Are we at the basic in-game "Q&A" stage of updates from Blizz?

[Eopoo-anetheron]

The way some of you all act towards these blues is exactly why retail is the way it is now. My goodness.

[Cheater-azjolnerub (Cheater)]

The way some of you all act towards these blues is exactly why retail is the way it is now. My goodness.

Tbh I kind of feel bad for making this thread. I wasn’t even demanding updates. I was actually just asking the community a question lol.

It did get linked in a news article on some obscure website though so that’s funny.

[Eopoo-anetheron]

There was no issue with your post at all. Some people just don’t know how to act lol

[Gnocci-emerald-dream]

The way some of you all act towards these blues is exactly why retail is the way it is now. My goodness.

I kind of wish your post actually made sense so I could properly respond to it. What actions toward blues, and what relationship to the way retail is? Looks more like you are just flinging around, not caring if it hits anyone specific.

[Morehwine-wyrmrest-accord (Morehwine)]

It did get linked in a news article on some obscure website though so that’s funny.

I saw that. It was weird and clickbaity. For those who didn’t see it, paraphrasing, the whole thing was short and like, “BLIZZARD BLUE SAYS NOTHING TO SEE HERE!!!1!1!!”

Just–what?

[Eopoo-anetheron]

It made a lot of sense if you read the thread.

[Gnocci-emerald-dream]

It made a lot of sense if you read the thread.

No, sorry, no points awarded to you. Your statement makes zero sense and on a scale of one to ten, it earns a solid word salad ranking.

[Eopoo-anetheron]

That’s too bad then. Ignore me and keep it moving.

[Idun-wyrmrest-accord (Idun)]

Some of us would like to think that fighting for a certain version of things will help blizzard make decisions.

That’s never been true, though. This isn’t a democracy, and we’re not voting. Especially now, with Activision’s financial Eye of Sauron looking on.

Never suggested it is a democracy. If anything it is a republic, and our representatives within the organization can and should be lobbied.

It’s not a republic, either. it’s a benevolent dictatorship, and we’re not the dictators. Believing otherwise is setting yourself up for disappointment and hypertension.

[Shunin-aerie-peak (Shunin)]

Yea totally agree

[Narya-kirin-tor (Narya)]

I only disagree with one word in your most recent post, but I’m real puzzled that you wrote “Eye of Sauron” in one post and “benevolent” in the next.

[Idun-wyrmrest-accord (Idun)]

I only disagree with one word in your most recent post, but I’m real puzzled that you wrote “Eye of Sauron” in one post and “benevolent” in the next.

Because those posts have different contexts.

[Piddy-uther (Piddy)]

With all due respect, if you cannot even concretely answer something as simple as which AV version they are going to try to reproduce at a few months till release, it is hard to take it at all seriously or retain any interest in the project. Your level of credibility is, in case you havent been paying attention, flagging quite a bit.

This is folly, and it’s a trap.

If they TRY for something, and fail, it benefits nobody. This community does not accept TRY. It is very Yoda-esque: Do, or Do not. There is no try.

Blizzard is well versed in the knowledge that best intentions and $4 will by you a cup at Starbucks. This community has absolutely no patience for, or place in their heart for best intentions.

Blizzard will hold tight until the momentum is so high, that release is naught but near, before they release anything at all even remotely concrete. We know as much as Blizzard likes to talk about “waiting for it to be Blizzard quality” that there are always pressures to ship. And that pressure builds over time, until, inevitably, they “Just ship”, and “Best intentions” are left a dying carcass on the side of the road.

So, no, I have no interest in what they want to try to do. I want what is, and what is not. And they won’t know that until they’re ready to ship. Because internally, it’s all best intentions until time and the real world crashes in and they’re given the word to light the candle, and ship.

Ready or not, here it comes.

[Gnocci-emerald-dream]

It is very Yoda-esque: Do, or Do not. There is no try.

Isn’t that more Miagi-esque?

I prefer “you’ll miss 100% of the shots you do not take”

[Tastymanwich-turalyon (Tastymanwich)]

To clarify my above post (sorry it’s been so long, didn’t realize I hadn’t been here in days), I’m not saying that Blizzard shouldn’t give updates of some sort. I especially like Odinmar’s suggestion early in the thread. I was more trying to explain why they don’t give updates, and (though it may only ever be a dream) try to get people to change their behavior so that Blizzard would be more willing to change theirs.

they need to stop being so damn hostile.

Expecting any person, on any topic, in any industry, to not be hostile is a fool’s errand.

To quote Terry Pratchett: “You need to believe in things that aren’t true. How else can they become?”

Bless you for the Terry Pratchett quote. To Cheater, I definitely don’t expect people to not be hostile, but a boy can dream.

[Piddy-uther (Piddy)]

It is very Yoda-esque: Do, or Do not. There is no try.

Isn’t that more Miagi-esque?

I prefer “you’ll miss 100% of the shots you do not take”

I’m not suggesting they don’t try internally. Just simply that the community is unwilling to accept knowing about it.

Honestly, which is the better scenario. “We’d like to keep Original AV” and the later “Yea, sorry, original AV didn’t work out.” vs simply, at “launch”, “We’re doing 1.12 AV”.

[Gnocci-emerald-dream]

It is very Yoda-esque: Do, or Do not. There is no try.

Isn’t that more Miagi-esque?

I prefer “you’ll miss 100% of the shots you do not take”

I’m not suggesting they don’t try internally. Just simply that the community is unwilling to accept knowing about it.

Honestly, which is the better scenario. “We’d like to keep Original AV” and the later “Yea, sorry, original AV didn’t work out.” vs simply, at “launch”, “We’re doing 1.12 AV”.

How about at least acknowledging the desire for the early version, and acknowledgement as to what many of us vanilla vets saw as harmful to the BG.

I suppose if they never acknowledge it, it leaves open the possibility to play the plausible deniability game. "Sorry you feel that way folks, if only we had known how passionate you were about the version of AV"

[Narya-kirin-tor (Narya)]

The first one, particularly if the exact two phrasings you have are the two options. Though “We’re going to try for patch 1.5 AV, but we may not be able to recreate all the assets, so don’t be disappointed if we wind up with 1.12 AV” would be even better; the important thing would be that it would indicate they were trying to communicate.

Saying at launch “We’re doing 1.12 AV” would be about as offensive as it could be: in one sentence, it would acknowledge that they knew this was something people cared about, imply that they could have revealed it before the launch, and brush off anyone who cared about it.

Sure, it’s probable that some of their playerbase would flip out in response to anything but exactly the version of AV they wanted and wouldn’t care for any explanations, but…there’s no logic in “we’re not going to try to communicate or be honest because we only care about the reactions of people who will inevitably yell at us whether we communicate or not.”

Blizzard has a long history of doing things like trying to hide changes they know will be unpopular instead of documenting them in their patch notes, and their community has a long history of figuring out what’s changed and publicizing it anyway. It’s bizarre. It’s like they think if they don’t admit it, we’ll never know.

[Gnocci-emerald-dream]

The first one, particularly if the exact two phrasings you have are the two options. Though “We’re going to try for patch 1.5 AV, but we may not be able to recreate all the assets, so don’t be disappointed if we wind up with 1.12 AV” would be even better; the important thing would be that it would indicate they were trying to communicate.

Would they fear embarassment that they were incapable of reverting changes of the sort I bolded in the patch note thread, when over 10 years ago their staff was willing and able to commit SWEEPING changes to that instance in each of back to back patches?

As I keep going back to, is that if they are incapable or unwilling to “do”, then do they actually deserve to be paid a monthly sub for it? Note, I am not saying that I would go to a PS, but the reality is that they could potentially fart out something that PSs are already providing. Worse if they were to switch gears, jump the shark and add crbgs.

You cannot unbake a cake and they should think long and hard if they want to do the cake justice.

[Narya-kirin-tor (Narya)]

My knowledge of private servers I’d consider reliable, safe, and reasonably certain not to abruptly shut down–or, frankly, any one of the three–is nil. Patch 1.12 AV, even patch 1.12 AV topped with an arrogantly dismissive tone as Piddy seems to have inadvertently suggested to my eyes, will not be the reason I don’t pay for Classic.

That’s just me.