You have, many times. You just ignore those parts so you can pretend otherwise.
10 Likes
You can’t “prove” someone right or wrong at all on extremely subjective matters of preference, which is what this fight boils down to.
1 Like
0 of those examples are comparable to SV, in part because SV does NOT build its identity around that weakness. The public perception is built around SV as the melee huntet but it’s really really not. Its not Rexxar. Its not Legion MSV. Its a hybrid hunter who still has a major focus on ranged attacks, though those are not themed around a mainhand bow or gun.
Admittedly, the PvE doesnt have much of a place for that identity right now, so that just kind of translates (in the community) to a melee hunter who uses ranged attacks point blank.
He said nobody wants RSV back. This means by his wording not a single person wants it back. There are several.
6 Likes
Some things are subjective yes. But after a certain point, and within context, it goes beyond that.
Metroîd has time and again made statements and claims about how RSV wasn’t very popular, and how all hunter specs were the same. To the point where he actively speaks against other posters who are asking for RSV’s return, saying that they’re wrong and should just play MM instead, because it plays like the old RSV anyway. Because “it’s all the same anyway”.
And the thing here is, as far as popularity/representation goes, you do not need to dig very deep to find out that RSV was actually a very popular and a commonly played hunter spec while it existed. Note that we are talking about the playstyle that existed between WotLK - WoD. Not SV as the talent category it was during Vanilla/TBC.
There’s recorded data proving that RSV was indeed a popular playstyle, even at times where it wasn’t necessarily performing at the top.
As for it’s design and the gameplay, and his claim that it was/is the same as MM, he hasn’t gone into much detail about why he “thinks” that this is the case. Any time someone asks him to elaborate on said claims, he just ignores them or replies with “I don’t need to explain any further because I’m right”.
Some examples:
Taken from what he said in a video he uploaded fairly recently.
But the thing is that Survival for the most part has always been a melee-spec. It’s been like that since Vanilla.
In short, no, Survival for the most part hasn’t always been a melee-spec since Vanilla.
In Vanilla, it wasn’t a spec at all, but a talent category with talents that added to the actual Core of the class as a whole, a core designed to focus primarily on ranged combat. We did not have multiple defined playstyles(specs) back then. As for the times that followed, the class as a whole(including Survival) became less and less about the aspect of melee. The actual Core Specialization known as Survival(prior to Legion), was introduced in Cataclysm and actually had next to nothing to do with melee, again, even less as time went on.
Like, if you look at the old talent trees back from Classic, it’s literally aimed towards, you know, keeping yourself alive but also focusing on melee instead of ranged offensive abilities. Because for many many years, like, pretty much all the hunter specs were, well, they were almost pretty much the same. I mean sure, you have your similarities and you have your differences but I think that’s why the hunter was always pretty much the noob class because all three specs no matter which one you picked are…it’s like all the same playstyle.
Here, he’s just flat out wrong, objectively. Why? Again, the era of Vanilla/TBC is irrelevant to this discussion. As per what I explained above.
Now I know Survival has never really been the best, I think for the most part it’s been Marksman but…I don’t know.
Here, granted that he doesn’t outright say what he means with “best”, but one can only assume that in context, he’s talking about performance and capability.
And like above, this is not just a matter of opinion or a subjective view, it’s just objectively wrong.
So like, every time I get on the forums everyone’s complaining, wanting Survival to go back to being ranged when…I just don’t understand why they just won’t play Marksman which for the most part, it’s the same thing. And I know a lot of people will disagree with me but, it (Marksman) really is. Like…I’m sorry, I may not be playing at mythic Sire Denathrius’ levels of content or at 3000 arena rating but it’s the same f**ing playstyle. Like, you’re not using your traps as much when playing Marksman but…it was the same thing.
Here, it’s enough for anyone to just look at the gameplay loop and the design of individual abilities as they were while part of RSV, and then look at current MM, and you immediately realise how…well…how they are NOT the same. Not even close.
And contrary to popular opinion, this part is not about subjective views. Those are irrelevant here. What matters is the precedent and the criteria set for class and spec design by the devs and this game as a whole. If you want to determine what’s too similar or what’s different, this needs to be done with the above in mind.
Something Metroîd still hasn’t done.
I kind of like that Survival in a sense is like Unholy Death Knight, where you can do both ranged and melee, kinda like a hybrid. I mean, it has always really been like that, I’ve always appreciated that about it because you can basically pick your playstyle.
No, Survival hasn’t always been like a hybrid. At least not in the way he thinks.
And yes, you can ofc fight in melee range even as a ranged spec/class. But in context, that’s not what “hybrid” means.
…don’t complain that it’s(Survival) not ranged anymore. I mean like, look, you can literally just grab a bow and arrow and, you can actually make a build…
In the video, here he went on to demonstrate how one changes specs in the game.
Anyway, not only does he fail to acknowledge the difference between “method of playing” and “intent of design(of a spec)”, he also completely misses the entire point people are trying to make when asking for the return of RSV, that being the actual playstyle it promoted. Something that’s impossible to replicate in current SV, no matter how you choose to play it.
We don’t need all 3 specs being ranged. I already know anybody who watches this video, probably 90% of them are gonna disagree with me in some way because they’re really salty about losing Explosive Shot - which is in Marksman now, so, it’s not you’re really missing anything.
Again, he misses the point people are trying to make about the playstyle of the spec(RSV) as a whole, and instead chooses to focus in on a single ability so that it can fit his narrative.
Not to mention how Explosive Shot as it’s designed to function for MM, does not in any way promote the same gameplay as it did while it was a part of RSV in the past.
If you miss all these shots, then Marksman is pretty much your go-to. I mean, I don’t really care, all the specs were pretty much the same back in the day. It just depended on, especially in the WotLK-era, like, my god…
Well, he doesn’t care…says enough on it’s own doesn’t it?
Anyway, he says “especially in the WotLK-era” which, in context of the era that existed before we actually got Core Specializations added to the game(again, this happened with Cataclysm), WotLK was the time where we had the most diversity in terms of playstyle-choices, more so than Vanilla/TBC.
So, once again, he is objectively wrong here.
Back to this…
My point here is that this is far from being just a case of subjective opinions. It’s about more than that. And no, Metroîd’s not the only one saying those things. Others do as well.
But that still doesn’t make what they say any more true. It only serves to discredit their arguments with subjective bias.
15 Likes
Yeah nobody reading this, Congrats on what you did or sorry about your loss man
1 Like
Never underestimate literature nerds and English teachers.
…especially a person who is both.
/cough
/points discreetly at self
6 Likes
I actually read it all to.
5 Likes
Stay golden
1 Like
11+ likes, so it IS being read. Again it’s proved, that not just once you have been wrong.
I wonder, what is your point here?
If it is defending your opinion, well, you need to develop some depth, some background of facts to bolster your stand, spouting any old thing makes you look shallow.
Having an opinion is GOOD, but for it to stick it NEEDS to be backed up by truth every time you say its truth. If you don’t know, say so, it’s ok, but talking bs and saying it’s true, it makes your opinion look like bs, something I truly do not want to see.
Maybe you already knew all this stuff. maybe not. Well, now you do, if you didn’t.
3 Likes
This entire thread must be purged
2 Likes
How can you even consider that? There’s got to be some other way!
1 Like
read it all, but I don’t have the attention span of a 2 year old…and I can read.
Considering all the things you keep getting WAY wrong I wonder on that last part.
2 Likes
Just wanted to point this out. Kind of comical.
5 Likes
Wouldn’t do you any good. SV threads are immortal, like phoenixes. Or cancer cells.
If it dies, it’ll just rise again elsewhere.
(See you guys next time on the Stop speaking sv thread, complete with the opening post “What is SV-speak and how do we stop speaking it?”)
2 Likes
You may not want ranged surv, but most of the hunters in this thread do - thus you are proven wrong.
5 Likes
most players are not on the forums complaining about whatever. The fact so many people enjoy it shows I am correct. Play MM bra
More people played ranged survival though…
5 Likes
So…most players aren’t on the forums complaining about current SV, and therefore you assume that they must all enjoy current SV.
Even though, like you said, they aren’t on the forums saying that they do…
Which one is it then? Must players come to the forums to talk about what they like or don’t like in order for such claims to be true, or is it possible to like or dislike something even without coming to these forums to talk about it?
Or is it the case only with current SV, that we should just assume that everyone likes it?
3 Likes
It’s double think. The enemy is both strong and weak.
Metroid does not argue in good faith. It’s why he has felt the need to use alts to try and make his posts look better than they are, and why he ignores posts that prove his assertions incorrect.
It’s why I don’t exactly write a lot when responding to him. It serves to encourage him and he doesn’t care about the arguments anyways. There’s little point when there are plenty of other posters I both agree and disagree with who I feel actually provide meaningful discussion.
3 Likes