Actually one of the reasons they are likely making classic is so they can claim it’s being harmed by the illegal pservers and have a valid reason to ask courts to close them all.
10 Likes
I’m not disagreeing with you that the trash you spam isn’t being removed.
I know it isn’t being deleted because Blizzard are too soft on people talking off-topic here. (wanting changes from outside vanilla timeline)
I know some posts are removed due to a myriad of other reasons (offensiveness etc)
I don’t doubt that.
I will repeat, for the slow, The rule of discussing Classic WoW instead of BFA on these forums however is not enforced (unfortunately).
Might I suggest the general forums for you to continue your campaign to introduce game ruining features? Thanks.
3 Likes
Well Brack thought I didn’t but I actually do.
I’m not going to pitch a fit over it not being 100% Vanilla complete with dial up Internet and my underdeveloped brain though.
I think what somewhat prompted this influx of changes posts was that they did commit to some changes already so people think there is a better chance of getting their change idea in the game. Just a theory. I know there have been change posts since the dawn of this forum but it does seem like there are more now.
3 Likes
Ornyx, Blizz mod:
For sure - be passionate! But this forum is for discussion, telling people to stop talking about x, y, and z because you have a passionate opinion is not okay.
Feel free to share that passion of wanting no changes to class balance in constructive ways, like showing the community why that would be a bad change through actually discussing it, etc.
citation:
I’m not arguing with you Bubble about this stuff in this thread. Mogar made a good post, I tried to make a good reply. I’ll talk about that.
3 Likes
US law does not apply to all countries.
Not enough is being done to squash the pointless prochangers from spamming these forums.
There’s already one, single, point of argument, against them all, “it wasn’t in vanilla, that is why it is bad for the game”.
It’s one point, and it is more than good enough to counter any and all prochange requests, yet they still keep popping up with more. You’re just spamming by suggesting them and defending them at this point.
There is NOTHING wrong with telling someone they have gotten confused or lost, and posted in the wrong forums. I am merely guiding you to the correct forums for the topics you want to discuss.
9 Likes
Don’t reply to the changes posts. Then it falls down the list.
We aready know we’re getting 1.12 with no changes.
Why bother arguing with posters that ask for changes ?
2 Likes
Hi Bamber-
This is a very interesting vantage that I didn’t even really look at and I am an intellectual property (patent) attorney. There are probably some trademark, copyright and patent issues involved ![:slight_smile:](https://d38bqls1q93fod.cloudfront.net/en/wow/images/emoji/twitter/slight_smile.png?v=6" ":slight_smile:")
good pickup!
2 Likes
People always mock the “you think you do but you don’t” statement. In reality it is actually a strong statement but only if it is correct.
Brack used it incorrectly and well we see where that went.
Just like the real Vanilla experience.
5 Likes
Changes are necessary. They may not happen at launch, but they will happen. Otherwise, burnout will occur, population will drop and it will fail. Vanilla, even without expansions would have evolved and changed. It is what it is…no change lifers get over it.
1 Like
That doesn’t even make sense.
Now, with WOW: Classic launching with absolutely no group finder, if the vast majority of players (especially the WOW: Classic only players) started asking for it and quitting because they didn’t have it - THEN Brack would have some room to say “I told you so”.
6 Likes
I’m pretty sure blizzard has said they will absolutely let exactly this happen. Isn’t there a statement along the lines of “whether it’s tens of thousands or tens of players, it is what it is?”. (not the actual quote, my paraphrasing what I remember it as). People use the phrase museum piece for a reason. It doesn’t need content changes. The Louvre isn’t looking to Bob Ross some happy trees onto the Mona Lisa. (Extremely hyperbolic analogy, I wouldn’t typically call wow the Mona Lisa of gaming). A lot of the pro change crowd asks seem more like they’d be interested in a World of Warcraft 2. Which is not what this project is.
3 Likes
Not everyone who signed the petition is perfectly aligned with your views, you’re nobody; you don’t know who signed the petition. The man who brought the petition to Blizzard, Mark Kern; even suggested it would be an intelligent move by Blizzard to put in an HD toggle for models and terrain. A couple Vanilla WoW developers have been interviewed and stated clearly that some changes should be made as they would have no negative impact on the Classic WoW experience.
Starcraft: Remastered, Warcraft III: Reforged; Classic WoW should follow this model as well.
You sure are overly dramatic for someone your age, jeez.
8 Likes
First and foremost, thank you for posting exactly what I think.
As far as this quote goes, I couldn’t agree more. Whilst I never really posted a lot in these forums, I used to look forward to coming on a daily basis and reading thoughts, contributing where it was sensible to do so.
Lately, in the face of a wall of change threads, I’ve largely given that up, and in thinking through it now, I’m not even sure why I bother any longer.
Awesome post, see you all in Classic!
12 Likes
You can wishlist some changes and still be happy with an exact replica of vanilla. I haven’t seen anyone posting in favour of changes say that they won’t play if X isn’t implemented.
Maybe OP should leave the forums and come back once game is released.
5 Likes
I agree with your post on principle, Mogar, but do hope you at least have the humility to see that you are not immune to this behavior either, as there are issues where you also advocate directly for a change to the underlying game.
These discussions, however, where people are proposing outlandish things do serve a purpose, and the “purist” contingent for any particular issue fills an important role in being the primary group to poke holes in the arguments against perceived change (I say perceived because it’s entirely possible for some issues to have people on both sides claiming their position to be more authentic). Being the primary “red team” is a critical function here in the battle for authenticity.
Now that all being said, the primary failure we have arrived upon so far is on Blizzard, and the lack of 2 way communication. They sit, removed and “hands off” maybe observing, but maybe not, we really don’t know for sure. The only real issue I’ve seen they’ve even mentioned as important to consider was spell batching, but even then they are non committal on their stance. Numerous issues could be addressesed and discussion on them more or less entirely shut down by just communicating the design. Some of them don’t go away (class/spec balance threads would exist even if every class was a literal copy of each other), but other, perhaps smaller issues would if they where announced as decided and properly justified with reasoning.
The issue is that we keep rehashing the same few topics over and over and over, when most of these discussions happened the first month these forums where around. We do that because they aren’t considered settled issues yet via the lack of communication, and that is an area blizzard could definitely improve upon, to help at least better focus discussion here.
9 Likes
To be fair it isn’t just about them getting the game for free. That’s like claiming the only reason people play emulators is because they’re free.
Many genuinely want a different game, just not THAT different.
And just one more small quibble, the devs HAVE wavered “in the slightest…” But only very slightly (water).
If they only spring leaks of that magnitude ill be a very happy camper. (sry for pun)
Obfuscatory semantics.
You and everyone else knows NoChanges is a spectrum, not a binary.
This is a continuum fallacy, and you know it by now. (thanks Peter)
5 Likes