Because Blizzard has failed the WoW community by destroying the very thing that made their game what it was. Their good intentions for making things more accessible did just that but at the cost of the communities on servers. When it got to the point people were starting to realize this they double down on their existing solution of CRZ and other methods instead of merging servers and trying to rebuild the community aspect of their game which bought in the $$$ right from the start.
I'd like to think of this as a test to see if they can remember how to make a good game. While the damage is done and they can never get what once was back 100% like it was before, they can show us that they are listening and actually do the job people want to throw money at them for instead of the job we think we do but don't according to them.
Hell if they can pull this off then maybe they'll learn some lessons that will make current retail better and draw people back to that. I'm not going to hold my breath though given the decision making that lead to this and the recent fubar of an announcement for Diablo Immortal. Given the development progression since WoD and Diablo I wouldn't be surprised if in a Blizzcon or two you see WoW Immortal and someone yelling at the customers for not having a phone.
11/07/2018 08:02 PMPosted by Alfreddsame philosophy of the original game,
They don't even know the original philosophy of the original game that is why.
People who made it are long gone.
Reforge wc3 looks like it has no soul in it.
Blizzards plan for diablo is to make it a family game.
most of the never changists are warrior mains drooling at the prospect of being Over Powered flavor of the forever class. Demanding no changes out of 1 side of their mouth and demanding the nerf bat be forever removed (a YUUGE change) out of the other side, often in the same breath,
Simple. You can play starcraft1/Warcraft3/spyro the dragon right now. So a remaster makes sense for those games.
You can't play vanilla right now. So people want the original back first. THEN we can talk about a remaster.
You can't play vanilla right now. So people want the original back first. THEN we can talk about a remaster.
WoW:Classic is going to be WoW:Remastered in a sense.
They are bringing back the old gameplay, old talents, old world, old quests, old dungeons... The ingredients of Vanilla, and placing it into the modern bowl of server and client infrastructure with things like right-click report and auto squelch that stops spammers and trolls, sharding at the beginning in starting areas that will give a better starting zone experience, and things like that.
We aren't getting a port of Vanilla, we're getting a re-creation. It's basically what I wanted all along.
They are bringing back the old gameplay, old talents, old world, old quests, old dungeons... The ingredients of Vanilla, and placing it into the modern bowl of server and client infrastructure with things like right-click report and auto squelch that stops spammers and trolls, sharding at the beginning in starting areas that will give a better starting zone experience, and things like that.
We aren't getting a port of Vanilla, we're getting a re-creation. It's basically what I wanted all along.
IN two words (which true to type will become an elaborate explanation unless i stop myself):
Unintended Consequences.
I'm really struggling to resist the urge to over explain...
Unintended Consequences.
I'm really struggling to resist the urge to over explain...
11/07/2018 08:13 PMPosted by VivftwThe design of the game is a direct product of the old philosophy. The reason people feel there is no need to tweak the game to make "improvements" is because the old philosophy and the state of the game that it bred were already superior to other options in their eyes. Making revisions means harming the game more than helping it, because it is believed that any revision will have negative (un)foreseen consequences that worsen the experience to a greater degree than the improvement the revision was hoping to achieve.
I think it was more of a marketing strategy rather than thinking what is fun. Everytime the next big mmo "wow killer" was announced, blizzard frantically looked at its features and Frankensteined it into their game with a disregard to if it made any sense with their original design.
11/08/2018 02:22 AMPosted by Ă pocalypseIt's because purists don't trust Blizzard.... and are too stupid to realize that if Blizz screws it up in any way, that the Pservers will just come back in force and provide the exact same experience they claim to want Blizz to provide.
That is of course ignoring that their "authentic" 1.12 trivializes much of the content, has broken-faceroll threat mechanics compared to the rest of the vanilla's timeline, has the terrible version of AV, tons of welfare gear, hybrids still all suck outside of healing, Warriors are still broken overpowered as DPS via feedback loop rage scaling mechanics, dishonorable kills still exist, balance changes where a frequent occurrence in actual vanilla, and while they scream no changes in one breath, they also simultaneously lobby for a massive overreaching change to the content in that it won't end after 2 years (which vanilla did by launching 2.0, and which private servers frequently do by launching "fresh" fairly often)
TL:DR
Don't listen to the purists, they're basically universally stupid and devoid of basic logic.
You truly are a special little guy. Someone's mad lol
11/08/2018 02:39 AMPosted by ZiryusMostly because it would mean accepting that vanilla wasn't a perfect game.
Compared to BFA... Vanilla is perfect!
Some of us have been championing a WoW 2.0 which is tailored to be the best parts of Vanilla WoW without the QoL that makes retail boring.
Some proposed ideas:
1. Randomized terrain, villages, capital cities NPCs, items, etc.
2. Slow leveling process with fast paced combat followed by long downtimes that encourage socializing. We don't need combat with the outdated GCD and auto attack.
3. Deep RPG systems and large skill trees similar to PoE. Emergent roleplaying as a result.
4. Hardcore raids
5. Fresh lore. Players are not gods.
6. The world is mysterious and the world leaves you clues to the story that build intrigue. The lore isn't hamfisted into cheesy cutscenes.
Some proposed ideas:
1. Randomized terrain, villages, capital cities NPCs, items, etc.
2. Slow leveling process with fast paced combat followed by long downtimes that encourage socializing. We don't need combat with the outdated GCD and auto attack.
3. Deep RPG systems and large skill trees similar to PoE. Emergent roleplaying as a result.
4. Hardcore raids
5. Fresh lore. Players are not gods.
6. The world is mysterious and the world leaves you clues to the story that build intrigue. The lore isn't hamfisted into cheesy cutscenes.
Its a conservative mentality. The conservative view is "new is risk". People want to relive the old positive of the game, and conservatives feel that
new = greater risk at destroying the old good
then
new = keeping the old good, but adding MORE good
Its a choice that people make every day. If you think number 2 is better, than you're open to change and new experiences. This is a more liberal view.
(Please don't take this as a political conversation)
new = greater risk at destroying the old good
then
new = keeping the old good, but adding MORE good
Its a choice that people make every day. If you think number 2 is better, than you're open to change and new experiences. This is a more liberal view.
(Please don't take this as a political conversation)
Remaster versions of Warcraft 3, for example, are welcome because that is an additional version on top of the existing Warcraft 3.
We donât have the Classic version to play. Letâs start with that. If they want to do a Remastered version in 10 years...hey, cool...that would be neat, but it shouldnât be an either/or.
We donât have the Classic version to play. Letâs start with that. If they want to do a Remastered version in 10 years...hey, cool...that would be neat, but it shouldnât be an either/or.
11/07/2018 08:05 PMPosted by CyberwinsBlizzard cannot be trusted to make any improvements at this time, or ever. Vanilla is the last chance to have a game that many of us enjoy and the game is fun as is. If blizzard wants to be innovated and new they have this canvas called BFA.
From downtown.....
Nailed it!
11/08/2018 01:10 AMPosted by EnkkiThe current dev team is not the original dev team. Their philosophy is not the same as the original team. Their "vision" is not the same as the original team. Their creativity is not the same as the original team. Their innovation is not the same as the original team. Their imagination is not the same as the original team.11/07/2018 08:02 PMPosted by AlfreddWhy is WoW:Classic more desirable than WoW:Perfectioned ?
But most of all, their motivation is not the same as the original team.
Many of us want the original, not the Mongolian cluster-[censored] it's become.
I agree it's a CF...but why the Mongolian hate?
Wow classic should be renamed 1.12 remastered.
Classic denotes an experience of an entire game.
Classic denotes an experience of an entire game.
Because we want a historical recreation of vanilla as close to the original as possible, not some watered down interpretive recreation.
It's hilarious all these posters saying Blizzard can't be trusted...
Yet, here they are, going to pay a company they don't trust to play a game they don't trust them to make.
Seriously, if you don't trust Blizzard, then go play other games.
Yet, here they are, going to pay a company they don't trust to play a game they don't trust them to make.
Seriously, if you don't trust Blizzard, then go play other games.
1 Like
11/07/2018 08:02 PMPosted by AlfreddBeen reading the forums for a while and I am not here to bash any posture, just want to sincerely know why does #nochange team would rather have an exact copy of the old game, with everyone knowing that it was not perfect, instead of a revised version of the game, with some tweaking that follows the same philosophy of the original game, for example, like what has been done with SC:Remastered and W3:Reforged.
Why is WoW:Classic more desirable than WoW:Perfectioned ?
Because WoW:Perfectioned, as envisioned by the people currently making World of Warcraft, is BFA.
You seem to be laboring under the misapprehension that "this is not perfect -> make it perfect" is a mechanical exercise like adding 2 and 3 to get 5, rather than imposing one individual's idea of an improvement, resulting in something far worse from the perspective of another individual.
11/08/2018 07:18 AMPosted by TarythiaIt's hilarious all these posters saying Blizzard can't be trusted...
Yet, here they are, going to pay a company they don't trust to play a game they don't trust them to make.
Seriously, if you don't trust Blizzard, then go play other games.
No. Push off with your imperatives.
I'll pay Blizzard for one month of Classic so I can see and judge for myself if they've wrecked it. If they've faithfully recreated the game when it was actually good, which is "coincidentally" when it was being made by an entirely different roster of people than are there now, then I'll keep paying them and keep playing it. And trusting Blizzard, especially trusting Blizzard to not do what they provably did making BFA, will never ever enter into it, because it's a for-profit company, not my buddy, not someone doing me a favor, the number of people on this forum who seem not to grasp this basic point aside.
They gonna make Wow for mobile. It is gonna be really reskined Crusaders of Light made by Netease.
11/08/2018 06:46 AMPosted by LokubiIts a conservative mentality. The conservative view is "new is risk". People want to relive the old positive of the game, and conservatives feel that
new = greater risk at destroying the old good
then
new = keeping the old good, but adding MORE good
Its a choice that people make every day. If you think number 2 is better, than you're open to change and new experiences. This is a more liberal view.
(Please don't take this as a political conversation)
okay tell me this mister i know everything.
first of all, we have 14 years of evidence that shows up what happens when you change stuff. it has gotten us to battle for azeroth. this was done via a combination of fan requested changes and blizzards changes.
now remember that most of us like vanilla for a few reasons.
1) Community and your reputation mattered
2) Dungeons weren't half hour wham bam thank you maam affairs
3) Classes were actually unique and had there own strengths and weaknesses, which actively encouraged grouping.
4) true hybrid specs (i'm not just referring to hybrid classes, look at the various ruin build warlocks, elemental mages in pvp, etc).
now keeping all this in mind, i want you to remember that just because you think something is a good change, does not mean another person does.
so who gets to decide what changes to add to the game?
should it be blizzard? they just announced Diablo Immortal and were practically booed off the stage for suggesting a mobile game to a bunch of hardcore PC players.
should it be the pro changes crowd? they can't even agree among themselves.
some of them want light balance changes. some of them want heavy balance changes.
some of them want transmog and some of them don't.
some of them want new content or zones added and others don't.
now also consider that the entire reason blizzard is making classic wow is because there is a huge demand for it via the private server crowd. if blizzard doesn't deliver an authentic vanilla experience, and instead loads it up with a bunch of changes to satisfy people who want changes, those people go back to private servers and blizzard loses out on that money.
so go ahead. tell us who gets to decide on what changes go into the game.
tell us what changes are good and why they are good.