WoW - The Burning Crusade - Shatters Sales Records

[Dhruin]

WoW: The Burning Crusade has shattered day-one PC sales records with 2.4M copies sold worldwide. Here's the official blurb (http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/070123/20070123005602.html):
World of Warcraft(R): The Burning Crusade(TM) Shatters Day-1 Sales Record
Tuesday January 23, 9:00 am ET

IRVINE, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Blizzard Entertainment® today announced that World of Warcraft®: The Burning Crusade(TM) has broken the day-one sales record to become the fastest-selling PC game ever in North America and Europe, with a worldwide total of nearly 2.4 million copies sold in the first 24 hours of availability. The Burning Crusade, the first expansion set for World of Warcraft, was simultaneously released in North America, Europe, Singapore, Thailand and Malaysia on January 16, and on January 17 in Australia and New Zealand.
Blizzard had supplied more than 4 million game boxes to retailers worldwide, and more than 5,000 stores throughout the world had their doors open at midnight to welcome thousands of expectant players.
Day-one sales totals on both continents were similar, with an estimated total of nearly 1.2 million copies sold on the first day in North America and an estimated total of more than 1.1 million copies sold in Europe within the first 24 hours of launch(a). By the end of the first day of availability on both continents, a total of more than 1.7 million players had already logged in and upgraded World of Warcraft to play The Burning Crusade.
"The Burning Crusade has already exceeded even our most ambitious expectations," said Mike Morhaime, president and cofounder of Blizzard Entertainment. "We're pleased that so many players are eager to see all of the new content that the expansion has to offer, and we look forward to seeing everyone online as additional players continue to upgrade in the days ahead."
Retailers are continuing to report sustained demand, so if players have not yet purchased their copy of The Burning Crusade, they are advised to call ahead to make sure their store has copies on hand. Additional shipments of the expansion have been routed to retailers to help maintain stock levels.
"The immediate popularity of The Burning Crusade once again shows that Blizzard consistently delivers what gamers want," said Robert McKenzie, senior vice president of merchandising at GameStop Corp. "In addition to setting a new day-one PC-game sales record at our GameStop and EB Games stores, the expansion garnered more online pre-orders than any other PC game in our company's history."
Prior to the launch of The Burning Crusade, World of Warcraft was played by more than 8 million players around the world -- with more than 2 million on North American realms and more than 1.5 million on European realms -- making it the most successful subscription-based massively multiplayer online role-playing game in PC-gaming history.
For more information on World of Warcraft: The Burning Crusade, please visit the official website for the expansion at www.worldofwarcraft.com/burningcrusade (http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/burningcrusade).

More information. (http://www.rpgwatch.com/show/newsbit?newsbit=3593)

[Reyla]

Staggering stuff.

I have tried every MMOG since Meridian 59 almost 10 years ago including World of Warcraft.

I did not see anything innovative or special about it - Kill things to level up and make your stats higher numbers. All MMOGs are exactly like this.

Why do 8 million people play this one?

[Acleacius]

It is certianly staggering.

Not sure I have only played EQ2 for a couple of months about a year ago, but Blizzard is known for additive gameplay.
Maybe the more cartoonish looks allows more machines to run it and more accessable to younger gamers and/or families?

[xSamhainx]

There's lots of reasons. Like Ace said, and Ive believed this from the get-go - It's a very system-friendly game. People generally do not have problems running the game, Blizzard is good at making a quality product that runs well. Certainly that's only one of many factors, but it's a pretty dang big one.

Also, there seems to be many people who are not only being intro'd to MMO's thru WoW, but online community in general. WoW is a lot of new people's gateway for this, and it goes far beyond the game itself. For instance, there were many people in my prior WoW guild who had never done more than email and surf the net online. They werent gamers at all. They were spouses, friends, or whatever of people who played. They had never interacted and chatted, never been part of something online as a member of a community. Then they got online and were part of something, interacting with people all over the world for the first time. This is huge for people who are experiencing it for the first time, a threshold most of us crossed many years ago and has lost it's novelty long ago. That's a big deal, and yes, it's very addictive when you first get a taste of it.

WoW is a perfect, mass marketed vehicle for this

[Ionstormsucks]

Staggering stuff.

I have tried every MMOG since Meridian 59 almost 10 years ago including World of Warcraft.

I did not see anything innovative or special about it

Because there is nothing innovative or special about it. WoW is a solid game, no doubt about it, but it does not offer anything new compared to other mmorpgs. Unfortunately we will see a whole bunch of mmos over the next few years that will be exactely like WoW because that game was so successful. The MMO market has become the new dragon hoard of the gaming industry - being innovative is sooo last year, stealing as much gold from the dragon as possible without him realizing it on the other hand...

[Reyla]

Thanks folks.

You all pretty much affirmed what I have been thinking. WoW is solid, non-threatening status quo gaming. And many non gamers play it for the social aspect.

Fair enough.

It is kind of sad though. Warcraft and Diablo were wildly innovative and were my favorite games of the 90s. Either I have changed or Blizzard has changed the way they make games. Probably a little of both.

[Ionstormsucks]

Either I have changed or Blizzard has changed the way they make games. Probably a little of both.

I'm not really sure if Blizzard was ever a real innovator when it comes to game design. They created a few very successful (and from my point of view very nice) games, but neither the concept of Warcraft (the strategy game) nor that of Diablo were overly innovative. These games were well made and flawless from a technical point of view - and, I think, the same can be said for WoW.
The main problem, especially for people that are following the mmorpg-scene since the beginning, seems to be that for a very long time there was hardly anything new at all. If I look at Everquest and then at WoW, I can hardly see any differences. Of course the games ARE different in certain details, but the main concept (as you called it - level up and make your stats higher numbers) has not changed at all.
It is interesting if you search through all the message boards of various MMORGs - they are essently full of innovative ideas from players (some real good ones, some extremly crappy once), still there is hardly a company that has the courage to implement something new.
For me this was extremly apparent in the case of Turbine's The Lord of the Rings Online. I was following that game right from the beginning and was an dedicated reader of the LOTRO message boards. I was always sceptical about Turbine creating a MMORPG in Tolkien's Middle Earth, but still the project fascinated me. The suggestions that came from fans were great and plentiful... and LOTRO could have been a totally different game than it is now. But from all we know so far it will be a game very similar to WoW.

[xSamhainx]

Blizzard knows what theyre doing, Diablo was the first real action-RPG that most people can remember, it pretty much set the standard for that type of game. Was it truly the first? I dont know, someone's probably gonna rattle off the title of some obscure game nobody played or cared about. Diablo was the first real hack and slash game that D&D geeks had been yearning for since they first had conception of D&D. Not to mention (but I'll mention it anyway) BattleNet, that was (and still is) huge. Warcrafts, I dont know about the first two, I never played them (I was too busy playing Starcraft). Now I know some crappy "Dune" RTS supposedly gets credit for the first real RTS, but the Warcrafts/Starcrafts are the most well known, Starcraft still being played to this day. I think it's a national sport of Korea.

Anyone playing Dune, or the original Age of Empires, or the original C&C still? I think not

Warcraft III however, was the game that is often credited with bringing the now standard concept of "hero units" to RTS games, and "creeps", the various assorted hostile creatures scattered around the maps that are a resource themselves. The concept of RPG elements to RTS, like peanut butter and chocolate just waiting to happen. Were they truly the first? Who cares, for the purpose of this discussion, they get the credit. Now this I think is also part of WoW's success, having a colorful universe already built, the series of the legendary Warcraft rts games and their lore, getting some RPG going.

Bam. Lots of WCIII fanatics out there, and I should know, because I'm one myself. Now give people who have been playing Warcraft for years a chance to actually play the races from the games, in the grand lore of the battles of Azeroth. Lots of solo as well as group play, you can tinker around or be serious, it's up to you. Let their immediate family, friends, mailman see them playing it, the rest is history.

Everquest, their company and the other MMO's have but a fraction of this legendary lineage built up that Blizzard as a company, and subsequently, it's little universe of games have as well. Sure, EQ has been around for ages, but it's but one little BB against the Blizzard warship when it comes to lineage, marketing, corporate reputation, etc. Even if Blizzard truly arent "the first" to do this or that when it comes to making an action RPG or what not, they are often the ones who did it notably well and are credited with it, such as the case of Diablo, Warcrafts/Starcraft. There's people that would go out and buy a Blizzard game without ever even reading a review of it.

Starcraft II comes out, you can bet your bottom dollar that I'll be running out and buying it on release day. Me and about a zillllion and a half other people. That's Blizzard's success in a nutshell

[zakhal]

I bought warcraft 3 battlechest last fall and Im currently going through it. Its a great game and part of my RPG/RTS continuum. After wc3 comes spellcraft series.

I did get few free wow testing tickets with the battlechest but Im not sure its worth it. I have played so many pve muds and mmogs that I just cant get the spark for them anymore. Last few times I bought pve mmogs the gaming experience lasted for like 2 weeks before I found myself totally bored with it.

Singleplayer rpgs atleast have good story so you can immerse yourself into it. And you can actually play them through. They have both start and ending. Life is just too short for pve mmogs.

[Ionstormsucks]

There's people that would go out and buy a Blizzard game without ever even reading a review of it.

Starcraft II comes out, you can bet your bottom dollar that I'll be running out and buying it on release day. Me and about a zillllion and a half other people.

You're right - and that tells me a lot about people. Most people are very easily satisfied, a bit too easily for my taste. Apart from that people seem to have an inclination nowadays to like companies instead of products. A vivid proof of that are the thousands of fanboys that jump in to defend Blizzard as soon as you post something critical on the WoW-boards.
Blizzard, I think, is very good at knowing when the time for a certain type of game had come. Had Blizzard released WoW at the time Everquest was released (I know that this is not really possible) it would not have been as successful as nowadays. A lot has to do with the fact that the telecommunication structure in most European countries was totally different at the time. Payment methods were a major obstacle - I remember that some of my friends got a credit card just for the purpose of playing EQ (living in Germany) - nowadays almost everyone has a credit card.

And honestly if I look at WoW, and especially the new expansion, I'm wondering more and more if not the hype alone has become a major part that contributes to WoW's success. If you look at the reviews that come out these days, then it seems that most reviewers have lost every bit of objectivity when it comes to Blizzard-related products. After over 2 years of WoW, Blizzard comes up with an expansion that offers absolutely nothing new at all - still you have to read something like


Burning Crusade, the first expansion to World of Warcraft, almost feels like an entirely new game.


in a recent review by Gamedaily.

I'm not quite sure what the reviewer did the last 2 years, but I played WoW and to me it feels pretty much like old wine in new skins. People are blinded by the hype - "oh, it's the new WoW expansion - I HAVE to buy it". But who am I fooling? I bought it myself, even though I knew (by playing the beta) that it would offer only new, but no innovative content.

[xSamhainx]

well, what more do you want? lol

In a way, I know what you mean. But what do you want, really. "player laundry"?

Youre playing an MMO, there's pretty much only so much you can do before youre talking about a new game altogether. The core of the game is what it is, all they can do is build around that with new lands/races/tradeskills/mounts, what is essentially more of the same. So what, there needs to be an RTS mode or something? Player massage parlors?

I know, that's their job to figure it out, but I always kinda think it's funny when people get all bent outta shape that they get more of the same from something within a genre.

[Ionstormsucks]

well, what more do you want? lol

In a way, I know what you mean. But what do you want, really. "player laundry"?


Innovation. Or at least choice. Maybe possibilities. I'm not talking about the next new tiny feature that some mmo company will implement and call their game a "next generation" mmo. I'm not talking about guild housing, mounts, ingame mail or crap of that sort - these are features that are interesting for like 5 minutes... then you'll just take them as granted.
But what for example happened to player customization and dynamic content? Old concepts, you might say, since these terms are around for quite some time now. But let's face it in nowadays mmos these features are extremly underdeveloped - not that they were ever fully developed in former mmos, but at least they tried. Take Asheron's Call for example. That game had maybe 5000 players, still they managed to arrange a monthly event (meant that something happened and changed inside the game world) - heck they even managed to change the season inside the game. Now, AC was not a brilliant game, but at least they tried to offer something new. It was only shadow of what would be possible if companies were willing to try.
If not dynamic content, then why not try to be at least a bit original and creative. Why do they stick to the same 3 or 4 quest patterns that we all know so well already. Kill x of that, or bring me x of that just does not cut it for me anymore. Now, I have to admit that there are a few very rare gems to be found in TBC, but they are really the exception and you won't need more than 5 fingers to sum them up. And no, I'm not talking about that stupid bomb mission in Hellfire Peninsula (recently praised in another review) - honestly, when I have to do missions like these I'm beginning to wonder if Blizzard is actually mocking their players (or rather their intellect). You cannot fail that mission, nor is there any danger involved in that mission. And if you're not lacking both hands then you won't need more than 2 tries to succeed.
I think it's a shame what's happening here since Blizzard is giving away a lot of WoW's potential.
Ok, now - let's just assume that all the stuff I just mentioned is just to complicated to implement into any game at the moment. Could you tell me, why a company like Blizzard was not even able to pull a couple of new classes out of their asses? Or did not at least come up with the hero classes which they promised would come...like 2 years ago?

Do you honestly believe that the mmorpg genre as it exists now is what is possible? I think not. No doubt, there will always be a basic concept that won't change, but there could be a whole lot of finetuning.

[xSamhainx]

I hear you, like I said, I know what youre basically saying. I just dont think it's really feasible to seriously get something real earth-shattering via an expansion pack that will impact the game enough to satisfy the jaded. A new character class might do it for a little while, but that's assuming that it or they are classes youd want to play. Youre still dealing with the same basic mechanic that all classes are bound to in the long run, and if youre that jaded, youd be feeling it in the short run.

I'm not playing the game anymore myself, partly because I have other things going on and cant devote the time, but mostly because I'm simply bored with it. My heart just isnt in it anymore, and I really dont think that there's anything they could do, short of.... I have no freakin clue really what they could do ... to get me to play it again any time soon.

I feel that way for all MMO's tho, I'm bored of the core mechanic of the game, and there's really no expansion other than some kind of magical overhaul that could bring me back. If they can figure that out, then yeah, I'll be there running around in the Hellfire Peninsula myself. I'll make time to play it.

[Acleacius]

That's what bothers me as a potiental player to WoW, why no customization?
It's not like customization requires any kinda of gameplay balancing like creating a new race?
The first 6 months, sure they are working on gettting new servers building up subcribers and after a year maybe something major happened, so they could get to it.
Ok after a year and a half something is strange, now the first official expansion and 2 years, Nothing!
I have seen much better in other games and its very much a Wth moment.
I am guessing Blizzard had to cut back a tiny bit on loot drops in WoW compaired to Diablo. ;)

[xSamhainx]

maybe because everyone is soon covered up in tons of armor anyway, they figured it's the least of their concerns.

[VPeric]

Blizzard has never implemented really innovative things per se, but they are the masters of improving concepts that already exist, to the point it seems like a huge innovation.

That'll also explain why we don't have anything _really_ new here, too - the competition didn't think of anything new either. ;)

[magerette]

Also, remember, a whole bunch of the core people that developed these games--thought them up and implemented them--are no longer at Blizzard.

People do definitely identify Blizzard with games they will want to play and buy--as indicated by these monster sales of an expansion, not even a new game--because of the games these particular people made, i.e, Starcraft, Warcraft and Diablo. I don't play online multiplayer, so can't comment on WoW, but do remember from the time of release that it was the last game those devs worked on before leaving.

The people there now are carrying on with other people's ideas, structures, plots, etc so I think that might explain why nothing really innovative is there.

Also of course, the old if it's not broke don't fix it thing.

[Lucky Day]

It seems to me EQ just sort of run its course over time. People wanted a new place to go and Warcraft had the big name. EQ2 was a bit of a failure just as the two attempts at new Ultima Onlines were busts before they were even launched.

I can't argue against Blizzard's devotion to quality and playable. "Everpatch" was a word frequently heard. Being both popular and stable counts for a lot for server growth as I found with the many servers I've seen on NWN.

[zakhal]

I can't argue against Blizzard's devotion to quality and playable. "Everpatch" was a word frequently heard. Being both popular and stable counts for a lot for server growth as I found with the many servers I've seen on NWN..


I wonder if automated testing could be one of the cornerstones of their success. Their products have always been fairly problemfree.

[chamr]

Blizzard has certainly earned a reputation worthy of customers buying their products based on their name alone. They haven't even come close to laying an egg yet. And their quality control is relatviely good. And they support their products well beyond the point a vast majority of publishers do. I have no problem with a company reaping the rewards of solid business practices. More power to them.

I'm a bit flummoxed, I must say, at the "Blizzard has never really innovated at all" theme of this thread. Say what?! I'd suggest that WoW is the first game they've developed that arguably merits that judgement. With Diablo, Starcraft and Warcraft, they've been, while not at the bleeding edge, certainly in the pack of leading edge developers in the respective genres. That's not to say they've gone out and done wild and crazy things with their designs, but they always found a great (if not perfect?) balance between meaningful and desirable innovation and solid, accesible game-play. WoW is the first time they've taken the more common big-business success strategy of sitting back and letting the pioneers blaze most of the trail and flame out, and then followed behind them picking up the best pieces of the wreckage, adding a few twists and improvements of their own and hitting the mass-market sweet spot.

[magerette]

I would certainly agree,chamr, that anyone saying "Blizzard has never innovated at all." is talking some trash. The very term 'Diablo clone' now famous in the industry, has to say that. Everything Blizzard has done in the past has been smart, gamer friendly and personally for me a lot of fun as well.
I'm curious, however about Blizzard's future, as I firmly believe that a company is only as good as its employees. I'm sure Blizz has the cash to hire the best, but then many would argue, they already had the best and ran them off.
I really wonder what will happen next for them. They haven't attempted a new game since Roper, et al. left, and correct me if I'm wrong, an expansion to an existing game is all they have to show for what..the last two or three years?
Although it's hard to forecast too much gloom and doom for them with those sales figures breaking limits unknown to man:)

[Ionstormsucks]

I would certainly agree,chamr, that anyone saying "Blizzard has never innovated at all." is talking some trash. The very term 'Diablo clone' now famous in the industry, has to say that.
Success is never a sign for innovation. The fact that the term "Diablo Clone" is nowadays often used to describe a certain type of game does not automatically mean that Blizzard were the first ones to come up with it. Take WoW for example. Without doubt WoW was not the first MMORPG, and certainly it was not very innovative. If you look at Everquest, Everquest 2, Asheron's Call, AC2, Anarchy Online, Ultima Online, and all the other games that went live before WoW then you have to realize that these games partly or in full possessed all the features that WoW has - in some aspects they surpassed them by far. Still, already today you can hear the term "WoW Clone."

Now, I guess we should not turn this into some kind of "Is/was Blizzard innovative?" debate, since that has also a bit to do with personal perspective or point of view. And, looking at the op, this wasn't the main question anyway... it was more about WoW being innovative or not.

[txa1265]

Still, already today you can hear the term "WoW Clone."

To the point of being nonsensical! WoW borrows much of the character look and feel from the Warhammer characters as detailed in many arguments, yet many articles now call anything that looks like that a WoW clone. Even Mage Knight Apocalypse, which has plenty of flaws of its own, was getting called a WoW clone in early (clueless) reviews ... despite being a single player action RPG ...

[xSamhainx]

Well, some singleplayer games do at times resemble MMO's without anyone else logged in, such as Morrowind.

[abbaon]

Only if you play them wrong. Incidentally, Ion, that was an awesome blizzard of obfuscatory bullshit, and the funniest thing I've read all week.

[chamr]

Success is never a sign for innovation.

:S Surely you didn't mean to use the word "never".

I'm not claiming Blizzard was the first to come up with action-RPG's and RTS's. I'm asserting they were (prior to WoW) innovative in those genres. As you indicate in your post, "innovative" and "the first" are not necessarily the same thing.

Also, it's a bit of false analogy to devalue the pervasive "Diablo-clone" term in gaming literature just because a few hacks are using "WoW-clone" these days at the height of WoW mania. Check back in 9 or 10 years and see if every single MMORPG is referred to as a "WoW-clone" like every single action-RPG is referred to as a "Diablo-clone" today.

Diablo can trace a good deal of it's lasting success to Blizzard's innovations in the context of the genre. For instance, were they the first to come up with on-line multi-play? Of course not. But the way they implemented that feature and the fact they did it in an action-RPG was truly innovative. Battle.net was, arguably, the biggest factor in the franchise’s unprecedented longevity. So in this case, I would argue that success certainly was an indication of innovation.

[zakhal]

Blizzard is innovative for making an "uber" formula that produces quality products that sell well everytime. Wow is just one example of the use of that formula. They transformed the aging and flawed concept of everquest mmog into high quality wow-mmog that everyone wants to play.

[txa1265]

:S Surely you didn't mean to use the word "never".

I would rather say that success is never a guarantee of innovation or quality or ... well, anything.

Relentless pursuit of a quality experience seems something Blizzard does very well at - regardless of the fact that the game of theirs I played the most was also the one that completely turned me off of RPG for ~7 years!

[magerette]

I would rather say that success is never a guarantee of innovation or quality or ... well, anything.



Except maybe imitation?

[Ionstormsucks]

:S Surely you didn't mean to use the word "never".

I'm not claiming Blizzard was the first to come up with action-RPG's and RTS's. I'm asserting they were (prior to WoW) innovative in those genres. As you indicate in your post, "innovative" and "the first" are not necessarily the same thing.

Also, it's a bit of false analogy to devalue the pervasive "Diablo-clone" term in gaming literature just because a few hacks are using "WoW-clone" these days at the height of WoW mania. Check back in 9 or 10 years and see if every single MMORPG is referred to as a "WoW-clone" like every single action-RPG is referred to as a "Diablo-clone" today.

Diablo can trace a good deal of it's lasting success to Blizzard's innovations in the context of the genre. For instance, were they the first to come up with on-line multi-play? Of course not. But the way they implemented that feature and the fact they did it in an action-RPG was truly innovative. Battle.net was, arguably, the biggest factor in the franchise’s unprecedented longevity. So in this case, I would argue that success certainly was an indication of innovation.

Indeed, my mistake... what I meant was that success is not necessary a sign of innovation. And I didn't mean to devalue the term Diablo-clone (if that is possible) - I just wanted to express that such terms are rather an indicator that a game was very succesful than an indicator that it was very innovative. I mean, just take the WoW-example. You can say about the game what you want, but in a way WoW hit the mmo scene like a truck. I'm sure it will leave a lasting impression. People are using the term WoW-clone already, and almost noone talkes about Ultima Online anymore, although UO was certainly a major step in the course of mmorpg history. Such terms come and go and mean almost nothing. Might well be, that in the case of Diablo success was an indication of innovation... it's hard to tell for me. I never was a big fan of Diablo, although I played the first part.
True innovation, I think, is hard to find nowadays. You know, it is an accepted fact in literature that innovation in literature is almost non-existing. Writers nowadays get most of their ideas from other literature (and the rest from other media) - there is hardly an idea that they create themselves.
Admittedly literature is a bit older than computer games, but for me parallels are obvious. Most of the basic genres were created in the pre-pc area. Companies later on developped and mixed them as technical possibilities grew. But is that innovation? Guess that greatly depends on point of view.

[chamr]

Fair enough. I think I'm just using a looser definition for "innovation" than you are. "Nothing new under the sun" and all that...

[Maylander]

Blizzard isn't all that innovative, in most cases some small company invents it in some small game, and Blizzard copies it and makes it a standard. They are very good at combining the best features to make the most solid games. Warcraft was never "new" in any way - RPG elements in strategy games? Wasn't new, strategy games in general? Come on, there were dozens before WC1.

The term "diablo clone" comes from Diablo being the biggest, the game that set the standard, not by being the most innovative. Remember that innovative means first, it means to invent something. There were action RPGs before D1, there were strategy games long before WC1/Starcraft, and there were MMOs with all of WoWs features before WoW, but Blizzard still set the standard by combining all the greatest features(well, a lot at least) into one game, and making it a polished, solid product. That's what they're good at.

True innovation still exists of course, and there isn't any less now than before, but there has always been far inbetween good inventions. For every good invention, there are dozens, if not hundreds or thousands, of poor ones.

Just like graphical operating systems - Microsoft weren't the innovative ones, they copied it and made it a standard.