WoW Burning Crusade Delayed until January 2007 290
Wowzer writes "Blizzard today announced that the release date for World of Warcraft: The Burning Crusade, the first expansion for World of Warcraft, is delayed until January 2007. From the article: 'By adding a few extra weeks to the development cycle beyond its original target date, Blizzard will be able to extend the closed beta test and further refine the new content that will ship with the game.' While disappointing now, what will this mean for the yearly WoW expansions long term? As Blizzard COO Paul Sams revealed plans in August that 'Starting with The Burning Crusade, every year thereafter we plan on bringing out a new expansion set.' 2008, 2009, ad infinitum?"
not so surprised... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:not so surprised... (Score:5, Informative)
Anyone who's been in a guild in WoW should know how long it took to run through BWL for example say 8 - 12 months ago compared to now. Not sure how the american servers are doing right now but on the EU servers there has been a big dropoff from the larger guilds. Blizzard _needs_ this expansion or I think they will start loosing a lot of subscribers.
Alot of it is their own fault, they are saying blue items in BC are better than epic items pre-BC, thereby removing the need to obtain the high-end raiding items at the moment. Looking at the amount of time you need to invest to get any decent raiding-items, you are simply better off getting to level 60 before BC comes, and the levelling up with your guild/friends.
Personally I cancelled my accounts, simply because I got bored.
Re:not so surprised... (Score:5, Insightful)
I know how much this sucks, and it drove me away from other MMORPGs in the past. Personally I'd be very happy with a more or less "stable" universe, with the occasional new content to keep people entertained. Hell, with good PvP you can even reach that goal by redesigning the PvP areas every now and then, without the need to actually generate a ton of new content!
What really ticks me off in "modern" MMORPGs is the carebear attitude towards the players. Why don't they just hand out everything to everyone?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I think this carebear attitude is why Blizzard got the millions of subscribers and billions of cash. It's the wide appeal of the game and the "no real penalties for losing" gameplay that attracts most people to the game. Compare this to the number of EVE players, where you can literally lose your ship and money (and hence "lose" time played). EVE is more interesting
Re:not so surprised... (Score:5, Funny)
I'm always amused at the term 'carebear'. As if it was some sort of insult to use it, either towards another person, idea, or action. Can you think of getting into a fight and be like... "Oh yeah?!? Well, you're... you're... a BIG carebare! HA! Take that! Mwuahahaha *walks away gleefully as if scoring some major victory*".
Ironically, it's been my experiance that those people who have used this term to insult things, act more childish than the actions or people it's being used upon.
Cheers,
Fozzy
Re:not so surprised... (Score:5, Interesting)
Let's take two very different (from a "carebear" attitude point of view) MMORPGs. EQ (the original one) and WoW.
In EQ, dying meant you lose
On the other end of the spectrum you find WoW. A minor loss in XP, "damage" to your equipment (which you kept) and if you're too lazy to get your gear back, the worst thing that happens to you is more damage to it. In a nutshell, you lose a little XP and gold. Quests are meant to be solved with a pre determined number of players and, let's be blunt here, that can be scripted if you're a halfway decent coder.
Now, when I look back at the playerbase of EQ, I'd be hard pressed to find real assholes. Sure, you had the occasional player or even group that was either loonies or outright bastards, but few of them survived for long. Simple reason: Being a jerk did not pay off. You DID need the other players, if for nothing else then for getting your gear back from the peak of mount whatever, within that certain week. Being a jerk meant that nobody would go out of his way and risk his gear for yours. I've seen raid parties of 30+ people tank their way through days worth of, from their point of view, "needless" quests, just to get the gear of one person back. Because you simply knew that he would do the same, or maybe he even already did.
In WoW... I've seen more jerks, idiots, morons and simple flat out assholes in that 4 months I played it than in my whole EQ time.
That's what I don't like about carebear games. They let you get away with being a jerk.
Re:not so surprised... (Score:5, Informative)
The problem is, the term 'carebear' is a created internet term, much like w00t, pawn, haxxor, leet, and others are. To this degree, there's no standard definition for it, and it's open to be used or abused in sentaces that don't properly phase the word to it's original means.
Carebear was always implied 'childish' behavoir or actions as The Carebears [wikipedia.org] was a popular childrens cartoon in the 1980's. It was used to insult people who would yell and scream at someone for 'killing' their character. I believe this was back in the Ultima days when PvP was open and easy. If you're missed those days, then maybe you've seen the South Park episode featuring WoW? You know that half naked guy running around killing people for no reason? Well, it was kind of like that. The grief would call the people he griefed 'carebears' because they would complain and yell at him for loosing, like a child would cry if they lost at a sport.
So, in the wonderful world of online gaming and RPG's, two terms where developed to insult the other people. "Griefer" and "Carebear". A person would call someone a "griefer" if they would kill you repeatedly and a person who complained (ie. cried about) at being killed repeatadly would be called a "carebear". Of course, in Ultima, that game mechanic was possible.
Of course, these terms survived and moved into EQ and all the games to be spawned after it. The term became associated with "easy" as games started to restrict the ability to kill others, such as requiring an accepted duel or special areas that a player could 'choose' to enter. Thus the 'griefers' where killed off and in their anger claimed that such games where too "carebear" to play because there was no threat of grief. Not surprisingly, the player base increased dramatically when such restrictions where part of the game model. Though, to cater to the Ultima fans, EQ and the following games created special servers that allowed open fighting and killing, usually after a certain, very low level. This of course, lead to the popular (and hilarious) story of Fansy the Bard [notacult.com].
Since then, games have tried to cater to the Player vs Player fan base, who liked the idea of danger and suspense when anyone could attack you. Dark Age of Camelot, who's game was designed with restricted areas for PvP combat, created an all open PvP server where anyone could fight anyone at any time. I even tried this server, but didn't last past the first level of open combat as it was just too annoying after I got my quick thrills of griefing. This became famous for showing how over powered the Enchanter class was, as it had a magic casting pet with no line of sight restriction, allowing it to attack you from far away without recourse. It also became famous for the small city of Mag Mel(sp?), where you could resurect and continue fighting. Ultimatly, the server numbers dwindelled to next to nothing because, due to game mechnics, you had very little chance, and players had very little reason, to let you level to the maxium level and have a fair(er) playing field. It's all part of the video game 'God' complex. Of course, at that time, those in support of PvP DAoC servers would call who critizied them 'carebears'.
So, there's a brief history, as I know it, of the term "carebear". And that's why it's not a very good use of the term when calling a game carebear, as a game cannot complain about the way people use it. Of course, if games where real, I could see Shadowbane calling WoW a carebear while Ultima Online kills them both. hehe
For more issues that Ultima faced, you can read some on Wikipedia [wikipedia.org].
Cheers,
Fozzy
You mean EQ of old right? (Score:2)
When I played, it was hardcore. No portal stones anywhere...if you needed to get a port you better find a druid or a wizard to port you. No binding NPCs....if you were a warrior or other n
Re: (Score:2)
Different people like different things. I've never gotten entertainment by trying to "beat" someone in the way that PvP players like to compete. I also don't get entertainment by paying to be someone's victim...
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
In my experience, carebears are usually people that don't have that much time available for playing games and which often in their real lifes have to "spend several hours doing a repetitive task" (for example, adults with jobs) so they're hardly keen on going online only to do some other repetitive tasks.
Re: (Score:2)
*snickers* Carebear... Fozzy... Touche! hehe, I didn't think about that. =P Though, I wasn't jumping on anyone, Simply pointing out my opinion of the use of a term as my comments where made in general, not towards the original poster. It was just the first post where I read the term being used.
Of course, "fozzY" is a rock band with a 'pro' wrestler, and "fozzIE" is a muppet. Of course, I should admit, I was just a bad speller when I picked this username some 10 years ago. LOL
Cheers,
Fozzy
Re: (Score:2)
Or better yet, just sell it for real money. It would save people a lot of time and it would make Blizzard money. It is a win-win situation. Well, the only people who might lose out are the poor people in 3rd world countries currently being paid to generate game stuffs.
-matthew
Re: (Score:2)
WTF are you talking about? I started in June'06 and it's been a slog just to get to end game content with my friends/guild.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I returned to
For me it's a nice pastime, relaxing and meditating between some rocks with my miner, filling a few cans... which is a shame with a char good 'nuf for T2 BSs, able to hit from beyond most people's visual range.
Been
Re:not so surprised... (Score:5, Funny)
By my reckoning, you can gain the required 38 levels after only 4796.5 hours of constant killing.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
PST with offers. ^_^
Thank you Blizzard (Score:5, Funny)
Make Love, Not Warcraft (Score:2)
To bad the "Sword of a Thousand Truths" probably won't be one of them, other than a mythical weapon that can never be obtained.
Re:Make Love, Not Warcraft (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And with lvl 70's you should have no trouble 25-manning MC and BWL.
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In related news... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
-Eric
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
IM IN BETA
AND SHARDING MY PURPLZ
"Reason: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING."
But that's how the quote goes! =(
Ad infinitum? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
And every game they produced since Warcaft:orcs and humans has been a masterpiece , they take great pride and joy in making these games .
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Let's look at Blizzard's history:
# The Lost Vikings (1992)
# Rock & Roll Racing (1993)
# Blackthorne (1994)
# The Death and Return of Superman (1994)
# Warcraft (1994)
# The Lost Vikings II (1995)
# Warcraft II (1995)
# Warcraft II: Beyond the Dark Portal (1996)
# Diablo (1996)
# StarCraft (1998)
# StarCraft: Brood War (1998)
# Diablo II (2000)
# Diablo II: Lord of Destruction (2001)
# Warcraft III: Reign of Chaos (2002)
# Warcraft III: T
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
From their site and wikipedia (sorry I can't get to their site right now):
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
And what's the problem with this? If you like WoW, aren't bored with it, then the news that Blizzard plan to keep updating it is good news.
And if want to try another game, there are other companies eager for your custom.
Re:Ad infinitum? (Score:5, Informative)
From Wikipedia:
A significant number of key employees have left Blizzard over the years. Many of these have gone to create gaming companies of their own. Some of these companies are:
* Flagship Studios[2], currently working on Hellgate London.[3]
* ArenaNet[4], creator of Guild Wars.[5]
* Ready At Dawn Studios[6], creator of Daxter.
* Red 5 Studios[7], currently working on a yet to be announced next-gen title.
* Castaway Entertainment[8], currently working on a yet to be announced next-gen title.
* Hyboreal Games[9], Working on a yet to be announced next-gen title.[10]
Notice the part where it says "A significant number of key employees"!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Was wondering if someone would bring this up but then I thought that anyone wantin
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
2008, 2009, ad infinitum? (Score:4, Insightful)
From an economic point of view, Blizzard would be crazy not to milk WOW for as much money as possible. And economic points of view are important to corporations
Of course (and half off topic), it would be smart to use some of that money and invest in something new, because at some point people will get tired of WOW.
Re: (Score:2)
FYI, some people still play Quake II online... hell, some people still play Quake online. If their dedicated fanbase is large enough to warrant expansions every year or so, then good for them, there's a fixed source of income for you :)
Besides I'm pretty sure they're working on "new" projects, like WoW 2, Warcraft IV, Diablo III, and Starcraft something,. Now all that's missing is a
Re: (Score:2)
But the numbers of players will shrink. And unless Blizz wants to shrink with them and become a minor player in the market, they better think about a replacement for WOW now.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
That's actually the first thing I thought when I read this. Who says WoW will even be around in 2009? Games like this are a fad. In a few years they'll be made fun of alongside facebook and myspace on I love the 00s on VH1. I can see that boring deadpan guy talking about it already.
"Yeah I remember WoW. It was this game that you just played and
More like ad nauseum (Score:2, Insightful)
More like ad nauseum, IMO.
I played WOW obsessively for a year and change. No matter how far I got, there was always some new goal I was chasing (level 60, full tier 1 set, pvp rank, etc). At some point I realized that my time investment in the game was becoming greater and greater. This was just about the time my guild got big and started doing the 40-man raids, and getting in on that would've required me to nearly double my playing time. There was just no way, unless I was willing to just give
Re: (Score:2)
I am NOT addicted. (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh noes! Fear ward!
Re: (Score:2)
Christmas dinner (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Christmas dinner (Score:5, Funny)
PETA is going to open a can of whoopass.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
With cranberry sauce?
Warcraft is the favorite son (Score:2, Insightful)
ZOMG! (Score:2)
Seriously, this is probably a good thing. I'm surprised how *little* downtime WoW has considering its size and population, but I can't imagine how difficult modifying the codebase for all the changes TBC includes will be. Let them get it right the first time.
--trb
Re: (Score:2)
With blizzard earning at least 1 billion/year from subscriptions, this performance is absolutely unacceptable whe
Re: (Score:2)
This isn't necessarily Blizzard's fault. For instance, last night we were in ZG and our MT and his wife DC'd from 6000+ latency. The rest of us were sitting comfortably at 200ish latency. Lag spikes are often a result of problems in internet connectivity between a section of the country and your server, NOT the entire server. That's not to say that server lag spikes don't exist, just that
I'm not sure why this is"ad infinitum" (Score:3, Insightful)
All of the EQ expansions cost 30 USD or so when they first came out; there have been roll-up packs for those who were behind the curve.
I quit after the 6th (when Gates of Discord came out; my machine couldn't handle it and I was tiring of the game.) I haven't looked back. I've since switched to Ubuntu, and it helps me resist the rare urge to go back.
Link directly to the source (Score:5, Informative)
Well (Score:4, Insightful)
However, by choosing to delay it they have put the playability of the game over the profit they could make by throwing it out there and just continually patching it up to standard (cough, Gothic 3, EA, cough). I'm quite happy to see a game studio finally taking the time to make a game good before cashing in on it, instead of throwing out whatever they have done to make the sales that will occur anyway. I just have to wonder whether this will be the last delay we will see for Burning Crusade, or whether more lay in wait in development hell.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The are well aware of one and one thing only:
The launch on the holiday season is not going to boost their sales. Why would that be? Simply because everybody that is projected to buy the expansion already has been playing WoW for some time. The expansion is not meant to increase their subscription, but rather to strengthen subscriber retention. Blizzard pretty much knows
Re: (Score:2)
It's not quite the "we'll delay getting some revenue from the game and risk our company so that the game comes out perfect for players" kind of attitude that it would be for other companies.
PS: Gothic 3 is hardly t
Second thoughts about UI restriction? (Score:2, Informative)
More curious (Score:2)
By pushing back to January this could allow another MMORPG or two some vital time to get in during the holiday crush and make a good impression. Pushing back also treads on some Q1 predicted releases as well, would they move forward or back to avoid Blizzard? (LOTR may still be on path for Q1 release)
Regardless WOW didn't get where it is by allowing crap to get out. If anything the time invested shows, both to the players
Oh noes! (Score:2)
God damn it, I'm so mad I could go outside.
Again? (Score:2)
Oh, wait... nm
I felt... (Score:5, Funny)
MMORPG expansions are no trivial matters (Score:3, Interesting)
Game balance is the biggest issue an expansion has to solve before it may enter a game. Because one thing's certain: Once it's there, you can't make it leave again. An expansion is here, and it's here to stay. Mythic with DAoC was the only company that ever pulled a stunt and unplugged one of their expansions after a lot of complaints and many people leaving or in the process of leaving, and even they only did it by introducing new servers.
So the delay may very well be not a technical problem, be it stability or bug-freeness. My bet would be on balance. You can make or break balance very, very easily with an expansion that often not only introduces new items but also new classes. Classes are maybe the most difficult part of the balancing process in a game. New classes must first of all be that: new. You can't simply recycle some styles and gadgets from old classes and just give it new names, or people will complain. And that new spiffy thingamajigs you give them have to be in check and balanced, not only against the world but also against the other classes for PvP. They must not level faster than the old classes, they must not be stronger in solo fights (and neither must they be weaker), they must not even provide more "group value" than other classes, and of course they may not "replace" an existing class.
Now do that if you can.
Balancing is a very, very difficult task for expansion packs. And, honestly, if I played WoW, I'd rather give them 6 more months and have it done right than demanding it out now and having it break everything there is.
Ad infinitum is probably right. (Score:2)
A Blizzard game was delayed? (Score:4, Funny)
Delayed? Date was never announced... (Score:2, Insightful)
even buggier than the original (Score:5, Interesting)
1- Loot rolls being won, but the item doesn't go into your bag. The item was 'lost' since he couln't loot the body anymore.
2- Just clicking on a particular elite mob crashed wow to the desktop, twice.
3- There were several mobs that didn't have any animation assigned to them. they were just these floating statues and you couldn't tell who they were attacking or if they were even dead yet.
4- He has mostly tier 2.5 and 3 gear, and is a freakishly amazing pvper, yet he was easily killed by a rogue only 2 lvls higher. he used to be able to just laugh at rogues with his mail armor and shield, now it appears the lvls signify an overpowering leap in stats making it unfair.
5- I don't know about him, but if I had worked relentlessly, giving up my life to get the uber leet T3 armor, and then see GREEN everyday items drop in BC that are actually better the most sought after gear in the normal game......I'd get so bitter i would prolly logoff and uninstall right that second!
I have seen alot more than this, but all i can say is that the game is nowhere near ready for release. They need to realize that it affects over 6million of us now and most of us like it just the way it is. Also, we already have to deal with the dreaded 'patch day' every tuesday where our servers are offine, we can't play and then we get to read about how they changed the game yet again.
This is just my opinion of the game from what i have seen. I mean no harm to Blizz, and i'm sure that with $(6million X $15 / Month) they can afford to devolop the game into truly one for the recordbooks.
GG
Many changes being released prior to the Holidays (Score:3, Informative)
http://blue.cardplace.com/newcache/us/38233956.ht
They will be doing a 1.13 patch still. To quote Eyonix:
"Keep in mind, we do plan to push a content patch prior to release, which could occupy your holiday time quite well." Followed by, "Oh, you know, just a few small things such as a brand new honor system, as well as new talents and abilities along with dozens of other changes and improvements.
So they are releasing much of the changes available to level 60 people prior to the holiday season. It may even include some world event about the opening of the Dark Portal.
Worth the wait! (Score:2)
Also, is anyone that surprised by this? Blizzard has made it a practice to delay their titles, and usually it's worth the wait. I think though many may be disappointed, it'll work out in the end.
I also think it shows that Blizzard has quite some brass, giving up the opportunity of hitting the Holiday market... though I guess t
Re:Cashing In (Score:5, Insightful)
Your claim is sort of like saying that just because you paid for WindowsXP you should have free access to every new piece of software Microsoft releases, because by god, you already PAID for Windows.
If you don't want to pay for the expansion, you can keep playing WoW all you like without the expansion pack. If the subscription fee is an issue for you, you can always play an offline RPG. There's nothing untoward about a company charging for the thousands of hours of dev time and expense to offer (what sounds like) a significant expansion, though.
Re: (Score:2)
To extend your analogy, if I had paid for buying XP plus a monthly fee for usage, I might also get the idea that upgrades should be included in the price.
And there are companies that work differently:
-Arena Net's Guild Wars costs money to buy but no monthly subscriptions
-EVE Online costs only a monthly subscription, updates are included (OK, it is a bit more expensive per m
Re: (Score:2)
Guildwars is compirable to Diablo 2, which also cost money to buy, no monthly subscriptions. Not really a MMO in the truest sense.
EVE Online costs only a monthly subscription, updates are included (OK, it is a bit more expensive per month)
Looks like you answered your own question.
umm.. split universes? (Score:2)
you can convert a d2 char to d2lod- ONCE..
how hard would it be to have the old world and the new world *like england and the colonies* and if you don't buy the box *ticket to the ship*, you stay where you are...
Re: (Score:2)
This is how it works, infact, Blizzard are fairly slow with creating expansions compared to EA and SOE, and they all charge for the expansion. You know you always have the choice not to buy the expansion and keep playing the way you have.
Re: (Score:2)
Everyone and their dog, at least the players that tend to play it "seriously" will get the expansion. Now, I'd be very surprised if that didn't also mean that the expansion items outrank the standard items by miles, in terms of stats. At least it would be the very first expansion that didn't.
Not buying the expansion usually means in an MMORPG that you're dropping out of the loop. Peer pressure is high to get it, since all
Not really (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
First, let me say... it's disappointing. WoW has been out for 2 years now? They've not released one (large) expantion yet. They have released content patches. However, if you haven't realized it, most of this content was planned to be in the game since WoW began but was pushed back to focus on other things.
Second, I must say I can't be too surprised, knowing the gaming industry (particularly PC games), heck any software, and how often they get pushed back.
Third, it does make me wonder. How would so
Re: (Score:2)
However a sequel to any franchise other than WoW right now is something of a pipedream considering Blizzard's track record regarding franchises other than Warcraft since WoW. Starcraft Ghost comes foremost to mind.
I only recently stare
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
When the level cap raises, stuff like Molten Core and BWL drops in relative difficulty, so average players can finally get a shot at the stuff they could only