Getting a meeting time nailed down. Help remind Blizzard!

[UPDATE: Thank you! You guys sent out hundreds of tweets! Mike and Blizzard now must know this issue is still very much alive. I’m taking down the auto-tweet link below, as I feel its done its job. But you can still tweet on your own. 🙂 I’ll be sending Mike another e-mail tomorrow. Thanks!]

WoW Petition Update:

As you know, I’ve got a tentative meeting set up with Mike Morhaime to discuss legacy server. Our first e-mail exchange below:

Screenshot 2016-05-11 09.48.16

I’ve since sent two followup e-mails to Mike. One last Friday and one again this past Monday. Mike is a busy guy, but I’ve yet to hear back about a definite date for a meeting. Nostalrius is also in contact with Blizzard and is also having some difficultly nailing down a time from Blizzard.

You can help.

I can’t give you Mike’s direct e-mail, and Blizzard no longer publishes a support e-mail address. So, we’ll tweet @Warcaft instead to help get this going. Simply click the link below to tweet out a message to Blizzard to let them know we want these meetings scheduled. Feel free to customize the tweet. TY!

[Auto tweet link removed. We sent a strong message. Rest is up to Bliz!]


  1. freespeech says:

    I honestly don’t understand Blizzard. Companies usually have to spend a lot of money on surveys to find out what their consumers wants.
    Blizzard, however, has more than a quarter of a million players telling them exactly what they want and, yet, they do nothing.
    Any other company in the Universe would have already opened Legacy realms and would be enjoying the easiest profit ever.
    I guess it must be some ego thing, because logic just can’t explain this.

  2. Mark Kern says:

    Well, to be fair, they are right at the moment of launching some major things: a movie, a WoW expansion, their first major console title (overwatch…d3 doesn’t count) and doing Blizcon. Legacy is probably just a very low time priority right now. At least this is what I hope.

  3. Cookieman222 says:

    I have always loved blizzard because great people like you Mark have always worked there and have always cared. Even if i don’t agree with there current actions , i’m sure they will follow through with this. (fingers crossed). and mark thanks for caring and being the spokesperson of the people it very refreshing to see people like you in the world keep up the good work mark! and i sincerely mean it when i say thanks mark.

    • Mark Kern says:

      Thanks! There are caring people there at Blizzard too. But sometimes when you get that big, you can’t retain a cohesive identity anymore. We used to talk about “bleeding Blizzard Blue” which was absorbing the culture of Blizzard. That’s not possible when you’re 3000 people, no matter what value statements you try to put together.

  4. Canivex says:

    Hey Mark, first of all I wanted to start this off by saying you have my sincere gratitude for what you and the Nostalrius team are doing.

    I couldn’t help but notice Mike has plenty of time to get on twitter and tweet all different people, but can’t even spare 10minutes to set a date and I really feel like he (and Blizzard) are just trying their hardest to stall the meetings to make people lose faith in the cause. Considering J. Allen Brack is the Executive Producer and Vice President for World of Warcraft, and plays a major role in the ongoing development, would it be safe to assume he is blocking this because of his ego?

    In my opinion he is a monumental PR failure.

  5. Corsah says:

    Sorry Mark, I didn’t have anywhere else to post this but hopefully you’ll find it worth reading.

    Something that might not have been mentioned yet, is the fact that legacy servers could be seen as simply catering to an already existing style of gameplay; namely twinking. Players choosing to remain at a certain level, a self-inflicted limition of scope and available content … simpler, static environments with far less items to acquire and things to do. Players who must constantly contend with wholesale modifications to max level classes, that then trickle down and affect their own, such as any move changes or resulting scaling imbalances.

    It would be inconceivably difficult to account for every arbitrary bracket of competition in a live game, which justifies the general disregard traditionally shown for twinking concerns. Except now the introduction of legacy servers, which by definition provides an unchanging environment, would leave gear itemization and spell mechanics untouched. In fact, one could reasonably expect a market for server transfers, as players create characters on former expansions in order to acquire previously removed items and gear. This would certainly be more engaging than leaving it to random chance from some tedious daily in current content.

    It might be presumptuous to think that this community would flock to legacy servers in large enough numbers, but with automatic level scaling and the upcoming homogenization of gear in battlegrounds, it certainly should be considered. People could embracy legacy servers for any number of reasons. They may long to progress through older content, prefer the former class mechanics, enjoy the earlier difficulty of leveling/questing, or simply want to go someplace that isn’t going to change on them. Providing such an accommodation would not only benefit those who specifically wish to utilize the service, but any others who might consider it a convenient alternative for when the current game happens to become tiresome.

  6. Galadourn says:

    Mark, in the survey you mentioned something along the lines of “having additional content in the form of land and lore only” during/after the official timeline. Does this mean that, in the case of progression servers (Vanilla,-> TBC, etc) with character copy, the Vanilla realm would still be getting updates, if such a feature were to be implemented? If so, how would the other realms (TBC, WotLK) get those updates in a meaningful manner, i.e. without having outleved the content?

  7. Konway says:

    Mark, random question: What was the concurrent player cap for a single server during Vanilla? We know that it was roughly 2,500 on launch day, but was it increased later in Vanilla?

  8. Pingback: all skins in cs go
  9. Pingback: alisexypics com
  10. Pingback: See link mixfap ru
  11. Pingback: Site babacams com
  12. Pingback: url alicumshot com
  13. Pingback: url ooosuita ru
  14. Pingback: url aliassporn com
  15. Pingback: inditub ru
  16. Pingback: Source irkburo ru
  17. Pingback: Homepage zumfap ru
  18. Pingback: link
  19. Pingback: taken from here
  20. Pingback: here is the link
  21. Pingback: click to read more
  22. Pingback: visit web page
  23. Pingback: more info
  24. Pingback: link to details
  25. Pingback: read an article
  26. Pingback: click at this page
  27. Pingback: go to the page
  28. Pingback: taken from here
  29. Pingback:
  30. Pingback:
  31. Pingback: read completely
  32. Pingback:
  33. Pingback:
  34. Pingback: continue
  35. Pingback: read
  36. Pingback: follow this link
  37. Pingback:
  38. Pingback: follow this link
  39. Pingback:
  40. Pingback:
  41. Pingback:
  42. Pingback: more information
  43. Pingback:
  44. Pingback:
  45. Pingback: read completely
  46. Pingback: click
  47. Pingback:
  48. Pingback:
  49. Pingback: visit the source
  50. Pingback: click to go
  51. Pingback: read
  52. Pingback:
  53. Pingback: go here
  54. Pingback: 182VnWwMD8s
  55. Pingback:
  56. Pingback:
  57. Pingback: more information
  58. Pingback:
  59. Pingback:
  60. Pingback: follow the link
  61. Pingback: this web page
  62. Pingback: click
  63. Pingback: go
  64. Pingback: 2018-2019
  65. Pingback: 2019
  66. Pingback:
  67. Pingback: WOW Site Blog Name
  68. Pingback: article
  69. Pingback: article
  70. Pingback: article
  71. Pingback: xxxpics xyz
  72. Pingback: xxxph top
  73. Pingback: article
  74. Pingback: xyz
  75. Pingback: adulthq top
  76. Pingback: article
  77. Pingback: xxxhq top
  78. Pingback: xxlhd xyz
  79. Pingback: adultpics top
  80. Pingback: article
  81. Pingback: xxxph xyz
  82. Pingback: article
  83. Pingback: article
  84. Pingback: xxlhq xyz
  85. Pingback: xxlph top
  86. Pingback: article
  87. Pingback: adultph top
  88. Pingback: xxlhq top
  89. Pingback: adulthd top
  90. Pingback: adulthd xyz
  91. Pingback: pornph top
  92. Pingback: adulthq xyz
  93. Pingback: article
  94. Pingback: xxxhd top

Leave a Reply