Jump to content
FORUMS
Sign in to follow this  
Stan

Blizzard Sending Out Classic Burning Crusade Character Creation Surveys

Recommended Posts

48466-burning-crusade-timewalking-event-

Blizzard has started sending out surveys about Classic Burning Crusade character creation to players, similar to how they handled the Shadowlands level squish surveys back in June 2019 with the goal to find out how the transition from Classic to Burning Crusade would be handled.

Placeholder for tweet 1243639881735327744

The survey contains four options outlined below, although one is currently missing: keep Classic realms at 60 and transfer your existing character to a Burning Crusade realm.

Blizzard LogoBlizzard (Source)

Thinking about the potential ways a player could start a character in "Classic" Burning Crusade, which of the following would you prefer most?

Please select one.

Continue playing my current Classic character on my existing server as it progresses to the Burning Crusade expansion, with the option to transfer to a Classic server that will never progress past level 60.

Start a brand new character from Level 58 on a new Burning Crusade server.

Start a brand new character from Level 1 on a new Burning Crusade server.

Continue playing my current Classic character on my existing server that will never progress past level 60, with the option to transfer to a Burning Crusade server.

None of the above

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Retreading old ground again, are we? At this point, I think it'd be better to just fix retail instead of going through all the old expansions one by one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Monlyth said:

Retreading old ground again, are we? At this point, I think it'd be better to just fix retail instead of going through all the old expansions one by one.

You can't fix what is beyond gone and totally changed. Just like Diablo 3. Too many things have changed from the original version that it is no longer recognizable.
Only new big games can get things straight. And while we wait for those games, we can just enjoy the verisons which were good.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Alkasar said:

You can't fix what is beyond gone and totally changed. Just like Diablo 3. Too many things have changed from the original version that it is no longer recognizable.
Only new big games can get things straight. And while we wait for those games, we can just enjoy the verisons which were good.
 

Honestly, I have to disagree. The fundamentals of the old WoW are still there. Legion took some major steps toward reviving what people loved about the game. BFA just went in the wrong direction (Doubling down on dailies, weeklies and RNG, reducing class identity, adding mind-numbing chores like Island Expeditions and Warfronts) after Legion's success.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Monlyth said:

adding mind-numbing chores like Island Expeditions and Warfronts

Those really puzzle me. Both are really cool experiences. Both of them have new stuff which was pulled off really well. Both feel jolly well polished.

But they're simplistic to the point of, indeed, being mind-numbing after a while. And instead of providing a fun reason to do them, they just get loaded up with essential rewards so you have to do them, mind-numbing or not. 

Both have variable difficulties and even the hard difficulties are boring.

I hope they provide some sort of retrospect on them some day. I'd be honestly curious as to how they ended up like they did, why nothing was done to fix them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Halock said:

Those really puzzle me. Both are really cool experiences. Both of them have new stuff which was pulled off really well. Both feel jolly well polished.

But they're simplistic to the point of, indeed, being mind-numbing after a while. And instead of providing a fun reason to do them, they just get loaded up with essential rewards so you have to do them, mind-numbing or not. 

Both have variable difficulties and even the hard difficulties are boring.

I hope they provide some sort of retrospect on them some day. I'd be honestly curious as to how they ended up like they did, why nothing was done to fix them. 

In my opinion, the problem with Island Expeditions was that you didn't have time to relax and explore the islands when NPCs from the opposing faction would outpace you if you were slacking. And you couldn't just kill the opposing NPCs, because they revive at a graveyard like players do. If it weren't for the opposing faction's presence, you and your group could chill and relax while doing Island Expeditions, instead of stressing out because you're not completing the objectives fast enough. And low-difficulty, chilled-out scenarios can be a pretty fun experience; Scenarios in Mists of Pandaria are proof of that. But when there's a ticking clock on the screen (One that will run out very quickly if you let the opposing NPCs collect Azerite freely), it's an awkward mix between relaxed exploration and intense time trials, with the downsides of both and the benefits of neither.

Warfronts failed because they play like a match of Alterac Valley, but without any opposing players. The objectives are structured like PvP objectives, yet there are no enemy players to interrupt you when you're capturing them. There's no excitement to capturing objectives when there's no chance of being ambushed or disrupted by the opposing team. The thrill of pulling off an effective strategy (Like keeping control of a resource-rich objective) is drastically reduced when you know that you'll win regardless of what strategies you attempt. Warfronts had all of the makings of a great PvP event, but they seemingly forgot to add the PvP.

Edited by Monlyth
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Alkasar said:

You can't fix what is beyond gone and totally changed. Just like Diablo 3. Too many things have changed from the original version that it is no longer recognizable.
 

Diablo III in its current, more or less final state has its fair share of design quirks (sets being almost completely necessary for mid-to-end-game success is awful) but I would take current Diablo III over its original incarnation every single time.

Steering further from the original topic, sorry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Monlyth said:

In my opinion, the problem with Island Expeditions was that you didn't have time to relax and explore the islands when NPCs from the opposing faction would outpace you if you were slacking [...] it's an awkward mix between relaxed exploration and intense time trials, with the downsides of both and the benefits of neither.

Completely accurate,. I feel like they might be pretty fun as they are if you could queue for them solo. Then you could explore different ways to achieve the goal and I suspect the difficulty would be compelling.

Forgot to say, actually, but I do find the PvP Islands decent. They're like arenas but more relaxed. Sometimes you barely see the other side. That's pretty cool. Shame there's not a good reward for them. 

3 hours ago, Monlyth said:

Warfronts had all of the makings of a great PvP event, but they seemingly forgot to add the PvP.

I feel like they'd work as PvE experiences they were just more difficult. Even Heroic isn't ever dangerous. It's just a slog you have to pay a little bit of attention to, instead of one you can AFK in. 

The idea of having multiple mini dungeon-bosses across the map that you have to divide your attention between, while simultaneously assessing the risks/rewards for fighting/neglecting them excites me. 

Pounding away for five minutes at a mob with one ability doesn't. 

 

... Annnnnd to perhaps add something to the topic, I'll ask a question. Is there anybody who'd jump for the 'start a brand new character at level 58' option? Seems like the only one I wouldn't be fine with, myself (though not 100% on starting anew at level 1, either.). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Halock said:

Completely accurate,. I feel like they might be pretty fun as they are if you could queue for them solo. Then you could explore different ways to achieve the goal and I suspect the difficulty would be compelling.

I personally just don't see the need to add time pressure to it. Especially not one as intense as the opposing faction NPCs, which can farm Azerite very quickly if left unchecked. Just make it like a 3-man dungeon with no role restrictions. It worked in MoP, and I don't see why it wouldn't work here.

16 hours ago, Halock said:

I feel like they'd work as PvE experiences they were just more difficult. Even Heroic isn't ever dangerous. It's just a slog you have to pay a little bit of attention to, instead of one you can AFK in. 

The idea of having multiple mini dungeon-bosses across the map that you have to divide your attention between, while simultaneously assessing the risks/rewards for fighting/neglecting them excites me. 

Pounding away for five minutes at a mob with one ability doesn't. 

When the group size gets as big as 40 people, players have a tendency to all gather into one gigantic mob and go after the most important objective, with a small handful of players splitting off to accomplish secondary objectives. Asking them to split into multiple groups and coordinate their efforts is usually asking too much from PuGs. So I don't think having to divide the group's attention between multiple bosses at the same time works very well, especially not for PvE PuGs.

Like I said, I think Warfronts would work a lot better as a large-scale PvP event, with high-priority objectives that the two gigantic mobs of players can clash over (Perhaps a fortress that you can break into with a boss NPC inside like Isle of Conquest, or just Arathi Basin or Eye of the Storm-styled control points), and a bunch of less-important secondary objectives for lone-wolf players to go after. 

Edited by Monlyth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That would potentially split player base way too thin, between Classic and BC servers. Then, there is always current expansion, which might also affect one of these to become abandoned by many players (or both). 

Edited by Arcling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope they go full progression right up to BfA and whatever else they have planned.   I'm enjoying playing over the old content, but this time I'm dragging my kid along who wasn't around for it the first time.   Sure you can still play all that stuff in retail but its just not the same.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it should be either let us transfer to TBC server (ie take over the character at the exact state when you choose to transfer) or clone our classic server character to a TBC one. I am sure there are people that would literally play classic for years so give them a place to enjoy what they like. TBH I have played wow for a about 5 years but missed out on TBC raiding and never even got to play WotLK past the introductory leveling part.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By Staff
      Blizzard games like World of Warcraft, Hearthstone, and Overwatch 2 might soon make a comeback in China, thanks to Blizzard reportedly teaming up again with NetEase.
      The news comes from Core Esports, which suggests Blizzard's game services could be back by the end of March or the beginning of April.
      After 14 years of partnership, Blizzard and NetEase hit a rough patch in 2022, leading to failed negotiations. Consequently, when the licensing agreement concluded on January 23, 2023, Blizzard's game services were suspended across mainland China.
      For more details, you can check out the article in Chinese or find an English translation by Amy Chen on esports.gg.
    • By Staff
      IMAGE CREDIT: DAVID PAUL MORRIS/BLOOMBERG 
      According to WSJ, Bobby Kotick, former CEO of Activision Blizzard, has floated the idea of buying TikTok to potential partners.
      Former Activision Blizzard CEO Bobby Kotick has reportedly shown interest in purchasing TikTok, as legislation in the U.S. threatens to ban or force the sale of the popular app over national security concerns.
      Kotick is said to be seeking partners for the potential acquisition, discussing the opportunity with notable figures including OpenAI CEO Sam Altman. The move comes amid growing scrutiny over TikTok's data privacy practices and its ties to China, with U.S. lawmakers pushing for decisive action.
      You can read the whole news piece over at WSJ.
      Bobby Kotick left his position at Activision Blizzard in December 2023 after Microsoft finalized its purchase of the company. Post-acquisition, he reportedly received over $375 million, as detailed by Forbes.
      Source: WSJ 
    • By Stan
      With Johanna Faires recently taking on the role of the new President at Blizzard, let's delve into the history of Blizzard Presidents from 1991 up to the present.
      Allen Adham served as President from 1991 to 1998. Mike Morhaime held the position of President and CEO from 1998 to 2018. J. Allen Brack assumed the role of President between 2018 and 2021. In 2021, Jen O'neal was named Co-Leader of Blizzard alongside Mike Ybarra. However, she chose to leave the company after just three months. Following her departure, Mike Ybarra took over as President until a few weeks ago when he also announced his departure from the company on January 25, 2024. Johanna Faires was appointed as Blizzard's President on January 29, 2024.
      We've come across a Reddit post where someone alleges to have worked at Blizzard during Mike Morhaime's tenure as President, continuing through Ybarra's leadership. We can't vouch for the accuracy of their statement, but here's what they had to share with the community.
      Source: Reddit
    • By Staff
      Blizzard Entertainment has named Johanna Faires as its new president, taking over from Mike Ybarra, who left the company last week.
      Before this role, Faires served as the General Manager of the Call of Duty franchise at Activision. She previously spent 12 years working at the NFL.
      “It is important to note that Call of Duty’s way of waking up in the morning to deliver for players can often differ from the stunning games in Blizzard’s realm: each with different gameplay experiences, communities that surround them, and requisite models of success,”
      "I’ve discussed this with the Blizzard leadership team and I’m walking into this role with sensitivity to those dynamics, and deep respect for Blizzard, as we begin to explore taking our universes to even higher heights.”
      This leadership change follows the announcement by Phil Spencer, the Head of Xbox, and Matt Booty, the President of Game Studios, about massive layoffs across Activision Blizzard and Xbox.
      Faires will start on February 5 and she will hold a town hall shortly afterward at the Blizzard campus in Irvine, California.
      Johanna sent the following mail to Blizzard employees this morning:
      (Source)
      Dear Blizzard,
      Though my official first day with you all is February 5, I want to let you know immediately that it is an honor to join you next week in this new capacity. I do so humbly and in awe of all that Blizzard has stood for and delivered to the world for over thirty years. Today also brings some mixed emotions. The loss of talented teammates in recent days is hard to hold side-by-side with the immense excitement I feel about joining Blizzard – and building on the momentum you’ve created for Blizzard’s next chapter.
      I want to thank Matt for the introduction, bring some further clarity to today’s announcement, and share more about how I see our future together at Blizzard. I understand this is a lot to take in. The news of my appointment may no doubt bring up a range of reactions, questions, even concerns.
      Activision, Blizzard, and King are decidedly different companies with distinct games, cultures, and communities. It is important to note that Call of Duty’s way of waking up in the morning to deliver for players can often differ from the stunning games in Blizzard’s realm: each with different gameplay experiences, communities that surround them, and requisite models of success. I’ve discussed this with the Blizzard leadership team and I’m walking into this role with sensitivity to those dynamics, and deep respect for Blizzard, as we begin to explore taking our universes to even higher heights.
      I am committed to doing everything I can to help Blizzard thrive, with care and consideration for you and for our games, each unique and special in their own right. I’m optimistic about our ability to serve our current and future player communities, and to further amplify the shared passion for greatness, polish, and creative mastery that is a hallmark of Blizzard’s approach to game-making.
      Next week, I will be in Irvine and I am eager to connect with as many of you as possible. I will be scheduling informal (and totally optional) meet-and-greets, where I want to hear more from people across the organization. Those of you who cannot make it to those gatherings or aren’t located in Irvine, please feel free to email me. We are also planning a town hall meeting to be held in the near future.
      A few personal facts about me: my #1 job in life is raising two amazing boys. In addition to parenthood, a typical week for me includes finding time for daily yoga and prayer, and of course, playing video games (big Diablo IV fan over here!). Throughout, the joy I find in games – and working with those who make them – only deepens.
      I remain inspired by Blizzard’s iconic legacy, and the transformative role gaming has played in my life and in the lives of others. I cannot wait to get going – to listen, to learn, to empower, and to collaborate with all of you on our bold and bright future together. Together, may we forge many legendary days ahead.
      Johanna
      For more details, check out the full article on Bloomberg.
    • By Staff
      In the wake of Microsoft's decision to lay off nearly 1,900 employees from its Activision Blizzard and Xbox divisions, there's growing speculation about a strategic shift in customer support for ABK games. Jez Corden, the Managing Editor at Windows Central, has shed light on this development through a series of tweets.
      Corden's tweets reveal that Microsoft is considering a major restructure in its customer support approach. According to his sources, the tech giant is contemplating outsourcing the majority of its internal customer support roles for ABK games to third-party companies based overseas. This move, Corden notes, marks a significant change for ABK, which was previously known for its robust in-house customer support team.
      Placeholder for tweet 1750587911249236224 Additionally, Corden pointed out that Microsoft has also begun dismantling several departments, notably those responsible for the distribution of Xbox games in physical retail stores. However, he emphasizes that this doesn't necessarily signal Microsoft's withdrawal from the physical gaming market.
      Placeholder for tweet 1750590022842278391 Placeholder for tweet 1750596402093216146 The restructuring appears to have wider implications across the company, as Corden reports a substantial reduction in community manager roles. This development could potentially impact the level of community engagement and support for Xbox games.
      Placeholder for tweet 1750594627088904334
×
×
  • Create New...