Mar 24th 2010 4:53PM On the subject of "sub has no place in PvE", can you quantify that at all?
Are we talking "no place in a raid that wants to get Arthas on farm before the buff gets to 15%"? Are we talking "3% less than the worst non-sub spec"? Are we talking raiding-only, due to the lower hit and expertise requirements in non-raid content?
Mar 22nd 2010 2:35PM Best suggestion I can offer:
I note that a tank is complaining. I am going to *guess* that the guild in question can field enough tanks and healers on their own, and the PUG folk are DPS.
If that's the case, a simple rule that "you can only roll on loot for your own role" might be enough to make the difference. It's relatively fair, guildies and non-guildies are subject to the same rules, and it helps ensure that the core tanks and healers at least get the gear they need.
(Another option *might* be to have GDKP runs, but have guild members not compete with each other and pay out of the guild treasury.)
Mar 5th 2010 10:38AM What won't I do? I won't use voice comms. I've tried them from time to time and they always ruin the game for me.
And they're also completely unnecessary; I'm progressing in ICC10 just fine with no voice.
A thing that I've never tried to date and can't imagine trying is: arenas. Also, "enjoying PvP", though I've sometimes still *done* it for the rewards (I feel dirty).
Jan 11th 2010 9:47AM What do I do while waiting for LFG to pop?
Since I play tanks and healers almost exclusively, I generally blink twice. Except I often don't have time to do that.
Just about the only time I'm not playing a tank or healer, I'm playing an enchanter, tagging along when a tank or healer *buddy* wants to make sure there's an enchanter in the party. If you're an enchanter this is something you can do. Go to the LFG *channel* and say "hey, tanks and healers, want to make sure there's an enchanter in your party? invite me and there will be!".
Trust me, tanks and healers can PUG a *lot* if they want to, so runs with enchanters can become a significant source of materials. Some of them will invite random DPS with enchanting just for this reason. Have just a couple of tanks or healers get to know you as DPS who brings enchanting and doesn't cause wipes and you could become very very busy!
Nov 5th 2009 2:18PM These are not microtransactions. Look at the price. They're transactions.
The reason a microtransaction is a special case worth talking about relates to the ratio between the price of the good and the price of the overhead of collecting that from the buyer. Consider credit card transactions. Very often, they're roughly (within an order of magnitude) 25 cents plus 3% of the total transaction price -- that's what the processor skims off from your money before handing the vendor their cut. If that's the case, how do you sell something that's worth ten cents? *THAT* is a microtransaction. And Blizzard isn't doing it. Even in the case where the item is one dollar, you could call it a microtransaction because of the huge cut percentagewise that the financial processing takes out.
Microsoft is doing it. The way they do it is, you perform a real transaction to obtain a new currency in bulk ("microsoft points") in a way that cannot be reversed (ie. you can't turn the points back into money), and then you perform the microtransactions with that new currency.
Apple is doing it with iTunes. The way they do it is, they don't actually charge you immediately. They wait in the hopes that you'll make more purchases, and then try to aggregate them into a bigger transaction that they can push through "at once". That's why after you buy a bunch of stuff over the course of a day or two, you get one email message that summarizes it all at once.
But Blizzard simply isn't going anywhere near it yet.
If the pets were a dollar instead of ten dollars, then yes. If you could pay a dollar for 50gp of in-game gold, yes.
Microtransactions *do* enable profit models that full transactions don't, and they can be especially applicable to MMOs. You can look at iTunes (both for music and for the app store) to see exactly how. If an item costs one dollar, you get way way way more impulse buys than you do at ten dollars. If there was a *flock* of non-combat pets available at fifty cents each, I think you'd see a lot of people spending more than ten or even twenty dollars on them. *That* would be an example of Blizzard actually doing microtransactions.
Nov 2nd 2009 1:40PM When I hear people propose this kind of thing as reasonable, there's a standard thing I use as a counter-proposal:
We turn on master looter. Whenever any item drops, regardless of who can use it, everyone rolls one number. The high roller decides what happens with the item. Tanking plate drops and a mage wins the roll? The mage decides if it gets assigned to a tank (and which one) or if it gets sharded. Wand with lots of spell hit drops? The tank makes an analogous decision.
Somehow, almost nobody ever wants to use this system...
Oct 29th 2009 5:45PM Actually, in this particular case, one thing Blizzard gets out of beating a dead horse is, they scare the crap out of all the other horses.
If anyone else is thinking about forming a company to run private WoW servers that support microtransactions, this should at least make them think a little harder before doing it.
Oct 22nd 2009 3:14PM So, cookie cutter specs assume cookie cutter groups. If you're in a large progression-oriented raiding guild with a standard makeup, they can make sense. If you're in a smaller, less focused guild on an RP server, they can make considerably less sense.
So none of my characters are pure cookie cutter spec. I have to take into account which buffs my teammates lack, and which they benefit from disproportionally. And so, all my characters are tweaked and tuned for the groups they run with and the purpose they have within those groups. And I tweak my gearsets and spell/ability rotations and priority lists the same way.
Aug 31st 2009 4:27PM A big boost by moving BlizzCon?
The existing convention was huge and sold out in under a minute. I'm not sure there's any venue on earth that could handle them if they got "a big boost".
Aug 12th 2009 4:47PM Good heavens, we wouldn't want to give consumers the mistaken idea that an Android device could behave much like a Palm Pre, would we? That would be confusing and terrible! I mean, that's almost like giving people the impression that the Palm Pre could behave like an iPod or iPhone, and we know Palm is very much against that!