No we were given a Directive:
noun
an official or authoritative instruction.
We had no say in this. We weren’t compromised with we were given a directive.
4 Likes
English is obviously not your first language, have a nice day.
You just want to call it something it’s not.
2 Likes
I’m not calling it anything, I’m describing an action (verb). Take it from someone that speaks English natively.
Yea born in the US here and only know english so lets get that crap out of the way.
We were not compromised with. We were told this is how it’s going to be and we have no input. How is that anything remotely like a compromise? Blizzard issued the directive.
3 Likes
is a noun form of compromise
is the verb form. They’re not the same thing. It’s not subtle.
1 Like
I think that will kill the game at the same time. But that’s my opinion. I guess it’s their game and if they want to kill it they can. Seems kinda stupid to me, but hey I’m just a paying customer that will leave when flight is completely gone.
4 Likes
We were not compromised with. We were given a directive.
1 Like
Did you have anything you wanted to add to this discussion or did you just want to play semantics?
this was no compromise I mean what did the development team give up?
you do it the way Blizzard says or you don’t fly that’s not compromise its an ultimatum
3 Likes
You know what that’s called right? “Artificial extension of played time”
If people wanna do stuff fast, let them do it, there’s absolutely nothing wrong with that.
Now if the they created less content and locked flying behind Pathfinder to drag things out, that’s their problem, not a player problem.
Don’t make me laugh with this white knight crap for Blizzard, players will be engaged if the content is good, the speed that they consume it doesn’t matter, if player engagement falls by the simple fact that they have flying, that means, more often than not, that the content is bad and players just want to be done with it.
Oh it is, and will continue being.
2 Likes
I think I need to switch sides on my stance. I really don’t want to be associated with you people. Read a book, stay in school kids.
Pathfinder exist because Shareholders focus on a metric that tracks the amount of time you are inside an MMO.
It did not exist prior to WoD because subs supported ATVI’s stock valuation but now that they hide the numbers due to the extreme dip in subs after WoD analyst need another metric to focus on.
I am not sure what Ion has convinced himself of but the reality is pretty clear that WoW is treated like a mobile game by investors trying to value Blizzard stock price.
1 Like
Except it wasn’t a compromise really. It is very much “We decide when you get flying. We decide how long it takes. We decide. We Decide. We Decide.” (We being Blizzard of course).
The players have no choice but to go along with the terms.
It’s not the existence of Pathfinder that is an issue. As many have stated.
It’s the lack of Player Control in regards to when we are able to fly. It is 100% in Blizzards hands on when flying is unlocked.
That’s not really a Compromise.
Pathfinder Part 1, unlocks flying in Kul Tiras / Zandalar (or expansion equivalent). THAT would be 100% on the players on when they gain flying. With part 2 etc being required for new zones added after launch.
The majority who have issues with pathfinder would accept that. Because that would be a genuine Compromise. We experience the content as they intended (their stated goal), and we can Fly when we accomplish those goals. Instead what we got was an Ultimatum from them. “Do all this stuff. Then Wait. Until we decide that you deserve the reward.”
6 Likes
Nobody that enjoys flying sees this as a “compromise”. You’re the one that insists on calling pathfinder and the time gate something that it simply isn’t.
2 Likes
all the people defending Blizzard like to throw that word around and I have to ask what did the development team lose? they still got paid the same amount of money did the same kind of work they always do and still went home at the end of the day as usual.
people that enjoy riding their grounds mounts lost nothing Blizzard lost nothing in fact only the ones that enjoy flight were the ones having something taken away only to be told you do what we say or youll NEVER get it back
that’s not a compromise
2 Likes
Pretty sure he wasn’t saying it was a compromise, but rather that we the players have been compromised. Though frankly, I think he was using the wrong definition; I’d go with “cause to become vulnerable or function less effectively.” Because taking away flying has certainly caused us to function less effectively.
2 Likes
Compromise can be used as a Verb or a Noun.
The hull was compromised and the ship began taking on water.
We agreed to a mutual compromise in order to survive.
The problem was he was a bit brusque about how he presented himself.
So, our ability to unlock flying, under complete player control, was indeed compromised.
It was compromised by Blizzards supposed “compromise” of “we’ll return flying but you have to complete this achievement to do so.”
EDIT: English can indeed be messy.
The Refuse Dump had to Refuse more Refuse.
1 Like
I don’t think there was a single post he made that said “we’ve been compromised”. He kept saying “we’ve been compromised with” meaning Blizzard made a one sided compromise…which doesn’t exist.
If that’s not what he meant he was TERRIBLE at explaining his point.
One of his first posts said “we’ve been compromised (verb).”
And he’s right; we were compelled to accept a lower standard, which is the definition he was using. And our characters were weakened because of it, which is the definition I find more pertinent.
2 Likes