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 newsMore details emerge on Void Storage -- 80 slots of space
by Adam Holisky 
Aug 17th 2011 at 11:40AM
The details on the new void storage are as follows:
- 80 slots to store items
-
All items put in void storage will have the following removed from them:
- Enchants
- Gems
- Name of player who crafted the item
The full bit from Kotaku's interview with Chris Metzen and Tom Chilton is as follows:
Another addition coming with the patch is "Void Storage", a new 100 to 150 [See Editor's Note] items slots. Like transmogrification, void storage comes from the Ethereals. Void storage is a pocket dimension created for a player that allows them to store extra items, but there is a downside.
Anything stored in the void is stripped of its enchantments and gems and the name of the person who crafted it, Chilton said. The stripping isn't tied to the lore of the game, either, but is the byproduct of a technical issue that makes this new storage system possible. (Read: Silly databases!)
Editor's Note: Blizzard has sent word that it's actually 80 slots in the Void Storage, not 100 to 150 as originally reported at Kotaku.
Brace yourselves for what could be some of most exciting updates to the game recently with patch 4.3. Look at what's ahead: new item storage options, cross-realm raiding, cosmetic armor skinning and your chance to battle the mighty Deathwing -- from astride his back! Filed under: News items
Reader Comments (Page 3 of 5)
Cambro Aug 17th 2011 12:15PM
There is no comparison of you with Blizzard, don't worry. :)
From what I can tell, a lot of data is...are...is (screw it) stored on a realm-by-realm basis. Hundreds of realms. Blizzard has lately been moving things to function cross-realm (battlegroups, real ID, dungeon finder, upcoming raid finder). That tells me they're centralizing as much data as they can.
I'm drawing the conclusion that Void Storage is something that will be stored independently of realm data, which when you think about it makes sense. If you faction or realm transfer, your Void Storage data won't have to be moved; it will be associated to the ID of your character, no matter where your character is.
I can understand the "created by" getting stripped, as that's one more relational thing tied to the gear that they would have to manage (does the name get updated if the person changes names? what if they delete the character?). Removing enchants seems odd, but my guess is when you put something from YOUR vault on YOUR realm into Void Storage, it tells the "Void Storage server" to "create a copy of this piece of gear and place it in this character's Void Storage", then tells your realm's database "delete this piece of gear". It COULD keep the enchant on it, but it's, again, probably one more piece of relational data that they decided isn't important enough to manage.
As far as lazy developers go, I have been a developer for 12 years, and yes, I am absolutely lazy. Necessity may be the mother of invention, but laziness is the catalyst for software design. :) BUT, remember the developers don't always call the shots. There are budget constraints, time constraints, physical or virtual or practical limitations, and generally someone else dictating how much they want you to do.
Cephas Aug 18th 2011 12:00AM
This is probably more work for the developers than adding 80 slots to your bank would be, since like you said they already have that system in place. They clearly didn't do it because they want to cut corners on development - they wanted to cut corners on their database storage space. 80 slots * 11 million subscribers * 50 characters (maximum) per account is a lot of data no matter how you slice it and only storing the itemID cuts down on that substantially, just like Nopunin10did said - and he didn't even mention reforge IDs.
kmarcy1729 Aug 18th 2011 11:46AM
No one has mentioned the obvious: Void storage is what they changed the key ring into, hence the limitations. As such I would be shocked and amazed if there was any cross-character or cross-realm access.
Cambro Aug 17th 2011 12:02PM
Will every character have access to this, even at level 1? Or will this be something that costs like 50,000 gold to unlock?
lordemperor Aug 17th 2011 12:07PM
Premium service $2.99 per month.
Sinfulle Aug 17th 2011 12:13PM
You bring up a good point regarding cost. Players were saying we didn't seem to have too many gold sinks this expansion. I could see Blizz asking for large sums of gold for these services, seeing as how we are dealing with Ethereals(who love money as much as Goblins).
AudreyR Aug 17th 2011 12:54PM
Everything on my server's AH is a gold sink.
hicks Aug 17th 2011 12:03PM
I guess it's time to start looking into selling cool-looking low-level weapon enchants.
adyuaa Aug 17th 2011 12:06PM
Alas, "Anything stored in the void is stripped of its enchantments and gems and the name of the person who crafted it." Of course, for just weapons, we could keep those in the old banks or our bags to save the enchant - or there might be a brisk trade in re-enchanting.
Andrew Aug 17th 2011 12:35PM
I think the re-enchanting trade is what hicks was referring to. Jumping on that bandwagon in T-minus 3...2...
hicks Aug 17th 2011 12:39PM
(This got stuck at the end, re-posting in the proper spot)
Exactly, when people stick their weapon in, it's re-stripped, thus necessitating a fresh enchant every time it's pulled out of void storage. Prices won't get out of hand, obviously, because smart people will leave it in their bags or bank, but it will make for a nice brisk trade for a bit.
Cephas Aug 18th 2011 12:08AM
If people keep re-enchanting weapons and putting them back in void storage, they're stupid. The bank will still serve as a perfectly good storage place for people who want to keep enchants.
Spelio Aug 17th 2011 12:04PM
I can only hope that Tabards can be considered "extra items".
alzeer Aug 17th 2011 12:05PM
to me it seems "store armor" is meant mainly for people who like to keep older sets so removing enchants is harmless because they wont be actually used.
StClair Aug 17th 2011 12:17PM
Yeah, that +4 Stam bracers aren't gonna be helping you a lot these days.
Cambro Aug 17th 2011 12:19PM
Good point. The armor I'm most likely to store (and weapons) is stuff I got from soloing very old content, that I never bothered enchanting, and usually doesn't even have gem slots. Plus, enchants don't affect the look of armor, only weapons, so if you like to keep your [Thunderfury] enchanted to prove to Trade that you actually have it and not just linking from AtlasLoot, keep it in your bank or bags.
LouCypher Aug 17th 2011 12:15PM
Finally a closet for all those holiday outfits.
glyakk Aug 17th 2011 12:14PM
I am also involved in software and database applications and I am surprised that you would think that they are just being lazy. When an items is stored in a database, especially on such a large scale as it would be here there could be unforseen problems, not to mention the size of the databases... millions of users adding 100+ items each + multiple enchants gems that all need storage also.. I imagine the reason they are doing it like this is to allow as many extra items as possiable, most of the items that would be stored would not even have many of these extra attributes anyway(tabbords, holiday items, etc.) And the ones that do(armor weapons, etc) could be stripped because they are for nostaliga reasons only. I do not see this as unreasonable at all.
BellaMuerta Aug 17th 2011 12:18PM
Now the hoarder in me hates myself for pitching my old gear... DAMN IT!
Nina Katarina Aug 17th 2011 12:23PM
I'm quite glad that they're letting you transmogrify weapons as well as armor. Some of the old weapon and shield designs are quite wonderful.