To have a discussion about what difficulties they experienced and what sort of challenges they faced. They didn’t need to take any specifics from them, but discussions about 15k player launches and dynamic respawns would help them down the road to know to avoid it, and probably led partly to layering.
Yeah, I just wonder why Mark Kern, who really doesn’t have a lot to gain from making some slight fabrications, has a different story than Blizzard, who is motivated to make sure people think they’re playing an accurate version of 1.12 ![:wink:](https://d38bqls1q93fod.cloudfront.net/en/wow/images/emoji/twitter/wink.png?v=6" ":wink:")
You mean Mark Kern who is trying to rebuild his gaming credentials after a failed attempt at a new MMO got him ousted from his own company? Mark is an expert on what was, and how Vanilla existed. He’s got good opinions as an outsider looking in, on what they’re doing now.
He’s not privy to the internal environment of the development group.
I want to experience the game again as “pure” as possible as it was back at launch. Technology advances had complicated this, for example better internet. I am all for changes if they bring me closer to the same game I experienced when it first launched. I do not support any other changes.
Your definition of purist, “A Classic WoW purist is someone who advocates for no changes made to the game of any kind.”, would make you a no changes advocate. In my opinion not a purist.
I care about the experience, not the numbers in the sever’s client.
Or Mark Kern, the person who helped get Classic in the first place. I see that like Ion, Mark is only useful to debate about change when he agrees with an opinion, but is suddenly discredited when the need arises.
1 Like
I literally listed where Mark’s opinion matters. As an outsider looking in. Unlike Blizzard he can’t comment on what they got. And the Nostalrius QA Lead… who would be the person supplying numbers… said that Nostalrius didn’t give them any specific data, just discussions.
They would have had to sign an NDA before entering Blizzard, so I’m not sure if I would take their word for it. There was also probably something in it for them to contribute their time and effort to shutting down their own community.
Since Mark Kern probably has plenty of friends at Blizzard and has insider information, I think whether he is correct or incorrect is up for debate.
So basically, you’re saying “Blizzard lied”.
I’m saying that I believe there is a probability that Mark Kern may be telling the truth and that the marketing copy is missing pieces of critical information. I can see motivations at play that make this scenario plausible to me.
He is also saying all the Nost guys lied. He is saying you are wrong for doubting a single guy who had nothing to do with this and he is right for not believing every employee and Nost guy. This is how he argues. He has decided what he wants to believe so it doesn’t matter what you say because he will just make up excuses for why his “souce” is reputable and yours isn’t. He has been doing it in any thread about changes.
While he is doing this he speaks out the other corner of how mouth about how everyone else is being mean and not having a genuine debate.
shrug
2 out of 3 say one thing. The other, who has no direct knowledge unlike the other two, says something different.
Without some sort of real proof, I trust the people involved not the person who doesn’t have direct involvement.
1 Like
Classic is about preserving a piece of history. That’s all that needs to be said. People that want changes really want WoW 2. So go to General and ask Blizzard for that.
I trust people based on what I know of there motivations and their past history. In this case, it seems to me that Mark Kern does not have the motivations the other two parties do to not mention something like the numbers of the game being reconstituted from private servers or from scrapping.
As in arguing the change debate, the number of parties is not an indicator of truth.
Except this isn’t about the number of parties, it is about 2 parties which were both actively involved in making classic and 1 who was not involved whatsoever. Why even have the debate if you are just going to believe what you want and discard anything that goes against it? You keep saying you want polite good structured debate on here and then you discard anything anyone else says and any sources they have while having nothing reputable of your own to offer.
Mark Kern isn’t a dev at Blizzard at this time. He wouldn’t be able to speak for what happened at that meeting as far as I know. Kern left Blizzard in 2006 as far as I know. Thats… Like 10 years before the Nost team visited Blizzard.
The actual developers that work at Blizzard that met with the Nost team, and the Nost team themselves confirmed Blizzard didn’t take any values from them. As close as they came to that was the Blizz team told the Nost team their design for Ony deep breath was wrong.
But thats all.
Yea but there is a big conspiracy designed to trick everybody!
In fact, I want the source to Mark Kern saying this. I don’t recall this statement from him at all… Like seriously. Think of the year he left Blizzard. Why would he be saying something so definitive about an internal Blizzard matter 10+ years after he left the company?
Especially in reference to a meeting he wasn’t there for. This doesn’t sound right. I do not ever remember him saying this.
1 Like
No, but the direct knowledge vs second hand knowledge is regularly an indicator of who is more accurate.
There’s a movie about this, isn’t there???
I could link to it tonight, it was in the video where he was talking about ED and Classic design. Just on lunch break at work, so no time.
Which is why I would tend to trust Mark, he simply has less motivation to hide something like that.