Maybe because raiding isn’t the only way to gear a toon. I’m not going to give Blizzard 30 bucks to become another faceless Blood Elf beggar who has to heal or wait on the bench in Horde Progression Guild #64359.
I don’t care about Cutting Edge anyway. They could try to make me by putting a seasonal expiry on the transmog, but I think I would just request my info be erased if they ripped that particular band-aid off.
However, I do enjoy pushing M+ occasionally, although that was a lot more fun in Legion. If I pick Bastion like I want, I won’t be able to do that, because everyone is going to want Revendreth for easy mode.
So I will be forced to find gear elsewhere. But raids will be balanced around tanks having corpse shield and DPS/heals having the phial buffs. So it’s not like we’ll be able to get further, I will just have less ability to carry people’s grey-parsing significant others.
If any of you listened to Ion’s response re Covenants, it was fairly obvious that what he was saying was that how Covenants worked would change over time in the expansion. So how it was at the start would not be what it was further along.
I’ve transcribed below a section of Ion’s response to the Covenant topic:
“Covenants we see as a gameplay mainstay. There are storywise dozens of quests, different paths, but also these abilities - soulbinds - that you’ll have three per Covenant with their own traits and trees of traits that you’ll unlock. Down the road potentially Covenant-specific legendaries that can modify Covenant abilities,utility, different perks that you’ll earn for your Sanctum and more, including cosmetic things like cool mounts, armor, transmog, back attachments, etc.”
That’s only part of his response, but its obvious from his words that there is a lot more to come regarding Covenant abilities than what we can see now. We have no idea, for example, what these Legendaries are and how much effect they will have on a Covenant choice.
So it’s probably a good idea to wait until we see more development revealed before chastising them regarding those base or current Covenant abilities.
They have tried to save another system for 2 expansions now.
It’s called Voidform.
By a majority of Priests past and present, it’s been rejected. I suspect the same will happen here too with Covenants if it winds up being the same sort of stupidity as Void-Crap is. Thank god I got away from Shadow.
And again I say: Aesthetics are important. But having them be just window-dressing makes them simply an affectation. I like more meaning in my aesthetics and this system, if it does play out as advertised, will give me that.
I respect your opinion but have a question:
Do you feel having to chose one class waters down the game for you? Or odes it enhance the game? Beacuse this is pretty much the same idea.
I think I have made it crystal clear that, if the system works as advertised, having a hard choice, enjoying the benefits of that choice and overcoming the limitations of that choice, is what will give me an enhanced gaming experience.
So no, I will not be able to have that experience with the changes you suggest as it will not be a hard choice. Don’t try to tell me my own mind. Again, speak for yourself, that is the only mind you know.
Yes, we definitely differ here as I see making the system flexible as negating the overall idea and dumbing down the challenge.
I think the company has created an entertaining challenging system that enhances the game and, as long as it plays as advertised, I am in support it.
The only valid argument I have read against the system is the concern about the company nerfing/buffing after players make their choice and have invested in that choice and, I feel if that happens, the company should allow people affected by it one change of Covenants without having to work for it.
I think the game would be enhanced if we were able to play the game from various classes and roles - plus, players would generally be better if they could see what it’s like to have dps pull for you as a tank, or have dps stand in fires as a healer.
That’s a huge reason why a lot of players choose Paladins/Druids/Monks - so that they can play from all the roles, help out in various ways, and experience the game in different ways.
Other MMORPGs function successfully in this way and aren’t somehow invalidated as RPG’s simply because players can play the game in various forms on a single toon.
Objectively - if the game had a flexible system - we could still just pick one covenant, never switch, and gain all the benefits and value from our choice.
Others don’t need to have restrictions placed on them for us to gain the value derived from the restrictions we find beneficial.
But that half could still be accomplished for those of us that want to be exposed to it.
Others having the choice to switch doesn’t preclude us from staying committed.
I made this point in another thread:
If I find monogamy valuable in a relationship - I can make that choice and get value from it. Everyone else doesn’t also have to be restricted to monogamous relationships for me to get the value from my own personal relationships.
And that’s totally fair for you to take that stance.
I’m genuinely trying to find a way to feel good about the system; but even if I got some kind of tangible benefit - I would feel selfish, at best.
But without any benefit at all - I feel even dirtier because it’s punitive for the sake of being punitive.
The arguments I’ve heard for the benefits being provided can still exist in a flexible system for those that want them - that simply leaves a benefit derived solely on being spiteful against players that play differently.
Overall it sucks - because at that point, I don’t even want to support the game if it’s going to treat it’s customers that way.
If half the point is to force player to lock themselves into an on-rails play track because that’s what you want, other players to be forced to do what you may or may not want to do yourself, what is the other half?
And I repeat:
‘My opinion is not in reaction to others; this is my opinion standing on its own feet. And my gaming experience of (1) making a hard choice, (2) enjoying the benefits of that choice and (3) overcoming the limitations of that choice, will be enhanced (if, of course, it plays out as advertised)/’
Just because I want the real thing, instead of playing from headcanon, does not make me spiteful. It means, as a paying customer, I don’t want to settle for less entertainment for my dollar.
I never said any of that. Please don’t put words in my mouth. If you are going to post such a slanted view, the least you could do is own it.
And if you actually read thru the posts, you would know what the two halves are referring to.
That gaming experience can still exist in a flexible system.
we can still choose one covenant and never change that choice to achieve the gaming experience we want, even if others can change freely.
The only way a flexible system gets in the way of that is if our gaming experience is based around what others can/can’t do. Which is why there are all these other threads celebrating the punishment and consequences others have to be exposed to by playing the game they way they want to play the game, with limited choice and agency and maximum consequence.
How is this dependent on it rolling out as advertised?
If they change the system so that abilities can be switched freely - I could still stay loyal to my first choice and get all the benefits you described to my gaming experience.
I’m more on the casual side of players - and I can’t understand how my personal enjoyment on the game is dependent on what others can and can’t do.
Again, no it won’t, as it will not be a hard choice therefore it will lack meaning and substance like the headcanon you are proposing.
I have made it perfectly clear my gaming experience is based around what I can and cannot do, not others. I want the hard choice and the benefits/challenge for my own enjoyment.
I have explained this ad nauseum, I don’t understand why you aren’t getting it. If you need metaphors to understand what I am saying, we are in trouble because I suck at them .
Someone already mentioned something similar in terms of relationships; but I’ll take it further with marriage.
Marriage today - means so much more when you stay committed to each other than it ever did in the past BECAUSE people can so easily get divorced.
It’s challenging to stay in a marriage BECAUSE people have that temptation to just call it quits.
In the past when you were just stuck with the person - staying together didn’t matter nearly as much, because people didn’t have a choice. It’s just the way things were.
In this sense - the challenge of staying loyal to a covenant is not only more difficult, but also more valuable; provided that people can actually switch when they want.
You’re totally entitled to have your opinion and preference - but your reasons just don’t make sense to support them. It seems like the other casual role play oriented people are facing a lack of support for the system and are seeking some way of reconciling the negativity the system imposes on others when it doesn’t have to in order to provide the benefits you’re claiming.