That hardly denotes lazy players, it merely denotes players who don’t think it’s worth their time to spend that time farming gold for activities they consider side games.
I understand what the 50g respec does, but I’m a bit confused how any of that is beneficial to the game.
That’s their prerogative.
Just don’t bend the game around those people, please.
LFD is also beneficial to the game but you disagree.
Blizzard certainly hasn’t removed it since it was added, and it’s been there for many expansions.
1 Like
Except having those people in game actually playing is better than them just logging off.
If you go into say a BG does it matter if they have dual spec? If you are in a dungeon with someone does it matter whether that’s they’re second spec? Does any actual gameplay change?
Yes, because dual spec being available presents gameplay opportunities to everyone around me that didn’t actually exist at the time, and since this is a game where almost everything you do is in groups, my experience is heavily affected.
I don’t want to play with people benefitting from such a flexibility. I want everyone to be under the same “handicap” or character management decision-framework.
Why not, what is the actual problem?
Let’s not act like people don’t have the option to respec though, that would be a mistake.
If you asked Classic players what they hate the most about retail, probably 90% of them will say LFD/LFR. LFD might make the game more convenient, but it doesn’t make it more fun.
Something that makes the game less fun cannot be beneficial.
This isn’t about what classic players want though, because otherwise you would respect my argument that I don’t want dual spec.
This is about you and recognizing that you have cherry picked specific things that you think are changes that you would like and changes that you wouldn’t like, and this actually differs between two people.
That is why it makes a lot more sense to go with something concrete. What is concrete, is how things were. The way it actually played out. It played out without dual spec. So that’s the answer to the question of “do we need dual spec”. The answer is no, we don’t because we got through it without dual spec before while subs were still going up, and we’ll get through it again without dual spec while subs are, coincidentally according to Blizzard, going up.
There is simply no pressing reason dual spec needs to be added.
3 Likes
Please explain to me why a 50g respec makes the game more fun than a 25g respec or a 100g respec.
To me, the most “fun” retro-TBC experience is the one that matches the actual TBC experience the closest.
So, given that context, 50g respecs are the most “fun” to me.
You have to understand, I look at this like I would any other retro game.
It’s like when I boot up Mario 64. There are sick bugs and janky mechanics in that game, but those are what make the game what it is, so when I boot it up, I expect all that jank to be there, or it’s not Mario 64.
But 50g is far easier to come by today than it was back then. To match the TBC experience it would need to be raised.
No, that’s your opinion that the cost of things for some reason needs to scale with “the experience”.
I personally like seeing the ground that can be made on the same parameters with better knowledge/skill. It shows how far we’ve come as players.
Again, it’s like approaching Super Mario as an adult compared to when you were a kid. All the sudden you’re flying through the levels way smoother and it feels good having the benefit of age/experience. It’s a naturally provided sense of accomplishment.
If there were bugs that made it impossible to play the game, would you not want them fixed? Would you even want to play?
#nochanges is at least an honest opinion. As for what classic players want? Of course it is about that, blizzard doesn’t consider #nochanges a valid argument on its own for TBC Classic.
So if enough players want dual spec and blizzard decides that it’ll retain enough subs to add it they will. Which is why if you don’t want dual spec you should articulate your reasons beyond #nochanges.
It’s your opinion that a 50g respec cost is “game breaking”, but history shows that this isn’t even a rational opinion because the game isn’t unplayable because of it, and never has been as long as 50g respec costs existed in the game.
2 Likes
And history has also shown us that dual spec does not destroy the game as some people keep trying to claim.
Yes but we’re not in a scenario where I’m begging Blizzard not to add dual spec.
Blizzard has shown zero perceivable interest in adding dual spec, so I’m not exactly under pressure here to make a solid argument for why it shouldn’t be added.
Of course this could change over night, but people wanted dual spec in vanilla too and they never added it then either. There’s precedence.
1 Like
I mean, I don’t think dual spec would “destroy” the game either. It would certainly make the experience less enjoyable for me though, because I’d feel like I’m playing on some dorky private funserver.
I don’t think “it won’t destroy the game” is a great argument to get Blizz to add it though.
2 Likes