Classic is classic. It is not meant to make everyones wishes come true. Retail is that way -->
7 Likes
Your logic fallacy argument is a logical fallacy. You are strawmanning with slippery slope.
Classic WoW design and hypothetical changes to it are no way bound to any logical order.
There is a 15 year history of the same thing you are claiming to be an illogical slippery slope actually happening. It doesn’t matter if it is logical or not, it can still happen.
9 Likes
Why make the two games more of the same? What is so bad about having two diverse games? You said you play both. Maybe just try to enjoy what each has to offer instead of changing them. Let people just play what they enjoy.
I like that Blizzard has done so much to keep Classic as authentic as possible. I am loving the game as it is. If I want the other things, retail is there for me with the same sub.
6 Likes
Completely incorrect. Adding end-game content, as such new raids or gear, is a complete DIFFERENT thing than adding QoL changes. You can add more raids with keeping the same fundamentals of a game. Just because you add to the game doesn’t mean you change anything else. It’s a new experience for end-game and will only progress the amount of gear/stats/knowledge you have, nothing else. Do you not understand that concept/realization or should I color out a sketch for you?
It’s different than QoL changes but just because it is a different thing doesn’t mean everyone wants it.
3 Likes
Actually it would. This is as close to a recreation of the original World of Warcraft as is possible for Blizzard to make. Your “quality of life” crap came later. Stop trying to change the game, if you are so bothered play a different game. I don’t go play soccer and then complain I can’t use my hands to pass the ball as a midfielder.
7 Likes
Don’t try to get into a battle of wits with me, you aren’t equipped to do so.
If you don’t understand that adding things no matter the context is ‘changing’ them I can’t help you. It’s literally the definition of what the word change is.
You aren’t going to argue against the definition of a word and win, it’s just impossible so stop.
That’s not to say you can’t feel or think differently about those changes, but that is subjective. Change is objective.
Next?
4 Likes
The “etc.” is all you need for flying, paladins for the Horde, Shamans for the Alliance, more FPs & Graveyards, less elite mobs, shorter dungeons, etc. I mean it’s no slippery slope, your OP is proof of it. “Etc.” can meany any, and I mean any, change.
But still, NO!
2 Likes
Here’s the thing: they don’t care if people continue to play it.
They have already committed to keeping servers going even if there are only tens of players. The point of the project is emulating the vanilla 1.12 experience as much as possible “warts and all”. That means no dual spec, flying mounts, transmog, etc.
It’s just here so people can play the game how it used to be, for the most part.
Who knows, they may open other projects in the future to try to retain the population, but they never expected this project to have much longevity in the first place.
2 Likes
You’re post is a good example of slippery slope.
Some of your examples aren’t that major, but some will significantly change the feel of Classic. And how far do you take them?
Linking items in chat? Yeah, no biggie and won’t affect my experience.
Dungeon maps? Not a big deal. But do you put boss locations? Give a rundown of all their abilities? This can quickly become very retail like.
Then you throw in dual spec’s. This is huge–it’s a major economy driver currently. Remove the gold sinks and eventually the economy inflates infinitely. There’s a reason retail wow has extremely high cost vendor items like mounts to help remove gold from the economy in other ways.
1 Like
If you have Free Space and Ad Hominem, you have Bingo.
2 Likes
NO, No changes especially QOL changes those get the double NO NO
1 Like
You could charge 1,000 gold for dual spec.
You’ll need to provide a source for that if you think it’s factual.
1 Like
There is a difference you don’t grasp, Retail is a constantly growing machine, Classic is to be a stagnant game. So fundamentally 2 different type of games.
1 Like
This is another stupid statement.
A better argument is people don’t want “improved” classic. They want it as close to vanilla as possible. If we want improved classic we need a separate game such as classic+.
3 Likes
A source for the devs saying that they don’t expect people to continue playing beyond the “tourists” coming to check it out initially?
Or that they will keep the servers running even if there are tens of players on them?
1 Like
If you stop growing, you die.
1 Like
Tell that to the Private servers that lasted 10 years…
2 Likes
Whether the slippery slope argument is flawed or not, the premise that the things you have listed will
- not destroy the game; and
- improve the classic experience
are highly debatable.
1 Like