Honor system isn't defensible

except eloraell is right.
THEY made the decision to go pure 1.12. The community has debated and lots of people would have been much happier with something not 1.12 which trivializes a lot of stuff.
THEY made the decision to go with 1.12 AV.
THEY made the decision to use everything.
the only things they have listened to us on is rolling back loot trading.

1 Like

And spreading the content patches from 4 to 6, making it more like Vanilla.

I literally demolished your quote above with actual straight quotes from the president of the company. And you have the gall to spout that you are pointing out flaws in people’s arguments.

You quoted an article we’ve all read, where the guy who doesn’t want to make Classic said one thing, then they did nothing of the sort…

“Demolished” is not the description.

you didn’t demolish anything.
if they are listening to us, why aren’t they considering stuff like a 1.7 av or pre 1.11 threat? both are very popular among the community.

She claimed they did not solicit input from the community.

Perhaps “listening” does not trump their (Ion’s) own opinion of things?

I said they didn’t solicit input on Vanilla elements. I also said they did solicit input from non Vanilla elements. Point me to the post where they asked you if you want DHKs or AV1.12.

Strawman is made of straw.

and how often have they HONESTLY listened to that input?
loot trading. content release.
wow.

and yet they aren’t providing any reasons why they made those decisions. all it sounds like is “this is what were doing and tough crap”

So what you’re saying is that Blizzard is letting you waffle, and ignoring you. I can agree with that.

I never argued that to be what they are ultimately doing.

So we should just lay down and give up?

They did not listen to cries for classic for 10 years, and then they did.

and gave us the dumbest version of it possible.
the one that makes content pre aq easier then it already was, the version that includes the most retail like version of AV, and the one that makes threat a joke.
despite obvious preferences from the community otherwise.

1 Like

The difference is a united playerbase vs Blizzard.

You’re not only arguing against players who disagree with you, AND Blizzard’s stated plans, but people can’t even agree on a version of AV they want.

Clearly its an opinion based decision, not a united playerbase, so Blizzard is just making the decision themselves.

To be fair, while they did not specifically mention DHK’s or 1.12 AV, they DID mention certain dungeons and whether the player caps for those dungeons should be an earlier or a later player cap.

That sounds like asking for input on vanilla elements to me.

but the lack of follow through is the issue.
you can sit there and pretend to ask for input all you want, but it’s acting upon it that puts truth to the words.

I’ll admit they raised some “possible examples”. The problem with the examples is they were providing a “Vanilla” and “Non-Vanilla” option. UBRS was never a 5-man instance in Vanilla.

We never actually got them to ask that of us, only mention it in interviews, and AFAIK it will be the 1.12 dungeon which is 10-man.

So that example is again a “Vanilla or Non-Vanilla” decision, not a “Vanilla 1.1 or Vanilla 1.12” one.

  • Warlords of Draenor Patch 6.0.2 (2014-10-14): Now a separate instance, retuned for level 100 players, with heroic mode added. Encounters have been updated with recent storyline developments.
  • Cataclysm Patch 4.0.3a (2010-11-23): Upper Blackrock Spire is now a 5-man dungeon.
  • Wrath of the Lich King Patch 3.0.8 (2009-01-20): No longer requires the Seal of Ascension to enter.
  • WoW Patch 1.10.0 (2006-03-28): Capped at ten players.
  • WoW Patch 1.3.0 (2005-03-07):
    • Capped at fifteen players.
    • Some Blackrock Spire bosses will now properly display their true level, instead of being considered world bosses (who do not display level).

If they’d said “Do we make it 15 man or 10 man” I’d accept that, but they weren’t the options presented.

I never said they acted upon that input, only that they went through the charade of asking for that input.

I was trying to point out the truth to another poster that claimed Blizzard didn’t solicit input on vanilla elements.

1 Like

if it’s a charade is it really solicitation?

It may not be solicitation in good faith, but it IS solicitation.

I share yiur opinion that many, if not most, of their decisions have thus far been underwhelming, to say the least.

IMO, they have chosen the least “vanilla feeling” options in almost every case.

IMO, they have been practically bending over backwards to cater to the retail, convenience oriented mindset in almost every case.

2 Likes

Again, you’ll get no argument from me.

But as Fesz picked up on, I was simply quoting the president of the company who was clearly (in good faith or not) soliciting input on vanilla elements we prefer. Why do I believe it meant vanilla elements? The other part of the interview that was quoted, “the compass heading should be to try to re-create the original 2004, 2005 experience.”. Note that he did not state 1.12, or 2006.

The compass heading may have been ignored so far, but to say that we were not invited to give input and that we should just shut up at this point and take whatever comes is something that deserves all of the pushback it creates.