Factual errors abound in ExtremeTech commentary
Several of you have passed word to us concerning an opinion article by Jim Lynch, a "journalist and community manager" from ExtremeTech. He recently wrote a piece concerning the "Ten Reasons World of Warcraft Sucks". If you would like to laugh a bit, I'd go over and check it out.I don't want to rip into him for his opinions. He's entitled to them. Opinions are things like "they need new battleground maps," or "Paladins are not good tanks." While we might vehemently disagree with them, they are opinions nonetheless, and they are not facts. Facts are things like "Blizzard can put in new battleground maps," or "Paladins can tank."
What I can do is correct some of his facts. First, he says that a player must spend 5000g to get a flying mount. It only costs 1000g. He suggests a price of 1200g as an appropriate amount to charge for a flying mount, looks like he's 200g too high.
He claims there is no gear for Mookins. While I agree Moonkin gear is few and far between before the tier 6 content, after you set foot into Mount Hyjal and Black Temple, gear and different itemization become available (I'll leave it up to you all to decide if it's good enough or not.)
He claims Blizzard should "get off [their] lazy butts and patch Azeroth so that your subscribers can fly there." Blizzard has came out numerous times and said they'd rather focus on developing new content instead of doing major revamping of old content. So in fact, they are developing a lot – and thus are not lazy.
He states "With the release of the Burning Crusade and the raising of the level cap from 70 to 80..." That's incorrect, the level cap was raised from 60 to 70. Wrath of the Lich King will raise the level cap to 80.
The above are just the pure factual errors. The rest of the article is ridden with opinions that make me want to write a five page diatribe. However I really don't feel there is a need to tell this guy what I think of his opinions.
If you've read it, what do you think of his piece?
Filed under: Analysis / Opinion
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
csarcops Mar 29th 2008 4:13PM
I think it was vicious, and more to the point poorly written.
twl23 Mar 30th 2008 2:46AM
I think the guy has some good points wrapped in a bunch of subjective views. I kind of just bypassed his thoughts on balance and itemization, although I think Blizz needs an overhaul on how they itemize gear. However, I thought his very macro ideas on the development of the game were very accurate.
Blizz has really gotten lazy with their development of the game. What needs to be taken into account is each player pays 15/mnth. That's equivalent to the cost of a new expansion for a similar game every 3 months. In the past 15 months since BC release we have gotten 2 new raid zones with a total of 12 new bosses. Comparatively, in the first 2 years of Wow they added ZG, AQ20,AQ40,BWL, and Naxx. For over 40 more boss battles. I think Risen had a good point that at the level that WoW is on they should be producing significantly more content for the WoW community. Also, I think we all know he was referring to the epic flying mounts and Blizz should have updated Azeroth for flying mounts. This is truly unacceptable that they can't go back in and recode the terrain for flying. This was the crown jewel of the expansion and we're not even able to use it in Azeroth. Also, gear graphics. One of the great things about Wow was that everyone used to look different. Now graphics are used and re-used until every single druids, no matter spec, pvp, pve has almost identical gear.
In summary, I think Blizz is starting to go down the path of too many companies before them. They were always a top flight game producer that was amazing at producing great games. They have now become a mega-corp that is starting to lose touch with their fan base and what lead them to their success.
Case in point, I posted on my guild forums the exact date that the patch would go live one month before it did. Because, the TGC sets were being released this weekend and I knew Blizz wouldn't release them without the in-game card items being available. The patch clearly wasn't ready for release, as is evident by the pervasive amount of evading mobs and the unreal amount of bugs present (more than past patches). They broke their cardinal rule of "when it's ready" and went with "when it will make the most money"
Lars Mar 31st 2008 1:25PM
I agree he does have SOME good points. I don't know if he was going for an over-the-top style or what. Hopefully it wasn't completely serious. There are some things that I personally disagree with about the flying mounts. I think the basic flying mount should be available at level 65, and it should be 100% speed. It makes no sense to me that the upgrade from ground to flying is slower. Also I think the epic flying mount should be a bit cheaper, like 2500 or something.
One thing I do agree with is making flying mounts work in Azeroth. Adam quoted this: "Blizzard has came out numerous times and said they'd rather focus on developing new content instead of doing major revamping of old content." But, Blizzard has already done huge revampings of Azeroth recently. Have you been to STV lately? There's hardly a quest or mob there that hasn't been tweaked. Plus they made the ride to 60 much easier yet again. They need to hire more programmers because frankly, they move at a snails pace as far as development is concerned.
Finnicks Mar 29th 2008 4:14PM
100% Druid QQ. Just look at 4 of the 10 reasons. "Waaah i tink dr00ds shud get thiz".
Abedabun Mar 31st 2008 9:24AM
Agreed with Finnicks/#3. And I am a druid.
Okay Mar 29th 2008 4:14PM
Did you really have to write up an article on his piece...? All his article was is a forum rant in the form of a blog on some website.
I wonder how much WoWInsider writers get paid for useless articles like these.
Kerz Mar 29th 2008 4:18PM
The factual errors are minor, and I think most acquainted with WOW will know what he meant by the level cap and 5000 gold for flying mounts. And how many people actually make it into BT/Hyjal? You're overreacting and nitpicking minor details when you should be giving realistic commentary on his opinions.
Angry Joe Mar 29th 2008 4:21PM
Maybe invite him to write here? ;)
Kadaan Mar 31st 2008 6:59PM
I think he'd fit right in with a Shaman QQ poster they have :)
xanithon Mar 29th 2008 4:25PM
'twas funny when he was talking about no new Battlegrounds, Eye of the Storm, he should know by the time he almost has four level 70's. PvP servers with not much PvP in them? Being on Dark Iron PvP server, my guild (Unforgiven) does town raids quite alot, and I participated on a failed Stormwind raid last year. He might not be considering the 20-70 outdoor PvP. my 2c.
RogueJedi86 Mar 30th 2008 1:49AM
I can kinda agree on Battlegrounds. We've had an unused BG in the game files forever, Azshara Crater, that Blizzard has never put in. The map already exists, they'd just have to set up the rules, which can't be hard, considering how easily they're revamped AV the past 2 or 3 times in big patches.
Here's more info:
http://www.wowwiki.com/Azshara_Crater
You can also explore it in wowmapviewer.
Pattmyn Mar 29th 2008 4:28PM
I actually was one of the ones who sent this in to WoWInsider, not for the content but just how it's written. The whole thing sounds like a four year old crying and though it has some good points, most of them are drowned out by the sheer stupidity of the others. The content on that site has been quickly going downhill and this is a prime example.
Perrins Mar 29th 2008 4:29PM
I WOULD SO ROLL A GNOME DRUID!!!
aggromonkey Mar 29th 2008 4:29PM
I like how he slams fear because it's "loosing control of your character" and then qq's about a nerf to clyclone all in one article. GG.
Megalomaniac Mar 29th 2008 4:32PM
A large portion of WI articles are riddled with factual errors concerning wow game mechanics that are much more damaging to wow players than this ExtremeTech article. Lynch may be making larger factual mistakes on trivial issues like flying mount costs (and it seems like that was more an issue of clarity rather than fudging the "facts"), but at least mistakes like that are easily identifiable to anyone that either checks in-game or can use google, and at least the mistakes he's made are easily correctable. Although he is appealing to authority ("I've been playing for 3 years and have X amount of toons") as part of the reason we should take his little piece "seriously," WI appeals to the same type of authority (just in larger quantity), which is more likely to sweep up new players with a false sense of "WI deals in facts".
As such, I turn your attention to the case of the pot calling the kettle black.
TheTreasoner Mar 29th 2008 5:33PM
I agree completely, Megalomaniac. A lot of articles on WoWInsider are really quite awful, and for them to point at another blog's article and say, "Haha, look what this guy said about WoW!" is pretty silly. Maybe I should make a blog about how awful other WoW blogs are.
Chad Mar 30th 2008 2:13AM
It seems the WI crew are using their admin privs to down-rank any/all posts that are critical of them. Apparently the truth hurts.
This article is a perfect example of hypocrisy. I laughed out loud when I saw the title on Google Reader.
Adam Holisky Mar 30th 2008 2:18AM
I'll leave your criticism of the site for others to address if they wish.
However, the only admin rights we have are to remove a post - and that only happens if there's a gold advertisement contained in the post. Furthermore, to do that, we have to inform the site's leads. I did this earlier yesterday when a gold spammer left about 50 posts on the site, sever in articles I wrote.
The people modding down or up the comments are other readers. And while I can't speak concretely for the other writers on the site, I know that I do not mod comments up or down. You all seem to do a good enough job. =)
Pucelle Mar 30th 2008 4:01AM
I assure you, I'm not a staff member - I just find you stupid. Hence the downranking.
I've noticed that, with the exception of BRK [who makes literal, factual errors], most of the "errors" on this site are either A) a matter of opinion, oh noes! or B) a reader who does not understand how to apply the critical thinking skills they should've learned in high school, assuming they're out of elementary in the first place.
The sheer number of readers who have a strongly-held opinion and call that fact... well... pretty relevant to this article, isn't it? Just because you think it's really true doesn't make it objective. Jump up and down all you like.
Megalomaniac Mar 30th 2008 5:02AM
@Pucelle: OMG THERE ARE WELL INFORMED POSTS TOO.
I've seen some pretty nonsensical advice on this site including but not limited to: +parry is a priority for bear tanks, 1.4 fast off hands are to make up for misses, pallys can't or shouldn't tank higher end 25 man raid content, etc etc etc. I've also personally seen posts that improperly neglect to give credit to proper sources (until someone called them out on it in comments, to which the comment was deleted and the post updated to properly give credit). I actually first took notice of WI when a guildie started linking to WI articles as a way of "proving" some ridiculous thing along the same vein as mentioned above. You're more than welcome to downrank me for whatever reason you like, and I have full confidence that people like you are doing the majority of downranking concerning posts which call into question the authority or quality of WI posts/information, but lumping me into the camp of people who confuse matter's of opinion with matters of fact is incorrect :-D, as is the false dilemma you presented in your reply. So in case you don't understand: there are valid criticisms against WI as a whole, despite your opinion that all complaints against WI stem from either A or B.
WI has a set of staff that regularly talk outside of their element, and a few staff members that are extremely well versed in both game mechanics and in articulating those mechanics in an entertaining way. You people that autodownrank any criticism against WI are the ones forcing ALL criticism concerning WI's accuracy into black and white, totally wrong or totally right. Grow up. I'd fully expect this thread to develop and devolve into WI fan-people saying something like "If you don't like it, GET OUT AND DON'T READ WI," which is the mentality that some of the WI staff readers have expressed in the face of criticism. That mentality is immature and silly. Taking the time to question what staff members say, and then criticize them when they post a screenie from a wow community without giving credit or asking permission, or making a claim that 2h is the way to go for enhancement pve damage... thats just well deserved. It means the person posting didn't take the time to research what they're writing about, and it happens frequently here. It seems as if all too often WI staff rely on commenters to correct errors, and I'm sorry but that is just the same kind of sloppy journalism or blogging that this particular article links to and complains about, and my original comment stands. pot. kettle. black.
Wall of text crits everyone