Also on AOL
- Autos
- Technology
- Lifestyle
- Gaming
- Finance
- Entertainment on AOL
- Lifestyle on AOL
- Sports on AOL
- Travel on AOL
- More on AOL
Featured Galleries
Joystiq
© 2013 AOL Inc. All rights Reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks | AOL A-Z HELP | About Our Ads

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
11-29-2011 @ 4:14PM
Jestin said...
"Without knowing what was intentional and what wasn't, I think there would be too much speculation and not enough substance."
I seriously LOVE you for this.
Reply
11-29-2011 @ 6:13PM
Dawn Moore said...
I love speculating, honestly, but I can go on forever and I just didn't think there was enough to go on right now. Plus, I usually end up disappointed cause I always have some grand vision that Blizz gets nowhere close to. >>; *wannabe game designer*
11-29-2011 @ 9:28PM
Caylynn said...
+1. Sorry Fox, my shadowy heart now belongs to Dawn. ;)
11-30-2011 @ 3:08AM
Moanique said...
It's simply the right thing to do if there's so much missing that you really can't divine the developer's intentions. If they wanted us to look at talents, then fine. But since they included abilities with little to no explanation about mysteriously missing spells for basically all of the priest classes (dps and healing) other than 'pre-alpha' and 'will be changed later', it's impossible to make any sort of sensible comment about them.
Well played Dawn.