Well if dual spec gets added to TBC Classic would you go back to Vanilla Classic?
I listed same faction bg’s and a paid level boost. If you’re in favor of those but against dual spec because “it wasn’t in original tbc” you are a hypocrite.
If there isn’t a reason to add them, then why did blizz add them in wotlk with an explanation of reasons it was being added?
the reason they added it in wotlk was to make it easier to swap between pvp and pve content, an issue that is currently present in tbc classic.
Who are these people that like traveling to their faction city to pay 50 gold to swap from a pve to a pvp spec?
Even the people that don’t want dual spec added acknowledge that it would be a nice quality of life improvement. But it wasn’t in original so it’s a no go for them.
I was being sarcastic when I said paying for respecs is where the real fun of tbc classic is at.
Im on record at least two dozen times saying I was opposed to those changes. If that doesnt convince you, go into my post history and read my posts where I was actually opposing those changes at the time they were being discussed. So, no hypocrisy from me.
We’re not talking about dual specs in Wrath. Wrath didnt exist when the original TBC was a thing. We’re talking about dual specs in TBC, an era in which dual specs didnt exist either. Wrath dual specs doesnt have jack to do with adding them into TBCC.
The explanation was already given during Wrath anyway. The game became even easier and it made no sense to keep specialization as a hindrance after you made epics as common as green items.
Wait dual spec wasn’t added so we could kill the lich king? But I thought dual spec was intrinsically tied to Wrath?
1 Like
Dual spec doesn’t equal all changes. It’s ONE CHANGE. The current pay atleast 100g a week for respecs if you enjoy pvp and pve is not a good system.
I’m not sure if I should even continue back and forth with people that can’t understand that simple concept.
1 Like
I’ll copy and paste the reason for you and hopefully you can understand how I think it applies to tbc classic, the first expansion that introduced arenas.
“Nethaera : Why are we allowing players to dual spec after all this time?
Ghostcrawler : We really felt like this was a great way to increase the flexibility available to players and encourage them to take part in more aspects of the game.
To use just one example, some players like to participate in both raids and Arenas, which is awesome behavior that we want to promote.
But, there are some talents which are more useful in one part of the game than another. Currently, players have to pay respec costs and go through the process of setting up the desired talent spec and action bars whenever they switch.
The new system makes this a much more logical process, saving on time and cost and allowing players to easily move from one aspect of the game to another.”
1 Like
So here’s the thing:
I don’t inherently hate dual spec as a feature.
I just don’t like the notion of it’s inclusion in an environment where it isn’t supposed to, or at the least intentionally wasn’t supposed to, exist.
Have other things that didn’t exist also been added? Yes.
Does that mean I want more things that didn’t exist added? No.
I will happily use dual spec in WOTLK, but you’re misunderstanding the enjoyment that I get out of these classic servers to begin with if you keep diverting the conversation towards dual specs merits or benefits.
For me, the point is to relive (as close as can be accomplished) the experience to the best that Blizzard is able to given the circumstances.
Dual specs exclusion was an intentional one we know that for a fact, and so it’s inclusion presents a problem: it provides a direct contradiction to the intended gameplay experience of TBC and as someone who wants the experience to be as close as possible, I am against any change that will hurt that metric.
This doesn’t mean I don’t understand why some changes were made…I can get the logic got same faction queues, Pally seal equalization, and even if it’s just greed, the boost.
I cannot see the same for dual spec because it’s is an actual gameplay altering feature that, imo, affects gameplay much more than any of the other things listed. There’s no good provable metric that it will create $$$ for Blizzard, and no reason why it’s Blizzards priority to make PvP more accessible in specifically TBCC to people who refuse to pay the gold cost.
The other things affect the game for sure, in their own unique ways, and that’s why I’m against them, but none so much as dual spec affect the actual day to day TBC experience as dual spec will.
6 Likes
And now GC word matter?
When AFTER that he is on record later saying he thought dual spec hurt aspects of the game.
But that doesn’t fit your agenda right?
Could you please link whatever he said? I’ve searched for it and couldn’t find anything.
I’ve seen his post explaining why it wasn’t being added in tbc, and the post I copied and pasted, but nothing about him saying it was a bad change after the fact.
It matters because he clearly explains why dual spec was added in black and white. It was added to solve a problem that was introduced in tbc.
Tbc introduced arenas, a new pvp content.
Players have to pay 100 gold to swap back and forth to enjoy this new content.
They add dual spec in wotlk so players can swap easier and it encourages more participation in different parts of the game.
The current system discourages players from swapping specs and enjoying different parts of the game.
If the criteria to get a change in is based solely on other changes simply being made then that is the bar that your logic is setting as what gets dual specs in the game. You are not making a case for dual specs to go in by and of themselves (you cant which is why people are going down allchange alley for their argument). Ergo, anyone can then use the same criteria to lobby for their change even if you only want dual specs.
Thats allchanges whether you are cognizant of it or not.
“oh hey, hi Neth, yea the game is becoming increasingly casual friendly and content doesnt take the time it used to in terms of completion in this expansion and given that gold is no longer a hindrance to 99.999% of players we felt it was time to bring specialization in line with how soft the rest of the game was going. Its no longer about hard choices but instead, having lots of choices, hence the change”
Pro tip, WoW was always the casual friendly game, including vanilla.
http s://mobile.twitter.co m/ghostcrawler/status/393042570650996737
“@DaemonGildas I personally feel like dual spec eroded a lot of class identity in the interest of being more convenient to players.”
This is one example of how GC saw dual spec after it was added and stated that it had a clear drawback to being added.
I have seen more tweets from him about this but I don’t have time to dig through it at this time.
Seeing as tbc heavily favors the design intent of classes/specs mattering, while wotlk moved away from this and moved toward “bring the player not the class”.
Which assumes that all players feel that dual spec eroded class identity, or even cared about it in the first place.
What the players think doesn’t matter.
It’s what the developers think.
And GC thought has far more value than what you or I think.
And he thought it had some negative impacts.
LOL seriously? What the consumer thinks doesn’t matter?
LOL
And he also thought it had positive impacts.
Thanks for the link.
Given that you and I have already been back and forth several times and you have admitted that a pvp only dual spec system might work, I think you see why I think dual spec should be added.
My main concern is the pvp/pve issue. The current system discourages players from doing both pvp and pve. Pvp is always better when more people are playing and I think dual spec would encourage more people to try it out.
I’m fine with an instanced pvp only second spec as I agree on pvp being better with more participants. And it minimizes the negatives that dual spec could cause in tbcc.
And it’s focused on an actual issue. It’s a controlled change to try and target an actual issue, instead of just making a giant change that’s so generalized it doesn’t really fix anything.
1 Like
We’re not done yet.
Here’s even more quotes by Ghostcrawler after Dual spec’s addition that indicate they have slight regrets.
https://twitter.com/Ghostcrawler/status/329760054200909825
https://twitter.com/Ghostcrawler/status/329759928753471488
https://askghostcrawler.tumblr.com/post/160282428853/in-the-previous-expansion-wow-introduced-a
So yeah go ahead and use the announcement QnA as proof of dual spec being fully approved by all devs forever after the day it was added, but you’d be using a disingenuous source.
As Red said, this doesn’t necessarily mean that we have here proof in the pudding that dual spec is objectively bad for the game in the overall, but it means you cannot deny the existence of downsides, when devs themselves, even the one who added dual spec, have spoken on it.
3 Likes
Thanks, Ive noted this like 100 times in these threads. I just think its funny that the even more casual than vanilla TBC in an era where TBCC is super casual is somehow not casual enough for you.
1 Like
I am not using the announcement as proof that dual spec was approved by the devs.
I used it to try to convince some of you anti dual spec people that there was a problem in the game, the current no dual spec system discourages pvp participation. And dual spec was added to solve that problem.
Go look at pvp participation for tbc classic and tell me it’s in a good spot right now.
Honestly after reading all of ghost crawlers thoughts on the matter I don’t think he actually pvp’s that much so he wouldn’t even be affected by this problem.