Legacy servers, OP 5 years later!

General
Prev 1 2 3 4 419 Next
I seem to remember a "flogging a dead horse" thread from the old forums which would be quite good to have as a sticky in the general forums. Although I doubt people would read it before posting tired old threads.
I'll mention some reasons why vanilla was !%#%, all of which you've probably forgotten as you bath in nostalgia.

1) No new content.

2) No proper PvP.

3) Imbalance: 30 seconds CC, racials etc.

4) Single-target buffing.

5) Weapon skill.

6) A lot of classes with no good secondary talent tree.

7) Keychains.

8) Flightpoints.

9) Bugs (and a lot of them).

What was great about vanilla, was that you didn't know how bad everything was, and how much it could improve. Stop dwelling in the past. 99 % of the people saying this would be great, have completely blocked out what was bad about vanilla.
A bunch of stuff...


2) Subjective.

3) Never happened in later stages of the game with PvP trinkets and fixes. Diminishing returns says hello, also.

4) Don't see a problem. Inconvenience? Yes. Laziness ultimately. Current solution is better, sure.

5) Laziness.

7) Still have those.

8) Laziness.

9) And the current game doesn't?

Opinions, opinions. Some people like Classic WoW better than what we have now and feel it was a better game. Nostalgia isn't valid in the case of remembering it being better as some people, with regards to them and the way they like their games, for them it was better.

Stop telling people what you think they should and shouldn't like.
Supposed in my post that you don't want the entire vanilla pack released at once, since people would then just go straight to AQ / Naxx, not having anything looking forward to.

2) Might be subjective. But when it comes down to challenging or even competitive PvP, there was none. (Atleast not in the first 3-5 months).

4/5/8) Are people just being lazy for not wanting to buff a 5min salvation on 40 raidmembers? It was annoying and a complete was of time. Same goes for weapon skill. It was an unnecessary thing only causing annoyance.
Regarding flightpaths, everyone hates them. Once you've seen a zone, the scenic route is just annoying. That's not laziness thats just irritation.

7) As I'm assuming my first statement, no you didn't. Not untill Naxx was released which was the last 1/7th of vanilla.

9) Nope, it doesn't. Vanilla content had gaping holes, as all the videos available show. The current content has bugs, yeah, but nowhere near the same quantity.
Once again i just have to tell you that the game gets more realistic (Spelling?) with weapon skill, tbh. Becouse if your father would give ya a sword, would you know exactly how to fight with it.. no you would not!

And about the flight.. Let's say you was on the airport and wanna fly to a place you don't even know where it is..

The more realistic the game is, the funnier it is!

And yeah, sorry for my bad grammar!
23/02/2011 1:58 PMPosted by Znk
The more realistic the game is, the funnier it is!


Is it? Why?

You've given to examples of "realistic" things which in the confines of the game, are little more than timesinks. They don't add to the enjoyment of the game unless you happen to be the sort of person who likes watching numbers slowly increase while hitting grey mobs or the sort of person who likes not being able to do anything interactive while travelling.
23/02/2011 10:07 AMPosted by Vaneras
The developers however prefer


I dont see how this is a valid argument. This game should be designed based on what the players want not the developers.

Still, If you want a good reason to decline these requests then just say that such a server wouldn't be profitable or simply that you don't feel that you have the resources to maintain such a server.
Playstation Store has this nifty little feature called "Classic Games"..

Went there, and saw Red Alert. Bought all of them cause that was a damn good game...

Installed it.. Played it for 39 minutes... Deleted it

I will let you figure out the morality of that story
23/02/2011 2:30 PMPosted by Brutalinax
The developers however prefer


I dont see how this is a valid argument. This game should be designed based on what the players want not the developers.

Still, If you want a good reason to decline these requests then just say that such a server wouldn't be profitable or simply that you don't feel that you have the resources to maintain such a server.


Nice argument you have there.. except for the fact that you are the minority. So you can't use the phrase "what the players want". It is what YOU want.

Also Blizzard has no incentive to tell you why they make the decisions they do. Are you a major shareholder in Blizzard?
23/02/2011 1:51 PMPosted by Seksuel
9) Nope, it doesn't. Vanilla content had gaping holes, as all the videos available show. The current content has bugs, yeah, but nowhere near the same quantity.


23/02/2011 1:51 PMPosted by Seksuel
Nope, it doesn't.


23/02/2011 1:51 PMPosted by Seksuel
The current content has bugs, yeah


You seem a little confused.
23/02/2011 2:30 PMPosted by Brutalinax
The developers however prefer


I dont see how this is a valid argument. This game should be designed based on what the players want not the developers.

Still, If you want a good reason to decline these requests then just say that such a server wouldn't be profitable or simply that you don't feel that you have the resources to maintain such a server.


Would you want to work on a game you have no passion for?

Excatly, just look at Minecraft
23/02/2011 2:36 PMPosted by Dekolet
you are the minority
Nobody asked them to completely change the game into a classic wow.We simply asked for one or two realms which this minority would enjoy.The other part of the player base could just keep on playing Cataclysm.
23/02/2011 2:50 PMPosted by Cardharry
We simply asked for one or two realms which this minority would enjoy.


This would cost time, money and resource for Blizz to do and also has technical difficulties attached to it that would cost even more time and resource to resolve.

I would be very surprised if Blizz haven't already done a cost/benefit analysis of catering to this minority playerbase and concluded that it wouldn't generate the returns necessary to be worthwhile.
23/02/2011 2:50 PMPosted by Cardharry
you are the minority
Nobody asked them to completely change the game into a classic wow.We simply asked for one or two realms which this minority would enjoy.The other part of the player base could just keep on playing Cataclysm.


Playstation Store has this nifty little feature called "Classic Games"..

Went there, and saw Red Alert. Bought all of them cause that was a damn good game...

Installed it.. Played it for 39 minutes... Deleted it

I will let you figure out the morality of that story


Nuff said... You would play it for one month tops.. then you would reroll on a Cata server
23/02/2011 2:50 PMPosted by Cardharry
you are the minority
Nobody asked them to completely change the game into a classic wow.We simply asked for one or two realms which this minority would enjoy.The other part of the player base could just keep on playing Cataclysm.


And what about the people who then want a TBC realm? SHall we make one or two servers for them too?

And the Wrath players too? Lets make another 2 for them.

Then we will need to have the man power and seperate teams to keep these individual realms running.

And how would this be in Blizzards best interest?
gief tbc realm nao
This game was evolving (exactly evolving) from beta and up to patch before TBC came in.

Everything after was a mere additions and the game only grew fat of these adjustable stuff. It stopped evolving from TBC launch.

If they (Blizzard) would really like to make their game evolve, they would improve classic altogether with new content and it's adjustements. Did they? No.

If they would like game to move forward then with each new patch they would add something new in content in all their world known. Exapsions and classic included. Did they? Except for new graveyards in classic - no.

If they would like game to improve the game they wouldn't make end classic content obsolete and later on only end game level content at all. Did they leave end classic content viable and still accessable? No.

Point is simple. They either do not know what evolving is and do not know how to improve the game and it's existing content or they don't want to because that's not as profitable as feed newcomers with shiny stuff.

I myself wouldn't like to play on classic as it was pre-TBC patch. It wasn't perfect and in no way balanced. But I would gladly pay the twice subscription price for classic with balanced classes and vibe-live content with old fashioned design philosophy but with new improvements we have now.

That's to make myself clear.
Khenn - that post is a load of rubbish. It is pretty obvious that the vanilla content has evolved since the pre-tbc patch, in that it is quite a bit different to what it was at the time. Indeed pretty much all the vanilla zones now have new content and have changed quite a bit.

However, this doesn't mean that vanilla has to evolve in the ways you set out. Vanilla's purpose has evolved from being the entire game to being purely 1-60 content. The content does not need to evolve to be end game content for everyone, although Blizzard has made some vanilla content available in heroic mode.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum