Yep, and if they support it, then they are fine. Otherwise others will ^.6 (That preservation is being called WoW classic btw.)
The World of Warcraft is still in existence in modern day. We could play legal jargon back and forth all day. But when you get down to the nuts and bolts, World of Warcraft is the game. And what comes after it are the expansions. The base game, as it will always be referred to is what people buy WITH the expansions(DLC, in this case).
If some pserver owner wants to take Blizz to court, theyâll lose. Even if theyâre right, Blizz can bully them out. Thatâs the issue with MMOs and expansions with those sorts of things. Unless the actual name of the game has changed, and itâs unrecognizable from the original, itâs not going to decay.
Classic MAY be something Blizz is doing to avoid the attempts of people going after them for pservers, and getting definitive rights to C&D them without having a fuss. But itâs irrelevant.
Still didnât pay for Classic. No matter how many times you try to say you did, you didnât. Classic is a new game. That has no purchasing fee, and is tied to an existing subscription to World of Warcraft.
^Also, this guy. Saving my kiester a bit more.
1 Like
This is why you are pretty much guaranteed a TBC and WOTLK in the future; however cataclysm and wod would probably flop so I bet they will let those go eventually.
Different titles. Separate Box costs, and way different games. They really canât charge people for Classic when they already paid for Vanilla, which is a preservation and support of that IP.
Iâm not sure on the sourcing for claims that itâs going to try to place guilds and friends on the same layer.
But my guess is that upon login it would:
- Check what guild youâre in
- Poll the system to see which layer has the most members of your guild in it.
- Check you friends list and poll the system to see which layer has the most friends in it.
- Attempt to place you in the layer with the most friends/guildies in it.
Same title. All of the expansions are still âWorld of Warcraft: (insert DLC here)â And the cost of the DLC doesnât have any effect.
They could charge people for Classic. And thereâs already been a fair few voicing their opinion that they would. As well as during the earlier campaigns for trying to get them to remake it anyway, people said theyâd pay.
So you didnât pay. No oneâs paying for Classic. Theyâre paying for a World of Warcraft subscription. ![:slight_smile:](https://d38bqls1q93fod.cloudfront.net/en/wow/images/emoji/twitter/slight_smile.png?v=6" ":slight_smile:")
A variety of factors ensures that the likelihood of meeting a specific person more than once is fairly low. Leveling speed, zone preference, dungeons, and the time of day each player plays can prevent subsequent encounters.
However, the likelihood of meeting one of the many people youâve met before is extremely high in a world with a persistent population. If you meet someone at the same level in the Barrens, then youâre likely leveling at the same pace as them and have a good chance of meeting them later in Ashenvale if you maintain that pace.
There are many ways to form friendships in WoW. Grouping for quests and dungeons, pvping with randoms out in the world, and small encounters like getting buffed or being saved from a bad pull by a stranger. However, friendships are rarely formed from a single encounter, and layering ensures that the random encounters out in the world are far more unlikely.
This is ignoring the fact that non-layering, thus people locked behind queues, makes it more unlikely than layering. Thatâs the whole point I was getting at. At least with layering, you have a ton of people to meet and mingle with. In a locked server, a fair portion of that is held up by the players refusing to log out. Meaning a smaller pool to pull from even if we were talking about a single layer.
EDIT: Grammar above
1 Like
If they charged people for classic then they wouldnât be supporting WoW. You are using the term DLC very loosely, when your supposed DLC changes the game in such a dramatic fashion, and there is not an option to not play the DLC. There is no Option currently to play the game I paid for, the original World of Warcraft, unless I go to a pserver. Classic is supposed to be that option.
Itâs horrid game design. If Iâm working on the Trogg quests on the east side of Loch Modan while trying to form a quest to go fight the Ogres(on the north-east corner of the zone), and upon finding a group I have to either
- go back to Thelsamarâs inn to layer swap(west side of the zone)
or - Go back to Ironforge to swap layers
Iâm going to be pissed. THAT is very much NOT a classic experience, in fact, it is one heck of a dis-incentive for grouping. Which brings us back to âthat implementation is directly harmful to the communityâ and thus non-viable.
Donât see how this makes sense whatsoever. âIf they pay for the game, theyâre not supporting them!â
It is. With mild modernization. That would improve the early play of the game, and avoid a lot of issues during launch that would ripple through for much longer than layering.
Queues will be short lived for all but a few servers (donât roll on streamer servers). Also, queues only prevent you from logging in for a short time; eventually youâll get to play even on a full server.
I ran into the same people multiple times while leveling in vanilla. A non-layered world is a vanilla world. If youâre proposing that a megaserver is better for community than a server with a reasonably limited population, then Iâm going to have to strongly disagree. A community isnât improved by a sheer number of bodies, especially if the population is randomized between layers.
That one is solved by having an internal cooldown about 30 seconds to 2 minutes that prevents layer hopping immediately after dropping (pvp) combat. So GLHF with those guards(who should have kept you in combat anyhow).
Just long enough to be noticed, but not long enough for things to be excessively punishing for players trying to use it in a legitimate way.
I already paid the licence fee for WoW . . . They canât charge me again for the same license, so if Classic is their preservation and support for that the license of that IP (WoW) they canât charge me for it again, as I already paid for it. Which is why it isnât âFREEâ.
Iâm saying considering the likely population, and how queue CAN negatively affect community and economy for more than the duration of the actual queue times, that layering(megaservers) is better than the alternative. If we could be sure all the players would stay, Iâd be on âteam more serversâ. But we donât know yet. Layering is a multi-mitigation, and goes far deeper than just âsplitting a big server into multiple smaller communitiesâ.
Iâd rather everyone get to play and contribute to the server as a whole while itâs settling out, than to have 75%(based on numbers quoted between you and another poster) be generally unable to play for extended amounts of time.
Yes, the queued players will eventually get to play. But after how long? Did they walk away at first and now theyâre behind? How far behind were they from the queue? How far ahead are the people that manage to get in?
Everyone being on a more equal playing field levels out the endgame population, allowing more people to stabilize it. Otherwise, it becomes wildly skewed to the few that broke free from the pack, never logged off (Cause queues), and rushed to endgame to corner markets. This then breeds disdain toward them, disdain toward fellow levelers for âslowing them downâ, mob sniping, etc. There are a lot of harmful things about an âorganicâ launch that are longer lasting than the issues of layering.
The license fee for the ongoing game of World of Warcraft. Classic is a side game thatâs standalone from the current World of Warcraft that you paid for. The only link between the two is âBlizzard generously allowing you to play the side game while paying the sub for the current gameâ. It feels gross to say that, cause I sound like a shill. But thatâs the reality of it.
They could charge you for Classic like any other product. You paying for something you got in the past gives you no sway in the current. Itâs the same argument for all the Vanilla players that cried about deserving the beta. They paid for a game they played. Thatâs the end of where that goes.
Classic is free, cut and point. Itâs played by an already existing sub fee, and does not have a box cost. You really should be thanking them for not tacking on at least $20, which most would pay in a heartbeat anyway.
2 Likes
100% agreed, and honestly, I think most of these guys are making mountains out of anthills on this in regards to Blizzardâs intentions.
Blizzard has acknowledged some already demonstrated clearly undesired outcomes(STV Arena Chest).
Although I strongly suspect that Blizzardâs gameplan is for âlevel appropriate STVâ isnât supposed to be able to be exploited in that way.
Biggest bench marks theyâre looking for is players who
- Players who make it past level 10 (2010 â70% of all players quit before reaching level 10â)
- players who make is past level 20
- players who make it past level 30
As each benchmark is reached, the total number of players who reach it is going to drop off considerably. If I had to guess level 30 to 40 is probably the point where the odds of a person continuing to 60 moves into the high 90% percentile.
Which means their âtarget populationâ is likely to be ~2,500 players over level 30, plus some indeterminate mix of lower leveled players. Once that magic mix of players is reached, the realm is likely to start being locked down for new character creation, and possibly even start seeing the number of layers reduced as they start deliberately causing server queues rather than trying to avoid them.
Seriously, people are thinking Blizzard is going to actively allow things to spiral out of control until they end up with 6K+ players at level 60. I highly doubt that is playing unless they end up with 10+ Million people showing up to play in the first week.
Theyâre going to be trying to manage the realm populations, and probably far more aggressively than many want to believe. Blizzard just also has to hedge their bets, because while it isnât likely, it IS possible they could be hammered by 10+ Million players, in which case theyâre likely going to be scrambling to get the hardware they need.
Layering should be something that goes away on its own after the first few weeks. It is going to take a major distortion somewhere else in order for it to continue past that point, and likely to only present itself on a very small number of realms. (IE Something Awful intentionally trying to pack 9K people onto one realm, certain streamers, etc)
1 Like
Iâm pretty sure that line was never asserted by Blizzard. Theyâve always expressed concerns about launch and the tourists since Classic was first announced.
They also directly said, at the same time(well, okay, about a day later) that âthere should be only one Kazzak, one Azeregosâ and that sharding doesnât make sense for those encounters. IE âthere would be no sharding with that contentâ
Also: There was no âdetailed rollout planâ known at the time of those statements.
Months later, we get the 4 phase rollout plan, which subsequently becomes 6 phases. And then:
I seem to recall those two statements going hand-in-hand with each other. That theyâd decided to use something different from sharding, called it layering, and then made clear they intend for it to be completely gone before phase 2 happens. Phase 2 being when the World Raid Bosses are released, and when the pvp honor system starts.
Blizzard has been very consistent on this one, all things considered.
2 Likes
Keep in mind, the anti-sharding people are pretty much 100% the same people who are anti-layering as well, because the layer hopping problems are also present with sharding. Although Sharding is much worse, because there would have been even more shards than there are likely to be layers.
I donât think layering works the way you think it does, but enjoy your delusions while you can.
If 3,000 was their target, the 1K layer would likely have been merged into the 1.5K layer, meaning there would be a 2.5K layer and 3 layers of 3K each.
Of course, this is an over-simplification, as many of those players would be cycling through instances, which are âlayer agnosticâ for all intents and purposes. Presumably, upon leaving that instanced content, theyâd be subjected to load balancing and assignment to a layer that isnât overpopulated.
Most of the objections Iâve seen to layering come from ignorance and lack of comprehension about what it is doing, and how it works.
Mostly because people are lazy, and canât be bothered to track down information on the subject. Or the information theyâre finding is coming from the layering equivalent of a Alex Jones.
1 Like
You can argue by assertion all you want, but without facts itâs just your opinion, and you know what they compare opinions to. You are entitled to your opinion, sure, but when you state your opinion as a fact, you might want to back it up with some evidence, otherwise you are just arguing by assertion and appealing to yourself as an authority on the matter.
They donât? Welcome to login queues and reminder that free realm transfers off of the queued realm is available.
1 Like