I think what is happening is that we are ordering a burger from Blizzard. We say we want cheese and Ketchup. Blizzard makes the burger, and the patty is great. Which is good because they want to make a good burger. But for the cheese they put the cheapo plastic cheese that takes longer to chew because it will let us savor the burger more. When it comes to the ketchup, they acknowledge that we want ketchup, but instead put mustard because the believe that will give a better flavor over ketchup.I think the core of the game is great. But in efforts to give us have us what they believe the "best" experience will be, they deviate from what we requested somewhat, and then they get backlash.
I would love to have DK presences back as well as 2 hand frost. Loved being able to switch to unholy for some quicker movement when doing certain things like farming or running back after a wipe or switching to blood during a damage phase where we cant attack. Love to see auras back for Paladins, glyphs that actually do cool things like water walking for the warlock mounts, no water walking for all mounts, poisons for all rogue specs, pvp gear from a vendor, need before greed, removal of legacy loot mode, and so much other stuff.Most of this stuff being removed at least for me felt like choices being removed. A piece of gear drops. Do I want it? Then I'll roll or roll for DE. Do I not need it? I'll pass so someone else can get it.
make it simple. more complex more problem and stop that season thingy u lose players
So, basically what Blizzard have done is acknowledge that they've heard our feedback (again) and they've made a video for players to watch and be convinced that what's being said will somehow improve the game and help prevent more players quitting the game.Let's face it, there's nothing new here, we all know the game isn't doing well and none of us are that surprised by this. Players aren't happy with what Blizzard are doing with the game and there are some who have quit the game because of this. Blizzard knows players aren't happy and they know they need to do something to try and turn things around so they pet Ion in a video to talk about what's coming up and Blizzard hopes this will be just the thing to convince everyone that better times are coming to the game sometime in the future.As always, only time will tell if Blizzard truly have really listened to player feedback and whether they actually do anything about any of this. As always, actions speak louder than words, Blizzard can say all the "right" things to try and convince players they're listening, but if Blizzard doesn't follow up and make changes to improve then it's all just a lot of talk and more players will simply walk away.
Well here's hoping Holy Priests get PW: Shield back :D
Mildly OT: I can't help but wonder whether I would care about this as much as I used to care about dev videos if I had a community to return to in WoW.It doesn't matter if they give me abilities I liked back, or returned threat to Legion levels because I started tanking in Legion and miss not having to fight for aggro. Can I play difficult mechanics instead please?I don't feel like I will make friends on the live game ever again. Not while m+ is all you need to get high level gear so nobody gives a fish about guilds. My last three years consisted of nothing but searching for a raid group that progressed and stuck together - like it used to be before Legion, or even before WoD. So what if I have class identity again? I love death knights no matter what. And shammies. But mostly death knights. Mmmmhhmmm, edgy. ... It doesn't matter at all while I'm sitting there alone after guild number #478 I tried to connect with dies as everyone realizes they can just gear in M+ and then pug everything.(You know that thing where people will pug raids all the time but in the guild complain that the guild run needs pugs? I love that.)I hope they will find a way to undo the damage they did. Until then, I will play Classic (which on its own isn't exactly a great game by today's standards) and enjoy at least having a community there so I can look forward to logging in....and also hope that they will make Wrath servers someday because hot damn.
Admitting their mistakes is the first step... of course they wouldn't really be in this situation if they hadn't retreated into their shells for the last 2 or 3 expansions and stopped engaging the playerbase.
Stances are dumb, they were always dumb (hang out in Zerk so a Rogue can't Sap you, kek!*) for Warriors they did !@#$ing @#$% all to promote some kind of class identity besides a feat tax mechanic. For the uninitiated: When you change stances you lost Rage. Originally you lost all of it unless you talented right then you could keep up to 25. You only got Charge from Battle Stance. THIS IS IMPORTANT.Battle stance was the stance you actually did %^&* in. It had Charge -you know the central mechanic of how your class gets into battle- and everything else you'd be using for 99% of the game.Defensive Stance (-10% damage taken, -20% damage dealt) was Prot Spec without having to be Prot Spec unless you were Prot Spec at which point you'd be in Defensive Stance. You didn't get Charge or Hamstring or Cleave or Whirlwind or *!@#ing anything damaging in Def Stance. I don't actually hate Def Stance but was so niche it really epitomized the waste of effort (and precious Rage) that was "stance dancing" to use Disarm. Trying to outlast an enemy in Def Stance was a frustrating waste of time.Berzerker Stance (+20% damage taken, +10% damage dealt) was your dps spec. It had actually useful #$%^ like Intercept (Charge + Stun that costs Rage), Pummel (originally 10 rage), Whirlwind (AoE), Berzerker Rage (break Sap, Fear, Gouge, etc) and Bloodthirst (lol) if you spec'd into it but...I'll explain below.So...ugh....it's complicated and works like this: critical to vanilla WoW was that you couldn't Charge if you were in combat. For a Warrior Charge is all important because it's a) direct movement into combat range and b) 20+ Rage to start the fight. So if you got shot first you couldn't Charge. Big problem. BUT if you were in Zerker Stance you couldn't Charge because the stance didn't get to use that power. You got Intercept. Intercept had a longer cooldown and a Rage cost. It was unlikely you had Rage before entering combat so starting Zerker meant dry-tank running to your target -unless you could find a rabbit to splatter for Rage first. Why does this matter? Because if you ate an arrow (or goddess help you a frostbolt) before you could Charge you'd best change to Zerker ASAP at which point you'd be struggling to get into range until you had enough Rage to Intercept to your target. And as the formulas of how you got Rage changed and contorted patch after patch it was extremely possible to be Rage-starved your about-to-be-very-short life since you didn't always get it when being damaged. When the devs finally dumped Stances they made Charge usable in combat (also there was constant complaining about Warriors using Intercept as a tactical Stun ability) and holy @#$% that fixed #$%^ing everything problematic about &*!@ing Charge, Intercept and being in and out of combat! UNBERIVABURU!1111Because uniquely, because you are a Warrior you soft headed idiot child, your class resource builds up instead of counting down. This distinction is critical. Everyone, EV-ERY-ONE, else starts with a full tank and spends down. You start on empty and Warrior who cannot build Rage is just an usually stupid, irritable Paladin.Now imo Vanilla WoW was built much more around direct-counter classes and Warriors counter Warlocks and Rogues because Zerk stance provided lots of interrupts and break-outs to counter their important powers. But you also took extra damage and Rogues are diamonds about getting extra damage.Why bring this up? To make the case that in the case of Stances it wasn't some beautifully deep and mysterious well of wisdom and power it was a bale of fail that made the class weaker. If you were questing you were in Battle. If you were PvP'ing you were in Zerker. if you were dps'ing you were in Zerker. If you were Tanking you were in Defensive. There wasn't much actual flexibility to the class because there was so little variation in what stance matched what activity. The entire conceit of "Stance Dancing" (changing stance to use a stance-specific ability like Disarm) wasn't an advantage it was a penalty. Strip every stance of every ability it shares with another stance and you start to see very short lists of actual unique powers. Battle and Def are nearly identical -Def. actually got to steal Thunderclap from Battle to improve it's AoE threat capabilities. Zerker was the most distinct but attempts at two-stance Warriors builds were kind of thematically pathetic given that Warriors, again uniquely because we eat paint during character creation, were a three stance class with three matching talent trees. The big change of dumping Stances in favor of Specs was an act of *!@#ing mercy on the Warrior class. (Notably Defensive Stance was far more important as a gear set ie Tank Gear then it was mechanically distinctive from the other two. Come endgame the difference between Battle and Zerker only changed in terms of effectiveness (which could vary wildly, granted) then it did in terms of equipment.)Given a choice between having one class be split among three schizophrenic-ly balanced mechanics and just making specs different it only took the devs a decade to get it right. And look at the other Stance classes. Oh wait, there are none. It was a mechanic so terrible it was never replicated^.No, *!@# you very much to Stances. I remember what that was like and I do not miss it. When Vanilla comes and I come back I will be a HUNTER.*unless you get Sapped, Rage out of it, and the Rogue comes back to Sap you when Rage wears off, kekekekek. 45 sec cd on Zerker Rage you plate-clad clod.^"What about Death Knights?" What about Death Knights? They tried stances, discovered stances were terrible, and never looked back.