You mean like the specific one that Ristra earlier cited?
But what about these non 1.12 functions / features; 1.11 SPECIFIC features IE: Scourge Invasion event that is not present in 1.12?
I assure you thatâs not a 1.12 thing, so about that point of view; thatâs already dumpstered.
Feel free to cite it.
For all we know something like the scourge event is in 1.12 it was just never triggered a second time.
I wouldnât say itâs highly unlikely due to the fact they never thought they would ever use this data ever again.
Rarely do we ever see Blizzard revert any changes in terms of numbers and models.
I know this wouldnât be a standard norm to do, but to say it isnât a possibility is disingenuous. I highly doubt Blizzard would state they didnât have the data just to say it. If they had older data I would think Blizzard would use terms like they feel more comfortable with 1.12 than the previous data points.
I think itâs important to remember that this was done quite some time ago Iâm sure around Cata-MoP they could easily made the choice to dump those old save files due to never thinking they would be reusing them.
Before the Classic servers were announced I do recall Blizzard claiming they âlost the dataâ, their credibility on this subject is not exactly backed up by a lot of good will.
I agree, but I guess I just happen to take their word on this matter. I like to believe they wouldnât say they lost it otherwise and use other neutral phrasing instead if they still had the data.
they never said that, that came from us twisting things that they actually did say.
They never claimed they lost the code, they claimed it didnât work on their modern infrastructure. A claim which is proving to be true since itâs taking this long to deploy.
Well why would you do that if youâre âFORâ Classic WoW? I do recall a couple of the posters in this forum presenting numerous reasons for why Classic was a bad ideaâŚ
Then backing that up with some Developer interview garbage claiming the data was âlostâ.
My immediate reaction to that is no way dude!
Is there a middle ground somewhere?
What I mean is, is there a way to satisfy both those who are grinding honor for HWL as well as those who want a serious WAR in Alterac Valley? Is there a way to both farm honor AND have a potentially marathon fight with Ivus and flightmasters, etc?
They never said they âlostâ the code, ill repeat that came from people twisting things they did actually say.
As to why people would twist things, well youâd have to ask the people that did that, and the people who spread that without getting the actual facts correct.
What Ziryus just said is pretty much what they have always said.
I think the middle ground is to simply offer both version of AV, say 1.5 and 1.12. Then people can pick the one they want and everyone wins. Itâs also inline with blizzardâs idea that this should be a museum, that way we could experience eithe version at will.
If one version ends up being vastly more popular, there we go.
He did at least link the Wiki for UBRS. (I removed the link cause⌠reasons)
Huh⌠Thatâs not how I remember it man, letâs view what the Internet has to say about this.
This first one, oh boyâŚ
https://us.battle.net/forums/en/wow/topic/9793020424?page=4#post-61https://us.battle.net/forums/en/wow/topic/20759359500?page=5#post-94https://us.battle.net/forums/en/wow/topic/20742924694#post-1If you donât want to visit the old forum via the links above you can just view the text as posted below. The evidence speaks volumes about the General forum community and lies perpetuated by either the community or Blizzard directly. Given the volume of links to official Blizzard statements that attempted to derail Classic for literal years, itâs kinda tough to trust such a statement as âWe lost the dataâ
Riiiiiight.
THE WALL OF NO!
Summary of Blizzâs public stance:
1. Blizz does not believe there are enough people interested in utilizing this idea long term to justify the various costs necessary to bring it about.
2. Blizz feels this idea is counter to the nature of MMOâs; non-progression equates to stagnation and eventual boredom.
3. The original game code does not exist in that form anymore. All the old data has been replaced, with the newer data which was not saved (archived) for later reuse. It was over-written and destroyed. âThere is no switch to flip on the realms to roll back years of patches and changesâŚâ In keeping with the sentiment in expressed in #2, above, itâs gone, never to return. Even if it were ârecoverableâ by other means it would still require lengthy and expensive rewrite.
4. They have no plans or desire to recreate the original version from scratch. They refer to the notion of attempting to do so as âa logistical nightmare,â⌠and in keeping with their stance in #1, above the time, money and resources required are prohibitive and unjustified.
To paraphrase it all: âToo much cost, too little interest and itâs not what the game is about⌠weâre not doing it.â
Proponents are adamant it is a good thing and continue to post it (in various forms), sometimes multiple times a day despite heavy resistance.
Analogies:
Those who argue for âClassicâ, âVanillaâ, âOld Contentâ, âOld Styleâ, âRealm Specificâ, âLocked Progressionâ, âThrowbackâ, âRetroâ, âPremiumâ (or any other variant thereof) servers frequently fail to put real thought into their idea. Consider how this would work in similar situations in other venues.
The movie industry:
âThe earliest days of film were so much better; we really had fun and such a sense of adventure. We really had to work at understanding what was going on and those that couldnât read the subtitles were just bad. We want special theaters that play only silent films (Vanilla), those were so awesome and we miss them so much. For those that want black and white âtalkiesâ (BC) we can maybe have some that do those too, but no further. Technicolor (WotLK) is where the studios went wrong and this fancy Bullet-Time fx (Cata) junk is just taking the whole thing in the wrong directionâŚBlizz, fix it now! Give us our silent films back!â
The auto industry:
We want our Model-Tâs back (Vanilla)⌠Henry Fordâs stuff was so awesome (blah, blah)âŚWe could support maybe the Mustang (BC), but no further (blah, blah)⌠Datsunâs 280Z (WotLK) is where it all went wrong (blah, blah)âŚChrysler Minivans (Cata) are just too bad to deal with (blah, blah)âŚ
Proponents are asking either for (a) regression to the past where things were not better than they are nowâŚand want to drag everyone else in the game with them⌠or (b) the ability to segregate themselves from everyone else so they can indulge in their nostalgia. Not only does the majority of the player base not want that, neither does Blizz. Not enough people want it to justify the costs of doing it and⌠most importantly⌠it goes against the progressive vision the company -- and players -- have for the game as a whole.
You will have no better chance of getting Blizz to do this than you would convincing the movie industry to revert to silent or even black and white only films or the auto industry to revert to producing nothing but cars like the Model-T or Edsel.
Blizzard specific references on the issue:
They were going to, long agoâŚ
We were at one time internally discussing the possibility fairly seriously, but the long term interest in continued play on them couldn't justify the extremely large amount of development and support resources it would take to implement and maintain them. We'd effectively be developing and supporting two different games.
Drysc (CM), Feb 21, 2008
http://blue.mmo-champion.com/topic/63797/wow-classic-servers
We occasionally see requests for us to open pre-TBC realms, or classic realms if you prefer. Lately there have also been requests for pre-WotLK realms, and I am sure that once the next expansion pack is released there will be requests for pre-Cataclysm realms as well. We have answered these requests quite a few times now saying that we have no plans to open such realms, and this is still the case today.
We have no plans to open classic realms or limited expansion content realms, and you should not expect to see the opening of such realms with the launch of Cataclysm either.
We realize that some of you feel that the classic game was more fun than the current game, and as a result would like to revel in nostalgia; the developers however prefer to keep the game moving forward as they want the game to continuously evolve and progress.
Vaneras (CM), Nov 28, 2009
http://blue.mmo-champion.com/topic/1659/tbc-wotlk-origional-realms
We have no plans of making pre-TBC realms. This goes against the very nature of an MMO and would be a logistical nightmare. There's no switch to flip on the realms to roll back years of patches and changes, and we don't intend to invent one so that a very small minority of players can play what we feel would be an inferior cousin of the World of Warcraft of today.
Zarhym (CM), April 27, 2010
http://blue.mmo-champion.com/topic/19223/cataclysm-the-wow-killer
Question: The whole topic of classic servers has been popping up on the forums, always on yours - I assume with the release of Cataclysm there's this huge wave of nostalgia here because you can't play in the old world anymore. Is this something you might consider doing after the Cataclysm launch?
Chilton: Currently, my answer would be probably not. The reason I say that is because any massively multiplayer game that has pretty much ever existed and has ever done any expansions has always gotten the nostalgia of, "Oh God, wouldn't it be great if we could have classic servers!" and more than anything else that generally proves to be nostalgia. In most cases - in almost all cases - the way it ends up playing out is that the game wasn't as good back then as people remember it being and then when those servers become available, they go play there for a little bit and quickly remember that it wasnât quite as good as what they remembered in their minds and they donât play there anymore and you set up all these servers and you dedicated all this hardware to it and it really doesn't get much use. So, for me, the historical lesson is that it's not a very good idea to do *laughs* - it's a great idea to talk about.
Tom Chilton (lead game designer), Aug 20, 2010
http://www.wowhead.com/news=166540/exclusive-gamescom-tom-chilton-interview-archaeology-details-and-more
(approx. half way down page)
https://twitter.com/ghostcrawler/status/285881503165054976
Greg âGhostcrawlerâ Street, Dec 31, 2012
Additionally, read this player post that might remind you of some of what you âmissâ about Vanilla WoW:
http://us.battle.net/wow/en/forum/topic/3881718715?page=1
WowInsider has a similar negative view:
May 2, 2012
http://wow.joystiq.com/2012/05/02/5-awesome-ways-world-of-warcraft-has-improved-since-day-one/#continued
Also â
http://us.battle.net/wow/en/forum/topic/6080659727?page=2
I work for a software company with corporate customers. Each of them has rather more invested in equipment than a PC gamer, and they like paying for upgrades even less.
Our products have been advancing technologically over time in a gradual fashion, so as not to lose the customers with the oldest equipment. However, things like operating system support and hardware version support are outside our control--which means we have to keep slowly advancing the requirements, and adjust existing code to match. Over time that means stuff eventually falls off the list of what we can support, because our code, gradually upgraded as it is, starts to require OS or hardware features the oldest equipment can't support.
We couldn't turn the clock back ten years, or probably even five, if we wanted to.
Blizz is no doubt in the same pickle. They've changed their database structure, upgraded the graphics, and likely done a lot of more subtle stuff over the last seven years that makes it fundamentally impossible to support Vanilla code, even assuming that code still exists in pristine form somewhere.
MOP will, as I understand it, very likely require at least a duo core CPU. That's another significant difference that can't be rolled back.
Therefore: what the Vanilla crowd is actually asking for is the development of new code to duplicate old code. That's not easy or cheap, and is going to compete directly for resources with development of current content. There would have to be a monumental ground surge of interest to make it feasible, an order of magnitude greater than what has ever been exhibited on the forums.
TLDR: That's not how software works.
From the EU forums, Feb 23, 2011
http://eu.battle.net/wow/en/forum/topic/1751857331
MMOChampion poll about whether Blizz should have such servers:
(June 19, 2012)
http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/1149323-Would-you-play-on-an-official-Vanilla-or-BC-server
It's a line Blizzard has drawn from way back when, yet suggestions or requests for classic realms continue to pop up on the forums. Let me tell you here and now... don't bother. Blizzard will eventually just lock your thread or delete it entirely simply because it's not in their best interests to provide such a service.
http://wow.joystiq.com/2009/03/13/no-vanilla-wow-realms-really/
Mar 13, 2009
Finally: Hereâs a link to a past post dedicated to a deeper discussion of the idea. Please read it all the way through â it is very thorough.
http://us.battle.net/wow/en/forum/topic/6080659727?page=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8HoaFWI5S0Q
http://i.imgur.com/Xw1Dx.gif
Lakota tribal wisdom says that when you discover you are riding a dead horse, the best strategy is to dismount.
How the forums are dealing with the âproblem.â
Buy a stronger whip.
Change riders.
Say things like, âThis is the way we always have ridden this horse.â
Appoint a committee to study the horse.
Arrange to visit other sites to see how they ride dead horses.
Create a training session to increase our riding ability.
Harness several dead horses together for increased speed.
Declare the âNo horse is too dead to beat.â
Provide additional funding to increase the horseâs performance.
Declare the horse is, âbetter, faster, and cheaper,â when dead.
Study alternative uses for dead horses.
Promote the dead horse to a supervisory position
There you go enjoy your citation.Please show me the quote from blizzard saying they lost the code.
LOL ironically âlost the codeâ doesnât appear anywhere in the ancient wall of no I posted.
Ok where in the Wall does it say they lost the data? or does it state something completely different?
Thats not evidence, what I said is true, they never said that, some people chose to twist what was actually said. no need to trust or not trust a statement that was not said,lol.
Also to add in the Nost meeting they were asked point blank about the code and they said no they did not lose it or that they had it, something to that effect.
Blizzard never said the lost the data. That was a misinterpretation of Blizzard saying something along the lines of âthe data is not in a usable state.â
1 Like
Directly at the top in paragraph 3⌠You are familiar with Ziryusâs wall of foolishness. I hope you see what I am doing here by saying it this way, I do hope you can figure it out.
That you are simply wrong?