WoW Petopia Community

I probably should have noted that wasn't aimed at anyone here, or anyone in particular really.

Equeon wrote:

Ziarre wrote:We might be entitled to want things, but acting overly entitled is never pretty to watch.

In my opinion, acting overly entitled would be "GIVE US MUSHAN AND YAKS NAO! OMG BLIZZARD!!", going absolutely beserk, without any sort of provocation.

However, just like the one ghost hydra, just like snakes were before Burning Crusade (and this is what lets me have hope for mushan!!) they were accidentally made tameable: teased right under our noses. For people like me, who don't even have a beta key, I will never get to enjoy a brief moment of joy with a yak or a mushan. It's just that these are such perfect hunter pets and honestly, it would not fit perfectly but it would please so many people if they just kept yaks in the Goat family and Mushan in the Crocodile family.

If you actually think Blizz was teasing you, then you need to look at the way they handle other changes in game. With as emotional as people get about games, Blizz is in a no-win situation regarding things that they don't want to do or can't do. Any amount of explanation simply results in more outrage.

Hydras? I'm sure there's something they still aren't happy with, and don't want to take the time to fix. It's likely that simple.

Yaks could easily fit in the goat family, but mushan really can't stay as crocs, Blizz would get lambasted for leaving something unfinished (see hydras).

While I hope we get them, the more I think about it, it's very unlikely that we will, for no other reason that Blizz will not want to set the precedent that any time they make a mistake adding beasts in using different templates that they are required to keep them in game. If they added these after the two families that they already did, it would be open season every time they did it and we caught it.

Using an existing beast as a template when adding other new ones (and likely other elements in the game) is a standard development tool, so this is likely to happen again.

Ziarre wrote:I probably should have noted that wasn't aimed at anyone here, or anyone in particular really.

Yep, but the crowd mentality can easily build it up, and develop unrealistic expectations.

Honestly...I'm not surprised at all that these were mistakes. But when I look back at the pet families we were given so far, Wotlk was probably one of the best for me. Not just because Wotlk was when Exotics were introduced, but when the unique looking pets came to play. Devilsaurs, Corehounds, and the Silithids come to mind. I'm one of those hunters that likes the big, stompy "ROOOOOOOOAR" pets, or the pets that look like they can really mess an enemy up. Personally, over these expansions we've been looking in a different direction than that, being reduced to half badass looking pets that look battle-ready, compared to "LOOK AT HOW ADORABLE THAT PET IS" on the other half, that I really never see much of anyway. I know every hunter has their prefrences but, I think you know what I'm saying here. Granted, the Water striders from Outland and the Quilen is on my wishlist, so I'm not saying I feel this expansion left us out from some really good ones. But I feel the silkworms, and especially porcupines...wow. Not even gonna go there.

What I'm saying is, Yaks and Mushan are probably the most unique-looking pets we've seen in awhile. Yaks are on the bridge between cute and battle ready. While the Mushan is the very door that would be opened to the more heavy weight pets that many have been wanting for a long time. I would use those two for a long time, because raiding or PvPing with ethier would make me more excited than a 10 year old on Christmas Day.

Slickrock wrote:If you actually think Blizz was teasing you, then you need to look at the way they handle other changes in game. With as emotional as people get about games, Blizz is in a no-win situation regarding things that they don't want to do or can't do. Any amount of explanation simply results in more outrage.

Hydras? I'm sure there's something they still aren't happy with, and don't want to take the time to fix. It's likely that simple.

Yaks could easily fit in the goat family, but mushan really can't stay as crocs, Blizz would get lambasted for leaving something unfinished (see hydras).

While I hope we get them, the more I think about it, it's very unlikely that we will, for no other reason that Blizz will not want to set the precedent that any time they make a mistake adding beasts in using different templates that they are required to keep them in game. If they added these after the two families that they already did, it would be open season every time they did it and we caught it.

Using an existing beast as a template when adding other new ones (and likely other elements in the game) is a standard development tool, so this is likely to happen again.

I'm not saying they are literally teasing us on purpose. I'm saying the concept of having pets within our grasp, if only for a moment, teases us.
And what I meant was they could stay like that during beta until they can set aside the time to work on a new mushan family a little more; as it was previously unintended. Hydras could have their idle sound quieted a bit (most likely a fix that takes under fifteen-thirty minutes of work) and released as a full family: they are already separate and have a special ability, they're fine.

What only makes it worse is that this same thing already happened with silkworms and porcupines. If they seriously expect us to believe that porcupines were never intended to be tameable, it didn't take more than a patch or two to give them their own unique family and ability. Silkworms were "close enough" to worms and were grouped in there. So, other than being "greedy," how bad could it be to do the exact same thing with these two?

Previously:
Porcupines got new family and new ability.
Silkworms added to Worm family.

Now:
Mushan get new family and new ability.
Yaks added to Goat family.

I'd really rather have the latter than the former, and although that's personal preference, there is no real argument as to why they shouldn't be pets. Too big? What are rhinos? Too unfitting? What are silkworms?

Slickrock wrote:

Sesamee wrote:

Swampfox wrote:These are my two favorite new additions... I really hope blizzard will have mercy and let us keep them. I will be very sad if they don't, but I understand we aren't *entitled* to them. But....DO WANT!!!

Well we're paying customers so really we're entitled to want whatever we want. I have no reservations about expressing my desires regarding in game pets. I pay to play the game and I play to have fun. Obviously it's up to Blizz if they want to listen or not but a smart company takes the needs and wants of it's customers into consideration.

Well, then I'm entitled to want 10Mil gold, a hunter that never dies, the OP weapons from Diablo, and tameable dragons. I'm entitled after all..

You can take my post logically or you can make a huge leap and say that being handed a bunch of freebies for which you have to put in zero work is on the level of wanting a certain beast to be tameable. Gear and gold are things that you work for in an MMO. Working towards them is a huge part of playing in the first place. Being a hunter, a class that tames beasts, and wanting to tame certain beasts is hardly "entitled" or the equivalent of demanding a free 10 million in gold. I'm not even going to comment on how silly comparing wanting a certain beast to be tameable to wanting a hunter who never dies is.

Sesamee wrote:

Slickrock wrote:

Sesamee wrote: Well we're paying customers so really we're entitled to want whatever we want. I have no reservations about expressing my desires regarding in game pets. I pay to play the game and I play to have fun. Obviously it's up to Blizz if they want to listen or not but a smart company takes the needs and wants of it's customers into consideration.

Well, then I'm entitled to want 10Mil gold, a hunter that never dies, the OP weapons from Diablo, and tameable dragons. I'm entitled after all..

You can take my post logically or you can make a huge leap and say that being handed a bunch of freebies for which you have to put in zero work is on the level of wanting a certain beast to be tameable. Gear and gold are things that you work for in an MMO. Working towards them is a huge part of playing in the first place. Being a hunter, a class that tames beasts, and wanting to tame certain beasts is hardly "entitled" or the equivalent of demanding a free 10 million in gold. I'm not even going to comment on how silly comparing wanting a certain beast to be tameable to wanting a hunter who never dies is.

You're the one that said you were entitled to it.

Perhaps you haven't worked retail, but customers who think they are "entitled" aren't a lot of fun.

Equeon wrote:So, other than being "greedy," how bad could it be to do the exact same thing with these two?

Only one thing, what happens the next time this happens?.. and we want those pets again....

Slickrock wrote:

Equeon wrote:So, other than being "greedy," how bad could it be to do the exact same thing with these two?

Only one thing, what happens the next time this happens?.. and we want those pets again....

In that case, Ghostcrawler should say "Okay, one more time, but not again this expac." That way he doesn't leave it hanging.

TheDoomcookie wrote:

Slickrock wrote:

Equeon wrote:So, other than being "greedy," how bad could it be to do the exact same thing with these two?

Only one thing, what happens the next time this happens?.. and we want those pets again....

In that case, Ghostcrawler should say "Okay, one more time, but not again this expac." That way he doesn't leave it hanging.

Yeah, this. And to be honest, what other Pandaria creatures could possibly accidentally become tameable, that aren't already? Kunchong? That's it. It's not like there are hundreds of potential different species of creatures that could all be made tameable solely in the continent of Pandaria.

TheDoomcookie wrote:

Slickrock wrote:

Equeon wrote:So, other than being "greedy," how bad could it be to do the exact same thing with these two?

Only one thing, what happens the next time this happens?.. and we want those pets again....

In that case, Ghostcrawler should say "Okay, one more time, but not again this expac." That way he doesn't leave it hanging.

*nods* The precedent was set already, so some sort of statement regardless of the result is pretty much necessary at this point.

*keeps her fingers crossed*

Slickrock wrote:
You're the one that said you were entitled to it.

Perhaps you haven't worked retail, but customers who think they are "entitled" aren't a lot of fun.

I have worked retail and customer service was considered part of the job. Customer requests and wants are to granted if at all humanely possible. The happier your customers the more money you make. Your customer owes you nothing but the price of the goods or services purchased. It's up to you to make the customer happy and ensure that they keep coming back.

It's up to Blizzard to decide if they want to accommodate their customers and decide to what extent they wish to do so. But wanting certain beasts to be tameable in a brand new expansion is hardly being "entitled" or obnoxious. I think sometimes people forget that Blizzard is a company and we are the customers not the other way around. Because of this I absolutely feel entitled to want whatever in the game I happen to want.

Well thank you for restraining yourselves for the first day of posting, at least.

I'm now locking this thread. For reasons that should be obvious to everyone.

Two notes: (i) even if you disagree with someone, sometimes it's best to exercise restraint and say nothing, especially if you've already said your bit or someone else already has, (ii) "taking offense" is the cheapest strategy for trying to gain the moral high ground in a debate.

Take these things into account for other threads you may be posting on as well.