There is gaurd rails for preventing changes, vecause if there wasn’t, then he wouldn’t have said some changes, he would have said ALL changes. See the difference?
The guard rails are expressed in other areas where they discuss how authenticity and design goal intentions are part of their decision making process. You can see this from the discussion they had on drums changes, as one example.
The problem with your fact of that article and the facts “anti” dual spec people are using is we aren’t focusing on just one fact for our argument. We are using all of them. And even that article of some changes supports no dual spec when brought into context with the other activities and discussion that has happened for tbcc.
I’m not saying dual spec won’t make it into tbcc, but I am saying it’s highly unlikely based on all known facts.
It’s about as likely to get into tbcc as cash shop sunwell gear.
Even if you refuse to accept any of the cons that have already been posted by the community, you do realize even ghostcrawler stated dualspec had negative effects on class and spec identity and the rpg elements of the game by extension of that, right?
To claim there is no cons is to claim you know the game better than a lead game designer who was there before and after it was implemented and saw its effects.
finally an actual statement even though it is still a “feelings” statement.
I didn’t see any other Cons in this post that were Actual game breaking reasons.
Class Identity? One class can’t become another class based on spec.
RPG elements? Respecs are a gold sink, changing spec is already in the game. If it was like OG Diablo 2 where you made a character and you were stuck with your choices then yea I could see that.
Spec Identity? This one I can kinda see… but that just mean he believe in META over anything else, there was a “Best spec” and you should use that or be at a disadvantage.
And considering Dual spec went to Tri spec it seems like they doubled down.
Do you have a link to this by chance? I couldn’t find it on a goggle search. I’d also be curious to know when he said this. If it was after he went to Riot games.
2013 is when he said it, after they had the time to observe the effects it had for multiple years.
This is one example of a con of dual spec.
A lot of the other cons boil down to how it effects player behavior, the fact it goes directly agaist the design intention goals of tbc (I can pull that link up for you as well if you like), and how it overall takes away from the experience of tbc by distorting it with wotlk design goal intentions for no other reason than convenience (dual spec doesn’t actually fix anything).
I don’t believe that you can predict in any reasonable respect - what the intentions or decisions of the developers are when they leave the door open to changes based on community feedback. That’s what I mean by no guard rails. They haven’t specified what is off-limits, whether that makes you uncomfortable or not is not important.
I agree that it’s not likely, but there are zero known facts. We lost all known facts about original design goals when they gave alliance seal of blood - because blood elf only was literally the original design intention of TBC. It’s even in the name. There are no guarantees of authenticity anymore.
The current state of fact is that the developers have not closed the door to changes, or to community feedback since their original statement that the doors were open.
That means, more changes will come. The goal of these types of threads are to encourage the developers to implement this specific QoL change, not to predict that it’s coming, not to demand that it’s anyone’s right to have it, not to insist that Ghostcrawler would have wanted it. It’s to fulfill the request of Patrick Dawson, when he asked the community for input.
How it effects players? It encourages them to participate in different parts of the game.
Blizz literally stated this was their intention in a blue post when they added dual spec.
If tbc design goals are discourage players from ever swapping specs or trying out pvp, then this no dual spec system is perfect.
Do you consider “encouraging players to try different parts of the game” a wotlk design goal? Because that is the literal reason they gave in a blue post as to why dual spec was added.
Dual spec had nothing to do with wotlk (except that it was added in wotlk) and everything to do with encouraging more players to try out pvp or different specs.
I agree with you. Take seal of blood away from Alliance. Put MQG and Engi belts back in arena. Take away HvH battlegrounds, take away the loot box from alliance for PvPing. Put the hard versions of T5 back in. Don’t let people buy pvp gear with tokens. Revert the honor changes. Bring back chicken.
Why don’t you make a thread asking for all of these things to be reverted? Those are all appeals to consensus items. Let’s see how much support you get.
I don’t have anything to do with those decisions. I wasnt in love with all those decisions. Firing those at me like I can do something about it is both stupid and pointless. Much like wanting dual specs in the first place.
Blizz had reasons for doing that and as we already established there is no reason for dual specs to exist in TBC. They also made some pretty unpopular moves too or do you have to cherry pick everything?
That might be relevant if we were discussing some new unknown feature.
But we’re not dual spec is a very well known and understood feature that we don’t have to theory craft to understand its impact. So players can very accurately base their opinion of dual spec on actual impact from real world observation not some vague idea of what it might do.
This is your opinion, you established that for yourself, silly goose.
I am pointing out once again the gaping holes in your argument, which aren’t a stretch of the imagination by any means. When your points are that easy to refute, they’re not good points.
You need to use the right words in discussions or you won’t be understood. You have a clear lack of basic word knowledge such as “established,” or “no reason”. As soon as someone gives their opinion, that to them - is a reason. The same thing can be said for every change that was made. It was an opinion first, such as “the alliance need seal of blood.” Not a fact, that was an opinion. It’s not a fact, because alliance didn’t have seal of blood for the entirety of TBC and they still completed the same content.
I hope that helps clear up what “no reason” means. If it applies to one, it applies to all. That’s just how things work.
