Do you agree that it is possible to change the game in such a way that it keeps the original intended goals of the game design, or may even realize those goals better than the original implementation?
If you agree with that then that represents a scope for some changes that are faithful to the original TBC.
In my view implementation and design are not the same (well actually that’s not even just my view - it’s fact).
I don’t believe TBC was the perfect representation of the developers design intentions and therefore I do think it is possible to enhance the game in such a way that it more fully realizes the original design goals of the game. Especially with modern tech. Changing ability queueing and Batching is an obvious example of this. The game is better for it and if the old devs could have pulled it off they would have.
By the way - I am not completely closed to changes outside the original game design intention - but I think there’s a much harder case to argue - it requires genuinely compelling reasons for the change.
Saying “that’s how it used to be” is still a valid argument. People liked the old game for a reason and every time it gets changed, it becomes a little less like they remembered it. Plus, the label has negative connotations and shuts down rather than facilitates debate.
I do not believe that you can have a faithful recreation when you have introduced changes to the game that fundamentally change the way the game was originally played.
Seal of blood being given to the alliance (and many others that were posted here) explicitly violate the term.
Sure and then I might be arguing against Ziryus or some other person who supports dual spec. the lfd would be just as much in the hands of the devs as dual spec is
Thats very convenient. Im sure you have justification for this but that doesnt mean its any good.
This is taking a legit point of view and condemning it for no good reason. Thats a preference, same as any other preference and everyone is equal in that regard. Not in your book though - something you might want to correct going forward with your “open discussion” which isnt really all that inclusive it seems.
If thats your understanding I cant help but not be insulted. No hard feelins.
I’m not saying it’s not a valid position, some people want the pure nostalgia experience. All that can be said is blizzard has explicitly said that for TBC Classic changes are 100% on the table.
Apologies to bump my own post but can somebody speak to this? For those people who say there are objectively no downsides to Dual Spec because it fixes QoL issues, shouldn’t you logically agree that Retail is (mostly) an objectively better game?
No because retail has a lot more changes than just QoL changes.
A perfect example would be personal loot, this is hardly a QoL change(some would even say it’s anti QoL), it’s a fundamental change to how loot is distributed and a lot of people actually really dislike it especially now that it’s forced everywhere.
BC was clearly designed with the intention that players do dungeons several times. Players were having trouble finding groups to do them. The devs noticed that and I think dual spec was one of several attempts to improve that situation.
Exactly. Which is why it’s not very fair or facilitative to use the #nochanges label because it is used as a dismissive and negative label. Same as telling people to “go back to Retail”.
But how is it not QoL? No more running raids over and over and never getting any drops. There are no downsides.
Because it very negatively impacts the ability to distribute loot as desired in a fixed group setting. And as for never getting loot, well enjoy getting the same piece of gear you don’t need again and again because that’s not any better.
But any ways that’s just one example of a non QoL change that many people dislike in retail.
Sure, and when that’s people’s position they should just say so instead of trying to concoct elaborate reasons that just boil down that’s how it was in the end.
And like I said originally had it been left as an option people wouldn’t really care because they could pick what worked for them. But it wasn’t, blizzard forced that change on all dungeons/raids.
Another good example would be the ability pruning, this is another non QoL change that is widely disliked in retail. So yeah there’s plenty of basic design changes now in retail that have nothing to do with QoL.
This is correct. You only need to state your position once, after that you’re actually not contributing much of anything to the conversation. If you want to have an actual discussion, ask probing questions that either expose flaws in the opposing view or provide reasons and examples for your perspective.
“I want to suffer the pain of 2007” is not useful to anyone in the conversation.
That’s a gross misunderstanding of the arguments made by those in favor of dual spec. We see no downsides, not because it fixes qol issues, but because no one seems to be able to articulate what those downsides are. Except for the possible abuse in raids. While we think that fear is vastly overblown we have seen it as a small possibility and have agreed to adding a cool down and change only in a major city.
When we started this discussion some against dual spec actually suggested people were going to be respeccing between trash and bosses in dungeons as well as raids. They soon realized that no one bought that line of bs so they began saying it would just happen in raids
Of course that’s also a harder ask to add it in TBC because another retail change is how streamlined loot is now compared to TBC which makes PL much simpler to do. Oh yeah that’s another non QoL change that many people dislike in retail.