Well said.
A LOT of people agree with you and if you look at all the Dev posts over the past few months NONE of them have nearly the amount of comments/traffic. This topic is not dead and should not be ignored if the Classic devs are wanting to listen to the community. 1.3k comments means people are upset…
Do the right thing devs! Give this more thought and don’t just write all of these comments off as unimportant. You can make a huge statement to fans that you really do listen to them if you make this change. As far as i am seeing this is the main topic for discussion and isn’t going away until it is addressed.
Devs, the 1.5 AVers are not going away and we know what we want. This topic deserves attention.
11 Likes
Only if you look at the pinned ones.
1.8k Replies: Please reconsider your stance on retail/classic reward linking - #1869 by Lyei-farstriders
2.2k Replies: Guild Banks Pt. 14
Given these aren’t pinned, yet have more replies, you’d put them down as more significant? Do you think we should have Guild Banks and Retail/Classic linked characters?
To be fair, Blizz has already responded with regard to the Retail/Classic™ linking.
![:cocktail:](https://d38bqls1q93fod.cloudfront.net/en/wow/images/emoji/twitter/cocktail.png?v=6" ":cocktail:")
You realise that you’re posting on Blizzard’s response to the AV 1.5 request…right?
[cognitive dissonance intensifies]
It’s funny when people blanket argue, and assume the people they are arguing with cannot discuss specific game aspects on their own merit.
2 Likes
Its funny when people ask a question on one post, completely ignore the answer, then move to another post and act like their question was never answered.
You’re slipping, Galdor. You are fast on your way to becoming a do as I say, not as I do kind of poster.
Unless, of course, this post was made ironically.
2 Likes
Except that these topics were talking about non-vanilla features. So it was all the nochangers arguing against the changers. Blizzard made it very clear that the game would not include features outside the scope of Vanilla.
This topic here, is about A.V and unless you have your head deep in the sand, it is pretty clear that a majority dislikes the 1.12 iteration. Blizzard asked us what versions of dungeons and battleground we want, they had a panel at the Blizzcon called “Restoring history” but decided to go for the 1.12 Versions which is just the retail versions without the renforts. It is honestly a little bit hypocritical …
3 Likes
The specific claim to authority was the number of posts on the thread, not the authenticity of the product. Since authenticity breaks down when you move away from 1.12.
Actually, its pretty clear that the people who don’t like it are loud and aggressive about it. That’s usually a good way to drive the people who are less aggressive, and don’t agree,away and make it look like its a majority. At most you’ve maybe got 100 different people posting support, possibly less with different character changes. That’s definitely not a claim to “majority”. Echo chambers are loud, but they’re rarely full.
[citation needed]
So far the only quote is J Allen Brack making a muddled “Do you want Cata or Vanilla UBRS?” example.
There wasn’t anything “muddled” about it. Your bias is showing.
2 Likes
We were never getting 5 man UBRS. That wasn’t a choice anyone needed to make.
Again, your bias is showing. It was never specifically about UBRS, but about the kinds of dialogue that Blizzard wanted to have with the community. That’s why after JAB mentioned UBRS he followed up with
“These are the types of questions. There’s lots of questions like that that we’ll be talking with the community about.” -Forbes interview
“Do they want a 10-person version? Do they want a 5-person version? Those are the types of things [we’re figuring out].” -Digital Trends interview
2 Likes
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 figurehead’s statement to an investment magazine.
1 Like
Classic™ hasn’t been released yet.
Whether or not they are specific is irrelevant as we know they are “listening” to feedback. Case in point, Spell Batching.
2 Likes
From what I saw, and what people I pay attention to saw, Spell Batching wasn’t even something on most people’s radar, and Blizzard chose to implement it because they could.
How about another example like… AV 1.12.