People that want Steady Flight are not asking for Skyriding to be nerfed
5 Likes
This might be relevant in a brand new game that has never experienced any changes before, with all itâs splendor still waiting to be ruined.
Wow is 20 years old. The fact is weâve seen 2-3 stat squishes (hard to remember exact number) and a level squish, which both had the effect of completely nerfing characters, content, and forcing players to relevel previously max level characters up from level 30 again.
This state of affairs, combined with the de facto hard reset of a brand new game every 2 years on average, and there isnât anything to ânerfâ that is more important than what already gets fundamentally nerfed according to blizzardâs whims.
Making any changes to Pathfinder is not only outside the scope of ânerfsâ because flight isnât a power system, but itâs so inconsequential to change it, the benefit to anyone who would use it for accessibility, vastly outweighs any other justification one could have for⌠not changing it.
Itâs basically a non factor for you, but something potentially huge to a group of people. Buffing the play of someone with disability couldnât possibly be the change youâre making this much stink over.
6 Likes
Pathfinder never bothered me, not even when it 1st happen in WoD. It doesnât bother me its still in the game now. Its just another thing to do when I am doing stuff. I donât give a 
that its there and is a part of the game. Just do it and get it over with. I never have and I never will give a Players who whine about it all the time I find to be annoying.
You admitted you donât care. You admitted it doesnât bother you to have it. So⌠Why do you even post? If this feature gets changed/removed for the benefit of others⌠It doesnât hurt you.
If you are saying changing it hurts you , thatâs not in alignment with what you just said. Posting because you feel like you want the game be left alone, thatâs where I am posting from, this entire time. A game company should be capable of recognizing when their product doesnât need to be altered.
Arbitrary design choices affect this game every single patch cycle, one such choice is⌠to keep Pathfinder in the game. Another such choice was⌠to update dragonriding at all, reworking very minor aspects such as:
- name change
- glyhs breaking
- accessible at level 10
- removing requisite quests for it.
These were things that I could claim I valued from Dragonriding before. These things didnât bother me, just like Pathrinder doesnât bother you. But they changed, regardless, and now I have to deal with some aspects that donât function in a manner that is optimal (they were optimal before), while others are just broken/removed.
And then the additional mounts being able to use dragonriding wasnât really a change that needed to happen at the expense of anything else. Iâm 100% sure a studio can enable a mount in Wow to use a new flight mode without changing anything else about it OR requiring the sudden use of a new ability that never existed before.
Weâve run the gamut of âI donât like this, stop talking about itâ posts and now weâre finally finding common ground, why do you insist on ruining that?
5 Likes
Because Blizzard also needs to hear that there are players that donât mind pathfinder being in the game, that we actually donât feel its evil or bad. We just accept it as part of the game content to do. They need to hear from both sides, as with everything, Discussion or input is not just an echo chamber.
So, on one hand, you want them to preserve -this- feature. But you have no comments on⌠Dragonriding preservation? Itâs not important to hear about Dragonriding from players?
I am confused by your lack of concern of the equitability of anything in this game. It really seems like your posts are for the sake of spamming/derailing any productive discussion. No one here is even advocating for the blatant removal of Pathfinder.
They are instead⌠asking for better design parity between two flight systems⌠to open up an accessibility option for leveling through new content that is quite literally being designed⌠to increase the appeal for players experiencing pain points within current design.
In an expansion⌠designed around addressing pain points.
In an expansion⌠designed to be the content better suited for everyone.
This is why most of what youâve even posted starts from a position of bad-faith. Youâre not willing to consider the other in the discussion, but you want to be considered as the âotherâ yourself. And you want Blizzard to be considerate when you are the âother,â particularly.
And you want them to ignore anyone that might be helped by changing pathfinder? Do you understand the value of empathy and inclusion? Thatâs sort of the foundation of Wow 11.0âŚ
I have given tons of my input on this for the past 2 or 3 months since all this discussion has started, even in beta I gave my feelings on it.
Your input is appreciated⌠as is everyoneâs⌠even those who would like to see Steady Flight accessibility.
It would be beneficial for you to start from a position of good-faith, if you want anything remotely close to âequitable considerationâ in a discussion.
I havenât had beta access. But I have been playing Wow for long enough to write novels on how this cheese gets made. I completely understand anyoneâs frustration with game changes on their own.
I am positing, from a good faith position, Blizzard needs to develop a consistent, sound development process resulting in the sorts of quality games they used to produce.
Part of my objection to TWW is the fact it represents something other than compelling content, yet people are going to entertain it as though itâs the best version of wow yet.
Thereâs another thread talking about how the state of the prepatch isnât giving them confidence about the quality of the incoming expansion.
If Blizzard is continuing to develop game content according to past Cadence, we have every reason to stop buying their expansions and paying their subscription⌠because they arenât supporting consistent or fundamental design philosophies (obvious) and the changes we see on our end universally spell out âreorientationâ to whatever game they end up putting out.
Regardless of calendar year, patch number, or expansion name, theyâve never been something that weâve absolutely needed them to do. They have always been a thing Blizzard does because thereâs always a chance that players swipe a card and buy a box and resub without giving anything so much as a second thoughtâŚ
Daddy Blizzard Came Home With Food⌠We Hungry, is the mentality I see whenever Blizzard releases an expansion. And then one or more major features is DoA or so buggy they have to disable it.
Meanwhile, someone with one hand is trying to complete a quest and canât because terrain/mob placement isnât considerate of people with disabilities. If only there was a minor sub system that could be slightly tweaked to better assist those players.
You know, the players whoâs high point of any day might be just to get to complete a quest?
âDay 237 of Wow, Finally completed that quest that was kicking my butt for the last 236 days. New 12 button mouse is great, but this pathfinder change really helped me even begin to shape an approach to this game. Thanks Blizzard.â
I havenât read a single post in this thread but they should unlock all flying from the start and remove this garbage pathfinding timegate, let people play the game how they want and donât dictate how they should.
10 Likes
And thatâs what an argument from âgood-faithâ looks like, on its face!
You got my support.
2 Likes
Ok, might be time to break some of the arguments down:
- steady flight is locked behind pathfinder but skyriding is not: steady flight has always been loc locked behind something. For those of us going via ground it can be seen as a return to BC/Wrath/MoP/etc days.
- others can access the sky while I/we canât due to a disability: Are you seriously basing your happiness and desire to play on others? In a game like this, we run the gamut of abilities among the players, there will always be those that can do thongs you canât and things you can do that others canât.
- it does not make sense: on the suface, correct, but when you throw in facts like steady flight has always been locked behind something since inception and SR has never been, one can make the argument it makes sense based on history or the precedence made when both were first added.
Yes I think you finally have it. You donât represent the player base, you are just giving us your opinion.
I never seen it that way, that Steady Flight is âlockedâ. Yes you could say Steady Flight was âlockedâ behind reaching level 68 back in TBC and the max version behind reaching level 70 and a âGold Lockâ. But yes it can be called a âlockâ.
I never liked Pathfinder. Especially when only âpart 1â was available at Expansion launch and you had to wait 1 whole year for âpart 2â. I did not like the fact that in Dragonflight you get to Dragonfly right out of the gate and Steady Flying had to be locked. This all still feels like âspiteâ from Ion & co, despite me thinking they donât really care.
If they want to create a reward for finishing the Main Story⌠why not add a Mount? Why not add a Pet? Why not add a Transmog set? Or a Toy? It has to be a basic function like Steady Flying, because they know all to well that is a carrot that has as big of a draw as nothing else.
With Dynamic Flying being touted as the new base and a 5 seconds switch between that and Steady Flying, I feel like there is a big enough penalty that is supposed to make you choose one over the other as your main flying mode.
So why is it a thing, to lock one but not the other? I still wait for someone to give me a good enough reason why this is the case.
5 Likes
This is what we refer to as âinconsistent game design.â Itâs entirely possible to have one feature fulfill a set of design goals, while having another similar feature, that does not.
When they added dragonriding, it had the effect of updating flying dynamics to be exciting and engaging for the player. They did not, however, update their existing method of flight travel, nor did they remove it.
They left it untouched alongside a feature that only existsed in the latest expansion content. Within this context, it makes sense that Dragonriding is wholly different than the flight features weâve had since TBC.
At the time of DF, you werenât Dragonriding anywhere except Dragon Isles, once you reach level 60+. It required an extra game purchase (expansion) and it requried your level to be at the expansion level first, before you had access to it.
Meanwhile, everyone else has access to normal flight under all the previous rulesets, without much change. Theyâve adjusted the level requirements of flight training unlocks, combined flight trainings to streamline flight earlier in the game, but the net effect is that you had access to an accessibility feature⌠this entire time.
Dragonflight being the last expansion, giving everyone access to the sky via dragons, and then later adding steady flight through pathfinder, marks a significant moment for players during that time.
You were able to enjoy both forms of flight in the Dragon Isles, finally. This doesnât represent the same thing it did back in WoD, where the original design intent⌠for that specific content⌠was to approach it without flight⌠only to backtrack and give in to player demand.
Dragonflight was designed from the perspective of giving you flight right away, letting you fly significantly faster, adding activities into the game which support game play while dragonriding, AND (this is the big one) this design space necessarily required them to address Pathfinder/steady flight at some point.
There would have to be a series of changes to normal flight in order for it to remain⌠consistent in design⌠with this new expansion feature.
Fast forward to TWW, where the plan becomes âDragonriding will be the de facto unlock at level 10, Dragon Isles will be the new leveling experience from 10 to 70â and these design philosophies, on their own, create huge problems with consistency.
For the sake of integrity of game, consistency of design, and adherence to⌠design philosophy⌠Both steady flight and PF need to be addressed. How they address it, what they finally do, really depends on how interested they are in design philosophy adherence.
If they want flying to be the way people approach the world starting from level 10 (changing the game so much indicates they do) then it stands to reason Steady Flight should be accessible the exact same as Dragonriding (I know itâs skyriding, just makes it easier to know what Iâm talking about), so the features do a better job of occupying the same design space.
If for no other reason than to be⌠consistent for the players. If youâre going to create an entirely new game every 2 years, completely displacing old content and trashing design you spent resources on, you donât get to argue against making a change to something like pathfinder, because youâve already thrown away the integrity that comes from consistency.
There is no long term value to be had, if you donât have consistency.
5 Likes
And my point is, neither do you
2 Likes
You keep going on about consistency. What I was trying to get across is Blizzard has been consistent when looking at DR and steady flight in vacuums. Or, in this cae, in a desire to be consistent with ehat they have done before with certain aspects, they become inconsistent when those aspects donât mesh with current design.
In otherwords the devs donât use foresight, if they have it, to see potential issues when trying to intriduce new while keeping the old.
I do not see it as the same situation with DF. In fact they made a mistake delaying TBC normal flying so long and it was not even on the road map.
5 Likes
I understand you. I agree. They have been consistent, if we are looking at things within a vacuum and completely ignore the context of the changes being made.
Blizzard does not practice foresight or hindsight in game development. They practice âget this cash influx onto servers so we can scoop the best Q3/Q4 numbers possibleâ and whatever relationship that has to financial mobility for them.
But if we look at the game within the context of⌠everything being patched/updated/reworked every two years (sometimes completely reversing/contradicting prior design philosophies) then we should probably hold Blizzard accountable instead of letting them continue to squander our best interests.
6 Likes
I believe change and progression in how the game is played is good. I believe the game needs to have new things added to it. As with the past as things are removed, such as like automated macros, and mechanic such has let me toss this out there like for hunters in general like feeding your pet to keep it happy, was a good thing.
I do not think removing the ability to actually seeing story line, like some of the battle elements of the game through out its history, is smart as being removed.
But I do believe in evolving the game as time goes on fully by adding how we do things and yes if that means phasing out old things or systems so be it. I do not have the answers in how to correctly do this to make everyone happy. Because everything is always subjective to the individual player.
The change is good which is why PF must go.
PF is no longer suitable for the modern game and never was to be frank!
7 Likes