No Blizzcon this year - boo-frickin-hoo

So Blizzard has decided to forego Blizzcon this year, "to focus on the games that are in development". In my opinion that's a wise move. I don't know how many resources a conference steals from development but this year is very busy for them. They are planning to release no fewer than 3 games: the next StarCraft chapter, WoW's next expansion Pandaria and the most anticipated game of the decade, Diablo 3.

I would much rather they focus all their resources on releasing these games (especially Diablo 3) than to be distracted by Blizzcon.

If you think about it, there's nothing much they can show off this year. There are no surprises left, apart from the unannounced project Titan. We all know what games are coming out this year and all of them (except perhaps for Pandaria) are close to being done.

Project Titan is most likely a long way from completion and that's why Blizzard won't announce anything related to it this year.

Taking all the above into consideration, why would they host Blizzcon in 2012? Just to get some geeks together? They claim that they are losing money on the show anyway (despite the high price of the ticket), so why bother?

Nah, don't be too disappointed if you were planning to attend this year. Apart from meeting like-minded folks (which is always cool) there wouldn't be any new announcements to spice things up. I just wonder what they'll show at Blizzcon next year.

Today only: $79 Nook Simple Touch from BN

Just in case you've been living under a rock for the past couple of days, let me be the last one to let you know that Barnes & Noble is selling a limited edition of the Nook Simple Touch e-reader, today only (November 25th 2001), for only $79, down from the regular $100.

First, I have no affiliation with Barnes & Noble whatsoever. Second, I thought I would post this here because I'm sure many of you are avid readers, just like I am. Fantasy and SF buffs usually are.

Why would you buy this e-reader? If you have an older reader that is not locked into, say, Amazon, this is a good buy. If you don't have an e-reader yet and are thinking about switching to e-books, this is also a good buy. Myself, I had an older reader, a Sony PRS-300 that served me well over the past 2 years. As of late, however, I felt the need for a better reader: a larger screen (the Sony has a 5" screen), faster page turns, screen with better contrast and also a touch interface.

The Nook Simple Touch has all the above: 6" screen that uses the new e-ink Pearl technology (which the latest Kindle also shares), much faster page turns and book loading than my old Sony, a dictionary, a longer lasting battery, WiFi, a responsive touch screen and a microSD slot. Compared to the Sony it does have 2 disadvantages: it is sightly taller and wider (but feels thinner because of the beveled back) and it doesn't have an aluminum face plate like the Sony. The bigger dimensions give it an extra wide bezel which allows you to told it better.

B&N are only offering this special edition for $79 today so if you like the deal, go now and buy it! The one thing that makes it "special" is the fact that it has a white bezel around the edge while the regular version has a black bezel. Otherwise it's identical to the regular Touch reader.

Here's B&N's page for this promo.

Personally I think this was a very good deal. E-reader prices will continue to go down but there are finally several choices under $100 and now's a good a time as any to buy a new reader. Here are some shots I took of my new reader, as well as a comparison to the Sony PRS-300 Pocket Edition.

 

 

Skyrim - or the trouble with console ports

Over the weekend I had the good fortune to lay my hands on Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim (PC) for a few hours. A friend's friend had just picked up the game and he let me play on his machine. I was rather excited to get the chance to test it because the hype surrounding this game is huge. It has almost universally garnered excellent reviews.

This isn't a proper review because I only played the game for those few short hours. It is mostly a commentary on the sad state of console-to-PC ports.

First, a little background. I adored Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind but disliked Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion. For these reasons, I wasn't sure I was going to like Skyrim.

In the little time I spent with Skyrim, I discovered an amazingly complex universe where my character was free to roam at will. The world of Skyrim is hauntingly beautiful and just makes you want to keep exploring. Well, until you stumble across some vicious monster or other.

I enjoyed the experience a great deal but all this was marred by the game's biggest flaw: the interface. Unfortunately, the developers were lazy enough to slap the same shoddy console interface on the PC version. The fact is that Skyrim wasn't made with a mouse and keyboard in mind. And it really sucks. The menus, the inventory system and character stats are a mess. It's true that after a couple of hours playing it I kinda-sorta got used to it but given enough time one can get used to anything, for example like riding a lame donkey versus a Ferarri.

To further compound the issue, the skill "tree" is so badly conceived that I dreaded having to visit it when I leveled up. The various "perks" are arranged in the form of constellations, a different one for each skill. While nice and shiny, navigating between the different skills and perks with a mouse and keyboard is a nightmare.

Melee combat seemed floaty and imprecise but casting spells was satisfying enough.

Overall I enjoyed Skyrim, which was more than I expected from it. The incredibly open world is rich with places to explore and quests to conquer. Even half an hour into the game you can find youself with at least half a dozen quests in your log and it's more often than not that embarking on one quest will get you sidetracked into yet another side-quest. In my short time in Skyrim quests didn't feel repetitive either and apparently the devs have stated that the game can generate an infinite number of quests, which is always a good thing for replayability.

All things considered, Skyrim still comes out as a great game but it's unfortunate that Bethesda has forgotten their PC origins and have chosen to saddle this otherwise brilliant game with a terrible and shoddy console interface. My dislike for consoles is only hardened by this experience, and I continue to believe that a proper RPG should not be played on a console, or at least not without mouse-and-keyboard. While many reviews have given Skyrim scores of 9/10 or 90%, I can't give it more than 8/10. I was seriously considering buying it but now I'll just wait until it reaches the discount bin.

DC Universe Online is now free-to-play

Just a heads-up for those interested. Starting on November 1st 2011, which was yesterday, DC Universe Online went free-to-play. I'm not that much into superheroes but I'll give it a whirl.

At this point I have very little knowledge about this game but I'll try to learn it as I go along. If I can get past the first couple of hours without getting bored, then I'll probably keep playing.

The free version of the game does seem a little restricted compared to, say, World of Tanks, but let us not forget that DC Universe Online started out with a subscription-based model. You can still subscribe, fear not, but now there's the option to try-before-you buy.

I've currently downloaded about 10GB of the 14GB game client. Yikes! I'll probably fire up the game over the next couple of days.

World of Tanks - more addictive than you'd think

What's the best game of the year? Depends who you ask but for me it was definitely World of Tanks. The novelty of the concept, the great gameplay, the vast number of tanks and maps, the endless ways in which a battle can take happen, the infinite replayability, the pseudo-realistic mechanics and physics and, why not, the free nature of the game conspired to make it one of the best games I've played in years.

Of course, not everyone is sold on it. Some people don't like the shooter genre. Some don't like tanks or the WWII setting. Some don't like playing online against others. And on and on. But from what I gather, World of Tanks has a huge worldwide gathering, especially in Russia where it is being developed. A reader informs me that it is actually developed in Belarus. My apologies.

One of the reasons why World of Tanks is so popular is the freemium business model. While other MMOs have started with a subscription model and then switched to freemium when they realized not a lot of people were playing them, World of Tanks was built around the concept of "free" from the get-go. In this aspect, my humble opinion is that it is really well designed. As a free player you have access to all the tank tiers (from 1 to 10) and all the maps. Other freemium games impose certain restrictions on how high you can go. Not this game. While paying customers can reach maximum level much faster, a free player can also get there, through patience and perseverance.

But here's the thing. There's a big chance that if you start out as a free player, even if you intend never to spend a cent on this game, you might find yourself voluntarily shelling out some cash at some point. The very thing happened to me. Though I spent a puny amount compared to hardcore players, I did show my appreciation to the developers by spending some money in the game. This is a good thing. A good game deserves compensation. The more people pay for it, the better the game becomes.

Let me tell you a story that enforces the above.

I'm an European living for many years in the US. I don't have any friends here who are gamers but back in Europe I know a bunch of hardcore nerds, just like me, who love PC games. One of them is a really good friend and we share a lot of interests but these aren't all the time identical. For example, we both love WoW and Diablo but he also likes games such as Dragon Age, The Witcher, Mass Effect. I don't like those but I like Borderlands and Glitch to give a couple of examples.

When I went to my home country on vacation last summer I demoed World of Tanks to my friend. It was easy: download the ~2GB client (very quick at European broadband speeds), install it, login with my username and password. I played a couple of battles for him and he showed some mild interest. I wasn't expecting him to really get into the game.

A few days later he told me that he had created an account and was now playing the game. I was like, woot! He had some initial frustrations with some of the gameplay but ended up being hooked by it. After I got back to the US he told me he was obsessed with the game. He'd even bought a subscription to it and had advanced along the American tank destroyer line farther than I had. Of course, I have a lot more tanks spread across many different lines but still...

So you see, World of Tanks can really grab you hard when you least expect it and it won't let go easily. There are, of course, players who have quit the game in frustration over one aspect or another. One of the main factors of contention is the matchmaker system which sometimes can pit you against tanks 3-4 tiers above you, where you don't stand much of a chance. I admit that the game is not perfect. But you know what? The version number says it is still in beta (currently version 0.6.7) and the devs are continually working on it, fixing bugs, improving mechanics and adding new tanks and maps.

I am not as obsessed with World of Tanks as I was at the beginning. These days I fire it up once every few days, or maybe a couple of times a week. Then again, I'm mostly playing Glitch. But when I do play it, it's almost therapeutic. I just love this game in so many ways. Even if I get raped two minutes into a battle, who cares? I will just load up another tank and perhaps win the next battle with 5 kills.

If you are undecided, if the genre mildly appeals to you, I urge you to try this game. You won't regret it and you might even end up addicted.

In closing, here's a screenshot of a recent glorious battle I fought in. Our team steamrolled the adversaries, with 13 kills on our side, 2 suicides on their side and 1 loss for us. My "Easy 8" Sherman was hanging by a thread at the end.

Diablo 3 deal, worth it?

At Blizzcon this year Blizzard has announced "the bomb": players who commit to 12 months of WoW subscriptions will get a free digital copy of Diablo 3! Is this wow or meh? It depends. I have made a quick analysis and if you're undecided, this might be for you.>

My analysis is purely financial and doesn't take the emotional aspect into consideration but since a large chunk of money is involved, I think it makes sense to figure out some numbers.

Notice that "committing" to a 12 month subscription does not require you to pay for the entire 12 months in advance. Nor does it require you to buy a 6 month package which is the highest one you can buy. This means that you can go month-by-month if you wish, but you'll have to engage in some sort of digital contract with Blizzard where they can be certain you will uphold your end of the bargain.

Currently you can pay month-by-month at $15 a month, for 3 months at $14 per month or for 6 months at $15 per month. My calculations are based on the two extremes but if you want to take this deal, the best thing is to go with two 6-month subscriptions, if you can afford it.

1. Month-to-month
Cost per month: $15
Cost for 12 months: $180
Real cost for 12 months (-$60 the value of Diablo 3): $120
@ $15 / month you will have to play $120 / $15 = 8 months of WoW to break even

2. 6 month subscription x 2
Cost per month: $13
Cost for 12 months: $156
Real cost for 12 months (-$60 the value of Diablo 3): $96

@ $13 / month you will have to play $96 / $13 = 7.4 months of WoW to break even

It sure seems like a long time to play WoW before you can call this a good deal. But wait, there's more. The "package" also includes an exclusive mount and access to WoW's next expansion (still not sure if this means Mists of Pandaria or the one after that, whatever that may be). While we can put a tentative value on the mount (mounts are $25 in Blizzard's store), beta access is a more subtle thing, something that can be either useless or priceless, depending who you ask.

So let's adjust our amounts by subtracting $25 for the mount.

1. Month-to-month
Cost per month: $15
Cost for 12 months: $180
Real cost for 12 months (-$60 the value of Diablo 3): $120
- $25 the cost of the mount: $95

@ $15 / month you will have to play $95 / $15 = 6.3 months of WoW to break even

2. 6 month subscription x 2

Cost per month: $13
Cost for 12 months: $156
Real cost for 12 months (-$60 the value of Diablo 3): $96
- $25 the cost of the mount: $71
@ $13 / month you will have to play $96 / $13 = 5.5 months of WoW to break even

As you can see, at the very least you will have to play 5 and a half months of WoW in order to break even on this deal.

There are more factors to consider at this point.

If you're not into Diablo 3 and you don't care about the other rewards, skip this deal.

If you're not into Diablo 3 but would like the mount and/or beta access, the deal is still good. Plus, you can donate your free copy of Diablo 3 to someone else.

If you are a die-hard WoW player and would also like to try Diablo 3, meaning that you are guaranteed to play WoW for at least 6 months, if not more, then this deal is killer. This is especially sweet if you know you'll be playing for another year.

If you're the type who gets bored with WoW 3 months into a new expansion, skip this deal. Just go month-to-month and buy Diablo 3 separately.

If you are still playing WoW between now and when Mists of Pandaria is released, now would be a great time to buy the deal. Just think about it. Assuming MoP is released around mid-2013, that gives you 6-8 months of solid play. When MoP hits, you have already broken even. From then on it's pure profit! Not to mention that you would have (presumably) also played a few months of free Diablo 3.

The bottom line is that you must think really hard if WoW will be fun for you for at least 6 months, or else you'll be throwing money out the window. There's also the matter of the guaranteed access to a future beta. If that is priceless to you, then by all means, get the deal.

At any rate, all this applies mostly if you are both a WoW and Diablo fan but you need to be aware that at some point in 2012 both games will be out and both will compete for your attention at the same time. Also, Mists of Pandaria will cost an additional $40, so take that also into consideration.

For me this deal is out of the question. Had Diablo 3 come out when Cataclysm was released, I might have been tempted. As it happens, I quit WoW for good about 2-3 months after the last expansion. I won't be returning to it any time soon.

Pandaria and me(h)

I'll have to admit that this year's Blizzcon took me by surprise. Seriously, Mists of Pandaria? Everyone and their grandma was hoping for a Pandaren expansion with a monk and/or brewmaster class. Instead, they got an expansion in the continent of Pandaria, with a monk class and a brewmaster spec. Duh.

I was a bit shocked because I never thought Blizzard would go in this direction. It seems to me they've been coyly denying any future dealings with Pandarens but what do I know? I'm not a big Warcraft buff.

So here we are, at Blizzcon 2011 and a lot of folks seem excited about the new expansion. Others, aren't so much. Oh, believe me, there are plenty of people who are just like me, namely meh. Still don't believe me? Here's a bunch of comments on Arstechnica.

Please understand that I'm not trolling or bitching or anything like that. I'm just trying to analyze this news from the perspective of someone who has quit WoW for many months and was just curious if there's the slightest reason to return to WoW with the next expansion. The way things look, there's no chance in hell I will return, not even if Diablo 3 weren't around the corner.

Another cute race doesn't do it for me. I'm thinking at this point that Blizzard is trying to appeal to the even younger demographic, perhaps in the 6-10 range. OK, I get it, older people also like fluffy things. Hell, I love fluffy things. I love cats, for example, but I would never own a pet. I love to look at them and play with them, as long as they're not mine. But I digress...

Another class seems a bit redundant at this point. There are already plenty of classes in WoW. The fact that this one doesn't seem to use weapons a lot is odd. I like my characters to use powerful weapons. You can always upgrade weapons but you can't upgrade your fists.

The total revamp of the talent tree has gotten old at this point. If I were playing WoW again I'd simply be tired of all these changes. I mean, it looks to me that Blizzard's philosophy these days is to revamp the talents and skills with every expansion. Just to keep things fresh, y'know.

Changing resource systems - yet again - is another thing that will potentially turn things upside-down for certain players. I'm talking about the warlock's resources (I haven't looked at other classes). C'mon, a different resource for every spec? Sheesh.

Combat between pets? Methinks Blizzard has run out of inspiration. I'm sure lots of people have swooned when they heard the news. I'm sure I would enjoy playing with my pets for a while - a short while. But how long until this, too, will grow stale? To me, this smells like a gimmick to keep players interested a little while longer. The person who thought of this must have felt like a genius: "Hey, I know how to keep players glued! We can give them combat pets! Just think about it: most players must have dozens of pets by now. If we add skills to them we can increase the time spent in WoW at least tenfold!"

A level cap of 90 seems to indicate a lack of content similar to Cataclysm. We all know how that went. Personally, I was bored with Cataclysm less than 2 months in. Will the same thing happen now? I bet not. Now there's kombat petz!!

In what has become a sort of tradition, Blizzard is pulling the no-flying-until-level-cap bullshit again. Another reason not to be drawn back to the game.

As far as grouping and quests and raids and dungeons, there's some nice stuff on the PvE side but nothing outstanding.

On the art side, I'll give it to Blizzard: they do know how to design some beautiful zones. Yet, something doesn't feel right to me. While it's all beautiful, Pandaria is a blatant copy of China. I believe they could have worked a bit harder to give it a general Asian flavor without making it specifically Chinese (not that there's anything wrong with China). There are other cultures and countries in Asia apart from China, such as India, Japan, Indonesia, Thailand and so on.

I've said what I had to say. It's not a collection of rants but merely my observations based on what I've seen so far. I'm sure there are many ex-WoW players who are looking for a good reason to return. While those who are still playing the game are thrilled with the new expansion I'm sure, I'm pretty positive that most of the ex-players aren't.

My feeling is that World of Warcraft is now past its prime and sliding on the inexorable slope of decline. Mists of Pandaria seems like a desperate attempt to keep the player base interested. I doubt they'll gain a lot of new players over this and I'll bet you a dollar that by summer 2012 we'll see even more bad news about the diminishing subscriber base. But hey, it wasn't meant to last forever.

To top it all off, they're offering players who subscribe to WoW for a year, a free copy of Diablo 3. That's laughable. It proves how confident Blizzard is in their Pandarian expansion. In other words, "we'll bribe you with a copy of D3 if you pay us for a year of WoW because you'll get bored with it in 2-3 months anyway". It would have been nice of them to offer this deal to anyone who, in the past, has subscribed to at least 12 months of WoW. But whatever, I'm still going to buy Diablo 3.

I'm actually glad that this next one won't be a solid, massive expansion. Otherwise I might have been tempted to try it. As it is, I'm (hopefully) going to enjoy myself to the max with Diablo 3 and I won't have to pay a monthly subscription to do so.

Finally, lease, if you leave a comment here, don't be throwing insults and such. If you are stoked about Pandaria, that's great, I'd be happy to hear why it excites you so much. If not, likewise.