Reminder: Blizzard was explicitly against dual spec being in TBC

[Zipzo-atiesh]

How is that a lie? It’s demonstrated by it literally not being in the game.

So you’re saying they just forgot to add it? Not on their radar?

[Ziryus-doomhammer (Ziryus)]

@Kumasama-westfall

@Zipzo-atiesh

because Blizzard had the option to put it in the game, and chose not to.

You. Are. A. Liar.

Keep in mind she doesn’t understand it takes time to actually develop something and put it in.

[Zipzo-atiesh]

If you think it took till whatever partial way through TBC all the way until Ulduar for them to figure out how to develop a feature like dual spec, I’d like to say you have as little faith in Blizzard as I do which means we share something in common at least on that front.

[Ziryus-doomhammer (Ziryus)]

@Zipzo-atiesh

If you think it took till whatever partial way through TBC all the way until Ulduar for them to figure o ut how to develop a feature like dual spec, I’d like to say you have as little faith in Blizzard as I do.

I don’t know what their internal work load looked like in TBC, but we do they had decided to do it during TBC.

[Riger-arugal]

@Ziryus-doomhammer

it takes time to actually develop something and put it in.

And my suspicion is that you don’t understand why.

The coding is often the easy bit. But changing an integral power system like Talents is something you can expect to impact many areas of the game in unexpected ways - it is this integration and balancing that takes the time. The timing often relates to the deployment of other features the system hooks into as well.

[Fasc-atiesh]

@Zipzo-atiesh

Lmao, you couldn’t steel-man my argument in your wildest dreams. Go ahead and try? lol

@Zipzo-atiesh

bluetracker.gg/wow/topic/us-en/98646792-we-need-free-respecs-or-spec-swapping/

In case people don’t remember, this was a very important design facet that must be maintained for TBC authenticity.

Pally seals and FvF or whatever other changes they’ve done are not the same, and we have no evidence of a similarly passionate stance on those elements.

Not having dual spec was inherent and important to the TBC experience, more so than any of those, and thus it must be maintained as a central design tenet of the expansion. Just as inherent as the design of your talent trees. Some things are just immune to #somechanges. It’s like asking for talent buffs or new raids. It’s simply not in the cards.

The syllogism you put forth is as follows:

1. TBC Characters should reflect a deep investment and commitment
2. Dual-spec undermines character investment and commitment
3. Therefore dual-spec violates what TBC characters should be
4. TBCC characters should be treated like TBC characters
5. All other TBCC changes have no bearing on character investment
6. Therefore dual-spec is unlike all other TBCC changes
7. Therefore dual-spec violates what TBCC characters should be

Claims 1-2 are based on your Blizzard citation.
Claim 4 is based upon the pre-Classic release stated intention by Blizzard
Claim 5 is based upon your personal opinion.
Claims 3 and 6-7 are logical conclusions if 1-2 and 4-5 are sound and well supported.

Any singular unsupported claim renders the final claim unsupported as the chain of logic is broken.

Claim 4 is unsupported:

• You have supplied a singular quote from Ion about Classic being a “museum piece” that predates even the release of Classic Servers, let alone TBCC Servers. Within Classic’s timeframe alone, we saw a multitude of changes that deviated from “museum piece” and while people can agree with why the changes were implemented, it does not change the fact that “museum piece” was no longer accurate before we even hit Naxx.
• Blizzard has made and continues to make overt representations about how they preserve or change their own IP. Specifically, we sign a contract that informs us that the IP we access with our license can and will change without any notice at all. This is an explicit statement that nothing can actually constrain Blizzard other than Blizzard. This is why any “promise” that Blizzard makes is not actually a promise, else we could hold them accountable for that promise. This is also why any “intent” that Blizzard makes is not actually a firm commitment. Blizzard is simply allowed to change.

Claim 5 is unsupported:

• It is entirely personal opinion. Notably the inclusion of the word “passionate” as a qualifier belies your entirely subjective based stance to support this claim. Whether a position is held passionately or dispassionately bears no impact on the accuracy or truth of the matter asserted.
• Seals in particular were introduced on a faction basis in a deliberate manner, noted midway for the disparity in power, and refused to be changed late in TBC despite knowledge of this disparity. Despite this maintained position throughout TBC, faction seals were granted to both factions in TBCC in direct contradiction to Blizzard’s stated position throughout TBC.
• No evidence is given to even explore or rationalize how system changes like Arena, tuning changes like LW and Feral Energy, or luxury changes like Boosts and Store Mounts, are somehow different or not part of an “inherent” facet of TBC.
• No evidence is given to explore or define “inherency” beyond the quotations that support Claims 1-2, thereby eliminating any useful comparison at all.

Therefore, because Claims 4 and 5 are unsupported, your conclusion is unsupported, and the syllogism is an unsound fallacy that includes special pleading (treating deviations from TBC to TBCC as unlike) and non sequitur (no logical connection between past TBC and present TBCC to support your conclusion).

@Zipzo-atiesh

You’ve spent all your energy focusing on completely irrelevant points of detail that there is just no reality in which you’ve actually considered my points accurately.

I’ve already addressed all of these things prior to this post, but you took great issue with it.

@Ziryus-doomhammer

Careful sometimes they become enraged when it’s mentioned that blizzard explicitly threw out #nochanges for TBC Classic.

See above

[Zipzo-atiesh]

We also know they didn’t implement it until well after WOTLK launch.

You’re going to have to justify how a feature of such proposed metric importance was pushed aside for that long and development difficulties as the reason is a stretch that is beyond believability.

[Ziryus-doomhammer (Ziryus)]

@Zipzo-atiesh

We also know they didn’t implement it until well after WOTLK launch.

You’re going to have to justify how a feature of such metric importance was pushed aside for that long and development difficulties as the reason is a stretch that is beyond believa bility.

Because there were even more important features they were working on

You know like an expansion.

[Zipzo-atiesh]

How is dual spec any different than any of the other things they worked on by the time of WOTLK’s release? What makes it so special that it is the one that got pushed off?

[Kumasama-westfall]

No, it’s not just that, he is assuming that because it wasn’t in the game that Blizzard was intentionally sitting on it. There is no evidence of that.

There is absolutely no evidence at all that Blizzard tailored Dual Spec specifically for Wrath of the Lich King. And if it was, then why wasn’t it given to us on release at that? Instead, Dual Spec comes about 6 months later with Ulduar.

Keep in mind Zipzo also pulled a Twitter post from GC where he said he had “mixed feelings” and said that somehow confirms Dual Spec was bad.

And besides, Fasc has already brought to bear that it’s irrelevant anyway. We have Seal of the Martyr in TBC Classic. We have retail boosts! We have Changes.

[Ziryus-doomhammer (Ziryus)]

@Zipzo-atiesh

How is dual spec any different than any of the other things they worked on by the time of WOTLK’s relea se? What makes it so special that it is the one that got pushed off?

Compared to what? Releasing wrath with 1 less raid? I don’t think you have a good grasp of how prioritization works if you seem to think all things are equal.

But then that is at the basis of your slippery slope arguments as well isn’t it…

[Fasc-atiesh]

@Zipzo-atiesh

What makes it so special that it is the one that got pushed off?

Dual Spec is a minor luxury feature and pales in comparison to raiding/questing/class content.

Easy.

PS - Pour one out for the dance studio we never got…

[Filthy-mankrik]

I love when they play the hits. Do one about character boosting now

[Kumasama-westfall]

Not even slippery slopes at this point. It’s just all speculation. If we’re going to speculate, I’m going to speculate that Blizzard didn’t implement it in TBC because Chris Metzen’s evil twin from an alternate universe interfered with it.

Makes about as much sense as anything else, right?

[Petdetective-pagle]

WotLK features have no place in TBC Classic.

[Ziryus-doomhammer (Ziryus)]

@Kumasama-westfall

Not even slippery slopes at this point. It’s just all speculation. If we’re going to speculate, I’m going to speculate that Blizzard didn’t implement it in TBC because Chris Metzen’s evil twin from an alternate universe interfered with it.

Makes abo ut as much sense as anything else, right?

Maybe it was those wizard alien terrorists who did it.

[Fasc-atiesh]

@Kumasama-westfall

Makes about as much sense as anything else, right?

If we’re going to disregard logic, all becomes equal, as truth is indistinguishable from lies.

@Petdetective-pagle

WotLK features have no place in TBC Classic.

My Alliance Paladin having Seal of the Martyr is quite the pickle then eh?

[Kumasama-westfall]

Seal of the Martyr.

[Kumasama-westfall]

It was those Russian hackers!

They’re always interfering with everything!

[Jeddite-sulfuras]

5,000G – unlockable at Level 60.

I’ll buy two – one for each Druid. PVE-Bear go RAWR, PVP-NotTree never die.