I never said that either. I said I preferred BC and Wrath over vanilla. I said vanilla was imo the worst of the trilogy. I never said whether I preferred Wrath over BC. So instead of having a rational dialog I have to spend my time pointing out your misquotes and gross misunderstanding of what I very clearly posted. And you wonder why I claim your reading comprehension is terrible.
but you’re trying to drastically change TBC to something it’s not, which definitively makes clear that you don’t like TBC even though you’re saying you do. Seems you prefer wrath, afterall, you really want dual spec.
I have never played a game that I liked 100%. Maybe you have. For me they are all a mix of things I like and things I don’t. When all things considered if the things I like out weigh the things I don’t I play the game.
I loved Morrowind. But not at first. I got so powerful so fast that the game was so easy I got bored. I was ready to quit when I discovered an addon that drastically reduced the xp you got. Clearly some people felt the same way about the game as I did. I downloaded the add on, deleted my characters and restarted the game. It was great after that, though even then there were still things I didn’t like. The UI of all the Elder Scrolls games are the worst of any game I’ve played
For me Wrath and BC are about equal but in different ways. For example I liked the addition of dual spec and the lfd. Doing dungeons is a big part of a MMO for me, not the only part, but a big part. But as I said above a certain level of difficulty is important too. I didn’t like that they nerfed down the dungeons in Wrath. They weren’t so nerfed down that the dungeons were boring but I preferred the difficulty level in BC better.
Given the good and bad of each game I preferred BC because of the difficulty level of heroic dungeons. When there were discussions comparing Vanilla, BC, and Wrath about a year into classic I posted that BC was the better game, imo
The thing I liked about TBC was it’s adherence to making the player commit to a spec, so we can’t be anything we want whenever we want.
…and you want to completely take that away from me and players like me who also enjoy this aspect of TBC, even though it is a defining feature of pre-WOTLK expansions, and notably, that’s how it actually was.
TBH it’s kind of mean and inconsiderate.
But many people (you?) have claimed the respec cost is trivial. The red haired child claimed just 2 dailies a day that take 10 minutes could net you 100 gold a week. Someone, I think it was riger claimed most people have so much gold that it was hard to find ways to spend it. You claimed it was an important gold sink. If all that is true then people aren’t committing to a spec. If all that is true then you are often playing with people who have paid to respec because they aren’t committed to just one spec. People are playing what ever they want when ever they want because they have so much gold, don’t know how to spend it, and the respec cost is so trivial, therefore it’s a big gold sink.
If BC is making the player commit to a spec then the gold cost isn’t trivial, people aren’t rolling in gold, it’s not easy to make the gold to respec, and it’s not a meaningful gold sink.
You can’t have it both ways. This is just another part of your game, saying what ever you think in the moment that will help you “win” the “debate.”
A) Dual spec does lock you into specs, jut two of them instead of 1, it does not allow you be whatever you want anymore than 1 spec does. Or are you so confused by how specs work you think there are only two specs per class in the game?
B) As an optional feature you would be perfectly free to simply not use dual spec and keep doing exactly what you’re doing now if you like it so much.
*giggle
It’s funny that you clearly have issues distinguishing points being made through either sarcasm or intentional irony.
The facts are that lack of dual spec does a great job of keeping people in their chosen spec, for the most part. Lots of people do respec often, I have those types even in my guild, but its costly but it’s the life they choose.
However, frequently we get arguments from pro dual spec about how dual spec should be added because it’s easy to respec anyway, so you’re just cutting out the middle-man.
I disagree with this notion, but even if I was forced to agree, the argument that it is an effective gold sink holds true as well in that scenario. If it’s easy to respec, people would be doing it a lot, but we can see it’s clearly not the case, so the argument that dual spec should be put in because it’s “already easy” is flawed.
Vast majority of people only need two specs to cover everything they’d like to have the convenience to swap between.
The gameplay difference between being locked in to 1 and having dual spec is significant.
The difference between 2 and 3 is a much smaller jump, if even noticeable at all.
Nah this argument has been refuted hundreds of times already, you’re wrong.
There’s no way to not be subjected to the collateral damage of dual spec being added, whether you personally use it or not.
1 Like
So you actually don’t know the difference, good to know you don’t even understand the basics of what you are arguing against.
Wrath was so freakin easy people were complaining about it. Dual specs came in Wrath. Its not a coincidence.
3 Likes
I wonder how many of those people whining about it being too easy actually had any of the hard achievements or a top rated arena team.
That was one of the great things about the armory, the people making those claims almost invariably had not done anything remotely hard and it was super easy to call them out on it.
Why? The game as a whole got easier. Its not up for debate. Trolling armories never substantiated a claim ever.
Heck, you were the guy that reminded me of the drama in Cataclysm when they tried to go back and make dungeon content difficult again. That would appear to be an indicator that Wrath was pretty easy.
3 Likes
His preferences don’t, though. He doesn’t even seem to know what his preferences even are. He keep on bringing up GC’s post concerning Dual Spec as if it is gospel and has just as quickly abandoned it when it seem untenable and instead grasps for a vague “nuanced” position which isn’t even based on what he promoted GC as saying.
He’s issuing “proof” for a stance he doesn’t even hold himself. What stance he holds isn’t even directly stated. It vacillates to the point that I think he just changes it because he forever wants to stay ahead of the argument.
At best, Zipzo doesn’t want Dual Spec because people in this thread are arguing for it. He can’t remember why he was even against it, he just knows he has to be opposed to it because he is opposed to me (in particular) and you because he sees you as being aligned with me.
I think Riger and Corpseknife are aligned against Dual Spec for that very reason as well–they just don’t like me so they oppose it to spite me.
Normal Ulduar puts everything in TBC to shame except Sunwell, and anything on a Hardmode beats Sunwell handily except maybe Sarth3D.
Arenas were really no different since that’s all based on players anyway.
Questing was the same.
Dailies were just as easy, and mostly optional.
Heroic Dungeons were easier.
Attunements were replaced by time/attempt gated bosses.
So unless lengthy attunement quests and Heroic dungeons are “the whole game” no, not even close.
The reason the backlash over Cata Heroics was so severe is because lots of casuals couldn’t do anything but the 5mans and were used to how easy Wrath was especially once people had T7 gear… to say nothing of how much of a joke they were with ICC25 Heroic gear all over the place.
And the last three released 5mans in WotLK got plenty of complaints, notably Halls of Reflection. Cata 5mans were on par with HoR and ultra casuals weren’t ready for it after a year+ of everyone running around in ICC gear.
The same exact complaints hit THESE boards when TBCC launched and the 5mans weren’t just snooze-fest sessions anymore. Tanks were whining about threat all the time, DPS were whining about bad Tanks, Healers were stressing about all the “extreme” damage, and those folks now either don’t post or don’t play.
But to call 5mans “the whole game” is just myopic as can be.
The game got more accessible. It cant be denied.
3 Likes
There’s a difference between the game added more easy content and the game got easier. There was still plenty of hard content for those who wanted it that wasn’t any easier than anything in TBC.
And if you think LFD would have worked any better for heroics in TBC than it did in Cata because the player base was “better” you are sadly mistaken. That shows you don’ understand why Cata heroics crashed and burned.
Accessible is not synonymous with easy.
1 Like
Having or introducing “hard modes” is evidence that the game is overall easier and more accessible. Dont know why you are trying to argue against the obvious.
3 Likes
MORE accessible = easier.
3 Likes
Not really, was sunwell easier than SSC/TK even though it was more accessible?
All accessible indicates is that you can gain entry to do something, it is not an indication of how difficult that might be afterwards.
And because they designed heroic dungeons around specific group comps, then threw them into a random group system that often generated bad group comps. Which shockingly people found incredibly frustrating.
TBC Heroics wouldn’t have faired any better in LFD back during TBC. Think about the swing in difficulty of say SH with a pally tank and mage/lock dps vs say a warrior tank with all melee dps and having to deal with that on a complete RNG basis.