You should hear what he calls us in the break room, when he thinks we aren't around.

That's a shame, because if you made it to the end of the article you would have found a well thought out conclusion weighing different factors in game design and ultimately coming out in favor of changes that offer more complexity to those who want it and less to those who do not.

Actually, the ones he insulted (the lazy ones) would be the ones who don't care enough to come and read the column to learn more about the game mechanics in the first place.

Wow...a little sensitive today aren't we. Let's not hurt that precious ego of ours.

If you stopped reading then you should never have commented. As it was, you missed some good thoughts but I guess since you can't be bothered reading you don't care do you.

What was that about lazy?

And for me as a pally, I think the new talents look fun, it will be neat to try different things and see if they fit with my play style.

And that's something the cookie cutters miss - every player is a bit different and some talents will suit players rather than encounters. Yes that speed talent may be optimal but in my raid group and with my latency it is better for me to use the other speed talent.

Not all the tiers are balanced that way but some of them are and that's a hell of a good start for a pre-alpha release.

I'll be honest, I have to agree. Indeed, the article *does* make a good conclusion in the end, but presets itself poorly in the couple leading to it whiny elsewhere.

I love WoW Insider, and I'll be the first to praise a great article, but I don't think it's fair to jump all over people who might have something negative to say.

...couple paragraphs leading to it and sounds a bit whiny elsewhere.

Speaking of terrible authorship...

Aw, did Fox not make you feel like a special snowflake throughout the whole article? Poor baby. When will writers learn their readers can't handle the mildest of pokes without inducing tears?!