Ars Technica has a post up today on the arrival of the first issue of the official World of Warcraft magazine. It’s a favorable account of its 144 pages of art and articles covering the topics of line of sight and loot sharing; interviews with Blizzard‘s CEO; and a feature retrospective.
It all sounds well and good, but here’s why we’re still skeptical:
To this particular writer, a WoW addict who is raiding Icecrown (but only two nights a week!) and owns an authenticator (come on, officers need to take more responsibility for account security!), it doesn’t sound like there’s much editorial content in the magazine that I couldn’t get from fan sites for free, and more succinctly. (Or, that won’t be condensed and rehashed on a fansite within the next month.)
Ars also waxes eloquent on the physicality of the magazine and its glossy, high quality paper, pointing out that most magazines these days are printed as cheaply as possible, and claiming that you won’t really understand the value of the mag until you hold it in your hands. That, I can’t form an opinion on, since the magazine is only shipping to subscribers, and not to newsstands.
But aren’t magazines supposed to be disposable? Magazines don’t go on my bookshelf, they go in the recycling bin. I just don’t have room. My Terry Pratchett and Neil Stephenson are already stacked horizontally, and the WoW magazine probably won’t share their re-reading value. It’s a collector’s item, for $35-40/year, depending on your subscription length.
Lets call a duck a duck. I’m still uninterested, and am likely to remain so at least until a subscription comes with a mount, non-combat pet, title, or other form of WoW-gamer crack cocaine.
