The difference is the amount of space gained vs power. Stackable gems and runes are much less of an issue, but I’m not saying they won’t change the power dynamic at all, I’m merely saying it’s a change I’m willing to accept, because it’s much more minor than adding a 4x10 charm inventory.
1 Like
I test the the full gem and rune stacking(purple potions stacking is awesome btw) not long ago and what I say from that, is that its amazing, no need for whole mules filled with gems anymore
but there is one caveat, gems seemed to lose value, mind you they didnt have much value to begin with, but you never needed to find someone that had that one flawed gem you needed to combining runes or further more you didn’t need anyone else to trade perfect gems with because you always had more then enough just from drops considering you got infinite space for them
1 Like
Mentioned above are not minimal changes.
Maybe it’s time to get them decent multiplayer support then.
No I don’t. I only express my opinion on the matter.
If Blizzard decides to go with the changes version of the game I’ll still play it. However it doesn’t change the fact that many of the things proposed by poeple will have absurd inpact on the game and there won’t be any D2 left just some modded version.
There is no nostalgia involved I wish people stop using this dumb excuse.
For years people wanted Classic WoW servers but the reason they had to wait over 10 years was because everyone thought it’s just nostalgia speaking.
Now Classic WoW is played by hundreds of thousands with more coming to TBC.
Nostalgia argument is never valid.
They need to find a way to please both sides of the party, different people on the forum prefer different QoL, some are after stackable runes but would never agree on loot changes, others want charm inv but don’t want stackable runes.
Middle ground needs to be found and preferably if they decide this outside of players involvement.
1 Like
The middle ground I think is separate realms just like retail wow and classic wow exist. I’m not saying wow classic is dead and yes it got a lot of people playing wow again, but yes it was a lot of nostalgia, you act like most of those people stayed. People had fun and then left, nostalgia can be fun and some people prefer the classic wow experience I won’t deny that. For a lot of people it was just nostalgia. I don’t have the time I did when I was a teenager to grind levels and gear in classic wow, so I didn’t.
Cryptkeeper is correct, Classic WoW had a HUGE boom in activity the first couple months and then most people left.
It WAS nostalgia, and a lot of people, after a while, realized that no matter how perfect the recreation, it just doesn’t hold up to what they remember, or what they could be playing instead. Because, surprise, you can’t recapture the past and the feeling of playing for the first time.
This is why they immediately began work on Burning Crusade Classic.
And I’m sure they are already working on Lich King Classic as we speak.
Catering ONLY to the purists is a sure way to make this game crash and burn within a couple months at best. There is NO reason they cannot give us a Classic realm and a Modern realm.
3 Likes
what will we do with those server afterwards?
they probably will just see it has a waste of resources though
You guys keep saying “servers” like each game mode is its own separate physical machine. They’re not. This is outdated terminology that for some reason people keep using even though it hasn’t been applicable in these discussions at all. Even when referring to classic D2, the word server is used wrong.
Toggles (game modes) like hardcore and softcore DO NOT RUN ON DIFFERENT SERVERS. They are simply 1s and 0s in your character data that prevent you from playing or interacting with people who do not have those toggles themselves.
There is no additional cost to Blizzard to keep servicing those.
Blizzard hasn’t done “servers” since the days of USEast/West or Asia/Europe, barring WoW, which continues to have dedicated “server” separations but they keep thinning them out more and more as the playerbase shrinks, merging them together.
Now it’s all a single global server, for games like D3 and D2R. They already announced this was going to be the case for D2R, unlike D2, which had 4 servers (US East/West, Asia, Europe).
Even the word “realm” is misleading in this regard.
3 Likes
Exactly,I do think realm is best descriptor though, but what do you suggest we call it.
They’re just game modes, like Hardcore/Softcore and D2/LoD.
Some people (me included) use that interchangeably with “toggles” but that word is also misleading because Autogold is more in-line with what a “toggle” is.
So yes, what we want is an extra game mode. D2/LoD/Modern. Modern would include all the changes the community is asking/voting for. Charm inventory, gems and rune stacking, maybe even personal loot. Doesn’t matter at this point. Don’t like it? Play the D2 or LoD modes.
Let us have our Modern game mode so we can shut up about wanting changes, and you can also have your classic D2 and LoD game modes like planned. Everyone wins, no one loses. I don’t see the issue.
3 Likes
That is false.
As a very active classic wow player i disagee.
I play on a PvE EU server (which isn’t even highest pop server) and it’s nearly impossible to farm herbs, theres a queue to kill quest mobs and so on, right now, after 2 years since release there are TONS of players online and it’s not even peek hours.
Yeah yeah, tourist left, big suprise here.
That’s true I’m wrong
Anecdotal evidence from a dedicated player is both biased and not a credible source, compared to all of the census data people have put out if you Google it.
Classic servers are currently estimated to be sitting somewhere around 300k active players worldwide right now, compared to several million at release. And unfortunately there is no way to tell how many of those 300k merely maintain their subscription because they also play regular WoW, and how many are truly active players, so even that data is probably being artificially inflated.
Oh, BTW, half of those are in Europe+Asia and half are in the Americas. Just for clarity’s sake.
That is not a small dip. That is not “tourists”.
It should say something that Blizzard is not bragging about their subscription numbers anymore. They stopped doing that when WoW numbers started tanking in 2015, keeping true numbers private. They have since to break the silence, indicating that they have no reason to brag right now, or else they would, because that’s just good business. WoW always prided itself on boasting about how many players it had… until people were able to use that to point out the game was rapidly losing players. So if the numbers are still private, then that means either there is no growth, or numbers are still dipping.
Losing over 75% of your playerbase isn’t a small dip and it definitely can’t be explained as “tourists”, which is in and of itself pretty rude anyway, as if there was something wrong with trying a game out and dropping it.
1 Like
I believe that was the goal, even before release of Classic WoW people estimated about 300-500k players will play it.
They were tourist, many of them were gone month after release.
They stopped reporting subs after Draenor fiasco, never came back to it apart from saying how SL was most selling game on PC and Classic WoW was a huge success. But that’s it.
Which is exactly what can be said about people wanting modded D2 (usually coming from PD2 players) and blindly ignoring it’s a remaster not a remake.
1 Like
Remaster means whatever the company making it wants it to mean.
SaGa Frontier’s remaster includes new characters, a new story segment, and fine-tuned and redone combat gimmicks, as well as a bit of rebalancing.
It was released a few weeks ago and is still called a remaster.
There is no actual rule on what a remaster has to be. This is something people on these forums made up as an argument against change. “It’s just a remaster,” ignoring the dozens of games out there released with major changes that are still called remasters.
Remake and remaster are used interchangeably in the industry, and picking one does not (and never has) locked you out of changing or not changing anything.
And as has been said a million times in this thread (please read it), we’re not asking for the base game to be changed, we’re asking for a game mode that includes changes, independent of the already existing game modes. Therefore, if you do not want changes, you will not have to play with them. Or with people who use them. It literally does not affect you, and the only reason to object is if you legitimately hate people having fun a different way from you.
1 Like
Would people stop using the “remaster” argument, it’s called Diablo 2 resurrected, not diablo 2 remaster
They did call it a remaster though, in the interview they gave. So it’s not wrong.
they did and they stated they don’t want to fix it but revive it, but it doesn’t mean they can’t use new additions like auto gold pickup and shared stash for instance and etc
See the post I made before you replied.
Remaster means whatever the company wants it to. There is no hard and fast rule, except that a remake is usually more in-depth than a remaster (this tends to hold true). Usually remakes are defined by a complete overhaul of the graphics system, a major overhaul (if not total redesign) of combat/interaction systems, and sometimes a major rewrite of the story.
Ironically, D2R already ticks one of those boxes, since the graphics engine had to be rebuilt from scratch and went from 2D to 3D. So it is already encroaching on the “agreed upon” definition of remake.
That said, remasters can and do frequently include major changes as well, so there’s nothing stopping them from doing any of the stuff we are asking for.
2 Likes
agreed, can you imagine them saying remake instead 
?
They can play mods…
1 Like