why are people so resistant to constructive criticism about the game?

[linayar]

LOL, you post too fast, I didn't even see it while trying to catch up on the thread.

Anyways, just a few comments:

I meant players shouldn't put themselves into the position of gate keeper. That they are in no position to slap their seal on things, and are regularly proven wrong and yet still attempt to do so. I was just addressing that concept.

One thing I would say is that no one can be an actual gate keeper unless they're an in-game bully, which is a reportable offense.

True that nothing is free, but wouldn't you also say it's true we've no idea what they've secretly worked on, what they secretly WANT to work on, who is free, who isn't, who would be willing to put in extra hours because they see some value people want? That we don't have an adequate concept to actually plan our their resources?

And that is why all we can do is voice our opinions, both in support of some ideas as well in opposition of other ideas. Let SE deal with the rest. It's just that places where ideas are shared can be places of arguments, which can be fun, but can also be unproductive or, worse, toxic.

Like using lore as an example as I see that fairly often, difference from saying something is unlikely because of x and can't because of x when the only reason it would be can't is because a refusal to believe in wiggle room or that new lore can be added. NO WAY EMET CAN COME BACK, ignores the fact they could have flash backs, ptsd, fragments, or what have you- no actually you're not right in say it's impossible, but you could say its unlikely because reasons.

This is essentially my argument for removing race-class restriction in WoW. The lore argument to keep it just doesn't hold true and people don't realize that lore doesn't (and maybe shouldn't) be static, at least not entirely.

Hear, feel, think. XD.

So, no room to speak then. The internet might be much emptier, hmm, probably for the better in some cases.

[Shougun]

LOL, you post too fast, I didn't even see it while trying to catch up on the thread.

VROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMMMMM.

One thing I would say is that no one can be an actual gate keeper unless they're an in-game bully, which is a reportable offense.

Technically true, doesn't stop people from acting like what they say is the law SE must follow though.

And that is why all we can do is voice our opinions, both in support of some ideas as well in opposition of other ideas. Let SE deal with the rest. It's just that places where ideas are shared can be places of arguments, which can be fun, but can also be unproductive or, worse, toxic.

Yee, yee indeed!

This is essentially my argument for removing race-class restriction in WoW. The lore argument to keep it just doesn't hold true and people don't realize that lore doesn't (and maybe shouldn't) be static, at least not entirely.

I've started to coin it as the lore-no. Usually the people who use it are quite knowledgeable in the lore but they have restricted themselves very tightly around it too. For example I had asked for Tonberry beast tribe and was told that because they're not technically beasts that it couldn't be done. Now the person who said it I know isn't evil or whatever (generally quite nice), but instead of saying it's unlikely or that maybe the system could be fun but the concept of beast wont work so we'll need a different system they just flat out said it can't be done. Well wouldn't you find it funny when about two weeks later SE comes out with a beastmen lore book page that says it's more of a concept than a technical description of body, a racial word in essence or a usage that can be something akin to calling something third world. And wouldn't you find it even funnier if they released a beast tribe of lalafell in a subsequent expansion.. like.. wouldn't that be just... funny... . .. . . . Cause they did. XD.

Lore-no's usually lead me to the 'you weren't really trying to have this conversation were you?' feeling. Eager to share their knowledge, which is nice, but not eager to actaully engage the potential ways to make the concept a reality. Like SMN and it's egi thing, back before it had demi. Sometimes people really do suggest things that are like "you literally have to rip out the lore to do that, and there is no other possible way what so ever" but just like people suggesting FFXIV be an RTS.. those type of suggestions are not 'that' common.

So, no room to speak then. The internet might be much emptier, hmm, probably for the better in some cases.

Loool. I cry .

[HeulGDarian]

Lore-no's usually lead me to the 'you weren't really trying to have this conversation were you?' feeling. Eager to share their knowledge, which is nice, but not eager to actaully engage the potential ways to make the concept a reality. Like SMN and it's egi thing, back before it had demi. Sometimes people really do suggest things that are like "you literally have to rip out the lore to do that, and there is no other possible way what so ever" but just like people suggesting FFXIV be an RTS.. those type of suggestions are not 'that' common.
.

"stares wondering" =w=

[Shurrikhan]

This is essentially my argument for removing race-class restriction in WoW. The lore argument to keep it just doesn't hold true and people don't realize that lore doesn't (and maybe shouldn't) be static, at least not entirely.

Out of context, I know, but just to use this one topic as a bit of a microcosm...

I feel like race-class restriction in WoW has followed pretty decently from the point and purpose of the game at its various times.

It started very restricted when the game was more about lore and world-building and distinct cultures. But every expansion since has softened those restrictions (be them by race or by faction) to some degree, just as the original lore, world, and their paradigms have been deemphasized. Until recently, what they allow in those regards has been reconsidered with each expansion, and at least to me it's always felt "right" at that time, perhaps because they played a good balance between protecting their intent and allowing what players less invested in those intents wanted (especially when they could shift their vision to accommodate those wants without sacrificing what they, the developers, wanted).

[linayar]

Out of context, I know, but just to use this one topic as a bit of a microcosm...

I feel like race-class restriction in WoW has followed pretty decently from the point and purpose of the game at its various times.

It started very restricted when the game was more about lore and world-building and distinct cultures. But every expansion since has softened those restrictions (be them by race or by faction) to some degree, just as the original lore, world, and their paradigms have been deemphasized. Until recently, what they allow in those regards has been reconsidered with each expansion, and at least to me it's always felt "right" at that time, perhaps because they played a good balance between protecting their intent and allowing what players less invested in those intents wanted (especially when they could shift their vision to accommodate those wants without sacrificing what they, the developers, wanted).

What do you think is their intent? (I've heard it say race-class restrictions had to do with balancing the race population so that people just don't end up as one popular race, but I feel like each race has enough following and it really shouldn't matter in the end.)

And with the new universal (mandatory for new players, optional for older players) starting area, I think Shadowlands is a really fitting point to remove all restrictions. Although the expansion after when players return to Azeroth (maybe) could also work.

[Yencat]

What do you think is their intent? (I've heard it say race-class restrictions had to do with balancing the race population so that people just don't end up as one popular race, but I feel like each race has enough following and it really shouldn't matter in the end.)

And with the new universal (mandatory for new players, optional for older players) starting area, I think Shadowlands is a really fitting point to remove all restrictions. Although the expansion after when players return to Azeroth (maybe) could also work.

There's probably several reasons for them not removing it, but I think a big one is they don't want to make unique totems and beast forms for every race, which is something people would definitely expect should they open up Shaman and Druid to everyone.

[linayar]

There's probably several reasons for them not removing it, but I think a big one is they don't want to make unique totems and beast forms for every race, which is something people would definitely expect should they open up Shaman and Druid to everyone.

If that's the reason, I can accept that, for those two. Just remove it for the rest then.

[Shurrikhan]

What do you think is their intent? (I've heard it say race-class restrictions had to do with balancing the race population so that people just don't end up as one popular race, but I feel like each race has enough following and it really shouldn't matter in the end.)

And with the new universal (mandatory for new players, optional for older players) starting area, I think Shadowlands is a really fitting point to remove all restrictions. Although the expansion after when players return to Azeroth (maybe) could also work.

I think their intent was more or less just to protect the identities of those classes and races -- or, more simply put, to let everything make sense as well as they could with what time they had without scrapping any preexisting lore.

E.g. "Does your race have warrior-priests?" "Yes, but not in a way remotely like other warrior-priests (i.e. Paladins). We're literally antithetical to that, as we have been for multiple books and a, even more critically successful, video game prior to WoW." Well shoot.

What does one do in that case? Do Night Elves create their own Elunite answer to the Paladin, which other races would complain about lacking access to? Do they double-down on racial abilities, including adjustments to core class kits, for each class? (Honestly, that's still my preference.) And what of time constraints? And what of the game's metalanguage if Night Elf Warrior was seriously distinct from an Orcish Warrior who is in turn well distinct from a Troll or Tauren Warrior? I'd love it, but then we'd probably have lost a whole class's worth of playstyle to accommodate those nuances (i.e. to allow the playstyle of a warrior-priest among Night Elves within or through the existing classes). Would we even get Shaman or Hunter if, by manner of speaking, those are just two faces of the Troll tradition of warfare (each approachable through a very racially-specific form of Warrior)?

I don't it. The "what if" elements here are too many and to varied to point out intent by contrast. All I can say is, again, I feel like they did a good job (at least until perhaps right now, with Shadowlands) of stretching their limits within reason. Burning Crusade introduced the Blood Paladins, a pretty distinct style of the previously Alliance-unique Paladins. By its end, it had also brought spellcraft back to the Kaldorei, rather than them avoiding it as the art (alongside sorcery) that rent their world asunder. Thus, it returned to their class options in Cataclysm. Did whole plotlines arise just to lead into that extended customization? In some cases, maybe. In others, I'd argue it was no more than byproduct -- opportunities taken.

Now, with Shadowlands, if racial abilities hadn't already been compressed in the name of a fairer, more tightly balanced raid experience, I'd argue it's the perfect time to have a more racially-distinct Night Elf Paladin. We're about to learn a whole lot more about Elune. The Nightwarrior is unleashed. Everything is primed for it. And yet, I guess, they've decided that the aesthetic just still does not fit, that the Nightwarrior is more a thing of agility and mail and terrifying strength through simultaneous ferocity and stealth, quite opposite a Paladin. And while I'd prefer to be able to play that archetype on my Night Elf in some form, I'm okay with it not being bastardized just to suit the existing class structure. It sucks, a little, but I get it.

[linayar]

I think their intent was more or less just to protect the identities of those classes and races

See, I think that's a good reason, if those races hadn't been so involved with other races of their factions. Even now, Night Elves had been displaced and there are refugees living in Stormwind. It just doesn't make any sense to me that that they don't share knowledge with other races or that there couldn't be a few who are interested. I don't even think having one's own distinct version of a class like, say, paladin, is necessary at all.

But yes, I've agreed that they've, for the most part, handled the increase in race-class combinations well, and I think that just serves to prove the point that, if they want to, they could do more to increase it while still being true (for the most part) to their lore and history of the races.

(On the other hand, the concept of a Lightforged Draenei Shadow Priest is also one of the reason why I'm fine with FFXIV's more "boring" races and classes/jobs.)

Anyways, just to relate it more to FFXIV or this thread, there can be several "criticisms" that can be discussed if people are willing, and this one from WoW would be an example as there are very opinionated WoW players who would be against increasing race-class combinations.

[Shurrikhan]

See, I think that's a good reason, if those races hadn't been so involved with other races of their factions. Even now, Night Elves had been displaced and there are refugees living in Stormwind. It just doesn't make any sense to me that that they don't share knowledge with other races or that there couldn't be a few who are interested.

And that's where I'd disagree. They literally have a separate Patron goddess. Night Elves have are the only race-wide monotheistic society in the game. Inversely, all WoW Paladins are, in a sense, animist. They are more nearly shamans -- or, heck, Jedi -- than traditional priests, even if there can be some overlap within the WoW take on priests. WoW Priests can follow a deity, scion, archon, or a general force, but Paladins, while they may have patron saints of sorts only ever follow the force of light. For the Night Elves, all aspects of these forces, at least insofar as they can tap into them, are merely elements of Elune, boons specifically granted either directly through her favor or as a result of her world investiture. The predominant mission of their religion, moreover, is not the pursuit of good and defeat of evil, but a preservation of a much less bimodal variety. Even in the Tauren druidic or shamanistic views of the world, there is good and evil, and the glow of their plains at dawn and the "rightness" of that nature was only a couple steps short of light-worship. But in the Night Elf view? There is bane and boon, purity and taint, and there is corruption, but it rarely lends itself to the idea of good or evil, of the selfless and selfish. There is just the nature of things, and the natures we choose for ourselves (e.g. all-encompassing duty, so much deeper than even fits the word as humans might bandy it about). They're fundamentally different.

Again, I don't think it'd be impossible to make NE Paladins work, just... there would necessarily be some compromise in there, and I'm satisfied with how that has played out thus far. It honestly annoys me less than I may in some rare cases have to play a race other than Night Elf than that Night Elf lore would be retconned.

But, yes, that topic's certainly a decent microcosm of the larger span of discussions possible in regards to XIV. Oddly so.