidden magicaly, like pandaria was...

    undermine sure was referenced ingame, so were many other zones, kultiras and zandalar were mentioned since vanila (well since W3 really) and we just got them in BFA, it might be years untill it makes apearance, if ever... that goes for dragon isles too...

    steam dragon was added in BFA, same as mechagon, whole island covered in tech, so thinking it have something with future expansion rather than assuming its bcs we literaly were on tech-island at the time is HUGE logical leap ahead... not impossible, but still...

    as for pet, for 15th anniversary we get Lil'Nefarian pet, and SL have nothing to do with black dragons or Nefarian or whatever, so again, not impossible but very unlikely it would be tied to next expansion...

    sure there might be something there, but there is huge amount of mental gymnastics to fit that theory in...
    literaly all that needs to be true for the theory to fall apart is Dragon isles to be hidden magicaly rather than by titan technology, and given that we dont even have connection of Dragon isles to titans (as far as i know), its pretty unlikely to have anything with tinkers...

    if you have ANY real connection of dragon isles and technology or titans (even sidenote mentioned in some obscure journal found ingame or in quest is enough) it seems like just two things you wish for smashed together, thats why id hesitate to call it "speculation"

  13. #333
    BfA was the expansion to give us Tinkers as every second hostile NPC was a Tinker. But Dragon Isles and Tinkers? Mechanical dragons? Man, this sounds so bad.
    MAGA - Make Alliance Great Again

  14. #334
    Quote Originally Posted by Nyel View Post
    BfA was the expansion to give us Tinkers as every second hostile NPC was a Tinker. But Dragon Isles and Tinkers? Mechanical dragons? Man, this sounds so bad.
    Does it?

    I mean the Dragon Isles are a blank canvas. Sure, they'll have lots of awesome dragon shenanigans, but who know what else they can have. Throwing in some fun techie flavor should only add to the fun.

    IMO, that's better than just one static theme throughout the entire expansion.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Lolites View Post
    saying we will (sooner or later) go to dragon isles is speculation, but claiming it have anything to do with tinkers or technology is wishful thinking, dragon isles could be hidden magicaly, like pandaria was...

    undermine sure was referenced ingame, so were many other zones, kultiras and zandalar were mentioned since vanila (well since W3 really) and we just got them in BFA, it might be years untill it makes apearance, if ever... that goes for dragon isles too...

    steam dragon was added in BFA, same as mechagon, whole island covered in tech, so thinking it have something with future expansion rather than assuming its bcs we literaly were on tech-island at the time is HUGE logical leap ahead... not impossible, but still...

    as for pet, for 15th anniversary we get Lil'Nefarian pet, and SL have nothing to do with black dragons or Nefarian or whatever, so again, not impossible but very unlikely it would be tied to next expansion...

    sure there might be something there, but there is huge amount of mental gymnastics to fit that theory in...
    literaly all that needs to be true for the theory to fall apart is Dragon isles to be hidden magicaly rather than by titan technology, and given that we dont even have connection of Dragon isles to titans (as far as i know), its pretty unlikely to have anything with tinkers...

    if you have ANY real connection of dragon isles and technology or titans (even sidenote mentioned in some obscure journal found ingame or in quest is enough) it seems like just two things you wish for smashed together, thats why id hesitate to call it "speculation"
    The aspects were empowered by the titans. So I think it's safe assumption that the isles are hidden via titan tech similar to Uldum. Probably as a way to empower the aspects once more.

  15. #335
    The Lightbringer Wangming's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    Not Azeroth
    Posts
    3,264
    Quote Originally Posted by Varx View Post

    Added in 9.1 for the anniversary event vendor. WoW's anni is in Nov and 10.0 will most like be announced by then.
    Considering BlizzCon has been cancelled and we will have an online event early next year instead, I highly doubt it.

  16. #336
    Quote Originally Posted by Varx View Post
    The aspects were empowered by the titans. So I think it's safe assumption that the isles are hidden via titan tech similar to Uldum. Probably as a way to empower the aspects once more.
    and the dragon isles might have nothing to do with aspects themselves, so thats kinda moot point... not to mention the meeting place of aspects (wyrmrest temple) is not hidden at all...
    and Uldum is the ONLY place hidden by titans (well i guess the heart chamber too), and thats bcs it had the "doomsday device" to kill everything on azeroth, titans didnt realy bother to hide anything else, their whole complexes are out in open, its wishful thinking, bcs we have NOTHING connecting dragon isles to titans...
    sure, there MIGHT BE another secret titan facility, but we have nothing suggesting it is so...
    on the other hand, pretty much everything connected to dragons in WoW is magical, rather than technological, so its much more logical assumption DRAGON isles will be centered around magic, not technology...

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Varx View Post
    I mean the Dragon Isles are a blank canvas. Sure, they'll have lots of awesome dragon shenanigans, but who know what else they can have.
    this is whole problem with your "speculation"

    it seems the whole idea is "we dont know whats there so it might be technology bcs i want it so"...
    i could think of quite a few ideas that are at least as likely, or in some cases more likely than technology being connected to dragon isles...
    Last edited by Lolites; 2021-06-12 at 04:52 PM.

  17. #337
    Quote Originally Posted by choom View Post
    You forgot to mention - the Dragon Isles are in SPACE
    In another (mirror) dimension, in the past. Space past.

  18. #338
    Quote Originally Posted by Wangming View Post
    See, that's probably one reason a lot of people dislike Tinker or Dragonsworn as a concept. Cause it is not really a concept. "Anything as long as it involves tech" and "Everything as long as it involves dragons" is just too broad. It doesn't sell it to people who aren't super into tech stuff or don't love dragons.
    There are more specific concepts we can discuss though. I'm just saying there is no limit to Tinker and Dragonsworn specs. They can be designed to fill any role.
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Since Arthas used Frostmourne, which is a Runeblade, and Frostmourne's power eminates from those runes, that made him a Runemaster by default.

  19. #339
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    It personally think its important to objectively take a look at what trends have been considered, what trends did not, and consider how Blizzard chooses to progress their design. Otherwise we really are speculating every possibility without any frame of reference. But we actually do have a frame of reference - every Expansion up to now and all the trends that have progressed since.
    I don't disagree, but I do think that it's very important that we weigh these things appropriately, and I honestly think that we as posters do a terrible job of this. As we look at trends that lead to class addition, we need to understand that we have a terribly incomplete picture and that by assigning too much value to our perceptions, small quotes, and evidence from a frustratingly small sample size. Looking for trends is fine and makes sense. It's human nature. Finding trends and saying "well that's a rule that Blizzard has to follow" is folly, and it happens more often than I'd like to see.

    Some things work, some things don't. Whether we personally view something as working as intended or not is not as important as whether _Blizzard_ considers it worth regarding. And that does contribute to some of the frustrations that players have too, like the borrowed power mechanics. Have to say, it's been working well since Legion despite all the hate and fatigue surrounding it. But I hope Blizz is listening this time amd knocking it down a notch.
    Where I think we need to be careful is how we associate decisions with "Blizzard". As frustrating as it is, there is a literal fuckton that we simply do not know. Something as simple as which class to add to the game can be dictated by a dozen different things, with direction coming from a dozen internal groups. Demon Hunters, for example, may not have been the first, second or even third choice of the dev team. But maybe marketing swooped in and said "Shut up bitches, Demon Hunters are mad bank. Toss em in!" What Blizzard wants to add is almost certainly a lot more complex than we really tend to consider.

    Borrowed Power is a separate discussion, for sure, but to quickly say that I don't think it's a problem in and of itself. It's just being used again and again makes it feel silly. and strips away player agency. I thought it worked well in Legion (with some tweaks as the expansion went on). But I think it's just way more intrinsically interesting to power up a weapon of legend, than it is to do so with random pieces of armor you constantly replace, or to get spooky powers from a group of people you'd never heard of before that expansion.

    As for Tinkers, I'll definitely have to say that as a fan of the class, I don't want to see them shoehorning them where they don't belong. A new class is a big thing. It should be a primary focus feature of an expansion, just like prepping up a major villain or hyping up exploring a brand new setting. I personally see no logical reason they would want to usher in Tinkers into an expansion that doesn't have a proper place in the story.

    If we are talking about a Dragon Isles having a story where Tinkers have a legitimate purpose being there, then I'd be fine with that. But I'm also very critical because the way they've been treating classes, characters or lore is also very very questionable.
    Here's where we disagree. I don't think it matters. Like, not even a little. Tinkers are an incredibly broad class concept and a very common archetype. It's the sort of class that feels right at home right from the start of the game, feeling muc more like a Warrior, Priest or Mage than the super specific Death Knight or Demon Hunter. It doesn't need a backstory or origin. It just is.

    If you are adding a super specific class I agree that it would be weird to not tie it in to the expansion. IF they were adding Demon Hunters to an expansion that didn't feature a single Demon, that would be odd given how hyper specific the class is. But something as general as a technology class, one that already exists in game? It doesn't really need an explanation or introduction, or a tie to the narrative of an expansion.

    I personally view having a Tinker thrown into an expansion setting and story that isn't tailored for it would just be seen as sloppy implementation. I think the devs recognize this themselves, as per their Shadowlands statement.
    I think that's placing a lot of emphasis on a single statement though. One that was meant for just the one expansion and may have zero meaning for another expansion.

    But overall, maybe it won't even matter in the end. WoW is slipping from its place as top MMO, and as it slips further and further, there will be more things to worry about than whether the next class will fit the theme of the next expansion.
    Honestly? My gut is telling me that the money is soon not going to be in retail WoW. but rather in Classic WotLK. They've shown a lot more willingness to monetize Classic, and I think they are going to see a ton of players specifically playing WotLK and neglecting retail. And one point, I think they will realize that it may make more sense to shift the bulk of their resources in that direction.

    And to me, it all boils down to the eventual release of Class Skins, where they can toss a whole bunch of classes in the game at the same time as a 'last ditch effort' to hit the widest demographics and bring them all back. Go big or go home, as they say.
    I've been a fan of the notion of class skins for a while now, as I like flexibility and the ability to accomodate as many character concepts as possible without a massive amount of dev work and balancing.

    But lately I'm starting to wonder if it wouldn't make more sense to do a massive overhaul of the class system as a whole, giving players a lot more freedom and flexibility in what they want to play. Ultimately, I think they're ridiculous obsession with making WoW an e-sport is what will hold them back from truly innovative character design and giving players incredibly fun and unique options. Which is sad.

  20. #340
    Quote Originally Posted by hipolnalrt View Post
    I agree. The quote attached to the pet seems interesting. "Dragons come in all types of temporal classification -- timeless, time-lost, and even infinite." The special emphasis on "infinite" when the pet isn't named "infinite" has to have special meaning. See my comment above. I think the Infinites will be the main antagonist with the help of tinker technology to fight. Bonus content will be other dragon stuff.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Calling it now - World of Warcraft: Infinite.
    This seems pretty plausible to me actually. It also fits if they are trying to make the expansions mirror some previous expansions.

    Legion is a continuation from BC. SL an extension of Wrath. If they go this route and make the infinites the main antagonist, that gets us back to Azeroth like many want while still keeping the more universal threats relevant (time travel, in this case) and brings back an emphasis on dragons, similar to how Cataclysm did.

Posting Permissions

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