Right the point is to remove the entire time sink involved which includes farming gold. Now adding a cooldown or a requirement to be in a town makes sense if the goal is to mitigate any raid impact.
For those who say dual spec doesn’t harm class or spec identity
https ://mobile.twitter.com/Ghostcrawler/status/392450066792726528?s=20
With his thoughts of how dual spec hurt class identity you really want to say it doesn’t have any negative effects?
If a lead game designer thinks it had negative effects, you think you are more qualified to decide if it had no negatives to it being added when you aren’t a game designer?
Since you don’t want to take the words of the devs from 2007, how about 2013?
Should I get a post from the devs from 2070 for you? (Even If I somehow did this, you would dismiss it if it doesn’t meet your agenda).
And in that same chain of tweets we have this gem
https ://twitter.com/VerainOfUrsin/status/392496638863765504?s=20
Showing dual spec was being used to have multiple raid specs.
It’s almost like we have historic evidence to see how dual spec has negatively effected the game.
Rose tinted glasses indeed on all these dual spec demanders.
JFC, I have actively conceded and adjusted my position on some arguments where I was proven wrong, admitted some level of immaturity in some of my posts, and this is how you respond. Prancing around on your high horses and actively deriding my intelligence.
And you wonder why people refuse to engage with you in any meaningful way.
1 Like
You’re damn right I’m unwilling to accept that because it demonstrates there is no consistency to your arguments in favour to the change. It just demonstrates that there are a number of people who agree on the same point for different reasons.
Which is fine. But there is no deontological justification for the change. It just boils down to personal preference.
Which is all I’ve said all along.
1 Like
Dual spec doesn’t let a druid turn into a paladin, so no it does not erode class identity. GC just sounds bitter his design goals for Cata didn’t work out.
And no duh some people will have 2 pve specs, some of which might be used in raids. Literally noone has denied that.
1 Like
Yeah, that’s fair enough, if Ghostcrawler ended up thinking that. Guess for whatever reasons, he ended up feeling that was the case, and I’ll acknowledge it. Although man I immediately found myself agreeing with the first reply to that tweet.
Here’s an interesting counterpoint. Ghostcrawler currently works for Riot games in what i imagine is a fairly senior game-design capacity. Riot are hugely successful at the moment (league popular as ever, valorant also well received and Arcane just absolutely blew up on Netflix). Riot are also working on an MMO at the moment. Given Riot games have a strong pvp focus, do you think they’re going to have strong barriers between engaging in pvp and pve in that MMO, such as respeccing costs put up in TBC (and dual spec removed in wrath)?
Or do you think that Greg mightve changed his mind once again since 2013, and realized that that kind of thinking has been consigned to the dustbin in 2022?
Something can’t be not provable in any way, and also provable. You need to pick one or the other. Also lots of things were added in WotLK. Does that mean there is a business driver for Death Knights and Northrend?
Actually, it’s a very good reason to not do something. Why implement a change if it is not going to address the business need? System enhancements should be bottom up: what is the problem, and how do I fix it? Not top down: here is the solution, where is the problem?
I didn’t say that perspective was right, but it’s certainly valid. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with somebody wanting to keep the game as faithful as possible when what you consider a negative, they consider a positive.
Why exactly do you not think dual spec is going to address “the business need”? You do realize this all played out 13 years ago, and quite clearly dual spec did address “the business need” seeming as they kept it in the game for the following 4 years right up to the abolition of talent trees?
You are conflating two separate things - one is the introduction of an entirely new way to play the game, the other is making improvements to how the game is played.
These are very distinct, separate things that are not equivalent in any respect nor are people asking for.
Blizzard has the data, they know what people are asking for and why. You have theories about what you think their business drivers are, and whether it’s important to absorb feedback.
Taking an opposing view is always your right but arguing against change for the sake of hating change is incredibly short sighted, and lazy. The fact is that if you made a thread asking for the changes to be reverted (that’s a long list!) that have already ruined your faithful recreation and make it no longer a faithful recreation, it would dry up and die very quickly. Dual spec threads are still going strong. Why do you think that is?
Because nobody can articulate what the “business need” is with any consistency.
What is the need? What is the problem it is seeking to address?
No, you are. You brought up the retrospective argument (it was good in WOTLK so it must be good in TBC), not me. You are welcome to amend your argument.
If they do, then why haven’t then done it? What is this data? What is the problem dual spec is trying to fix?
It’s not lazy, it’s just a contrary opinion to yours. People like the old game and don’t want it to be changed. I enjoyed the Majora’s Mask remake but I felt some of the changes actually diminished from the original game. There is nothing wrong with people feeling that way.
I’m not going to get into a long esoteric discussion that most people would not be interested in. But I reject deontology completely and so do many prominent philosophers. Piaget puts deontology as the first and lowest stage in his Theory of the Moral Development in Children.
It totally does not. Many of those supporting dual spec have given many very rational reason why dual spec would help not just the individual who buys it but players who may not buy it and the game as a whole. You haven’t been here since the beginning of this discussion so you may have missed some of those arguments though we have repeated them several time. I’ve referenced and linked to the longest thread begun in June a few times.
1 Like
I mean people have pretty clearly stated what they think dual spec would help with, namely increased participation in different areas of content. Which is certainly an important goal for an MMO.
And while you can argue how much it would actually help, although it’s certainly more than not at all, that is a clear objective behind wanting dual spec.
1 Like
Again with the ad hominens.
Yes, they have. And I had been curious to explore the logical progressions of those arguments - yours included. Which at risk of oversimplifying, does boil down to majority rule. Lots of people want this for different reasons, therefore it should be implemented. No one reason matters, what matters is how people feel about it.
Which is fine. It just doesn’t make it right, and it certainly doesn’t make it comparable to Multiboxing.
So you are claiming to know game change impacts better than a lead game designer.
What are your credentials for this? Experience?
Maybe you make games for a hobby???
No?
Then I think his opinion on how dual spec impacted the game is better than yours.
Think of it like a Venn diagram. You have people who like to heal/tank. Then you have a subset of people who play classes that heal/tank. Then you have a subset of players who enjoy healing/tanking over solo content and PvP. Then you have a subset of players within that who want to heal/tank but feel restricted from doing so due to having only one spec.
That is a very small proportion of users who will be affected. If the business case is to “increase participation” there are several different solutions which could achieve that more easily. Cross-realm LFG. Cross-faction dungeons. You name it. So why pick Dual Spec specifically as the solution?
You will never be satisfied unless it fits your agenda.
??? Really
I, a user, would like to be able to change my talent trees to a configuration that lets me engage in a different type of content effectively, without needing to pay a gold cost. This is because the gold cost represents a time sink, or penalty, in forcing me to do something I don’t wish to engage in.
Not sure how else I can explain it, its pretty clearcut to me?
1 Like
If there was no business driver, they wouldn’t have implemented it in Wrath. I’m really not sure why you feel that making one change necessitates the other when they are not comparable in the slightest.
I’ve already answered why blizzard hasn’t done it - they don’t have project hours or budget allocated to it. I don’t believe it has anything to do with ‘faithful recreation’ because they have already destroyed that notion with the changes they made to the actual gameplay (which were not changes to systems - hence not requiring major development).
You still get the old game if they put dual spec in. It literally doesn’t effect you if you choose not to use it. This is what’s so frustrating, it’s literally an assault on your feelings when other people’s lives are made easier. When you go to the casino with your pals and share a blackjack table, do you get upset when they win?
Have epic flying without having to do anything for it
Get all the end game gear without doing anything for it
…
Should I go on?