How did Blizzard handle the TBC and Wotlk launches without layering?

[Heidene-kelthuzad]

Your “detailed and constructive” view was so overloaded with hyperbole that it wasn’t worth addressing seriously, as is your assessment of my response.

You cannot distinguish between an inconvenience that adds flavour to the game, and an inconvenience that makes the game unplayable.

Well, whatever the case, somehow (aside from this part) my response did get you to discuss the issue at hand instead of being focused on disregarding my personal approach on how i bring my point across
Clearly we don’t see eye to eye on this, and that’s completely fine. I’m glad to see you decided to explain to me why you think the way you do, cause i’m really curious to see where people with your PoV are coming from.

I see sharding as something that was a good idea if uaed sparingly but was taken way too far in the current game.

Layering in the initial weeks until the playerbase spreads out a bit more seems like a good solution.

Initially, when i heard about sharding only being used in the starting areas and only for days, i was fine with that.
Yes, it deviated from the OG design for those first couple of days as massive amounts of people entered the starting areas, but since it was so very limited and shortly lived, that was a compromise i was willing to accept.
But, the starting zones expanded from starting areas (northshire valley) to zones like the Barrens, which was too much already, which is why it got rejected so hard.
And now we have the whole continents sharded for weeks if not months, with shards worth a whole realms population (as in, still massive competition in the starting zones), and we’ll also have queues regardless.

I understand if you still think this is an acceptable solution. I’m aware some players aren’t willing to put up with the old inconveniences, even if they’d be heavily reduced thanks to modern tech. That’s fine.
Personally, i disagree, and think it’s worth putting up with the downsides that might face Classic if the population really won’t be as big as Blizzard (imo pessimistically) predicts it to be, because the upsides of the game overshadow those massively as they have before.

It succeeded back then despite an epic fail launch, and even with a couple dead realms way down the road. Vanilla WoW remained to be one of the, if not the most beloved MMORPG up until this day.
That’s the game i’m betting on again, because i know it can succeed today just as well, if not more than back then since people yearn to have a real, oldschool MMORPG experience again, which has been absent for a long time now since i’d say mid WotlK.

[Sacromonk-barthilas]

a couple dead realms way down the road.

There are more than a couple. Without cross realm these realms would be unplayable, the bad sort of inconvenient.

I’m aware some players aren’t willing to put up with the old inconveniences, even if they’d be heavily reduced thanks to modern tech.

People put up with those inconveniences because we weren’t aware of any alternatives. You can’t wind back the clock on that.

And considering that these days every part of the wow community goes straight to 11 when there is anything they don’t like (especially the classic community) I can certainly see why blizzard aren’t willing to deal with it.

I mean just look at the sheer quantity of people who lost their collective minds when they couldn’t get on to the stress tests.

[Puremallace-arthas]

TBC was an absolute nightmare and WotLK had queues as high as 11,000 on some servers

[Elbardo-dalaran (Elbardo)]

badly, a lot of people complained during the BC launch.

[Wigglytüff-stormrage]

I mean, why would I wait an hour to play my MMO when fortnite will drop you into a new game near instantly?

Yes, why indeed.

What competition did WoW have for the multiplayer market back in 2007? Counterstrike? Halo? TF2? Certainly nothing as dominant has the various MOBAs, battle-royale, or even Hearthstone have been in recent years.

People want to pretend that gamers have undergone some fundamental change, but refuse to acknowledge that the gaming market has changed dramatically.

[Kaylar-silver-hand (Kaylar)]

Yet somehow 11 million players all logged in at once and were able to play in Wotlk

No, they didn’t log in all at once. Some of them did. Some waited in 2-4 hour ques. People would come up with ways to not get booted by the afk system so they could bypass the que time when they came home from work or woke up. Which meant the que kept being inflated by afk people. If layer had been a thing people would have been outraged that Blizzard had technology that would let them play but weren’t using it. Whatever the temporary downside, it would have been better than not being able to play on launch. It’s easy to say “Well I wouldn’t”. But the mentality we have prior to launch and the mentality we have after launch when we’re told we can’t play yet even though servers are open are 2 completely different birds. (Mind you, I’m sure there are some people who’s opinion wouldn’t change in either situation, I just don’t think it’d be the norm)

I think Classic will retain a healthy population and will be fun for those of us who continue to play after the first month. But I also think people grossly underestimate the size of the vapor population launch will have. Comparing it to any previously WoW release doesn’t really show much. Playing at the start of an xpac meant investing in the cost of buying a new game. Idk about you but I don’t drop $65 (xpack + sub fee) on something I’m not planning on playing or something I’m mildly curious about and might not play. The issue wasn’t a huge amount of temp players, it was overlapping playtime that normally doesn’t overlap (some people even took time off work for the first 2 days etc). A huge spike in temporary population wasn’t what needed to be addressed.

Checking out classic on the other hand is either free or the cost of seeing a movie… $12 a movie ticket for a 2 hour movie? Eh, I’ll take a chance it looks kinda ok. Maybe i’ll like it, maybe I won’t. Either way, me and my friends have something do tonight and to talk about when we go out for food afterwards. Classic, isn’t too difference. You have the people who KNOW they want classic. You have the people who missed vanilla and don’t mind spending $15 to at least see what it’s all about (many were wary of Pservers) and people with active subs who have zero financial commitment because it’s a side game that comes free with the game they already pay for. The second 2 types will decide they like it and that it’s worth the large investment of time, but not likely the bulk of them. Al lot, will play for a bit, maybe get there months worth (cause they paid for a month after all) and then head off with their memories and talk about it with their friends.

I do think the topic of Layering is valid, especially given the end result of Sharding, but we’re also seeing things from a test server where stuff is being tested to find issues. Some of the issues might not be fixable, some will be. I still think the temporary downsides are acceptable. As long as it’s temporary. But I also think comparing it to other day one releases of wow isn’t really that helpful. Especially since most disregard the fact that with every new release the devs used every new trick they had invented to try and solve the problems they had on previous releases. Phasing in LK was directly related to the problems they saw in BC. If they could go back in time, BC would have had phasing. Classic adds a different problem, so they came up with a solution that uses the technology they now have available. Forseeing a problem and using the best current technology they have available to solve that option is how they have handled every xpac. Maybe I don’t agree with every solution they have. But mostly I think they’re doing their best to create a temporary fix to a temporary problem.

Jeez, I wrote a book >.< What am I doing with my life…

TL;DR Previous releases had to solve the problem of a consistent playerbase that temporarily overlapped their playtime on release day. Classic it’s a problem of making room for a large vapor population while also making sure the solid population ends up with populated servers. The solution to 1 is not the solution to the other.

[Heidene-kelthuzad]

People put up with those inconveniences because we weren’t aware of any alternatives. You can’t wind back the clock on that.

And considering that these days every part of the wow community goes straight to 11 when there is anything they don’t like (especially the classic community) I can certainly see why blizzard aren’t willing to deal with it.

I mean just look at the sheer quantity of people who lost their collective minds when they couldn’t get on to the stress tests.

There is the question though: at what point is it worth it to use modern tech to relief players of inconveniences within the game?

For example, LFD was birthed out of the same mindset, as you could argue that spending so much time and effort on just finding people to play with in dungeons is not appropriate for WoW, when it has the capability due to it’s tech team to allow for easy, quick queues by bringing in a big pool of players from all over other realms.

Same thing for LFR, you could argue that players should always be able to raid and get to see the endgame content (cause they might otherwise miss out on a significant experience in the game), and they had the tech available to make that happen again, using the same approach.
The designers must’ve been excited, because using this tech sounded like a big win with the community who surely at first appreciated the new convenience and ease of access to the endgame.
Yet Ghostcrawler regretted that decision of allowing it in thinking it will help players, because of all the game changing aspects it brought afterwards, which needless to say the community reacted very negatively to.
Sharding, CRZ, again. Modern solutions that attempt to fix players pain points, but bring with them so many more consequences that affect the whole game for it. Given modern WoW’s health nowadays, it was not for the better of the actual game and therefore it’s community, but rather the opposite.

---

I agree with you that players really are gonna lose their mind again, be it over layering when it’s in the game, or over layering not being in the game at launch and beyond.
Things either way are going to get messy, and Blizzard can’t win either way, which sucks. Their devs are just people too, and they want to make players happy, trying to reduce any pain points they have as they are capable of, which is why they attempt to again use their modern tech by putting in layering.

But - is that really actually good for the overall game, and therefore it’s core audience that they’re counting on to stay? Is it not going to lead to the same issues they had before when resorting to these measures in order to please the players, at a time where first impressions matter so much as people already know exactly what they want in Classic? (Vanilla the game, basically)

I imagine it must be incredibly difficult for them to say “no” when they have what seems like a sound solution right now to them with layering.
They want to be the good guys who don’t leave their community hanging. I get it, 100%, and that’s why i appreciate their team so much.
But given the history we have to judge where this road goes, it looks like another well intentioned attempt that will lead to a whole lot of problems specific to this system yet similar to old versions of it. And they are going to be new to a game that’s never had these issues before, and will leave people wondering what game they actually received. What then?

[Sidearm-exodar (Sidearm)]

One thing that is different for this launch is that Blizzard has decided to use “mega-realms” for Classic. These are not like the “normal” realms of Vanilla or TBC, in that they have 2-4 times the initial capacity , and potentially corresponding mega-queues without some kind of scaling like layering/sharding/whatever to allow more people to play.

And they apparently seem against server mergers so, yea.

[Mogar-stormrage (Mogar)]

There is so much inaccuracy and straight up lies in this thread it’s really not worth reading.

[Sacromonk-barthilas]

There is the question though: at what point is it worth it to use modern tech to relief players of inconveniences within the game?

I’ll go back to the point I made earlier about good vs bad inconveniences.

For example, LFD was birthed out of the same mindset, as you could argue that spending so much time and effort on just finding people to play with in dungeons is not appropriate for WoW, when it has the capability due to it’s tech team to allow for easy, quick queues by bringing in a big pool of players from all over other realms.

As far as LFD goes I will always maintain that this was a good change. There is nothing about the experience of spending an hour or more in town trying to put together a run for Sunken Temple only for it to fall apart after the 3rd boss because one of the group members ran out of time while the group was forming. It adds no flavour to the game, only frustration amd a sense of wasted time, the feeling that you should have just stuck to questing. This isn’t something that could always be solved by being in a guild, since your guild may not have members at an appropriate level etc.

Same thing for LFR, you could argue that players should always be able to raid and get to see the endgame content (cause they might otherwise miss out on a significant experience in the game), and they had the tech available to make that happen again, using the same approach.

LFR is a different kettle of fish. It was inconvenient to have to find a guild and gear and progress together, but that sense of teamwork and accomplishment that came with it added flavour to your wow experience.

Modern solutions that attempt to fix players pain points, but bring with them so many more consequences that affect the whole game for it. Given modern WoW’s health nowadays, it was not for the better of the actual game and therefore it’s community, but rather the opposite.

I would agree with you if it weren’t possible to learn from the past, and I’m in no way convinced that blizzard aren’t capable of this.

We know the problems these things can cause now, so it is entirely possible to avoid these pitfalls in the future while aiming to fix the current problem.

Is it not going to lead to the same issues they had before when resorting to these measures in order to please the players, at a time where first impressions matter so much as people already know exactly what they want in Classic? (Vanilla the game, basically)

At this point it looks like blizzard are trying to give people exactly that, while avoiding some of the old problems that existed then in a way that doesn’t detract from the game experience as a whole and avoids the pitfalls of previous attempts to solve these problems.

But given the history we have to judge where this road goes, it looks like another well intentioned attempt that will lead to a whole lot of problems specific to this system yet similar to old versions of it. And they are going to be new to a game that’s never had these issues before, and will leave people wondering what game they actually received. What then?

Again you are making the assumption that the classic team learned nothing from the past, with no evidence to support this assumption.

[Gorwarth-khazgoroth (Gorwarth)]

Long time verteran here… before sharding xpacs with a terrible nightmware of stability issues and over crowding… if you were lucky enough to push ahead of the curve you generally had a decent enough leveling experience but if you were unlucky enough to be stuck in the middle of the pack you had a very bad time constantly waiting for NPCs / quest mobs / nodes to respawn.

If you cycle back through some old forum posts you will actually see people recommend chaining dungeons to level to avoid the world servers as they constantly crash and lag on launch.

[Sacromonk-barthilas]

I think I spent more time waiting for mobs to respawn in BC and wrath than I did anything else for the first week or so.

[Gnomerang-blackrock (Gnomerang)]

“If it ain’t broken don’t fix it”. I would even go to say that waiting in que time is part of gameplay. It slows down your game progression so u don’t speed through everything. Unlike modern WoW where u get lvled and geared in 1 week.

[Gorwarth-khazgoroth (Gorwarth)]

Exactly right and thats IF you got through the server queues.

[Irisse-maelstrom]

Is it overly simplistic to just ask for that again? The wide ranging, worldwide problems that layering is causing just does not seem worth the small benefit of less crowded starter zones for a day or two.

You’re looking at this like a player and a subscriber. You know, someone who, when they say, “I want Classic to be have the Vanilla experience”, actually means it.

Blizzard is looking at it like a game developer who thinks what you really want is retail, because they don’t actually understand what people liked about Vanilla that has been lost in Retail.

Me, layering was the straw that made me not want to roll on Vanilla. And unless they fix RP war mode balance on live, I won’t be there too much longer either.

[Starcherie-tichondrius]

I believe the game had around 5 or 6 million players when TBC launched, and around 11 million when Wotlk launched. Sharding and layering did not exist for the launch of either game.

To hear Blizzard talk now, layering is a neccesity. Yet somehow 11 million players all logged in at once and were able to play in Wotlk. I’m not saying it was a perfect experience, but people logged, dealt with some crowded zones for a little bit and then just played the game.

Is it overly simplistic to just ask for that again? The wide ranging, worldwide problems that layering is causing just does not seem worth the small benefit of less crowded starter zones for a day or two.

Blizzard handle’d it by introducing new classes or races to each faction.
BC each faction got a new race a new class added to that faction.
Wotlk gave people dks and made it so you had to have a 55 to even play one which new people had to level from 1 to there and 2 starting areas in wotlk content.

People were pretty much spread out, I didn’t get much lag or problems with tbc in hellfire like some people.
In wrath I had to compete against people farming herbs and or quests but the quests weren’t a problem to get completed.

[Studmuffyn-veknilash (Studmuffyn)]

There is so much inaccuracy and straight up lies in this thread it’s really not worth reading.

Yah, the other day when I was on my yacht with my wife Salma Hayek we were discussioning that very thing :O)

[Sacromonk-barthilas]

If it ain’t broken don’t fix it”. I would even go to say that waiting in que time is part of gameplay. It slows down your game progression so u don’t speed through everything.

So you want timegating then?

Because that’s what people would call it if blizzard did something like this in retail.

[Sacromonk-barthilas]

People were pretty much spread out, I didn’t get much lag or problems with tbc in hellfire like some people.

You must have been on a dead server.

I remember trying to log on the saturday morning after wrath launched. 2500+ queue. It was after lunch by the time I actually got to play. Then the world server crashed an hour later and I had to do it all over again.

[Sarrinda-tichondrius]

With this, all Timezones are getting Classic at once. However back then, TBC and WotLK were released one Timezone at a time… (I remember being able to level and enjoy a DK before many of my American friends, on the Zul’jin Server, and some even being able to do it before me.)