Feckless Leader's Warcraft Movie Review

imgs: Legendary

Note: this review contains some plot [SPOILERS]. If you would like to avoid any mention until you see the film yourself, how about this older piece I wrote about how World of Warcraft could abandon the subscription model. Also, I've never reviewed a movie before, for fun or otherwise.

Prior to the two showings I went to on Friday, one in 3D and one in standard, I spent an indecent amount of time panning a wide range of critical opinions and held those criticisms fresh in my mind during both viewings. I'll even say I went into the theater a bit nervous at the first viewing, having great hope the movie wouldn't be a disappointment or worse: an embarrassment as a fan of the universe it was based on.

While definitely not a perfect film, I can state with full confidence that this movie is not this generation's Battlefield Earth, nor will it turn out to be the blockbuster flop of the summer. What plagues this film the most is the fact director Duncan Jones' original cut was shortened by 40 minutes for theatrical release. Perhaps lesser of a plague is that this movie is based on a video game, an inescapable fact that had many of my friends saying the previews "looked cool" while wondering if it was a movie made for them or just fans of the games. This is a movie that players of the game(s) should absolutely love, and also provides a enjoyable experience for folks looking for a fresh, action-packed and visually stunning fantasy film.

Setting/Cinematography

This is an absolutely gorgeous movie. If you dug the flick but have not seen it in 3D, go do it! Unless 3D makes you queasy, then don't. For me, it is hands down the best use of 3D I have seen. Most of the time those movies aim to do something gimmicky like stick a plant frond or a lightsaber in your face, but not with Warcraft. Jones' use of the tech seems to focus on adding more depth to each scene. While some of the action suffers from the standard 3D blur effect, the vast majority of the time I'd forgotten I had the glasses on.

Orc rendering is a thing of beauty, with more attention given to the named orcs in the movie. Even though the CGI orcs who make up the horde are reportedly varied in their makeup and assembly, they still feel like the Uruk-hai from Tolkien's universe, if less mindless. And I'd argue this isn't a bad thing: with a main character sheet so large, introducing more key players like Killogg Deadeye and Grom Hellscream would further muddy the waters (though if you're watching closely both have cameos).

The various settings throughout Azeroth are keenly representative of their in-game counterparts, from the exterior of Dalaran and the library of Karazhan, to the interior of Stormwind's throne room. While World of Warcraft's art style tends to be over the top and boxy, the architecture fit well within this world and didn't distract from the movie.

The movie features a healthy dose of magic, which for the most part is rendered believably. There are a couple of shots featuring Khadgar and Medivh that remind me of bad television CGI. A bit cringe-worthy, but I didn't think the largely-CGI film would make it all the way through unblemished.

Characters

The movie opens with a scene that features a short skirmish between a man and a green-skinned orc, though the shot ends before we can see the aftermath (we're led to assume the man has been smashed into paste). We then cut to Durotan, orc Warchief of the Frostwolf Clan, and his wife Draka in their tent. I thought the juxtaposition between the fearsome orc in the previous scene and the humanity we're shown in Durotan and Draka served well to illustrate to the audience that this was not going to be the average good guys vs. bad guys movie (if it hadn't already been apparent through the trailers).

Throughout the next quarter of the film as the plot develops, we're introduced to the rest of the movie's major players, a fairly large ensemble: Orgrim Doomhammer, Blackhand, King Llane, Lady Taria, Gul'dan, Garona, Anduin Lothar, Callan Lothar, Khadgar and Medivh, as well as a few ancillary characters who have relatively small yet recurring presences throughout the movie. While this a fraction of the number of characters Lord of the Rings wanted audiences to care about, those movies had the luxury of longer runtimes with the story unfolding over three installments, something the source material for Warcraft could have supported. Character development is a bit hampered due to the constraining length of the film, and as a result there could have been more depth across the board, even if there were no major disappointments.

Based on trailer footage, I went in skeptical of Dominic Cooper's King Llane and Paula Patton's Garona. I thought the former would be a bad casting choice, and the latter wouldn't provide a convincing performance. I was wrong on both counts. Cooper fits well as the benevolent and wise king of the Alliance, and Patton portrays Garona as a hardened outcast loved by neither the orcs or the humans. There is a particular scene where a dejected Garona asks Durotan if the Frostwolf Clan will accept her among their ranks, and Durotan replies that she is safer with the humans. Even though the movie could have explored its characters further to foster greater audience investment, this was a poignant moment where I really felt for Garona and her status as an outsider to both worlds.

Durotan, brought to life by Toby Kebbel, gives one of the movie's best performances. To me that feels like saying Andy Serkis' Gollum gave a better performance than Elijah Wood in Lord of the Rings, but it's true in this case. The level of detail Duncan Jones and ILM were able to capture and portray on-screen is absolutely stunning. While there were a few CGI elements that jolted me out of the film, orc rendering was not one of them. In fact, the orcs translate so well that they at times come across as more realistic than the humans. It feels like Jones placed extra emphasis on making the orcs relatable, which is shown particularly in the interactions between Durotan, Draka and Orgrim. As a consequence sometimes their human counterparts come across a bit flat.

Daniel Wu's Gul'dan serves as a twisted and believable villain, but unlike Rob Kazinsky's Orgrim Doomhammer and Kebbel's Durotan, I cannot find the actor beneath the CGI. Still, Wu provides a solid performance, and fans of the game may be surprised by the scene where Gul'dan engages in some good ol' hand-to-hand combat. I'd always thought he was a decrepit and diseased old orc who could stand only with the aid of a staff. Still, the scene worked.

Rounding out the human performances were Ben Foster's Medivh and Ben Shnetzer's Khadgar. Foster's approach to Medivh has you wondering (by design) just what the frick he's really up to the whole time (until, of course, you find out exactly what's been going on). Schnetzer brings an earnest portrayal of the bumbling young mage Khadgar, and in one scene provides the most over-the-top and comical game reference for fans familiar with the Warcraft universe.

The one character portrayal that didn't resonate with me was Clancy Brown's Blackhand. Though it was neat to see how he gets his "black hand" this time around, he feels rather like the hollow, standard lieutenant villain seen in Hollywood movies: a brute, unthinking enforcer blindly following the orders of his deranged boss. I can understand, based on the original lore, why they chose to feature Blackhand instead of someone like Deadeye or Hellscream, but to the casual viewer his inclusion may not seem to serve many purposes other than to have another recognizable evil face on screen. Out of all the named orcs, his CGI rendering was the poorest, which is too bad since just by looking at Brown's looming presence as an actor one might think he'd make a great orc.

Plot

Things develop quickly and there aren't many lulls between action scenes. Dialogue tends to be short and to the point, and often serves to move the plot forward at the expense of greater character development. Again, that's part of the consequence of having to shear the movie down to approximately 120 minutes, but also because the source material is so dense and full of nuance.

Since Jones' approach to the movie sees the conflict through the lens of both the orcs and the humans, there is little time for wasted exposition. Stakes need to be heightened for all characters on both sides of the war in time for the climactic battle. Normally a director would have a good 90 minutes to do this, but with two sides to the conflict this is halved for each, and we're sometimes shown rather hastily what a certain character has to lose in the stakes game. Anduin Lothar's non-game-lore son Callan's presence is an example of this and tells the audience that Lothar has more to lose than a mere battle. It feels simultaneously forced, but necessary: we know our humans fight for Azeroth's salvation, but it can be difficult at times to understand why.

With the orcs, we're explicitly told that their home world is dying, but aren't shown too much. As a fan of the game, I know exactly what this means and what it looks like, but I can see how a casual viewer might have a hard time conceptualizing how bad things were in order for the orc clans to look for an escape---an escape that involved invading and enslaving a new world. And it isn't until the orcs have arrived on Azeroth that Durotan's Frostwolves begin to realize that wherever Gul'dan's magic goes, death follows. Perhaps this is why the orcs, specifically the Frostwolves, felt like richer characters, since their obstacles for survival became two-fold in that moment: overcome/cooperate with the human resistance and escape the enslavement of Gul'dan's fel magic.

Fans of the game universe know the essentials of this story, but the lore has been tailored for blockbuster digestion. As I mentioned above, the film features new characters in Callan Lothar and Ladia Taria, the wife to King Llane whose existence we knew of but nothing else. There are also some character deaths that play out quite differently from how they happen in the game lore. The changes do add a greater immediate impact in the film and the fates of several characters are resolved to satisfying ends, even if they differ from the original tale.

The movie's final few minutes are hopeful in that they hint that this is just the beginning (in fact, the movie is officially titled Warcraft: The Beginning in international markets). This is a bold move. In a greater context where Warcraft: The Middle and Warcraft: The End are sure things, it makes perfect sense. But knowing the fate of those two films rests solely on the success of this one makes the scenes just a tad bittersweet. For a non-seasoned viewer, it isn't the Frodo-tries-to-run-off-without-Sam ending we got with Fellowship of the Rings, but I can imagine it leaves them feeling like a lot is unresolved.

I attended with two friends whose only connection to the Warcraft universe was that they have friends who are connected. They didn't express any issue with plot discernment or clarity, and rather enjoyed the visual spectacle. However, they'd be hard-pressed to name every character by their head shot. So while the story is fast-paced, the environment rich, and the characters varied and numerous, the characters themselves may not have been provided enough screen time to fully resonate with a general audience.

Conclusion

At the end of the day, I feel that anyone with a deep love of the Warcraft universe will enjoy this film despite its narrative swiftness and adjustments to lore. It is a visual victory that faithfully brings the world of Azeroth to life, complete with unobtrusive nods to those who've played the game. For general fans of the fantasy genre, it should be an enjoyable ride, deserving a spot on the shelf next to other solid fantasy movies; not just the shelf for movies based on video games. It's good enough to warrant a sequel (or more). Still, I cannot help but think about what might have been, since when it's all over, the movie is constrained by its own run time: 120 minutes is simply not large enough a canvas for this moment in Warcraft history, and as a result fails to captivate on a grander scale.

Cheating in Overwatch Gets You Noverwatch

Your throat tightens. You can feel the blood rushing up your neck and into your face. The heat coming off your cheeks makes your eyeballs sting. If anyone could see you they'd be able to tell something is amiss. Your shoulders slump and you sink a little bit in your desk chair, pondering the actions that led to this. You cheated in Overwatch, and have been banned for life.

For real?

Not quite, but pretty damn close. Generally when an account is permanently banned or closed due to whatever reason, all the player has to do is start a new one. In games like Heroes of the Storm or World of Warcraft, this means you'll lose all progress on the banned account, and in Warcraft's case will have to purchase a new game license, but at least you can still play.

Blizzard's approach to cheating in Overwatch seems a bit more strict, ensuring it's absolutely not worth a player's time, energy, or money to even attempt it. I'm not going to get into the ways one can cheat, as it's all over the web and pretty standard FPS fare. But as far as the bans go, Blizzard appears to be tying them to Hardware ID (HWID), which can have a much greater impact than simply closing the account. Similar to an IP ban where the player's IP address is essentially blacklisted from accessing the servers, the HWID ban sees Blizzard taking a "snapshot" of your computer's configuration and hardware (in addition to other things), then using that information to "re-ban" you if they find you've started a new account. The method they use to accomplish this is something well within their rights, as we agree to it when we accept the Battle.net Terms of Use.

The reason I think we're seeing HWID bans this time around is because of a few stories I've read like this.

As you can see, this person purchased the game four different times (*cough* retail value of $240). They began cheating in beta (emphasized because I lol'd) and got their first license banned the day after the game's official release. The second license was also banned, though the OP claims they weren't cheating any longer. Then, the third license was banned even after a clean install of Battle.net and Overwatch, once again without cheating. After messing with some technical hardware crap that's way beyond me (aside from using an IP masker) to try to fool what they suspected was an HWID ban, the fourth license was yet again banned. I will concede this individual should be given an A for effort.

Blizzard does not want cheating in Overwatch, period. Granted, there will always be ways to get around these things with enough know-how, but Blizzard seems to be making sure it'll be difficult and perhaps even costly for offending players---costly enough that it isn't worth trying. Due to the seemingly more stringent approach, which I heartily applaud, I can't help but wonder when we'll start to see this action by Blizzard in response to cheating in their other titles.

It's disappointing Blizzard has to threaten and carry out such a strong punishment to deter players from cheating. They've got a game with a well-defined set of rules that are meant to effectively provide an equal opportunity for success to all players, yet we have pathetic individuals who need to god-mode themselves in order to feel competitive. They're probably the same kid who had to rock the SuperSoaker in the neighborhood water-pistol fights in order to feel good. It's sad they never grew out of that mentality.

Answer me this, cheaters: when you've equipped a set of I.W.I.N. elements which leads you to, well, winning, do you then gloat over the losing team, too? Does your victory gained through unfair means really contribute to a feeling of superiority and self-worth? Or is the satisfaction found in the fact that you can actually mod the game and get away with it?

Perhaps the cheaters out there can petition Blizzard to create an unregulated server where players who want to hack the shit out of the experience can do so. I hear that's been a thing lately. But I suppose that would take the fun out of having an advantage over your opponents. Of course, you can always go with the simpler, safer option.

Hint: it's the one that requires actual skill and doesn't involve cheating. 

Gaming Affairs: The Darkest Dungeon

Gaming Affairs happen when Blizzard titles just aren't holding my interest for whatever reason, yet I need to satisfy that gaming itch. In this series, I'll talk about games I play outside of the Blizzard universe.

In Time, You Will Know the Tragic Extent of My Failings...

The Darkest Dungeon by Red Hook Studios is a side-scrolling, dungeon-crawling RPG that has me absolutely encapsulated at the moment. Though I've only spent about eleven hours adventuring, the impression it's left on me has been significant enough that I am abandoning protocol and writing about a non-Blizzard game in this space for the first time since this blog's inception five years ago.

This isn't your typical dungeon crawler, though it has many of the standard elements: terrifying foes to battle against, a variety of items and trinkets to use on your characters, currency used to upgrade/augment characters, and a progression system. However, this isn't a hack-and-slash game; combat is turn-based, and feels surprisingly fluid---well, as fluid as turn-based combat can be. I think this is due to the variety of classes in the game in addition to the gritty-cartoony art style.

The core element of the game involves building a party of four characters and sending them into various dungeons in search of gold and family heirlooms---the former used to purchase mission supplies and rest your characters, the latter used to upgrade various buildings/areas around the Hamlet, your base of operations when not in a dungeon. The game informs you right off that your outlook is bleak, which sets a curiously dark and humorous tone. Many of your characters will most definitely perish, you're told, and death is permanent. But, like in Warcraft, it's only a setback.

Experiencing the Characters

What really made the experience feel unique was the Darkest Dungeon's approach to characters. Characters are recruited without cost at the Stagecoach, which is one of several areas/buildings in the Hamlet. There are fifteen different classes who can show up at the Stagecoach, with new characters arriving each week (note: weeks in game are measured by mission; i.e. once you embark on a mission, on your return the game will denote a week has passed). I haven't been able to get a full reading on class types, but it seems standard RPG fare: there are tanks, damage-dealers, support/buff classes and healers, though there's quite a bit of nuance given there's 15 classes spanning the four categories I've listed.

Each character, in addition to their base stats and abilities, has the chance to carry unique "Quirks," which are essentially attributes that can have either positive or negative effects. For instance, a character could feature a 15% damage increase to human enemies as a positive quirk; a negative quirk might see a character's attack speed diminished for the first round of combat. There looks to be over 100 different Quirks, so the possibility for combinations is numerous. Over time, the characters will acquire additional positive and negative Quirks (or replace ones they previously had) based on how well or poorly they perform in dungeons.

Another character element I found interesting has to do with one of the game's mechanics: Stress Level. In addition to managing your characters' health, you must also manage your character's stress levels. A character's stress is affected by all sorts of things: the simple fact of being in a dungeon, the amount of light in a dungeon, stepping on a trap, interacting improperly with "Curios" (special items) in the dungeon, taking a critical hit, and so on.

The stress bar starts at 0 and goes up to 200. If a character's stress bar reaches 100, their resolve is tested and they will either gain an affliction (debuff) or become virtuous (buff). Afflictions are interesting as they can cause your character to harm themselves, eschew heals from other party members, or outright refuse your orders. This, as you can imagine, can be detrimental to the party's success. I found myself cursing certain characters when they let stress get the best of them---even if partly my fault---and cheering those who persevered and became virtuous in the face of strong adversity.

What happens when a character's stress level maxes out? We'll find out.

Each character class also has a distinct personality which reveals itself through fully voiced chat when traversing the dungeon. It is pretty hilarious listening to your characters having a complete meltdown in the middle of a dungeon run.

All that said, the characters really bring this game to life: not only are you fighting against the monsters in the dungeons, you're also fighting against the sanity of your own characters. They end up feeling more real. This opens up an avenue for complex decision-making, and as a result there is a feeling of loss when a character dies---even if it's promised to be a relatively regular occurrence. We're so used to playing RPG's where the character's own thoughts, feelings, and motivations are assumed to be unflawed. The Darkest Dungeon turns that idea on its head, and as a result brings a peculiar amount of humanity to its characters.

Once Again, You Will Die

Part of me scoffed a bit when the gamed warned me at the outset that I should expect to lose characters. I thought to myself, yeah, the game is probably tuned to be challenging but if I play ultra-conservatively I should be able to make it through unscathed.

Nope. It's probably a challenge every player issues themselves at the onset, and I'm not saying it's impossible, but it's highly improbable you will finish this game without experiencing loss.

Screw it, it's impossible.

The first character I lost was a ranged damage-dealer. She took a couple of nasty crits which not only left her health at dangerously low levels, but it sent her stress over 100. Her resolve failed and she gained the Masochistic affliction, causing her to chip away at her own health points in addition to a handful of other actions that put the party in jeopardy. She soon found herself on Death's Door, which is the game state where the character is essentially one more hit away from death. Due to the turn-based nature of combat I was unable to toss her a heal before she was targeted by the enemy, and she fell.

Thankfully, the other three party members survived and were able to abandon the quest and flee the dungeon without further loss.

The next time I lost a character, the impact was much greater. With a group of my four most seasoned adventurers, I stumbled upon a certain monster that will wreak havoc on your party if you're unprepared---though I didn't know this at the time. I watched in absolute horror as my party became overwhelmed. Hit points dwindled and stress levels shot through the roof.

Suddenly, one of my characters died...from a heart attack. The sheer terror of the encounter maxed their stress level and their body couldn't take it anymore. They keeled right over. A bit amused at what just went down, I nonetheless thought it a good time to make a retreat, which is a command available to players engaged in battle.

Except, sometimes in the Darkest Dungeon as in life, retreating doesn't work. Instead of watching my characters flee to safety, I watched helplessly as the retreat failed and two more party members succumbed to heart attacks, while the third was finished off by the monster's attacks.

The entire party of my most seasoned adventurers was dead. And with them all of the gold and items they looted, all of the trinkets I'd equipped them with before sending them into battle, were lost.

That hurt.

Two Sides to the Coin - The Hamlet

Dungeoneering is really half the game---well, more than half, as you'll spend a majority of time in dungeons, but a key component to being successful in said dungeons is the prep phase. The entirety of the prep phase takes place in the Hamlet before a mission.

The Hamlet features a variety of buildings/areas that serve to help you on your quest to finish the game. The Stagecoach, which I mentioned above, serves as the place where you recruit new characters, increase your overall roster size, and increase the base level of recruited characters (as they initially start at level 0). Both the Abbey and the Tavern are buildings where you can send your characters to relieve stress and be cured of Afflictions they may have acquired during a mission.

But true to the game's nature, even these simple activities don't always go as planned. For instance, several times after sending a character to the Tavern for a night of drinking they decided to tie one on and refused to leave the bar. Meaning they were unavailable for the next mission.

In another hilarious turn of events, I sent a character to the Tavern for a visit to the brothel where he contracted syphilis, which ended up giving him a negative Quirk that adversely affected combat prowess.

The Sanitarium is where you can remove negative Quirks or lock in positive Quirks; however, this costs a significant amount of gold, and seems like an element that's best left alone until the later stages of the game where you're being more strategic about party composition and engaging in more difficult dungeon runs.

There are also a couple of buildings where you can upgrade your various characters' skills, as well as upgrade their armor and weapons.

Progression

This game is designed to be a slog. It is supposed to take you a while to master. After the 11 hours I've spent, I have yet to embark on a 2nd-tier mission, opting instead to play it safe by leveling up characters on 1st-tier missions.

As mentioned above, characters start at level zero and can reach up to Level 6. I'm assuming you'll need a full party of Level 6 characters in order to tackle the game's most difficult challenges. I decided to level up a core set of characters to 3, then send them in to obliterate the 1st-tier missions in an effort to stock up on heirlooms and gold. Problem was, when it was time to embark, all of my Level 3 characters refused the order. 

I scoffed once again. Apparently, the low-level quests were beneath their experience. My own characters weren't listening to me. In truth, it's a neat mechanic that prevents a player from essentially gaming the system. Without it, one could simply re-run early missions until they had max-level characters, and then smash through the rest of the game with relative ease.

Based on my experience thus far, I can only imagine the completion of this game will take several dozens of hours. And I'm cool with that.

Conclusion

The Darkest Dungeon on its surface may look like your typical turn-based dungeon crawler, but I'd argue it's the development of the characters and the randomness within that set this game apart. Fortune and Despair can strike at a moment's notice and without warning, just like in life. It laughs at the notion that "heroes always win." Heroes don't always win, and there often needs to be sacrifice before triumph. The Darkest Dungeon brings that home, and then some.

My Recommendation

If you hate turn-based combat, you're probably not going to like the Darkest Dungeon. I'm lukewarm on turn-based games, and while things definitely do get repetitive and can seem slow at times, the unpredictability in how the characters might react to any given situation breathes life into this game. I won't say this is a must-have, though you'll probably enjoy it if turn-based is your thing. At minimum, I'd toss it onto your Steam wishlist and wait for that $25 price tag to drop. Definitely worth the $10 I paid for it.

Between a Rock and a Fel-Corrupted Apexis Fragment

I was about ready to give up on Warcraft last Sunday. Well, at least I felt that way for a spell. Prior to this, my Sunday afternoon in gaming looked promising. I had a good chunk of time carved out to play, something I find less and less of these days. My plan centered around my main objective for the afternoon: the round of dailies in Tanaan Jungle. I hearthed to Vol'mar, but before I could even grab one quest, I was dead.

Sigh.

As I made my way back to my body, the four Alliance I'd spotted had multiplied into fourteen or more. Horde representation was limited to corpses on the ground and those unlucky enough to appear in Vol'mar via login or hearth, only to have their lives quickly snuffed out. This continued for the better part of two hours, from what I could tell.

It was a familiar scene. The Alliance and Horde bases are ripe for these sort of encounters, and I witness the aftermath in Vol'mar more often than not. A sense of dread accompanies each use of my hearthstone, or cast of Astral Recall. As much as I hate it, this is the game working precisely as intended. I have that straight from the horse's mouth. But this post is still me complaining about PvP on a PvP server, so continue on at your own risk.

Why. Why why why did I roll a toon on a PvP server? The answer is that at the time, I wanted a more "real" experience. This is where my current self gives my past self a reprimand in the form of "You fucking twat you didn't even PvP much to begin with, how is the ability to have your PvE goals rendered impossible by something inherent to the game server's design a more real experience?"

Open world PvP allows and encourages other players to absolutely demolish my gaming experience, consent for which I gave when I first joined the server. The obvious solution is to transfer away, right? I wish. It's a hell of a lot more complicated than that.

I don't play on my current server because I'm a heavy role-player nor do I play there because I particularly enjoy World PvP. I play there because that's where I found the best match when it came to a community the last time I was trawling through the Recruitment forums. I've said many, many times in the past that if it weren't for the people I play with I wouldn't be playing this game. Transferring for me would signal the beginning of the end.

Still, the whole experience left me wondering some things. Allow me to gripe.

Why do Vol'mar/Lion's Watch NPCs hit like wet noodles?

Where the fuck are the pandaren guards from the Timeless Isle when you need them? At least those guys were annoying when players first set foot there and engaged in PvP. Do I even have guards in Vol'mar? You want me to believe that I'm the commander of this outfit...that I'd give my blessing to the most shittily defended base on the front lines of the most threatening warfare we've seen on the continent? If that's the case, strip me of all land, titles, and accompanying privileges. Send me the fuck home. I'm an undeniable failure.

I guess it's cool that Gargash the flight master can be kited far outside of Vol'mar and held hostage. You've got to hand it to that guy for his zeal and tenacity when it comes to the effort he puts into holding off opposing forces. But come on, Gargarsh! First rule here is YOU DO NOT ABANDON YOUR POST.

You're fired.  

Would the game experience benefit from more structured rules to open-world PvP?

I can almost hear the collective war cries from the PvP advocates on this one. Cannot fault that response.

PvP happens. I know, and I'm OK with it as part of the game. What gets annoying is the scenario I've outlined above: I've got a chunk of time to quest, yet I'm prohibited from doing so. While I'm attempting to grab quests between corpse runs, I'm killed repeatedly. The PvP is slowing me down, sure, but now because of several deaths in a short span of time, I'm given a resurrection timer. Now I literally cannot play the game. I suppose I could stick my thumb up my ass (that's where I keep my garrison hearthstone) and play around with my mission table for a minute, but I don't find that to be a very compelling alternative. Granted, the Horde side on my server does the same thing to the Alliance at Lion's Watch. It's a vicious cycle.

I don't know what I'm looking for here. And it's not a legitimate want, given I am on a PvP server. I don't want the game changed for a large group of people just to fit my fancy, but after I've ratcheted up to that two-minute death timer, I think it'd be nice to have a guarantee that I have more options than simply logging out.

Again, this stems from my choosing to be on a PvP server, and the experience that I'm looking for is readily available on a PvE server. I've outlined why that's not an option for me at the moment. At the same time, I question if having an unassailable enemy force holding the main PvE quest hub hostage for hours at a time is exactly what Blizzard had in mind for open-world PvP engagement. 

Could Blizzard perhaps include value-added services with each expansion purchase?

It must be clear that players don't necessarily choose their server based on its designation type, i.e. PvE or PvP. Some players may not fully understand what it means to roll on a PvP server. Some players may not know that even on PvE servers, it is possible to engage in open-world PvP. My problem is with how tightly we're locked in to the server we choose. 

I've advocated in the past for there being additional services included when a player buys the expansion. Wouldn't it be neat if a server transfer and faction/race chance were included with the purchase of each new expansion? Wouldn't it make sense to have those options, given how players come and go? A returning player with the ability to easily play with friends on his/her established toons without the prohibitive costs of character services seems like a win-win to me. 

Can we have cross-server guilds? 

I think the one legitimate gripe about this would be the watering down of a server's community. But I'd counter the community is only as large as the one you engage in. I play on a high-population server, yet my in-game community is limited for a few dozen people. It wouldn't matter what server I was on, just that I can continue to play with them---people I've now traveled across half the country to meet. While it's feasibly possible to do now, it's not possible to do under the same guild banner. 

With current cross-realm technology, I can't imagine we're far off from the ability to host cross-server guilds.  As the game ages, communities continue to get smaller and smaller. It would make sense to support what you've got. This would be the perfect solution to the problem I'm experiencing, and I'd exercise the option in a heartbeat. 

There. Do you feel better? I feel better.

We Should Be Able to Talk

This piece is about the discussion---or lack thereof---in the wake of the Blizzard Watch article "Does the Warcraft movie have a problem with women?" If you're not interested, turn back now!

We've had a rough history, we humans. A perpetually out-of-balance history, when it comes to our relations. Those with power, and those without. Those with wealth, and those without. Those with rights, and those without. We are the child of that history. The love, pain, heartache, triumphs, struggles and losses of the past---those are all imprinted into our collective DNA whether we're aware of it as individuals or not.

We're drawn to see the world as we imagine it to be---and much of that is based on our own personal experiences. But one human's experience doesn't do justice to how things really are---it can't. Our time spent here is over in a beat, and much of that experience for most people takes place in a relatively tiny bubble. It's not easy to grasp our diversity, and the sheer will and sacrifice it took humanity to get where it is. We especially have it easy in this time of interconnectedness and relative prosperity---I'm assuming, since you're a gamer and reading this. And because of our technological advances, we're in a better position to both understand and talk about our history with one another than we ever have been.

The thoughts above came to mind after reading Elizabeth Harper's Blizzard Watch article titled "Does the Warcraft movie have a problem with women?" and spending time reading the comments it began to generate. The article was well-constructed and it was obvious Harper spent a good deal of time putting it together. Unsurprisingly, I cannot say the same about the majority of responses, both on-site and in my social media circle.

It doesn't pay to refute those who say that the article's main purpose was website hits; they've adopted a belief that fits their worldview. It doesn't pay to refute folks who say "I've never seen a problem," because they've decided based on their experience there isn't a problem at all---or at least, if the problem doesn't affect the perceived majority, it isn't one. It doesn't pay to refute the hyperbolic, name-callers, and slippery-slopers who seem to fear something they can't articulate on. I'm mostly done with that battle, but I'm never going to leave where I stand up in the air.

How women are represented in-game? That's on Blizzard. How women are treated in-game? That's mostly on us, the players. It's not surprising that women up until recently have often filled the roles of love interests, fodder for other characters or sex symbols. That's largely the role they've occupied in the entertainment industry in the past. But as we grow as a planet and learn more about one another and our history, stratified gender roles continue to crumble. Slowly, but surely, this will be reflected in our culture. It is changing, but that journey has not ended. It can take time to notice a problem in what has always been considered the norm.

If there's one thing we know about the past, it's that we get a lot of shit wrong. It's up to future generations to fix it, like we saw recently with same-sex marriage. Let's not forget less than 100 years ago, women didn't even have the right to vote. Up until the 60s, and arguably much later, women were expected to be homemakers---an ugly notion that still lives on today and seen all too often. Where do you think "go make me a sandwich" comes from?

Sexism is a problem in World of Warcraft both on the company side and the player side, but that's largely because they're both products of a sexist society.

The fact that the entire Warcraft universe was created by mostly men doesn't bother me; I don't see it as a good or a bad thing. It just is. However, I can also understand how the mechanisms of sexism in our society manifest themselves, unconsciously even, in the creations of a group of college-aged guys. While Blizzard are less creators and innovators, those guys were simply going off of what had been imprinted on them by their experiences in life---life within an advanced, industrialized male-dominated society. It would be astounding if sexism wasn't noticeable in WoW given its origins.

Things won't change overnight. It'd be naive to think they would. But they also won't be changed if they are ignored. If there are customers who would like to feel better represented and welcomed in even something as seemingly insignificant as a game world, they should be free to express their feelings. When it comes to players and how they treat one another in game? I can't solve that one, only do my part. But it's on all of us.

Sexism in Warcraft may not be noticeable to you, or it may not be a problem for you. But we still need to be willing to talk about this stuff with calm, open minds. Without hyperbole and baseless accusations. And that takes effort. Especially when it takes empathy and possibly requires us to look at a not-so-flattering aspect of ourselves. Our society. Our norms. But I can't convince anyone to act or see it any differently. I just think we should be able to talk.

I'm going to keep doing my own thing, with the hope that those hindering debate---consciously or not---will one day come to better understanding.

#SaveWoWInsider (Updated 2.4.15: Saved)

Cover letter from second WoW Insider application (click to enlarge)

Update 2.3.15: Now you can save WoW Insider! Well, you can at least be a part of the next step.

Update 2.4.15: Blizzard Watch, the next venture for the staff formerly at WoW Insider, has surpassed its first three tiers of fundraising goals.

I can't even remember when or how I first discovered WoW Insider. All I know is that it was a long time ago. What I can say is since that first visit, I've returned on a near-daily basis. The Queue is something I look forward to reading every single day, and I'm pretty confident when I say I haven't missed an edition of The Queue since I first started reading. I'm one of those people for whom The Queue can be "late" if it isn't posted in the AM.

WoW Insider has consistently been a source for all things Warcraft, and really, continues to be a great source for all things Blizzard. I'd like it to remain that way. When I learned about the all-but-confirmed rumors about AOL shuttering the Joystiq family of sites, I was dismayed. I won't pretend to know about the finances that drive a decision like this; companies regularly cut services that aren't performing to standards. As far as I know, only AOL knows what those numbers look like; at least, if anyone else knows they aren't able to say.

In the corporate world, they'll look at a site like WoW Insider and determine it's value. Value, in this sense, is profit. However, a visitor to the site defines value in much different terms. I know that I'll find Warcraft news and analysis in a singular place, written by people I've grown to trust over the years. People who I consider a part of my life even if I'm not a known part of theirs. Most importantly, WoW Insider functions as a rallying place for the community where ideas can be freely shared and debated. That's value to me.

It's because of WoW Insider that I met hundreds of WoW players I hadn't known before. I wouldn't have this blog if it weren't for WoW Insider: this space began as a holding tank for the posts I submitted the second time I applied for a position at WoW Insider. I enjoyed the process of it, so even after rejection I chose to continue filling this space. The pet battling guides which brought over 1,000 visitors daily throughout MoP and much of WoD wouldn't exist were it not for WoW Insider. The hundreds of pets I've given to enthusiastic pet battlers over the last few years is a direct result of WoW Insider's existence.

#SaveJoystiq is trending nationally again.
— Adam Holisky (@AdamHolisky) January 27, 2015

I'm not going to pretend that a hashtag/letter-writing/boycotting campaign is going to give us the result we're looking for. If the rumors are realized, and our worst fear confirmed, there's not much we can say to AOL that would change their minds. We can yell "Hey! We like this! We find this valuable!" All they need to counter with is the bottom line, one that's in the red or not far enough into the black. Not profitable.

So where that leaves anyone, who knows. Until we get official word, none of us on the outside can truly tell what will transpire. However, the community does have the power to take things into their own hands should the worst happen. Sites like WoWhead, Ask Mr. Robot, Curse, Warcraft Pets, and others offer a substantial amount of a free content to the community, with additional benefits to people who pay a small subscription fee. I subscribe to, or have donated to each of the sites above because I find their content valuable and want to ensure they remain a resource for the community.

I can't say whether or not something like that would be feasible in sustaining WoW Insider for very long, if at all. But if we do have a shot at #SaveWoWInsider using our own means, we owe it to the folks there---and ourselves---to give it a try.

Additional bloggers talking about this:

Sportsbard
Alternative Chat
Apple Cider Mage
Exodar Sisters
Liopleurodonic

Don't Be That Player: The LFR Parasite

Many of us have been That Player at one time or another. From toxic players, oblivious raiders, elitist jerks and beyond, Don't Be That Player is a series that looks at different scenarios we've all encountered, and how they might be approached differently. 

You queue for LFR, hoping to join one already in progress. See, it's just the final boss who drops something you need and you absolutely hate the second and third bosses as groups can never seem to coordinate well, which often leads to a wipe. A few minutes later while you're out questing, the queue pops. You accept and get ported to the instance...and see that it's a fresh run. Drat. Except, you have a secret weapon. You quickly find the little green eyeball near your minimap that tells you you're in an instance. Right-click, then select "Teleport Out of Dungeon."

You hold your breath as the screen loads. Then you're back where you were moments before, quest objectives flanking you on all sides, and so far it looks like no one from the group has noticed your disappearing act. You knock out a few more quests, all the while eyeing your chat frame with the hope you won't be discovered. The first boss falls. The group wipes on the second boss, but quickly recovers and is onto the third. By this time, thirty minutes have passed. The third boss is more challenging than the second, but after a few wipes, some rage quitting and reforming, the third boss dies and the group heads towards to fourth.

Aware of the raid's progress the entire time, you right-click the little green eyeball and choose "Teleport to Dungeon." You port into the instance and join your fellow players in front of the final boss. The fight goes down without a hitch and when the boss falls the RNG gods curse you for abusing the system and you get no loot. Ever again.

But no, really, you may end up getting loot, but that's beside the point. You shouldn't be acting like the player above in the first place.

My Time is Better Than Yours

See, that player has determined that his/her time is significantly more valuable than that of the other 24 players in the group. They desire the ends, but don't wish to bother with the means of achieving those ends---even when they've essentially pledged to do so by entering the queue with 24 others in the first place. The LFR Parasite takes advantage of a flaw in the system that results in the exploit of their fellow players for personal gain. The LFR Parasite wins regardless---they don't "waste" their own time while reaping the benefits of a group they've latched onto. Worst-case scenario is their ruse gets discovered and they get voted from the group. Only to queue up again.

The LFR Parasite can be found in many forms in addition to the one described above. Other common variations include the Auto-Follow Parasite and the DPS-Queues-As-Heals Parasite. In all of these cases, the Parasite desires a reward that's only achievable with a group but doesn't wish to contribute effort of their own. "Well that's just another term for a 'carry'." No, it's not. The Carry may be there for a variety of reasons, while the Parasite involves specific intent to abuse the power of the group.

But what harm does it really do if one person decides to game the system in this way? The short answer is not much. LFR, by design, isn't tuned for 25 players at the top of their game. Anyone who's defeated the bulk of the Durumu encounter with seven people alive can attest to this. In other words, the absence of one person won't make or break the chances for the group's success in most cases. But what if three people did it? Five? Seven? Sooner or later, the impact will be felt and math alone dictates the percentage chance of the group's success will eventually plummet to zero.

It's not so much the action itself I take issue with, but the attitude behind that action, which I feel is a symptom of something much larger that permeates the MMOsphere: a blatant, callous disregard for how one's own actions could negatively affect fellow players. Heck, it's this disregard that really led to the idea for Don't Be That Player.

So you don't act like an LFR Parasite simply because it's not nice or considerate of your fellow players. I know when I enter an LFR that most players won't be dishing out top-tier DPS, but I do assume that if they're there, they'll at least try---after all, that is the purpose LFR: to participate challenging encounters with other players. If you're worried about the value of your own time in-game to the point you'll outright play the system to exploit other players, you're doing it wrong.

Overwatch Impressions From a Guy Who Loves Blizzard but Dislikes Shooters

Img: Blizzard

I figure the title's the best place for the full disclosure on this one. I have to reach back over ten years to find the last instance where I spent a good deal of time with a first-person shooter. That was Timesplitters 2, and I played the hell out if it. Before that there was Wolfenstein 3-D and Doom, but that's literally the extent of my experience with shooters.

Then, Blizzard announces Overwatch and I immediately wrestle with the dichotomy of my disdain for shooters and my love for Blizzard. Another team-based FPS. Hrmph. And in Blizzard fashion, a playable demo awaited. I've heard people mentioned Team Fortress 2 in the same breath as Overwatch---I can't speak to that. Seriously: I have zero frame of reference when it comes to the present-day state of these kinds of games. So I queued up in a line that turned out to be much, much longer than even Blizzard anticipated---there were Blizzard employees acting as stanchions, since the area they'd initially cordoned off wasn't nearly large enough to hold all of those who wanted to play.

TL;DR: it was a pleasant surprise. Looks like I'll be playing a shooter for the first time in over ten years.

The game is set up with two teams of six, one team having the role of Attacker, the other of Defender. To be forthright, I had little sense of what was going on in this regard. Luckily, my two friends and I were matched up with nine other players, six of whom had already declared themselves a team. Thankfully, the "team" willingly split up and we were guided by a dude who'd obviously been queuing all morning---he assisted us with character selection based on our familiarity with first-person shooters. He suggested a couple of characters to me who did damage, but ones where precise aim wasn't as critical to the success of the character.

I chose Pharah first, an attacker. The precise-aim-not-necessary advice wasn't quite accurate, and I didn't do too well in this match in which we were the attacking team. However, this wasn't because the game played awkwardly; it was 100% operator error. The controls themselves were pretty slick: aim with the mouse, and press the left-button for the main attack. Shift used her "Jump Jet," allowing her to hover or fly. WASD functioned as movement keys and Spacebar caused the character to jump. Her other two abilities, Concussive Blast and the ultimate Barrage were attached to the E and Q keys, respectively.

So you can see player controls are very similar to what you'd find in a mashup of an FPS and a MOBA-style game, and thus should feel relatively familiar to a player with even novice experience in these genres. The game itself is fast-paced, and to someone not used to playing this way, it was absolutely frenetic. I did feel a bit lost and ineffective as Pharah, though she seems like a character who, once you have a handle on, can be absolutely deadly. We ended up winning this match, despite my lack of skill hampering the team.

However, once we assumed the role of defending team, things changed. First of all, I got the impression that the defending teams in these matches have the advantage: during the minute or so countdown prior to the match starting, the attacking team is cooped up in a locked room, waiting for the doors to open. Not so with the defending team. They are free to roam the map and set up their positioning prior to the match's actual start. I don't know if this is a standard attribute of these sorts of games, but I felt it placed the defending team in a better position to be victorious. That, and the fact that the map objective we were tasked with defending sat behind a choke point that happened to be nearby to where our characters spawned after death.

Secondly, I discovered Bastion, who quickly became my favorite character (granted, I only tried three in all). This little robot has the ability to heal itself, remotely deploy mines across the battlefield, and coolest of all, transform into a powerful turret. I camped myself in partially shielded area and ripped through my opponents. We won that match as well, and I even earned Player of the Match which immediately convinced me that Bastion will see a significant nerf in due time.

And you know what? I'm just going to stop this post right here; the fact I'm even writing about a shooter right now---you'll just have to trust me when I say it's gotta be good if I'm taking the time to jot down some thoughts on it. It's a Blizzard game, after all: fresh, engaging, fun, intuitive, and challenging all in one. If you love shooters, or if you've generally stayed away from shooters for most or all of your gaming life, this is a game you need to check out.

Additional gameplay tidbits:

• Not bound to one hero per match---players have the ability to select a new hero in the spawning area they return to after death
• Heroes have distinct roles (each with unique abilities): offense, defense, tank and support
• A full match lasts approximately 15 minutes
• Many additional heroes and arenas to be added in the future
• Currently no plans for a solo campaign; story elements to be developed outside of gameplay

Feckless Leader's Blizzcon 2014 Takeaway

Definitely room for another banner next Blizzcon.

Five days and approximately 25 total hours of sleep later, I'm back at my desk in Wisconsin after having a wonderful time in sunny, warm California. A friend of mine asked me to dish him the highlights of the convention and I was at a partial loss---I'm still processing everything. Overall, it seemed bigger, even though according to attendance numbers it was in line with Blizzcons '13 and '11. When pressed, there are a handful of things that stood out to me. Find those below.

Blizzcon Focus

Something felt different this year, and it didn't hit me until I woke up this morning: this was a very Warcraft-less Blizzcon. Blizzcons '08 and '10 also had no new WoW news, but I wasn't there---so it's hard to say if the impression I've been left with is accurate. And that impression is that Blizzard is moving away from Blizzcon essentially being a World of Warcraft Con to a true celebration of the Blizzard Universe. To me, aside from announcing a new IP, the tournaments (Hearthstone, Starcraft and WoW Arenas) were the big events at the convention. I can only imagine future Blizzcons will feature Heroes of the Storm tournaments, if not Overwatch as well when it's ready.

If this is the way Blizzard is evolving, I think it's a really smart move. While they will indeed support World of Warcraft for years to come, they'll need to diversify to maintain their presence as a titan in the gaming industry---and to keep players coming. And I think we've been witness to this in the past year or so especially with Hearthstone and Heroes of the Storm. And of course now, Overwatch. Speaking of...

I did snap some shots of gameplay when I was spectating, but word on the street is I wasn't supposed to do that so...instead here's some art from the official site!

Overwatch

I plan to expand on my impressions of the half dozen matches of Overwatch I played in a separate post, but this was obviously a huge takeaway from this year's convention. Full disclosure: I avoid shooters (FPS) like the plague. My first experience was GoldenEye, and that game left me with such severe motion sickness that I literally couldn't play it for more than a few matches. In 2002, but a few years shy of discovering World of Warcraft, a friend introduced me to Timesplitters 2, which is a FPS with PvP and a campaign where the player travels through time in order stop a menacing alien race from effing things up. I played the shit out of that game: the complete campaign on each of the difficulty levels plus the vast majority of side missions and achievements.

Overwatch is going to be a very different game from what I've described above, but the point is that I felt a deeper connection to this game akin to what I felt with Timesplitters. Granted, part of the reason is that it's a Blizzard game---I trust them implicitly---but at the same time, I had a blast in the short time I spent with Overwatch. The characters are unique and engaging, the approach classic Blizzard: easy to play, but difficulty to master.

Anduin Lothar's armor from the movie.

The Warcraft Movie

I feel somewhat guilty talking about the movie given the fact if you weren't at the con, you won't be able to see what was revealed. They screened a short teaser trailer and also included a second clip to demonstrate the level of detail they'll be going into when it comes to characters/actors in the movie, this specific shot featuring orcs. It was screened in a special Dolby Atmos theater and security was tight. People may wonder how nothing was leaked, but given the threat of a $250,000 fine for piracy, and the men in black who strolled the theater as the clip played, it's not a surprise to me that the public won't see this til Legendary/Blizzard deem it ready. Though I'll say one thing: it looks good. Real good. If you want to know specifics, email me.

The fact that we're over a year away before we see this film hit theaters when held next to how amazing it looks right now gives me great, great hope. This film will be striking in its visual beauty, ala the same way Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings held us in awe. The lynch pin in whether or not this will be the beginning of a powerful movie franchise or the end of Duncan Jones' career will be how the story plays out. And based on comments during the movie panel, this is likely just the beginning of it all.

I have high hopes.

Pano of the Hearthstone Stage.

Hearthstone as a Growing Esport

I gained a sense of this when watching qualifying matches on Twitch during the lead up to Blizzcon, but it was something else altogether watching it go down in person. We spent more time than we probably should have watching the matches, if seeing as much of the con as possible was our goal. I really enjoy watching matches play out, seeing the professionals make decisions that leave me, as a novice, scratching my head. But then! Then you see how those choices play out and you realize you're watching players who are on a completely different level. I felt like I should've brought a notepad.

The set was beautiful, the fans were into it, and the casters were entertaining and spot on. Hearthstone as an esport is only set to get bigger in the years to come and I'll be interested to see how the upcoming expansion, Goblins vs. Gnomes, will affect the metagame.

Pre-Expac First Impressions

img: Blizzard

As I write this, it's not yet been 24 hours since the release of 6.0.2. Like many players, I've spent a couple of those hours tooling around with the new content, enough tooling around to have an opinion which---YAY---I get to share here!

The Event

A quest chain with vanity rewards seems to be the go-to method for Blizzard as of late. Which is fine by me. While I would definitely enjoy a more disruptive event ala the Wrath of the Lich King zombie invasion, I'm not upset about what we got. If you were left feeling like, "that's it?" Don't worry, that's not it. Word is there's a lot of new content coming soon.

Models

I main an orc shaman, and while his old face doesn't have an updated equivalent, I was able to find a new face that fit well enough. That said, some of the new models are going to take some getting used to. I'm most definitely biased, and feel that Horde are the overall winners here---some of what I've seen on the Alliance side has made me cringe. It's still early, and I can't honestly tell whether my negative reaction to certain models and faces is solely because it's new, or if there's something else going on here. 

All in all, I'd like to see more facial customization options added to the game. I can't help but feel that some of what I've seen isn't quite done. For some of the faces, that's my hope.

Stats

Wouldn't have even noticed the squish if I weren't paying attention. I operate with a pretty clean UI and thus do not have yellow numbers popping all around my screen when I fight stuff...not even dem godly critz, yo. So really, I didn't notice until I looked up at my character frame and saw 80k health. I took note of it and went about my business. Which consisted of running the new UBRS, where I felt just as powerful as I did prior to the patch.

Storage

Between the Toybox, Void Storage and the Reagants tab (the latter of which I haven't yet utilized), I freed up several dozen spaces in my bags and bank. I'm anticipating the arrival of the heirlooms tab, and would suggest Blizzard also consider a Tabard tab and perhaps a Shirt tab (thank you Brawler's Guild). The freed-up spaces soon became a necessity because...

Soloing

I've soloed much of Ulduar in the past and wanted to see if there were any noticeable differences. Soon as I stepped in and saw the legion of trash before Flame Leviathan, I decided I didn't want to be there anymore. Instead of leaving without trying a thing, I popped ghost wolf and sprinted straight towards the boss area, hundreds of mobs in tow.

I killed Flame Leviathan---sans vehicle---before all of the trash could even reach me. Well then. If I was persistent enough to go after the Ashes of Al'ar I may as well add Invincible and Mimiron's Head to the WoW Weekly list. 

How's the patch treating you thus far? 

What's Next for Blizzard? - Blizzcon Predictions

Predictions: if you're wrong, you look foolish, and if you're right, no one cares. So I've got nothing new to offer you here, just my own speculation. For something more tangible for those of you lucky enough to hear many of these anticipated announcements in-person at Blizzcon, check out my Blizzcon Guide for Noobs.

With Blizzard stating they've effectively cancelled the mystery-MMO we've come to know as Titan, it's left a lot of fans wondering what's next for the game giant. Let's keep in mind that cancelling long-in-development projects isn't uncommon when it comes to Blizzard. We have quite a bit of precedence for it, actually. Analysts are even seeing it as a strength. The action in itself mirrors the Blizzard philosophy of "make games they'd want to play themselves." And as CEO Mike Morhaime said in the Polygon interview, releasing a game that doesn't live up to their expectations isn't an option.

Many players were hoping for an update on Titan's progress at Blizzcon this coming November. Without that prospect, and the likelihood we won't hear much about "what's next" in Warcraft beyond what we already know of Warlords of Draenor, it leaves me wondering what we might see this year. 

Hearthstone

There's little doubt we'll hear something about the first expansion to their massively successful trading card game. If not at Blizzcon, then shortly after. The developers have even said as much. With a reported 20+ million players in the game, Hearthstone is slated to receive support for years to come, especially with the growing popularity of esports and its impending availability to the broader mobile market.

Blizzcon Prediction: Details on Hearthstone's first expansion which will introduce the Death Knight hero; firm release dates for availability in wider mobile market.

Starcraft: Legacy of the Void

We know there's one more chapter in the Starcraft II trilogy, and what that will look like is hinted at heavily at the ending of Starcraft II: Heart of the Swarm. Full disclosure: Starcraft is probably the Blizzard game I play the least, so I know even less of what I'm talking about here than normal. Either way, expect to hear about Legacy of the Void at Blizzcon this year, but probably nothing about a release date.

Blizzcon Prediction: Trailer for SCII:LotV with a game release slated for 2016.

Heroes of the Storm

If MOBAs are your thing and you were lucky enough to get into the Alpha, you already know how much potential this game has. With Heroes of the Storm, Blizzard continues its tradition of expanding into new genres and kicking ass at it. I've played Riot's League of Legends and have a summoner near max-level, but there's something about the game that doesn't grab me. I've always been a casual, for-fun LoL player. However, with LoL, it takes a certain time investment---if you really want to progress---even as a casual player. 

Heroes of the Storm aims at broad appeal, like with Hearthstone, where they've created a complex game with a low barrier to entry. I feel it's safe to assume we'll get a vague release target (i.e. Q2 2015) at Blizzcon. My hope is that the game will transition to Open Beta shortly after, if not by the time Blizzcon arrives.

Blizzcon Prediction: Open Beta announcement, new playable heroes including Vol'jin and Deckard Cain, target release date announced.

Diablo III

It's going to be quiet on the Diablo front this year. Reaper of Souls spent a good amount of time in the spotlight at last year's Blizzcon. Considering the title just released for console, I doubt we'll be talking about what's next in Diablo.

Blizzcon Prediction: Diablo does not play a major part at this year's Blizzcon.

World of Warcraft

I want to learn where we're heading after Draenor. And we will eventually, but it might not be at Blizzcon. If that's the case, it means we'll be talking about the expansion we've been talking about since last Blizzcon. Which seems like a rather drab prospect, given---on average---the type of player/fan you're addressing at an event like Blizzcon. Unless they've undersold the expansion to us this whole time (an admittedly difficult notion to swallow with just how much information we have) and are set to unleash new information that will send us into a frenzy. In a good way, of course.

I also think this is a great opportunity to show where the movie's at. Significant time was spent at last year's Blizzcon---Duncan Jones and some of his crew even had a panel, and I assume we'll hear more this year.

Blizzcon Prediction: They'll announce the next expansion; the one after Warlords, but details will be scarce so as not to spoil the ending of Warlords of Draenor. Why? I don't have a whole lot to back that up, but here's someone who took a stance and ran with it. The remainder of the time will focus on what we'll be seeing the week after Blizzcon when the expansion launches. As far as the movie goes, I don't believe we'll see the trailer, but feel confident we'll be shown a short scene.

Additional Titles

With the cancellation of Titan, might there be room for Blizzard to announce another project they're working on? On the other hand, given Titan's demise, perhaps Blizzard will be more cautious about how and when they announce their large-scale projects. I don't think we'll see a new title announced at Blizzcon beyond what's been discussed above. The timing of Titan's cancellation was more about tempering expectations: they didn't want anyone going into the convention thinking they'd hear about Titan. Conversely, announcing the cancellation of a title at such a major event simply wouldn't be wise.

That said, I bet we see Blizzard's updates to the Warcraft RTS games; perhaps not the whole lot, but I believe we'll see an updated Warcraft 3 engine including art assets, as well as the functionality that will tie it to our Battle.net launchers. 

It doesn't really pay to argue these points, as I've essentially pulled them from my bum. But are there any predictions you'd alter/add?

Leave 'em below. 

Don't Be That Player: The Beggar Police

Shoeless Bob is in need.

Many of us have been That Player at one time or another. From toxic players, oblivious raiders, elitist jerks and beyond, Don't Be That Player is a series that looks at different scenarios we've all encountered, and how they might be approached differently. 

You're at the mailbox in front of your faction capital's auction house, cleaning out expired items and sales from the day before. Trade chat is buzzing, your mailbox empties, so you head into the auction house. You notice a level 9 character trailing you, and he stops just behind you as you interact with the auctioneer.

"Can u spare some gold," reads the white text above the player's head. Before you have a chance to respond, several nearby players do it for you with the likes of  "lazy noob is lazy" and "go quest and get it yourself getting gold is easy." Ah yes. That age-old MMO sin called laziness.

Don't be any of those players. Well, if you've gotta be one of them, be the beggar. But don't throw in with the Beggar Police.

Before I get into it, please know I'm not oblivious to the fact that the act of begging is perceived negatively. I recall one instance where I'd simply logged on to post auctions only to be hounded by a low-level player who wanted me to run them through Molten Core. That was mildly annoying.

On the flip side, I've given away tens of thousands of gold to so-called beggars, sometimes thousands of gold at once, mainly because I can remember what it was like to be in their shoes: facing either a return to town or the destruction of items mid-quest because of inadequate bag space; being unable to train a certain riding/flying skill because gold reserves wouldn't allow it; seeing the chasm between point A and point B and having no idea how to reach the destination.

So what is the difference between the beggar and the person in genuine need? There usually isn't one...

Could they reach their goal on their own without a handout? Unequivocally, yes. Could you assist them in reaching that goal much faster than they would've alone? For most of us, yes. Sure, the begging player could really be a sleaze who preys on the kindness of others with the intent of saving up enough money for a Grand Expedition Yak. But how likely is that? If that's what keeping you from helping another player out, that's some Alex-Jones-level paranoia*. If you're worried about it, fine, but by god don't try to prevent someone else from helping because you see things a certain way.

In fact, I dare you to help out next time you encounter a beggar, but don't just give your money away. Ask them what it's for. Gear? Maybe they aren't aware that they're better off questing and running dungeons since any purchased gear would be quickly replaced. Gold? Turns out they want to buy bags, and you've got a tailor sitting on a ton of extra cloth. Either way, nobody gets hurt, a random player gets a little help, and you get to go to bed knowing you've made Azeroth better place for at least one person.

Occasionally, I'll hear back from a player I helped. One returned two and a half years later to repay a substantial sum I'd given him to train flying (back when it was expensive). The other told me how my generosity inspired him to do the same when he encountered other players in need.

The intended takeaway, and this can apply to many other scenarios: if you're actively going to try to prevent a player from doing something you don't like, but causes no harm to another player...just don't. Especially if all they really want is help.

On the Flip: Becoming a Better Beggar

Begging for stuff will be inherently seen as a bad thing in a game where nearly anything you'd possibly want to acquire can be earned through a bit of work. Being an MMO though, there's still a lot of room for players to rely on others, and asking for some assistance via way of a few gold coins or satchels doesn't seem outrageous to me.

So beggars, next time, don't beg---which in Warcraft we've loosely defined as the act of asking a stranger for something that you could easily acquire or achieve by yourself. Instead, ask for help. Going from player to player with a direct question tends not to yield positive results. Unless you're lucky enough to find me. Instead, make your appeal a general one. What you'd really like: four 16-slot bags and maybe 10g. How you ask for it:

"Just re-rolled on this server, curious if anyone would be able to help me with a couple of things. PST!"

Though you didn't ask for bags and coinage directly in the question above, you've positioned yourself as a player in need instead of as a beggar. This is an extremely important distinction. By controlling this small-but-significant perception, I find you're much more likely to get help. And if you are a player in need, remember the kindness done to you when you have the opportunity to help someone else out later on down the road.

Is there a subject you'd like to see me tackle in Don't Be That Player? Email me.

*no true offense meant by the Alex Jones dig. Occasionally the man produces a content gem, he's just a bit too antagonistic for my tastes. 

On Branding: Why the Warcraft Movie Logo Makes Sense

img: Legendary

I had a three-year stint working for an ad agency that provided branding services for clients. A caveat: I was more of a wordsmith and an IA designer, so not an expert in all-things branding. Still, we launched several companies from the ground, one of which in particular is experiencing impressive success in their state and beyond. Granted, we thought they were selling a pretty sweet product, but still their message had to be tailored, packaged, and distributed through the smartest channels.

It has been over a year since I left the agency, but some of the mixed reactions to the logo from the upcoming Warcraft movie got me thinking about my old job. Re-branding---the act of updating, changing and retooling current brand assets---can be extremely risky. Generally, it's done to freshen up or give a face lift to a company or product aiming for greater appeal among a wider audience. Of course there's been a rich history of re-brandings that didn't go so well.

But Blizzard isn't re-branding. They have no need to. So why isn't the Warcraft movie logo the logo we fans have become accustomed to over the past twenty years? The answer is simple: audience. 

Warcraft: the Movie needs to make money, and in order to do that, it's going to need to be seen by a much wider audience than the one currently invested in the Warcraft franchise. While it's unclear just how much of a budget the Warcraft movie has, director Duncan Jones is surely working with more than the $5 million he had for Moon. If every current and former player saw the movie in theatres twice and then bought the DVD, it wouldn't guarantee a profit. Not even close. 

So how do you entice people to see your action-packed, drama-infused, visually stunning film that's based on a game universe when they have no interest in it (and in fact, may hold an unfavorable opinion towards video games in general)? You get them to forget it's based on a game and promote like it's just another action movie. I may eat a hat on this one, but I fully expect that most---if not all---of Legendary's promotional efforts once trailers are out will conveniently leave out the fact that the movie derives its plot from a video game. 

I think at this point, a good portion of the movie-going public have seen a Warcraft commercial; remember, the ads were pretty popular a few years back when they had all those celebrities sitting in. Heck, some aired during the Super Bowl! Chances are that tens, if not hundreds of millions of people who don't play the game have already formed an opinion about it. And as Legendary Pictures sees it, that just may not be the right opinion.

Maybe each and every trailer will include "Based on the #1 Best-Selling MMO of All-Time," but I highly doubt it. Blizzard and Legendary Pictures already have the majority of us---fans of the Warcraft franchise---in their pockets. We'd see the film even if the logo would've came to us in pastel-colored comic sans. It's the rest of the world that Legendary needs to capitalize on, those who've maybe seen a commercial once or twice, have a friend who plays, or know nothing altogether. They need to be convinced this is a movie proper, and not just some video game brought to screen, made just for the game's fans. The logo is part of that. 

What do you think? Agree, disagree, or request my address in the comments so you can send me a hat to chew on.