WoW.com's top ten stories of 2009, part 4
by Mike Schramm 
Dec 18th 2009 at 1:00PM
Number 1: Patch 3.2
Of all of the big stories in 2009, it was patch 3.2 that reigned supreme. The Argent Tourney and its related instances and quests weren't expected at all before this year, and yet, at the end of the year, this is probably where most players ended up spending most of their time. 3.2 brought us a new 5-man and four versions of a new raid -- both normal and heroic modes for 10 and 25 people. It introduced the Isle of Conquest, a brand new battleground to fight in. This patch changed the mount levels, and perhaps most importantly for the future, it showed how Blizzard would update the Emblem system -- by providing us options to trade the various currencies for older levels of gear, as well as rewarding us with Emblems even just for running 5-man dungeons. And course it brought druids something they'd been hoping for since the beginning of the game: new forms.
In the end, it probably wasn't the best patch of 2009 -- lots of people wondered why we were fighting each other when Arthas was right there, and while lots of players ran Trial of the Crusader, it probably won't win any popularity contests against Ulduar or Icecrown Citadel. But nevertheless, it was a huge update to the game, with lots and lots of player interest, and coming as it did right in the middle of August, it was the biggest story of the year for us.
In the end, it probably wasn't the best patch of 2009 -- lots of people wondered why we were fighting each other when Arthas was right there, and while lots of players ran Trial of the Crusader, it probably won't win any popularity contests against Ulduar or Icecrown Citadel. But nevertheless, it was a huge update to the game, with lots and lots of player interest, and coming as it did right in the middle of August, it was the biggest story of the year for us.
What will 2010 hold? Cataclysm is expected, and it'll definitely shake up the World of Warcraft. If the hints we've seen are any indication, Blizzard may hold another convention, and it might not even be in Anaheim. And as always, we'll definitely see some surprises. As the new class changes for the next expansion unfold, and new features are unveiled for the game (and players find their way to the end of Arthas' story), we can be sure to expect one thing in 2010: the unexpected.
Filed under: Patches, Virtual selves, Blizzard, Instances, Raiding, Bosses, Wrath of the Lich King
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
Drakkenfyre Dec 18th 2009 1:06PM
Martin Fury is a shirt, not a mace. You are thinking of Martin Thunder.
threesixteen Dec 18th 2009 1:12PM
it still irks me that blizzard banned the guy for something they gave him. it was their mistake, not his. when blizzard sends me a pet in the mail, am i supposed to first check with a GM that i'm actually allowed to have it?
unless there's something to this story that blizzard didn't reveal. like maybe the player and a GM were in cahoots or something... now that'd be a story.
but if the facts are as they've been presented, the player was wronged and deserves restitution.
Drakkenfyre Dec 18th 2009 1:18PM
There is a difference between checking an item out, and what he did.
They went into Ulduar, used it multiple times, got several world firsts, and then went into Trade and bragged about it. They knew using the item was wrong, he should have been banned.
I also believe I know how they got it in the first place. If you check out the item ID number for Martin Fury, it's 17.
http://www.wowhead.com/?item=17
Item #117 is Tough Jerky.
http://www.wowhead.com/?item=117
I bet when they were restoring his guild leader's low-level Warlock, they mistyped the item ID number.
Mike Schramm Dec 18th 2009 1:46PM
You're right, of course. It's been a long week (and a long year) for me.
SerenityNow Dec 18th 2009 3:35PM
Unless you're thinking about the Jiminy Glick fat suit (+40 Humor, +40 Obnoxiousness). Which is also known as the Martin Short.
Hoggersbud Dec 18th 2009 9:25PM
when blizzard sends me a pet in the mail, am i supposed to first check with a GM that i'm actually allowed to have it?
Only if you mouse over the pet and it says "Bringing this pet out in front of bosses will cause them to insta-die" or something.
Retropally Dec 18th 2009 1:11PM
What? Why wasnt wowinsider show's anniversary episode number 1?
scraggerly Dec 18th 2009 1:16PM
What made these the top stories? (most comments? pageviews? wow.com staff opinion?)
just curious...
elvendude Dec 18th 2009 1:34PM
It's definitely not comments. I know for a fact I've seen more comments on some posts than these ones have (http://www.wow.com/2009/12/14/why-you-dont-have-freedom-of-speech-in-wow/ being a recent example).
I'm betting it's pageviews.
Mike Schramm Dec 18th 2009 1:48PM
It was mostly pageviews, though we did a little tweaking according to trends and our own memories of the year. If there was ever a very close call, we looked at pageviews on major posts on WoW.com.
modulok Dec 18th 2009 1:13PM
The multi-page format of this post is highly annoying. I am willing to tolerate all of the "after the break" stuff, but I could have done without 4 page views just to read a top ten list.
scraggerly Dec 18th 2009 1:16PM
I asume the more click throughs and more pageviews = more advertising $$$
Doberbane Dec 18th 2009 1:24PM
Just another reason that I have an ad-blocker. With it, the internet is usable and enjoyable once again. :)
Keveline Dec 18th 2009 1:45PM
The worst part about it is having to "next page" to the end to be able to see any of the comments, since apparently each page has it's own separate comments.
But the comment system here has always been borked unfortunately...
Mike Schramm Dec 18th 2009 1:47PM
They were only broken up because it's easier to read than one gigantic post.
Tridus Dec 18th 2009 2:15PM
@Mike
It's not easier to read then one gigantic post. It's considerably harder to read then one gigantic post. I can keep scrolling through one post quite nicely.
scraggerly Dec 18th 2009 2:24PM
I don't think they are supposed to say its b/c of advertising revenue, even if it really is... I prolly woulnd't say that if I were mike or wow.com
4 pages is obviously not convenient in any way shape or form.
Maybe I'm a conspiracy theorist, but correct me if I'm wrong... more clickthroughs and pageviews equals more money for advertisements.
mel Dec 18th 2009 4:43PM
Also.. If you go to i.wow.com on your iPhone and click to Page 2, you're taken off the mobile site and onto the normal site. Kind of annoying. This is the case for all multi-page articles.
If you'd like to submit this to your developers, tell them to use relative paths (/2009/12/18/wow-coms-top-ten-stories-of-2009-part-2) instead of absolute paths (http://www.wow.com/2009/12/18/wow-coms-top-ten-stories-of-2009-part-2). This way the subdomain stays the same.
Bradwr Dec 18th 2009 5:57PM
I completely agree. I disliked the multi page view. It adds nothing to the story or presentation imho.
agnoster Dec 19th 2009 5:04AM
@Mike:
*cough* I like wow.com and all, but isn't this a bit disingenuous? Every news outlet that breaks up articles into multiple pages is doing it for the same reason - page views -> ad revenue. It's not easier to read an article by clicking through multiple links than simply scrolling - this is a misconception from printed media, where it would probably be unwieldy to work with a huge long scroll rather than turn some pages. On the internet, that is not the case. Each extra page means locating a link to click, waiting for the next page to load, scrolling back past whatever's at the top - and god help you if you opened the article on your computer before going somewhere without internet. There are exceptional cases where you might want to break up the content a bit (I imagine War and Peace would not work best on one page) but... for inspiration, look at Wikipedia. Each topic is one page, you don't have to click through to get to the next "page" of the article on... oh, say, Stonehenge. (If Wikipedia ran off ad revenue, it might look different, of course.)
If you don't believe me, try a survey: "Would you prefer long articles broken up into several pages, or all on one page?" I'm fairly confident it would be a landslide in favor of one page, but I'm obviously willing to be proven wrong by empirical evidence.
It's the same reason your RSS feeds only contain a teaser, so that you have to hop to the actual website to read what's "below the fold" (by the way, this is the internet - there is no "fold").
Now, it's not wrong to try to make money off a blog, not at all. I delight in reading your content, I support you guys making a living off it, but please - treat us like adults, okay? You shouldn't be ashamed that you've made decisions that improve your revenue - but you might have cause to be ashamed if you need to lie about it to us :-P