100% confirmed sharding isn’t staying.

Classic Discussion
11/06/2018 11:02 PMPosted by Ankoku
1. Dynamic Respawning
2. Make it a mess at launch, create memories. All lining up for a single spawn, communities are indeed built from level 1 onwards.


To be honest if they instead went with the multi-tagging system we currently have I wouldn't mind. For the most part that system doesn't have any real "downsides" besides the havoc it can play on skinning.

Although I can see concerns that people don't have to communicate to form a group and still benefit from this. That alone isn't a gamebreaker for me, but I understand some may see it as a slippery slope toward community fracture once again.
He said they "think" they can limit sharding for a "few" weeks. These words are not assuring anything. Think means they might or might not, a few could be anywhere from 2+ weeks. These words are arbitrary and not definitive.

Few
As mentioned above, "a few" means two or more.

2+, with no end defined . . .

think
/THiNGk/Submit
verb
1.
have a particular opinion, belief, or idea about someone or something.

He believes they can do it, but he isn't certain, he is hoping we won't notice when it happens beyond what we deem a "few" weeks.

With few being 2 or more, it could be indefinite, whenever server load is too high, which seems most likely considering the reasoning for using it in the first place.
11/06/2018 11:19 PMPosted by ßøøðøø
He said they "think" they can limit sharding for a "few" weeks. These words are not assuring anything. Think means they might or might not, a few could be anywhere from 2+ weeks. These words are arbitrary and not definitive.

Few
As mentioned above, "a few" means two or more.

2+, with no end defined . . .

think
/THiNGk/Submit
verb
1.
have a particular opinion, belief, or idea about someone or something.

He believes they can do it, but he isn't certain, he is hoping we won't notice when it happens beyond what we deem a "few" weeks.

With few being 2 or more, it could be indefinite, whenever server load is too high, which seems most likely considering the reasoning for using it in the first place.


I'm glad you're looking at it objectively, because to me, seeing a lawyer (cheap joke, harr harr) make statements about how they "might" be able to do something for a "few" weeks just sets off warning sirens.

Does this mean they MIGHT do it or not do it, and if they do, it will be a for an indeterminate amount of time?

Or does it mean they're definitely doing it and it MIGHT only be for a few weeks? (The alternative being permanently?)

That's why combining two vagueries is unnerving - and the favorite tactic of publishers and lawyers (and politicians).

I hope I'm wrong.
If he intended that it definitely will be for only 2 or 3 weeks, he would have said that it will ONLY be for Two or Three weeks, we wouldn't have resorted to obscurity by using arbitrary distinctions.
I'm in this for the long haul. Early sharding is disappointing, but that's a short time period compared to hopefully years of gameplay. If you want to abandon Classic because of launch sharding, that's fine, but my "I'm out" threshold hasn't been reached yet.

However, if sharding becomes permanent, then my departure becomes permanent.
11/03/2018 04:16 PMPosted by Aranhod
11/03/2018 04:14 PMPosted by Morbyd
So basically some people on these forums are saying;
"If WoW launches in playable condition, we won't play it!"
Did vanilla WoW launch in a playable state?


Didn't they announce last year they want to recreate vanilla but they don't want to recreate vanillas launch... Almost an exact quote!

how delusional can you guys be for over 1 full year. People begging for garbage...you can't apply this logic anywhere else.

I got an idea for you If you want the game to crash every 5 mins, bind water or food to Alt f4.
"There’s still a lot of questions about how the team will tackle it, but Brack says they’re committed to recreating an authentic Vanilla World of Warcraft experience. "One of the tenets of Classic WoW is none of the cross-server realms and different [server] sharding options that we have available to us today. There’s a lot of desire on part of the community that this is something that they don’t want." - PC GAMER article with J. Allen Brack.

There has been some discussion around what he actually said in that quote. I think it should be clear to people with good reading comprehension, that it's rational to think it's the most likely that he's talking about one of Blizzard's tenets when it comes to creating Classic WoW.

Seems like they've changed their mind when it comes to that, and this is one of the examples as to why people don't trust what people at Blizzard say.
Sharding in 2018? It's time to put your billions to use Blizzard, or do you plan to rest on your laurels? The future will be MMORPGS without sharding, and that can handle massive amounts of players.

Now you can either lead the way when it comes to developing that, or play catch up after someone else does it. You've had close to 14 years since launch to figure out how to deal with the issues huge amounts of players create, and what you have to offer your customers at this time is the miserable sharding, LOL.
11/03/2018 04:24 PMPosted by Aranhod
11/03/2018 04:21 PMPosted by Velossena
Did Vanilla WoW have potentially millions of players trying to funnel through the starting zones?
...

...yes?

It was an enormous cluster !@#$ on day one. I doubt we'll get some of the more meme-able issues like loot surfing back, but yes it was nearly impossible to play because the servers were getting crushed by an absolutely enormous wave of players.

On my server we literally formed orderly lines to kill certain quest mobs because the servers couldn't handle people fighting over them.


Nope. We know the numbers, it was just over 100,000 playing on the first day. Now we have the entire retail community able to check out Classic when it drops which is rumoured to be nearly 2 million subs and then we have all the people coming back just to play Classic.

If it was unplayable and you had to line up to kill mobs in real Vanilla with 100k people then can you imagine what a million+ will be like if they don't intervene with any "crowd control" methods??

It's selfish to demand Blizzard to treat this like it is Vanilla when they invented sharding because the WoW population grew too big for their servers to be able to cope without it. This isn't Vanilla numbers anymore, I wish people would be reasonable but it seems like everyone is saying "my way or the highway"
they need to go on record and say the gates of aq event wont be sharded, thats the motherlode of all massive events right there and it was in classic....
11/07/2018 02:18 AMPosted by Klinkiniak
Sharding in 2018? It's time to put your billions to use Blizzard, or do you plan to rest on your laurels? The future will be MMORPGS without sharding, and that can handle massive amounts of players.

Now you can either lead the way when it comes to developing that, or play catch up after someone else does it. You've had close to 14 years since launch to figure out how to deal with the issues huge amounts of players create, and what you have to offer your customers at this time is the miserable sharding, LOL.


The last minutes of nost being up had more than a thousand players out front of Ironforge casting aoes and with little lag, if they can do it as dirt poor eastern europeans then so can the billion dollar company blizzard, its not like we are getting this for free either. im not subbed so if i came back then i am giving them money just for classic that they otherwise would not have and same with hundreds of thousands of former players, blizzard is cheap and it looks bad it looks like they dont care about their players.

LAST minutes of Nost before it was forced to shut down by blizzard, a server in some folk's basement basically...thousands of players live.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nu-JMqNTn-M
^ Now that put's the MMO in RPG.
11/07/2018 02:55 AMPosted by Voidmalign
It's selfish to demand Blizzard to treat this like it is Vanilla when they invented sharding because the WoW population grew too big for their servers to be able to cope without it. This isn't Vanilla numbers anymore, I wish people would be reasonable but it seems like everyone is saying "my way or the highway"


People want a superior product from Blizzard than a MMORPG with sharding. It's time to come up with a solution that's less detrimental.

When it comes to being reasonable, I've stated that they can have servers with and without sharding, that way they cater to both groups. I also prefer that because I don't want a lot of other people suffering because of Blizzard catering to my taste and neglecting them.

That will be acceptable while they work on replacing sharding with a superior system, which they will if they actually care about providing us with a high quality MMORPG.

I think it's important to remember that Blizzard isn't some charity that just did loads for us for free, they're a multi billion dollar company.

I think it's healthy that people have standards when it comes to what they're willing to spend money on. That they are pushing hard for what they would love to experience, is also a healthy thing imo.
11/03/2018 06:59 PMPosted by Morbyd

Care to use your psychic powers to give me the winning lottery numbers?


Could ask you the same thing.
11/06/2018 11:04 PMPosted by Glaved
11/06/2018 10:25 PMPosted by Valdric
They should make a #NoChanges server thats unstable, has 15k pop and forced 200+ ping . All the people whining about sharding can join that and stand around in the starting zone for a week fighting over a single boar kill while the rest of us can join the other servers that shard for a week or two and be enjoying the game with rational people.

Well you should grow up, people asking for their not to be sharding are making in the right.

Just because you want classic to have changes and sharding doesn't give you the right to act like a big baby and insult a group of people.

I never advocated other changes and If they don't remove sharding from the game after a week or two I can understand people leaving. Even with it on I can still imagine a huge amount of people fighting over the same mobs and it not at all being dissimilar to the vanilla release experience. If they can come up with a way that doesn't involve sharding at all, then all power to them but literally wanting unstable servers and unplayable starting zones due to congestion is the dumbest thing I've heard.
What if we had sharding in real life.

You pull up to the Chick-Fila line and its all the way wraped around the building to the street.

You click a button on your phone and phase into a Chick-Fila universe where the line is short.

If we lived in a world with that capability we would all eat more chicken sandwiches I think.
Sharding is a no, same with loot trading. I feel that this is more along the lines of a Final Fantasy remaster with those included -- Where the game is dumbed down in areas "just because of QoL reasons", rather than a as close as possible 1 to 1 release. The devs know think they know best but they dont.
11/07/2018 04:30 AMPosted by Fateweaver
11/03/2018 06:59 PMPosted by Morbyd

Care to use your psychic powers to give me the winning lottery numbers?


Could ask you the same thing.


Lol.
11/07/2018 03:11 AMPosted by Grimremorse
they need to go on record and say the gates of aq event wont be sharded, thats the motherlode of all massive events right there and it was in classic....


This is all I want. Yet blizzard stays silent on the issue.
11/03/2018 04:02 PMPosted by Ughash
Straight from ions mouth it’s just there to help a smooth release then eventually once things get going, remove it. So there ya go :P
Just three things wrong with that ....

1. Ion said it. He's said so many things in the past that he's no longer believed.

2. The smooth release ... something they haven't done since the game started. Even BfA, which came along AFTER they discovered sharding, wasn't a smooth release.

3. "eventually" is an open-ended period of time.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum