again, tourists are going to come from everywhere not just current players, the best solution is one that also affects them too.
And how do you define people who actually want classic and shouldn’t suffer?
did you read this thread at all? Pointing out effectiveness is ok, did you also neglect where I acknowledge that even doing that is better than nothing and that a combination of things is not a bad thing, or even the quote you just copied where I directly bring up one of the options?
and that’s why i emplore them to choose something that ISN’T SHARDING. which is awful, anti community, anti classic, and did i mention awful? it’s literally the worst choice for those who plan to stick around.
1 Like
the people who plan to stick around in classic long term.
and sharding, as has been stated numerous times, stunts community growth.
2 Likes
Ok? by why quote me and say that? I was talking about the solutions we were discussing as an alternative, i did not say “use sharding!”
and yet you argue against options that cost more money (seperate sub, box cost) saying that somehow those won’t be effective. how would they not be effective? i know plenty of people who have said they are going to “check out classic” just because they get it free. they have no intention of sticking around, they just want to go goof around for a bit because they get it free anyway.
1 Like
So do queue times, and realms created that just end up dead.
Maybe the people who can stick around for a zone or two through sharding are the people who actually care about classic?
A box cost or a separate sub does not address the initial rush.
see? now we’ve already moved from sharding 1-10 and a few weeks to sharding a zone or two. when does that zone or two expand? blizzard has already moved the goal posts from no sharding/crz to sharding at launch? what prevents them from expanding its use?
NOTHING. WHICH IS WHY I WILL CONTINUE TO FIGHT AGAINST THE ABOMINATION KNOWN AS SHARDING UNTIL BLIZZARD COMES OUT AND GIVES US CONCRETE ANSWERS OR REMOVES SHARDING.
1 Like
it reduces the number of people in the initial rush. thus impacting it quite a bit.
2 Likes
Please reread everything not just one thing, talking about how effective is not the same as saying “no don’t do them”, or at least that is what I mean, and exactly what I end up saying if you read everything.
I said for either one , how effective they would be, not that they would no effect, definitely things to keep in mind, though a combination of things is probably the best approach in the end, as I did agree with.
oh separate sub? that I will say would have the worst effect out of all, it would be about as effective as the patch, but also isn’t worth considering since it is highly unlikely they change that now. A Box cost with the early access is the best to hope for on that front.
Does it reduce it enough?
It certainly didn’t in vanilla.
Let me put it this way.
You want to know why i fight so hard against sharding?
- its anti vanilla/anti community.
- they initially said "We’re not going to have sharding/crz/etc because thats anti vanilla.
- they got caught red handed in the demo and have already moved the goal posts from “no sharding” to “use it at launch”
what prevents them from using the goal posts again except people making absolutely sure they understand they will lose subs if they keep the crap up.
so i will continue to say.
Shard 1-10 and 2 weeks maximum. any use beyond that and i will unsub and you will NEVER SEE ANOTHER DIME FROM ME AGAIN. PERIOD. I don’t care if its AQ Release or whats going on. NO SHARDING. PERIOD.
1 Like
new technology could easily fix the launching issues of old vanilla.
1 Like
No i want to know why quote me when I am not talking about supporting sharding?
They also stated right after that they know it is something we do not want.
Still had a bad BF launch with the new tech.
they stated before using sharding they knew we didn’t want them to use it too. as a matter of fact they made it a point in interviews to point out they wouldn’t include sharding. guess that lasted a long time didn’t it?
stop using the crappy cloud tech that yes saves you money but can’t even support a 120 person raid on a city and thus is about darn stupid for an MMO and use real tech again?
start using real tech? i mean crap, if a crappy Nost server in some basement can run hundreds if not thousands of people just fine a zone, imagine what blizzard could do?
Companies should stop worry about how much it costs to run a game and start thinking about how much an actual MMO that actually supports community and such could make.
heres the way i think about it - if im making an MMORPG, i want people to be able to see each other and interact. in that regard do i want equipment that means i have to teleport away people from each other? or do i want to invest more and let people see each other and interact.
1 Like
Yes with server crashes.
But then do we want dynamic spawns? do we want shared tags?
yeah because the nost server was totally crashing when it had its goodbye day with thousands all in zone spamming chat bubbles and aoe everywhere.
man if nost could do that with a server run out of some basement, imagine what blizzard could do if they actually invested in tech that was actually designed to support hundreds if not thousands of people all in the same area.
you know, almost as if they were investing in tech that was designed to run an actual MMORPG instead of the cheap cloud tech where they can’t even support a 120 man raid on a city…
Think about that for a second. the current cloud technology is so awful that blizzard has to take action against people RAIDING A CITY IN AN MMO.
THAT IS AWFUL.
when your tech can’t even support group content such that actual common elements in an MMO are actively shut down…yeah.
1 Like
I will always fight for sharding because it makes the game better.
GO GO SHARDING.