How will classic affect retail server population?

[Fixiu-dalaran (Fixiu)]

Fel Reaver in Hellfire that would somehow sneak up on people.

how in the heck did he do that. i always wondered. i mean he normally shakes the ground and trumpets loudly ever minute on the minute, yet he managed to sneak up on me. tricky devs are tricky.

[Nyl-sisters-of-elune]

You seem to be confused about what metagaming is. having to “adjust and go back” is metagaming. Requiring metagaming is not conducive to roleplay.

No, that’s not metagaming. Here, since this says it better than I can let me copy/paste for you:

Metagaming is a term used in role-playing games , which describes a player’s use of real-life knowledge concerning the state of the game to determine their character’s actions, when said character has no relevant knowledge or awareness under the circumstances.

Adjusting for an event that isn’t synchronous isn’t metagaming. That’s just out of game stuff. This happens all the time when larping or even playing tabletop rpg’s where a DM says, “hey, it seems like you think x, y, z…that’s not right…let me explain it a different way/draw it out/put minis on the board because you seem to want to do something that doesn’t make sense in context of what’s happening.”

The metagaming Debbie Downer commentary is about how you ruin the gameplay because of your inability to adjust to circumstances not being exactly what you want and thus you bring that in game and ruin the experience for everyone else. Like you clearly seem to do over completely trivial and stupid things like all the garbage you listed.

The original dev team did understand roleplaying better; things like not using story phasing were intentional.

Sure it was, they didn’t have the technology. LOL. So are you going to somehow argue that since they didn’t have technology from the future that they had a hand in ensuring got developed that they were subconsciously or unknowingly catering to RP’ers? LOL

Ultimately, though, I’m arguing only that Retail actually is much worse for roleplay than Vanilla was, not that the change was intentional.

Ultimately I don’t care what you’re goalpost shifting the argument to. My point has been the same the entire time. They didn’t cater vanilla to RP’ers any more than they cater retail to RP’ers. Which is to say neither of them catered anything to RP’ers. That’s the argument. If you want to pretend that it’s not now because you realize your initial claim is stupid, well, be my guest and bow out.

[Fixiu-dalaran (Fixiu)]

We all know

nooo, we don’t all know that. silly nyl person. by the way, is that pronounced nil or nile? what i’m observing is you dont think the rpg features from vanilla era wow were important enough to waste the coding/player’s time on, when that is precisely why we liked it – it wasted time in a meaningful way, kinda like real life does.

[Irisse-maelstrom]

Metagaming is a term used in role-playing games , which describes a player’s use of real-life knowledge concerning the state of the game to determine their character’s actions, when said character has no relevant knowledge or awareness under the circumstances.

Adjusting for an event that isn’t synchronous isn’t metagaming.

Actually, it is exactly metagaming, when the asynchrony is “real-life knowledge” “when said character has no relevant knowledge or awareness”. Maybe you should read your own definitions?

The original dev team did understand roleplaying better; things like not using story phasing were intentional.

Sure it was, they didn’t have the technology.

Plenty of games used story chapters back then. The technology to do it was there. All you have to do is have two versions of a zone, which they could do, and keep track of quest status, which they already did. They avoided it because they were using a roleplay friendly “shared world” paradigm, rather than a roleplay unfriendly “unshared story” paradigm.

Ultimately I don’t care what you’re goalpost shifting the argument to.

It’s not me that’s shifting the goalposts. It’s you, shifting from what the game did to what the devs were trying to do.

[Nyl-sisters-of-elune]

Maybe you should read your own definitions?

Comprehension isn’t your strong suit is it? It’s when you use out of game information that you do not have in-character to make in-character decisions. An easy example of this would be if you knew a particular creature was vulnerable to fire as a player but did not know that in-game, and you used that information to make decisions about which spell you were going to cast to ensure you did fire damage. That’s metagaming. Again, it’s when you use out of game information to make decisions for your character in game. And you call yourself an RP’er lol

Plenty of games used story chapters back then. The technology to do it was there. All you have to do is have two versions of a zone, which they could do, and keep track of quest status, which they already did. They avoided it because they were using a roleplay friendly “shared world” paradigm, rather than a roleplay unfriendly “unshared story” paradigm.

Citation required. Specifically citation stating they had the tech in wow and decided not to use it to cater to RP’ers and/or that they intentionally avoided the tech to be as roleplay friendly as possible. I won’t hold my breath.

It’s not me that’s shifting the goalposts. It’s you, shifting from what the game did to what the devs were trying to do.

Really? Do I need to go back and quote the initial post you responded to? Here, this is the post I made 3 hours ago that started this discourse between you and I:

The debate was, as explicitly stated, started because someone said people who like retail aren’t really people who like rpg’s and people who like vanilla/classic somehow magically are. Neither retail nor classic cater to the people who RP, people do it in spite of the game not catering to them in both of them. I’m not certain what’s complicated about that.

You can remove your foot from your mouth now.

[Kurddran-stormrage]

You’ll finally be able to appreciate the ambient cricket chirp sound effects on retail

[Fixiu-dalaran (Fixiu)]

Comprehension isn’t your strong suit is it?

nyl, nyl, nyl, please self control. make your point speak for itself.

[Irisse-maelstrom]

It’s not me that’s shifting the goalposts. It’s you, shifting from what the game did to what the devs were trying to do.

Really? Do I need to go back and quote the initial post you responded to? Here, this is the post I made 3 hours ago that started this discourse between you and I:

Nyl:

The debate was, as explicitly stated, started because someone said people who like retail aren’t really people who like rpg’s and people who like vanilla/classic somehow magically are. Neither retail nor classic cater to the people who RP, people do it in spite of the game not catering to them in both of them. I’m not certain what’s complicated about that.

You just proved my point. The debate started about the game, not the devs: “retail”, “classic”, and “vanilla”, not “them” or the devs. As I pointed out, Vanilla did cater to roleplay in ways that retail does not, irrespective of what the devs intended, then or now.

You’re the one who shifted to what the developers intended, rather than what the game actually did - as I said, “you, shifting from what the game did to what the devs were trying to do”.

You can either abjectly surrender now or pretend you fail to comprehend the difference. My bet is on the latter.

[Tygraszun-sargeras]

It will lower the active base for sure. Retail will still be popular though. Many who play retail like it, they probably will not like Classic since it is a very different game. I expect to see two very different communities form. That being said…if Blizzard does not fix BFA…that alone will be enough to keep shrinking the player base.

[Nyl-sisters-of-elune]

When you chastise Irisse for snark that’s being thrown my way I’ll consider caring in the slightest about you chastising me for throwing a little snark back. Until then you’re wasting your time.

You’re the one who shifted to what the developers intended, rather than what the game actually did.

Uh, what? Saying the game catered to a particular group of players (or didn’t, whatever works here) isn’t a statement that the game was unintentionally beneficial to one group of players. It’s a statement about how the game was designed. That means the point of the statement is about the developers AND how their designs were implemented in the game. Again, this is you trying to change the scope of the discussion, one you engaged me on in the statement right there.

And it’s even worse than that. Simultaneously trying to tell me that I’m goalpost shifting I can quote numerous examples where you explicitly called out developer intentions. Here:

They avoided it because they were using a roleplay friendly “shared world” paradigm, rather than a roleplay unfriendly “unshared story” paradigm.

That’s you quoted talking about developer intentions. Here’s another one where you tried to shift to developer intent:

The original dev team did understand roleplaying better; things like not using story phasing were intentional.

I mean I can go on and on here.

You can either abjectly surrender now or pretend you fail to comprehend the difference. My bet is on the latter.

Yep. Right back atcha!

[Laeric-wyrmrest-accord]

A couple points here.

1.) Blizzard themselves use the terms “Classic” and “Vanilla” interchangeably. So yes, Classic = Vanilla, Vanilla = Classic.

2.) Addons existed in Pre-TBC times as well. Some of them are even getting updated to run in Classic.

[Irisse-maelstrom]

Uh, what? Saying the game catered to a particular group of players (or didn’t, whatever works here) isn’t a statement that the game was unintentionally beneficial to one group of players.

It is a statement about whether the game is beneficial to one group of players, without making any statement about intentionality. You’re the one who is trying to bring in what’s intentional or not, when it’s irrelevant to the original statement.

That’s you quoted talking about developer intentions.

Some of Vanilla’s being better for roleplaying was intentional, some was not; that was me explaining which parts were which. It doesn’t change the fact that the original discussion was about what the game facilitated, not what the developers intended.

[Nyl-sisters-of-elune]

It is a statement about whether the game is beneficial to one group of players, without making any statement about intentionality. You’re the one who is trying to bring in what’s intentional or not, when it’s irrelevant to the original statement.

So now you’re going to try tell me what I intended when I wrote that so that you can argue that I didn’t know what I meant and therefore I’m shifting my own argument because I was unaware of my own position? Your mental gymnastics are amazing!

Some of Vanilla’s being better for roleplaying was intentional, some was not; that was me explaining which parts were which.

That’s you eating crow after telling me I’m goalpost shifting by talking about developer intentions right after you did it over and over and over again.

It doesn’t change the fact that the original discussion was about what the game facilitated, not what the developers intended.

Lol you’re so ridiculous.

[Krestin-aegwynn]

Hello all, I have been reading all this bickering. Classic isn’t killing anything. It will be bringing old subs back online making the WoW population expand. Look at my profile for gods sake, this is when I quit playing WoW, but I am ready to throw my wallet at Blizzard again to enjoy the game the way it was when I started. Some people like cheese pizza, some people like supreme. In the end Pizza is Pizza.

[Fixiu-dalaran (Fixiu)]

When you chastise Irisse for snark that’s being thrown my way

well to be fair, i did call you silly nyl but it was not an actual observation of your mental faculties, whereas you’ve repeatedly claimed irisse and i were variants of stupid, unrealistic, self absorbed, salty, snarky, tools, not sensible, our words being bull feces, worthy of your ridicule, incapable of understanding word definitions, insulting, ridiculous, a waste of forum posting, ludicrous, reaching, and condescending. lol

[Fixiu-dalaran (Fixiu)]

my point exactly. i dont think classic will kill retail since its all on the same sub, people will go back and forth. some will settle on the one they like best and hopefully the rest of the story is happily ever after

[Enrik-wyrmrest-accord (Enrik)]

You need an active WoW subscription to play Classic so it’s irrelevant.

Retail players will be paying customers, so Blizzard loses nothing at worst and only gains at best.

[Nyl-sisters-of-elune]

Ah so is this where you twist everything I say into a hyperbolized version so that you can somehow think your snark is better/more acceptable than my snark? Do you honestly think that being passive aggressive about your snark is somehow perfectly fine but being direct isn’t? What about being deceptive to try to make points like you just did repeatedly? Is that fine? Should you be above reproach? Unless you’re here and you can honestly say you’re not throwing barbs at all you’re not in a position to judge the way I write. And you can’t say that. If you think you can you’re being dishonest not only to us but to yourself.

[Nexius-emerald-dream (Nexius)]

Impossible to give an accurate prediction, but one thing is for sure - everybody is enjoying classic far more than BFA. You can see it in the streamers expressions for sure. Cdew even made a joke where he loaded up BFA and after 1 second of logging in he said that was enough, then turned classic back on.

Fact is, BFA is a horrible, boring, unrewarding snoozefest whereas Classic is far more rewarding, challenging, and enjoyable.

[Irisse-maelstrom]

It is a statement about whether the game is beneficial to one group of players, without making any statement about intentionality. You’re the one who is trying to bring in what’s intentional or not, when it’s irrelevant to the original statement.

So now you’re going to try tell me what I intended when I wrote that so that you can argue that I didn’t know what I meant and therefore I’m shifting my own argument because I was unaware of my own position?

I’m just pointing out what you actually wrote. Maybe you meant something else, but you can’t expect other people to magically divine what you mean when it doesn’t match what you actually wrote.