More WoW Woes

This WoW Gameplay Discussion (thanks Voodoo Extreme) offers a message from Blizzard Entertainment president Mike Morhaime on the ongoing difficulties being experienced in World of Warcraft, their MMORPG. The update describes why 20 realms had to be taken offline, and how players from the impacted realms will be receiving a total of seven free days added to their subscriptions due to this and another glitch earlier in the week. The update concludes with promises and apologies:
I want to take this opportunity to say that we will do everything possible to ensure that unexpected downtime like this does not occur in the future and that if it is necessary, we will do everything possible to give you better warning and keep you informed. In the future, we will avoid doing maintenance during peak hours, unless no other alternative presents itself. When complications occur that could impact your playing time, we will provide that information as well. We failed to do this last night, and I assure you that we are making changes to ensure that we do a better job of communicating with our players next time.

I want to extend my personal and heartfelt apology for the problems that some of you have been experiencing on our servers. We remain committed to delivering the best possible service for you and will continue to work around the clock to ensure that we provide an experience that you and I have to come to expect from Blizzard games.
View : : :
54.
 
Re: WoW, who gives a rat's ass?
Jan 23, 2005, 20:25
54.
Re: WoW, who gives a rat's ass? Jan 23, 2005, 20:25
Jan 23, 2005, 20:25
 
What about Arena.Net? http://www.arena.net/about/index.html Then there was Click Entertainment...

Can't deny that the brain drain has been significant.
Significant in what way? There are still plenty of the original founders and core members there. Every company is going to lose people. (Look at Valve and id; both of them have lost all but one of their original founders (granted, Valve only had to lose one guy to accomplish that, but you get the point)

Sure losing those three guys to Triforge (Later became Arena.net) wasn’t a good thing, some of them were there since before WarCraft I, and it would be silly to say they wouldn’t have SOME sort of impact. However, it does a disservice to the rest of Blizzard to say that they were in any way responsible for EVERTHING that went right at Blizzard. Especially when there’s a ton of guys still there who have been there as long (or longer) as those three.

Bill Roper was a big loss in that he was pretty much the visible face of Blizzard (Along with providing the voices for the original Orcs and Humans :D), however, he was not the only guy in charge there. It’s basically pissing on Michael Morhain and Allen Adhem (Who, without them, there would be no Blizzard) to say Blizzard can’t cope without him. He’ll be missed of course, but it’s not like he was the only piller at Blizzard. The loss of the Arena.net and Flagship guys most certainly had an impact on Blizzard, but to totally disrupt it to the point where nothing of worth remains? I highly doubt it.

Of course, how much weight each person at Blizzard pulls is ultimately unknown to you, me, and every random Internet troll. And I’m sure we’ll all just disregard the constant “It’s a team effort” and “There’s really not a single key person” comments as untrue pleasantries and industry courtesy, no matter who it comes from: the Arena.net guys, Bill Roper, Chris Metzen or pretty much EVERY Blizzard employee who has ever been asked about it.

Ultimately, it’s irrelevant. My point is that saying that all of the “big dogs” are gone is utter bull. Many of the core people are still there. IMO, the spirit and course of Blizzard is still there and if losing a handful of people every now and then means that the Blizzard we know no longer exists, then the Blizzard “we know” died with each and every game they made. WarCraft I’s Blizzard was not WarCraft II’s Blizzard; War2’s Blizzard was not StarCraft’s Blizzard, etc. etc.

However, yes, the current server situation is utter bullshit. Hopefully they’ll get it fixed; if not, they’ll lose money in the long run. No skin off my back, I guess.

(Oh, and as for Click Entertainment: it was founded by 2 (TWO!) guys from Blizzard North; who weren’t even in charge of anything apparently. Blizzard North then went on to make Diablo II. Click seems to have disappeared in the time since then. I think it’s safe to say they weren’t a significant impact on Blizzard North’s creative abilities. (Was Diablo II a better game than Diablo? I’d say so. Was the Diablo series good to begin with? Eh, I’ll leave that up to you.))

Sincerely,
Jeremy Dunn

Date
Subject
Author
1.
Jan 22, 2005Jan 22 2005
2.
Jan 22, 2005Jan 22 2005
6.
Jan 22, 2005Jan 22 2005
3.
Jan 22, 2005Jan 22 2005
4.
Jan 22, 2005Jan 22 2005
5.
Jan 22, 2005Jan 22 2005
7.
Jan 22, 2005Jan 22 2005
   Re: Jeez
8.
Jan 22, 2005Jan 22 2005
9.
Jan 22, 2005Jan 22 2005
10.
Jan 22, 2005Jan 22 2005
12.
Jan 22, 2005Jan 22 2005
13.
Jan 22, 2005Jan 22 2005
14.
Jan 22, 2005Jan 22 2005
18.
Jan 22, 2005Jan 22 2005
19.
Jan 22, 2005Jan 22 2005
22.
Jan 22, 2005Jan 22 2005
24.
Jan 22, 2005Jan 22 2005
     Re: No subject
25.
Jan 22, 2005Jan 22 2005
      Re: No subject
27.
Jan 22, 2005Jan 22 2005
       Re: No subject
41.
Jan 23, 2005Jan 23 2005
        Re: No subject
26.
Jan 22, 2005Jan 22 2005
     Re: No subject
28.
Jan 22, 2005Jan 22 2005
      Re: No subject
23.
Jan 22, 2005Jan 22 2005
11.
Jan 22, 2005Jan 22 2005
32.
Jan 22, 2005Jan 22 2005
33.
Jan 22, 2005Jan 22 2005
39.
Jan 23, 2005Jan 23 2005
46.
Jan 23, 2005Jan 23 2005
50.
Jan 23, 2005Jan 23 2005
52.
Jan 23, 2005Jan 23 2005
 54.
Jan 23, 2005Jan 23 2005
      Re: WoW, who gives a rat's ass?
51.
Jan 23, 2005Jan 23 2005
56.
Jan 24, 2005Jan 24 2005
59.
Jan 24, 2005Jan 24 2005
60.
Jan 24, 2005Jan 24 2005
       Lets try this:
63.
Jan 26, 2005Jan 26 2005
        Re: Lets try this:
64.
Jan 27, 2005Jan 27 2005
         Re: Lets try this:
53.
Jan 23, 2005Jan 23 2005
15.
Jan 22, 2005Jan 22 2005
16.
Jan 22, 2005Jan 22 2005
38.
Jan 23, 2005Jan 23 2005
40.
Jan 23, 2005Jan 23 2005
42.
Jan 23, 2005Jan 23 2005
43.
Jan 23, 2005Jan 23 2005
     Re: No subject
58.
Jan 24, 2005Jan 24 2005
61.
Jan 24, 2005Jan 24 2005
17.
Jan 22, 2005Jan 22 2005
20.
Jan 22, 2005Jan 22 2005
21.
Jan 22, 2005Jan 22 2005
35.
Jan 22, 2005Jan 22 2005
36.
Jan 23, 2005Jan 23 2005
37.
Jan 23, 2005Jan 23 2005
     Re: No subject
29.
Jan 22, 2005Jan 22 2005
34.
Jan 22, 2005Jan 22 2005
47.
Jan 23, 2005Jan 23 2005
48.
Jan 23, 2005Jan 23 2005
49.
Jan 23, 2005Jan 23 2005
30.
Jan 22, 2005Jan 22 2005
31.
Jan 22, 2005Jan 22 2005
44.
Jan 23, 2005Jan 23 2005
45.
Jan 23, 2005Jan 23 2005
57.
Jan 24, 2005Jan 24 2005