analysis-opinion
Latest
Totem Talk: Post-patch enhancement shaman still waiting for buffs
Every week, WoW Insider brings you Totem Talk for elemental, enhancement, and restoration shamans. Rich Maloy lives and breathes enhancement: his main spec is enhance, his off-spec is enhance. He blogs about the life and times of enhance and leads the guild Big Crits (Season 2 Ep 06 now out!) as the enhancement shaman Stoneybaby. We're now two full weeks into patch 4.0.1 with our new and improved enhancement spec. Improved? Actually, no. Our DPS is only marginally improved over the previous incarnation, while our fellow melee brethren were buffed to the teeth. My rough analysis shows the difference between us and top melee DPS, usually warrior and death knight, has widened significantly since the patch. I'm going to preface all of this analysis by saying that I am not the top enhancement shaman, by far. I play well, I study my class, I optimize my spec, gems, forging, gear and rotations. I don't die to stupid stuff -- well, at least not often! In other words, I try to push my damage without sacrificing myself. Be forewarned that some of these numbers I'm embarrassed to post in such a public manner, and while I'm hardly the benchmark for DPS, I can at least provide a baseline of what your average progression raider's numbers look like. On average across eight of 12 hard-mode fights in ICC (excluding the gimmick fights Gunship, VDW and BQL, and excluding H-LK because we're just now working on him), the top melee DPS was doing 50 percent more damage than me pre-patch and 64 percent more post-patch. I could narrow that gap down to about 15 percent on a standstill fight such as Deathbringer Saurfang, but on high-movement fights such as Sindy, the top melee would do as much as 80 percent more damage than me overall. As much as it pains me to say this, as a raid leader I have to ask the question: Am I dead weight in raids right now? Will level 85 with Unleash Elements bring better output?
Defining Playstyles: Beyond casual vs. hardcore
In a recent Totem Talk post, I made a loot list for enhancement shamans that have access to ICC but are not progression raiders, because they are either alts or they are -- drum roll, please -- casual. That's right: I used the c-word without context. Casual. There, I said it again without context. Excuse me while I duck from the rotten vegetables being thrown in my direction. The use of that c-word in relation to an Icecrown Citadel loot list sparked a very interesting comment thread. Most comments were well thought-out, added value and furthered the discussion. Some were, to borrow Adam Savage's favorite term, vitriolic, because of my heinous misuse of the term "casual." I said it again without context. I'm just casually throwing around "casuals" here. Given the reaction that post received, I started doing some research into what exactly "casual" and "hardcore" actually mean. What I found was not surprising at all: They mean completely different things to absolutely everyone. The MMO population of players, across all games, is estimated at over 61 million people. There are as many variations on play time and playstyle as there are players in the game. Do you really think we can divide this many people simply into two groups of just casuals and hardcores? I think it's time we move beyond the polarizing definitions of casual and hardcore and come up with some definitions of our own.
Could a closed Mac be in Apple's future?
By all accounts, and despite the groans of inconvenienced developers, iPhone OS has been a smashing success. In the second quarter of 2010, Apple sold roughly 20 million iPhone and iPods, compared to about 3 million Macs. The iPad alone has already sold its millionth unit. That means there are a lot of iPhone OS installations out there on Apple-branded equipment. Under the hood, iPhone OS is virtually the same as the OS X that runs on Mac desktops. Steve Jobs announced this back in 2007, and it has been confirmed by any number of jailbreaks that allow third parties to explore the iPhone OS from the command line. It may be closed but iPhone OS is still basically OS X. What differentiates iPhone OS from Mac OS has been the openness of the platform. Developers must go through Apple's review process to deploy software to the vast audience of iPhone OS device owners. Apple sets the rules, ensures the quality, polices the system. It's a new way of computing, closer to the TiVo or Wii experience than, say, the Windows or Linux experience. Could it be the future of a new Macintosh line?
iPhone devsugar: 9 ways Apple can improve App Store
Apple has been working hard to make the App Store a better experience for both customers and developers. Recently, they introduced in-app purchases, scheduled sale prices for apps, provided review status indicators in iTunes Connect, and introduced other new features. Despite that, they still have a long way to go. Through talking with developers, I've assembled a list of items that Apple might yet look into and implement. They range from issues arising from iPad development and deployment, to longer-standing items that would benefit the entire store. Here, then, is a list of nine suggestions for improving the App Store experience for iPhone OS developers.
Ben Heck ponders Xbox 360 Slim: Motherboard, Memory Unit support, internal hard drive
Full image after break digg_url = 'http://www.joystiq.com/2010/03/18/ben-heck-ponders-xbox-360-slim-motherboard-memory-unit-support/'; In light of recent Xbox 360 hardware news, like pictures revealing an alleged Xbox 360 Slim motherboard and documentation of USB storage in a future update, we decided to see if the two stories tied together in some technical way. Surprisingly, they just might. Modding artist, hardware sculptor and warranty wrecker, Ben Heck, told us that if the leaked Slim motherboard is legitimate, not only does he see no place for memory cards (lending even more credence to USB storage for data transfer), but he dropped on us the idea that it may also have an internal hard drive. To emphasize, this conversation is speculation based on potential evidence that has not been confirmed by Microsoft. Joystiq: Okay, before we go any further, explain this internal hard drive theory? Ben Heckendorn: Well if you look at the upper left of the board, there appear to be (2) SATA connections. One is clearly for the DVD-ROM, of course, but what's the other one for? My guess is an internal hard drive. How it connects I'm not sure, but why else have 2 SATA connectors? Also there's an extra plug that could be hard drive power (next to DVD power). Now, after looking at the board, you said you were "99 percent sure" there are no Xbox 360 memory card slots. Please explain. None of the connectors look remotely like an Xbox 360 memory card reader [Ed: See one after break]. Keep in mind the memory cards were kind of a "Trojan horse" to have a hard drive-less (cheap) 360 back in 2005. Now, especially with built-in memory since the Jaspers, they are essentially useless. Why waste money and space on adding something none of your new customers will even need? Of note: The memory cards were basically USB devices, except they ran off 3.3 volts and had security chips to authenticate them, as do all Xbox 360 peripherals.
iPhone devsugar: The need for multiple ipa delivery
App Store clutter remains an ongoing issue. In addition to "business card" applications that offer little or no functionality beyond a simple web page[1], there are lite editions, demo editions, full editions, and even in the case of Tweetie 2, completely new applications providing upgraded functionality. Each of those applications must be registered with a unique app identifier, each one takes up a separate slot when installed on your iPhone's home screen, each application occupies a separate App Store listing, complete with its own screen shots, marketing material, reviews, and so forth. Each one must be managed by you in iTunes, where you must decide which to sync, which to keep, and so forth. Add to the mix, the possibility that we're likely to see iPad- and iPhone-specific application releases in the near future in addition to the Universal Application solution that Apple has been heavily promoting. That's because iPad applications offer developers the opportunity to re-imagine their interfaces, adding features without the constraints of the iPhone's small screen and modal interaction limitations. An iPad app that adds significant new functionality may branch off and become yet another related app in a single application family.
Should you be building universal apps for App Store?
Universal apps. They're the solution for delivering your iPhone OS application to both the iPhone and the iPad and having it run natively on each without silly make-do's like pixel doubling. It's a way to ensure that your app "fits" each platform, providing art and interfaces that match the target screen. Or, as Apple puts it, "Developers can now start planning for universal applications, allowing them to take full advantage of the technologies found on iPad, iPhone, and iPod touch with a single binary." Right now, I've got a bug up my sleeve about the whole issue. I'm not convinced that it's the right solution for a lot of apps. Just because you *can* merge an iPhone app with an iPad app, and sell one product, you shouldn't -- unless the functionality is significantly the same for both platforms.
TUAW redux: The future of iPhone OS and Mac OS
One of the big topics of discussion yesterday in our TUAW back channel was this post from the New York Times Bits blog. In "Why can't PCs work more like iPhones," Bilton pointed out that the iPhone has given Apple a chance to build a new OS from the ground up. This is a familiar viewpoint to us here on TUAW. Last year, I asked whether the future of the Mac OS would turn out to be the iPhone. In my write-up, I pointed out that the iPhone OS was built from scratch to work with Objective C 2.0 with its properties and other modern language features. Its API, far from being cobbled together, showed ever increasing design maturity without the weight of heavy backwards compatibility concerns. I concluded that Apple might take a lesson from the iPhone OS and consider offering a ground up redesign for Mac OS X, at least in terms of core OS principles. In his post, Bilton considers how Mac OS X might integrate iPhone OS features into its user experience, suggesting a possible Front Row-like overlay layer, running an iPhone OS interface. The goal would be to craft iPhone-style GUI simplicity onto the desktop experience, so that users could move seamlessly between their mobile and desktop worlds. But as much as we believe that Apple is heading cautiously in the direction that Bilton suggests, the TUAW consensus is that a desktop OS needs far more structure and, at the same time, flexibility than what the iPhone OS offers.
Tablet analysis and opinion: What TUAW has put on the table
In light of the current tablet frenzy, TUAW is not alone shouting "Tablet, Tablet!" from the rooftops. The tablet has been a widespread and consistent story from several directions which we have been compiling and discussing. Over the last few weeks, TUAW has depended on multiple background sources who have information about the device, as do scores of other sites and news outlets. In that light, we've assembled this round up of analysis and opinions posts, based on the most-likely credible rumors and sources we've been able to dig up from the last few years. Here are some of our longer discussion pieces that you might have missed the first time 'round. Publishing different: What the tablet brings to the table Like newspapers before them, traditional book publishers are facing the reality of the new digital world. With Apple's much anticipated tablet expected to debut within the next few months, they're... App Store approvals and the tablet: why it matters When iTunes Connect returned after its Christmas break, developers noticed that things had changed quite a bit on the App Store approval front. Applications that had formerly taken ten to fourteen... Tablet speculation: How could a tablet connect to the world? Do you know what word Dave Caolo is hearing in his sleep? Tablet. What phrase is trending mightily on Google Search? Tablet. What is every Apple fanboy and fangirl dreaming of for...um...some new... Also of interest: Talking tablets with Aaron Vronko of RapidRepair iPhone devsugar: Working with tablet resolutions Pricing the tablet: How high can they go? TUAW Watercooler: Apple's next big thing A Mac tablet? Not just yes, but 'heck yes' Buyer's Guide: 33 things you don't need if you have an iPhone Apple's original tablet Our iTablet Dreams: What TUAW is wishing for
Publishing different: What the tablet brings to the table
Like newspapers before them, traditional book publishers are facing the reality of the new digital world. With Apple's much anticipated tablet expected to debut within the next few months, they're under more pressure than ever before to "Think Different". Moving from print to digital isn't a smooth or easy path, despite the fact that most authors are working digitally in the first place. As early experiences with the Amazon Kindle have shown, digital tablets are not geometric or mental equivalents of the printed page. "You've got to think beyond the page," says Chuck Toporek, my editor at Addison Wesley/Pearson, "because the page no longer exists -- there is no page number, or page to flip." Book content has to adapt and flow to on-device presentation. Like the HTML revolution of the '90s, publishers will need to rethink how their content can adapt to changes in font size, and "the page" is more driven by screen dimension and resolution than a piece of paper is. "[Interaction styles like] pinch and zoom should not hinder the user," Toporek adds.
Zaprudering the invite: Obsessive fun with TUAW
As you can see in the image at the top of this post, several features stood out to our TUAW team. Mike Rose was first to notice that the art used spray paint rather than finger paint, as you might expect for a tablet event invite. "Could this be a hint of MacPaint Pro?" asked Steve Sande. "That would harken back to the original Mac (MacPaint) and be very cool." Dave Caolo noticed that the Apple logo front-and-center, along with the thin (tablet-shaped?) border pointed to a Macbook-like presentation. It would be awesome if the tablet really could mimic and/or replace many laptop features, although all early Humint rumors point to an iPhoneOS-only system. So what does the art-styled presentation hint at? To most of the team, this seemed a vote for augmented reality interaction a la Excelitech's Virtual Graffiti app [iTunes link]. Maybe we'll be able to interact in new ways with maps and images through a touch-based interface. Will the target audience differ from the anticipated Kindle crowd? Maybe this touch-based creation will be aimed more at tangible creative media than at simple video and book display? Maybe the rumors about gestures gone wild with a high-powered CPU we've been reading about give a better sense of who Apple is aiming their "latest creation" at. What do you think? Let us know in the comments. Update: Commenters point out that the colors used almost perfectly match the current nano line. Update: TUAW's Megan Lavey adds "I think Apple is announcing the release of its interactive paintball set. It uses the built-in iSight camera. You mad at someone? Click a button on iChat and the paint color of your choice blasts that person in the eye." *hee*
App Store approvals and the tablet: why it matters
When iTunes Connect returned after its Christmas break, developers noticed that things had changed quite a bit on the App Store approval front. Applications that had formerly taken ten to fourteen days to work through review were now getting processed in a couple of days or less. The upshot? Happier developers, better bug releases for users, and a healthier App Store ecosystem. There's another consequence of the new, speedier approvals: the tablet. With the device due to ship March/April (late Q1, early Q2), and no announced 4.0 SDK, developers were left wondering how they'd have the time to bring their software up to date. Under the old review process even a single procedural rejection, which are quite common for small GUI details, would have exhausted nearly all of February in non-productive "wait mode". With the enhanced review system in place, it's likely that developers will be able to spend those extra weeks refactoring their software, allowing it to ship in a timely fashion once the actual device appears on-scene. Apple is expected to push their SDK to developers within two weeks of their late January product announcement, probably by 15 February. Assuming a 2 April product launch, that leaves nearly six weeks to update and test software. Not that developers are waiting. Many devs are already working on resolution independent versions of their applications. They are tasking their designers to re-imagine screens, to test hand-held cardboard prototypes, and otherwise start the process of scaling their products to new dimensions. It should be noted that some of the App Store heavyweights have suddenly become quite tight-lipped in recent days, refusing to talk in any specifics about how their upgrade process is proceeding. The rest of us will have to get by on guess work, at least until the product announcement at the end of this month. Without specific leaks regarding hardware changes (for example, will there really be a front facing video camera? and if so, will expanded Image Picker/Media Player classes support access?), it's hard to pin down exactly what new features can be leveraged in third party software. But it's a fairly safe bet that nearly all features available on the current iPod touch line will be in play on the new tablet. And that alone is enough to hedge some safe business bets about pushing forward with large screen development. It's still too early for most of us to start playing -- those tight-lipped folk have a bit of the wild "Apple will kill me if I speak" look around their eyes -- but it's not too early to begin planning and working. Even without specifics, there are ways to move forward on the development front. Carpe diem. There's not much time left before the yet-unannounced tablet ships.
Blizzard should focus on more Patch 2.3s, not on new mid-level zones
By now you've heard the news: Patch 2.3 will lower the XP requirements needed to level from 20-60 by 15% per-level. As an extra bonus, Blizzard is adding 60-odd new quests to Dustwallow Marsh. I would prefer they do this than add more zones specifically for mid-level content . New mid-level content is always a hot topic, especially by people who are on their third or fourth trip to the well. We've all got those "If I never, ever, see this zone again, it's too soon" zones. The solution often bandied about is to create alternate progression paths so we never, ever, go back to Stranglethorn Vale. I'm going to put forth a different idea: Fix what is broken. This will help minimize unused zones, and maybe not spread out the lower-levels so new players can actually find groups.Which seems to be the step Blizzard is taking with 2.3. In terms of quest progression and rewards, Blizzard hit it out of the park with TBC. You've got quest-givers nicely clumped together and often they all send you in the same direction. The cash, XP, and item rewards for completing the quests are excellent. When you compare the expansion quests against original Azeroth it becomes apparent how frustrating quests could be. It seemed like completing most of them involved long griffon rides for mediocre rewards. Quests felt like they were, well, I was going that way anyway...
