This is something we struggle with, because after Cataclysm we seriously question the time-investment of re-doing old zones. Presumably, from a lore standpoint, the Horde is going to have to back down from areas on the edge of conquest (particularly Ashenvale.) But we don't want to re-do that zone - it's an important Horde level-up area. And even if we DID re-do it, we'd still have to have quests - it couldn't just be night elves /dancing. On a related note, would you guys be willing to sacrifice a new zone in the next expansion for us to re-do Gilneas? As an Alliance only zone? What gameplay would we get out of it?
I think Blizzard and I need to have a serious talk about exactly why people keep playing their game.
This might, I realise, be an age thing, but the concept of the reboot has always been something I've struggled with. If I take a very personal example to demonstrate: when Eon Productions rebooted The James Bond 'franchise' in 2006, I was concerned. After all, taking such an iconic character back to where they began could end up creating far more questions than it answered, might completely destroy the ethos and idea that Ian Fleming had initially created in the 1950's. However, it was patently obvious, even in the eyes of this amateur Bond aficionado, that some of the Bond 'legacy' needed to be left where it had been created. Picking and choosing your moments is a hard task, knowing what to leave out and what to include... and I found myself thinking that there were some parts of the 'old' Bond that I missed.
Fortunately, when Sam Mendes came along and made Skyfall, he realised that there was a way to combine the old and the new in a way that didn't break everything, but somehow just made the entire experience that little bit more complete.
Daniel Craig AND Ben Whishaw. IN THE SAME CLIP11!1!11!!
I sense that Blizzard feel that because Cataclysm is considered a failure in most people's eyes, that means that everything within it did not have merit. I have to disagree, and say that I think the work done to create the Sundering was enormously satisfying not simply from a lore standpoint but also from that of a quester. Re-running those old zones was a revelation, and hugely enjoyable. However, levelling has stopped being what people play the game to do, it is simply a means to reach End Game, and that is where I suspect the reticence to 'reinvent' old things becomes most acute: Ghostcrawler is right. What would be the point of Gilneas as an Alliance capitol if all the player base wants to do is run endgame...?
So then, Blizzard, why not put end-game content in Gilneas?
What is wrong with a full top-down reboot? With almost ten years on the clock, it would be a fabulous way of bringing the game up to date. Is it really necessary to make 'new' the only option when it comes to continuing the stories and conflicts in Azeroth? As Q and Bond can attest, taking the old and flipping it on its head really can work, if you find people to do it who understand their source material and have a real love of what they do. For the second time this week I feel the need to appeal to developers who think the only way to guarantee a return on their hours of work and investment is with the word 'new': considering how much of the game is currently recycled to begin with (and we're not just talking models here) I really don't understand the reticence to go back to basics and try and bring some consistency to a storyline scattered across four expansions and countless continents.
The practicalities I do grasp: I think last time the decision to place so much remodelled content in an area where the majority of people would give it only scant regard is a lesson well learnt. However, and I think this is an important point to make from the viewpoint of continuity, going back is not a bad thing. Someone somewhere is already thinking ahead to 10 Years of Warcraft: don't tell me they're not, there is a team already in place doing just that. If you want to celebrate the true strengths of this game, then the lore is absolutely at the foundation of that, and there is a growing feeling that this means everyone needs to be on the same page. If Blizzard could pull off a consistent storyline from 1-90 AND into endgame for the 10th Anniversary, I suspect that would be a master-stroke no-one else will ever have to opportunity to ever repeat.
The new isn't a bad thing, I know. Neither is the old. The ideal world is somewhere in-between: getting that balance right is no mean feat, and you're never likely to keep everyone happy. The reboot has a lot to lend to Warcraft, if the right people know which moments to pick. Maybe with the movie in production, which I reckon might also make it in time to cinemas for Warcraft's 10th birthday, we might see some of the old and the new together. For now, I can only hope that the people in charge realise that a redo is not a failure, or a waste of energy. If done right, it has the potential to completely redefine what the game can be.