The Queue: A very special Monday treat
by Alex Ziebart 
Mar 7th 2011 at 11:00AM
Today's edition of The Queue has a very special treat for all of you. Mike Sacco was feeling particularly brave late last night and decided to share something wonderful. Behold: Mike's guide to Pokemon Red and Blue, as written by his 14-year-old self.
You can thank me later.
brian asked:
Does the pushing back of Firelands to 4.2 mean that something they had planned for 4.3 will never come to be?
No. Blizzard's just breaking up the content patches a bit, making them smaller with less time between patches. Instead of patches 4.1 through 4.4 being Cataclysm's content patches, it will probably be more like 4.1 through 4.8 or whatever Blizzard decides to do with the content spread. It will be more like vanilla WoW, which had a total of 12 content patches. Some of them had raid zones, some of them had 5-man dungeons, and some of them had smaller content additions such as patch 1.8, which had a few world bosses and a Silithus zone revamp. Patch 1.10 added weather and dungeon quests for pre-raid tier armor.
Speaking as someone who has been playing WoW since beta, I do think 12 small content patches over a two-year period was a hell of a lot more fun than four immense content patches over the same amount of time.
Huulo asked:
Will my current unspent justice points be reset when patch 4.1 goes live? Should I try to spend them all before 4.1 or will I be able to use them to buy tier 11 gear when it goes live?
Since patch 4.1 will not have raid content in it, nothing will happen to your current justice/valor points, contrary to what we said here in The Queue prior to the announcement of Firelands' being dropped from the patch. My valor points got rolled down into justice points on the PTR, so if you transfer a character to the PTR and that happens ... don't panic! It won't when patch 4.1 goes live.
When patch 4.2 goes live, your valor points will be rolled down into your justice points, but you won't lose your current justice points. At that point, you should be able to use JPs to purchase tier 11 and VPs to purchase tier 12.
anbilow asked:
Just curious: of all the writers here, who would you consider the most hardcore raider? Just something I've been wondering.
That's one of those questions that is more complicated than it sounds. How do you define hardcore? Most progressed? Most time invested? I'll try to skip the philosophy and give you the most direct answer possible.
Many of us raid. I'd say most of us raid. Of the raiders, quite a number of them have killed Nefarian and are working through hard modes. I think Dawn Moore is probably the most focused on the pinnacle of raiding, though -- the height of the top 100. I truthfully don't know her current raid status because I haven't yet reached the point where I stalk my staff, but that's the part of the game she seems to really enjoy above most other things.
windstalker668 asked:
What, if anything, will you guys be doing at PAX East? I waited too long to order a ticket and am only able to go Friday, was just wondering if any of the WoW Insider team would be poking around that day.
We aren't doing anything in an official capacity. If Blizzard doesn't make a big showing at a convention, we can't justify making one, either. We're pretty much stuck just doing BlizzCon unless Blizzard branches out (and I really wish it would, because we love hanging out with you guys in meatspace). That being said, the guys going to PAX East on their own dime are working on putting together an unofficial WoW Insider meetup. I don't have any details to share right now, but keep your eyes open. If anything solidifies, we'll be sure to tell you.
If anything happens, it will probably be really laid back. Some drinks, maybe some food. It won't be a circus like our annual BlizzCon meetup (which we've already started planning, oy).
jasonfelliott asked:
Most important question of the day: what the hell happened to Arcane Brilliance this weekend?
Archmage Pants, like every other mage in the world, forgot his teleport runes when moving from one place to the other with all of his earthly belongings. He didn't have an opportunity to sit and scrawl out the column, but it will be returning this upcoming weekend.
Have questions about the World of Warcraft? The WoW Insider crew is here with The Queue, our daily Q&A column. Leave your questions in the comments, and we'll do our best to answer 'em!
Filed under: Analysis / Opinion, The Queue
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 11)
Roguesan Mar 7th 2011 11:01AM
Question for the Queue:
While questing through Mount Hyjal for the third time, I was reminded of a Queue question I'd been meaning to ask since the initial run. After mucking about with the harpies for a bit, you are given the option of ordering the execution of the main harpie (her name escapes me for the moment), or sparing her life. I’ve picked both options now but, as far as I am aware, it appears to have had no effect whatsoever. I’ve come across the same sort of situation in Twilight Highlands, choosing to help injured Orcs to their feet or ‘end their misery’. Both seem to allude to the player making a moral choice between good or evil a la games such as Fable and KOTOR, only without any demonstrable or acknowledgeable outcome.
My question is this – What is the reasoning or purpose for these choices being included in the game?
Is it to present the player with the illusion of having a modicum of free will in the game, despite the fact that their actions make little difference? Is it a mechanic designed to cater to RPers? Is it at all likely, in your opinion, that Blizzard will implement any options of this nature that will actually allow for some sort of choice for the player beyond whether or not to do a particular quest, or to pick one companion pet or the other as a quest reward? Perhaps opposing mini questlines depending on the player’s actions in the starter quest?
Okay, so that was more like a handful of questions dressed up as one. To summarise: What’s the point of the pseudo-choices?
(Feel free to chime in on this one fellow Queue-readers...)
fallemwarrior Mar 7th 2011 11:11AM
Because blizzard secretly records your response so when they take over the world they know who's naughty or nice, the Christmas later that year will now reflect upon your decision upon saving or not, if you didn't save u get a grenade with the pin out on Christmas, if you did save you get a one time chances to purchase sparkle ponies for all your toons at the new low price of 50 dollars a toon and you cannot refuse, if you didn't do any and are stuck in Vashj'ir you get free tickets to a Katy parry concert, who has been given the title "Aspect of death" after she killed Deathwing while singing at his birthday party. Its a lose, lose, and lose more situation
Harvoc Mar 7th 2011 11:12AM
Nope.
Harvoc Mar 7th 2011 11:13AM
Oops meant to reply to eximus.
Ilmyrn Mar 7th 2011 11:19AM
As much as I'd love to believe it's the first little baby steps toward a new quest design paradigm with actual choices and paradigms, Blizzard is somewhat hobbled by the nature of the MMO. Everything HAS to turn out the same for everyone in the end, otherwise the story wouldn't match up. I'd say enjoy it for what it is: a chance to make a choice, to RP a little if you like, and don't worry too much about it.
N-train Mar 7th 2011 11:24AM
I think these were put in simply to add a little flavor to these quests and allow you to break off from the very linear path of Cata questing just a little bit. Does it ultimately affect the outcome? No, but it does allow you to feel a little bit more tied to your character.
In terms of the future, I have seen multiple Blue Posts that acknowledge the fact that they likely "over-corrected" the lack of linear questing in Cata. They liked that these zones told stories and were much more fun than the vanilla ones, but they felt that they were often *too* linear and never really let up.
If you ask me, Cata was the first phase of a new direction for questing, and their first chance to widely implement phasing, linear stories, and cinematics/scripted events into the game. I think the next phase could likely be exactly what you're talking about, and that's allowing your character to choose from a handful of linear progressions in a single zone.
However, I think one has to look at the consequences of such an action.
Firstly, a lot of people don't want to be presented with choices that are permanent. If you don't like a talent choice or glyph, you can quickly replace/change it with minimal effort. It takes about 2 minutes to up and roll a new class/race/faction if you don't like the one you've got. What happens if you decide to take the "Support Sylvanas path" in Silverpine, but halfway through wish you had chosen the opposite?
The other issue comes with the resolution of these stories. When I finished Swamp of Sorrows on my Horde character, I went on wowpedia to see if there were any other old Warcraft RTS bits I had missed, when I got there, I found out that those who played Alliance had actually destroyed Stonard, despite the fact I'd just got done defending it. That left me feeling off, that the zone ended in two different places for both factions. I felt like it was unnecessarily confusing and convoluted.
When you start to allow characters to choose their own progression, you either have to give each path its own ending, creating the kind of "wait, what?" of Stonard, or give each path the same ending, which makes you wonder why you even had the choice to begin with.
Sagretti Mar 7th 2011 11:25AM
One of the greatest influences for inclusion of those choices is probably the infamous torture quest in WOTLK. There were a fair amount of people, or at least bloggers, that found it distasteful you were barred from a significant questing area if you refused to have your character commit torture. They specifically wished you could complete that quest an alternative way that was less distasteful, or go for the quick and dirty method.
As for no consequences, most likely it would have been a rather major undertaking to make multiple extra questlines based on that single choice. However, I'm glad they didn't create major consequences for your actions, as too many game morality systems end up with people powergaming things anyway (for example, it's better to make "good moral decisions" in Bioshock in the long term because the rewards are slightly better).
Rapskallion Mar 7th 2011 11:27AM
I'm a bit late to the computerized mmorpg world... WoW is the only one I've ever played. I didn't even start playing until a few months before TBC was released. That being said, I have played some rpg games on consoles... my favorite being Fabled.
I really liked the inclusion of standard rpg stuff (leveling, gearing, etc) with action choices that really shaped your character. Should I kill these harpies, or let them live? Should I kill and loot this random npc? Will general populace like or fear me because of it? Yeah, reputations are a larger scale of this concept, but not quite the same.
I'd love to see WoW integrate more choice --> effect components into the game. Understandably it's hard given the mmo nature of the game and the need for world events to be consistent for everyone. Much easier to do on an offline console game. But if they could do it without resorting to some cheesy phased mechanic I'd be stoked.
Nawaf Mar 7th 2011 11:27AM
Would be awesome if we get some quests with choices that lead to different endings like in Heavy Rain.
Luci Mar 7th 2011 11:32AM
Katy Parry... definitely my new warrior name.
LynMars Mar 7th 2011 11:34AM
I wouldn't call it "destroying Stonard" so much as "hey, we showed them, now let's steal some supplies and call it a day!" it's a little...weird, and yeah, the Horde side is really different; it makes little sense and doesn't match up as well as it could.
I liked the few choices presented in Hyjal and other places to allow my characters to pick the choices they would morally, and not "just because the quest said so!" (like torturing a man in Borean because the Kirin Tor won't, and I have no option to tell them to buzz off without leaving the quest chain hanging), especially since the progression in Cata--classic and new zones--does feel linear in the extreme; in tabletop we'd call it "railroading" players.
I'm hoping the satyr in Hyjal makes a return as well, as that plotline felt it should have gone somewhere other than "haha silly mortals I tricked you and am now free as if you totally didn't see this coming!"
Amaxe Mar 7th 2011 11:35AM
In dealing with Roguesan's question and not the "first" guy, I would say this:
In WOLK, there was a certain objection raised that you had to go carry out certain actions in game (Such as the "Torture the cultist" quest) whether or not your character would want to.
My guess is that this kind of thing would be in response to these objections. The choices do not impact the overall effect of the story.
Which leads me to wonder: What if Blizzard implemented some sort of "Alignment" system in game. This would be more of a RP thing than a benefit thing. But I personally would like to see something where your character could become known as being good or evil depending on what you do.
(You want to gank lowbies and kill quest givers? OK, fine. But you'll be feared rather than respected)
Probably all sorts of reasons why this won't be implemented, but personally I think it would be cool.
Sunaseni Mar 7th 2011 11:44AM
It's a Deconstruction of moral choices in CRPGs. In most CRPGs, even the smallest choices end up affecting how others see you and whether they respect you or not (e.g. Light/Dark side in KotOR, whether Morrigan approves or not in Dragon Age [hint: she doesn't]). In WoW, just like in Real Life, your choices ultimately don't affect the outcome of the world as a whole, so your character is tested knowing that in the end, the world will not change no matter how depraved you can be.
Or maybe it is just for role-players to just have fun with, and this post is just post-modern arthouse babble.
Grovinofdarkhour Mar 7th 2011 11:45AM
Ahh, you're talking about http://www.wowpedia.org/Quest:A_Bird_in_Hand ! I've wondered about that myself.
Right now there is no repercussion to your decision, other than having to live with it.
I think it would be neat (and fitting) if Marion - assuming you let her live - either "broke the spell" and came back on your side and helped at some point, or came back for vengeance in an epic questline at a later time. But if you had killed her, you wouldn't get to see these things.
Knob Mar 7th 2011 12:16PM
Maybe this blue post is a hint of an answer to your question: http://blue.mmo-champion.com/topic/161854/tone-down-tol-barad-dailies
"We'd like to make the Mount Hyjal hub phase per player so that your personal progress unlocks new content for you, rather than for your whole realm."
Maybe, just maybe, your quest decisions will affect what NPCs you see in your phase. Maybe they'll expand on this later on and have your decisions make an impact in your personal phase. I actually wouldn't be surprised if such a development went live or at least on the PTR close to the Guild Wars 2 launch, since one of the main USPs of GW2 is the personal story and your personal phased version of the main city, the layout and inhabitants of which vary depending on what decisions you made on that character.
Royal Mar 7th 2011 12:20PM
Just a Drop in the Bucket
http://www.wowhead.com/quest=27454
Eastern Plaguelands
I love the option of blowing yourself up and to what varying degree of blowing yourself up.
Ooglie Mar 7th 2011 1:15PM
I'll answer this with a suggestion of my own. I agree with those that it was a way to allow players to progress without having to commit objectionable acts.
But I think there IS an opportunity here for blizzard if they explore it. They have made reputations too closely tied to getting "stuff" in my opinion. If the choices we made affected our reputation with various factions it could add a whole new dimension to the game. Not just factions like we see now but other type of factions. I'll give an example:
Let's say a quest has you confront someone in an inn. There might be a variety of choices each with their own impact. If among the choices I could either pick a fight with them or find a peaceful resolution to the confrontation. If I picked a fight, perhaps Innkeepers and bartender would react to me differently because I'd have gotten known as a brawler.
These choices couldn't affect major story progression because of the need for consistency, but it could flavor the game allot if different npc'd reacted to us differently based on our choices.
hicks Mar 7th 2011 1:25PM
@LynMars: He's totally coming back, probably for some Vash'Jir-centric content patch. I just did that quest on a third alt the other night, and it is fairly cheesy, particularly the third time. But WoW has a long-running schtick with dubious questgivers making you run around and collect goat bladders or collect seeds or kill all the ducks, then finding out at the end of the chain that you've been empowering the wrong guy.
At least we're finally beginning to see some resolution with some of those setups, like Fandral Staghelm and his rumored inclusion in a future raid. Or is it confirmed? I can't keep it all straight...
Wolfshanze Mar 7th 2011 1:55PM
@Roguesan
The Spelling Police would like to remind you it's actually Katy Perry.
@Luci
I think Katy Parry would be a better name for a DK.
Now see if you can spot something that goes boom...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QGJuMBdaqIw
Kuro Majutsukai Mar 7th 2011 2:16PM
Because if the moral choice had demonstrable gameplay effects, then people would game it. Leaving out any larger effects leaves the moral choice as just that-- a moral choice, not a gameplay choice.