So you’re making the argument that RDF has zero impact on the social aspects of Classic WoW expansions (or any future expansions)?
But boosting, botting, megaservers, and GDKPs don’t have an impact on the community of classic! 
12 Likes
Well said. Also if you check add-on sites the downloads for the lfg bulletin board is over 300k.
Back when blizzard killed the one lfg add-on that was created their reason was “incompatible with our social design for Classic”.
So with that I pose a question. Where is the data from the community that blizzard claims they gathered?
So instead of letting players play how they want (within terms of the eula) blizzard now is going to dictate how they think we should play.
What if I don’t give a flying fart about being social but instead just want to play the game?
5 Likes
No not at all, I’m saying it has a positive impact. RDF means more people running more dungeons, more social interactions. What makes staring at an addon until you find some random person putting a group together a ‘better’ social interaction?
3 Likes
Personally I find this to be irrelevant.
There is no rules that states they need to provide empirical data that the community is majority for/against a change.
Design choices aren’t always a democracy, sometimes in game development, devs simply have a vision and want to create it.
This is such an overused emotional appeal.
Sometimes players don’t know exactly how to get what they want, because they aren’t game developers.
Total absolute freedom to do whatever you want is not a game, that’s a boring sandbox. The whole point of a game is to achieve what you can within the constraints given to you.
In this vision, the devs seem to want one of those constraints to be lacking what RDF provided.
4 Likes
It’s not irrelevant. Blizzard stated majority of community wanted this change. Are they saying they polled everyone? Streamers? Or just because they think they know what’s best?
4 Likes
No they didn’t.
If they did and I missed it, please provide a citation.
They’ve simply said they know it’s contentious but there are enough cheering it on that they’re confident they made the right choice and are unlikely to reverse course.
LFD can be not added on day1 of wotlk release but must not completely get removed.
if you don’t like the game it was? don’t even play it.
1 Like
You forgot to mention the part where some ‘logical fallacies’ don’t actually invalidate an argument and the argument still may be valid in spite of the ‘logical fallacy’.
You’re also being overly pragmatic and technical, which in itself can be a fallacy as it aims to follow the rules, rather than fully appreciating the complexities of human communication. However, in this case the rules are entirely governed over by you, and not universally agreed upon.
2 Likes
The real reason the if-you-don’t-like-it-don’t-use-it argument fails is because humans will always drift towards the path of least resistance even if it’s not good for them long-term, or for the system in which they are placed.
Asmongold once made a similar point by saying, if a rat tail could be vendored for a million gold, everyone would be vendoring, even though any individual could easily recognize it wasn’t a good system. Likewise, from the perspective of the against-LFD crowd, they think it’s a bad system. Probably they would even end up using out of convenience.
(For full disclosure, I myself am somewhat ambivalent on this issue–overall I think LFD is not good, but on the other hand I realize it’s a necessary evil for low pop servers. So I kind of hold my nose and say yes to LFD)
2 Likes
Zipzo is the new lemonfront don’t @ me
1 Like
It indicates a lack of common sense and decency.
The problem in the case of LFD is that for a lot of people it’s not so much that it’s the path of least resistance, it’s just a much much better or possibly only option.
4 Likes
This is a prime example of why “what the community wants - blizz is out of touch” consensus mongering is stupid on its face and deserves no respect whatsoever.
What constrains people from buying max level toons in full tier epics is the fact that its not on the cash shop - not some goodwill enlightenment and love of the game and all thats good. If Blizz put those up for sale tonight they would be millions richer by the time the office opened in the morning.
Apparently this community buys gold from farmers in quantities that account bans dont deter the gold sellers - why would I ever take my cues from them?
7 Likes
No LFD = no one gets to use it
LFD added = people get to use it or not use it as they choose.
You’re forcing everyone to play the game your way instead of giving them the option. Changing the game and ruining the authenticity that mattered to you so much in TBCC in the process.
10 Likes
Ironically by those who are now using a #nochanges like argument. There’s a clear irony here.
I would argue that there is room to advocate no change in a specific area without advocating a blanket #nochanges position though.
My preference is for there to be no change from the original where there seems to be a clear design intent from the original developers supporting the feature. I think that holds in this case.
I’m open to compromise though - such as an LFD without xrealm. I suspect that people who feel more passionately about it probably don’t want a compromise though, and that’s fair enough too.
Not only that but they would be forced to, if they wished to continue to do dungeons, because the average player will choose short term gain over long term stability hands down. If it existed, the majority would use it because it is more efficient.
That said, elements of RDF are good. The matching system most importantly, allowing people to avoid having to deal with the LFG channel, is a big improvement for people who just want to play instead of having to work their way around discussions about Donald Trump and European adventurism etc. (Avoiding the actual descriptions because bad words).
So even if it came in completely as it was, with cross-server, instant teleport group matching, people would gravitate to it and dry up the other options, because it exists.
In the same way that people complain about faction imbalance and megaservers, then transfer to an imbalanced megaserver because they ran out of options as network effects drove the rest of the playerbase to them too… yes. That’s precisely what will happen.
4 Likes
There’s nothing ironic about it, most of us were pro-no changes from the start. Then we copped arena mmr changes, battlegroup changes, phase pacing changes, content nerf changes, horde v horde battlegrounds changes, etc etc. I only started pushing for dual spec about 10 terrible changes deep into the game (beyond what was in at launch). At that point I was like well f it, it’s open season on changes, so why not?
The people using “authenticity” as a reason not to add dual spec to TBC now suddenly don’t care about “authenticity” in Wrath. 
I agree though, the debate on changes is now fought issue to issue, but seems like the tide might be turning on this one, given Brian said he was “surprised by the backlash”.
You’re grasping really hard. You actually just don’t have to use it.
2 Likes
to bad. If you don’t want to use it, don’t use it. No need for you to TRY to explain that. its pretty simple. DON’T USE IT.
either way, stop trying to force those of us that want to use it to not be able to. Stop trying to make us play the game you want to. When YOU have a choice.
i don’t care what you say, it is as simple as it sounds. if you don’t want to use it then don’t. fallacy all you want.
3 Likes