Skip to Content
2-12-2011 @ 12:24AM
Nice to know they're listening, even if the initial response was "Too bad, we don't care if you don't like it."
2-12-2011 @ 12:29AM
But ... it's their game.
2-12-2011 @ 12:35AM
Ya really. i was surprised by the last blue post in there way of dealing with the title removement. Dont have that particular title myself but if they had removed Loremaster from me with the quest resets for cata, i would be pretty pissed too. But glad they are fixing it for everyone.
2-12-2011 @ 12:49AM
@matthew:It's their game... But it's also a business. And if they were to turn this precedent (removing earned achievements with no warning) into a habit, they'd be liable to start losing customers.
2-12-2011 @ 1:29AM
Missed getting Loremaster pre-Cata by 30 quests or so because I didn't realise the title requirements were being changed (as if I needed another reason to hate Blade's Edge Mountains). It's annoying to be caught unaware for sure, but not the end of the world.
2-12-2011 @ 1:52AM
@Shadda:Not remotely comparable.1.) It was widely advertised that the requirements for Loremaster were changing.2.) People who had previously earned the title didn't have it removed when the requirements were updated.People wouldn't be complaining about the Exalted change if it had been announced and those who'd already earned it had their titles grandfathered in.
2-12-2011 @ 3:06AM
Well, that's on you then, isn't is Shadda? You didn't get around to getting the achievement, the requirements changed, and you got set back. On the other hand, you're talking about people who set their sights on a goal, reached it, and then got it taken away through not fault of their own. Not really comparable.The type of person who likes getting achievements is probably not going to like having them taken back, so it's not surprising there was such an uproar.
2-12-2011 @ 10:43AM
You know I'm glad they reversed their decision but I am not buying the whole technical aspect excuse. they flat out said they wanted it to mean more. So which is it? It was technically harder to grandfather or you wanted it to mean more? Yeah nice try to cover it up. Happy for the people who lost their acheives but still sad it had to come to what it did to get it back. And to all those QQing about the QQ well you can QQ yourself silly. It will be the only action you will be getting this weekend. :p Noyou!
2-12-2011 @ 9:21AM
Guess that wasting a GM's time for over half an hour in game paid up :PReally dont understand why Blizzard decided to remove the title in the first place when they've never done something similar in the past. If only they'd revert their stupid idea of removing ZG.
2-12-2011 @ 10:24AM
@relmatos:Actually, this reversion update gives us a pretty big hint as to why they did: they wanted to keep the achievement relevant and challenging (like Loremaster and Explorer), but because the coding was completely different, there was no existing way to keep the title for the people who'd already earned it.Their main error was in making the decision privately and then not communicating it before it went live. If they'd actually polled the community, I wouldn't be surprised if some people--maybe even a majority--might have actually rather pushed the requirement to 50 and had to re-grind than keep it at 40, which is currently much easier to obtain than it was in Wrath.
2-12-2011 @ 12:15PM
If the problem was that, they'd have easily added a temporary title to one of the achievements until they could fix it. And I agree. This wouldnt have happened if they took the time to listen to the community instead of surprising us with it and dismissing our complaints.
2-12-2011 @ 2:46PM
"It was technically harder to grandfather or you wanted it to mean more?"Is there a reason it can't be both? Technical limitations inform design choices. If their choice was between making a new "Exalteder" title or moving the old one, it's not to hard to see why they thought moving the Exalted would be the best way to preserve the feeling of the title. Not everything is a conspiracy.
2-12-2011 @ 3:13PM
"You know I'm glad they reversed their decision but I am not buying the whole technical aspect excuse. they flat out said they wanted it to mean more. So which is it? It was technically harder to grandfather or you wanted it to mean more? Yeah nice try to cover it up."Cover WHAT up? What are you talking about?Blizzard still wants the title to represent a significant accomplishment. They haven't changed their opinion on this. They also clearly have decided that taking the title away without at least announcing it was a bad idea. You can expect that sometime in the future they'll still move the title to the 50 reps mark.In the meantime, the way the current tech works is that the titles are linked to the achievements. You must have an achievement to have a title. When it was moved off the 40 reps achievement, everyone lost it. Blizzard is putting it back on the 40 reps achievement so people get it back. It IS a technical problem. That problem has not yet been solved, so they are working on it. It IS harder to grandfather it in, impossible in fact with the current set-up of the software.Yes, Blizzard wants it to mean more. Yes, they don't have the tech to support moving the title without removing it too. These are not exclusive. For now, the title is awarded at 40 reps even to anyone who hits 40 reps tomorrow. So what's your problem again?
2-12-2011 @ 11:28PM
"precedent"? Flawless victor.
First time? A confirmation email will be sent to you after submitting.
Members enter your username and password.
Enter your AOL or AIM screenname and password.
Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments.
When you enter your name and email address, you'll be sent a link to confirm your comment, and a password. To leave another comment, just use that password.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.