Joklem wrote:
Decrypted: isn't it fun to smash people's rose-tinted glasses?
I didn't say Vanilla was perfect and I don't deny it had terrible balance and terrible players.
None of which contradicts my simple observation that it was a more fun and more worthwhile game.
MMOs compete directly with other forms of recreation. The fact that a game is the best of the worst is a moot point since it isn't a choice between playing a MMO and being bored. Proof of that is that most people quitting WoW now are
not interested in other MMOs.
Again, you can argue about balance etc, but the fact is, it worked.
I don't think it was the "new-ness", I think the appeal was that Vanilla was very simple and immersive, it had broad appeal, it felt very "organic", and it was community-based.
I don't see any hard evidence that a MMO necessarily has a shelf life of six years - Starcraft is proof that good games don't necessarily have to die.
To argue that Cata/WotLK changes were necessary because the clock was ticking seems like a self-fulfilling prophecy. That's not to say that WoW should have stayed Vanilla, or with all elements of the Vanilla paradigm, forever, but as I remember a forum sig saying during mid-TBC, "MMOs never die, they kill themselves when they lose sight of what made them great". Same thing happened to EQ.