Vanilla isn't just vanilla: discuss it

Classic Discussion
I keep seeing this: "Classic is classic" and "vanilla is vanilla" so "just give us vanilla no changes." News flash, this forum exists, the announcement exists: they know we want it but they don't know what "it" is.

I played vanilla like many of you, I started in the beta actually with a Druid named "Tree." This rogue I'm posting on ended up being my main vanilla character that raided MC/BWL/NAX/etc. Go ahead and check my legacy Knight pvp achievements or my lvl400 unarmed "weapon" skill. I still have my Nightslayer and Bloodfang sets in my bank. I have great memories killing Green Dragons in massive PvP battles over the spawns. Some old member of my guild probably still has a warlock logged out by one of their portals. There are still AQ event videos on my computer.

I loved it, I want the vanilla feel like the rest of you, but that doesn't mean there is no more discussion to be had because "vanilla is vanilla."

I'm going to start this off on a tangent: StarCraft remastered

StarCraft remastered is a perfect example of a successful rebuild of the glory of a game. It has just enough enhancement to make the experience better while still delivering that classic StarCraft:BW feel. Now, technically you can still go back to your old disks and download/play to super old versions. We won't have that option in WoW. But changes, QoL or otherwise, don't have to mean the end of a classic feel. Camera changes in StarCraft are a good example of this. Yet, also in StarCraft, they kept the old gaps between buildings and collision oddities that allowed you to glitch units over usually impassible terrain because that sort of thing, even though unintended at the time, became a part of the game. It's not REALLY original StarCraft but it's got all the things to make it feel "classic."

Saying "just give us vanilla" doesn't help anyone do anything. Vanilla was many greater and lesser patches over several years. It was also many things to many people (10 million people to be exact, just before the BC launch). So remember this isn't just for you alone. This is a chance for us all to relive the game we loved.

Do we want truly unbound group sizes end game instances like BRD/UBRS/Strat/Scholo that allowed 40 people in them? That use to be allowed until 1.3 or so. Both cases are vanilla. It was also vanilla when they reduced it to 5man for some of them.

Meeting stones and the "baby steps" of group building assistance even showed up toward the end of vanilla (not to be confused with group finder or even LFG).

Should the game not launch from the blizzard launcher? Should it not integrate with battle.net? That was also Vanilla.

I've even seen some hard line classic posters say "only bug fixes" but even that can change the game. Wall walking anyone? How about my StarCraft example above. Losing wall walking wouldn't ruin it for me but regardless that's a change.

We all want the big dangerous world without a lot of the new things that made even seeing that world obsolete. But does a larger bank really effect that (just as an example)? I had mule alts back then, they worked, but it was a massive annoyance. Remember before they made mail to your own characters instant (that change happened in vanilla too)? This is a type of QoL change that, for all my nostalgia, wouldn't effect my enjoyment. That doesn't mean I suddenly want flying mounts and group finder (because I don't). For me, a larger bank doesn't effect my enjoyment of the game. In fact, it would maybe mean I could keep a large collection of all that gear I was forced to sell back in the day (I miss my Shadowcraft set); maybe it would enhance my nostalgic enjoyment. All that aside... I'd still feel like I was playing vanilla with or without it.

I still want my mount at lvl40 and the insane expense of epic mounts. I did the exalted grind in AV back in the day just to save gold on my epic mount and I'd be happy having that back again because it felt like a real accomplishment. I want old non-linear dungeons. I could go on and on.

My more controversial want: for all my nostalgia, I'd appreciate a secondary spec option so I didn't have to spend 50g every time I wanted to PvP (100g total to go back to raid mode). That was a TON back then and, I feel, an unnecessary punishment for people who wanted to play both sides of the game.

Anyway, my personal desires aside, I'll still play classic even if my whole checklist isn't hit. The point is that there are things worth having a discussion about because vanilla ISN'T just vanilla; so many things happened and changed back then from 0.8 to 1.12.0.

I'm sure we all had our favorite time period but that's exactly why we need to be constructive and have these discussions. Like it or not we won't all have our own server (and that wouldn't be fun anyway).

My point is, pick your battles, I'm not going to let a bank size discussion ruin the classic feel for me. Lets turn this trip down nostalgia lane into the fun we all want it to be rather than ruining it with a screaming match.

Added here from one of my later posts for emphasis:
Does this mean we're going to play exactly the old game like popping the disc in for the first time or are we going to get the experience of the old game in it's prime like with StarCraft: Remastered.
I look forward to the purists rebuilding their computer from 2004 to play it and demand Blizzard use the original server hardware for the TRUE Vanilla experience
Small changes can make a surprisingly large impact. It's also a very slippery slope. I'm purely and advocate of making no changes whatsoever, because that is the only logical way to preserve the experience of classic wow. Now is the time to tell Blizzard that.
11/15/2017 11:29 AMPosted by Shadyfigure
I started in the beta actually with a Druid named "Tree."
I started with a Night Elf Druid named "Elf". Get on my level.
(not much of a contribution, I know :P)
Just copy pasting my post here, I agree with you btw.

Do the purists think TBC was a bad expansion or something? I keep seeing "NO CHANGES" "If we let them change game will be bad like legion it is now"

But I thought they did a really good job with TBC and wotk, hell I even enjoyed the beginning of cata. Why would you even want a realm with 20% mages 20% rogues and 20% warriors and 40% everything else? I made these numbers up but you see what I mean, this is not 13 years ago, people know how to min max, know what classes are the best, and the class specs in vanilla 1.12 were far from balanced. only warriors were proper tanks, and mages/rogues/warriors lead the dps chart.

People like me want to go back to TBC or wotk for nostalgia and the "good old days" , but obviously there is no such thing so we are also hopping on the vanilla wagon hoping for some class skill number tweaks, but all I see are people screaming for an unpolished game 13 years ago, and denying that blizz did any good changes over the decade.
Good post op. Many people posting here are private server drones. They want blizzard to host a 1.12.1 jerryrigged server that they’re used to.
11/15/2017 11:32 AMPosted by Karvv
Small changes can make a surprisingly large impact. It's also a very slippery slope. I'm purely and advocate of making no changes whatsoever, because that is the only logical way to preserve the experience of classic wow. Now is the time to tell Blizzard that.


What does no changes mean?

No changes from 1.0?
No changes from 1.1?
No changes from 1.2?
1.3?
1.4?

I think you get my point.

Presuming they take the same measures they took with StarCraft remastered I actually trust them to make changes outside of exact patches too and keep it feeling classic. I'm sure we'll also have a chance to rebut them when they are announced.

Regardless, "slippery slope" and "no changes" don't really offer any information. Hence my wall of text.
You are opening a can of worms
My point about making small changes can become a slippery slope is exactly how it sounds.

Take cosmetics for example. People want new character models, if blizzard gives them that, the next day they will ask for the new spell effects because the old ones don't match up with their new character models. If blizzard gives in to that, they'll ask for new spell animations because the effects don't match the old animations.

Next thing you know, they'll want new gear because old gear models don't look good on new character models. Then they'll want transmog because they prefer the look of some models over others, or don't like how silly they look with half of one set, and half of another.

My point is that none of these suggestions are over the top or too far when you look at them from the point of what was immediately before them. But if you look at it from a pure classic experience to asking the question "do you want transmog also", is obviously a huge leap and bound from the original experience. It's a slippery slope.

That's why I advocate for the original experience and nothing more. The only reasonable debating that should happen in this forum should be about what to keep or what to remove from features between 1.0 and 1.12.1, since those were the changes that occurred during classic wow.
No changes.

Progression through 1.X patches, of course they should do that.

Don't add anything to the game that wasn't added originally or in any of the 1.X patches.

That is a straightforward way to go about it. How can you argue against it because it stays true to form?
Actually...Vanilla is Vanilla. If any changes are implemented that compromise that then it will no longer be Vanilla.

You can debate about what QoL changes you feel are necessary, but don't pretend you're preserving the original experience by doing so.
One of the things a lot of the posters keep saying is "don't change anything" well, a lot of stuff got changed. Like computers and software. Yeah, they got some old code but old code is old code and doesn't work any more.

So when people say "don't change it" -- it's like they think Blizzard is tinkering around with something that exists in a usable form and no, they aren't going to take the craptacular patch job from the pirate realms because that needs to be fixed as well. For Blizzard standards it has to be rebuilt, and just like Steve Austin it can be better, stronger, faster!

Blizzard is a multi-billion corporation and has to release stuff at that level. No one is going to forgive Blizzard for an unstable constantly breaking platform. It's not reasonable to want bugs put in just so they can be taken out again. Keep in mind, the term is CLASSIC which is different than ORIGINAL.

I see all the slippery slope arguments and I can agree that it is scary. But some of you are just whipping yourselves into a frenzy over stuff that doesn't exist yet. You can expect a lot of stuff, and that includes some changes as well as an overall very authentic feeling experience.

When all you do is shout NO like a toddler in the terrible twos, it doesn't help anything. "As close to vanilla as possible" says something. Preparing yourselves for compromises, like maybe mail will have more than one attachment because it's just simpler and easier to use the existing interface -- is that really going to be game breaking?

Keep in mind that what you want (original vanilla) doesn't exist in a cohesive form, and no, your disks won't help... It has to be rebuilt/fixed/updated. So instead of just throwing a fit and NO NO NO what are the sorts of things you can live with? Not saying all the QoL stuff will or even should go in. They aren't going to mess with the big stuff. Middle stuff maybe, minor stuff pretty much definitely.

But what sort of background stuff can you live with?
One of the things a lot of the posters keep saying is "don't change anything" well, a lot of stuff got changed. Like computers and software. Yeah, they got some old code but old code is old code and doesn't work any more.

So when people say "don't change it" -- it's like they think Blizzard is tinkering around with something that exists in a usable form and no, they aren't going to take the craptacular patch job from the private realms because that needs to be fixed as well. For Blizzard standards it has to be rebuilt, and just like Steve Austin it can be better, stronger, faster!

Blizzard is a multi-billion corporation and has to release stuff at that level. No one is going to forgive Blizzard for an unstable constantly breaking platform. It's not reasonable to want bugs put in just so they can be taken out again. Keep in mind, the term is CLASSIC which is different than ORIGINAL.

I see all the slippery slope arguments and I can agree that it is scary. But some of you are just whipping yourselves into a frenzy over stuff that doesn't exist yet. You can expect a lot of stuff, and that includes some changes as well as an overall very authentic feeling experience.

When all you do is shout NO like a toddler in the terrible twos, it doesn't help anything. "As close to vanilla as possible" says something. Preparing yourselves for compromises, like maybe mail will have more than one attachment because it's just simpler and easier to use the existing interface -- is that really going to be game breaking?

Keep in mind that what you want (original vanilla) doesn't exist in a cohesive form, and no, your disks won't help... It has to be rebuilt/fixed/updated. So instead of just throwing a fit and NO NO NO what are the sorts of things you can live with? Not saying all the QoL stuff will or even should go in. They aren't going to mess with the big stuff. Middle stuff maybe, minor stuff pretty much definitely.

But what sort of background stuff can you live with?


Not much of this argument even makes sense. Vanilla server advocates justify wanting a classic server because they want to re-experience the old game as it was, similar to playing ocarina of time on the N64. They think its a historic work of art.

Not many of them would want Nintendo to create a new ocarina of time with updated graphics and then mass ban the playing of the old one, just because they have the technology to do so. They create new legend of zelda games for current fans to play, while also allowing the play of the original ocarina of time whenever someone wishes to.

Also, calling people toddlers just because they are vocal in their disagreement with you won't get you far in being taken seriously.
I feel as though there is a discrepancy to be made between preserving vanilla as an item and the feeling/fun of vanilla while playing it.

Preserving vanilla would literally mean starting at 1.0 and progressing as it once did.

Is that actually what we want? because the game had a ton of faults even with nostalgia glasses. Do we want the game to begin with content from an early 1.0 type stage but contain features later vanilla patches?

What about changes that came late but were absolutely improvements, in my opinion, such as the no full duration CC in PvP (that was 2.0 if I recall initially)? I think it's ok to leave it on this one, cool.

1.12.1 was the BC pre-patch so in a way that has more in common with 2.0 than 1.12. I don't think any of us want the BC skill trees that existed in 1.12.1 for example.

We're ok altering the EXACT timeline of vanilla even with things from later vanilla patches because it makes sense. I don't find it unreasonable to entertain other options. Lots of things were planned for vanilla that got scrapped due to budget/timeline/technology limitations.

There's also the matter of fact that no matter how precisely we follow the vanilla formula it will simply not be the same since the exact figures are known for every step of the way. Is there anything in this space worth discussing that, while technically less like how vanilla was, would actually enhance the overall classic feeling. Maybe not, but it's worth discussing.

There are also notable add-ons that were ubiquitous back then that were later added as features. Most notable of these are probably auction house related. Do we go with old implementations (and we all download add-ons again) or just admit that in this one case it's ok to take a newer implementation. There were even questing add-ons that did nearly exactly what modern quest system does but I do agree that would take it too far probably.

I'm not claiming all of my (or other people's) answers are correct. I'm saying the discussions are worthwhile.

My whole point of bringing up SC:R in my first post was to display that it's possible to play the same game with enhancements and it's not ruined when done right. This isn't WoW:Vanilla, it's WoW:Classic and there's an opportunity here that we may never have again.

Does this mean we're going to play exactly the old game like popping the disc in for the first time or are we going to get the experience of the old game in it's prime like with StarCraft: Remastered.
11/15/2017 12:11 PMPosted by Karvv
Also, calling people toddlers just because they are vocal in their disagreement with you won't get you far in being taken seriously.


LOL, trust me the NO posts aren't taken seriously either.

I am also advocating that Classic be as close to original as possible. But it's not going to be original. It's going to be rebuilt.

Personally for me, the toggle for different graphics isn't breaking either way. BUT for RP realms I think one view should be required, whatever Blizzard decides to do. This is the time for discussion and we all have a place at the discussion, and as we see there are various thoughts about various issues.

NO! isn't discussion. It's a fit.
11/15/2017 11:57 AMPosted by Bumbledoor
No changes.

Progression through 1.X patches, of course they should do that.

Don't add anything to the game that wasn't added originally or in any of the 1.X patches.

That is a straightforward way to go about it. How can you argue against it because it stays true to form?
WHAT PART ABOUT THIS DO PEOPLE NOT UNDERSTAND.
Vanilla can still be a long hard painful grind like it use to.
That dose not mean we need to keep every nonsense broken thing tho.
I'm sure there where lots of fixes and changes planed for classic before TBC came out.
11/15/2017 11:33 AMPosted by Sfzrx
Just copy pasting my post here, I agree with you btw.

Do the purists think TBC was a bad expansion or something? I keep seeing "NO CHANGES" "If we let them change game will be bad like legion it is now"

But I thought they did a really good job with TBC and wotk, hell I even enjoyed the beginning of cata. Why would you even want a realm with 20% mages 20% rogues and 20% warriors and 40% everything else? I made these numbers up but you see what I mean, this is not 13 years ago, people know how to min max, know what classes are the best, and the class specs in vanilla 1.12 were far from balanced. only warriors were proper tanks, and mages/rogues/warriors lead the dps chart.

People like me want to go back to TBC or wotk for nostalgia and the "good old days" , but obviously there is no such thing so we are also hopping on the vanilla wagon hoping for some class skill number tweaks, but all I see are people screaming for an unpolished game 13 years ago, and denying that blizz did any good changes over the decade.
tbc was good but part of the downfall.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum