---
title: 'WoW Forever Has an Identity Problem | Xaryu Reacts'
source: 'https://youtube.com/watch?v=R8zFYk8PY6Y'
video_id: 'R8zFYk8PY6Y'
date: 2026-09-24
duration_sec: 3468
channel: 'Xaryu'
---

# WoW Forever Has an Identity Problem | Xaryu Reacts

> Source: [WoW Forever Has an Identity Problem | Xaryu Reacts](https://youtube.com/watch?v=R8zFYk8PY6Y)

## Summary

This video is a reaction and analysis of a video essay about World of Warcraft Classic's new 'Forever' expansion, focusing on its visual identity and whether new assets fit the classic aesthetic. The creator discusses the importance of art direction, community feedback, and the philosophical goal of Classic Plus.

### Key Points

- **Forever's Identity Problem** [00:00] — The video opens by stating that WoW Classic's 'Forever' expansion has an identity problem, with new assets feeling out of place compared to the original game's aesthetic.
- **Asset Fit Analysis** [00:38] — The creator asks if a new Skyborne asset looks like it belongs in vanilla WoW, concluding that it doesn't due to excessive geometry and a mismatched color palette.
- **Cohesion Over Preference** [52:33] — The core issue is not whether new content is preferred, but whether it feels cohesive with the existing world. The goal is to create an additive version of Classic that feels like it always belonged.
- **The Point of Classic Plus** [53:12] — Forever is meant to be a permanently growing and evolving version of Classic, providing an alternative to Retail WoW. This is the stated goal from Blizzard.
- **Warcraft's Aesthetic is Key** [54:17] — The video argues that Warcraft's identity is its world and atmosphere, not its UI or mechanics. New assets that betray this style are a 'horrible precedent'.
- **Criticism is Essential** [55:28] — Productive criticism is vital for the game's improvement. The creator emphasizes that dismissing critics as 'haters' is counterproductive, as feedback is what shapes the game's future.
- **Community-Driven Development** [56:24] — Forever is a community project, and Blizzard has explicitly asked for feedback. The creator hopes that player input will be heard and implemented.

### Conclusion

The video concludes that while new content is exciting, it must maintain visual and stylistic cohesion with the original game. The future of WoW Classic depends on the community's ability to provide constructive feedback and Blizzard's willingness to listen.

## Transcript

This is a theory-wise vid. So many of you guys have been linking this one to me. This is, wow, forever has an identity problem. Yeah, like just based on the title,
we've already been having this conversation. We have the SD, the HD. Obviously, the world has all of these old assets. It looks like, you know, classic,
but then you'll see like this right here, You know, the new platform for Skyborne, it's like some things might feel out of place, you know, or maybe you don't think that, but I think it's worth the conversation.
So we have the Skyborne, some new assets. Do they fit? Do they not fit? Let's take a look here. I want to ask you a question. Sure. Does this asset look like it belongs in vanilla World of Warcraft?
Yeah, so. So, yeah, I mean, no, not really. No, no. So what could actually be improved?
Like, it's easy to complain, but I don't know. I'm not an artist. Like, what is it really? Is it too many feathers? Because it's already, like, low poly in a sense here.
It's the colors. You guys think it's mainly coloring? or do you think it's like the actual like so many, like so much geometry too, like boom, boom, boom, boom, like so many sharp edges, both?
So a little less geometry and tone down the colors. I kind of agree. The color palette, I actually agree with that. The color palette's like a little out of place. So you turn down the geometry a bit,
like remove some of the, like it's so much compared, it's like visual almost overload and then the color palette. I agree. Then it might fit a little better. Cool. Now, before someone says, no, of course not, it's new, that's not what I mean.
What I'm asking is if it looks like it could have released between 2004 and 2006. Because from everything that we've heard at BlizzCon, that is the intent of WoW Forever,
to feel like a natural extension of the world. We believe WoW Classic's art style is timeless. which is why our focus was not on changing the game art,
but on small ways we could push specifically things like the environmental effects. Forever wants to extend Vanilla, make it forever, by adding more of what we have come to love with Classic.
My issue isn't new assets, isn't new upticks, it's that some of the new art doesn't feel like it belongs to Vanilla's visual language. Wait, I haven't seen these. So, like, once again, same problem.
Too much geometry, too much, the color palette's too vibrant. Yeah, yeah, yeah, like, yeah. Man, I feel so bad, because I don't want to hate on any of these artists at Blizzard,
because, like, these artists are great, but it's, like, it's just different kind of art, right? It's, like, it looks like it could be on retail. Like, too cute, people are saying, like, the eyes, like, yeah.
No, I tend to agree, guys. I tend to agree, you know? I mean, let me just say, the game is absolutely gorgeous with the lighting updates, the fog, the shadows. Like, it looks incredible when you're playing WoW Forever.
But some of these new assets that are being created, like, definitely feel a little jarring, to say the least. So the answer to my question, I think, is clearly no.
It's a totally different art style. In this video, we'll explore how and why I think that is, because as it stands, the assets added are an incoherent mess. And I think this is a fair criticism.
In fact, this might be my biggest criticism of Forever. It's literally just art. The game itself is awesome. A lot of the stuff they added, like no world buffs camping, some of these new talents, the scroll comprehension for mages,
It's like, all of the new items, the dungeons are amazing, the quests, the world, the river, like, the... It's literally just, like, the art and the UI. It's like, the biggest problem is just the art.
It's trying to get new stuff into this game that made it look like it was always there. Right? Because, yeah, this is clearly vanilla. So how could you make this look more like this? Yeah, definitely less, like, feathering, for sure.
Two. detract from the otherwise beautiful work done by the team behind the rendering update. So far, I like the game. I think it's off to a good start. I like most of the changes they've made,
and if the game is ever to have the longevity of old school room-based, I actually support even larger changes to secure its future. I am the opposite of a no-changes player. I don't want just new dungeons and raids for 10 years.
With that said, I want a world that looks cohesive, with sound art direction. A world that grows inward and captures the aesthetics of what it is in veneration of. The issue with these new assets is not texture resolution
or even the amount of polygons. This is an art direction problem. Something that happens when two or more different art styles clash in an unintentional, ugly way.
Spot on, theory-wise. These are great actual examples. examples, like, classic, not classic, mixing these two in the same world, tough, right? Spot on. Spot on. I actually maybe should
just forward this video to Blizzard, like, because I, you know, I really think the art team might be, like, legitimately and honestly, like, struggling with this, because it's like, okay, we do this stuff for retail, and it's just so different, like,
it might be a learning curve thing. I think Agron had an interview, I think I remember watching a panel or an interview where he was literally, No, it was the Q&A. And he was saying it's been a learning curve for our art team.
Like, we're trying to get this right because clearly, like, it is very different, you know? But, yeah, very fair criticism here. Right now, Forever is in its beta, and Blizzard asked for feedback.
So, here's some feedback. Wow Forever is Classic Plus. That's why moments after the reveal, Holly Longdale said... Yes! Yes, yes, yes!
This is Classic Plus. Woo-hoo! That's right, Morgan Bell. Who called it that? Classic Plus. The world should still feel like classic. Classic Warcraft aesthetics.
Wow Classic. Classic Classic. I'm really excited about this one and how well it fits in the classic wow design philosophy. Classic Plus. Transmod? Not in my Classic Plus.
Classic Evergreen Classic Hazoroth. When I started on Classic, our dream was to get here. This is Classic Plus. It's also why every single BlizzCon panel about the game
was all about keeping it faithful to Classic or vanilla World of Warcraft. Of course, they couldn't actually call it Classic Plus, since that'd be silly. Classic Plus is not a product name. It's not marketable.
I'd argue Forever is pretty bad too, but that's neither here nor there. The point is, Classic Plus is Classic World of Warcraft, or vanilla, augmented, enhanced. New updates, new systems, all in the vague spirit of what made the game so exceptional two decades ago.
Changes are expected, encouraged even. We'll see good changes and bad changes. It's likely that we'll get a whole bunch of both, which is why being critical and honest is so crucial. The player base's responsibility, our responsibility, is to steer the game for the developers to have as easy a time understanding what the demographic of people actually playing enjoys.
This video is all about critical, honest feedback, because as it stands, the game is good, and I'm enjoying the beta, but there are two large flaws in it that I want to cover in their own dedicated videos.
In this one, we'll talk about the visuals, or better put, the visual inconsistencies that will only get worse if they aren't called out and fixed now. Sure. Some of these issues really do scream of a rush development that prioritized...
I think that's very true. This is a beta, and this is literally the time to call this kind of stuff out in a nice and friendly way, okay? In a constructive and positive manner, you guys.
But yeah, absolutely. Look, this stuff doesn't feel like it fits. Let's not do more of this. I didn't see these weapons, but I kind of agree. Like, you look at just, like, classic stuff, like, side by side,
and it's quite jarring, you know? Speed over art direction. As I've said, I'm not referring to the new rendering technology. I actually think it looks incredible. Luckily, the single coolest change they've made so far.
Yeah. I would say those new visuals are a perfect encapsulation of what Classic Plus or Forever should be in microcosm. Taking the original world and augmenting it, interpreting its vibes, its stories, and its hooks, and then making them all the better.
More immersive and evocative, without changing the nature of the world itself. No one asset was replaced or supplanted, just made better. I love this stuff, and the team behind it knocked it completely out of the park. No notes.
Instead, I want to turn my eye to the second kind of visual change, new assets. Much has been said about the UI. Frankly, there will be add-ons for it, I'm not too broken up, even though, yes, it's pretty garish and out of place.
Yes, the retail icons in the character creation screen are hideous, soulless, and gross. But, as it stands, there are bigger fish to fry. Instead, I'm talking about these assets. Something quickly noticed is that while Forever and its developers at BlizzCon claim to love and value the original Warcraft aesthetic,
that hasn't held entirely true for, well, any new asset added to the game. We believe WoW Classic's art style is timeless.
I don't want you to think that I'm saying that these developers are lying, nor do I see anything but passion from them. I fully believe they love WoW and want Forever to be the best it can be.
However, it's still an issue. All the promo art at BlizzCon was using classic models for a reason. Each mention of HD models was done as a reference point to how they are trying to make them like classic models in whatever way they can.
And the toggle, yeah, let's talk about the toggle. While I appreciate it in theory, it doesn't really solve anything. It only applies to the original races. To my knowledge, not even the Skyborn get it.
It has zero effect on any other new asset. No creatures, armors, weapons, and so on. I think the toggle might have been marketed in a way to make people think that it was a global toggle.
Because when I was playing at BlizzCon, everyone was like, oh, show me what the SE world looks like compared to the HD world. This is just not the case. It is a character model toggle.
There's other options in the game, like turning quests' health off, or, you know, the positioning of your unit frames, but it's literally a character model toggle.
Right? That's what I understood, too? Yeah, so I think there was a lot of miscommunication here. Yeah, a lot of people in the chat seemed confused on this one. Regardless, yeah, like, you can use the old models,
but that's not going to, like, change anything else. That makes sense, too. Why would it? It's not like Blizzard is about to create two entirely different style of items and double their workloads. The only reason it works on the original models is because they already exist.
Anything new is very, very clearly nothing like the original art style. So, like, why even talk about it? It's almost confusing to me. There was so much effort put into reassuring players that they are aligned with their love for the original art style,
yet none of that has extended to the assets, both those seen in the beta and those datamined. We believe WoW's graphics art style is timeless. Pushing stylistically different models into an otherwise faithful interpretation of something
comes off as jarring. If I were to plop down the Mario model from Odyssey into Mario 64, it would look weird. Sure, the modern Mario model looks nice in a vacuum,
but in relation to the world itself, it totally clashes. This video is just on point. Absolutely. Yes. I really think this video needs to be played for, like, the art team,
and, like, they have to sit through the whole thing, start to finish, and get their, like, checkmark of, like, okay, you watch this, because it's a big deal. You know? And it's not like any, hey, it's good art. It just, it doesn't fit.
You know? I think it's very, very, very true. would betray the art style and vice versa. Great art direction is established through consistency, through things looking like they belong together.
This doesn't look like it belongs. Because it doesn't, it was created for a game with an entirely different art direction and style. Retail WoW, then backported into Forever with its texture resolution set to medium.
Some models received minor changes, like removing a flared feather, but the entire structure and style of the model remains entirely identical to the modern incarnation of World of Warcraft. In other words, it looks weird as hell, in my opinion.
To be clear, texture resolution is not the issue. You can crush that all you want, you can even strip away some polygons for good measure, but none of that would make it look like it belongs in the vanilla world.
To understand why, I want to talk about the evolution of World of Warcraft's art style. To start I want to ask you another question Do these look like the same art style to you Because they are supposedly the same creature No right One is demonstrably different less gritty more silly if anything
Even if you think they are the same art style, whimsical, even. As you approach this conversation subjectively, the visual differences themselves are measurable, right? We can all acknowledge they exist.
For those unaware, World of Warcraft has gone through two distinct stylistic shifts over the years. Specifically, the release of the Warlords or Gamers expansion brought with it a remaster of the original races,
and a pivot to a different type of aesthetic for the new continents and the overworld. World of Warcraft, and in turn Warcraft itself, was always cartoony. But cartoony doesn't evoke a single art style.
Cartoons, as a medium, have hundreds, thousands of different styles. You can't tell me that Adventure Time looks stylistically similar to SpongeBob and neither look remotely similar to the, I don't know, original Scooby-Doo.
The evolution from the original Warcraft aesthetic to another was certainly jarring. World of Warcraft was named using... I, um, I was very vocal when Warlords of Draenor came out, saying, like, the new models, I don't like them.
I don't like how they move. I don't like how they look. it's not the loud art style. And you know what people told me? Czar, shut up. It's just because they're new, you'll get used to them.
Now, this art style has been in the game longer than this one on retail. It's been over 12 years. And yes, I'm saying the same thing.
It is stylistically different. I said it from the start. There we go.
way to indicate motion in an otherwise still or panning frame. This is a cost-cutting measure, a way to save time. Motion in-universe is implied from the lines, yet no actual animation of the
character or object is technically necessary. Action lines have become a standard visual language and art choice, yet were born solely from time constraints in the production process, and of course, staying faithful to the original frames that they are adapting from the manga,
if that's what's happening. Point is, constraints breed creativity. Back in WoW, there was a limit to the amount of detail they could include in any single asset. If you look closely at a building, tree, or character,
you'll notice that the underlying object is crude, basically a handful of angular planes. A wooden beam is a rectangular prism with nothing but a four-sided texture wrap defining it.
The textures themselves do the heavy lifting on otherwise simple silhouettes. It's what I call a painted-on style. Low geometric complexity, but high illustrative complexity.
The art of the texture evokes something deeper than the simple shape of the object and causes your imagination to interpret the image into something greater than the sum of its parts. That's what gives low-poly, low-res art styles
so much of their charm and character. It's why there's an entire trend in indie games that is all about capturing the nostalgic aesthetics of the PSX era. Lunacid, Pseudorigalia, Atlas, Gloomwood, Dread Delusion,
the list goes on and on. There is a distinct value in obfuscating detail and letting someone's imagination fill in the blanks. It can sometimes feel even more evocative than just some Unreal Engine 5 hyper-realism, you know?
That is actually one of the defining features of the new rendering tech we're seeing in Forever. The fog, the lighting, it takes details away. You can't see as much. It's not just increasing the draw distance, it's shrouding it.
It's giving it depth. In other words, making it more immersive. The original art style of World of Warcraft is likely, to me, one of the most beautiful, timeless, and special aesthetics ever put into a video game.
Many of us also feel that classics art style is timeless, as I said before, and deserves to be preserved. It means so much, and it is responsible for creating connections with the world that still remain strong more than two decades later.
There are still things trying to capture this style. I cannot express just how important that is. I don't want it to be locked away like a forgotten collectible in some old, ignored, never-updated-era server.
It is as important, if not more important, than the current game's aesthetic. It deserves to be added to, to be appreciated by an entirely new generation of people. Not hidden away because there's some corporate fear that if the models don't have enough polygons,
someone who would never have enjoyed the game wouldn't subscribe for a month. It's not worth killing this style or relegating it to the background when it still has so much left to give. It's not like any other industry aspect of the world is being updated alongside these new assets either.
So I'm not even sure what demographic of people would be like, ah, yes, someone says in all caps, how is cohesion subjective LMAO?
You're right, man. You are right. that people, yeah, I mean, he's saying his opinion that he likes this stuff, but that's not the major topic, unless you've tuned in in the last 30 seconds.
The video topic is, since the world already encapsulates this style of art, and since Blizzard has went on stage and told us that they're trying to capture the essence of this art,
then putting an art that doesn't match it, whether or not you have a preference for one, the other doesn't matter. That's not the point. The point is it should all be cohesive to
the world that they chose to build. That's the point. Right? The opinion on which one you like better is not the point. I don't know why this needs to be said, but let's
keep playing the video. 1% of the game now looks very different. Finally, I can enjoy it. On the other hand, even one percent of the game looking out of place can break the tightrope of immersion every game walks.
You can think this style looks dated, old, whatever, but it's timeless, and I don't want to lose it again. In 2014, during the rollout of the model updates to the original races,
the senior art director Chris Robinson outlined how they are doing away with, for example, painting expressions onto a character face and started to give them actual lips, teeth, and articulated facial geometry.
Now, they can be super expressive. And from here, the rest is history. Expression has become the default of the quote-unquote modern WoW aesthetic. Looking good! It needs to express itself immediately and clearly.
Interpretation is thrown out the window. 2014 and onward is a distinct inflection point for the game. Now, models could use five times more polygons, resolution doubled,
and rigging became far more complex. Every animation started to be reworked into something expressive rather than interpretative. So if you ever wonder why dwarves became so bouncy as the forever developers said at BlizzCon,
this is why. The bouncy dwarves are a symptom of the greater aesthetic change. I am so proud to announce that we have gone back and painstakingly restored the classic animations
animations you know and love across the game's HD character models. No bouncy dwarves in this game. Sure, you can make them less bouncy, less overtly expressive, but everything else remains equally
antithetical to the style of the original world. After all, that's what happened in 2014. The artistic toolbox evolved into a different art style. The visual language became softer, less
abrasive. The addition of five times more polygons has a very real chance of doing that. After all, polygons give you the option to smooth objects out. They turn a jagged thing into a not-so-jagged
thing. I call it softened exaggeration. Beveled corners, bulbous rocks, and complex geometry on armor, weapons, creatures, and so on. The style is... well, my buddy and fellow video essayist
idol calls it pudgy. Things are just bulky and cartooning in a distinctly different capacity. Putting them side by side is like comparing My Little Pony with Ren and Stimpy. The point is
Blizzard now has access to a larger toolbox and consciously chose to alter the way assets are created and represented in the game. They can make vanilla assets. So, in one of the interviews
like, I always want to give like the artist credit here, right? Because like I agree with what he's saying, but in one of the interviews with I think it was a Q&A with Josh Greenfield. He was talking about the tools that were used to create
what you're seeing on the right here in early 2000s or whatever are literally not available anymore. The software used doesn't exist anymore.
It wasn't updated. It wasn't maintained. They don't have those tools. So now what they're trying to do is, like, how do we make, with our modern tech, something that looks like it was made in 2000?
And I hope they can do it, right? I'm sure they can. Do we have any artists in here? Can you, like, this is, it's got to be possible, but it's probably a learning curve, right? Assuming they're using their retail art team, right, their One World of Warcraft art team.
Like, we're going to have to figure this thing out, right? we're going to have to figure it out because it's like, we got to dial back all of these crazy tools and tech to just make it look like simple
and like it fits in the world, not that it's completely just out of place. Just find it looking really good. Let me add that part. Like it looks really great, but it just needs to be cohesive. So I hope you can figure it out. I really do.
This is probably the biggest problem. And by the way, let me just say this. If this is the biggest problem Classic Forever has, we are in a great spot.
If the thing that we're nitpicking is literally art cohesion, then that is pretty good. That is pretty good. But it doesn't mean we shouldn't give the feedback, right?
In a positive and constructive way, of course. But that's pretty good. That's using their new tools. They just chose not to. Instead, geometry began to communicate the form of the item,
a complete reversal of Vanilla's style, where texture communicated the form of the item. I don't think this is subjective territory. These are not the same style.
You can like both, or like just one, but to say they are the same is not true. Codifying in the original grammar, our team has led to the game not really feeling like Warcraft to me.
Don't get me wrong, it looks good. I like the visuals of retail well. I think they are pretty, but Warcraft, they are not, and fit into the vanilla. Thank you for saying that.
Yeah, I've been saying that for years. Very good art. Well done. Warcraft, no, not so much. Exactly how I feel. Do they look good? Yeah.
It's not really Warcraft anymore, but they're awesome. Absolutely. World, they would not and have not, Which is why the evolution of the character models also came with an evolution of the world itself.
Every new zone inhabits the very same expressive softness that the characters do. I want to emphasize that when I say softness, I do not mean in tone, necessarily. What I'm talking about is a literal softness to the visual of any asset thanks to the way it is modeled, textured, and shaded.
Let's summarize the differences then. The original vanilla aesthetic had angular silhouettes as opposed to rounded, curved silhouettes, low-poly geometry as opposed to dense geometry, an emphasis on texture communicating the form rather than the geometry communicating the form, a harsh, painted surface detail rather than a cleaner, muted surface detail, rigid animations as opposed to expressive, deformation-driven animations, a rack of beveled edges, and a specifically illustrative quality to its assets,
rather than an animation-like quality to them. The art style, objectively, is different. So, why are these distinctly retail WoW-coded assets populating WoW forever?
Half the creatures in the new Skyborne zone are not vanilla. To clarify one final time, when I say not vanilla, I do not mean that they did not exist in vanilla. I mean they could not have existed. Someone in the chat, I think, I think just said it.
the current art team literally doesn't know how to make art like that anymore. I think that's literally true. It's like, and this is what Josh was saying, like, assuming, I think he said this is a retail art team.
So literally, like, the retail art team, they got a new job on their desk, and they're like, wait, what? Like, I think it's just like, it's going to be this massive learning curve of like,
okay, or hiring some new people. Maybe that's the answer. I don't know. But it very different you know existed in vanilla But you probably right There is an important difference I want new models new armors new weapons new ways to express and showcase an art style I love dearly
These do not express that art style. Meanwhile, they would not look out of place in retail. Hell, some of them just seem to be backports of retail models. That's true. If you put this in retail, no one would blink an eye.
Maybe that's the litmus test. Right? Would this fit in retail? If the answer is yes, then it's like, okay, well then you could have the retail asset. Like, then, right? Like, because they're very different. That's a very, very fair point.
Bottles, except with their texture resolution turned to, like, medium. That's an important distinction because creating stylistically cohesive, believable assets is crucial to retaining art direction.
Immersion. Even if the world looks outdated to you, even if in a vacuum you find these things to be cute and pretty, in context of the world itself, they stick out like a sore thumb. Yet cohesion is key.
Bear with me as we take like a momentary detour. Some of the best modern horror games aren't the most visually advanced. The only way a horror game becomes scary is when you are adequately immersed in it.
So games like Lost in Vivo, Mouthwashing, Iron Lung, and Signalis manage to establish believability through low-poly or retro aesthetics just as well as the most popular games like this project you can think of.
In WoW Forever, these bizarre out-of-place assets prevent immersion more so than they add appeal to players who like playing all the way zoomed in to appreciate the higher fidelity
of them or something. It's almost as if they are specifically made to be backported. A way for retail WoW to use the exact same ones if need be. And that's exactly what happened. You can just lower the texture resolution, and yeah, these are identical.
Here's the thing. You don't have to care. You don't have to find any of this a real problem. If the only reason you play classic is because you like the simpler rotations, the longer leveling experience, or whatever else, then awesome. But I think if the developers themselves highlight how
they want the world to be the main character again, then it should be fair to point out that visual cohesion is extremely important to the world. And right now, it feels like a mess in some areas,
thanks to these assets. By not looking like they exist, I think that's a very fair thing to say. You don't have to care about this, but it is still highly relevant.
Because Blizzard has come out and said it is to them, and there's a lot of people that do. So if this isn't your cup of tea, That's okay. Cool. But it's very relevant still. Very relevant.
This in the same version of the world that the game is built to resemble, they end up not feeling like they belong in any version of the world in a strange way. They don't fit the new zones added in forever in the same way they don't fit the old zones in Vanilla.
Why have two entire panels about staying true to Vanilla if none of the new assets stay true to Vanilla? isn't this setting yourself up for immediate criticism? I think that the aesthetics of classic WoW or vanilla WoW
are as important as the gameplay. They are paramount to the vibe and authenticity of a classic plus. At no point does classic plus ever mean that we should start...
I'm shocked at 20 minutes into the video, because I think this is great, this is spot on, but I'm shocked he hasn't mentioned that they're using their retail unit frame when the whole video is about art style, right?
And art direction and identity and cohesion. Because it's like bringing this in, to me, is just as much of a sin, right? At least the action bars are classified, right? The action bars look really nice.
The mini-map is its own unique mini-map for this game mode alone. Awesome, right? But the unit frame and the cast bar being straight copy from retail is a very big red flag.
Oh, he did earlier? Oh, did I miss that? Oh, I must have. I'm almost like going to say I'm shocked he hasn't brought it up, but everyone's saying he did. But yeah, that is like very, I mean, just as big of a red flag, right?
Upping retail assets into the game or diminish its artistic cohesion. That's low-effort content creation, not artistically sound art direction. What's even stranger is that the new zones added in Forever do look like vanilla zones,
augmented by the same rendering tech the rest of the game is. Again, I love it. You cannot tell me that the Riverglades don't look like they could have been released in 2004. I haven't been to the Riverglades yet.
It's on my to-do list today. But from what I've seen, yes, they crush it. Right? They crush it. Like, it looks awesome. So, like, there we go, right?
It looks like it could have always been there, which is the goal. Instead, that's the goal. That's what we're all after, right? So cool, right? It's possible. So faithful. The environment team absolutely killed it.
S tier, no notes, again. But there seems to be some kind of issue with every other art team. Not of talent, but of art direction. I want to dive further into this.
There is nothing but time stopping Blizzard from creating assets that remain faithful to the original game. Nothing. I have seen so much cope and excuses defending these decisions,
highlighting how they simply cannot do something that they did on older technology 20 years ago. Bullshit. Bullshit. Old aesthetics are not reliant on old technology.
That's why we have the PSX-era industry. Hell, just look at Valheim. It combines retro assets with modern rendering techniques in the very same way that Forever does, and managed to sell millions upon millions of copies.
Somehow, not having super high detail assets didn't kill the game or make it not approachable. We can even look at games like Octopath Traveler, which blend pixel art with unique lighting, water, and shading effects that could only exist today.
This is not a new thing. There is nothing stopping Blizzard other than a strict development pipeline and directions from, I'm assuming, upper management. Directions that I think are more focused on speed and monetization than actual art.
Because if we were to try and inhabit the style that Forever is supposedly in veneration of, a lot of the art team would likely need to be taught that style. It would require new onboarding. It would require the creation of bespoke new pipelines that only apply to forever.
I really don't want to start yapping about private servers because I never played them. They never interested me much, and I'm not here to defend ripping a company's intellectual property for your own profit. However, I was sent some original...
Finally, someone says it. There we go. ...a little WoW team just to look at, and honestly, they look far more in line with Vanilla's aesthetics. Can I kind of... Okay, Damien, I hate to agree. I didn't play either, and I don't want to defend it, but yeah, yeah, true.
Okay, true. They're not identical? Of course. But I'd rather see an effort than see a multi-billion dollar company give up and say, no, retail assets it is.
Which is strange. True. They essentially separate opposites at BlizzCon. Many of us also feel that classic art style is timeless, as I said before, and deserves to be preserved. Each panel was a love letter to vanilla. So what are we doing here? That's the part that frustrates me.
This game is billed as a separate entity to retail WoW, yet it is entirely begotten to it, shackled to it. It needs to use its infrastructure, its asset development pipeline. It's everything, really.
So what's so different about it? Even our character models are just the new ones, albeit with some minor animation tweaks. The UI is borderline identical. Every new asset is literally identical stylistically.
Is this not cause for any concern? Do we really care this little about the art style that defines a genre? I'm not trying to hate on retail here, but shouldn't these two games be different in more ways
than just the leveling is longer and the rotations are simpler? Shouldn't you be able to look at a screenshot of Forever and go, that's forever a different version of the game, much like you could classic or vanilla or era or whatever else?
I think so. I think that does more to grow the IP by broadening the scope. Just to be totally honest with you, I never expected to have this come. I got a thought real quick. We got a $50 donation from Aiden,
and he says, Zar, I love that you care deeply about the art aspect of the game. Your voice is so important for those of us that really care about this. Thank you. I'm trying my best, Aiden. I'm trying my best, brother.
Thank you for the big support. It is deeply important to me, like it is to TheoryWise. And like I said, if this doesn't matter to you, that's okay, too. But I think there is, I actually don't know the split.
If I had to guess, it would be like 55-45. Like, it's not everyone. Not everyone cares about this. But it is deeply important, right, to quite a bit of people, right? So it's, right, it's my biggest complaint, right?
And it's really my only complaint, in a sense. It's, like, the game owns, right? And like I said before, if this is really our biggest complaint, we're in a great spot, right?
Seriously, if we're complaining about this over anything, this is awesome. This is what we're complaining about. So this is awesome. But it's legitimate, and it should be raised, and it should be, like, absolutely should be raised as a concern.
Not in my wildest dreams did I ever think that Classic Plus will start using Retail Wow's art style, and that I'd need to make a video defending the aesthetics of Warcraft.
Hearing about how a bunch of streamers needed to twist Blizzard's arm behind the scenes to add fucking classic models to a game Blizzard themselves called Classic Plus is just wild to me.
In a really unintentional way, it makes me question the authenticity of the panels all about the vanilla aesthetic. This whole thing is a bigger problem than some people let on. It's a small snowball that is just starting to roll down a very, very large hill.
If there was ever a time to stop it, it'd be now. We can try and make our voices be heard before it irreparably becomes the new standard. Because if you, like me, do care about visual cohesion in the world, it will get worse.
This isn't an assumption. We have data mine assets. We know what's going to be added. And none of it is in the classic art style. I'm about to quickly talk about those. I think, like, bringing it up early and saying, like, look, this is really important and raising it as a concern is valid as heck.
It's like you don't want to not say something, and then they don't know, and then it's ba-ba-ba-ba-ba-ba-ba. Right? Like, they should be flooded with, like, very loudly and politely and positively in a constructive manner
that, like, cohesion is important, and it should look like the old world. I agree. I agree. So if you want to avoid spoilers of what upcoming creatures and items look like, skip to the next section.
The Dead of Mind assets triple or even quadruple down on all of these issues. Every single one of them, except weirdly this furball. I have no idea which artist created this guy, but like kudos to you for making the single new creature asset that actually looks like it belongs to Vanilla.
Wait, so it is possible. They can do it. There's proof right here. Maybe he used old shoulders. Maybe he put the old shoulders on a... Wait, maybe it is an old furball and old shoulders and he just put on like a feather or something.
I don't know. That's why I go, and that is possible. Like if Turtle Wow did it, this guy did it, kinda. You know, like it's possible. But besides that, every single thing, every one of them is retail.
It's retail all the way down. Every single new weapon, new piece of armor, new creature, it is just a retail asset with a retail art style. For example, let's look at this Root Dragon thing.
In what universe does this look like it belongs to a version of the game that forever is supposed to, according to Blizzard themselves, look like? Are we being serious? It has all the quintessential features of the retail art style we established earlier.
Spencer geometry, modeled surface detail, and a rounded silhouette. Meanwhile, to return to that urbal for a second, it has an angular silhouette, painted detail, and simple geometry that gives way to the textures defining it.
You can compare these two things side by side and see a very good video in the short direction. Some of these other new assets are literally just backported retail ones with no changes.
Or look at these new tier sets. They could be added to RetailWow's trading post tomorrow and not a single player would call them out as assets that don't belong. Once again, good litmus test. If you ask yourself, could this go on the retail trading post?
Could this go on to retail and someone might, they wouldn't call it out? Then it's probably not a good fit for forever, right? Very, very good question to ask before actually putting anything into the game.
Every single one of them does not look like any armor set created between 04 and 06. True, true, true. This is very, like, especially the Helm is retail-y. I called that out right when I saw the Priest here set.
I was like don get me wrong the Priest actually looks cool But it doesn really feel classic especially the helm And look I I like the helm And like I said it looks awesome Because that not the conversation Six and again
not because they are new models, but because of the way the models are modeled. The art style itself does not match. It is in line with the visual evolution seen in 2014. Modern material treatment, far, far denser geometry in the shoulders and helmet, and of course, that very
same curvature that we see in all retail assets. Just because they don't have the complex geometry belts or fluffs or boots that are added to some retail sets does not suddenly make them vanilla
in style. You can't just remove features of a retail asset or crunch its texture resolution to the medium settings and suddenly make it feel like it belongs in vanilla. It doesn't. Why would
it? This is not an argument of texture resolution, but one of art direction, of cohesion and immersion. A spider model from Legion, a recolor of a Cataclysm boss, elementals from Legion and BFA, robots from BFA, and Mercyus from Mists of Pandaria for some reason, none of these strike me as high effort.
None of this tells me this product is anything but rushed. And it will only get worse. With every new asset being made that looks nothing like the original game, the world style becomes less and less coherent.
A smaller portion of the world with each new update is made up of assets that actually look like the original world. It becomes an incoherent patchwork of two conflicting art styles.
Retail WoW is already overwhelming with its visual clutter, and I'm concerned that Forever will look no different if this doesn't change. Okay, now that we're done spoiling some datamine visuals, I want to ask you one final question.
Does this model from the Zephyrus Isles, the starting zone for the Skyborn, look like it belongs in Westfall? Or does it maybe look like it belongs in Bastion, the Kyrian zone from Shadowlands?
Hell, it doesn't even look like it belongs in Zephyrus Isles, the zone it was created to belong in. It looks strange. It's a creature that genuinely doesn't match any of the surrounding environment whatsoever.
It is both stylistically different and even thematically odd. Are we to think this is augmenting the game in the same way the wonderful new rendering tech is? Or is it just supplanting the game?
Changing it, sure, but not in a way that is faithful to the original. Not in a way that's spot on, though, that's truly defined a decade of the entire genre. An art style that would separate this game from anything else in Blizzard's live service catalog.
Just because forever implies and should have changes does not mean every change is automatically good and should not be criticized. And just because something has more polygons or higher texture resolution does not mean it automatically belongs in every world.
Let's think of that Mario example from earlier, right? So, again, why? I can only think of one real answer. It saves time. It allows Blizzard to monetize the same asset twice.
It's a cost-cutting measure to get a product out the door faster. I recognize that sounds tempting. I understand why sods, WoW players, and streamers want a real MMO to play with real new updates.
I get it. Me too. I don't want to just play the first two expansions of classics for the billionth time. True. I also want new content and to finally feel the original world grow again. True.
Have we ever considered that there is a right and wrong way to do that? why sacrifice the integrity of the world itself just to facilitate a faster initial content cadence
why not take your time and really sell the image of the gaming that you venerate even if it means spending the next six months onboarding artists to a new asset production type like i said that might be the best move you have your retail art team and you're just guys you're crushing it it
looks great, make your retail assets, and you onboard a whole new team of forever artists that really are trained to look, make them look like those Turtle Wow new NPCs
and stuff. Make them look like they belonged. And then you just separate the teams and have them each doing their thing. Trying to cross over is probably crazy. You just have a team for each. That might be the best
solution here. I don't think most players who care about this would care if the first new raids use repurposed models for their bosses and gear. I'll take one tier of recolors, like in the Season of Discovery, if it means a feature
of cohesion. And as you can see with the new upcoming models, it's not like we won't be getting a ton of random recolors anyway, just like retail. Four or five for every new piece of armor, surely.
The only other MMR that has ever tried to take off what Forever is trying to is Old school RuneScape, and I have played a lot of old school RuneScape. It's a game with a hypercritical community
that throws a riot if the studio making it, Jagex, removes a missing pixel from a skill icon in the UI. And then, Jagex removes the green pixel on the construction logo. Why was this not pulled?
When will Jagex authorize him to rename it? Bro, bro, the old school RuneScape community makes a Reddit post over a green pixel being removed.
right, like that, like, if it's always been a way, like, been a certain way, oh my gosh, I actually love that, that is hilarious, literal a green pixel being removed,
why would this not hold, I love it, dude, holy crap, right, so, like, you know, obviously, this is quite an extreme example, it's funny, but, yeah, like, like, really, though, if there's
something that's working and it's like there, it's like, okay, you know, it's like that art style cohesion is like, okay, I think, I think we've really, I mean, there's only a few minutes left,
but I think, I think a lot of us are really on the same page. And for the people that don't care about it, I hope you can still respect that. Like, there's a lot of people that do and cohesion is still important, even if you like the new stuff, right? Jagged adds it back. They do not fuck
around over there. And because of that, they have retained the art style that has become one of the most recognizable and beloved in the entire medium. No high-res textures, no incoherent clashing of
art styles. It's retro, even more so than classic ever was. And yet, it still gains new players, and yet, it still thrives with over three and a half million subscribers as of recent reporting.
Having a solid, charming, consistent art direction trumps a conglomerate of disparate, barely coherent, high-fidelity assets any day. With the community's guidance, they keep the good and the bad while enhancing the game in meaningful, transformative ways.
On the worst day, Forever can feel like playing a janky mod or private server in no small part because of how incoherent some of the visuals are and will be in the future. It's still a good game.
There are plenty of stylistically unsound and solid games out there. But it can be so much more if we actually use the opportunity to change it for the better. Put bluntly, it's okay to have standards.
It's fine. You are the one paying for the product. You're allowed to criticize it. This is not an argument of changes or no changes. Everyone who is playing forever wants changes.
That is what we signed up for. This isn't an argument of pro or anti-retail wow either. Retail can have its vibe, its own vibe. Why do we need to start homogenizing these games?
Why do they need to have the same vibe visually? The only other success story in this space clearly hasn't felt the need to do so. And I think I speak for most old school MMO players when I say that graphics aren't king.
Fidelity does not instantly create immersion. It doesn't inherently make you believe the world. And the world is the main character, right? If it needs to be anything, believable seems like the thing it needs to be most of all.
The issue I have with the Skyborn isn't that they're blue or made up. Frankly, I don't care. If people care, that's fine. That can be their battle to fight. But my problem is that they look completely out of place.
as V-Toggle, wearing the weird mishmash of retail WoW-styled armor, delky, gaudy, and deeply immersion-breaking. Yep. Just look how great it is. A theory-wise is just spitting facts this video, man.
And just to be clear, because I see some people saying, well, if you just want to play classic, go play classic. You're missing the point right over your head. And theory-wise, just get it, right? It's not about whether you prefer this one or that one.
It's about that cohesion, right? Does it feel like it belongs, not which one you prefer? And of course everyone wants changes. That's why we're playing classic plus, right? Classic reverse.
We all want that, right? We don't want to just be playing the same thing over and over, but it should look like it always was meant to be, not copies from retail. So very, very, very good video.
Blood Elves were introduced in TBC, equally gaudy in the lore, but each new asset remained stylistically congruent with the game they were added to. And before I get told to go back to Classic or whatever, listen.
The entire point of Forever, and Classic Plus in general, which Forever objectively is, is to create a permanently growing, evolving, and additive version of Classic or Era.
Should I play that again for some of you guys? I mean, I could just replay that sentence again if that's over your head, because that is the point of this. After all, Blizzard said that themselves, okay?
I mean, that is the whole point is for people that love classic but feel like, okay, we've done it a million times. Let's make this thing last forever now by adding in new content. That is the goal here, okay?
retail.wow already exists. And let's play it again. Okay, okay. This is for you guys that, you know, maybe didn't get it the first time. To create a permanently growing, evolving, and additive version of Classic or Era.
Retail WoW already exists and is still being updated with new content all within its new visual style. Classic does not have an alternative to that. That's the point.
This is that alternative. Finally, Warcraft is its aesthetics, is its style. When you close your eyes and think of the world of Warcraft, I doubt the first thing that pops in your mind is handing in a quest or pressing the auto-attack button.
It's probably an image of the world. The gloom of Duskwood, the serene autumn of Redridge, the parching heat of the Barrens. These are locales that define your journey.
Betraying them through stylistically bizarre and out-of-place assets is a horrible precedent to set, and I simply do not see enough people talking about it. And those who do essentially get dismissed by a hugbox toxic positivity
or get lumped into a totally imagined, completely non-existent, no-changer crowd. Criticizing a video game is true. Like, I'm that guy. I've been calling this out for, like, day one,
and people are tired of me saying it. Like, Zar, we hear you stop saying the same thing. I'm like, guys, this is important. And then it's just like, well, go play classic then. It's like, dude, what are you talking about?
This is important to bring up, right? It really is. Very important stuff. Inch art direction is totally normal. This is an audio-visual medium. You can like the gameplay and still find issues with the art
that truly do make it a worse experience. that make it far from perfect. Criticism, when done productively, is good. That is the only reason Forever is even getting made.
It'll also be the only reason it remains good or even great. And it's all based on what we've been hearing from you. Forever exists because the team soaked up many, many years
of ideas and passion for Classic Plus. and for that inspiration, we want to thank you. Our ambition is mighty, but most importantly, we have room to pivot based on community feedback.
This is a community project. Blizzard has specifically asked for community feedback. This is feedback, and it is extremely important in my opinion. At this point, I'm not sure if we'll see any changes.
It just kind of seems like this is where we're going. I hope so. desperately hope that the people who made this game a reality, the players of classic who spent almost a decade waiting for something like this, don't lose Warcraft again.
38 minutes of straight facts from TheoryWise.
Wow. Wow. Wow. A couple people asked if they could get the video linked over on YouTube and Twitch. We'll give that one a thumbs up. Because you guys want to share the video, like the video, stuff like that.
I will send it over on YouTube and Twitch. This is a great video. I think this video is worth, this is, yeah, this is definitely worth sharing too. One sec.
Okay, sweet. I mean, that is worth a watch. Holy crap. Once again, once again, guys, this stuff doesn't matter to you. That's completely okay too, right? But I still think it's very incredibly important.