Remind me, what do you have to do to unlock Dragonriding at the beginning of TWW?
Sure, walking on the ground. Alternatively, we could stop pretending that blocking off Static Flight behind the campaign and exploration while permitting Dragonriding immediately makes any sense at all.
I donât think they are going to be willing to admit why⌠inconsistent design, poor quality games development⌠done in bad faith.
Similar to some of the participation in this discussion.
It does if you remove the knee jerk emotional response.
Hope this helps:
Deflection that just shows you, and others, donât want to discuss as much as cry about something.
Or we can stop pretending what makes sense to us makes sense to Blizzard and keep the knee-jerk emotional reactions down.
Even I agree it does not make sense from a customer standpoint, but at the same time, we donât know Blizzards reasoning and many of the complainers instantly slam Blizzard, and any that disagree with them, with labels like Ablest, so even if we agree with the premise it does not make sense to us, some of us are also able to look at it from different angels yet if we are not 100% in lock-step with the ones complaining we get blasted. I am one of those that if I am ever â100% in lockstep with youâ watch out for my foot up where the sun donât shine.
Oh, and as an aside, I am already planning on using the ground route for my first playthrough. so weather Both are locked behind pathfinder or only one is does not make much difference to me, as I am not going to be flying till I get pathfinder aanyway.
How is it deflection to point out that nothing has to be done to unlock Dragonriding, while you have to complete the campaign and exploration to unlock Static Flight?
Youâre mocking complaints about it, Iâm raising the point that Dragonriding has no gate or lock in place on it in TWW, and youâre⌠claiming that stating that fact is deflection? What?
Right. Say nothing, do nothing, accept it. Then get told âshouldâve said something soonerâ months later.
Nah. Thereâs a reason this is getting brought up, and thatâs because bringing the topic up and getting it discussed is how you increase the probability of bringing about a change.
It can be frustrating to have people come into these threads trying to drone out complaints/suggestions/commentary with âlol sux to be u quit or play suckerâ. Thereâs been plenty of that. None of this has been one-sided.
⌠what are you even trying to say with this? I canât tell if this is coming across as a veiled figurative threat or a self-jab?
Thatâs fine, but thatâs a choice youâre actively making. Thereâs a huge difference between actively choosing to stay on the ground and being forced to stay on the ground.
Iâm (also) not enjoying character cosmetics (cosmetics reserved for creating our characters) locked behind achievement walls, either i.e. red elf eyes & red draenei skin. Itâs a cheap way to force players to play their tired out content 
Did I ever say that? NO, that is what those that think feed back is calling Blizzard, and others, all kinds of negative thigns.
What people donât get is one can provide feedback witbout the emotions included in the posts.
In this case: âhey, one sky access mode is locked behind pathfinder, the other is not, can we get some reasoning as to why or make both the sameâ vs. âhey, locking one behind pathfinder but not the other is stupid and ablestâ.
Hey, They can choose to use DR if they so wish, might not be the best choice for them, but it is still a choice.
Let me shed some light, if I am 100% in lockstep with you, you are likely forcing me to be, either physically or by making me out to be some sore of inhuman monster if I am not. As such, watch out as I will be backstabbing/kicking your behind/etc the first chance I get.
Grats, you missed the point.
Every person responding to this or speaking to the topic isnât dumping crap on Blizzard. Some are, and some always do. Lumping legitimate complaints in with the (fairly regular for the forums) typical hate towards Blizzard is a convenient way of dismissing legitimate complaints.
⌠So what does that have to do with this discussion exactly?
Ableism simply refers to something discriminant in favor of people who are able-bodied. If I go to McDonaldâs, pull up and there isnât Handicap parking spot or wheelchair accessibility to the front door, that is Ableism. Doesnât mean McDonaldâs Hates Disabled People.
Means something wasnât designed with the differently-abled in mind, which tends to make things harder for people who already experience difficulty with every day ordinary tasks, such as finding a parking spot or getting through a front door.
This is something Iâve not really focused on yet during this discussion because I had hoped there would be some adults in the room who understand what it actually means to be differently-abled.
For example, if someone is claiming a disability, I am not going treat that person as if they are committing fraud. I am going to take them at their word and support them in their journey, because while I donât know what itâs like to try and play a video game with a physical impairment, I do know that there probably isnât a single person who chose to be differently abled.
I canât fault those people for recognizing something as âableism,â coming here to process some emotions about it. The disheartening thing to me is how through all 1700 pages of this discussion, no one ever addressed the fact we are talking about people who need support.
Instead, anyone against changing anything about this game (for whatever reason) focused on the hyperbolic responses and whether or not there was even a reason to complain.
Part of the reason quality games design isnât just some wish list item, why itâs actually paramount: we have a simple change here that has effects on two of the more minor sub systems from the game.
They share design overlap (both are flight travel from point A to B). Their current design offers a very small difference in the net results of any travel using either one, but the mechanics and action of flying with one of the systems may cause motion sickness.
This isnât to say that people with a disability, may have motion sickness. This is to say anyone, with a disability, illness, medical condition, or perfectly 100% healthy, may experience motion sickness as a side effect of using one of these features.
In these situations, even someone normally able bodied, becomes impaired and begins to experience discomfort from the activity. Continuing to focus on one group of people, continuing to focus on hyperbolic statements, and refusing to acknowledge something so simple as âmotion sickness can be a side effect from this activity, for anyone who does itâ makes 99% of the rhetoric regarding disability⌠pure trash.
I would like to continue to participate in meaningful, productive discussions without people continuing to get sidetracked with whatever perceived slights they are getting from this conversation. Most of you have zero experience in a formal setting, reviewing data objectively, or understanding complex situation while being viewed through the lens of nuance.
Itâs not anyoneâs shortcoming, just a difference in life experience for many. To which, most of you would benefit from some time reflecting on how you can contribute to a discussion in the future, rather than trying to score internet points or be âcorrectâ as an authority on a subject.
Lastly, my understanding is that nothing is off the table for Blizzard. They could 100% nuke PF and then this discussion has to shift to stay relevant.
And I donât want legitimate complaints dismissed. But is it too much to ask that people donât turn their hate for Blizzard on other players? D o we REALLY have to call anyone that just points out options âAblestâ?
So in this case, can it be argued that as long as Blizzard makes things ground friendly, even if it is not someone preferred choice, they are providing options for differently abled people, and those options increase once PF is done?
DR has tools to help those that are differently abled, not enough for some, but they have made at least some effort for our disabled comrades/fellow adventurers. Blizzard is indeed providing ways for our disabled fellow adventurers to complete the story and explore. Would it hurt any of the ones slamming Blizzard for locking steady flight behind pathfinder, and using the hyperbolic language, to back up a bit and instead be like âok, Blizzard has made steps in the right direction with it, but they have not done enough or here are a few more steps they could doâ
I mean one reason I am goin the ground route is because I donât trust Blizzard not to have put in obstacles that could force the skyriders to the ground in certain sections, and those obstacles would likely be the kind that the skyriders might be able to outrun/avoid but a differently abled person on a steady flying mount might have issues doing. I mean can you imagine some of the complaints from those using steady flight getting shot down as they were too slow to ether land or get out of the area?
I mean we all know that Blizzard has made everything ground friendly, and has locked steady behind pathfinder, but we donât know every obstacle that they have put in the path of either mode of completing, For all we know, they could have made the obstacles even out in a way that shows no diffeerance in speed one can complete pathfinder.
Iâm not going to pretend to speak for other people. Iâll just repeat what I said earlier; these arguments have not been one-sided.
Do I think calling somebody who legitimately wants to help or suggests alternative solutions ableist helps anything? Nah.
On the other hand, thereâs been plenty of âthatâs how itâs gonna be suck it upâ comments, as well as an unfortunate number of combative commenters who go from thread to thread on this topic spewing drivel towards people just asking for consideration on the subject because they have no stake in the discussion anyways.
Re:
And both of these things detract from the conversation, which is a lot of the issue. I am trying to say go ahead and speak up, but mind the vitriol and hyperbolae, as the side that does the least of either is likely to be the one that gets the focus of those on the fence and, possibly, any Blizzard employees that happen to read the forums.
Bogus! I much prefer slow precise flying. Dragonflight is only good for point a to point b fast flight. Iâve played wow since original release, my son and daughter too. We all prefer slow flying. We Represent The Base, along with millions more.
No, you each represent yourselves, or possibly your group, not the entire player base. By saying you represent the player base, you are saying those that disagree with you/those that prefer DR (for whate3ver reason) donât represent the player base.
In this case, I would support an argument of 'Blizzard is currently evaluating the game during the âpatch seasonâ we find ourselves in. A new version of the game is inbound, with additional changes and it might be too early to tell what the final outcome for this Pathfinder and dual flight system will be. If Blizzard somehow decides that pathfinder needs to remain a requirement for unlocking steadyflight in TWW zones, thatâs going to increase the difficulty level of approaching the content for people who already have a difficult time approaching the content with the intended flight mechanics, which -coincidentally- are the same people who might be using steady flight to avoid getting into combat they canât handle.
For the average player, unlocking any form of flight represents a graduation from the ground to the skies, and the six-axis freedom that comes with it. The game finally feels âunlockedâ and people finally get to move not only through the air, but at their absolute fastest speed (200% ground to 310% air, in the older content, prior to pathfinder).
It changes the scope of the game considerably, and in TBC you effectively adventured through a ground-based game until approx 67, then went and unlocked the ability to fly, increasing your access to areas and activities previously out of reach. Once 70, you unlocked the faster flight, finally feeling that last level of freedom.
For someone differently abled, flight can represent ânot dying repeatedly to walk through this areaâ which makes a significant impact on their ability to get something meaningful out of their play. Imagine, for a moment, having only one hand. You might have to bind everything to a mouse or a keyboard, moving in a way that makes it almost impossible to respond to combat with more than 1 thing at a time.
Steady flight might make the difference between you being able to get around mobs selectively and carefully, or spending all day running back to your corpse, which would feel ironically easy in comparison to moving around while alive.
I think the nature of having choices (more options for approach) is the key, and the beautiful aspect of wow. Choosing to take things slower, not use skyriding the first time through, perfectly acceptable choice to make for the individual.
I would not advocate forcing everyone to make that choice, nor would I defend game design that ultimately locks dragon riding behind pathfinder if it there are leveling zones in TWW designed around the use of flight.
If they lock both behind PF and there isnât anything that requires air access prior to level cap, I would be okey with that. But I think it would be better for everyone (more options tend to be better than less options, objectively speaking) if both were accessible at the start, soon as you began leveling.
Itâs consistent with the wish to have skyriding as a leveling system, and with the desire to help make things more accessible. Itâs also jarring (again, bad game design) to have skyriding AND steady flight available during the leveling experience up to TWW and the suddenly one goes away.
That is probably the biggest source of IRE and hyperbole about Ableism. If I were enjoying my game from the air with steady flight up to level 70 (with some level of disability) and suddenly the game is not only giving me Skyriding as the only option to continue in TWW zones, but then suddenly the leveling experience questing becomes hard mode, I might refund my TWW and unsub.
If my options are âcorpse runsâ or âbathroom runs,â I probably wonât continue playing a video game, regardless of the designers intent behind a feature like pathfinder. The name itself, is a little insulting to anyone who was around during the discussion about WOD flight.
I remember that was the first time I really felt disgusted with Blizzard, decided to stop Stanning for them. If they mess up, they are going to read about it.
I once asked if those that are disabled could get an option that would let DR more or less be a form of SF for them, keeping pathfinder as the unlock for steady flight for all players.
Maybe something like that needs to be looked into, if the focus is going to be on the disabled players. Give them what they need/want to play but keep things the same for everyone else.
How do you know? Just because you feel that way doesnât mean everyone feels that way. By the way, watch out, Grendel is sneaking up on you.
We noticed.
As you have said
The issue when it comes to video games and setting a thing of nerfing game play for a set group of people based on their ability in RL to play, IE a disability per say. Is that from there on out everything in the game ends up at some point getting nerfed because people will say, they have a physical or mental disability that prevents them from playing or doing something in the game at its set difficulty and reward, and that they deserve to also have that. So its mechanics or difficulty must be nerfed to fit their disability or else. Its a slippery slop to cave in on.
I am not against like things of LFR or that type of thing as a easy mode of game play, but when you say hey Mythic Raid needs to be nerfed so that my uncle Bob who has cerebral palsy can do it, so he can feel included or get the same rewards as everyone else. Then its wrong.