Dragonflight Alpha/Beta General Discussion

[Triceron]

Yknow one way therewillbedragons could be proven correct? By telling us the expansion name. You’re telling me they’re privy to all kinds of information, and played a build with a bunch of tertiary features and the final launch zone playable yet they don’t know what the expansion is called? Fuck outta here. There’s a reason they aren’t saying.

I doubt the name of an expansion gets out that early really.

I mean would 7.0 Mongrel Horde be called 'Warlords of Draenor' during development? How long until they actually got the name for the expansion set in stone?

[Teriz]

That's the biggest thing. Is it possibly all bullshit? Sure yeah but it is currently the leak that makes the most sense, was dropped super early, has since retroactively 1:1 matched how CrossFaction is implemented so it's the one that makes the most sense but either way we'll know in a month.

Uh, no it didn't;

He claimed Cross Faction was a feature in 10.0 (wrong), claimed it was group finder only (wrong) and specifically not something that could be done with direct inviting (wrong). Literally the only thing he got right about it was there not being guilds (something everyone assumed anyway) or open world/public channel chat (very obvious).

[Zankai27]

I thought he said the expansion was called "Dragon Isles"?

He didn’t; the only mention he makes is “Yes, dragon isles” which doesn’t say “It’s called World of Warcraft: Dragon Isles”, but that it takes place there.

If he knows the name (which he should if he bothered to memorize the rest of that info) he can come out and say it instead of not saying it to cover his tracks. By all means!

Edit: Also yeah he did NOT call cross faction 1:1 by any means. Adding to that, I already covered how his comment history proves he meant that cross faction was meant for 10.0, which we already know is false, so he’s full of shit.

- - - Updated - - -

I doubt the name of an expansion gets out that early really.

I mean would 7.0 Mongrel Horde be called 'Warlords of Draenor' during development? How long until they actually got the name for the expansion set in stone?

My dude. Please. They have never, in the history of the game, tested the final zone before the first two launch zones. And you’re telling me our guy was able to test not only those parts of the game, but see a completed map of the region, play a tertiary feature like the new Torghast (literally claimed) but nowhere was the expansion’s name listed? Something that likely gets finalized as soon as actual builds get started? No one on this pre-alpha team told him the name but they had access to stuff alpha releases don’t even have for MONTHS? Come on! My point is, if you have the kind of connections to play the game that early and get THAT much info, you can get a name.

And the mongrel horde idea never made it to any kind of development. It was purely conceptual.

[Archmage Xaxxas]

Uh, no it didn't;

"He claimed Cross Faction was a feature in 10.0" - This is not a honest wording of the truth. Truth is, "cross faction is in" 10.0. It is. Because it's in 9.2.5.
But the suggestion here that they claimed it was coming in 10.0, it's just dishonest.

therewillbedragons did go on to say "interesting, it was planned for 10.0.
might mean that 10.0 is going to take longer than expected."

which is very dubious yes, but from the 'old news' claim, isn't crazy. 'planned' and 'coming' as of the leak-date is different.

"claimed it was group finder only" - Why would an early-build playtest of 10.0 be using the Battle.Net feature even if it was present in the build? This just makes sense to gloss over and miss, while the Group Finder would have a new check/button on there presumably.
It's not like it would need testing since it's in 9.2.5.

"and specifically not something that could be done with direct inviting" - Which would only be true for Battle.Net inviting. Besides Battle.Net, as far as Ion said in the post, is it not the case that outside of RealID/Battle.Net friends, everything has to be done through the Group Finder?

therewillbedragons' quote:
"you couldn't even join group with opposite faction using normal invite to group, everything had to happen through group finder apply/invite ui"

[Zankai27]

"He claimed Cross Faction was a feature in 10.0" - This is not a honest wording of the truth. Truth is, "cross faction is in" 10.0. It is. Because it's in 9.2.5.
But the suggestion here that they claimed it was coming in 10.0, it's just dishonest.

"claimed it was group finder only" - Why would an early-build playtest of 10.0 be using the Battle.Net feature even if it was present in the build? This just makes sense to gloss over and miss, while the Group Finder would have a new check/button on there presumably.
It's not like it would need testing since it's in 9.2.5.

"and specifically not something that could be done with direct inviting" - Which would only be true for Battle.Net inviting. Besides Battle.Net, as far as Ion said in the post, is it not the case that outside of RealID/Battle.Net friends, everything has to be done through the Group Finder?

therewillbedragons' quote:
"you couldn't even join group with opposite faction using normal invite to group, everything had to happen through group finder apply/invite ui"

Please, PLEASE go through his post history. He literally claims that CF was a 10.0 feature and [the fact that they moved it up] “must mean that 10.0 is taking longer than expected.”

We know they tried to do CF in 9.2 and had to move it BACK to 9.2.5 so his info is demonstrably false.

https://www.mmo-champion.com/threads...8#post53575418

[Triceron]

My dude. Please. They have never, in the history of the game, tested the final zone before the first two launch zones. And you’re telling me our guy was able to test not only those parts of the game, but see a completed map of the region, play a tertiary feature like the new Torghast (literally claimed) but nowhere was the expansion’s name listed? Something that likely gets finalized as soon as actual builds get started? No one on this pre-alpha team told him the name but they had access to stuff alpha releases don’t even have for MONTHS? Come on! My point is, if you have the kind of connections to play the game that early and get THAT much info, you can get a name.

And the mongrel horde idea never made it to any kind of development. It was purely conceptual.

But you're implying that they would have the name out there, ready to promoted to everyone in the focus test, when there's really no reason to divulge any of that information since the name of expansions and games are usually dictated by marketting. Otherwise the people working internally on games tend to use codenames for in-house development projects anyways. We already knew of this from Blizzard's own internal project names like Titan, Gorgon and Medusa.

It would make sense either way if this person knew the name or not, because even Blizzard themselves may not have a final name until things get cleared by legal and marketting.

Hell, I've worked on activision games that was part of a big name franchise series, and we didn't even settle on a name until way late into production. Names get changed for all sorts of reasons. It's not like the work on the game depends on the name at all, really. There's been games that have been released that I still call by their original project names, because I've been so familiar with the in-house use rather than the name they ended up releasing it as.

[Syegfryed]

Well that therewillbedragons leak hints at fourth specs. Honestly fourth specs for a few classes with more to come later would be a pretty huge selling point. A spec is the equivalent of an entire FFXIV job and just look how hard people lose their shit for just two of those.l

I agree it would be a way to sell the expansion, even if not a good one, but fourth specs seems way harder than just making a new class

The most easiest to do atm is tinker and dragonsworm/dragon related, and would be the easiest shit to do with an expansion around dragons

Let's be real here. No one sets out to make a bad game.

Its not new that Wow is leaning more to create content that keeps you playing rather than good content.

Every expansion was built on the good will of the developers wanting to create good stuff. That it ends up turning badly or shit hits the fan is likely due to incompetence or oversight, not a lack of passion.

We can pass some time discussing how they are not doing for passion, and are not rly doing because they like, but because its their job and have to do, we can argue a lot of devs simple don't like the game, its just a job/work, hell, i would bet a hand that the lore guys dislike wow lore and thats why they are trying to rewrite the stuff to their taste.

Point is, they rly need something big after the flop and the scandals, half-asset systems and burrorwed power isn't going to do the trick, people need visual and things that full the sight.

New classes and races is what bring people

[Hitei]

"claimed it was group finder only" - Why would an early-build playtest of 10.0 be using the Battle.Net feature even if it was present in the build? This just makes sense to gloss over and miss, while the Group Finder would have a new check/button on there presumably.
It's not like it would need testing since it's in 9.2.5.


therewillbedragons' quote:
"you couldn't even join group with opposite faction using normal invite to group, everything had to happen through group finder apply/invite ui"

Why would an early-build playtest of 10.0 have the feature period? The answer is it probably wouldn't, as above, systemic features are something they worry about later on. It makes no sense to attach it to the group finder on an isolated test realm when the very, very obvious choice would be to just hook it up to friends, which is how it works in the actual version. Because it's easy to toss someone on friends and right click invite, instead of having to go into finder and make a group to test it.

"and specifically not something that could be done with direct inviting" - Which would only be true for Battle.Net inviting. Besides Battle.Net, as far as Ion said in the post, is it not the case that outside of RealID/Battle.Net friends, everything has to be done through the Group Finder?

"outside of a main way of doing it, it has to be done through group finder"

I feel the need to point out that this is an unreasonable sidestep. He literally claimed it had to happen through group finder. That is objectively wrong. "Well outside of..." doesn't work in a situation where you can only do something one way, because now you're doing it two ways. It also isn't only two ways, because you can also invite people from the same cross-faction community. So 2/3 of the ways to cross faction group do not involve the group finder and its interface.

Well that therewillbedragons leak hints at fourth specs. Honestly fourth specs for a few classes with more to come later would be a pretty huge selling point. A spec is the equivalent of an entire FFXIV job and just look how hard people lose their shit for just two of those.l

100% subjective, but the classes he chose are also super suspect. Hunter and Warlock? You're telling me that they sat down, went "we want to add tank specs to some classes" and that Shaman wasn't the immediate, guaranteed addition? The class begging for an earth spec, with vague history of off-tanking? No spell-breaker mage? Instead they picked hunters, and what can only be some awkward pet-tank mechanic that is a pain in the ass to deal with because of repositioning mechanics?

[Archmage Xaxxas]

Please, PLEASE

Take a chill pill. I was done making the micro-edit before you could even finish begging me.

First the "shit eating" comments and now this. Rabid much?


I'm way more involved in to people's 'Super Sure' attitudes than I am into the leak itself. It's just a matter of time, and meant to be for fun. I appreciate the fakeness of the therewillbedragons 'leaks' if they're fake just for the sake of the imaginative fun.

But this storm of weird misinformation sometimes, or taking things far beyond their respective quotes then stating it as fact, rather than just questioning the red flag. yknow? That's just tiring, not as fun.

Even my own supersure attitudes about EoD have faded in the months since, and I look back at it unfondly. It could be real I'm just at a loss to why it looks that way.

[therewillbedragons]

no need to argue, I was definitely under the impression that xfaction was a 10.0 feature

the version I played still had shadowlands logon/splashscreen, and the loading screens for any new areas were just the generic placeholder one (dwarf on gryphon). there's likely a name and logo at this point, there was just no trace of it in the build I played. lips are very tight, the only piece of information I've been able to get since my hands-on experience was "announcement this week".

[Zankai27]

But you're implying that they would have the name out there, ready to promoted to everyone in the focus test, when there's really no reason to divulge any of that information since the name of expansions and games are usually dictated by marketting. Otherwise the people working internally on games tend to use codenames for in-house development projects anyways. We already knew of this from Blizzard's own internal project names like Titan, Gorgon and Medusa.

It would make sense either way if this person knew the name or not, because even Blizzard themselves may not have a final name until things get cleared by legal and marketting.

Hell, I've worked on activision games that was part of a big name franchise series, and we didn't even settle on a name until way late into production. Names get changed for all sorts of reasons. It's not like the work on the game depends on the name at all, really. There's been games that have been released that I still call by their original project names, because I've been so familiar with the in-house use rather than the name they ended up releasing it as.

I'm glad, but you're missing the point. This *is* late in production. We're way past the planning stages. In a month, the name has to be shown to everyone. The dev team absolutely knows it by now, and probably months ago. If this person has the connections they have to have in order to get this info, then coming up with a name should be easy. Hell, give us a fake name if they want. But unfortunately, they aren't doing that because it's the easiest way to cover their ass. They're perfectly happy to keep posting here about "all the stuff they knew but wow, that's different than I remember" or "wow, they must've held that back from what I saw".

The problem is, their info is all fabricated. They keep trying to act like they have real info and use the oldest tricks in the book to avoid incriminating themselves, and then they mess up with their cross faction info (by literally claiming, per their post history, that it was planned for 10.0). We know that's completely untrue because it was originally planned for 9.2. So it's pointless to give them the benefit of the doubt and I'm not sure why people are. God, it's like they've never been in a leak season before. And I *know* most of you have.

no need to argue, I was definitely under the impression that xfaction was a 10.0 feature

the version I played still had shadowlands logon/splashscreen, and the loading screens for any new areas were just the generic placeholder one (dwarf on gryphon). there's likely a name and logo at this point, there was just no trace of it in the build I played. lips are very tight, the only piece of information I've been able to get since my hands-on experience was "announcement this week".

Cute. Pray, tell us, with fake names and scenarios, how you happened to play this "pre-Alpha build"? And also somehow know info about the development process, while having "plausible deniability" for any concrete answers?

Take a chill pill. I was done making the micro-edit before you could even finish begging me.

First the "shit eating" comments and now this. Rabid much?


I'm way more involved in to people's 'Super Sure' attitudes than I am into the leak itself. It's just a matter of time, and meant to be for fun. I appreciate the fakeness of the therewillbedragons 'leaks' if they're fake just for the sake of the imaginative fun.

But this storm of weird misinformation sometimes, or taking things far beyond their respective quotes then stating it as fact, rather than just questioning the red flag. yknow? That's just tiring, not as fun.

Even my own supersure attitudes about EoD have faded in the months since, and I look back at it unfondly. It could be real I'm just at a loss to why it looks that way.

I hate leakers, man. I don't think they deserve the benefit of the doubt, and when they continue to post about "all the info they totally have, guys" they just make themselves look like worse and worse people. Maybe you don't spend much time around other fandoms with toxic leak cultures, but that shit is exhausting and I'm past the point of entertaining it when the leakers themselves aren't just having a laugh. So, I call them like I see them.

It's fine if they only post once. But its when it turns into this nonsense where I've just had enough of it. I don't see why anyone would find something like *this* fun. Especially for a leak centered around a commonplace "dragon isles" idea with nothing new or interesting in it? Cripes.

[Aeluron Lightsong]

In fairness the loading screen for a new expansion doesn't kick in until muuuuuch later if I recall so.... that part about having the SL loading screen is technically correct.

[huth]

I'm glad, but you're missing the point. This *is* late in production. We're way past the planning stages. In a month, the name has to be shown to everyone. The dev team absolutely knows it by now, and probably months ago.

What for? They don't need it for another two weeks yet.

[boyzma]

no need to argue, I was definitely under the impression that xfaction was a 10.0 feature

the version I played still had shadowlands logon/splashscreen, and the loading screens for any new areas were just the generic placeholder one (dwarf on gryphon). there's likely a name and logo at this point, there was just no trace of it in the build I played. lips are very tight, the only piece of information I've been able to get since my hands-on experience was "announcement this week".

Okay, if you're not madly trying to rush to cover your butt...answer this. Give us some names of any of the zones you saw...can't say you never looked at your map and saw them...everyone at some point needs their map. Waiting.

[Teriz]

What for? They don't need it for another two weeks yet.

We know from Mists of Pandaria that the name of the expansion is known for a long time before the reveal. The MoP trademark was found in August 2011, and wasn't revealed publicly until October of that year. Artists and designers also have to design the logo.

[Hitei]

Okay, if you're not madly trying to rush to cover your butt...answer this. Give us some names of any of the zones you saw...can't say you never looked at your map and saw them...everyone at some point needs their map. Waiting.

I don't even want names so much as any description at all.

Highly suspect the leak has what the Infinite flight is going to do be doing in the first raid instance, but not even what the first zone looks like.

[Zankai27]

What for? They don't need it for another two weeks yet.

The MoP name was finalized months before the reveal, WoD too. Trademarks, etc. All that has to have already been done, full stop. There are no maybes here.

In fairness the loading screen for a new expansion doesn't kick in until muuuuuch later if I recall so.... that part about having the SL loading screen is technically correct.

But a loading screen and a logo or even a barest mention of a name aren't the same thing. The latter should be readily available at this point to anyone with the ability to play a pre-Alpha build enough to look at the entire map and test several features.

[Triceron]

We can pass some time discussing how they are not doing for passion, and are not rly doing because they like, but because its their job and have to do, we can argue a lot of devs simple don't like the game, its just a job/work, hell, i would bet a hand that the lore guys dislike wow lore and thats why they are trying to rewrite the stuff to their taste.

Point is, they rly need something big after the flop and the scandals, half-asset systems and burrorwed power isn't going to do the trick, people need visual and things that full the sight.

New classes and races is what bring people

I agree with your sentiment

But this is like talking about an episode of Kitchen Nightmares without Gordon Ramsay being there to kick their asses into shape. How likely is it with the team that is working on WoW, which has been *tailored* to keep the machine well greased, going to come up with new ideas on how to reinvigorate WoW? They've been laser focused on end-game progression and timegating and refining the grind. Now we're supposed to imagine they had a ton of fresh ideas hidden away all this time, waiting for a shift in management to unlock all their potential? I'm way too jaded to think that's what's gonna happen.

As I said, I would love the game to get a new class. I still think it's unlikely to happen, and remain unconvinced until I see one. I'm not setting up my expectations high like I did with Shadowlands, I can say that for sure.

[Archmage Xaxxas]

See that's how Blizz gets 'em..

For one tester, they see "Rubyside Lowlands" "Blue Mountains" "Verdantia" "Blackscar" and "The Wastes of Time"
and another tester, "Redglade" "The Azure Wake" "Glimmerwood" "Ebonvale" and "Temporos"

... gotta weed out the leakers somehow

[Triceron]

I'm glad, but you're missing the point. This *is* late in production.

Er, no it's not. Again, I have literally worked on projects that didn't get a name set in stone until the final week of announcement. It's as crazy as it sounds, and it happened. At an Activision studio, no less.

We're way past the planning stages. In a month, the name has to be shown to everyone.

And the dude said clearly that he played a build that didn't have the name or logo, with the devs not stating either. I mean, you can either take that info at face value and choose to believe or not believe it, or you could run your conspiracy theories that the OP somehow must know information that was never given to them.

I'm not sure what angle you're trying to get at here. I get that you're not convinced, but you can't really turn the absence of evidence into evidence itself.