And they never followed up on any of that with specific questions or inquiries. Almost like the head of the company, the HR kingpin, was spinning for effect. All the people that matter to the development have said 1.12 ever since the first Dev Watercooler where they started talking about Classic development openly. There has been no further follow through on a figureheadâs statement to an investment magazine.
1 Like
Classic⢠hasnât been released yet.
Whether or not they are specific is irrelevant as we know they are âlisteningâ to feedback. Case in point, Spell Batching.
![:cocktail:](https://d38bqls1q93fod.cloudfront.net/en/wow/images/emoji/twitter/cocktail.png?v=6" ":cocktail:")
2 Likes
Soonâ˘âŚ
SoonâŚâ˘
FTFY.
1 Like
From what I saw, and what people I pay attention to saw, Spell Batching wasnât even something on most peopleâs radar, and Blizzard chose to implement it because they could.
How about another example like⌠AV 1.12.
Obviously, they were aware that it was being discussed among the community.
2 Likes
It was discussed yes. But reading most posts, people were generally in the camp of âIt would be nice, but unlikelyâ.
And yes, thereâs a blue post saying they are doing it. Because they worked out that they could. âweâve seen questions about spell batchingâ is a different intro to
posting direct links to threads.
And again⌠youâre on the âconclusion of watching feedbackâ thread where they announce the decision after reading the feedback. Theyâve heard what everyone said and clearly thereâs enough people saying 1.12, as well as no compelling need to deviate from 1.12, soâŚ
Youâve come full circle trying to dodge the fact that this isnât a âTell us what you think about this ideaâ post. Its a âWeâve made our decision and this is what it isâ post. They listened, they heard, they chose. Now listen to them, hear them, and adjust expectations accordingly. You can dislike the decision, but without a compelling reason that no-one has managed to provide yet, theyâre not going to change it.
There you go again with the bias.
2 Likes
There you go with the trolling again. Canât make an argument, why not make a fallacy.
Fallacy? If you say so.
1 Like
Disclaimer long post, sorry
Aaah the classic âVocal minorityâ argument. I like that one ⌠First off, if you are a little bit good at math, you might have heard of something called statistics and representative sample. This is how most theories, hypothesis are based on actuallyâŚ
So if you go up the first answers of this posts and counts the like, you could use this as a representative sample of the larger group.
Now, as I guess you wonât like this argument, we can go over a little bit of history. The vocal minority is always ârightâ. One example of it, is the presidential election. In the past years, the participation at the votes have decreased, and the vast majority of voters do not vote at all or vote âNothingâ/âBlankâ on the paper. And guess what, a representative will still be elected.
You donât take decisions assuming what the silent majority wants. Itâs sad to say but the silent majority is always wrong. If you have the chance to voice your opinion/choice, you should use it. If you didnât say anything, you shouldnât complain about the decisions afterward âŚ
Back in November 4th 2017, J. Allen Brack gave several interviews. In the one given to Digital Trend*, he said:
" Content-wise it will be identical. Now, âidenticalâ has a lot of nuance, [though], because WoW changed a lot in the two years between launch and [Burning Crusade]. One of the reasons we are talking about this as early as we are is to get the communityâs opinions on which way we should go for certain things. A good example is U.B.E.R.S. â [Upper Blackrock Spire is a dungeon that had a 10-person version and a 5-person version. At some point in development, we dropped the 10-person version. Was that the right decision? Do they want a 10-person version? Do they want a 5-person version? Those are the types of things [weâre figuring out]."
And to Forbes**, on January 30, 2018
âMy favorite example for this is Upper Blackrock Spire. There was a 10-person version and a five-person version for most of that two-year period, but toward the end we decided, nope, UBRS is going to be a five-person and weâre going to retune it to be appropriate for that. Is that the right decision? I donât know. These are the types of questions. Thereâs lots of questions like that that weâll be talking with the community about.â
Itâs pretty clear that he doesnât refer only to UBRS, and it is one example.
5 Likes
Watch closely Blizzard at how people will be loving this pvp aspect of the game, with pvp currency and pvp gear being so important to some of the player base.
maybe even consider bringing it back
Really? Acting like this statement killed the 1.5 AV argument?..
If you think this is the kill blow to 1.5 AV then you are only thinking with a biased mindset. Like. . . seriously?
Donât get me wrong, I get it, it obviously goes against the 1.5 AV argument, thatâs for sure, but Blizzard restating basics to try and steer the conversation is only a reaffirmation that they want to avoid doing 1.5 AV.
In fact by not addressing the supposed issue of lost data and instead focusing on âtake the pressure off players to be constantly figuring out what we might do nextâ that could actually help increase the assumption that the data was not lost.
The statement comes off as âHey lets not talk about this because we want to do it the other wayâ. That makes me feel like the stated post for 1.12 AV here is their strongest argument and that they just donât want to go through the work of 1.5 AV.
To be frank, if anything this statement has empowered my PoV in arguing FOR 1.5 AV.
Edit: INB4 âThat was a âputting it to restâ statementâ.
Yeah they tried that with WoD having no flying.
8 Likes
I am convinced at this point (having watched the Q&A video that had commentary by the vanilla dev) that the âclarityâ that was spoken of is Ion and company seeing participation as metric for âfunâ. Which is so very not how the game works currently, nor is it how the final iteration of vanilla AV was.
10 Likes
Do you really think they are that stupid? These people are the face of a giant company, I really think theyâre smarter than that. They may see participation as a metric for profit, but nobody with a brain would see participation equaling fun without some outside influence.
In the corporate world, anything is possible, especially when you have to answer to investors and get used to talking in language that they understand. It becomes second nature over time.
The state of BfA kind of points to them having lost their way in terms of game design: they donât seem to understand what is really fun about an MMO.
5 Likes
Watch the Q&A that was posted recently with the commentary from the vanilla dev. It speaks volumes about their philosophy about âfunâ.
4 Likes
Ion is the former Guild Leader of Elitist Jerks, where âfunâ was a 4 letter word.
Theyâre highlighting in that in the 8.2 Q&A recently, he absolutely failed to define what he finds fun, and instead talked about how they use metrics to determine what people want to do.
3 Likes
The same company that relies on RNG and weekly chests for gearing for current game, rinse and repeat world quests for reputation grinds and that making a new race is equivalent to keeping everything going.
Sadly I am not surprised by much anymore.
6 Likes
Have you watched the video yet?
1 Like