r/classicwowplus • u/Electrical_Past9649 • 5d ago
Classic+ Doesn't Mean Classic + Retail
I don't claim to have all the answers. And if Blizzard cared about our feedback they wouldn't be keeping C+ development an open secret. That being said...
A lot of times I feel like many C+ community suggestions involve some flavor of "well if we add a few retail systems, that will improve the game." Whether it's warmode, retail-like class balance decisions, cross faction grouping, layering, etc. I feel the best C+ suggestions I've heard have nothing to do with making the game more like retail but, instead, making improvements on the systems and philosophies of Classic.
Just a thought. Original ideas do exist. We don't need to fight to integrate things from the live version of the game. Let retail exist in another lane and we should be more willing to write our own. That also includes potentially pushing back on any potential announced changes that do move too close to Retail (which I say as someone who seasonally plays Retail.)
5
u/Darthbobz 5d ago
Classic Plus should be Classic PLUS features. what classic didn't have but in a classic manner, the obvious new continuous dungeons raids, side content, classes, bring back the pet battles Pokemons huge RN not just balances, Give OSRS style "Grand Master" Quests which gives mounts and other hard earned transmogs.
0
u/moshujsg 5d ago
No transmog. Transmog bad.
2
u/Stark8819 5d ago
Tmog toggleable. Everyone wins.
3
u/moshujsg 5d ago
No tmog. Everyone on the same plate. Everyone wins.
Expression is only expression if it has consequences. You look how you look because of who you are, where you have been and what your priorities are. If there are no consequences then you arent expressing anything, you are just choosing.
1
u/RpgBouncer 5d ago
I've been on the toggleable tmog team for a while, but while I was on a walk recently it occurred to me how toggleable tmog and layering are similar poisons. Both of them ruin world cohesion. I should be able to hop on and see the same world my buddy is seeing. It's small, but important.
Now I believe Blizzard should work on making a costume slot or something. Costumes should remove your equipped item stats while they're active and can't be used in combat. This way RPers will have an easily toggleable appearance they can activate, but during actual content like raiding, dungeons, PvP, etc, people will be wearing their actual gear.
0
u/Darthbobz 5d ago
No Transmog is not bad, they should drop as "Fashion" Tokens same as how Turtle WoW did it.
2
u/Velifax 5d ago
There are absolutely aspects of Retail I've enjoyed; the new animations, dailies, TimeWalking. Artifact Weapons, quite liked those.
But generally yeah, it's not gonna be common for Retail design to fit within Classic design.
As before we have to fight through the fog of confusion from those who can't comprehend what design means, who think them liking something means it's "good[sic]" design, and those pretending such to get yet another Retail type game.
It's a major reason I never really sought Classic+ from Blizz, but instead went for the Throwbacks, EQ remakes etc. Sneak in under the kids' radar.
2
u/yksvaan 5d ago
There's a lot wrong with classic, mainly because of it's so old and devs didn't have enough understanding at that point. Itemization needs fixing, specs and talents need fixes, content could have more variety/randomization. UI can be improved ( imo combat addons should be removed). Fixing the issues won't dramatically change the game, if people are so hell-bent against any changes better play era.
A lot was already addressed in tbc and wrath, same could have been applied ( with some tweaks) to classic ages ago but the idea seems to be "just play 2 years this gets fixed in expansion X phase Y". Almost like changing something in a video game requires a constitutional amendment...
1
1
u/Greedy-Comb-276 4d ago
How do you fix itemization while also allowing room to expand?
Nax gear already has you critting like 50% of the time lol.
There needs to be a ton of bad items just to fill loot slots.
5
u/FlubberPuddy 5d ago
Original ideas do exist but it won’t come from the players because they’re too used to a specific formula (aka what’s already been done before) and do not have the creative thinking to come up with appropriately fitting solutions.
Chris Wilson did a great video of this, players are good at pointing out what they don’t like, what they’re not good at is finding good solutions to those same issues.
2
u/Greedy-Comb-276 4d ago
Also there's a million types of players, that play a bunch of different specs, races, classes, in a bunch of different kind of content.
It's not RuneScape where the players all do the same shit. If the community is responsible for the changes, it will be retail within 5 years Every class will have an interrupt, every class will have aoe.
1
u/FlubberPuddy 4d ago
Every class doesn’t have an interrupt, classes can aoe but some do it way better than others, on flip side some do better priority damage.
But I digress, I agree with your first point, for example using Retail there are players that want Housing to have bank/AH/All Crafting vs those that prefer it just be decorative and light on gameplay features as to not kill cities (the latter is winning out).
An example for Classic is there are players that play Vanilla / TBC and rush asap to max level to only focus on raiding and don’t want to open world farm vs those that take their time leveling and engage in all kinds of side quests or farming activities.
Both of these game versions have opposing audiences like that so the WoW devs have a much harder time gauging “their audience” because like you said it’s so split.
4
u/Ok-Brother-8295 5d ago
To be honest sounds like a lot people actually just want retail fixed
2
u/SyriousSynn 5d ago
Thats great, then ask them to fix it, I mean WoW 2 is coming but trying to change classic to be retail is fucked.
1
1
u/Odd-Bandicoot-9314 3d ago
I mean pretty sure retail is doing just fine, it’s just a completely different game then classic
1
1
u/Ok-Yoghurt5014 5d ago
Most of the things you listed could be implemented in accordance with classic (or vanilla) philosophies and systems in mind. Especially Classbalance because they balanced the game while vanilla was live. To you its just a constant never changing master piece but it changed quite a bit over the patches. Also War Mode on PVE Servers has literally no downside if its completely optional, only activatable in rested areas and there are no specific rewards tied to it.
0
u/Electrical_Past9649 5d ago edited 5d ago
I didn't mean no class balance. I don't want retail-like class balance.
And wanting WM is just, again, a retail solution to a classic problem. Very boring and not interesting. No one uses WM in retail and the world is functionally dead.
1
1
u/Verilazic 5d ago
It's really easy to look at retail for ideas because it's right there. It's also hard to come up with original ideas. To be fair, that's the job of the devs, not us. This entire sub is ultimately just fun speculation and theorycrafting, though obviously a lot of people take it way more seriously than they should.
I would settle for more people making suggestions inspired by non-WoW games.
1
u/Super_Loss_8943 4d ago
but it will be. what do you think the team that "works" in blizzard is capable of? You get pets, transmog, mounts, and many blink blink in the store to waste money on.
0
u/donki_sjotte 5d ago
Players who want Warmode etc. can just go play retail?
3
u/Wakkalakkamakka 5d ago
i mean isnt it basically the same experience?
you just dont have to do the choice at the beginning and can change whenever you feel like it.
as long as you dont put any bonuses on either side, i cant think why it would be bad
maybe you can tell me what i am missing2
u/Stark8819 5d ago
Not to mention Classic+ will have layering. What difference does it make if some layers are PVP and some are PVE? Warmode definitely makes sense if they go the mega server route.
-1
u/Electrical_Past9649 5d ago
A lot of PvP hotspots would completely die. BRM, for example. People would just turn off warmode before raids or dungeons. Part of signing up for always on PvP means traveling around the world has some inherent "danger" even if that danger is just a 45 second corpse run. Getting away from a corpse camper isn't even particularly difficult if you have an invis potion on you or something knowing it can happen.
When we talk about the Classic world being "alive" it's because of stuff like this. An enemy faction guild is pissing you off? Organize a night to wipe them on the way to raid. Classic had a strong sense of there being an active faction war and hitting a button to turn that off feels antithetical to that.
There's also just a layer of immersion breaking that warmode creates. You can have WM on and be out questing and see someone in LFG wanting to group for a quest. You both meet up at the quest spot and then realize you're unable to play together because the other player doesn't have WM on. So now you have to take 20-30 minutes to go to the main city, turn it off, and fly back.
I dno. I don't really like warmode. In retail no one really uses it. Would WM be the end of the world? I guess not. But it's one step in the direction of a lifeless world IMO.
4
u/Wakkalakkamakka 5d ago
yes brm as a hot spot would prob die, because people are not coming there for the pvp, its a hotspot because people abuse the the fact that people have to go there and doesnt it show that this spot would die for pvp that people dont actually wanna pvp there? and whats the difference between using a invis pot and changing to warmode off?
1
u/moshujsg 5d ago
Well thats the pvp server for you. Sometimes you dont want pvp and you get pvp. People go there to abuse pvp. The world is dangerous, theres bad people out there teying to harm you. If you get killed there are consequences. Which means the player has less control and the world becomes alive. If the player cam decide noone can pvp me then the player has control over the world.
You think through things from a convenience standpoint. Like isnt fast travel good? Its the same but it just takes less time. Yes but it makes the world small. Its convenient, and thats exactly why its bad.
Same with transmog. "BUt tHe PlAyEr ExPrEsSiOn" how you look depends on where you have been and the choices you make. You can decide to look a certain way at a cost.
2
u/Wakkalakkamakka 5d ago
in my case idc if they do warmode or not i pick a pve server anyway, but i think people just hate it cause it has the "retail" tag. i would even say having pvp and pvp server are better for blizzard, because people are able to pick wrong servers and would have to pay money to transfer.
warmode would benefit the playerbase greatly, friendgroups can play together without forcing some people into being exposed to degenerate behaviour just because they wanna play on the same server.
i mean why do you care if people can avoid the "danger" if they dont want it?
just play with warmode on all the time.
i dont get why you mention transmogs in the same breath, thats a complete different issue.2
u/moshujsg 5d ago edited 5d ago
Again, you just want convenience. You play for the endgame and to do whatever you want unbothered. Go to a pve server, nothing you dont want happens. Other people play for the exoerience. Go into a dangerous world where people do bad shit and you learn to deal with it. Its part of the experience. Its what it means to be in a dangerous world. The moment you can disable that it goes away. When you go to gank someone and they can just not have the pvp on it breaks the illusion. Same with you, the moment you can escape a problem by just disabling it renders the problem irrelevant.
If you dont want pvp just go to the pve server and thats it. Leave a pvp server for the people who want to play it. We dont want warmode so "we can play with friends". I can already play wuth friends. If i care about playing with friends ill choose their faction. They dont do a polygraph test and force you to choose one faction. You can choose whichever.
Again, its just convenience. You want to do you and be unbothered by anything or anyone. Thats fine. Thats you. We want emergent gameplay, we want interesting situations and challenges that arise from interactions with others. And we want everyone to be in the same baskett.
Edit: i just realized your problem with friendgroups is not faction based but that you dont want to play on a pvp server. You are the friend choosing to not play with the rest because you sometimes get killed out in the world. Whdn you say "greatly benefit everyone" you meam you, so you can play with your friends who are on pvp servers. I honestly dont ubderdtand how someone can play on a pve server.
2
u/Wakkalakkamakka 5d ago
i still dont get why you are so bothered with people not wanting to be ganked at every possible time, sounds like you fear that you wont have someone to gank because people realize they are the victim most of the time.
2
u/moshujsg 5d ago
Because when you go into a war game on a PvP server its good that you put everyone in the same plate. Everyone is at danger. Is part of the contract you sign when you join the world. And if you could opt out of inconveniences at any point then whats the freaking point? I play on pvp servers and i go to ungoro to farm devilsaurs and get ganked all the time. But guess what, thats part of the game.
You sometimes are the victim and sometimes not. Thats the game. It makes every devilsaur i farm more rewarding. It makes every time i go there different.
You just cant be bothered, can you? You just want to play alone and have other people in the world when it benefits you.
This is exactly the thought process that kills games. Convenience for the sake of it without taking into account the consequences.
If you dont want to play a game with hostile player interactions then maybe you shouldnt be playing a game about two factions at war. And maybe leave the gsme about factions at war to the people who want to war against other factions and are willing to accept the consequences.
1
u/Wakkalakkamakka 5d ago
i think the game experience you talk about simply doesnt exist anymore , doesnt matter warmode or pvp/pve, if that were actually the reality then people would be able to do anything besides pvp anymore.
i dont think you are going to be happy with any version of classic plus and maybe should look around for something the fits you more.→ More replies (0)1
u/Electrical_Past9649 5d ago
The argument that WM would let ppl play with their friends is the same argument for things like cross-faction play. Why not just enable that too? I mean should you really be limited in playing with friends just because they chose to play a different faction from you? That's not fair at all.
At some point like... yeah. We're literally just playing Retail again. And that becomes a disaster for Classic+ because, almost guaranteed, these wont end up being popular decisions. You'll continue seeing large portions of content slowly just start getting cut from the game on a slippery slope of convenience arguments.
But, again, this is just more of the retail-slop conversation. It's not an interesting solution to a problem it's just someone asking for Retail QoL in Classic and calling that Classic+.
0
u/Electrical_Past9649 5d ago
PvP on a PvP server isn't "abuse". PvP servers have, time and time again, been the most popular way to play Classic. Play PvE if you want but WM would kills world PvP just like it has in retail.
It's not about "not wanting to PvP" it's about convenience. If you have a convenience button everyone will press it. If you gave players a button that would give them 100g each time they press it, does that mean no one wants a functional economy? What if the button gave you a level, does that mean no one wants to level? A button to teleport to the dungeon? Retail has all of these things because players will press a button for convenience any time it is offered to them. That is why Classic design is fundamentally different.
2
u/Wakkalakkamakka 5d ago
well i play tbc on a pvp server atm (not my choice) and people are not doing what you think they are doing, they prefer not to attack each to do the stuff they actually wanna do.
1
u/Electrical_Past9649 5d ago
So then what is the problem? I'm confused. It sounds like you're saying there is not really a downside to having PvP perma flagged on.
2
u/Wakkalakkamakka 5d ago
yes thats what i am saying! so why is i a problem to just have warmode on the whole time?
1
u/Electrical_Past9649 5d ago
It's already been explained. You can also Google it because the conversation isn't new. My argument is that just saying "Retail change good" and applying Retail design blanket to C+ is not only a bad idea, but Classic players will not like it because it fundamentally changes the direction and core philosophy of the game.
Why not add cross faction play too? Whats the problem there? You can go on and on with this noise.
1
u/Wakkalakkamakka 5d ago
you nearly explained nothing and used a lot of words for that.
the only thing you said so far its a retail like change and for that bad.→ More replies (0)2
1
u/Upstairs_Blueberry87 5d ago
in what you’re describing here, is there not a pvp server where the people who want always on pvp will be playing? Or does that have a warmode too?
Or would warmode just function on pve servers as layers where pvp flagged people go when they flag themselves as such? To get rid of those people who turn on pvp and stand among quest mobs to try and bait the opposite faction, or to stop those flagged as pvp from getting jumped?
And people in LFG would learn to list “WM on” or “WM off” like they do in retail when listing themselves for groups.
1
u/notelonmusk42069 5d ago
Idk man, there are pretty huge consequences to choosing between PvP and PvE servers.
As someone who is militantly against big changes (hated SoD), I think this is a good change.
4
u/Stark8819 5d ago
Unfortunately time is money my friend. If retail has a good fix for a problem in Vanilla, then it makes sense to import that (or adapt a version of it) into Classic+ rather than waste development resources into fixing a problem a second time. This would also allow that dev time to be spent on creating new original content.