Yeah that is unfortunate but its the reality of the gaming industry right now. Sadly Fortnite has revolutionized and changed the industry single handedly.
Fortnite is nothing but a fad
1 Like
Hereâs a pile of books to burn while youâre at it.
#letusdiscuss
2 Likes
Thanks. Reporting you for abusing the report option. Thats trolling and against terms of service.
1 Like
Nah when I went to flag this post they gave me four options to flag it under and this post fits pretty well into at least 2 of them. Working as intended.
5 Likes
no one cares
2 Likes
The entire gaming industry now is a fad.
1 Like
Glad to hear you care friend =D
reported for calling me a friend
3 Likes
They said no front line releases. At worst, yesâŚActivisions re-org efforts and refocus on âboosting profitâ could mean Classic WoW no longer meets the economic thresholds theyâve set for where resources are spent. Most businesses set a benchmark metric for profitability, and proposed projects that donât meet that metric are backlogged or tossed. Sometimes, through realignment efforts like this, those benchmarks are moved up, making projects that were economic before no longer viable.
That said, we donât know what that benchmark is, and we have no idea what their internal estimates are on cost vs revenue for the Classic project.
I think common sense will tell you that Classic, as advertised with no changes, will not be a major revenue stream. You could reasonably assume that, based on the comments from the earnings call yesterday, that they may be re-evaluating spend on things that they think could be better allocated.
I think it could still come, but might be delayed or will include other ways to monetize the game.
Honestly, Iâd be fine paying a totally different sub for the game if it could guarantee the integrity of the game.
1 Like
There is zero evidence that Classic will be affected in any way.
2 Likes
True, but sharding? I think it will be kept throughout - if there are enough people still playing. Itâll be hard to justify to upper management the increase in cost for a âside projectâ when you can do it cheaper.
It sucks but itâs what seems like will happen.
Well, the only CM to communicate to the Classic audience was laid offâŚso there is that.
To you point, yesâŚjust about everything else is purely speculative. However, the evidence that they did lay out, at the very least, shows that Activision-Blizzard is heading in a direction that seems antithetical to Classic WoW, and traditional PC based MMORPGs in general.
How would it be more expensive to leave sharding off after release exactly?
2 Likes
Arguably Vanilla thru WOTLK was a fad cause those numbers have never returned.
From a corporate point of view that likely casts a shadow on how profitable a classic release will be or risks of being a loss due to the fad that passed over 10 years ago.
Depends on the volume of people. If the volume remains high and Blizzard leaves sharding off, then that means there will be more load handled across less âhardwareâ (not to be confused with a physical server, or for the more technically adept, ec2 instance). Or, if they leave it âoffâ, itâll be more hardware dependent so theyâll need to use more powerful âhardwareâ to handle the load.
If the number of people drop and volume of low, they can leave sharding on and no one will know the difference.
Thatâs not how blizzard servers work at all anymore. Even if it was this still doesnât make any sense. They could just leave it off considering server caps for vanilla are way lower than retail and if it lags out just let it lag.
The only reason they turn on sharding in retail is for performance on the users end so they have the best experience possible. Turning on sharding for classic does the exact opposite of what it is trying to do in retail.
2 Likes
I would be inclined to say you are wrong and do not understand sharding at all.
1 Like
I would be inclined to ask you why you think that.
Blizzard does not consider that a major release. It is the same bucket as warcraft and starcraft remastered.
2 Likes