Also on AOL
- Autos
- Technology
- Lifestyle
- Gaming
- Finance
- Entertainment on AOL
- Lifestyle on AOL
- Sports on AOL
- Travel on AOL
- More on AOL
Featured Galleries
Joystiq
© 2013 AOL Inc. All rights Reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks | AOL A-Z HELP | About Our Ads

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
12-07-2010 @ 6:48PM
bongato said...
Well this is really lame... they're overestimating how much some of us care about Achievements as their own rewards.
Seriously though, there's a finite amount of XP awarded for a finite amount of achievements. Yes guilds could skyrocket up fast, but they'd still top out how much XP they could get from these and the drastically slow down, while smaller guilds would gain slower and steadier but over time likely get the exact same amount of finite XP and they'd all equalize after a bit.
I'd have thought they'd have done the math on it, this is pretty sad.
Reply
12-08-2010 @ 2:17PM
Eirik said...
It's not so much about the achievements being their own reward as it was that the achievements were bringing in tangible benefits (the guild perks).
I agree that Blizzard should have exercised a couple of use-cases earlier in the process. It's not like the data about guilds wasn't available to them before Cata released. So now, they get to play catch-up, and make the best decision they can after the fact.