NEW Warpstalker mount added to TBC classic. Potential store mount.

[Kathranis]

The premium items they seem to be putting into BC Classic look like they're meant to replace the TCG Loot items that started being introduced in 2006, since there are also tags for the Dark Portal Hearthstone and the Path of Illidan items.

Those Loot Cards came from later sets in the TCG (Hunt for Illidan and Betrayal of the Guardian), but match the theme of the expansion (Black Temple and Black Morass), so it would make sense to move them around.

And since the mount Loot Cards are still rare and are worth a lot of money, they're replacing them with completely new mounts so as to not devalue the original Spectral Tigers and shit.

That's my guess, anyway.

[Ragedaug]

You do realize mounts are CHEAP in BC. The riding skill is what costs. So now you're _making up_ a fact that Blizzard would give the riding skill for free, and being mad about it. That's Karen level of logics, dude.

And it's Karen level 3D chess, since you're making this entire thing up in the first place since no one knows what that mount is about.

No I did not realize that mounts were CHEAP in BC. If I realized that, I wouldn't have said the opposite of it. Are you just assuming I'm a liar who knowingly makes stuff up to fool people on the internet. You don't know me, why would you assume I'm a bad person instead of just assuming I'm dumb?

In my experience there's way more dumb people than bad people. I would recommend just playing the odds next time instead of assuming the worse about people you don't know. So next time instead of starting your posts with "LIAR LIAR LIAR!!!", you could instead try to be helpful and be like, "You probably just didn't know this, but here's the correct information - ...".

Anyway, I'm relying on my memory, and I'll admit it's not the greatest. I thought the price switch was in Wrath, but definitely would not be surprised if I'm wrong and you are right. My highest level toon was only level 18 when BC dropped the first time, so the first mount I bought was in BC and I could have sworn I paid 90% mount / 10% license, like Vanilla pricing. Maybe the change happened during BC? I dunno, maybe I'm just wrong. /shrug.

[leggomydairy]

this is what is going to happen......... history repeating itself, fking unbelievable

https://www.reddit.com/r/classicwow/...othing_now_we/

Wow the Classic WoW sub really is deranged

[Nyxblow]

What if the Warpstalker mount was to be available only for very high amount of gold and act as a massive gold sink ?

[Monolithi]

It's funny how everyone was like "Nah, they will never let you boost characters in WoW classic!".. Now everyone is like "Nah, they will never add store mounts to WoW classic!"

But hey if Blizzard can earn some extra $$$, they surely won't miss that opportunity.

Would you miss the opportunity?

[Stormdash]

when has that sort of thing ever happened

Giving you a wow retail mount for activities in another game? At least twice - once for Hearthstone and once for HOTS.

[Clozer]

Would you miss the opportunity?

Imagine spending thousands of hours into creating something amazing.. and then someone comes along and gives you a ton of money to destroy it. Would you miss the opportunity?

[Monolithi]

Imagine spending thousands of hours into creating something amazing.. and then someone comes along and gives you a ton of money to destroy it. Would you miss the opportunity?

Destroying it or enhancing it is a matter of perception.
I just asked would you miss the opportunity if you are in Blizzard shoes, doing your job as Blizzard CEO?

[lolmmofuture]

Destroying it or enhancing it is a matter of perception.
I just asked would you miss the opportunity if you are in Blizzard shoes, doing your job as Blizzard CEO?

thats why this is differnet tho,

this is the games industry. the goal should be to make the best game you can make.

who decided that ceo's can just screw that over?

im not saying they cant make money, they are a business after all, but its about making enough money for the sake of the game VS making ALL the money for the sake of greed.

[Monolithi]

thats why this is differnet tho,

this is the games industry. the goal should be to make the best game you can make.

who decided that ceo's can just screw that over?

im not saying they cant make money, they are a business after all, but its about making enough money for the sake of the game VS making ALL the money for the sake of greed.

Business is about maximizing profit, not some profit. Competition does max profit, you cant afford some profit or you go down after a while. That is why sucessfull companies stay and indie ones go under.

[Prag]

thats why this is differnet tho,

this is the games industry. the goal should be to make the best game you can make.

who decided that ceo's can just screw that over?

im not saying they cant make money, they are a business after all, but its about making enough money for the sake of the game VS making ALL the money for the sake of greed.

How do you measure “the best game” if not by some sales or subscriber oriented measure?

Let’s not forget that game development is expensive. You’re having to put up the capital before it ever sells, be it salary, research, assets, etc. Not entirely applicable to Classic/re-releases but there’s still engineering costs.

I think people were expecting Classic to be a return to some indie gaming studio. I would love to know why anyone thought that would be the case.

[Thundering]

What if the Warpstalker mount was to be available only for very high amount of gold and act as a massive gold sink ?

If this is the case then it would be fine for me, New ingame stuff earned ingame is fine as long as it goes with the Classic design.

Store mount and I think I will quit.

[sam86]

they already made token wow a part of classic, why won't they do that?
even satan has more conscious than bobby kodick, apologizing to statan to compare him with a pure evil like bobby

[Kralljin]

How do you measure “the best game” if not by some sales or subscriber oriented measure?

I think there is still a line when a certain game has extreme financial success due to its monetization or it just being a good game.

When a game is stuffed full of Microtransactions, which also target whales and makes a huge revenue, it's different to a game that's a one time purchase and has no other string attached to it.
This isn't necessarily about WoW, but games that also go into predatorial practices such as lootboxes, their financial success is not necessarily reflective of their objective quality as a product but rather their ability to make more revenue.

You can't measure the "best game" in an objective fashion, but when we talk about the financial aspect, then the monetization of the game naturally plays a massive a role in that metric.

Subscriber numbers are a different story, but when we go back to WoW there, then we only know that Blizzard considers "other metrics" superior to subscriber count to measure the success of the game nowadays.

Let’s not forget that game development is expensive. You’re having to put up the capital before it ever sells, be it salary, research, assets, etc. Not entirely applicable to Classic/re-releases but there’s still engineering costs.

Mate, Blizzard did the legwork with Classic (their words, not mine) and it did not have any additional monetization outside of Server transfers (where Blizzard certainly also made a lot of money due to Phase 2) and TBC is frankly much smaller in scale than Classic.

Disregarding that people who exclusively play Classic / TBC are also paying a monthly sub, it's not like it's some Free to play game, when you play TBC for 6 months, you pretty paid Blizzard a sum equivalent to what other Triple A games cost.

The additional monetization isn't there to make the project profitable, it's to make it more profitable.

[Prag]

Mate, Blizzard did the legwork with Classic (their words, not mine) and it did not have any additional monetization outside of Server transfers (where Blizzard certainly also made a lot of money due to Phase 2) and TBC is frankly much smaller in scale than Classic.

Disregarding that people who exclusively play Classic / TBC are also paying a monthly sub, it's not like it's some Free to play game, when you play TBC for 6 months, you pretty paid Blizzard a sum equivalent to what other Triple A games cost.

The additional monetization isn't there to make the project profitable, it's to make it more profitable.

Mate, as someone who’s managed data migrations between legacy and modernized systems, migrations from legacy DBs to data warehouses, etc... this is drastically over-simplifying the risks, costs and processes.

Even a small embedded team of a few data/software engineers, a QA and some sort of project/infra lead based on CA tech salaries is going to average like $100k/mo in salary costs plus any actual direct costs (CDNs, etc).

Is this a smaller investment than designing from the ground up? Of course.

Is this a simple, cheap or easy endeavor? Of course not.

Bobby wants his ROI and his investors want big returns. Expecting them to understand/care about the nuances of “it’s just a re-release” in order to temper their expectations of rapid returns is just not a valid argument here.

Please save us both the time if you’re going to pretend that anyone giving the green light for these projects would consider anything other than growth a “success”.

[Kralljin]

Mate, as someone who’s managed data migrations between legacy and modernized systems, migrations from legacy DBs to data warehouses, etc... this is drastically over-simplifying the risks, costs and processes.

When Blizzard says that the "legwork is done", this precisely means there is still effort left, but far less effort than previously.

So, no need to tell me about the technical details involved, because the people in the know said already it's less effort.

Bobby wants his ROI and his investors want big returns. Expecting them to understand/care about the nuances of “it’s just a re-release” in order to temper their expectations of rapid returns is just not a valid argument here.

It's not exactly arcane knowledge what's Blizzard endgame here is, nor did i question it, but justifying it with technical reasons - despite Blizzard themselves saying it's far easier than the previous project - is dishonest.

If your stance is: Blizzard wants to make even more money - okay? Thank you for your contribution.

[Prag]

When Blizzard says that the "legwork is done", this precisely means there is still effort left, but far less effort than previously.

So, no need to tell me about the technical details involved, because the people in the know said already it's less effort.

It's not exactly arcane knowledge what's Blizzard endgame here is, nor did i question it, but justifying it with technical reasons - despite Blizzard themselves saying it's far easier than the previous project - is dishonest.

If your stance is: Blizzard wants to make even more money - okay? Thank you for your contribution.

Yes, I realize that a more complete picture disrupts your ability to argue on inferences.

“Please, don’t share the technical realities. I want to continue dismissing arguments based on a two second blurb from Blizzcon.”

Okay, carry on dude.

[Kralljin]

“Please, don’t share the technical realities. I want to continue dismissing arguments based on a two second blurb from Blizzcon.”

Because i'd take the "two second blurb" of professionals that are actually involved in the matter than yours.

[Prag]

Because i'd take the "two second blurb" of professionals that are actually involved in the matter than yours.

If you don’t want the perspective of someone with relevant business and technical experience, then stop replying. Explaining the process in detail is obviously not in the scope of a Blizzcon talk, and implying that its absence somehow validates your assumptions is asinine.

[Electric Lighter]

The cash shop conquers all. There isn't any stopping it. All things fall to chaos eventually.