The Flight/Pathfinder compromise

Community General Discussion
83

In fact that was their 2015 plan, but removing flight is not an option as the massive player exodus in May '15 deftly illustrated, causing the “no flight ever” plan to be jettisoned.

Rather than graciously back off and acknowledge their egregious miscalculation (not to mention their sneaky underhanded way of trying to slip “no flight ever” under the radar) by restoring flight at max level for a gold sink, we got the spiteful Pathfinger ultimatum.

So far, this dev team has removed 3 key features of WoW:

  • player flight at max level available throughout the life of the expansion

  • seamless map zones without load screens

  • fluid combat; the insertion of GCD into everything makes WoW combat feel like a turn-based game

In addition, player options have been removed bit by bit until really your only remaining option is how your toon looks.

Scaling content to player ilevel/level has eliminated any reason to level or bother acquiring skills. Without any real sense of progression you’re just on a treadmill.

What you’re playing now is called World of Warcraft but it’s really World of Chorecraft, bearing very little resemblance to the game we all once knew and loved.

:cry:

8 Likes
84

That actually would not bother me with decent FP locations. I could use FP and then still get to where I wanted.

85

The compromise lies somewhere in-between what the gamers and developers want.
I think gamers and devs can agree we both want the game experience to be a lasting one. As gamers, if we get done with the game too soon we’ll get bored. As developers, if gamers get done too soon they might stop playing.
Flying as it is runs contrary to both gamer and dev interests at least on this one point, making the game last.

I believe, flying needs to be reworked somehow. Gameplay needs to be weaved into flying such that it is a game. One which a player succeeds or fails at flying a level, then ‘natural’ limits to flight would be more acceptable and these might be included when designing a level.

Devs should admit, perhaps privately to themselves, that they’ve been rather irresponsible when developing flying. Flying was introduced in BC as a treat for players promoting that new expansion, but there was very little development into actual flying, one just takes off and go, no gameplay, no limits, no boundaries… except bare minimum. So it was very easy to develop THAT flying, and now it has become a problem. It is WAY TOO convenient transportation.

Swinging the pendulum far to the other side and just REMOVING flying is just as irresponsible. Pathfinder is an excuse to postpone developing proper flying. It’s an illusion, flying is locked away until part 2… and part 2 is not made available until there is no point to flying anymore cause we’re done with the game… soooo… you get flying! yay! …but then that next zone is made a No Flight Zone because… reasons…

Was it a mistake to give flying so poorly developed making it game breaking convenient transportation back in BC?.. in hindsight, yeah, I think so.
Taking it away a good idea?.. no.

Do what should have been done in the first place. Develop a flying game that creates those boundaries needed for level design.

I realize there’s many other things on the table and development time and resources are limited, but a revamp of flying needs to be scheduled in, give it some priority, and stop postponing its development.

It’s ok to make things take longer to accomplish as long as the longer journey is enjoyable. We’re here to play games, right?

86

Patch 8.3 is going to bring a surprise. And that surprise isn’t lots of gold.

1 Like
87

Gee, and yet flying worked perfectly fine for seven years. I don’t see the problem.

BTW, let me cut and paste this comment I made yesterday in “FLYING… HERE’S THE TRUTH”:

“There are anti-flight zealots who consider “convenience” a dirty word. And no, I’m not exaggerating. They actually sneer at the concept of getting from point A to B without being repeatedly attacked.”

2 Likes
88

It’s not convenience a problem, but when something is made too convenient it hurts gameplay, game challenge and game time.

89

Did you actually play BC? Did you pay any attention to the landscape? There were jagged mountains and winding paths all over that place that absolutely required flying to get past, to the point that it was irresponsible to NOT hand flying to every 58 first stepping into the Outlands. What you consider convenience, I consider necessity.

If you don’t like flying, don’t fly. Just don’t act surprised when everyone else flies over the mountains while you’re still winding back and forth through all the meandering passes.

2 Likes
90

#StockholmSyndrome

2 Likes
91

You’re right, BC landscapes were designed around flying, but since then flying seems to come in conflict with how Level designers rather do things… like it doesn’t exist… am almost re-typing a post I already made. Scroll up and check it out.

1 Like
92

Wow, it’s almost like there isn’t any problem with flying beyond the developers choosing not to design content with flying in mind.

5 Likes
93

Would you rather they didn’t compromise and stayed with NO flying going forward?

94

If they reduced the rep requirements to Friendly, without increasing or adding other requirements, it wouldn’t be as frustrating.

Alternatively, make it just have three requirements: max level for the expansion, loremaster, explorer.

4 Likes
95

Pathfinder is fine just remove the gap between part one and two
One unlocks the launch zones
Two unlocks the end zones

2 Likes
96

I do that anyway. Tank/barding, run through everything, let them leash. GG hearth out after done.

97

Most players do that as well which is why they have put in some very punitive dazing mechanics now which makes using certain abilities during combat a no go as it guarantees a daze.

98

Remove flight and just design a modern fast travel system.

Keep flying as a thing with no restiction and design the game around it.

Or just do it BC,style as a max level purchase and use flight as a economy drive that it once was.

Everything else sucks. Have the sjw balls to make a decision blizzard ffs

99

A more self aware and less self absorbed man would have noticed. I doubt it even registered with him.

1 Like
100

You keep using that word. I don’t think it means what you think it means.

If I come to your house to rob you of all of your possessions, you catch me and I “compromise” by only taking half of your stuff, would you still think it was a “compromise”?

2 Likes
101

First you can’t be “robbed” of something you never owned. And I’ll say it again would you rather have NO flying??? Because those were the choices.

102

A lot of the brouhaha would go away if Part 1 let you fly in the launch content and if older expac requirements were restricted to just the quest/explore/campaign stuff. I don’t think those two are terribly unreasonable.

There will still be people demanding to buy it with gold but I think they’re less numerous than the folks who’d just like to see just a bit of give on how the system is implemented.

2 Likes