All Posts by trevornor

Originally posted by strategy

To counter the threads of some that think Wow is too easy: Since WotLK PvP gear is now rated: did you know it is the most difficult MMORPG in this field?

A PvP rating of 2200 means LESS than 1% of the players will ....ever see this gear on their avatars?

These new ratings assure the "elite" players they will feel elite. 

Carebear? When only 1% or less of the players will ever get this epic gear?

ok, original post read, check.

The percentage is backed by what fact(s?) and being pulled from where?

I know what a 2200 rating is, but people will play the system and get the items.

I disagree that it's the most difficult gear to get.

WAR's top tier gear is going to take much more effort and time to aquire.

Let me explain this system since I doubt you play many other games.

WAR's top tier gear is only available to people in the King fight. The group needed to go after him is 24 people.

To lock the city in order just to have the shot at him requires about 300 people working together (without opposition mind you, and before they made it much more difficult to do apparently) to lock the appropriate areas to make it even available.

Note there are 5 pieces per set. Odds are you won't get one in just one run. (might see one or two drop, but 24 people rolling...)

Then you have to wait for it to reset and start locking things again.

I bet you that people will have the full arena set in WOW long before anyone can boast having a full set of top tier gear in WAR. And mind you, WAR has almost 2 month's head start. (First lock started to happen about a month ago)

Have a good day. I can agree WOW has some of the hardest gear to get, but I do not think it's top dog.

Originally posted by grunty

Originally posted by Lobbyboy69

Originally posted by AmazingAvery

Originally posted by Unfinished

I'd rather see hard data from FunCom, intrawebz polling especially on the AoC Official forums isn't exactly a Gallup Poll.

But hard data from FC will never happen., unless required by law (Quarterly Financials)

This is a better indication of how people "Whom" actually play the game feel or have an interest in it.. which is pretty good in the direction it is going + its not moderated and laid out fo all to see. A lot of this just shows those people who played for 5 minutes 5 months ago can't call their thoughts on the game then accurate anymore in lots of area's and still very much relevant in some.

Problem with these polls Avery is that is done with people still playing the game. Anyone still playing the game is an obvious die hard AoC fan no matter what the state of the game. If you gave people who have left a free 2 week trail you would find considerably different results.
 

Considering that it was a poll of the community and advertises itself as that it's  results can be said to fairly represent that community.  Someone who does not play Age of Conan is not a member of that community and their opinion is not and should not be reflected in that poll.  You admit you do not play AoC therefore you do not belong to that community and your opinion in relation to this poll has no value.

Well, just a thought on this.

Part of the reason of changing the head man was not only to stop people from leaving, but also get people back. Former player's perception of him might be just as important if they intend on restoring former player's confidence in the game. (and I believe they do). Percieved leadership was one of many reasons people left. (I believe they improved things now to a point it is now a non-issue, though the 10% worse percentage is higher than I personally expected)

Just my opinion of course.

The second part AA touched on was there seems to be enough players for PvP, but again (just like other games) no one has figured out the golden formula on how to get people constantly open PvPing right now. I hope this gets figured out soon. (TBH not only for this game, but my own current form of addiction)

Have a good night

Well, an overlooked store that's going to have a few copies here in the US is 7-11. If all else fails, ask one of them.

Originally posted by Lisaka

[quote]Not only item but it includes masteries, titles, trophies and the whole endgame which results in locking of zones and progression to the city which is currently being tweaked.[/quote]

The "currently being tweaked" phrase is getting really old. I don't really understand when people will stop worshipping companies when they bring the most promoted feature broken. Seriously guys, as long as you exist there will be crap games. The biggest problem of modern games is they are distributed broken. And no....WoW was never THAT broken. The only problem I remember in WoW start were the overpopulated server as not even the company expected such a success.

Why you never asked yourselves: How such a simple game as WoW became so popular?
The answer is people don't want super cool features - they want working ones.
There are millions of people who want to leave WoW /like myself/ but there is nothing playable out of the new games.
The only game that cam closer to WoW was LoTR. Too bad combat was too slow for me. :(

You might want to go post hunting. Specifically patch notes.

The server issues themselves was 2 months at least.

Combat flow was still being worked on 6 months after release.

Pet issues 6 months.

Disconnecting issues were still problematic 9 months after release.

Vanish and other skills, 2 years to get working properly.

Not to mention the unplayability of several dungeons that took about a half a year to address. Itemization was still being worked on 9 months after release for the high end dungeons.

I got 2 weeks worth of comp time for how much they were down fixing things, and I joined after the sales freeze to address the server issues.

No, WOW when it began wasn't in WAR's condition, it was much worse. Most was hid initially behind the server overflow issue. Once that got fixed, things were still bad, just did not seem as bad compared to the #1 issue (server overpopulation)

Have a good day

Originally posted by infofront

Originally posted by trevornor
...

4. ok, let me get this straight, you buy a game that is designed for RvR/PvP experience and your level of expectation for it's PvE is to be equal or greater than a PvE focused game that has had 4 years to develop? As for the MJ comment, I would love to see it because that type of comment can be taken various ways. Did he ment the amount of content (which I can say I think does rival WOW's) complexities (Which I doubt since this is a RvR game) Polish (unrealistic) or something else? I work customer service, and I know how a person's expectation can color what they read or hear on a daily basis. I would love to see his comment as originally is done so we can see the context of it. WOW's original system was not nearly as complex as it is today.

...

 

I'm a little tired to be typing too much tonight. But here is what you're looking for (the interview text is available in many other places, I just snatched a random link from google): warhammerinfo.blogspot.com/2008/09/burning-crusades-quality-delayed-war.html

"We obviously had a major bump when Burning Crusade came out," Jacobs said.
"When [Blizzard] released that expansion, they raised the expectations of the player."

Jacobs paid tribute to Blizzard's ability to create stand-out quests that players would talk about with each other, and to pack its game with content.

"They put in some of what we call 'watercooler quests', the things that you talk about around the watercooler," he said.

"We looked at the amount of content they put in that and said we need more time if we want to add some of those things, if we want our own watercooler quests or more watercooler quests. So our choice was to delay the game and spend more time on it."

 

Also, I'll mention that the argument that "WoW is only better than WAR because it's been in development longer" seems really pointless to me. I don't really care about development time, money spent, etc. WoW is better than WAR right now, so my hard earned dollars are going to WoW. If the situation changes in the future, I would gladly renew my WAR subscription.

First of all I want to say thank you for the link. Much information on this sight gets slanted and changed from the original meaning too many times to take "he said,she said" without a little back up. So again, thank you.

Well, the article I would say falls within my "something else" It looks like he was talking about memorable missions that caught player's attention and be something to talk about with others.

There's a few I have hit that made things really memorable to me, what I would oncider "watercooler" missions that grab you and shake you. The Empire 1st PQ comes to mind. A second is another PQ later on around a burning windmill. That was a piece of virtual art with things on high and the sound they came up for it. What is "water cooler worthy" is going to be different from person to person. Here's the last detail that caught my attention when I came to WAR. I hated PvP in WOW. (and TBH hate is a kind word about my passion about it). I knew WAR was going to be RvR. I had played DAoC ages ago, and it wasn't a bad expereince to me (never took ahold of me either) and I am a big fan of the tabletop game comany (though 40k ALOT more than Fantasy) so I applied to the beta. After I got accepted and playing for a while, I had to tell my friends something (including my WOW guild) What I said is the following (which I hope you understand the significance of it)

I hate WOW PvP

I am in the WAR beta test.

WAR is about RvR.

I will be pre-ordering and buying WAR.

My friends, knowing me as they do, was shocked about this. If that isn't "watercooler talk" enough, I don't know what is. It took a passionate hater of PvP and convinced me to play and continue playing the game because of it's PvP.

The last is the fact some things you can script for, develop and write, and others you just have to fix after contact with the customer base. Maybe my time scripting content for a persistant world in Neverwinter Nights colored my view on this topic, knowing how hard it is to script bug free (and hopefully exploit free) content and the time it takes to really write alot of PvE content and stuff. It probably made me appriciate the effort and time needed. The expectation of a newly released game, to be as good or better than something that has been tuned for 4 years, to me, is unreasonable, given my experiences. Even with beta testing, nothing finds the cracks than exposing it to a player base who is not looking to do things the way it was ment to be done. WOW was in similar conditions when it was released. It takes time. If you do not have patience in this, then all I can do is wish you well. Because my feeling is nothing that is released will ever meet your expectations until a year or more later.

Have a good night and thank you again with the link.

Originally posted by bodypass

Originally posted by trevornor

 

Wow, just wow. You completely misread the content here. I will try and spell it out to you a bit.

"Beginning of Fiscal 2008" Means at Q1, not now. Meaning it's been in place since the begining of the year.

Next set of statements pertains from the fact the customer, at any period during a quarter (given there are monthly subscriptions) can cancel the service it offers, they cannot include future potential money from the service as part of the finacial income, but instead, record it as it comes in.Also, this was directly due to the start of people pre-ordering and cancelling on whim within the industry. If you look at other finacials, I bet you will find similar statements nowadays. Translation to english, people who pre-order a game does not mean they buy it anymore, so they cannot list the money from said pre-orders until the person accepts delivery of the pre-ordered goods. Second, even if a person is subscribed at the time the fiscal quarter starts, it does not mean he will be by the end, so instead of listing $45 per subscription, they have to wait until the money actually comes in. Both are valid reason to defer recording the income.

The last set of comments is refering to the fact people, in the past, generally bought the pre-orders they ordered. This is no longer the case. They recognise that fact and wishing to make the report as accurate as possible, seperate revanues from those pursuits into it's own catagories. Also means subscriptions are also alot more volitile than they used to be. Remember, not only do they have WAR, but also aquired DAoc another MMO with subscriptions,  as well as some sort of profit sharing arrangement with various services packaged with their software based on actual use (like gaming hubs or voice chatting software)

Also note the following comment on them defering it does not impact their cash flow. Translation "We are simply recording it differently but it is not affecting actual monies coming in as before"

These, of course, are my interpritations of what you quoted, and no more or less valid than yours except in the fact  what you say has no real connection to what you quoted. Also, I do appologise for the bit of scatterbrained this is. Too much work and not enough rest can do it to me.

Have a good night

 

Sorry guy, but ...the first quarter of the fiscal year is July to September. in this financial world.

So the post above IS the bomb and you were wrong. Learn something about the finacial world first please.

October was the month it all collapsed together:

the sales of Warhammer on line: just look at present day bestseller : http://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/videogames/229575/ref=pd_nr_vg_mte

That game is NO longer a bestseller.

The terrible drop in players activity on Xfire (while other games held the same player base or even climbed).

The reaction of the player base who didn't find any more players on half of the servers.

The server merges needed to save the game.

-----------------------------------------------------

So the EA report was written ABOUT the sales figures ending on Sep 30th, BUT with the know how of what was seen in October, so they had to take actions in order to save the day.

It's simple. Couldn't  be simpler in fact because ALL elements in this prove it.

 

 

Ahhh, Amazon, the company that almost unilaterally pissed off the entire pre-order population of WAR that ordered through it? A site that only shows the popularity of the game of customers who are willing to wait to play it? Here's another link for you...

www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp

Well, let's see here. 3rd out of over 500 titles when sorted by best sellers? A place whwere people go in and pick it up? MMOs are the type of games people want to play now, not wait a week for shipping. Amazon is not proof of a game's popularity, just convient for you to use.

Also, look at the flippin finacial report and tell me what quarter this all is listed under. It isn't Q1 2008. And I am a retail manager who deals with it every day.

Sorry, nothing yet from you I see as valid in this. Basically you are telling me "Who do you believe, me or your lieing eyes?"

Ahh, and X-Fire. Does that mean that the 10% drop in WOW players means over 1.1 million players quit in a week? Nope, that is no more valid than what you try to use X-Fire for.

Have a good night. I will love to see your review of WOW's finacials in the next day or two and see if you are even 1/100th critical.

Originally posted by CobraSolidus

Don't get me started. If I were to start on all the lies of MJ here I would probably have been banned in less than a minute. Let me put it this way, I don't like Michael Jacobs for the reason that he has come across as a man of double standards also ready to stretch to is unprofessional means of communicating when he feel that is beneficial. He flames Blizzard for their comments about WAR not really being that ready at launch. Then he flamed FC for not launching a ready product. What the hell, he can not post with such double standards, and in particular when he is a CEO (at least he is supposed to be). It's juvenile and those guys should refrain themselves from Trolling and flameing. Brad McQuaid I say sure as hell 

So a person, who is critical of another game is a bad person?

Pot, meet kettle. Might want to look in the mirror.

Originally posted by law90026

Originally posted by Abriael

bodypass, you know that EA has TONS of online services (and that includes digitally distributed goods), from which that statement can come? Attributing it to warhammer online is completely laughable.

Bomb defused (no need actually, it was a dud). You're wrong, OP is massively wrong. End of story.

It's so fun to witness the absolute cluelessness of doomsayers.

 

I suspect you're wrong. Here's the quote again from the report:

""Change in Deferred Net Revenue (Packaged Goods and Digital Content). Beginning in fiscal 2008, Electronic Arts was no longer able to objectively determine the fair value of the online service included in certain of its packaged goods games and online content. As a result, the Company began recognizing the revenue from the sale of these games and content over the estimated online service period. Although Electronic Arts defers the recognition of a significant portion of its net revenue as a result of this change, there has been no adverse impact to its operating cash flow. Internally, Electronic Arts' management excludes the impact of the change in deferred net revenue related to packaged goods games and digital content in its non-GAAP financial measures when evaluating the Company's operating performance, when planning, forecasting and analyzing future periods, and when assessing the performance of its management team. The Company believes that excluding the impact of the change in deferred net revenue from its operating results is important to facilitate comparisons to prior periods during which the Company was able to objectively determine the fair value of the online service and not delay the recognition of significant amounts of net revenue related to online-enabled packaged goods."

The increased losses here arise as a result of the inability to evaluate the value of online services for certain products and is meant to facilitate comparisons to prior periods when EA was able to do so. If you consider that the major new online product EA has is Warhammer Online, it makes sense that any losses attributed as a result of EA's policy can be linked substantially to Warhammer Online's projected performance (or lack thereof).

Essentially, the premise is that a large portion of this increased losses can be tied to the performance of Warhammer Online.

Generally, a company is not going to affect its bottom line so drastically unless they feel they really need to. This huge increase cut deeply into the quarter's profits but EA did it anyway. My take on it is that EA was probably advised by its accountants that it had to do this because they couldn't justify having a large revenue entry on its books based on Warhammer Online's projected performance when the fact of the matter was that these projections were likely wrong now.

Does this mean Warhammer is a failure? Not necessarily. However, it is a strong indication Warhammer Online is doing significantly worse that what EA had expected.

Wow, just wow. You completely misread the content here. I will try and spell it out to you a bit.

"Beginning of Fiscal 2008" Means at Q1, not now. Meaning it's been in place since the begining of the year.

Next set of statements pertains from the fact the customer, at any period during a quarter (given there are monthly subscriptions) can cancel the service it offers, they cannot include future potential money from the service as part of the finacial income, but instead, record it as it comes in.Also, this was directly due to the start of people pre-ordering and cancelling on whim within the industry. If you look at other finacials, I bet you will find similar statements nowadays. Translation to english, people who pre-order a game does not mean they buy it anymore, so they cannot list the money from said pre-orders until the person accepts delivery of the pre-ordered goods. Second, even if a person is subscribed at the time the fiscal quarter starts, it does not mean he will be by the end, so instead of listing $45 per subscription, they have to wait until the money actually comes in. Both are valid reason to defer recording the income.

The last set of comments is refering to the fact people, in the past, generally bought the pre-orders they ordered. This is no longer the case. They recognise that fact and wishing to make the report as accurate as possible, seperate revanues from those pursuits into it's own catagories. Also means subscriptions are also alot more volitile than they used to be. Remember, not only do they have WAR, but also aquired DAoc another MMO with subscriptions,  as well as some sort of profit sharing arrangement with various services packaged with their software based on actual use (like gaming hubs or voice chatting software)

Also note the following comment on them defering it does not impact their cash flow. Translation "We are simply recording it differently but it is not affecting actual monies coming in as before"

These, of course, are my interpritations of what you quoted, and no more or less valid than yours except in the fact  what you say has no real connection to what you quoted. Also, I do appologise for the bit of scatterbrained this is. Too much work and not enough rest can do it to me.

Have a good night

Well, I am not going to crit the readers here with the original wall of text, so I will refer to it by number to line up with the original post #1.

1. WOW's combat system is a product of 4 years of final tuning. When WOW was released, it was similarly "unhinged" even though other games were fine tuned by then. It's a growth process all MMOs seem to go through at release. To call it bad after a single month is simply impatient. I would think if you tried any game first month, you will always see some of the "unhinged-ness" until they adapt the code to the player level. I can hear it now "Why wasn't it fixed in beta testing?" Because you test the system in controlled settings to see if it opperates properly. No game tests their coding "uncontrolled". It's how they respond and adapt that matters. Give it time. If that means you stop subscription for 6+ months until it is fixed to your satisfaction, that's your right to do and I personally understand. Will I unsubscribe, heck no because it is just a minor distraction to me.

2. See above.

3. Dungeons. There are several instanced dungeons (Both in the main city and abroad, with others unlocked while sacking the opposing city), and then there are 24 various lairs (open world dungeons) hidden across the landscape. Some require exploring out of the way areas, others are skill jump approaches that remind me of Tomb Raider to get to. Then there is PQs that many call quickie dungeons which number in the hundreds across the landscape. The fact they are not exact duplicates of WOW does not mean they do not exist. so 24 Lairs + 10 for each side (not counting city sacking ones) is 34 dungeons. Is that somehow not enough for you? For your reference, Lairs were ment to suplement dungeons, not PQs.

4. ok, let me get this straight, you buy a game that is designed for RvR/PvP experience and your level of expectation for it's PvE is to be equal or greater than a PvE focused game that has had 4 years to develop? As for the MJ comment, I would love to see it because that type of comment can be taken various ways. Did he ment the amount of content (which I can say I think does rival WOW's) complexities (Which I doubt since this is a RvR game) Polish (unrealistic) or something else? I work customer service, and I know how a person's expectation can color what they read or hear on a daily basis. I would love to see his comment as originally is done so we can see the context of it. WOW's original system was not nearly as complex as it is today.

5. The UI has one thing going for it that WOW's does not, adaptability. Have you even messed with the UI design settings in WAR? Alot of your problems with it are clickable settings within the UI interface menu. We, as players, can adjust the UI in ways it takes a programmer (and a downloaded add on) to modify WOW's. Heck, WOW's original UI went through many changes due to the add on's themselves being greatly superior back in the day, to include the features. Again, this takes time.

6. Here I see we are going to disagree on this topic. I like WAR's design for skills a heck of alot better than WOW's. First, each skill you get has a unique purpose. They also scale up as you level (which also allows the raise in your level for PvP areas) So no new skill will replace another skill, each will have it's use. For the example you list, DPS, My Witch hunter can do burst damage, DOT, stackable DOT, Buff, Debuff, positional attacks, snare, reduce healing effects, silence, self heal, reduce action points and morale. All are builders of accusations, and this list does not include the effects of the executions. BTW, he's only 17th level. If you are calling this list insufficient, I hate to see what your level of expectation is. Also, skills are not the only form of abilities or advancement in the game, unlike WOW. WAR also includes tactics (passive buffs) and morale (abilities you can trigger the longer you are in combat) and gear (which is common to both games). Combine the fact you can actually change both tactics and morale abilities without respecing (and even have tactic combinations preset up to 5) makes for greater adaptability on the fly. As for "uber abilities" I guess you never got level 4 morale ability that fully heals your group (in range)?

7. Character Looks customization does what it needs to do, be fluid in mass combat without severly taxing a server with minute details.

As for skills, I touched on this before, but I will explain plainly here. Advancement in WAR is several ways and mechanisms. Actual abilities are greater in the fact you have not only clickable skills, but also passive abilities from tactics and combat generating abilities in morale. Add to this the advancement set up. in WAR, your skills level with you, removing the need to "retain" them like you do in WOW, that remves what, 80% of the "advancement" in WOW, the fact you have to retain for each rank? Second, the Mastery tree in WAR has additional effects WOW's does not. First is the fact it takes only 1 point to get the ability, because of the scaling. WOW, you have to spend 1-5 points in each to make it fully effective. Second, with WAR, each branch has 5-6 skills attached to it that gets a buff for each point you put in that path. So each point does not just have a single effect, it increases several skills at once. Then we have Renown, something WOW wishes it had. This allows the player to adjust his stats as he levels as well as get new abilities. Meaningful advancement of PvP. We also have Tome unlocks that can give you additional abilities as well. Shall I go on?

8. Here comes some direct proof that makes me doubt you advanced far in WAR, the comment of lack of CC. This greatly differs from the great amount of complaints that are happening that there is TOO much CC in the game.

Second, you obviously do not know end game very well. Each side only has one city to sack, but in order to get there, you have to unlock and capture 2 of the 3 racial fortresses, which needs you to capture the assosiated areas.

Third, your opinion that zergs win battles does not mesh with the uproar that it takes only a few defenders to generally hold off a much larger force trying to assault a keep due to one mechanic you have completely overlooked, collision detection, whcih choke points become a viable tactic a severly outnumbered force can use to great advantage...if they work well enough together. You theory and opinion only matters if both sides only zerg, which they do not all the time. There are many stories and first hand accounts where a well fuctioning small team demolish zergs.

9. From what I have read in tech support, this game relies on the processor and memory levels much more than the graphics card. The graphics cards need to have certain abilities, but in general it seems to under use it. Alot of people in tech support help players get the AA and AF working to it's full potential and the increase in performance is quite good (if that is indeed what is wrong) The engine looks like a new product on the market and refer back to point 1 again about my thoughts on things.

10. Itemization. This does need improvements, but again is no better or worse than most games at release in this department. I have seen PQs drop epics and gold bags before, so they are out there.

Next crafting. It is focused on two things, short term buff and effects (potions) and lower level long term buff and effects (talismans) Instead of breaking those two principles out to X many skills, with a grind component that is obnoxious (which this game has removed for the most part) they made it a side distraction at most intead of another sink to be pursued. The fact the game is not centered around crafting means the game is not centered around grind sinks (wether it be kill grinding, time grinding, money grinding or node grinding) It is about RvR. It also makes it so that to be competitive in RvR or PvP, you do not have to be a grinding god to get leet buffs. (insert bad opinion of twinks in WOW's PvP ruining overall experience for the majority of players, to the point they have to group cross server to make BGs viable)

11. Another sign you have not played this game much or in depth. Many chapter's lowest level rewards are non-expiring talismans, I have gotten non-expiring talisman drops, and some of the ones I have made have been pretty good (just not max level to see if crafting will make perminent ones, but I do not see it as a problem). Here is another point you seem to miss, it's not a gear driven game like WOW is (thank goodness) It's more about character development, guild development and team mechanics. Not all items are class specific. I have gotten general weapons, armour and broken stuff (that can be repaired and made into an item for any class), all general use. Now, this comes full circle about another difference I think they are better for. Each reward you get is useful by you in the terms you can actually use it. I have been on many raids to Kara in WOW and not a single item drop to help me. The way they do loot in this game means if you win a loot roll for PQ, Keep Lord or Boss, you get a bag and in it is something you can use or every quest has an item usable for you instead of 3 items that you cannot use at all.

12. Another sign you have not played this game much, or reciently.

First, flight masters. Thank goodness you do not actually have to fly between pairings. If you take a close look at the realm map in the intro video, you would have seen how far apart each pairing truly is. ALL of WOW's area would fit on the elven island alone. Let me give you a clue about the flight mechanism in WOW. All it is, is a time sink, and a terrible one that I am very glad they removed in this game.

End game city. It wasn't up to par with the rest of the game. They moved alot of racial specific content to the remaining city. When the others are leased (apparently as free content as it should be) it will give people that much more to do. But given the fact most have not figured out the end game mechanic well enough yet, and figure out how to take even one city, the other two can wait in my opinion.

As for Scenerios, they added the mechanic to be able to que for all scenerios of your teir from anywhere quite a long time ago (a month now I think) Your complaint is old news, addressed and fixed.

13. This again are complaints of old information. Open PvP, you are allowed to go one tier below your current teir. This mechanic was in at release. If you do not have the unlocks after 10 additional levels of advancement that they were intended for, it's how you are playing that seems to be at issue. The chicken was to address griefing and ganking, which is still a problem on the open servers. Again, the mechanic was well discussed and open information from the beginning. If you chose not to work on Tome unlocks for the lowest 2 teirs until you are level 32, there's an issue with you, not the game. And note, it does not stop you from walking around in the zone and getting all the exploration unlocks (though more difficult) it only stop combat ones, which again, 10 levels above the intended combat, not the game's fault. It encourages true PvP with comparable opponents. It prevents the "I am uber leet because my level 40 can gank a level 1"

As for the carebear comment, please refer to the WOW site for how unpopular the latest zombie event was to the majority of the player base. Here lies the error of your mindset and making a profitable and popular game.

With your minset, everything from now on has to meet or beat WOW's development. That means the 5 years to make it and the 4 years of improvements along the way. I do not see that as a finacial sucss with even the more open minded finacial investor. (not to mention how fast technology advances and need to be included over that period of time.

I will simply say good day to you and let you get back to you either playing WOW or trying to play WAR as WOW.