I also think the difficulty in Cataclysm (especially the opening tier) accentuated this, especially since there was no buff like there was in ICC.

For ICC, it was not horribly hard to kill the first 11 bosses in heroic. Sure, Putricide and Sindragosa weren't pushovers but they weren't the slogfests that Sinestra or Council could really be. LK took a lot of beating heads against the wall and perhaps they should have made prior fights harder so that the jump between the two wasn't so profound.

But Cataclysm...well, Cataclysm was profound. Between Al'akir, Sinestra, Cho'gall, Nefarian, Council and pre-nerf V&T you had a lot of long, grueling fights on heroic to go through. It was nice in the sense that content wasn't exhausted - but it also felt like there was always another thing ahead.

Firelands looks to be more like the ICC model, where the first 6 bosses aren't so bad but Ragnaros is incredibly hard. Maybe that'll be more fun.

Also, for those saying that they disagree: note that she holds Ulduar as the best raid they've done, and the argument is not about normal vs. heroics - the argument is about normal achievements vs heroic fights. If they made the meta about beating the heroic mode, not beating the heroic mode AND doing the fight in a weird way, that'd be better and more enjoyable. And I'd agree: beating Ulduar fights largely felt like an accomplishment. Beating ICC fights felt more like a relief.

Reply