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)
10-22-2011 @ 6:34PM
Kreek said...
It's essentially a "can't make everyone happy" situation. For every player who loved the size and character of Scholomance or BRD, there were 3 other players who detested those dungeons because they were incredible time sinks that were horrible to run in PUGs. No one wants to sink 1 to 2 hours in a dungeon run that collapses before you get to the last boss, which was a fairly frequent occurrence. Maybe the ability to fail a dungeon makes it more exciting, but more often it just sucks.
Skipp-able areas or bosses are interesting, but once the dungeons are about a month or two old, they'll get skipped 9 times out of 10. Is it worth the effort to make them then? Possibly, but it's all about prioritizing what needs to get done for each dungeon. Creating 1 or 2 "extra" fights for 6 different dungeons is time and effort that could've gone to a 7th dungeon.