No, you clearly didn’t listen to the answer.
They said that’s what they were considering as a possibility, not what would happen for certain.
1 Like
Oh you’re going with that route? What other possibility have they mentioned? Unless they gave us another option, it’s safe to assume they are going with the only one they mentioned.
1 Like
If there’s going to be as many people as I expect once this becomes a thing, prepare for the shards.
Take new Orcs and Trolls for example. Both will be fighting over boars for the very first quest. It’s going to be chaos.
I’d love it to be chaotic and such, but I’d also like to get past the first quest without spending hours trying to tag boars, although I REALLY hope it’s only in extremely populated beginning areas, and optimally for a limited time after things calm down.
1 Like
OP when he sees sharding in the starting zone on launch day.
6 Likes
They did have more than 15 people in the demo though. So there’s that.
Someone posted this video not long ago. While it could be down to GPU (+settings) or internet, when I saw it, it did raise some concern, that their server isn’t up for the task, if the video is anything to go by. Still, take it with a grain of salt though.
Well, the fact they called it a possibility would mean the exact opposite is also a possibility.
The fact they used qualifiers like “maybe” and “thinking about” when describing sharding as temporary or locked to certain zones means that it’s a possibility it isn’t temporary or locked to certain zones.
Edit: we don’t know for certain, is my point, and I don’t think it’s wise for anyone to be saying definitively one way or the other what will happen with sharding when not even Blizzard has said so definitively.
2 Likes
It’s not going to launch for a long time, the tech will improve in time for release.
1 Like
The exact opposite in terms of what? Not doing anything?
Oh I see what you’re suggesting here… No that’s not how they used possibility at all. They said they were looking at the possibility of sharding as a whole. As in, they might find a different system. They didn’t say we are looking at sharding with the possibility of it being limited. They said it IS 100% going to be limited if they plan on using it.
1 Like
The exact opposite of having sharding, i.e. not having it, or the exact opposite of it being temporary and/or locked to certain zones, i.e. being permanent and/or in every zone.
Right, exactly.
So why are you saying with such certainty that sharding will temporary and/or limited to certain zones, let alone in Classic at all.
I’ve not seen that clarification anywhere. Do you have a source on them saying this?
1 Like
Not having anything at all? Not a possibility. The very first thing they said about classic WoW was that they were not replicating the launch experience and have repeated this over and over again.
Not having sharding and having a completely different system? Sure, they could. Is it likely considering they didn’t mention it before? Nope.
Nope wrong again. They 100% did not say the limited part was a possibility. They said it will be 100% temporary. I think you need to rewatch some videos bud.
Are you really this dense?
What other system did they mention? Any at all, I will wait here. This leaves us with the only thing we know blizzard is 100% considering and that’s sharding.
Okay now lets look at sharding because that’s all we have to look at. What did they say about it? Oh, lookie here they said it WILL be temporary. So how do I know it will be temporary? Do I really need to explain this anymore than I have to?
Lol JFC don’t speak about anything classic related if you are really this far behind.
Watch till the end.
I can link you even more sources if you really need it but come on man… this is common knowledge at this point.
Also, just to really make sure we are clear here. Read the title of this thread. The options this guy is talking about is sharding and server crashing. So even if blizzard wasn’t planning on using sharding at all and using a different system, it still wouldn’t matter in the context of this thread.
We are talking about sharding or server crashing. Stay in the context.
3 Likes
Just saying. Server crashes are a non issue, when pservers are launching 15K+ without crashing.
Sharding is QoL, nothing to do with servers. Unless, Blizzard is using crappy cloud servers…
3 Likes
No private server in history had that much players and didn’t crash. I’ve played every single one you can think of at launch and they have all crashed.
Also, it’s probably just safest to not compare private servers to almost anything related to blizzard. They are not the same thing even remotely.
3 Likes
Sharding is just not compatible with classic WoW. That kind of tech isolates people, instances the world and thats just lame.
I’m against sharding at any point. I wish Blizzard would just grow a pair and remove sharding completely. Too many people in the same area? group up and the problem is solved.
3 Likes
Perhaps. I think I do remember a crash or two now that you mention it. They were tiny though. Wait 20-30 seconds and log back on. Small enough I barely remember, inconsequential enough to hardly notice.
Which is why crashing shouldn’t be an issue. Billion dollar biz compared to small private biz. I’ll stick to comparing the two, it fits. If a pserver can provide a smooth enough launch with that high of a pop, then blizzard should be able to as well…
The potential for 900 players in the Valley of Trials at one time on launch day isn’t compatible with Classic WoW either. That’s a pirate server sort of experience, and grouping up won’t solve that problem.
Sharding doesn’t inherently mean it’s going to be through the whole game or that you’re only going to see a small handful of people at a time.
1 Like
This is where a lot of the fun of private servers comes in, seeing hundreds of players in 1 area is just really fun, sure its annoying but its also fun and I’m kinda sad Blizzard doesn’t want to do that…
2 Likes
IMO its actually fun to have tons of people at launch day. It might lag and sometimes crash but it is part of the fun.
That said, remember that classic has 6 starting zones. If Blizzard gets the number of servers right, its going to be ok. I’m afraid that, with sharding, you are going to see way less people that you COULD be seeing without any issues.
2 Likes
Most of the time, but nost for example was out for like 6 hours at one point.
Yeah except they are not the same at all lol. Here I’ll give you an example about things that I can actually mention as for hardware/software I honestly am not sure about.
Private servers have been proven to and frequently lie about their population numbers. For example, they can load up fake ‘players’ onto their servers in mass to boost up their population numbers. They did this all the time, especially when stress testing. Also, a lot of the biggest launches on some private servers included having your characters data transfered over from a previous server.
So let’s just say that there was a private server that had 10k at launch, well half of those players could realistically already be 60 spread out across the world. Or even just a lower level in a different area. It’s nothing like having every single person in one single spot.
Also, with how most private server launches they do a lot of really in-authentic strategies in order to spread out the load. They start off with q times which is fine but then they have CRAZY low respawn rates. So you the populations spread RAPIDLY because gathering quests are basically done when you pick them and up and kill quests you don’t need to leave your one spot.
There is so much more I can get into but it’s just safer to say… I wouldn’t compare them at all.
You most likely won’t see people moved to a different shard until the cap Blizzard sets per server zone is met, so I don’t really see the issue other than #nosharding. But there’s going to be sharding at the low levels so we should get used to the idea.
How is it not a possibility? It’s an even easier (and in many opinions, better) possibility.
Yeah, and massive lag or disconnects caused by millions of people in the starting zones wasn’t part of the launch experience in vanilla, so not implementing sharding wouldn’t be replicating the launch experience.
I won’t purport to know what they meant, and they were probably deliberately vague for this exact reason, but I think it’s safe to say they meant the bugs present at launch, or falling through the floor every couple steps, and what-not when referring to “the launch experience.”
You haven’t known Blizzard very long, it seems.
I’m just going to bundle these all up because they’re all basically the same point.
1:24 - “That is where we are looking at using sharding in a very limited way.”
1:52 - “That said, the first few weeks when everybody is packed into Valley of Trials – everybody is packed into Elwynn – we think we can using sharding there in a limited, time limited way to solve the initial launch data load problems, while making sure that, in the long run as server communities solidify, there’s a healthy population in a single world for everyone to live in.”
Never in that statement did he actually clarify that if sharding is in Classic, it will be limited. He said they are looking into that as a possibility.
First statement is especially unclear. Are they looking at using sharding in a very limited way, or are they looking at sharding in a very limited way? You could also ask “Are they looking in a very limited way at sharding?” but I think that is not what he meant given the context.
In the second statement, he mentions the starting zone for Orcs and Trolls, but mentions the very large Elwynn Forest for Humans. It is unclear exactly what zones sharding would be limited to. Would it extend to all of Durotar? Barrens? What about the initial weeks inside Stormwind and Orgrimmar?
His second statement does focus on, and even directly specifies, “initial launch data load problems,” lending credence to the notion that sharding is only being looked at initially. However, he never explicitly stated that sharding will implemented at all, nor did he clarify it would only be in those zones and/or for a limited time.
As I said, all we know is that they are thinking about it, and the way he phrased his sentences is unclear.
Are you really incapable of making arguments without insulting people?
I don’t care about any other system. I want NO CHANGES. That means no sharding. If there was no other system than sharding, then I want NO SYSTEM.
I looked at it plenty in retail. I don’t like it, and I don’t want it in Classic, at all.
If you’d like to, because the video you linked me is exactly what I was talking about when I was saying that they’re thinking about it, and not saying definitively one way or the other.
You linked evidence supporting MY side of the argument, not your own.
Yep, which is why I was referencing it.
I would take the server crashing, honestly. Sharding is a deal breaker for me.
I mentioned in other threads that if it’s limited to the starting zones like Northshire, Valley of Trials, etc, and removed after the first couple days, maybe I could tolerate it.
I’d still prefer the servers crashing over sharding, though. That’s how unappealing of a system it is to me.
Maybe to people who don’t want vanilla sharding sounds great, but to people who want vanilla, sharding shouldn’t even be a possibility Blizzard is considering.
This is especially true for Blizzard, which likely has far better servers and protection for said servers than any private server would have. With a server cap of 2,000 like it was in vanilla, too? Not a problem at all.
It’s not as easy as saying “sharding or server crashes,” really, because no sharding doesn’t necessarily mean server crashes.
Funny enough, in an attempt to prove me wrong somehow, Nicho actually showed us Blizzard saying the same thing.
1:29 - “We understand – and I understand – completely that sharding is antithetical to the concept of a cohesive Classic community where you are competing over limited resources.”
Yet they’re considering it anyway. And people wonder why I don’t trust Blizzard.
Yes, it is, because that exact same potential existed in vanilla.
Obviously the people discovering the game and starting up on it was spread out far more than the population would be in Classic, but that didn’t make it impossible for it to happen.
If anything, the advancements in infrastructure and hardware Blizzard has made over the years (not to mention the game client itself) should greatly diminish the negative effects of a cluster of people like that.
If your concern is competition for mobs or resources… that is entirely part of vanilla.
Agreed. Obviously less lag and crashes would be optimal, but not at the cost of a really densely populated player base.
Something I miss in WoW these days is feeling like I’m playing a MASSIVELY multiplayer game.
Nostalrius had a much higher population cap than existed in vanilla, yet their servers were relatively stable compared to other private servers. If Classic is done correctly, with 2,000 player caps like they were in vanilla, that shouldn’t be a problem for BLIZZARD, which has infinitely more resources available to them than any private server could hope to have.
I think you meant crazy high respawn rates? If they were crazy low, you’d need to move around quite a lot if you ever intended to finish a kill quest.
Also, I can’t say for certain, but if that’s how the spawn rates were in vanilla, then it’s safe to say that’s how they should be in Classic, and the population spreading out will also happen there.
What do you mean “other than?” Sharding wasn’t in vanilla, so it shouldn’t be in Classic. Simple.
7 Likes