This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Classic Theme
Thottbot Theme
Meaning of the word "hard" & was vanilla harder then WoW is now?
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
553595
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Monday
Yes. Coordinating 40 people is hard.
Heck, its hard coordinating 5 people, now times that by 8...
Post by
xtromas
conclussion
*conclusion*
Post by
seebs
The question isn't just whether it's "hard" but whether it's "interestingly hard".
Okay, imagine that you have a pretty tough fight, but one that guilds can sometimes pull off.
Now... Remove several of the challenging aspects. Take out complicated phases. Take away the Safety Dance from wossname the unclean... And instead, have a thing where every 10 seconds of the fight, there is a 5% chance that a player will die, including right when the fight starts. Completely randomly.
Which of these is going to be harder for people to beat? I'm guessing it'll be the one with the random player death. Indeed, if you make the chance high enough, it'll be
impossible
for people to beat it. Would that make it "harder"? It certainly would. Would people find it more fun and challenging? No.
The essence of a good challenge is that it rewards
skill
(or maybe gear), not pure random chance.
A lot of what made Vanilla hard was random good or bad luck, and things where you could spend months farming something and just happen never to get a drop that would let your healer gear up. Whoops, bad luck. WotLK offers more interesting challenges.
Post by
Orranis
While I agree with you mostly, your lecture is flawed. If it is time consuming, then it can be considered a requirement of great effort to endure, which is what you have posted as part of the definition. Also, because (and I'll admit this is true) of the higher ratios from boss damage compared to player health, it could be said that it did take an equal amount of concentration to do tank n' spanks as it now takes to do dynamic encounters. So, if you want, it's perfectly justifiable to say Vanilla was "hard." Also keep in mind that Vanilla did have dynamics, even if they don't involve motorcycles with supersonic attacks. Indeed, Naxxaramas, which is ridden with mechanics, is quite often forgotten to be a Vanilla raid.
tl;dr
Was Vanilla 'hard' that's you opinion.
Was it more fun? Also your opinion.
Neither side is fact, get over it.
Edit: I personally relish WoTLK and it's quick to do, but fun and interesting encounters and raids. Ulduar might be my favorite raid of all time.
Post by
166878
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
seebs
Posting opinions isn't a problem. Posting opinions while claiming they're facts and being unwilling or unable to support them in any way might be a problem. So don't do that; figure out what facts you can support, and argue for them, or argue for your opinion if you have reasons to hold it.
Post by
Jacmac
The meaning of hard changes quickly from individual to individual.
Definition of the word hard:
difficult: not easy; requiring great physical or mental effort to accomplish or comprehend or endure; "a difficult task"
And that my friend, does not DEFINE vanilla to be HARD but rather TIME CONSUMING that is two complety different things.
Even if you knew the mechanics, the "show" it would still require GREAT time effort.
It could be argued that time consuming leveling requires great mental effort to accomplish. At least a lot of extra patience to endure which is in your definition; that should count for something.
Post by
116883
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Rouen
time consuming is not hard, but it sure feels more rewarding. wow was never hard by itself, what makes it hard is finding people that are able to work together and coordinate properly. this is the main element of guild skill, and it is still 100% required.
The main problem with MMO's is that they appeal to a vast playerbase, including the player base that does not have enough time in their day to be able to maintain top end gear or spend all day bashing my face into the keyboard on heroic ICC attempts until I am so intimately familiar with the Blood Queen encounter that she ends up asking for my hand in marriage.
Time Consuming = Fun if you have the time. You people can call folks like me "casual," but the meaning of casual today has become more of a subjective term relating to the amount of time that is invested into the game.
Casual =/= Fail.
Post by
146010
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
qwertydood
I'm just going to post this in every thread about this that I see. Read it, stop posting these topics please.
http://www.mmo-champion.com/general-discussions-22/warcraft-raiding-has-not-become-easier/msg2161024/?topicseen#new
Read and be educated, and stop making these posts.
Post by
418219
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
trislit
One interesting aspect of the casual vs. hardcore debate is that most of the players that actively participated in 40 man raids were in the mid to lower teen ranges, which would have logically put them in the middle school - high school range. Flash forward to WoTLK and those same players are now 6 years older now and maybe in college or starting their first real career, and you can see why it is so much more difficult to organize that many people for the large blocks of time it took to finish a vanilla raid. Blizz knows what they're doing when they implement faster gear/dungeon grinds, it's not so much to simplify the game, it's more likely to cater to the majority of the current player base.
Post by
44207
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.
