Patch 5.3 interview with Ghostcrawler
Mystery of the Unborn Val'kyr
The latest patch 5.3 news
All of the latest Mists of Pandaria newsI'm clamming it up
by Adam Holisky 
Jan 8th 2009 at 12:01AM
This topic deserves an article for a few reasons. First, let's take a look at all the changes to clams since 3.0.2:
- Clams are now stackable in stacks of 20. (Patch 3.0.2)
- Players can now open clams while riding a vehicle, sitting, mounted, stealthed, and invisible. (Patch 3.0.8)
And further, someone said "Clams take up too much bag space, let's let them be stacked together."
Okay, so the latter isn't too silly. But this change that's coming in 3.0.8 allowing them to be opened while in non-default states is just weird.
I'm not saying that Blizzard should be doing anything other than fixing our massive clam dilemma. In some ways I'm glad that the game has come down to fixing clams.
But if you're at all like me, it does raise an eyebrow, doesn't it?
Author's Note: Yes, I know the Simpson's quote is "say it... say chowder..." But it sounds much better with the word clam in there.
Filed under: Items, Analysis / Opinion
Reader Comments (Page 3 of 6)
Calaana Jan 8th 2009 2:52AM
((It's easy.. ))
It wouldn't be so much a slap if the ppm on Blood of the Clam procs hadn't just been stealth nerfed. That thing was the only way we had to counter melee and now they lolstun us into dead.
Bring back the 20% damage reflect while fishing or I quit blizz!
croe Jan 8th 2009 5:45AM
Agreed. It will be clam power that defeats the Lich King. Let's hope that Blizz does something about that before they put him into the end game.
George Jan 8th 2009 7:37AM
Easy fix, forget Clams, reroll Shrimp.
Carbon Jan 8th 2009 12:41AM
Actually, the clam stacking thing goes back to some thread blue posted in during the beta. It was pretty funny, but it may be lost for ever.
I do believe it was Neth going on about looting 1 million clams to allow your clams to stack.
whackopanther Jan 8th 2009 12:45AM
What raises my eyebrow more is that WoW Insider continues to write posts like this. Not that this piece of info wasn't interesting or funny, but it is fairly obvious the author must've bent over backwards to lengthen the article from probably 1/4 of it's current length into this post which contains 75% drivel and 25% actually interesting fact.
It's a blog format. Don't people post short posts on blogs? Something like this would've been fine.
--------------------
LOL look at this - they fixed clams:
"Quote from patch notes."
Makes you wonder what part of their development process triggered that.
--------------------
Instead, we get to know what Adam was doing when he thought up the post, the fact that he felt the need to justify that he is posting about the whole thing... argh. Save those for real, long articles. Short articles are fun as well. But keep them short.
Aralana Jan 8th 2009 1:02AM
You have no sense of humour, do you...
Anyway, as you said - it's a blog. That means that it's MEANT to be a source of entertainment. I, personally, nearly spat my water on my keyboard when I read the phrase "our massive clam dilemma". If you don't like it, then just skip over it (just like I skip over the raiding posts and the posts for classes that aren't mine). Don't feel that because you don't like it, nobody does and it shouldn't be there.
Gaz Jan 8th 2009 1:22AM
http://www.penny-arcade.com/images/2009/20090107.jpg
Plastic Rat Jan 8th 2009 3:03AM
Have mouth, will whinge.
Guapa Jan 8th 2009 4:25AM
I don't get what you're complaining about. You comment is also unneccessary, free of useful information and WAY longer than it would need to be. So it is very similar to Adam's post. Only that his' was more fun and contained a Simpsons reference :-)
Decrusher Jan 8th 2009 1:08AM
@ Whackopanther
Dont be such a troll. I personally think it is a far more interesting post if Adam actually makes some comments other than
"LOL look at this - they fixed clams:
"Quote from patch notes.""
Plus I like Adams complete sentences better than I like your "drivel."
Adam, please feel free to continue with your own "drivel", at least it is entertaining drivel.
Vocenoctum Jan 8th 2009 1:36AM
I believe when they initially made clams stack, they mentioned that it was a quick fix to a minor irritation. I think this is just an extension of that.
Personally, I think it's great and clams were always a pain.
Also, the irony of pointing out that Blizz has gotten so close tothe bottom of the list that they're fixing clams, would be that you've had such a slow news day that you're reporting the clam issue in it's very own post. :)
Abscynth Jan 8th 2009 1:38AM
Clearly the clam department at Blizz worked overtime over Christmas to bring us these changes...
Diamornte Jan 8th 2009 2:18AM
omgz its about friggin time!
sosei Jan 8th 2009 2:19AM
Not to summon the lock QQ (I have the patience for changes), but if it's a minor thing to make one object stack that wasn't stacking before (clam meat) how much of a hassle would it be to do the same to another (soul shards)? You could reverse justify it and say that clams don't have a separate bag (as opposed to a soul shard bag), but until we have a playable murloc class...
I'm just wonderin'. Is there something harder about that minor fix than the clam meat?
tanzin Jan 8th 2009 2:22AM
Umm, they could easily "fix" soul shards to stack. They don't want to because that greatly changes the game for warlocks.
Alchemistmerlin Jan 8th 2009 10:31AM
Wooo Whinelocks.
Soul Shards not stacking is not a glitch, they are that way on purpose.
sosei Jan 8th 2009 11:00AM
@tanzin
...in a beneficial way, moreso than clam stacks. So why haven't they changed it? That's my question.
@Alchemistmerlin
Y'must be refering to someone else. :) I'm aware it's not a glitch - it's a correctable *issue*, though. It's a reagent, and most (can't personally think of one that doesn't) reagents stack.
Ahoni Jan 13th 2009 10:04AM
@sosei
Working as intended. Soul Shards are not supposed to stack. As a warlock main, I like Soul Shards. I don't want them to be an unlimited or purchasable resource. If you don't like the Soul Shard mechanic, you shouldn't play a warlock since it kinda defines the class.
sosei Jan 13th 2009 10:26AM
@Ahoni
...I play the class - as my main, no less - because I like the class. Saying that I shouldn't play the class because Soul Shards don't stack (and apparently shouldn't) is akin to saying I shouldn't play WoW because it costs money, even though I'd like it to be free. While the latter example won't be changing anytime soon, the former can. The attitude of 'that's how it's been, that's how it should be' is inane and lazy.
I never said anything about them being available for purchase or unlimited. Just stackable. Do Shaman run around with bags full of Anks? Do Paladins run around with bags full of Symbol of Kings? How about Druids and the various seeds they need for Rebirth? No, they don't. And you want to know why?
Because they stack.
jnl Jan 8th 2009 2:31AM
Balius I understand that balancing PvP isn't easy, and will take time. But i refuse to comprehend how this clam issue is now being dealt with at this time instead of years ago. When it would of took 5 minutes then when there wasn't so many healers and class's/specs that don't have silly burst or great defenses QQing because every fight they're in lasts 5 seconds. On the topic though, this is a nice touch. But like my previous comment was trying to convey, do you honestly give 2 cents about clams?